دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی تناقض های استدلالی در راهبردهای بازاریابی گردشگری: مطالعه موردی فریلسن، هلند به همراه ترجمه فارسی
عنوان فارسی مقاله: | تناقض های استدلالی در راهبردهای بازاریابی گردشگری: مطالعه موردی فریلسن، هلند |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: | Discursive contradictions in regional tourism marketing strategies: The case of Fryslân, The Netherlands |
رشته های مرتبط: | مدیریت و گردشگری و توریسم، بازاریابی و مدیریت گردشگری |
فرمت مقالات رایگان | مقالات انگلیسی و ترجمه های فارسی رایگان با فرمت PDF میباشند |
کیفیت ترجمه | کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله متوسط میباشد |
نشریه | الزویر – Elsevier |
کد محصول | f413 |
مقاله انگلیسی رایگان (PDF) |
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
ترجمه فارسی رایگان (PDF) |
دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله |
خرید ترجمه با فرمت ورد |
خرید ترجمه مقاله با فرمت ورد |
جستجوی ترجمه مقالات | جستجوی ترجمه مقالات مدیریت |
بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله: 1-مقدمه |
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی: 1. Introduction Tourism marketing strategies can have significant implications in terms of the social construction of tourist regions and the opportunities and limitations for stakeholders to engage in tourism. Importantly, tourism marketing as a policy tool aims to influence representations of tourism destinations (Cousin, 2008; Kavaratzis, 2012). Destination identities may therefore be politically charged (Dredge & Jenkins, 2003) and attributed meanings may be far from neutral. As such, various interests may underlie the discourse employed in destination positioning statements made in regional tourism marketing. Regions and tourism destinations alike are socially constructed and derive their meaning and identities from discursive practices (Saarinen, 2004). While discourses do mobilize meanings themselves, they are always incomplete and contested, giving room for the emergence of tensions between attributed meanings (Dredge & Jenkins, 2003). Such tension can result from discursive contradictions and paradoxes, reflecting opposing interests or unrealistic aspirations for tourism development. Marketing strategies then can become contradictory or even counterproductive, communicating conflicting signals. An example is when destination marketing is developed for external visitors only, without considering the consequences for the local environment and residents (Burns, 2004; Choi & Sirakaya, 2005; van Rekom & Go, 2006; Ziakas, 2013). This is particularly relevant for regions in which tourism mainly relies on markets that are geographically proximate or even within the regions that are branded as destinations. In a context where home and away are geographically proximate, binaries of tourist– host, visitor–resident and consumer–producer become increasingly indistinguishable, which makes them vulnerable to contestation and to contradictions between attributed meanings. Contradictions can become problematic in tourism marketing when they are not acknowledged or wrongly used. At the same time, when consciously used they might form a basis for tourism development by positioning destinations through otherness and authenticity on various levels, and by constructing and reconfirming differences between and within destinations (Salazar, 2010). However, the ‘intraregional’ perspective of tourism and its societal dynamics has for a long time remained largely overlooked. Mainstream understandings of tourism have become almost equivalent to international travel, crossing territorial borders and the mixing of cultures (Salazar, 2010). It is stated that tourism research suffers from an ‘international bias’ (Eijgelaar, Peeters, & Piket, 2008). Much tourism research has ignored touristic activities and experiences near to everyday environments, where tourism is produced and consumed by people living within a region (Canavan, 2013) or a city (Braun, Kavaratzis, & Zenke, 2013). As such, a number of challenges arise when aiming for an improved comprehension of tourism at a regional level. One challenge pertains to the way everyday experience of places, attractions and regions intermingles with tourist experiences and vice versa (Díaz Soria & Llurdés Coit, 2013). Another challenge is to better understand how regional destination identities are produced and reproduced (Pearce, 2014; Saraniemi & Kylänen, 2011) and how key stakeholders in this process engage in this through the discourse they use. While top–down understandings of tourism development are countered or complemented by bottom–up processes such as word of mouth (Chen, Dwyer, & Firth, 2014; Pan, Maclaurin, & Croots, 2007), governments, destination marketers and policy makers maintain essential players in this process. Therefore, we aim to disentangle various contradictions present in the discourse of regional tourism marketing. Employing the case of the Dutch province of Fryslân, a thematic analysis of destination positioning in tourism marketing strategy documents forms the basis of this paper. As such, the paper is guided by the following research questions: (1) What kind of contradictions emerge in the ways Fryslân is positioned as a tourism destination by regional tourism marketing strategies? (2) What are the possible implications of destination positioning discourse and the concurrent contradictions for Fryslân as a destination for intraregional tourism? By focusing on the implications of destination positioning discourse for tourism as an intraregional phenomenon, this paper aligns with a small but growing number of tourism researchers who identify a lacuna of academic knowledge on the social, economic and psychological processes involved in tourism on national and (intra)regional levels (Canavan, 2013; Ganglmair-Wooliscroft & Wooliscroft, 2013; Schänzel, 2010; Singh & Krakover, 2015). After further embedding the paper in relevant academic scholarship, we introduce the particular geographical context of the study and outline the methodology and data used. The paper continues with the analysis and findings, followed by a discussion about the implications of discourse in destination marketing, particularly with respect to the various roles of internal stakeholders in relation to tourism and the potential of tourism to (re)create value to everyday life environments. |