The Gallipoli battlefields on the Gallipoli Peninsula, Turkey, is a dark tourism site containing cultural and historical significance to many New Zealanders and Australians. The Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) fought an unsuccessful battle against the Turkish for the control of Gallipoli Peninsula in 1915, causing the death of 8700 Australian and 2721 New Zealand soldiers. The national connections with Gallipoli still remain with the site being named ANZAC Cove and large ANZAC Day commemorations being held every year at ANZAC Cove and in New Zealand and Australia. Gallipoli can be categorised as dark or darker on Stone’s Dark Tourism Spectrum as; it is a site of death and suffering; has historical and educational components; the location is authentic and there is a low amount of tourism infrastructure. High numbers of New Zealand, Australian and British travellers visit Gallipoli because of the sites cultural significance and to pay respects to the soldiers who lost their lives. Historical education is also another reason for visitation. Tourists visiting Gallipoli can experience the four locations of ANZAC Cove, Cape Helles, Walkers Ridge, and Chunuk Bair which each have memorials and cemeteries. In total there are five cemeteries and six memorials tourists can visit. Other site attractions include war trenches, war tunnels and walks to the battle locations. Above ANZAC Cove is a purpose built commemorative site for the high number of visitors that attended the ANZAC Day ceremonies. ANZAC Day is the most popular visiting time, with an international ceremony the day before and a dawn ceremony followed by New Zealand and Australian ceremonies the day of. The closest town of Kabatepe also has a visitor centre which contains a small war museum.

Tour companies in Turkey offer group and private day tours of a number of sites and also offer Gallipoli as a stop in multi day tours. Some comp offer a once yearly ANZAC Day Ceremony tour. Many visitors are self-guided as the memorials and cemeteries are easily accessible.

http://www.anzac.govt.nz/

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/war/anzacday

http://www.gallipoli-tour.com/anzac-cove-gallipoli.html

http://www.turkeytravelcentre.com/gallipoli-anzac-day-tours/anzac-cove-guide.html

Hi Everyone,

My name is Emily Cowell and I am studying Tourism Management at Victoria University of Wellington. I am a New Zealander born and raised, although both of my parents emigrated here from England. For this reason we have had many trips back to England to visit family over the years. My most recent trip to England in 2007 had a large impact on me as I was finally old enough to begin placing an importance on my family heritage and began to seek more knowledge around it.

On this particular trip I felt a strong sense of belonging to the places we visited with family. Although I was not born in England I could begin to consider the lives of my ancestors in a way that I could not in New Zealand.

These feelings were even stronger after visiting heritage buildings in Manchester such as the Royal Exchange Theatre that was previously the Corn Exchange Building. This is just one example of many listed heritage buildings in Manchester that I saw. As was mentioned by Dr. Liburd heritage buildings bring out a sense of pride in people because they have survived for so many years. The skill of Englishmen centuries ago is prevalent in the strength and durability of the structures, some even survived the IRA bombing in 1996. Therefore these buildings and the knowledge that can be gained from their history can spark feelings of nationalism, this is one of various reasons why they are worth preserving.

The advertisement that I have selected to analyse advertises Contiki tours around Europe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDbLle5qSv0

This ad focuses on a woman who recalls her various experiences on a Contiki tour. She beings by showing a pair of shoes which she bought in London and then continues on to say where she went and what she did while wearing the shoes (clubbed in Paris, chased a bull, fell in love etc).

As it is a Contiki tour it is clearly for a younger audience as the tours only cater to people between 18 and 35. Therefore a unique set of motivations are addressed. On other Contiki ads I watched words such as “discover”, “experience” and “go” were used. These tap into the common needs and therefore desires of young people to ‘fly the nest’, see new parts of the world and have experiences that they would not be able to have at home.  These needs were immediately addressed in the advert through the distinction between material object and intangible experiences (the shoes versus the dancing, chasing the bull, falling in love). Therefore the focus on experiences and discovery continued for the duration of the advert.

Social motivations are also highlighted in the video. Although the narrative does not include extensive information about social situations the examples below illustrate that the character is rarely pictured alone. The majority of the film contains the main character with other people, presumably her travel companions and others who she may have met on her travels.

This acknowledges the need of many young individuals to meet new people. This may even fit in with the need to discover in that part of that discovery is meeting new people and forming new relationships.

