TheMunicipalityofSlagelseAninsightintotourismcollaborationinamunicipality

FinalMasterThesis

MasterprograminTourism

AAU-CPH

10thSemester

Supervisor:MartinTrandbergJensen

Authors:SørenBilleEriksen&ChristofferFahlmannKarlsen

Picture1EditedfromTheMunicipalityofSlagelse'slogo(Slagelse.dk30/5-2017)

2

Abstract

Theaimofthisstudywastoexploretheunderstandinganduseoftheterm‘tourismcollaboration’

amonglocalgovernment,LTOsandtourismactorsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.Thetermisoften

usedwhentourismstrategiesatdifferentlevelsarebeingwritten,anditisalsoakeywordinthe

latestcoastalandnaturetourismstrategyinthemunicipality.

By assuming a social constructivist approach, the qualitative data for this research has been

collected throughanobservation studyof a tourismworkshopand semi-constructed interviews

withtourismactorsandkeypersonsfromLTOsandthelocalgovernment.

The findings show that the term ‘tourism collaboration’ is understood and used in significantly

differentways,dependingonwhoisasked.

Ithasbeenfoundthatthelackofcollaborationandcoordinationbetweenthelocalgovernment,

VisitVestjællandand local tourismassociations ishighly influencingthe local tourismactors,and

theirabilitytocollaborate.Thedifferenceintheoveralldestinationlong-termobjectives,andthe

localactors’short-terminterestshasproventocomplicatecollaborationbetweenthedestination

tourismdevelopmentorganisations,andthelocaltourismassociations.Thelackofajointtourism

strategy,andthelackofcoordinationinthedestinationlevel,hascausedthelocaltourismactors

tolosetrustintheorganisationsabilitytocreatecollaborations.

Power relations,bothstructuraland individual,playsan important role in thedevelopmentand

implementation of collaborations between actors. Especially it is relevant in relation to the old

disbanded municipalities of Skelskør, Korsør and Slagelse who with their local anchoring have

different approaches to tourism collaboration. The findings in this thesis contributes to the

theoretical fields within tourism network and power relations theory and opens up for an

unexploredfieldofmunicipaltourismresearchinDenmark.

3

TableofContents

Introduction............................................................................................................................................5Problemformulation.........................................................................................................................................7Subjectfield.......................................................................................................................................................8

Methodology........................................................................................................................................10OntologicalandEpistemologicalconsiderations.............................................................................................10

Socialconstructivismandinterpretivisminthisthesis................................................................................11Participantobservation...................................................................................................................................12

Choiceofobservationstudy–tourismworkshop.......................................................................................13Overtorcovertroles?..................................................................................................................................14Takingnotesandanalysingparticipantobservations.................................................................................15

Interviews........................................................................................................................................................16Choosinginterviewees................................................................................................................................16Interviewdesign..........................................................................................................................................18Theinterviewees.........................................................................................................................................18

Validityoftheresearchandlimitations..........................................................................................................21Ethicalconsiderations.....................................................................................................................................22

Theoreticalconsiderations...................................................................................................................23Stakeholdertheory..........................................................................................................................................23

Howwestudyactor-networks....................................................................................................................24Researchingnetworks.................................................................................................................................24

Collaborationsinatourismdestination..........................................................................................................26Public/privaterelations...............................................................................................................................27Collaborationamongstakeholders.............................................................................................................28

Localgovernmentpolicyandplanning............................................................................................................32Policyinstrumentstofacilitatecollaboration.............................................................................................35DestinationpartnershipandDestinationteam-building............................................................................36

Powerrelations...............................................................................................................................................38

Analysis.................................................................................................................................................44Theapproachtotourismcollaborationfromnationalleveltolocallevel......................................................44

TheDanishGovernment’stourismstrategy................................................................................................45KL–LocalGovernmentDenmark................................................................................................................47ThelocalgovernmentofSlagelse...............................................................................................................49TourismassociationswithinthedestinationofSlagelse.............................................................................52Subconclusion–Officialtourismstrategiesfromthenationleveltothelocallevel..................................53

Thetourismdepartment’sapproachtoencouragetourismcollaboration....................................................56Workshop–Observationstudy...................................................................................................................56Outcomesoftheworkshop.........................................................................................................................63Tourismstakeholdernetwork.....................................................................................................................66

Collaborationinthelocaltourismactorlevel.................................................................................................71Networkscreatedbydestinationteambuilding.........................................................................................72Networkscreatedbythetourismactorsthemselves..................................................................................77

Theoldmunicipalityborders–localtourismnetworks..................................................................................78Skælskør......................................................................................................................................................79Bisserup.......................................................................................................................................................80Korsør..........................................................................................................................................................82

4

Slagelse.......................................................................................................................................................84Collaborationbetweenthefourcities.........................................................................................................86

Powerrelationsamongactors,LTOsandDMOs.............................................................................................88RelationsbetweenlocalgovernmentandtheLTO’s...................................................................................90Individualpowerrelations...........................................................................................................................93

StateofcollaborationinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.....................................................................................94

Discussion.............................................................................................................................................96Thegeneralconfusion–Theneedforaclearleader/DMO............................................................................97

Acleardefinitionofroledistributionbetweentourismassociations,VisitVestsjællandandthetourismdepartment.................................................................................................................................................99

Recognitionoflong-termdestinationstrategies,andshort-termlocalinterests.........................................101Localanchoringintheoldmunicipalities,andindividualpowerrelations...................................................103

Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................106

Literature............................................................................................................................................108Websites........................................................................................................................................................112

5

Introduction

Collaborationsintourismdestinationshasbymanyscholars(JamalandGetz,1995;Morrison,2013;

JamalandStronza,2009;LankfordandHoward,1994)beendescribedasanimportantelementof

tourismdevelopment.Therehasbeenaspecificfocusontheinvolvementoftourismactorsfrom

the local leveltotheoveralldestination levelandall thewayuptothenational level.However,

therehasbeena“[…]lackofacriticalmassofempiricalworkoncollaborationinthedestination

context.”(Fyall,GarrodandWang,2012:11),andtheintentionofthisthesisistocontributetothe

understandingofcollaborationsbetweenactorsintourismdestinations.

Back in 2011, the local government of Slagelse took the first steps towards a new tourism

development in thearea,byoutsourcing three specificworkareas toVisitVestsjælland: tourism

marketing,tourismproductdevelopmentandnetworkingamongtourismactors.VisitVestsjælland

isalocalgovernmentfundedorganisation,whichisoperatingasasubsidiaryofVisitDenmark.Also,

apartofVisitVestsjælland,arethetwoneighbouringmunicipalitiesKalundborgandSorø,which

meansthatitiscoveringaratherlargeareaofwesternZealand.

TheMunicipalityofSlagelseisrichoncoastlinewithabout180kilometresofbeautifulnaturealong

the coast, and small islands in the south. In 2017, the development department at the local

governmentofSlagelse,createdareport,TourismPolicyConsiderations(appendixM),thatoutlines

whatshouldbeprioritisedoverthenextfouryears.Oneofthemaininitiatives,athree-yearproject

namedcoastalandnaturetourism,isplacinggreatemphasisoncreatinganddevelopingsynergy

and interactionbetween tourismactors that areworkingwithin the field of coastal andnature

tourism.

“The project will run over a three-year period, where the goal is to create

interconnectionanddevelopmentacrossthetourismactorsandactivitiesthatshould

end up in bookable experiences that can be easily communicated to the potential

tourists.”

(AppendixM,TourismPolicyConsiderations,2017:8)

6

The vision is to establish better andmore productive collaborations and partnerships between

tourism actors, but equally as important is to create a stronger relationship between the local

tourismorganisations(LTO’s)(Dredge,2006:p270),andtheprivatetourismactors.

“Theintentionistoinvolvelarger,aswellassmallertourismactors,andhelptobring

coherencetothetourismindustry.ArelationshipwhichisreflectedinthewaySlagelse

marketedasanactiveandscenictourismdestination.”

(Appendix M, Tourism Policy Considerations, 2017: 8)

Asseenabove,thesewell-meaninginitiativesfromthelocalgovernmentaremeanttobeinvolving

tourismactorsofall sizes.TheTourismPolicyConsiderations-report,with itscoastalandnature

projectisaprojectthatinvolvesthewholedestinationofSlagelse,amunicipalitythatbeforethe

mergingofmunicipalitiesin2007,werethreeseparatemunicipalities.

Oneoftheresearchersofthisthesis,Christoffer,hassincethesummerof2016beenworkingpart-

timeinthetourismdepartmentofthelocalgovernmentinSlagelse.Throughthisjob,hehasbeen

involvedwiththedevelopmentoftourismcollaborationsinthemunicipalityandhaslearnedthat

previouscollaborationinitiativesoftenhavequicklybeenshelved.

This thesiswill, based on themunicipality of Slagelse as a destination, try to contribute to the

understanding of tourism collaborations, the development of these and the challenges and

implications thatmaybe in it. By empirical data collected throughqualitative semi-constructed

interviewswithbothpublicandprivateactorsandanobservationstudy,thisresearchwillseekto

gainamorecomprehensiveunderstandingoftourismcollaborationsinaDanishmunicipality.We

finditinterestingtoinvestigateuponhowthesesmallercoastalandnaturetourismactorsperceive

theirrolesandinfluenceinthebiggertourismpictureofSlagelsemunicipality.Maybebylistening

tothetourismactorsandtheLTO’s,wecangetanunderstandingofwhyearlierinitiativeshavenot

beensuccessful,andhowthelocalgovernmentcanensurethatallactorsarecollaboratingtowards

acoherenttourismstrategy.

