No abstract

No abstract

Purpose -The systemic nature of tourism products generates the need for a broad involvement of destination stakeholders in the destination management organization's (DMO) activities and makes destination governance, defined as the setting up and developing of rules and mechanisms for business strategies by involving stakeholders (Beritelli et al.), an interesting topic. Over the last seven years the authors have conducted an in-depth study of governance and performance of 13 European tourism destinations -three mountain and two seaside destinations, four urban cities and four small heritage cities (Sainaghi; d'Angella; De Carlo and Dubini) -which represent an interesting sample to study this topic. This paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approach -A qualitative methodology is adopted; applying a theoretical model (Airoldi et al.) to the sample, the authors analyzed the governance structure of the selected destinations in terms of typologies of stakeholders involved, contributions provided, rewards obtained, decision-making processes and mechanisms which link these four components.Findings -The clinical cases (Yin; Eisenhardt) reported in the paper reveal several archetypes in destination governance structures defined according to different variables: destination manager characteristics; amount (absolute and relative) of financial contributions managed by the destination manager; financial model (firms and public bodies participation in destination manager annual budget); number of actors participating in the governance structure; number of actors participating in permanent meta-management activities.Practical implications -The empirical analysis offers interesting implications for both the academic debate and practitioners. From an academic point of view, this categorization enriches the academic contributions on destination governance, which are often descriptive. Moreover, the model allows identifying key variables and relationships in order to analyze and assess destination governance structures. At the same time, this framework offers interesting insights for destination managers responsible for the design and management of the governance structure.Originality/value -This paper proposes a model originally projected to analyze firms' governance for the analysis of DMOs governance. The authors decided to apply this model because it offers a new perspective to study destination governance, which considers the complexity of the environment and the different kinds of relationships between stakeholders.

The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Purpose This paper aims to explore the effects generated by the Milan World Expo 2015 on both firm performance and seasonality structure. It aims to answer the following research question: Did the Milan Expo 2015 influence only hotel results without changing seasonal patterns, or was this mega event able to reconfigure seasonal periods? Design/methodology/approach The present analysis is based on Smith Travel Research (STR) data. This source offers daily data on a large sample of Milan hotels (approximately 80 per cent of the total), representing more than 30,000 rooms. The empirical data relate to a period of 12 years, 11 of which are focused on the pre-event period (2004-2014), while 2015 is centered on the Milan Expo. This data comprise 4,383 daily observations. For each day, three operating measures were analyzed: occupancy, average daily rate (ADR) and revenue per available room (RevPAR). Findings The empirical findings fully support the first hypothesis: the four seasonal periods built around the main market segments are relevant lenses for understanding Milan’s demand structure before Expo 2015. The findings also support the second hypothesis relating to the effects generated by the event: Expo 2015 was able to improve hotel performance during the four seasonal periods analyzed. The most fragile seasonality registered the highest rise. Finally, the last two hypotheses to be investigated are as follows: did the Milan Expo 2015 simply improve hotel performance, without changing the underlying seasonal patterns (H3), or did this event reconfigure the demand structure (H4)? The analyses carried out lend more support to the fourth hypothesis, suggesting that new seasonal patterns emerged during Expo 2015. Originality/value This paper explores the impact of a mega event on seasonal patterns of hotel performance metrics. At least three original aspects are introduced. First, to analyze the Milan demand variation, a market segment approach that proposes an innovative seasonal matrix is developed. This is based on the three main client groups attracted by the destination. Second, the effects generated by the Expo are measured with consideration given to the four seasonal periods. Third, based on graphical and statistical analysis, the paper confirms that new seasonal patterns emerged during the Expo.

This article aims to identify the key elements underlying a destination capability (DC) and to examine what the genesis of these factors is and how they interact to foster the destination development. The article explores a specific development process—the creation of a new product in an alpine destination (Livigno, Italy)—making use of a theoretical framework structured around four major dimensions: DCs, coordination at the destination level, inter-destination bridge ties, and destination development. The results help clarify the genesis of a DC in the context of new product development. First, the dynamics underlying the creation of a DC show that coordination at the destination level constitutes the heart of the process, whereas the integration of scattered resources in the new product plays a more limited role. Second, from a dynamic perspective, the analysis has identified three patterns (scouting, implementation, and involvement).

No abstract

No abstract