Destination Branding: The Comparative Case Study of Guam and Vietnam
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT In the context of a global recession, the tourism industry has struggled hard to battle declines in sales turnover, particularly in countries where inbound tourism is a major economic contributor to national output. To improve their competitiveness, many countries not only promote their natural attractions but differentiate their destinations with branding strategies that establish their unique positions to attract more international visitors and boost sales. This paper is a comparative study of Japanese visitors and their behavior in Guam and Vietnam, both destinations possessing many similarities in climate, culture, and beautiful beaches. Implications for the tourism industry and branding are examined and justified by the high spending potential of the Japanese market segment. Findings from this research can suggest successful paths to a country's branding strategy and tourism development. INTRODUCTION In the context of a global recession, the tourism industry has struggled hard to battle declines in sales turnover, particularly in countries where inbound tourism is a major economic contributor to national output. To improve their competitiveness, many countries not only promote their natural attractions but also differentiate their destinations with branding strategies that establish their unique position to attract more international visitors and to boost sales. The challenge for destination marketers is how to differentiate their offering from competitors in a growing competitive tourism market place. In the tourism literature, many authors suggest that tourism destination branding represents the most obvious means by which destinations can distinguish themselves from the mass of commodity destinations around the world (Folyey, Fahy, 2004, cited by Fyall, Laesk, 2007). However, the need to attract visitors requires conscious branding strategies for the different target visitor groups (Kotler, Gertner, 2002; Freire, 2002). Several countries were very successful in applying the country branding concept, particularly New Zealand (Lodge, 2002), Spain (Gilmore, 2002), France, Scotland (Olins, 2002), and the re-imaging of former Yugoslavia (Hand, 2002), other destinations experienced failures (for instance the case of Ontario analyzed by Lodge, 2002). The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the experience of destination branding on Guam and Vietnam to differentiate their tourism products, both destinations possessing many similarities in climate, culture, and beautiful beaches. The paper will focus on the key inbound market segment for both destinations: the Japanese segment. The chosen segment in this comparative study is justified by its high spending potential and this segment is considered for both destinations their important market to attract. The perception of tourism destination image from Japanese visitors will be analyzed empirically through our exploratory qualitative survey with a small group of Japanese visitors arriving in Vietnam and Guam during the same period of study. Thus, the better understanding about Japanese consumer's behavior, in particular their individual perception about the two destination images explored in this paper will help marketers to identify specific destination image attributes and to design appropriate destination branding strategy for this market. Our paper is structured as follows: The first section presents tourism destination branding research through a brief literature review. The second section analyzes the tourism industry performance and competitiveness of the two destinations of Guam and Vietnam. The third section explores through empirical study the Japanese consumers' behavior and their perception of these two destinations. The last section will discuss the findings and suggest solutions to differentiate the destination brand images in order to improve significantly customer satisfaction. TOURISM DESTINATION BRANDING RESEARCH Tourism destination branding has been viewed as the most powerful tool for destination marketers for differentiation strategies, as places have been becoming more and more substitutable. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».