7

Problemformulation

As explained in the introduction, the aim of this thesis is to gain an understanding of tourism

collaborationsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.Asseenintheforthcomingcoastalandnaturetourism

strategyinthemunicipalityandgenerallyinstrategiesfromnationaltolocaldestinationlevelthe

term collaboration is a keyword in political discourses around tourism planning and tourism

development.Withtheaboveasastartingpoint,thisresearchwillseektoanswerthefollowing

question:

How is the term ‘tourism collaboration’ understood, used and implemented by the local

governmentandtourismactorsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse?

Withthisproblemformulation,thisthesisseekstounderstandhowthetermtourismcollaboration

is understood andusedbypublic andprivate actors and thepossible challenges that liewithin

developingthisinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.Tohelpanswerthisoverallproblemformulation,this

thesiswillseektoanswerthefollowingsub-questions:

• Isthereacommonthreadintourismstrategiesfromanationalleveldowntothemunicipal

level,inrelationtocollaborationandpartnerships?

• Doesthemergingofthemunicipalitiesin2007influencetheunderstandinganddevelopment

oftourismcollaborationsinthecurrentmunicipality?

• Howdopowerrelationsbetweenorganisationsandindividualsinthemunicipalityaffectthe

understandinganddevelopmentoftourismcollaborations?

8

Subjectfield

In the following section, a brief geographic and demographic description of themunicipality of

Slagelsewillbepresentedtothereader,followedbyalookatthestructureoftheleadingtourism

stakeholdersandactorswithinthemunicipality,

TheMunicipalityofSlagelseislocatedonthewestsideofZealand,Denmark,andisthe16thlargest

populatedmunicipalityinDenmarkwithapopulationofapproximately80.000inhabitants.Thecity

ofSlagelseisthelargestcity,andit iswherethelocalgovernmentofSlagelseis located.Korsør,

SkælskørandSlagelsearethethreecitieswithinthepresentmunicipalityborder,whobothusedto

beseparatemunicipalitiesbeforethemergingofthemin2007.

The 180-kilometre coastal line can be seen as an attraction in itself, for tourist seeking active

activities in thenature,orarelaxingvacation.Alongthecoast there is largerareaswithholiday

cottages,whicharethemostusedaccommodationinthedestinationofSlagelse.

VisitVestsjælland,thetourismmarketingorganisation,hasmarketedtheareaasSjællandsVestkyst

(Zealand’sWestCoast)asareferencetotheDanishwestcoastinJutland.Thereasonisthatthe

coastisasbeautifulasJutland’swestcoast,butismuchmoreprotectedandthereforemoresafe

andfamilyfriendly.

InthesouthwestareaofthemunicipalityclosetothecityofSkælskør,aretheretwoislandsnotfar

fromthemainland,AgersøandOmø.Theseislandsareattractionsinthemselves,duetothespecial

islandcommunityandatmosphere.Theyareonlyashortferryrideaway,andhavedifferentkinds

of accommodations for tourists. The area in the south, from Skælskør to the border in to the

municipalityofNæstved,isquiteruralwithlowpopulationdensity.

The local government in Slagelse outsourcedmost tourism developmentwork, by creating the

before mentioned VisitVestsjælland. VisitVestsjælland is a cooperation between the three

municipalitiesofSlagelse,KalundborgandSorø,whicheachsupportVisitVestsjællandfinancially.

TheagreementbetweenthethreemunicipalitiesandVisitVestsjællandisthatVisitVestsjællanddo

tourismproductdevelopment,marketingandfacilitatenetworkingbetweentourismactors.

9

Within the local government of Slagelse there is not a specific tourism department, but the

responsibilitylieswithinthedepartmentofCultureandLeisure.Buttosimplifyit,theanalysiswill

refertoitasthetourismdepartment,whentourismprojectsatthemunicipalitylevelisdiscussed,

sinceitcanbearguedthatthereisatourismdepartmentwithintheCultureandLeisuredepartment.

Inthespringof2016,thelocalgovernmentofSlagelsebeganatourismproject,wherethevisionis

to strengthen the costal andnature tourismat thedestination. To get anunderstandingof the

resourcesbeingappliedtothistourismproject,itisworthmentioningthatthereisbudgetedwith

75%ofonefulltimeemployeetoworkwiththestrategy.

10

Methodology

Thepurposeofthischapter isto introducethereadertothemethodologicalconsiderationsand

approachesthatunderlietheresearchconductedinthisthesis.Tobeginwith,areviewofthethesis’

ontologicalandepistemologicalstandpointswillbepresentedandwhatisperceivedasrealityin

thispresentresearch.Secondly,anexaminationontheuseofhermeneuticsanditsrelevancyto

understandingthefindingsanddatacollectedinthisresearchispresentedtothereader.Thelast

parts of the chapter are concerning the approaches taken in relation to the qualitative data

collection–whichincludesareviewofthemethodologyusedinconductingqualitativeinterviews

and the choice of respondents and an explanation of the approaches taken during observation

studies.

OntologicalandEpistemologicalconsiderations

Thispartofthechapterwillclarifyandpresenttothereadertheontologicalandepistemological

approacheswhichtheresearchinthisthesisisbasedon.

Thetermontologyisdealingwithhowweperceivetheworldandhowwebelievethatarealityis

created.Inontology,oftenbasedonspecificstreamsofsciencessuchassocialornaturalscience,

wefinddifferentapproachestotheacceptanceofrealityandtheconstructionofit.Naturalscience

researches are found to beworkingwithin the positivistic or post-positivistic fieldwhere social

realityisexternalandobjective(Wahyuni,2012),andpositivistsarein“[…]thebeliefthat‘there

existsa (knowable) truthout there,drivenby immovable laws” (Hollinshead,2006:45). In stark

contrast to themore rigid thinking of positivism,we find social constructivism,which perceive

realityandtheconstructionofitinasignificantlydifferentway.Theconstructivistapproachbelieve

thatrealityisconstructedbyrelationsbetweensocialactorsand“[…]theyrecognizethatindividuals

with their own varied backgrounds, assumptions and experiences contribute to the on-going

constructionofrealityexistingintheirbroadersocialcontextthroughsocialinteraction”(Wahyuni,

2012:71).Notonlyisrealityconstructedintheinteractionbetweensocialactors,butitisalsoina

“[…]constantstateofrevision[…]”(Bryman,2012:33).Whenspeakingofrealityasconstructedby

socialactorsandrelationsbetween,itisimportanttonoticethatthisalsoverymuchincludesthe

researchesthemselveswhoareequallyasmuchapartoftherealityconstructionthanthesubjects

of the research (ibid.). Although, in recent years, there have been an increased support an

11

encouragement for the appliance of social constructivism in qualitative tourism research

(Hollinshead,2006;Dredge,2010;Wayuni,2012),thenitmustalsobenotedthattherehasbeen

criticismoftheratherfreeinterpretationofrealityfoundinconstructivism(Bryman,2012;Botterill

andPlatenkamp,2012).Socialconstructivismhasbeenaccusedofpresentingafictiverealitywhere

everything is relative and only exists because it is perceived that way (Jacobsen, 2001: 122).

However, this critique has been denounced by social researcherswho argues that the criticism

stemsfromamisunderstandingoftheconceptofsocialconstructivismandanexaggerationofits

claimeddenialofreality(Pernecky,2012).

Socialconstructivismandinterpretivisminthisthesis

Theresearchquestion(s)inthispresentthesisproposesasearchforanunderstandingoftourism

collaborationsinacomplexmunicipalityasSlagelseandthecomplicationsofcreatingsynergyin

such a rather large region.With aqualitative approach through semi-constructed interviews an

observationstudyofatourismworkshop,itisrecognizedthatrealityandmeaningisconstructedas

aninterplaybetweenthesubjectsoftheresearch.Thus,thisthesiswillbetakingtheperspectiveof

a social constructivist approach. From interactions such as interviews and observation, we are

seeking to understand the tourism actors and their opinions and assumptions. With a social

constructivistapproach,itisimportanttonotice,thattheversionofsocialrealitypresentedinthis

thesis,cannotbedefinitivebecauseitalsowillbeaconstructofour,asresearchers,ownopinions

andassumptions(Bryman,2012).Whenwe,asresearchers,attendaworkshopandobservetourism

actorsinteractwitheachotherandtheirreactionstoissuesthatarebroughtup,weareformingour

ownassumptionsandinterpretationsofasocialrealityinthemunicipality.Therebyconstructivism

“[…]addsavaluabledimensiontotourismbyallowingnewconstructionstoemerge”andithas“[…]

both a critical and a hopeful aspect because of its ability to expose and challenge prevailing

understandings”(Pernecky,2012:1132).Attimesduringtheresearchforthisthesis,theresearchers

prevailingunderstandingsofthesubjectwaschallenged.Asoneoftheresearchers,Christoffer,is

employedinaparttimejobintheorganisationthat isthelocalgovernmentforthedestination,

thereweresomepresumedperceptionsabouttourismactorsandassociations.Theseperceptions

weresometimeschallengedbecause,asresearchersinasocialconstructivistrole,weweregiven

12

theopportunity to investigate thesocial lifeof tourismactors fromadifferentperspective than

Christofferhasotherwisedone.

