CC BY
74 QUTaCh and Practice
Journal iM. Bulletin of Stavropol Region
UDK 338.48
Ramutè Narkunienè
EASTERN AUKSTAITIJA REGION TOURISM COMPETITIVENESS ANALYSIS
Aim of the article - after the research of the theoretical concept of the destination's competitiveness study, evaluating the Eastern Aukstaitija region's tourism competitiveness compared to Orebro region in Sweden. One of the objectives of the article is to perform the research of theoretical concept of the destination's competitivenessstudy. Other objective is to perform the Eastern Aukstaitija region destination's competitivenesscomparative analysis with the Orebro region in Sweden. The first article conclusion is that competitiveness - is a complex concept, describing the object or entity's ability to compete and the changing of time, place and conditions. Competitiveness is often determined by the subject (state, company, group or individual) the economic and social well-being, prestige. Appropriately targeted for the competitive assessment use Wober distinguish
Narkunienè Ramutè -
lecturer, Utena University of Applied Sciencies, Maironio str. 7, 28142 Utena, Lithuania, e-mail: ramutenarkuniene@gmail.com>
Relevance of the topic. Countries, regions and cities competitiveness problems annually attracts more and more attention of researchers. The authors of scientific articles analyse the concept of the competitiveness, highlights the key competitive factors, analyse their impact on overall competitiveness. Formed different strategies, applying different measure, granting the financial resources for the increasing the competitiveness of the regions. The growing of the destination's competitiveness should primarily build on the main factors of the identification of competitiveness determinants and appropriate using these factors in the competition.
A large variety of these different factors has different influence for the country's tourism destination. This article aim is to compare the competitiveness tourism factors in the Eastern Aukstaitija region in Lithuania and Orebro region in Sweden.
The research problem: There is no Eastern Aukstaitija region's tourism competitiveness study, so is the topic of the article is relevant.
Article object: competitiveness of tourism destination.
Aim of the article - after the research of the theoretical concept of the destination's competitiveness study, evaluating the Eastern Aukstaitija region's tourism competitiveness compared to Orebro region in Sweden.
Objectives:
To perform the research of theoretical concept of the destination's competitiveness study.
To perform the Eastern Aukstaitija region destination's competitiveness comparative analysis with Orebro region in Sweden.
Methods of the research:
1. Analysis of the scientific literature.
factors: tourism resources, tourism infrastructure, staff competence, tourist market diversity, geographic environment, virtual environment and the image of tourist destinations. The second article conclusion - performing the comparative analysis of competitiveness, the overall average of tourism experts of East Aukstaitija region in Lithuania is 7.5 points, while the Swedish tourism expertsevaluate the competitiveness factors in thus - the average of assessment is 6.38 points.Representatives of Orebro regional tourism in Sweden evaluate their factors influencing for the region's tourism competitiveness below than the Eastern Aukstaitija region tourism representatives in Lithuania.
Key words: tourism destination, region, competitiveness.
2. Comparative analysis of competitiveness, using a «web» sketches (spider plot).
1. THEORETICALS ASPECTS OF THE TOURISM REGION'S COMTETITIVENESS
The concept of competitiveness has always been in the focus of scientists, politicians and businessmen. There is no common approach to competitiveness in the world's scientific community. This is due to the competitiveness is extremely complex concept rather than a situation or condition that is measured by one or more parameters.Competitiveness is often determined by the entity (state, company, group or individual) the economic and social well-being, prestige. Competitiveness can be dealt with researching the various levels of objects and subjects: state, national union, city or country, economic sector, company or organization, product or service. The term competitiveness comes from the Latin word concurrentia, meaning a struggle, competition, competition. Competitiveness - is a complex concept, describing the object or entity's ability to compete and the changing of time, place or conditions.
Regional competitiveness problem was investigated by «region» is understood as an integral part of the state is less than the state itself. This approach allows the watch to the region as a complex, open and vibrant socio-economic system of a larger space. Porter, Crouch, Ritchie and Hassan and other scientists analysed the competitiveness theories and models. Nowadays, competitiveness is determined not of the country available resources, but develop resources: workforce knowledge, skills and ability to innovate, improve and etc.
M. E. Porter (1998) entered a competition «diamond» model, proposed a different model of competitiveness.
A gricultural
Bulletin of Stavropol Region
№ 1(21)/1 Supplement, 2016
Porter, in order to deepen the analysis of the competitive factors, perform the study of the competitive success in various countries and found that the most determining factors are the competitive labour costs, interest rates, exchange rates and economies of scale (1998). Economic competitiveness occurs unevenly in different countries, so it makes sense that the factors that determine the economic competitiveness of the different locations are different. According to Porter's competitive advantage could be perceived as «the country's ability to create an environment that will enable businesses to grow and innovate faster than foreign competitors.»
