Private Business’ Roles as Stakeholders in Developing Surabaya as Tourism Destination

Abstract

According to UNWTO report, the international tourist arrivals reached 1.2 billion people in 2016. There was 5% growth in the developed countries and 2% growth in the developing countries, including Indonesia. In 2016, Indonesia welcomed 11.52 million international tourists. As the second biggest city in Indonesia, Surabaya has important roles for the country. Receiving around 564,000 international tourists in 2016, Surabaya had changed into a tourism destination. The development began in 2005 when Surabaya Tourism Promotion Board was set up to promote the city tourism. This board consists of private tourism business, such as hotels, restaurants, travel agents and tourist attraction operators. They are working together with other tourism stakeholders in Surabaya. This study aims to reveal the roles of private business in developing Surabaya as tourism destination. The study describes the activities done by private business to develop Surabaya, such as conducting promotional activities, developing products, initiating new programs and joining in international events. Moreover, they are actually helping their own business as well as supporting tourism destination development in Surabaya. This study shows that commitment, consistency, and collaboration among private business as the stakeholders are the keys to develop tourism destination in Surabaya.

Network Governance in the Tourism Policy: The Case of Padang, West Sumatra

“…The study of network governance in the Indonesian tourism policy has been previously conducted. Indrianto et al [8] conducted a study about the roles of the government as a stakeholder in developing destinations in Surabaya, East Java Furthermore, a study carried out by Nusantara et al [10] also showed that two different tourism development approaches in Surakarta resulted in relatively balanced stakeholder assessments. This is because stakeholders in Surakarta maintain a differentiated and balanced view of the respective impacts of the different tourism policies and their development approaches.…”