The epistemological considerations are evolving around what we, as researches, perceive and

approveasacceptableknowledge. Ina somewhatnaturalprolongingof theontologicalposition

takeninthisthesis,aninterpretivisticapproachwillbefollowed.Withtheepistemologicalposition

withininterpretivismwearemakingasubjectiveinterpretationofourfindingsduringobservation

andinterviews,and“[…]takinganinterpretivestancecanmeanthattheresearchermaycomeup

withsurprisingfindings,oratleastfindingsthatappearsurprising.”(Bryman,2012:31).

Participantobservation

Thissectionofthechapterintendstointroducethereadertoanobservationstudyasamethodical

approachtoqualitativeresearchinthisthesis.

Observationstudiescanbeapproachedandperformed inawidevarietyofways,andcanhave

differentpurposesinrelationtotheresearchquestionandtheaimofthestudyingeneral(Colein

Ritchie,BurnsandPalmer,2005:63).Insocialresearch,themethodofparticipantobservationis

widely considered an acceptable and usefulmethod in understanding humannature and social

interaction(Bryman,2012:431),anditistheobservationmethodappliedintheresearchforthis

thesis.Beforegoingintothepracticeofaparticipantobservationstudy,afewthingshavetobe

takenintoconsideration,especially;theroleoftheobserverandthephysicalandsocialsettingof

the study itself. In participant observation studies, there is an important distinction, between

choosingacovertoranovertrole.Asthenameimplies,thecovertroleseestheresearchernot

revealinghimselforhisintentionstotheobservedparticipants.Thebenefitsofthecovertroleare

thattheresearchergetstoobserveparticipantsintheir‘truestnature’sotospeak.Withouthaving

inthebackoftheirheadsthattheiractionsandspokenwordsareevaluatedandobservedbyathird

party, it should be assumed that they are actingmore natural andwithout outside restrictions

(ibid.).Thecovertrolehaslimitationsinthemeansthattheyoftencanonlybeconductedinpublic

spaces,whereresearchersnotbeforehandhastonegotiateaccessandthatittosomedegreelimits

theresearcher’soptionsofhonestinteractionwiththeobservedindividualsorgroups.

13

Theovertrole,incontrasttothecovert,seestheresearcherrevealingthenatureofhispresence–

oratleastrevealingittotheoneswithwhomhenegotiatesaccesstheobservedspace.Researchers

inovertroleshastheadvantageofbeingabletobehonestwiththeobserved,thustheriskofbeing

caughtinethicaldilemmaswillbedecreased.Withanovertrole,theresearcherswillalsobeable

to takenotesopenlyandmaybeevensteerconversations incertaindirectionsbeneficial to the

observations(ibid.:436)

Theuseofparticipantobservationinthisthesishasbeenconductedwithtworelativelydifferent

intentionsinmind.Firstofall,wesoughtapreliminarymethodicalexercisewherewecouldcollect

somebasisknowledgeofthetourismactorsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse:Whoarethey,andwho

are the most prominent ones? How are they geographically distributed throughout the

municipality? Secondly, the observation study was conducted with the intention of learning

somethingabouthowtourismcollaborationsarecreatedinasocialsettingandwhatcomplications

thatlieswithin.

Choiceofobservationstudy–tourismworkshop

As mentioned briefly above, one of the intentions of an observation study was to use it as a

preliminarymethodtogatherbasicknowledgeabouttourismactorsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.

ThroughChristoffer'spositionasastudentemployeeinthetourismdepartmentofthemunicipality,

webecameawareofaworkshoptobeheldfortourismactors intheregion.Theworkshopwas

initiatedwiththe intentionofcreatingnetworkrelations,presentingnewtourisminitiativesand

innovationingeneral.ItwasinitiatedandfacilitatedbyLandudviklingSlagelsewhichisalocalaction

groupworkingfordevelopmentofruralareasinthemunicipality.Theyareresponsibleforallocating

fundsfromEU’sruralareaprogramandfromthedevelopmentpoolfromthemunicipalitytonew

projects in the region. The new tourism initiatives presented at the workshop were projects

developedwithhelpfromthesefunds,anditwasalsoindentedtoworkasaformofmotivatorfor

theothertourismactors,byshowingthemwhatcanbeachievedwithfundingfromLandudvikling

Slagelse. Following the project presentations, the actors was divided into groups that rotated

betweenfiveinnovationstands,eachwithadifferenttourismthemefortheregion,wheresome

interestingdiscussionsandissuesemerged.

14

Aninvitationwassentouttotourismactorsinthemunicipality,butitwasfurthermorestatedinthe

invitationthatactorsnotdirectlyinvolvedintourism,werealsowelcome.Theactorscouldsignup

fortheworkshopafteraprincipleoffirstcomefirstserved.Thefactthatitwasnotmandatoryfor

actorstoattend,madeitinterestingforusbecauseitcouldtellsomethingaboutwhatareasofthe

municipalityhasthemostinterestintourismdevelopment–whowerethere?And,perhapseven

moreinterestingly,whowerenotthere?

Overtorcovertroles?

Foraresearcherwiththeintentionofdoinganobservationstudy,gainingaccesstoaclosedorsemi-

closedsettingcanbeachallenge,and it canoften requirequiteabitofperseverance fromthe

inquiring part (ibid.). The tourism workshop facilitated by Landudvikling Slagelse, can to some

degreebecategorisedasaclosedsettingbecauseonlyChristoffer,byvirtueofhiswork,hadnatural

access.Ontheotherhand,SørenwasnotguaranteedaccessandChristofferhadtonegotiatehis

participationbeforehand.

Attheworkshop,wewereabletoassumemostlyacovertposition,andtakinganovertrolewhen

we saw it beneficial for steering conversations and gaining information about tourism actors

present.ThecovertrolewasnaturallyassumedbyChristofferashehadtohelpwithpracticalities

duringpresentationsandtotheparticipantsattheworkshopwereseenasanemployeeforthe

municipality.Søren,atleastinthefirsthalfoftheworkshop,assumedacovertrole,andwasable

toblendinamongtheotheractorsatthetables.Asmentionedabove,oneofthedisadvantagesof

acovertroleistheinabilitytotakenoteswhilethestudyisbeingcarriedout.Atthisworkshop,

severalattendeesweresittingwiththeirlaptopsinfrontofthem,soSørenwasabletoalsousea

laptop to take notes of the observation without it being suspicious. The covert roles were

maintaineduntiltwothirdsintotheworkshop.Atthispointthepresentationsandsmallerrotation

workshopswasdoneanddinnerwasserved.Anexampleofhowwesawagoodopportunityto

switchtoovertandrevealourpositionasresearcherscameduringdinner,wherewecameintotalk

withagovernmentofficialsittingnexttous.Theofficialshowedtohavevaluablegeneralknowledge

ofthetourismsituationinthemunicipality,andbecauseofthishewasalsoabletogiveprovideus

some interesting interpretationsof somediscussions thathadarisenbetweenactorsduring the

15

workshop.Weestimatedthathisknowledgewastoovaluableinrelationtoourstudy,thatwehad

torevealourtrueintentionsofourpresence,towhichheluckilyreactedpositively.Wewerenow

abletoaskmorein-depthaboutthetopicshepreviouslyhadindicatedtohavemoreknowledgeof.

Theconversationwiththisgovernmentofficialwillbemoreprofoundlyexaminedinthefollowing

analysischapter,asthisisjustanexampleofhowswitchingfromcoverttoovertcanbebeneficial

for theresearcher(s).But ismustalsoberememberedthatthis revealingofandchangingtoan

overtrolecanhavetheeffectthatitcausesreactivity(Bryman,2012)amongsttheparticipantshow

nowknowsthetrueintentionsoftheresearchers.Reactivitycanoccurwhentheparticipantswho

arethetargetoftheobservationstudyclearlybegintochangeororganisetheirbehaviourbecause

theyhavebecomeawarethattheyarebeingobserved(Saunders,LewisandThornhill,2009).Asthe

shiftinobservationrolestookplacerelativelylateintheobservationstudyandclosetotheending

oftheworkshop,itmustbeassumedthatanyreactivitycausedbythishashadlittleimpactonthe

overallresultoftheobservations.

Takingnotesandanalysingparticipantobservations

Thepurposeofconductingaparticipantobservationinthisthesisis,asmentionedintheprevious

section,wastocollectgeneralknowledgeaboutthetourismactorsinthemunicipalityaswellasto

investigate the process and possible complications of creating a tourism collaboration. To

rememberimportantsituations,wordsandactionsthatoccurredduringtheworkshop,noteswas

writtenonalaptop.Duringparticipantobservations,dependingontheresearcher’sroleandthe

setting in general, there aredifferent approaches to taking fieldnotes: ranging fromonlyusing

memorywhenwritingseemsinappropriate,tojottednoteswithverybriefdescriptionsofsituations

to full field notes (ibid.: 450). In the previous section iswas described how Sørenwas able to,

withoutstandingout,sitwithalaptopattheworkshop.Thisallowedhimtotakesomein-depth

descriptive notes about the observed. On the basis of these full field notes, complementary

knowledgewascreatedfortheforthcomingqualitativeinterviews.

16

Interviews

The following section is intended to clarify the methodological considerations underlying the

interviews conducted in this thesis.On thebasis of this, the rationalebehind the choiceof the

interviewrespondentswillbepresentedtothereader.