The Contiki ad showcases a whirlwind trip around Europe. During the thirty-one second advert eleven experiences were mentioned over four different destinations. The speed at which these different experiences are mentioned creates a sense of excitement and also suggests an element of easy travel. The central character in the advert seamlessly travels from place to place with ease. As many young people have little connections to their home country, no mortgage, unlikely to have children, it is easy for them to travel and just “go”. Contiki cleverly market to people in this stage of their lives with the way in which the video is put together.

The age range that Contiki has specified for their tours in my opinion is quite broad. Individuals who are between late twenties and mid thirties are likely to be more advanced in their travel careers than those who are in their late teens and early twenties. The tours may be attractive and suitable for the specified age range however perhaps for different reasons.

Therefore I would be hesitant to say that most young people between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five have a need to discover the world and meet new people. Those on the more mature end of the age spectrum may have begun a career and are beginning to make commitments which create constrains in relation to travel. Therefore a Contiki tour may cater to their needs of escaping a routine and discovering various alternate surroundings in a short period of time. I agree that aspects of the tour may appeal to the entire age range (social reasons, visiting new places) although various motivations should be considered across the age range.

Emily Cowell

Blue Flag

As worldwide travel increased in the 1980’s, environmental consequences intensified, resulting in the first sustainable certification scheme, Blue Flag, to be established in 1987 (Blue Flag, 2012). The eco-label is now present in over 36 countries (Eco Index, 2012) and subsequently there are now many certification systems, as outlined by the following website: http://www.ecolabelindex.com/ecolabels/?st=category,tourism

Over 45 Eco-labels are listed on the site, emphasizing the large scope and complexity of the current system. To further illustrate the problem, the present Blue Flag scheme will be analyzed, highlighting strengths and weaknesses. TEFI values will then be discussed, allowing  potential improvements to the overall eco-label concept to form.

Corresponding with the majority of eco-labels, the Blue Flag Programme is owned and managed by a not-for-profit organization. Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE), previously the Foundation for Environmental Education Europe, presented their concept to the European commission in 1985 and became a global organization in 2001 (Blue Flag, 2012). To date, the eco-label functions by contributing to the sustainability of beaches and marinas, with 3650 areas awarded the certification (Blue Flag, 2012).  Blue Flag adopted an international set of criteria in 2006, positively resulting in the organization to be more cohesive and united worldwide (Blue Flag, 2012). The main criteria analyzed include measuring water quality, environmental management, education and water safety (Blue Flag, 2012).

The current Blue Flag accreditation system in New Zealand will now be discussed to understand potential flaws in the system. Foundation for Environmental Education has one representative from each participating nation, with FEE-NZ responsible for Blue Flag in New Zealand (Blue Flag New Zealand, ?). Only three beaches, all located in the Taranaki region, are awarded the certification leading to the question: are the rest of New Zealand’s beaches not sustainable or is the organization not committed to their responsibility due to funding/incentive/lack of government support issues? The following link will take the reader to Blue Flag’s website, which is relatively basic and many of the links (including www.feenz.org) do not work: http://www.blueflag.org.nz/links.php.  There are also many mistakes in regards to place names and regions in New Zealand on the international Blue Flag website, concluding that the organization’s partnership is not so strong with New Zealand.

In defense of the organization, the criteria (focusing on beaches) are detailed and perhaps there are only three beaches in New Zealand that comply with the following standards:

 Table 1: Blue Flag Criteria- Beaches

1) Environmental Education and Information

• Information about the Blue Flag must be displayed.
• Environmental education activities must be offered and promoted to beach users.
• Information about bathing water quality must be displayed.
• Information relating to local eco-systems and environmental phenomena must be displayed.
• A map of the beach indicating different facilities must be displayed.
• A code of conduct that reflects appropriate laws governing the use of the beach and surrounding areas must be displayed.

2) Water Quality

• The beach must fully comply with the water quality sampling and frequency requirements.
• The beach must fully comply with the standards and requirements for water quality analysis.
• No industrial, waste-water or sewage-related discharges should affect the beach area.
• The beach must comply with the Blue Flag requirements for the microbiological parameter faecal coli bacteria (E.coli) and intestinal enterococci/streptococci.
• The beach must comply with the Blue Flag requirements for physical and chemical parameters.