This is achieved by enabling the four groups of factors (Porter, 1998):
Competition structure - country's government formed a legal environment which entails the establishment of new businesses and activities. Intense competition forces companies to make greater efforts: to innovate, to offer higher-value products and thus increase their competitiveness.
Demand characteristics - it is the country's consumer features. Larger and more affluent market is able to activate the ups and attract more foreign investment.
Supporting sectors - that others economic sectors, will associated with the company: suppliers, financial institutions, partners and other business services, making the market more attractive to investors.
Factors in performance - this natural resources, labour market and education level of knowledge, technology, infrastructure and so on.
According to the «Diamond» model, the competitive advantage of the territory should be interpreted as the ability to create an environment that will enable companies in the region to improve and innovate faster than competing regional businesses. According to Porter, competitiveness of the company and the competitiveness of the region - are not identical concepts. Competitiveness of the company shows market share and profitability, and competitiveness of the country or region depends on how productive use of available resources.
Porter offers to use geographical advantages of the region creating a clusters of related companies.
The world's most famous regional competitiveness development plan was the Lisbon strategy. The Lisbon strategy is most known for its main purpose -to make 2020 the European Union «the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable to create sustainable economic growth, with more, better jobs and greater social cohesion and respect for the environment.»
Global trends and priorities are changing, so at this point it is essential that the tourism sector have been competitive and balanced. It must be recognized that the long-term competitiveness depends on sustainability. Integrating sustainability into their activities, tourism stakeholders will maintain a competitive advantage. The over arching challenge for the tourism sector - persist competitive, while also embracing sustainability, recognizing that the long-term competitiveness depends on sustainability.
Due to the globalization process countries and regional competitiveness has became a policy instrument. For the programming period 2007-2013
European Union has paid particular attention to improving the competitiveness of the regions as a way across the country to economic and social cohesion. Strategy «Europa» 2020 states that the single market to reach 2020 year strategic objectives, where competition and consumer stimulate growth and innovation, as well as the need to strengthen the competitiveness of the European tourism sector.
Wober (2002) suggests the evaluating the competitiveness of the tourist areas, to compare them using the Web sketches. Wober (2002) distinguishes 6 competitiveness factors: resources, tourism infrastructure, staff competence, touristmarket diversity, geographical and virtual environments.
In summary, the analysis and assessment of the destination's competitiveness evaluation factors of economic competitiveness assessment purposeful use Wober to distinguish factors of tourism resources, tourism infrastructure, staff competence, tourist market diversity, geographic environment, virtual environment and a destination's image.
2.RESEARCH OFTHE EASTERN AUKSTAITIJA REGIONTOURISMCOMPETITIVENESS
2.1. Methodology of the Eastern Aukstaitija region tourism competitiveness
When evaluating the competitiveness of the country, analysing the competitive situation between the countries. By analogy, assessing of the region's competitiveness, region is compared with other regions in the same or in another foreign country. Therefore necessary properly select the indicators that accurately reflect the competitive advantage of formation opportunities.
Survey methods:
- Comparative analysis of competitiveness, using a «web» sketches (spider plot).
For the preparing the comparative analysis of the region competitiveness, the competitiveness indicators of Eastern Aukstaitijatourism region are comparing with the competitiveness indicators of Orebro Region in Sweden. For this purpose, are interviewing the Eastern Aukstaitija experts-tourism specialists (representatives of the tourism information centres), and the Swedish Orebro tourism information centre experts-tourism specialists, who have evaluated the competitiveness factors in 10-point system.
Evaluating the essential factors of competitiveness, web cart schemes method was carried out. Each web radius corresponds to one of the factors, characterizing competitiveness. Web centre meets the minimum total value of the factors, while the external parameter - the maximum.
The most important principles in choosing comparative partner are: similar geographical situation; similar size (the organization / location); similar structure, the essential processes and products; similar market and its development prospects; comparative partner - is a true leader in its field.
Tourism competitiveness indicators of Eastern Aukstaitija region in Lithuania are compared with the tourism competitiveness indicators to a similar Orebro region in Sweden.
6 QUTaZ and Practice
Journal iB.]MlHliiot8lavn|iolllcg)«i
2.2. Analysis of the tourism competitiveness of Eastern Aukstaitija region
Eastern Aukstaitija region consists of Utena, Anyksciai, Ignalina, Molétai, Zarasai districts and Visaginas municipality. Regional centre is the Utena city.