Whenusingsemi-constructed interviewsasaqualitativemethod in this thesis, it isbecause the

intervieweeshopefullycanprovidetheresearchwithvaluableinsightsandknowledgeabouttheir

experiencesofbeingatourismactorinthemunicipalityofSlagelseandthepossiblecomplications

of creating a tourism collaboration.Much in relation to the social constructivist approach, the

researchquestionsinthisthesisarecallingforus,asresearchers,toengageinconversationswith

theactorstogaininsightsintotheirsocialrealityandeverydaylives(Kvale,2007).

Choosinginterviewees

In this research, 7 tourism actors have been chosen as interviewees. As touched upon in the

previoussection,oneofthebenefitsofhavingtheopportunitytoobservethetourismworkshop

wastouseitasapreliminaryexerciseandgainanunderstandingofwhotheactive(andnon-active)

tourismactorsinthemunicipalityare.

17

Figure1Mapofparticipatorsatthe2017tourismworkshopinthemunicipalityofSlagelse(Source:TheTourismDepartment)

As seen in the above map of participating actors at the workshop, a large part of them was

concentratedinandaroundthecitiesofKorsørandSkælskørandotherwisespreadoutthroughthe

municipality. First and foremost, we have therefor interviewed actors from the most densely

represented areas on the map as we know that these are areas who actively are pursuing a

developmentoftourisminthemunicipality.

Inadditiontoourinterestinthedenselyrepresentedareasofthemap,ourattentionwasalsodrawn

to gap in the southern partwhichwas not represented at theworkshop. Through Christoffer's

knowledgeoftheregionwewereawarethatthesouthernpart,mainlyinandaroundthetownof

Bisserup,indeedisinvolvedintourismwithcampingareas,beaches,birdsanctuariesandapopular

Lene Wibroe SkælskørLokalrådSimonne Gorju SIMONNE.DKBerit Andersen Danmarkerdejligt

Jørgen DamgaardLandudviklingSlagelse/GimlingeLokalråd

Birthe TofthøjSkælskørBådfartogKorsørMadmarked

Frederik Pedsersen Kultur,Fritid- ogTurismeudvalgetTroels Brandt LandudviklingSlagelseLisbet Kristensen DenBlåCaféGitte Fyrkov Musholmferie-sport-konferenceMarcel Hermes Musholmferie-sport-konferenceBirgitte Christensen KunigundePer Møller KunigundeKarenM Hansen FødevarerproducentHenrik Andersen DybkærgaardUlla BrinkHansen FødevarerLokaltFinnVedel Pedersen SlagelseKommuneHenrik MøllerKastrup OstebørsenPuk Hvistendal SlagelseKommuneEstridMaria Eriksen ESTRID/SlagelseturistforeningDitte Hvas SkælskørBykontorLillian WallinKristensen KunstnerogudlejerPerStangby Thuesen SlagelseTuristforeningAnneMette Christiansen LandudviklingSlagelseSøren Eriksen AalborgUniversitetJørn Engkebølle SlagelseTuristforeningCarsten Jensen SkælskørNorCampingTroels Christensen Kultur- FritidsogTurismeudvalgetAnders Riber SlagelseturistforeningLene Feldt KorsørLokalrådKurt Sørensen Bien,Produktionsskolen

Roland Ipsen SkælskørLokalrådJette Søndergaard Postgården,hotelLotte Falsing Brugerrådet,Kulturhuset,BoligKorsørFlemming Hansen Skælskørerhvervsforeningm.fl.Jack Rasmussen tudeåkanoKenn Rasmussen tudeåkanoKristin Larsen KorsørsejlklubTorben Roepstorff SkælskørTurismeJesperThykjær Andersen KorsørLystfiskerforeningMetteBlum Marcher GuldagergaardBettina Wentzer KorsørsejlklubPernille Hjort KorsørsejlklubLeif Andersen SkælskørBådfartSøren Larsen NaturformidlingvedSørenlarsenKarl Sigsgaard KorsørLystbådehavnLars Ellegaard SkælskørTurisme/LokalrådetFlemmingL. Petersen KLFJytte Bjergvang AgersøbeboerforeningMicha Meedom SlagelseKommuneAnne Carlsen CampinggårdenBoeslundeRasmusFriis Sørensen DanskKyst- ogNaturturismeHelene Gerup OmøFiskogTangF.M.B.A.Roland Ipsen SkælskørLokalrådEigil Hou PicnicforeningeniSlagelselystanlægChristoffer Karlsen SlagelseKommuneStine Andersen DybkærgaardMathias Andersen DybkærgaardLasse Andersen DybkærgaardJørgen Andersen KFTudvalgetAnette Moss VisitVestsjællandAllan Pedersen PanzermuseumEast

Billy JensenHalsskovLokalråd/FrivilligcenterSlagelse

Lotte Hansen LokalrådetSkælskørJohn Andersen DanmarkerdejligtAnne Bjergvang AgersøNaturcenterRita Bojesen KOKSkælskørDitte Holst AgersøNaturcenter

JørgenNordtorpJørgensen

DanskVandrelaug(Kvalitetsvandrestier)

Mette StryhnHansen GerlevLegepark

PerNygaardKristensen TaoCentret

Jørgen Rasmussen StorebæltVinterbadereAnne Justiniano SlagelseKommuneSussi Lægg DetLilleGlashusAnne Jensen HalsskovLokalrådHanne Liechti ArtMarketsVennerKaren Sejlund Håndstrikwww.haandstrik.comBranka Lugonja StGallaglaskunstSusanne Andersen DybkærgaardSteen Andresen SkælskørLokalrådMette Mandrup SlagelseKommuneNina Thorborg KunstnerværkstedetKabeldepotetAnders Helbo PanzermuseetsFriluftsmarkedDaniel Hansen journalist

Turismeworkshop2017

18

inn. It was therefor also a crucial part of our study to interview someone from Bisserup to

understandwhytheywerenotrepresentedattheworkshop.

Besidesprovidinguswithamorecompleteinsighttotheactors’perceptionofthetourisminitiatives

inthemunicipality,theirgeographicaldiversitymayalsohelpgiveusinsightsaboutifactorsphysical

locationrelativetoeachothercanaffectthesynergyofthemandtheirwillingnesstobeapartofa

tourismcollaboration.

Lastly,weinterviewedPukHvistendalfromthemunicipalityofSlagelse,whoisatourismproject

leader.Shewasinterviewedtogainbasicunderstandingofthetourismprojectsinthemunicipality

andhowtheyhandlethecreationoftourismcollaborations.

Interviewdesign

Interviewingcanbeachallengingprocessandneedstobeplannedandconductedcarefully,butif

executedright,interviewscanbeoneofthebestqualitativemethodicalchoicesinunderstandthe

worldofourfellowhumanbeings(BrinkmannandTanggaard,2010).Inourcase,theplanningof

theinterviewswasdonewithinspirationfromChristofferpre-knowledgeaboutthemunicipality,

inspirationfromtheparticipantobservationandtheliteraturereview(whichwillbepresentedto

thereaderinthenextchapter).

As mentioned earlier, the interviews were conducted as semi-structured which, compared to

structuredinterviews,“[…]canmakebetteruseoftheknowledge-producingpotentialsofdialogues

by allowing more leeway for following up on whatever angles are deemed important by the

interviewee.”(Brinkmann,2013:21).

Theinterviewswereconductedwiththeassistanceofsomelooselythemedguides.Theguidesall

consistedoftwoorthreemainquestions,eachcontainingfollow-upquestionstohelpinthecases

weretheconversationwasturnedtomuchawayfromtheoverallthemes.

Theinterviewees

Thispartofthemethodologychapterwillintroducethereadertotherespondentsthathavebeen

conductedsemi-constructedinterviewswithforthepurposeofansweringtheresearchquestionof

19

this thesis. Each respondentwill be presentedwith a short description andwith the rationales

behindchoosingthem.

JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,Skælskør

OurfirstinterviewwasconductedwithJetteSøndergaardwhoistheowneranddailymanagerof

HotelPostgaardeninSkælskør.Shehasbeenmanagingandrunningthehotelsincesheboughtitin

2007whereitwasalmostjustaruin.Shetheninvestedalotoftimeandmoneyandspentthenext

yearsrebuildingwhatisnowasmallhotelwithgoodfacilitiessuchas;banquetfacilities,conference

roomandrestaurant.Thehotelisverywell-likedinthelocalareaandwithitslocationrightnextto

thecityharbouranditsbeautifulexterior,ithasbecomeabitofalandmarkinthecityofSkælskør.

With ten years as a hotel owner, she possesses valuable knowledge about tourism in the local

community.JetteSøndergaardwaschosenasanintervieweeonthebackgroundofobservations

wedidat theearliermentioned tourismworkshop,wherewesatat thesametableasher.We

noticedthatshewasobviouslyirritatedduringtheworkshop,andwebecameinterestedinlearning

moreaboutherperceptionofandopinionsontourismcollaborationsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse

andinparticularwhyshewasreactingthewayshedidattheworkshop.

TineJensen,MusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre,Korsør

Musholm Holiday and Conference Centre is located in the outskirts of Korsør, and they are

specialisinginmakingholidayexperiencesforpeoplewithspecialneeds.Thisismainlyconcerned

aroundpeoplewithphysicalchallengesastheyhavedevelopedtheirfacilitiesandroomstoreceive

thesekindsofguests.ThetypicalguestsatMusholmarefamilies,inwhichthereareapersonor

personswho fallwithin the aforementioned group of physical challenged. A large part of their

visitorsduringsummerarealsoinstitutionsonholidayorwhoaredoingsummercamps.Familiesor

personswithoutanydisabilitiesarealsoableto,andverymuchwelcometovisitthecentreforat

stay,butactivitiesandfacilitiesaredesignedandtargetedforpeoplewithphysicaldisabilities.