3) Environmental Management

• The local authority/beach operator should establish a beach management committee.
• The local authority/beach operator must comply with all regulations affecting the location and operation of the beach.
• The beach must be clean.
• Algae vegetation or natural debris should be left on the beach.
• Waste disposal bins/containers must be available at the beach in adequate numbers and they must be regularly maintained.
• Facilities for the separation of recyclable waste materials should be available at the beach.
• An adequate number of toilet or restroom facilities must be provided.
• The toilet or restroom facilities must be kept clean.
• The toilet or restroom facilities must have controlled sewage disposal.
• There should be no unauthorised camping, driving or dumping of waste on the beach.
• Access to the beach by dogs and other domestic animals must be strictly controlled.
• All buildings and beach equipment must be properly maintained.
• Coral reefs in the vicinity of the beach must be monitored.
• A sustainable means of transportation should be promoted in the beach area.

4) Safety and Services

• An adequate number of lifeguards and/or lifesaving equipment must be available at the beach.
• First aid equipment must be available on the beach.
• Emergency plans to cope with pollution risks must be in place.
• There must be management of beach users and events to prevent conflicts and accidents.
• There must be safety measures in place to protect beach users.
• A supply of drinking water should be available at the beach.
• At least one Blue Flag beach in each municipality must have wheelchair and accessibility features.
• Wheelchair access and accessibility features must be in place for at least one Blue Flag beach in each municipality.

Source: Blue Flag, 2012

The following government agencies are the primary organizations in charge of managing New Zealand’s oceans:

Ministry of Fisheries (MFish)

Department of Conservation (DOC)

Ministry for the Environment (MfE)

Ministry of Transport

Maritime New Zealand

Regional Councils (RCs)

National Marine Coordination Centre (MCC)

Ministry of Economic Development (MED)

Though the above list is extensive there does not seem to be any agency that focuses specifically on managing New Zealand beaches. From the perspective of tourism, Blue Flag accredited beaches are an insignificant determinant of demand (McKenna, 2011) however as environmental concern shapes the future of travelling, the accreditation may play a more important role in destination selection. Note that New Plymouth’s council website markets the achievement of Oakura, Fitzroy and East End beaches being awarded Blue Flags as recently as the 30^th of January, 2012 (New Plymouth District Council, 2012), meaning that the accreditation is still recognized by regional government in New Zealand.

The example of The Blue Flag Programme aimed to illustrate how eco-labels are an important step to ensuring sustainable tourism practices however there are major weaknesses due to there being many systems and insufficient global collaboration. Applying the TEFI values of mutuality, ethics, stewardship, professionalism and knowledge allows potential improvements to be discussed. The Blue Flag international programme shows promising signs of mutuality however the New Zealand partnership is underdeveloped. The certification could be a significant tool of developing cleaner, safer beaches in New Zealand, especially with the media focus on New Zealand drowning’s this summer.

Drawing from minimal knowledge on eco-labels it can be concluded that one global system for specific categories would be beneficial for sustainable tourism. For example, one global system for accommodation, one for beaches, one for attractions etc. Ethics would be an important part of accreditation systems, with businesses having to ensure that they do not greenwash their tourism enterprises, especially if they exploit awarded eco-labels for marketing purposes. Stewardship and mutuality are obviously key components of successful eco-labels and hopefully a more collaborative approach will be taken, as all eco-labels have the common goal of contributing to sustainable tourism for future generations.

References

Blue Flag, 2012. Beaches. Available: http://www.blueflag.org/Menu/Criteria [12.02.2012]

Blue Flag, 2012. History. Available:http://www.blueflag.org/ [12.02.2012].

Blue Flag, 2012. Available: http://www.blueflag.org/ [12.02.2012]

McKenna, J. (01.06.2011). Blue Flag or Red Herring: Do beach awards encourage the public to visit beaches? Tourism Management. 32, (3).

New Plymouth District Council, 2012. Blue Flag Beaches. Available: http://www.newplymouthnz.com/OurDistrict/SustainableDistrict/BlueFlagBeaches.htm [13.02.2012]

Tourism and Stereotypes

A stereotype is an exaggerated belief, image or distorted truth about a person or a group that are often based on images in mass media, or beliefs passed on by parents, peers and other members of society. They can be either positive or negative. Tourism stereotypes have lead to negative views associated with tourists to be formed, with an emphasis on mass tourism.

How do Finnish students see Canada and New Zealand? How do Canadian students see Finland and New Zealand? How do New Zealanders see Finland and Canada? Read what other students write and comment on two or more blog posts.

