Destination Competitiveness: a Comparative Study of Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Central Florida STARS Rosen Faculty Scholarship and Creative Works Rosen College of Hospitality Management 2015 Destination Competitiveness: A Comparative Study of Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore Louise Todd Anna Leask Alan Fyall University of Central Florida, [email protected] Part of the Hospitality Administration and Management Commons, and the Tourism and Travel Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/rosenscholar University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Rosen College of Hospitality Management at STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Rosen Faculty Scholarship and Creative Works by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Original Citation Todd, L., Leask, A. and Fyall, A. (2015). Destination Competitiveness: A Comparative Study of Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore. Tourism Analysis 20 (6), 593-605. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cog/ ta/2015/00000020/00000006/art00002 Tourism Analysis, Vol. 20, pp. 593–605 1083-5423/15 $60.00 + .00 Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3727/108354215X14464845877832 Copyright Ó 2015 Cognizant Comm. Corp. E-ISSN 1943-3999 www.cognizantcommunication.com DESTINATION COMPETITIVENESS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF HONG KONG, MACAU, AND SINGAPORE LOUISE TODD,* ANNA LEASK,* AND ALAN FYALL† *The Tourism Group, Business School, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK †Rosen College of Hospitality Management, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA This article presents a comparative study of the destination competitiveness of Hong Kong, Singa- pore, and Macau and those strategies developed to enhance their future positions in the global desti- nation “marketplace.” The methodology adopted is secondary in nature in that a critical review of the existing literature was conducted along with a synthesis of current practices across the three city-state destinations. The 15 Cs Framework provides the research parameters for the study in that it advo- cates an inclusive approach to those challenges and opportunities facing destinations as they seek to enhance their overall competitiveness. In particular, the study explores the specific approaches of the three destinations in terms of their similarity to thematically grouped clusters of the 15 Cs. The article closes by highlighting particular opportunities and challenges and potential management approaches that could be adopted within the destinations for the future. Key words: Hong Kong; Singapore; Macau; Visitor attractions; Destination management Introduction product, service, and experience portfolios to main- tain a competitive edge in the marketplace. Com- In recent years Southeast Asia has been trans- petitiveness in the context of destinations refers to formed by a combination of economic expansion, the means by which the component parts of the des- globalization, universal connectivity, and social tination are brought together to deliver the tourism adaptation (Bhosale & Gupta, 2006). Subsequent “product” or “experience” (Fyall, 2011). As such, increases in intra-Asian travel have contributed destination competitiveness represents a combi- to the city states of Hong Kong, Singapore, and nation of comparative advantage and competitive Macau becoming leading tourism destinations advantage with Ritchie and Crouch (2003) arguing (Dioko & So, 2012; Henderson, 2002; G. Li, Song, that together the destination’s “comparative advan- Cao, & Wu, 2013; Tse, 2001; P. Y. K. Wan & King, tages and its competitive advantages in tourism, 2013; Zeng, Prentice, & King, 2014). As such, each create its overall ability to compete in the tourism is keenly marketing their destinations’ features and marketplace and, ultimately, its ability to reach the Address correspondence to Anna Leask, The Tourism Group, Business School, Edinburgh Napier University, 219 Colinton Road, Edinburgh EH9 1UQ, UK. E-mail: [email protected] 593 Delivered by Ingenta to: University of Central Florida IP: 132.170.210.213 On: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:58:23 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. 594 TODD, LEASK, AND FYALL levels and types of success that it realizes in the advanced by Fyall, Garrod, and Tosun (2006), pro- tourism field” (p. 328). vides the research parameters for the study in that it In the specific geographical context of South- advocates a holistic and inclusive approach to those east Asia, this study thus examines the destination challenges and opportunities facing destinations as “endowment” in each of the three destinations of they seek to enhance their overall destination com- Hong Kong, Singapore, and Macau and those man- petitiveness. In particular, after an introduction to agement approaches that could be adopted to ensure the three destinations and the 15 Cs Framework, survival in the competitive international destination the study explores the specific approaches of each “marketplace.” It is interesting to note that despite the destination in terms of their similarity to themati- documented growth of tourism in the settings of Hong cally grouped clusters of the 15 Cs of relevance Kong, Singapore, and Macau, limited research has to their geographic and tourism context. It closes been undertaken to date of a comparative nature. That by highlighting particular opportunities and chal- said, some authors have made comparisons between lenges and potential management approaches that Hong Kong and Singapore as competitive destina- could be adopted within the destinations in the near tions, albeit with Singapore’s visitor attractions fre- and more distant futures. quently considered from the perspective of heritage management (Henderson, 1999, 2002, 2007a, 2010; Hong Kong, Singapore, and Macau: G. Li et al., 2013) and theme parks (Hashim & Said, The Case for Comparison 2013) while others have focused solely on strategic development (Meng, Siriwardana, & Pham, 2013). Hong Kong, Singapore, and Macau were selected Existing research into Macau’s tourism industry, for the basis of this study for a variety of reasons. meanwhile, has tended to focus on the achievement For the most part, all three destinations share similar of a balance between its casinos and gaming industry favorable strategic geographic locations (at the gate- and its status as a United Nations Educational, Cul- way to Southeast Asia and the crossroad between tural and Scientific Organization (UNESCO) World Australasia and Europe), a similar cultural context, Heritage Site (Dewar, du Cros, & Li, 2012; Dioko & and a colonial historical legacy which, for the most So, 2012; C. H. Huang, Tsaur, & Yang, 2012; Y. Wan part, has contributed to stable political and social & Li, 2013; Zeng et al., 2014) with a more recent arti- systems coupled with language and cultural diver- cle exploring resident attitudes toward tourism devel- sity. With each demonstrating a lack of abundance opment (X. Li & Wan, 2013). Further studies on Hong of natural resources, the need for manufacturing and Kong have primarily referred to the management of its export-driven economic activity (including tourism) cultural and heritage attractions and the classification, was a necessity for growth (Horng & Tsai, 2012). behavior, and preferences of their visitors, as well as Likewise, each has implemented, albeit to varying general tourists to the region (Heung, Tsang, & Chen, degrees, active tourism policies with tourism per se 2009; McKercher & Ho, 2006; McKercher, Ho, & du being used as a key driver for economic growth Cros, 2004; Wang, 2004). (Henderson, 2010; Meng et al., 2013) with public Notwithstanding, this article presents a compara- government sector support and investment consid- tive study of the destination competitiveness of the erable in each of the three destinations. Although three city-state destinations of Hong Kong, Singa- not specific to the three chosen destinations, Kozak, pore, and Macau. A comparison of their destination Baloglu, and Bahar (2010) argue that destination features and responses to the operating environment competitiveness should in fact be examined through allows the identification of aspects of convergence more comparative studies, with a preference for and divergence that can then be used to identify more than two destinations providing a more robust broader underlying and resultant trends that might and worthwhile outcome. A similar message was be relevant for other destinations. The methodol- communicated in the study by Enright and Newton ogy adopted is secondary in nature in that a criti- (2005), albeit with the use of Hong Kong, Singapore, cal review of the existing literature was conducted and Bangkok, and the more recent study by Leung along with a synthesis of current practices across and Baloglu (2013), which compared and contrasted the three destinations. The 15 Cs Framework, first 16 destinations across the Asia Pacific region. Delivered by Ingenta to: University of Central Florida IP: 132.170.210.213 On: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 16:58:23 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESTINATION COMPETITIVENESS 595 In view of the above, the destinations of Hong Table 1 Kong, Singapore, and Macau