Tine Jensen is the daily activity coordinator atMusholmHoliday andConference Centre,which

meansthatsheisplanningandcoordinatingactivitiesandeventswithpartnersandcustomers.She

hasbeenworkingatMusholmforalittleovertwoyears,andsheisoriginallynotfromthearea.This

openedup foradifferentapproach thanmostof theother interviewees,whoallhavea longer

20

historyinthemunicipality.Thisgaveustheopportunitytwointerviewapersonwhomaybeisnot

biasedbyahistoricconnectiontoacertainareainthemunicipality.Furthermore,asmentioned

earlier,MusholmislocatedintheKorsørarea,whichisoneofthethreebigcitiesinthemunicipality

andthereforitwasimportanttotalkwithactorsfromthere.

HansLarsen,BoeslundeCamping,betweenKorsørandSkælskør

BoeslundeCampingislocatedsomewhereinthemiddlebetweenKorsørandSkælskør.Itisaregular

camping area with additional holiday cabins and holiday apartments. Boeslunde Camping was

chosenasaninterestingtargetforaninterviewbecauseofthelocationbetweentwoofthebigger

cities.Itwasimportantnotonlytointerviewactorsfromthethreebigcities,butalsotofindtourism

actorsplacedoutsideofthese.

ToniAndersen,BisserupTownCouncil,Bisserup

Basedontheobservationsfromthetourismworkshop,whereitwasnoticedthatnoonefromthe

southernpartofthemunicipalityaroundBisserupwasattending,acuriositywasawakenedasto

findoutwhytheywerenotthere,andiftheymaybehaveadifferentviewontourismcollaborations

inthemunicipality.ContactwasmadewiththespokespersonoftheBisserupTownCouncil,Toni

Andersen,whoagreedtodoaninterview.Bisserupisasmalltownplacedatthecoastlineinthe

southernpartofthemunicipality.Thereisonlyabout500inhabitants,butnonethelessthetown

hasquitealotoftouristsvisitingeveryyear–especiallythebeach,theharbourwithorganicfish

salesandbirdsanctuaryarepopularamongthevisitors.

SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,betweenKorsørandSlagelse

Dybkærgaardisafamilyownedfarmwithafarmshopopenforvisitorsallyeararound.Theyarea

fairlynewactorinthetourismsector,astheshophasonlybeenrunningfortwoyears.Theshopis

steadilygrowingwithevenmorevisitorseveryyear,andtheyareplanningonexpandingthetourism

businesswithabicyclerentalfortouristswhowantstodrivearoundinthescenicarea.Because

theyareasuccessfulnewcomer inthefieldof tourism, itwas interestingto listentotheirstory

abouthowtheyhavegottentothispointandhowmuchinteractiontheyhavebeenhavingwiththe

localgovernmentandothertourismactors.

21

PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,Slagelse

ThelocaltourismassociationinSlagelseis,liketheothertourismassociationsinthemunicipalities,

avolunteerorganisation.ThechairmanoftheboardisPerThuesen,whoinhisdayjobisworking

asaroyalequerryinCopenhagen.Hehasbeenthechairmanforthelastcoupleofyears,andhehas

beenworking hard on changing the focus of the organisation to amore tourism collaboration

orienteddirection.Inthelocalarea,heisknownasahardworkinganddedicatedmanwhoisdoing

a lottohelpthe local tourismactors.Whenheretires fromhisregular jobnextyear,hewillbe

dedicatingallofhistimetothetourismassociation.Hewaschosenasanintervieweebecausehe

firstofallisamemberofoneofthetourismassociationsinthemunicipality.Thetourismassociation

hasan interesting role in thecreationof tourismcollaborationsbecause they inmanywaysare

functioningaslinksbetweenthelocalgovernmentandthetourismactors,andthereforemighthave

interestingviewsonthesubjectofcollaboration.Furthermore,PerThuesenhasbeeninvolvedin

theplanningprocessoftheveryworkshopwhichwasthesubjectforourobservationstudyinthis

research.

PukKirkeskovHvistendal,projectleaderinthelocalgovernment,Slagelse

AstheprojectleaderoftheCoastalandNatureprojectandasanemployeeofthelocalgovernment,

PukKirkeskovHvistendalwasanimportantrespondent.Shewaschosenasanintervieweebecause

she, in her position, was able to provide us with knowledge of how the local government are

approachingthecreationoftourismcollaborationsbetweenactors.

Validityoftheresearchandlimitations

Thevalidityofresearchwithinsocialscienceisconcernedwith“[…]theintegrityoftheconclusions

thataregeneratedfromapieceofresearch”(Bryman,2012:47).Toensurethatasatisfyinglevelof

validity was reached for the research for this thesis, which to a very high degree is based on

qualitative researchmethods throughsemi-constructed interviews, several considerationsabout

thepreparationandconductofinterviewscanbemade.Whenconductinginterviewsandasking

therespondentstorecollectmemoriesofthepast(whichinthiscasehappenedoftenbecauseof

22

questionsconcerningtheoldmunicipalitystructure),itisimportantnottorushandpressurefora

quickanswerbutinsteadgivetherespondenttimetothink(Brinkmann,2013).Whenapproaching

possiblerespondentsbeforehandwithaninquiryforaninterview,theyweretoldthatitwouldlast

foranapproximately30minutes,butbeforeeveryinterviewitwasensuredthatsignificantlymore

time was available from the researchers if the respondents use more time on their answers.

Furthermore,ifitwasvisiblethattherespondentsseemedtobestressedaboutnotbeingableto

answerquickenoughtothequestions,theyweretoldthatshouldtakethetimetheyneeded.

Inordertoobtainamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofhowtourismcollaborationsarecreated

andhowitworks inthemunicipalityofSlagelse,therespondentswereselectedonthebasison

some criteria that there should a certain geographical diversity between them. The geographic

diversityamongsttherespondentswastoacertaindegreereachedwiththeexceptionofthetwo

small islands of Omø and Agersø which lie outside of the southern part of the coast in the

municipality.ThetwoislandshaveacouncilthatinsomewaysalsoisfunctioningasaLTO,andit

wouldindeedhavebeeninterestingforthisresearchtolistentheirstories.Unfortunately,itturned

outtobeimpossibletoestablishcontactandsetupaninterview.Similarly,itwouldalsohavebeen

rewardingfortheresearchifithadbeenpossibletosetupaninterviewwiththeLTOinKorsørto

give them the opportunity to give their opinions of the topic of tourism collaboration in the

municipality. In both instances, contactwas first attempted bymail and then followedupwith

phonecallswhichwerenotresponded.

Ethicalconsiderations

Alltherespondentsinterviewedforthisthesisweregiventheopportunitytobeanonymous.We

wereawarethatsomeofthequestionsintheinterviewguidesevolvedaroundtopicsrelatedtothe

respondent’s attitudes towards other actors in the municipality. None of the respondents

interviewedchosetobeanonymous,andtheyarethereforeappearingbynameinthisthesis.During

theobservationstudy,themajorityoftheparticipantswerenotawarethattheywerebeingstudied

andbecauseofthis,somespecificparticipantsmentionedintheanalysiswillnotappearbyname.

Thisiseitherbecausetheyhavechosennottodosoorthatithassimplynotbeenpossibletogetin

contactwiththemafterwards.

23

Theoreticalconsiderations

Inthischapter,areviewofrelevant literatureassociatedtotheresearchquestionaskedforthis

project,willbepresentedtothereader.Withtheresearchquestionsaskedforthisproject,wewish

tolookintocollaborationandpartnershipswithinatourismdestination,andhowtheseareaffected

by the planning and development on the destination level. Understanding how relations and

collaborationsfunctionsbetweentourismactorsandstakeholders,bothpublicandprivate,isthe

pointofdeparture.Thefocusforthisresearchwillthereforebebasedwithintheresearchfieldof

stakeholder and collaboration theory, and power relations within stakeholder networks.

Furthermore,it isinterestingtolookintotheliteratureconcerningpublic/privaterelations,since

we are interested in finding out how the tourism actors perceive the strategymade by a local

government.

In the following section of this chapter, a review of research and theory within stakeholders,

stakeholdernetworks,powerrelations,tourismpolicy instruments,collaborationamongtourism

actorsandtourismplanningincommunity-basedtourism,willbepresented.

Stakeholdertheory

Asinanyotherindustry,adestinationconsistsofstakeholderswhichareaffectedbythestateof

tourisminthearea.Stakeholdersarealsoaffectedbyeachother,andsocioculturalandeconomic

factors. Freeman (1984) defines stakeholders as “any group or individual who can affect or is

affectedbytheachievementofanorganisation’sobjectives”(Freeman,1984:46).

Freeman’s(1984)definitioninvolvesamassivenumberofcompanies,individualsandorganisations,

sowhatneedstobedetermine iswhatcategoryofstakeholders is relevant forthisresearch. In

TinsleyandLynch(2001)descriptionofwhatatourismdestinationis,theyalsodescribetheverity

of stakeholders there iswithin adestination. They say that a tourismdestination consistsof“a

number of components such as attractions, accommodation, transport, and other services and

infrastructure” (Tinsley and Lynch, 2001: 372). A stakeholder in a tourism destination can be

organisationsorindividualswhoare,ornotare,workingwithtourism,orseethemselvesasapart

of a tourism destination. According to Gray (1989), stakeholders are all individuals, groups, or

organizations“directlyinfluencedbytheactionsotherstaketosolveaproblem"(Gray,1989:5).