The situation of tourism sector in in Eastern Aukstaitija region. Although in recent years in the local and inbound tourism growth in volumes, but visitor flow is reduced in Eastern Aukstaitija. In evaluating the flow of foreign tourists observed that their maximum flow enjoys Zarasai district, but in other areas of the region this flow is significantly lower. This shows that foreign tourists do not tend to visit other parts of or the entire region. In order to increase the number of foreign tourists and even distribution needed for closer regional cooperation, information exchange and joint regional tourist routes and /or tracks forming. While one foreign tourist expenses are higher than domestic tourists, but particular attention should be paid to the local tourism as Lithuanian population constitute an absolute majority of accommodation establishments and rural tourism visitors to and thus absolute value of local tourist expenses accounts for the bulk of tourism incomes. A tourism development direction necessary action-oriented measures to prolong the day visitors «delay» in the region, but not necessarily seeking of accommodation of visitors.
There were 175 rural homestead in region in 2012 year. This concluded 28.9 % of the country's total number of rural tourism homestead. According to this indicator, Eastern Aukstaitija region lead in the country in whole period. Assessment of the situation in the region by area, can note that rural tourism homestead are very evenly distributed in the region.
In order to increase the competitiveness of the region, using local resources, it is important to identify how the tourism experts are evaluating them. In the questionnaire survey, tourism experts were asked to evaluate the competitiveness of the Eastern Aukstaitija region, which is defined by the following criteria: resources, tourism infrastructure, staff competence, the tourist market, variety of geographic environment, virtual environment.
Were interviewed tourism experts - representatives of Utena Tourism Information Centre, (TIC) Molétai TBIC (Tourism and Business Information Centre), Anyksciai TIC, Zarasai and Ignalina districts TIC. All respondents rated the tourism competitive-
ness of Eastern Aukstaitija region by assessing each criteriain 10 points system (1 point - very poor condition, 10 points - excellent condition). Total average of tourism competitiveness of Eastern Aukstaitija region is 7.5 points.
Development of regional tourism in Sweden. Sweden is one of the major European countries -to its territory almost equal for France (450 thousand square kilometres), but with a small population number (about 9 million).
Sweden from most of the other countries differ by long distances of the continent and the population is concentrated in the middle of a triangle whose corners are located in the three largest cities - Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmo and along the Norrland coast. 80% of people live in 30% of the country's territory. Population density - 21 people in one square kilometre and the distribution is very uneven. It is also unevenly distributed and economic activity, and what led to the emergence of this trend on the domestic politics, as regional, which took place in several stages of development.
Regions concept is used to describe many types of geographical, administrative and functional regions. Sweden is currently divided into 21 lens - this division of the territory began in the seventeenth century, when lens changed provinces (although at that time lens number and frontiers has changed many times. In addition, influencing EU, the recently created NUTS system, large regions in Sweden distinguished by combining several lens. At the same time saved informal division of the country into three large historical-geographical region - Gotland, Svealand and Norrland (the southern, middle and northern Sweden). According to the Sweden regional policy perspectives can also use other options division of the country districts, highlighting the whole range of types of regions with special needs and conditions.
Orebro region in Sweden.Orebro is a region in central Sweden. 140,599 inhabitants live here. Region surface area - 1380 km2. 2209 employees from 71,447 working in in the tourism sector, hotels and restaurants. Orebro city is a very nice city in centre of Sweden. Among the population are immigrants from 150 different countries. Orebro city is from Stockholm 200 miles distant, from Gothenburg and Oslo - 300 km, it is a natural logistical centre in Scandinavia. Its attractive dislocation makes Orebro attractive for multiplier business in the region and an ideal place for
Managemen t of tourism destinatio:
Image of tourism destination
Virtual environment
Cultural ant natural
resources
Geographica
l location environment
Tourism infrastructur
Staff competence
iversity of
tourism
market
Eastern Aukstaitija region in Lithuania
Orebro region in Sweden
1 picture - Comparison tourism competitiveness criteria in Eastern Aukstaitija region in Lithuania and Orebro region in Sweden, Web cartoscheme
e
1 gricultural
Bulletin of Stavropol Region
№ 1(21)/1 Supplement, 2016
conferences and fairs.A well-developed infrastructure rail and buses, as well as Orebro airport infrastructure. Orebro is a bicycle city in Sweden. There are a lot of bicycle paths and a number of places you can rent an inexpensive municipal bicycles. Orebro offers many interesting tourist attractions, most known is the castle, built in the 13th century.
2.3. Comparison of Eastern Aukstaitija region in Lithuania and Orebro region in Sweden evaluating of competitiveness indicators
Comparing Lithuanian and Swedish competitiveness of countries in general (2013 year): Sweden is in the 9th place, and Lithuania is in 49th place (The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2013).
Orebro region's tourism competitiveness indicators were obtained by interviews representatives of Orebro tourism information centre.