When I think of a Canadian traveller I imagine tourists who are adventurous, partaking in outdoor activities when visiting a country such as New Zealand. I also have formed a similar stereotype of the tourism activities people participate in when visiting Canada, such as snow sports, hiking, fishing, hunting and seeing wildlife. As I have not yet been to Canada or meet many Canadian people I presume I have formed these stereotypes due to how Canadians are portrayed in the media/television.

The below photo is sourced from Lonely Planet and is the stereotype I have formed of what Canada looks like even though I know the landscape is quite diverse.

Also, here are some blogs I found about people dismissing stereotypes that are often formed about Canadians:

http://blog.cheapoair.ca/travel/five-canadian-stereotypes-and-why-theye28099re-wrong.aspx

http://blog.cheapoair.ca/travel/five-canadian-stereotypes-and-why-theye28099re-wrong.aspx

Sorry students from Finland, as I have had almost no exposure to Finland as a country through media etc.  or met anyone from Finland, I have not formed any stereotypes about Finland as a country or the people who live there.

TEFI Values

Does stereotyping in tourism adhere to the TEFI values of ethics, professionalism, mutual respect and stewardship? In regards to mass tourism and the negative stereotypes that are sometimes associated with tourist’s, is it ethical to generalize all tourists into one group and blame them for issues such as acculturation?

An example of recent stereotyping in tourism is documented in the following New Zealand news articles: http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/6212798/Kiwis-too-crazy-for-Dubrovnik and http://tvnz.co.nz/travel-news/dubrovnik-tourism-boss-sacked-drunken-kiwi-and-aussie-comments-4673091. The destination manager of Dubrovnik made comments that she would prefer if Australian and New Zealand travellers should not visit the city because they are all crazy and drunk. Not only did the tourism official generalize all kiwi’s, but all New Zealanders and Australians. Therefore, can mutual respect be formed between countries when negative stereotypes are formed about the origins of visitors to a host country? Clearly the comments made by the tourist official were not professional or ethical and she was fired however as the article spread worldwide there could be significant long-term damage to Dubrovnik as a tourist destination.

From a different perspective is it ethical to market Canada or New Zealand as a destination by showing only images of quiet lakes and mountains in some marketing communication (such as the image I provided from Lonely Planet), when the countries have a diverse range of landscapes and therefore tourist activities. Does this promote stewardship by marketing certain natural attributes of destinations that may not be present in the future due to climate change or overuse by tourists and by providing these images does it further re-enforce stereotypes people have already formed about destinations?

Travel Motivations

Tourism New Zealand is renowned for creatively marketing New Zealand as a tourist destination, providing motivation for selecting a recently released marketing campaign, targeting USA travellers, to be analyzed throughout this TEFI activity.

The campaign was launched in September 2011 and aims to motivate USA travellers to “create lifetime memories in New Zealand” (Tourism New Zealand, 2011). This blog will analyze the below picture from the marketing campaign as well as the 30 seconds of video communication that can be viewed at the following web address: http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/news-and-features/latest-news/2011/09/americans-asked-to-create-lifetime-memories-in-nz/

The picture is of a man of athletic build, aimed at targeting the energetic American who seeks outdoor experiences. He is standing on a pinnacle, at a location in New Zealand, with his arms raised in victory, implying a sense of achievement, most likely from completing a hike to see the view of New Zealand he travelled for. It is interesting that we cannot see the man’s face and therefore can only determine that he is somewhere between the age of 20-40, due to physical characteristics such as hair, height etc. This strategy is effective, as it does not narrow the age demographics of people who can be motivated by the advert. Even the selected clothing the model is wearing is intentional, in particular the color red, which is often used to represent danger and in this case thrill seeking etc. It is also important to note the lack of snow on the mountains, which would have been intentional as the campaign is aiming to encourage American’s to travel to New Zealand during the summer months.

After watching the video lecture on travel motivations, it can be understood that the picture aims to create awareness of certain needs such as accomplishment, relating to esteem or perhaps even self-actualization needs on Maslow’s hierarchy. As the man is in the picture by himself, it can be assumed that he is either in the early stages of his life, before children etc. (as the mans hair is not grey he is unlikely in the post children stage of life). The picture helps overcome the constraint of i.e. people not wanting to travel to a long haul destination by themselves by showing the man has accomplished what he wanted and is happy which stimulates the need of wanting to feel like the man shown in the picture.