24

According toactor-network theory,whichwewill talkmore about later, “actor-network theory

employsasemioticdefinitionofactorswhotaketheirformandacquiretheirattributesasaresult

oftheirrelationswithotherones.Anactorisanythingthatactsorreceivesactivityfromothers.So,

theirscope isextendedfarbeyond individualhumans” (Jensen,2001. In.VanderDuim,2007.P.

963).

Howwestudyactor-networks

Accordingtotourismresearchers(Tribe,2005;Murdoch,2006;Law,2004;Latour,2005),tourism

studieshastakenaturnfromadistantobservingtask,toamoreactivewayofstudying.Tribe(2005)

describesthisneweraofresearchas;“thetotalityoftourismstudieshasnowdevelopedbeyondthe

narrowboundariesofanappliedbusinessfieldandhasthecharacteristicsofafledgingpostmodern

fieldofresearch”(Tribe,2005:p.5).ScholarssuchasMurdoch(2006),Law(2004)andLatour(2005)

claimsthatresearcherscannolongerstudyactor-networksfromadistance,butshouldexamine

hownetworksareformedandcreatedamongtourismactors.Itisbyobservingtheserelationswe

canstudy“whogainsandwholoses,andbywhichmechanismsofpower”(Flyvbjerg,2006:40),and

whatvaluesandmeaningsareattachedtothenetwork.Law(1994)states“thateverythingyouseek

toexplainordescribeshouldbeapproachedinthesameway’’(Law1994.P.9-10),whichintheory

makessense,but inreality,mightbehardtofollow.Because, ifwefollowMurdoch(2006),Law

(2004) and Latour (2005) argument about studying tourism networks and its actors closely, by

putting ourselves in the field, the research can quickly go in different directions depending on

responses,obstaclesandfocuspoints.Butthewayweasresearchersinitiallyapproachthetourism

network,shouldbethesame,asLawpointsout.

Researchingnetworks

Networks in a tourism destination can be hard to identify, since they can be both formal and

informal,andactorscanbepartofmanynetworksatthesametime,anddropinandoutofthem

astheylike(Dredge,2006).DianneDredge(2006)hasinacasestudyofLakeMacquarie,NewSouth

Wales,describeshowtostructuretheprocesswhenresearchingnetworksinatourismdestination

(Dredge,2006.P.271-274).ThefollowingwilldrawfromthefourstepsdescribedDianaDredge.

First,weshouldidentifywhatnetworksareinterestingfortheresearch.Bymappingthetourism

actorsinatourismscape,itispossibletodrawtiesbetweentheactorsandmapouttherelations

25

betweenthem.AccordingtoKnezovich(2014),therecanbethreedifferentreasonsformappinga

network:understandhowwecanengageinasystem,understandthebroaderimplicationsofour

engagementinasystemordescribehowasystemisworking.

Second,weshoulddecidewhataspectofanetworkisrelevantforourresearch.Isittounderstand

socioculturalaspectsofacommunity,or istounderstandtheeconomicsthatdrivesthetourism

actorsinnetwork.Anotheraspectcouldbevaluesandpowerrelationswithinanetwork.“Froma

structural-functionalist perspective, networks can be investigated according to a number of

dimensionsincludingcentrality,densityandthestrengthandreciprocityofrelationalties”Dredge,

2006: 272). This argument fromDredge is somethingwewill comeback to later in the section

describingliteratureandtheorywithinnetworkpowerrelations.

Dredge (2006) has adaptedWaarden’s (1992) table of dimensions and properties of networks,

whichfunctionsasalistingofaspectsofnetworksthatcanberesearched(seeTable1).

Dimensions Properties

Actorsandagencies The number and type of actors involved; needs and interests of

actors; interdependencies between actors, structures, capacities

andresources;degreeofprofessionalization;mandate;perceived

roleandattitudesofactors.

Functionsofthenetwork Accesstothedecision-makingprocess;consultationandexchange

between participants; negotiation; coordination; co-operation in

policyformulation.

Structureofthenetwork Size of the network; boundaries (open or closed); membership

requirements; pattern of linkages; strength of relations;

density/multiplexity; clustering; centrality of the network;

reciprocityofinterconnections.

Characteristics of

institutionalisation

Ad hoc, temporary or informal organization to formal, stable,

permanentcoalitionstructures.

Rulesofconduct Negotiation and accommodation of conflicting interests; shared

sense of public welfare; secrecy or openness; politicalization or

mutualunderstandingtodepoliticiseissues;rationalistpragmatism

orideologicaldisputes.

26

Powerrelations Captureof stateagenciesbybusiness interests;autonomyof the

state;capturebyprivateinterests;balanceofpowerbetweenstate-

interestgroups,hegemony.

Actorstrategies Tostructurerelationswithinthenetwork;toinfluencetheselection

ofactorsinthenetwork;toinfluencethefunctionofthenetwork;

tocreateornurturecertainconventionorinterests.

Table1Dimensionsandpropertiesofnetworks(Waarden,1992:In.Dredge2006,p.273)

Withthelistabove,andKnezovich’s(2014)reasonsfordoingnetworkresearch,itisimportantto

acceptthattheshapeandconditionofnetworksareaffectedbymanydifferentaspects.Therefore,

weasresearchershastokeepanopenmindwhenapproachinganetwork.Forexample,power

relationscanaffecteconomics,andtheotherwayaroundandsoon.

Thirdly,howdoesanetwork,oraclusterofnetworks,influencetherelationshipbetweenpublic

and private partnerships. Some networks are actively created by public department in a local

government,mightstrengthenthecommunicationbetweentheprivatetourismactorsandthelocal

government.Networkswithonlyprivateactorscouldcreateadistancebetweenthepublicandthe

private.

ThefourthandfinalstepofDredge’s(2006)stepsonhowtoapproachanetworkresearch,isto

reflectonhowthefindingswillbepreservedbytheactors,thelocalgovernmentandthenetwork

in general. What outcome should the research have in order to develop and innovate the

destinationandthenetworkswithinit.Somefindingmightcallforanewstrategyfromthelocal

government’s side of the table, but that might not be in every tourism actors interest. When

reachingaconclusiononhowtodevelop,weshouldcarefullythinkabouthowtoimplement.

Collaborationsinatourismdestination

JamalandGetz(1995)werethefirsttointroducecollaborationtheoryamongtourismstakeholders.

Theirargumentformorecollaborationintourismdestinationwasthattheindustryisfragmented

withmanydifferentstakeholders(JamalandGertz,1995).Otherthanstrengthentherelationship

between private stakeholders, Jamal and Gertz further argued that collaboration could benefit

public/privaterelationships.“Inadditiontoaidingpublic-privatesectorinteractions,collaboration

27

may provide an effective mechanism for community involvement in tourism planning, through

selectionofkeystakeholderstorepresentthevariouspublicinterests”(JamalandGertz,1995:200).

Morrison (2013)has listed fiveexamplesonhowpartnershipsandcollaborationamong tourism

stakeholdersisavaluablecontributiontoatourismdestination:

• Destinationplanning:Planningwithin adestination canbeadifficult task, since it often

involvesawiderangeofdifferentstakeholders.Ifallstakeholdershaveacommonobjective,

planningwillbecomeeasier.

• Research:Thisisasrelevantforusatitcanbe.Researchingwiththeobjectivetobetterthe

destinationcanbehardifthestakeholdersisnotwillingtoprovidethenecessarydatato

researchupon.

• Product development: Sharing of knowledge lead to development, and if tourism

stakeholderiswillingtohelpeachother,developmentoftourismproductsbecomemuch

moresuccessful.

• Marketingandpromotion:Joiningresourcestopromoteawholedestinationismuchmore

effectivethanifeverytourismactortriestopromotethemselves.

• Community relations: Tourism effect the everyday life of the local community at a

destination.Throughcollaborations the local communities canhavea say in the tourism

planningoftheirarea,whichwillresolveinlesscounteractingofthetourismdevelopment.

(Morrison2013.P.193)

Public/privaterelations

Adestination isamultilevelphenomenon (Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010),which

successaredependingon thedestination’sability tocreatehealthypublic/private relationships.

Therearenolimitationsonthegeographicscaleatourismnetworkcanhave,whichmeansitcan

beaconnectionbetweenactorsfarbeyondthedestinationsborders.Whatwenowwanttoexplore

is the relation between public networks and private network, and evenmore interesting is the

networkswhichincludebothpublicandprivateactors.

“Localgovernmentsinmanycountriesarebecomingincreasinglyinvolvedinavariety

of activities to boost tourism, including destination marketing, strengthening local

28

tourism industrynetworks,andoffering incentives inorder toattract investment in

newtourismdevelopment”

(Long,1994;Elliot,1997;Godfrey,1998;Hall,1998.InDredge,2001:356)

Oneoftheactionsthatlocalgovernmentstaketotryanddeveloptourism,istoestablishakindof

local government fundedDMO.Anorganisationwhich the local government canoutsource the

tourism responsibility to, which is popular among local governmentswith smaller destinations.