Evaluating the competitiveness of regions, representatives of tourism the both regions equally evaluated only two criteria: geographic environment - 9 points and a virtual environment - 7 points. Representatives of Sweden tourism region evaluated a higher score (8 points) only staff competence. Representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region evaluated staff competence by 7 points. All other indicators representatives of Sweden tourism region had evaluate a lower score: cultural and natural resources - 6 points (representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region - 8 points); tourist market diversity -6 points (representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region- 8 points). Representatives of the Sweden tourism region was evaluated by the lowest score tourist infrastructure - 5 points (representatives of Eastern Aukstaitijatourism region - 6 points); the destination's image - 5 points (representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region- 8 points); and management of tourist destinations - 5 points (rep-
resentatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region - 7 points). Representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region was evaluated by the lowest score 3 indicators: tourism infrastructure, image of tourism destination and management of tourism destination.
Total evaluation average representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region is 7.5 points, while the evaluation average of representatives of Sweden tourism region is 6.38 points. So, representatives of the Orebro tourism region in Sweden was evaluated own competitiveness of the tourism in the region below, than the Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region representatives.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Competitiveness - is a complex concept, describing the object or entity's ability to compete and the changing in respect of time, place or conditions. Competitiveness is often determined by the entity (state, company, group or individual) the economic and social well-being, prestige. Analysing and evaluating the destination's competitiveness evaluation factors, for the competitive assessment of purposeful use Wober distinguish factors of tourism resources, tourism infrastructure, staff competence, tourist market diversity, geographic environment, virtual environment and add a destination's image.
2. Performing a comparative analysis of competitiveness, the overall average of representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija tourism region is 7.5 points, while the overall average of representatives of Sweden tourism region is 6.38 points. Representatives of Orebro Sweden tourism region was evaluated their region's tourism competitiveness factors below than the representatives of Eastern Aukstaitija of tourism region in Lithuania.
REFERENCES
1. Ronald L. Martin. A Study on the Factors of Regional Competitiveness: a draft final report for The European Commission Directorate-General Regional Policy. 1984. Cambridge. 184 p.
2. Crouch G. I. Modelling destination competitiveness : a survey and analysis of the impact of competitiveness attributes. Gold Coast, Australia: CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd, 2007. [Digital resource]. URL: http://www.sustainab-letourismonline.com/awms/Upload/Resource/ bookshop/Crouch_modelDestnComp-web.pdf
3. Cole S. The Regional Science of Tourism: An Overview // Regional analysis and policy. 2007. № 37 (3). P. 183-192.
4. Dredge D., Jenkins J. Destination place identity and regional tourism policy // Tourism Geographies. 2003. № 5 (4). P. 383-407.
5. Corporate Social Responsibility: A business contribution to Sustainable Development: Communication from the European commision. 2002. Brussels. 24 p. [Digital resource]. URL: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/ february/tradoc_127374.pdf
6. Fagerberg J. International competitiveness // The Economic Journal.1988. № 98. P. 355-374.
7. Niklass L., Tallberg P. Forming a regional policy in Sweden: Where will the contradictory policies lead? 2010. 21 p. [Digital resource]. URI: http://www.apas.admpubl.snspa.ro/ handle/2010/258
8. Galimybiy studija. Kryptingas investavimas j turizmo pletrq Ryty Aukstaitijos regione (Utenos apskrities teritorijoje). 2013. Vilnius. 165 p.
9. The Global Competitiveness Report 20132014 // World economic forum. 2013. URL: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2013-14.pdf (download time: 22.08.2015)
10. Lietuvos Respublikos turizmo jstatymas, 2011. URL: http://www3.lrs.lt/pls/inter3/dokpaies-ka.showdoc_l?p_id=404344 (download time: 22.08.2015)
11. Nacionaline LR Turizmo pletros programa Prieiga [Digital resource]. URL: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/forms/legalAct.html?document
Я TsTsCh and Practice
Journal iM. Bulletin of Stavropol Region
Id=5a333640af3511e39b958c81fb177d0b (download time: 22.08.2015)
12. Портер, М. Конкуренция. Сантк-Петербург-Москва, Киев : Издательский дом Вильямс. 2002. 592 c.
13. Foss O., Johansen S., Johansson M., Sven-sson B. Regional Policyin Norway and Sweden, a Comparative Anglysis // ERSA conference papers. Barcelona : Paper Presented. 2000. P. 1-16.
14. Lusticky M., Kincl T. Tourism Destination Benchmarking: Evaluation and Selection of the Benchmarking Partners // Journal of Competitiveness. 2012. № 4 (1). PP. 99-116. URL: http://www.tomaskincl.net/wp-content/ uploads/88.pdf (download time: 24.08.2015)