The television advert aims to motivate American’s to travel to New Zealand by implying that memories of their visit to New Zealand can be evoked by events in their every day lives. This is portrayed by a young man (wearing a suit- implying the man has a job) completing what appears to be a daily bus ride to work when a bump in the road evokes the memory of his trip to New Zealand. In the flashback to his holiday in New Zealand, the man is filmed enjoying himself with a young women and a group of friend, targeting younger consumers, in the beginning stages of their careers. The dialogue is “What you find in New Zealand, will always bring you back. There’s no place like it on earth”—- this is a pretty big promise to make!!!

Dually, the two different marketing communications make significant promises to tourists. For example: freedom, promise of beauty, good times, accomplishment, memorable etc. In terms of TEFI values, is this ethical marketing? New Zealand is an isolated and therefore has unique aspects however the landscape is often compared with other countries such as Scandinavia and Canada. It is interesting that the different flash shots of the 30 s second advert show a variety of weather (cloudy, dark clouds, sun), meaning that the video is trying to show the different weather that tourists may experience in New Zealand and not promising only sunshine in the summer months. It also could be questioned whether it is sustainable to target a country that requires long haul travel to visit New Zealand, leaving behind a large carbon footprint, relating to the criticism the trademark 100% Pure technique often receives. Both the campaigns also portray the tourists as having no boundaries whilst in New Zealand, which is not the case and there is often the misconception that activities such as freedom campaign are condoned throughout the country.

Overall the picture and video were enjoyable and interesting to analyze, in particular the way the video portrayed that memories from travelling to New Zealand was a good technique, though it does promise a lot. In regards to TEFI values, it would be appreciated if feedback could include how the values could further be applied to travel motivations and marketing.

References

Tourism New Zealand, 2011. Americans asked to create lifetime memories in New Zealand. Sourced: http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/news-and-features/latest-news/2011/09/americans-asked-to-create-lifetime-memories-in-nz/

The Killing Fields of Choeung Ek

Dark Tourism

Dark Tourism is defined as travelling to sites associated with death, suffering and the seemingly macabre (Stone, 2006). The determinants of demand that drive tourist’s to sites with dark elements is still misunderstood; do people simply want to pay their respects or is it human’s morbid curiosity that motivates the experience? The objective of this blog is to examine The Killing Fields of Choeung Ek, Cambodia, one of several mass graves that were a result of the Khmer Rouge reign in the 1970s (1975-1979). For more information of the history behind The Killing Fields please visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_Fields

Attraction

The tour of The Killing Fields of Choeung Ek has been sourced from the following Cambodian travel websites: http://www.asia-adventures.com/cambodia/cambodia-attractions/phnom-penh-attractions-2.php. and  http://www.asia-adventures.com/cambodia/cambodia-activities/cycling-cambodia/cycle-killing-fields-tonle-bati-1D.php The second website advertises a one day cycle tour from Phnom Penh to The Killing Fields, commencing at 7am. Tourist’s cycle 15km to Cheoung Ek Killing Fields, which is open daily and has no age restrictions, although it is advised that children are guided appropriately. The cost of the tour is $US95 per person, which includes a towel, water and food service. The tour company describes the attraction as tranquil, whilst reviews describe the site as lacking educational information about the graves and history behind the site (although more recent reviews praise the audio tour, which may be a new addition). Some may also find it controversial that the site operates as a profitable organization, run by a Japanese rather than Cambodian corporation.

Dark Tourism Spectrum

From understanding Stone’s (2006) Dark Tourism Spectrum, I would place The Killing Fields of Choenug Ek at the darkest end, as it is a site of death and suffering. The location is also authentic (although there are a number of other Killing Fields located throughout Cambodia), tourism infrastructure is minimal and depending on the tourist, there could be educational orientation with the site. Some could argue that the sight is not recent enough (approx. 40 years) to be considered dark however other factors outweigh the measurement of temporal distance.

TEFI Values

Choeung Ek is an example of the ethical considerations and controversy that can surround dark tourism sites. Is it ethical to make a profit (in particular the tour company that charges $US95 for tours) from a site of mass human suffering? Is it ethical to allow tourists on the site when some may not have sufficient understanding of Cambodian culture and history to respect the site and also may not be psychologically prepared for what they will witness? Is it ethical that the site is run by Japanese, who have a different culture to Cambodia and may be commercializing the site in a disrespectful manner? Other TEFI values can also be applied to the site such as its sustainability and what service the site is to the community.