Thereisaneconomicexplanationforthischoiceofstrategy,sincelocalgovernmentsarerestricted

bydifferentlawsthatcanlimittheiractionsinrelationtodeveloptourism.Aprivateorganisation

doesnothavethesamerestrictions,andcanforinstancehavepayingpartners(Morrison,A.2013).

“Inmostdestinations,theLTO(LocalTourismOrganisation)istheindustry’speakbody,whichisin

turn supported by sets of formal and informal networks that span public and private sectors”

(Dredge, 2006: p 270). An enthusiastic and productive relationship between a LTO and a local

government,areofgreat importancetothedevelopmentofadestination,andcancreateother

networkswithinthetourismsectorinadestination(Dredge,2006).

Researchingthesepublic/privatenetworkscanbedifficult,andpaststudiesdooftendescribeand

analyseonemomentintime,butcannotconcludethetransformationofanetworkovertime.“Case

studies, inparticular, contribute important insights intonetworks since the roleand influenceof

networksarebestunderstoodatthe levelatwhichdestinationplanningandmanagementtakes

place”(Dredge,2006:271).Analysingtourismactorsandtheirviewonapublic/privaterelationship

canbehard,sincetheycanbeunwillingtocompletelyopenupsinceitisthecommunitytheyalso

liveandworkin,intheircivillife(Dredge,2006).

Collaborationamongstakeholders

‘Partnership’ and ‘cooperation’ are two other terms that often are used when talking about

stakeholdersworkingtogetherforacommonobjective.AccordingtoJamalandStronza(2009),the

term‘collaboration’describesamuchdeeperinter-organizationalrelation.“Collaborationprovides

foraflexibleanddynamicprocessthatevolvesovertime,enablingmultiplestakeholderstojointly

addressproblemsorissues”(JamalandStronza,2009).TwentyyearsearlierGray(1989)described

collaborationas"aprocessofjointdecisionmakingamongkeystakeholdersofaproblemdomain

29

aboutthefutureofthatdomain"(Gray,1989:227).EventhoughJamalandGetz(1995)introduced

collaborationtheoryamongtourismstakeholdersbackin1995,collaborationamongstakeholders

inother fieldshasbeen researchuponearlier.Gray (1989)describedhowcollaboration among

stakeholderscandevelopsharedvisions,andresolveconflictsinnetworks,whenthestakeholders

recognizetheadvantageofworkingtogether(Gray,1989).Thiscouldbeakeypointfortourism

developers in a destination, to get stakeholders and tourism actors to see the advantages of

collaboration.

JamalandGertz(1995)hasintheirworkwithcommunitytourismplanning,usedGray’sdescription

ofcollaboration,andadaptedittotourismplanning.

“Collaboration forcommunity-based tourismplanning isaprocessof jointdecision-

makingamongautonomous,keystakeholdersofaninter-organizational,community

tourismdomaintoresolveplanningproblemsofthedomainand/ortomanageissues

relatedtotheplanninganddevelopmentofthedomain.”

(JamalandStronza,1995:188)

‘Community’referstothegroupofpeoplelivingindestination,buttheirdefinitiondoesalsoalign

with Van der Duim’s (2007) idea of a tourismscape consisting of both human and non-human

elements.Stakeholdersare‘autonomous’dotothefactthateventhoughtheyarecollaboration

andworkingforcommonvisions,theystillhavetheirindependentinterests,andmustvaluetheir

owninterestshigh(WoodandGray,1991).The‘problemdomain’ishowproblemsandsituations

withinadestinationandanetworkofstakeholders,canbeatypethatcannotbesolvedbyjustone

stakeholder,botcallsforaninter-organizationalaction.

Gray(1989)hasfivekeypointsaboutthecollaborationprocess:

- “Thestakeholdersareindependent

- Solutionsemergebydealingconstructivelywithdifferences

- Jointownershipofdecisionsisinvolved

- Thestakeholdersassumecollectiveresponsibilityfortheongoingdirectionofthedestination

- Collaborationisanemergentprocess,wherecollaborativeinitiativescanbeunderstoodas

emergentorganizationalarrangementsthroughwhichorganizationscollectivelycopewith

thegrowingcomplexityoftheirenvironments"(Gray1989:236)

30

Gary furthermore describes a three-stage model about developing collaboration among

stakeholders.First,theproblemandkeystakeholdersmustbeidentified.Whoisthestakeholders

thatarethesestakeholders,individualororganisations(Freeman,1984),thataredirectlyinfluenced

bytheidentifiedproblem.Thenextstepistofindacommonsenseofpurpose.Asmentionedby

WoodandGray(1991),stakeholdersaremainlyfocusedontheirownagenda,whichmeansthata

common path must be found. “Identifying and sharing future collaborative interpretations;

appreciatingasenseofcommonpurpose”(JamalandStronza,2009).Thelaststageistoimplement

andnurturethecollaboration.

Trist (1979) has an interesting point on collaborations among organisations, and collaborations

leading to change. The argument is that individuals’ minds can change faster than whole

organisations’,soindividuals’valuescanbenefitandbethestartingpointforcollaborationsthat

canchangethefuture(Trist,1979).

Residentswithinadestinationisastakeholderwhichmustbemanagecorrectlytogaintheirmuch-

neededsupport.LankfordandHowardcreatedtheTourismImpactAttitudeScale(TIAS),amodel

thatcanbeusedtoanalysetourism’s impactonresidenceinadestination.Theirfindingswhere

that local governments and tourism developers and planners, must make extensive efforts to

involve locals in the development process, and make collaborations with these groups of

stakeholders(LankfordandHoward,1994).Itisimportanttorecognisethattourismdevelopment

inanareaaffecttheeverydaylifeoftheresidence.

“Local governments and tourism promoters should pay particular attention to the

findingthatifpeoplefeeltheyhaveaccesstotheplanning/publicreviewprocessand

thattheirconcernsarebeingconsidered,theywillsupporttourism.”

(LankfordandHoward,1994:135).

Theyfurtherarguethatresidentswhohavebenefittedfromtourismintheirarea,arelesslikelyto

perceive thesocialandenvironmental impactsasdamaging thearea,butdoon theotherhand

perceivetheeconomicimpacttobegreaterthantherealitymightbe(LankfordandHoward,1994).

JamalandGetz(1995)hasmadesixpropositionsasatoolfortourismmanagersandplanners,as

wellasresearchers,tousewhenworkingwithcollaborationonacommunitylevel.

Proposition1:

31

“Collaborationforcommunity-basedtourismplanningwillrequirerecognitionofahigh

degree of interdependence in planning andmanaging the destination” (Jamal and

Getz,1995.P.197).Theremustbeagoodcollaborationbetweenthelocalcommunity

and the tourism actors, because they are sharing the same resources and space.

“Tourismdevelopment thatexceeds thecarryingcapacityof theeconomic,natural,

andsocioculturalenvironmentwillimpactnegativelyontheoveralltourismindustryof

thecommunity,duetothecloseinterrelationsoftheelementswithinthecommunity's

tourismsystem”(JamalandGetz,1995:197).

Proposition2

“Collaboration will require recognition of individual and/or mutual benefits to be

derived fromtheprocess” (JamalandGetz,1995:197).AsWaddock (1989)argues,

theremustbethreeconditionsinplacebeforeacollaborationcanhappenbetween

organisations; “recognition of interdependence, perceptions that significant benefit

will result from the collaboration, and recognition of importance of the issue(s)”

(Waddock,1989in:JamalandGetz,1995:197).

Proposition3

“Collaborationforcommunity-basedtourismplanningwill requireaperceptionthat

decisionsarrivedatwillbeimplemented(i.e.,theprocesshaslegitimacyandpowerto

eithermakeorstronglyinfluencetheplanningdecisions”(JamalandGetz,1995:198).

Stakeholderhastofeelthattheyareinsomekindofpositiontochangeorinfluence

things,forthemtowanttoinvesttimeincollaboraterelations.

Proposition4

“Collaboration for tourism destination planning will depend on encompassing the

followingkeystakeholdergroups:

§ localgovernmentplusotherpublicorganizationshavingadirectbearingon

resourceallocation

§ tourism industry associations and sectors such as Chamber of Commerce,

ConventionandVisitorBureau,regionaltouristauthority

§ residentorganizations(communitygroups)

§ socialagencies(e.g.,schoolboards,hospitals)

32

§ specialinterestgroups”(JamalandGetz,1995:198)

Proposition5

“A convener is required to initiate and facilitate community-based tourism

collaboration. The convener should have the following characteristics: legitimacy,

expertise,resources,plusauthority,andmaybederivedfromagovernmentagency,

anindustryfirm,orgroupsuchasthelocalChamberofCommerce,orthelocaltourist

organization”(Ibid:199).

Proposition6

Aneffectivecommunitycollaborationprocess for strategic tourismplanning for the

destination requires: formulation of a vision statement on desired tourism

development and growth; joint formulation of tourism goals and objectives; self-

regulationoftheplanninganddevelopmentdomainthroughtheestablishmentofa

collaborative (referent) organization to assist with ongoing adjustment of these

strategiesthroughmonitoringandrevisions”(Ibid:199)

Tourism planning in a community is complex task do to themixture of residence and tourism

planners,sharingofeconomicandenvironmentalresourcesandgettingstakeholderstorecognize

theinterdependence.Acollaborationstrategy“(…)maybesuitabletomanageturbulentplanning

domainsatthelocallevel”(Ibid:200).

