Destination Competitiveness: A Comparative Study of Hong Kong, Macau, and Singapore

Abstract

This article presents a comparative study of the destination competitiveness of Hong Kong, Singapore, and Macau and those strategies developed to enhance their future positions in the global destination "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 advocates 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.

Managing Asian attractions, Generation Y and face

“…These three locations were selected for a variety of reasons. They share similar cultural contexts and colonial historical legacies that, for the most part, have contributed to stable political and social systems coupled with language and cultural diversity (Todd, Leask & Fyall, 2015).…”

Sustainability, Quality of Life and Challenges in an Emerging City Region of George Town, Malaysia

“…They pointed out to the importance of understanding such dynamics and monitoring the methodology that will constitute a good practice for development and conservation. Rogerson (1999) and Todd et. al (2015) have also highlighted that, besides the current capacity to engage with global capital, the important function of a city's heritage has a significant impact on the spatially differentiated pattern of competitiveness.…”

Evaluating Dimensions of Destination Image for Selection of Eco- tourism Destination in Bangladesh

“…The last criteria illustrated the dynamic of the destination image that consistently advances and directly involves the destination (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991;Baloglu, 2001). Subsequently, these destination image attributes are clarified and developed into a specific measure (Kim, 2012;Todd, Leask & Fyall, 2015;Terzidou et al, 2017).…”