Problemy zarządzania turystyką na szczeblu mezoekonomicznym w dużych miastach

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to illustrate the key aspects of tourism management and destination governance with a particular reference to metropolitan areas. Furthermore, the possible organisation forms of governance are discussed. Today, tourism in Poland is affected by a new global challenge – managing tourism on the destination level. It is a cause of several trends and deve-lopments that complicate tourism and hospitality industry as the whole: strong development of IT technologies, changing consumer trends, changing role of governments in tourism, knowledge-based economy approach, and growing market pressure (Alejziak 2000, Buhalis 2000, Public-private sector coopera-tion... 2000). Nowadays, interesting attractions, amenities, effectively run enter-prises and local governments stimulating the private sector actively are not enough to gain the competitive advantage on the global tourism market. Destination governance is a factor which determines success. The competitive potential of Polish cities in tourism will be determined by four driving forces: metropolitan development, internationalization, innovations and creativity, and integration processes. The overall goal of tourism management (governance) is to ensure both competitiveness and sustainability of a particular destination (Scott, Baggio, Cooper 2008, p. 43). According to UNWTO, destination governance defines “the operational activities, the expectations, the priorities and the goals of a destination management organisation (DMO). It also relates to the development and implementation of a cohesive policy, a consistent management system, and an effective decision making of a DMO” (Survey on Destination Governance... 2010, s. 4). Ritchie and Crouch (2003) define destination management in a strictly operational aspect, as positioning a destination, service experience management, marketing, information/research, human resource development, supporting factors and resources, and resources stewardship (Ritchie, Crouch 2003, p. 71–75). Middleton and Clarke (2001) identify two marketing strategies of a DMO. A promotional strategy “means devising and implementing promotional programmes to communicate destination images and key messages to targeted segments of potential visitors”. A facilitation strategy “creates marketing collaboration bridges between a DMO and individual operators in a destination, and between the ‘umbrella’ campaigns and industry marketing expenditures” (Middleton, Clarke 2001, p. 334–336). In that context three roles of a DMO can be pointed out: a knowledge broker, a brand champion, and a product designer (Mintel 2005, Kruczek, Zmyślony 2010). Destination governance or destination management should not be identified only with one organisational type. Vanhove (2005, p. 117) states that it is “too often identified with public authorities”. The range of organisational form is wider. Seiser (2008) conducted research among city tourism organisations associated within European Cities Marketing (ECM). 45% of the member organisations have public forms, mainly publicly owned, but also financed by private companies to some extent. 27% of organisations are private, 20% of them have a hybrid form, 4% are NPOs and 4% are foundations. In Poland there are two main organisation forms of DMO: public or hybrid (public-private, as a local tourism organisation).