Localgovernmentpolicyandplanning

AccordingtoTinsleyandLynch,(2001),atourismdestinationis“anumberofcomponentssuchas

attractions,accommodation,transport,andotherservicesandinfrastructure”(TinsleyandLynch,

2001: p.372). Haugland, Ness, Grønseth and Aarstad (2010) describes how a destination is

multileveled,sinceithasissuesonmanydifferentlevelswithinthedestination.Therecanbeissues

onactorlevel,thatshouldbeaddresseddifferentlythatissuesonadestinationlevel,meaningthat

planningandstrategiesalsoneedstohavedifferentlevels.Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad

(2010)arguesthattherearethreemainlevels,theactorlevel,thedestinationlevelandthelarger

geographical level, and for that reason it is important to incorporate an integrated multilevel

strategy(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010).

33

Tourismdestinationdevelopmentistheactivitythatshouldleadtovalueforthedestinationand

thetourismactors.Ifwelookatitfromalocalgovernmentperspective,or/andaDMO,tourism

developmentisnotonlynurturingoftourismactors.Atourismdevelopmentstrategymustspanthe

boundariesofthedestination,andengagewiththeworldaroundit.Haugland,Ness,Grønsethand

Aarstadhasintheirworkwithintegratedmultileveledstrategies,developedaframeworkshowing

threedifferentlevelsofadestination.

- Destinationcapabilities:“Themoreadvancedcapabilitiesadestinationpossesses,interms

ofimageandbranding,andutilizationofdistributedresourcesandcompetencies,thebetter

willthedestinationbeatdevelopingintegratedmultilevelstrategies.”

- CoordinationattheDestinationLevel:“Asthelevelofdestinationintegrationincreases,in

termsofreplacingconventional,individualisticinter-actorrelationshipswithadministered,

contractual, or corporate relationships, the destination’s ability to develop integrated

multilevelstrategieswillincrease.”

- Inter-destination Bridge Ties: “Combining different inter-organizational forms at the

destination levelwill contribute tomore efficient integratedmultilevel strategies, as this

enables comparison between forms of coordination and stimulates intra-destination

competition.”

(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010:p.274-280)

34

Figure1Aframeworkfortourismdestinationdevelopment(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010:p.280)

Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstadarguesthattheresultofintegratedmultilevelstrategies,will

leadtovalueforcompanies.Buttourismplanningcanbeadifficulttask,andwhatisevenharderis

tocreateadestinationstrategythatfitsall.Areasonforadestinationstrategymightbetogain

somesortof competitiveadvantageoverotherdestinations,bycreatingauniqueproduct,ora

themeforthedestination.Butatthesametimeactorswithinthedestinationaretryingtocreate

their competitive advantage. “Developing competitive advantages at the destination level is a

complexendeavourasitinvolvesanumberofdifferentactors.Itrequiresallactorstoagreeonaset

ofcommonstrategicgoalsandtobewillingtoimplementactor-levelstrategiesaimedatachieving

thesecommongoals”(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010:p.284).

35

Policyinstrumentstofacilitatecollaboration

Svensson,NordinandFlagestad(2005)arguesthatthereisanabsentofresearchdealingwiththe

destinationgovernmentsinvolvementindestinationpartnerships.

Local governments can play an active role on developing collaborations, which is often the

instrumentbeingusedtodeveloptourisminadestination.Localgovernmentscannotcreatespecific

tourismproducts,sotheirtaskistoencourageandnurturethecommercialstakeholderstojoinin

partnerships.DianneDredge(2016)hasdescribedfourdifferentpolicyinstrumentsthatcanbeused

bygovernment,orlocalgovernments,toreachadesiredoutcome:

• Financialinstruments–arethosethatusemoneytoachieveadesiredeffect.Thesemight

includepositivefiscalincentivessuchassubsides,taxbreaksandinvestmentincentivesto,

forexample,attract investmenttoencourageprivatesectoractorstoconserveorprotect

environmental assets. Negative instruments might include taxes and surcharges and

environmentallevies,andmightbeusedinanefforttoreducedemandatenvironmentally

sensitivesites. Intourism,socialentrepreneurship,positivefinancial incentives,taxbreaks

andsubsidiescouldbeusedtocreateenablingconditions.

• Information instruments - include information and education campaigns and advocacy

initiatives targetedatdifferentactorsand collectives, and thataredesigned to influence

behaviour.Informationinstrumentscanshapetheenrolmentofdifferentsocietalgroupsand

actorsinsocialentrepreneurshipandcanfacilitateculturalchange.Voluntaryaccreditation,

awardprogramsandmarket-basedinitiativeswhereinoperatorsleveragemarketadvantage

aimedatshapingbehaviourwouldalsofallunderthiscategory.

• Authorityinstruments-arethosethatrelyongovernmentauthorityandinfluencetoachieve

their desired effect. Laws and other statutory instruments can be used to support and

encouragesocialentrepreneurship,suchaslegislationthatformallyrecognizesandclarifies

its operational environment, financial and taxation responsibilities and reporting

requirements.

• Organizational instruments -Organizational instruments includethose initiativeswherein

governmentscreateorsupporttheestablishmentoforganizationalentitiesorpartnerships

toachieveadesiredoutcome.Destinationmanagementandmarketingorganizationsare

examplesororganizationalinstrumentswheretheyaresupportedbygovernment.

36

(Dredge,2016:p,11)

DestinationpartnershipandDestinationteam-building

AccordingtoWilson,BuultjensandNielsen(2009)thereisalackinresearchfocusingonbinding

partnership in tourism, between public and private organizations. Binding partnership are

categorizedaspartnerships that aboundeitherby commercial contractsor legal arrangements

(Wilson,BuultjensandNielsen2009).

DirectlylinkedtoDredge’s(2016)organisationalinstrumentisanarticlebyMorrison(2013),where

he defines two types of collaborationswhich can actively be created by local governments. He

describesthedifferencebetweendestinationpartnershipsanddestinationteam-building,whichare

twospecifictypesofcollaborations.

Destinationpartnershipreferstotheideathatstandingtogetherisbetterthatstandingalone,or

asMorrisonputsit“1+1equalsmorethantwo”(Morrison,2013,p.192).Anexamplefromofthis

canbe local governmentsoutsourcing the role asDMO, to commercial tourismorganisation. In

contrast to localgovernments, these tourismorganisationscanhavepayingpartners,and these

joined resources can then be used to market the destination. These types of destination

partnershipscanhaveotherobligationsthanmarketing,whichforexamplecanbenetworkcreation

among stakeholders, or product development. This example of a destination partnership is a

commercial one, but destination partnerships can also be non-profit, but in both scenarios the

arrangementismeantto“producebenefitsfortheDMOanditspartnersthatwouldnotbeachieved

without working together” (Morrison, 2013, p. 191). Nelson and Zadek (2000) describes

partnerships in tourism as: “Partnerships aremade up of people and organisations from some

combination of public, business and civil constituencies who engage in voluntary, mutually

beneficial, innovative relationships to address common societal aims through combining their

resourcesandcompetencies”(Nelson&Zadek,2000:InSvensson,NordinandFlagestad,2005:33).

Destination team-building refers to specific activities that a local government, or a commercial

DMO,canarrangetocreatecollaborationandpartnershipsbetweentourismactors.“Thereareso

many diverse tourism stakeholders in a destination that the DMO often has to be proactive in

bringinggroupsofspecificpeopletogethertodealwithparticularissuesoropportunities”(Morrison,

37

2013. P. 192). An example of this can workshops that encourage tourism actors to join in

partnershipstogainprofitfortheirbusinesses.Thetaskhereistointroducethetourismactorsto

each other, and get them to believe in what Morrison argues - “1+1 equals more than two”

(Morrison,2013,p.192).

A tourismdestinationoften involves complex tourismorganisations,withdifferentagendasand

theycaneitherbepublicorprivate.Inrelationtodestinationpartnerships,Rhodes(1997)argues

thattheissueisofteninteractionsbetweenpublicorganisationsandprivateones,whentryingto

establish collaboration. To successfully establish destination partnerships between public and

private tourismorganisations, "implies that neither governmentnorbusiness is in chargeof the

processbutthattheinterdependencybetweenthemmaybecrucial.Inlinewiththeaboveargument,

governanceimplieslesscontrolandpredictability,noself-evidentleadershipandnogivenhierarchy”

(Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,2005:32).Despitethecomplicationswiththeestablishmentof

destinationpartnership,theyhave“becomealabelonambitionstobringactorstogetherinnew

constellationsforthepurposeofjointproblemsolvingandpolicy-making”(ibid.).

Svensson, Nordin and Flagestad (2005) has outlined a conceptual framework for analysing

destinationpartnerships.Thethreeareaswhichmustbeaddressedare:

• “Inclusivenessconcernsthecapacityofpartnershipstowidentherangeofactorsinvolvedin

theprocessingofdestinationdevelopmentactivities.

o Who participates, which roles do they play, and on what basis is access to the

partnershipdecided?

• Accountability concerns the locationof responsibilityandthemechanismsthroughwhich

decisions-makersmaybeheldaccountable.

o Thisisahighlysensitiveissuethatmightthreatenthelegitimacyofpartnerships,and

thisiswherethedistinctionbetweenpublicandprivateismostevident,andalsomost

controversial.

• Coherence refers to the ability to gain support for a common outlook on destination

development and the mobilization of common resources for implementation of agreed

operations.

38

o Thepresenceofpartnershipsdoesnotguarantee that theymakeadifference, let

aloneaddvaluetotheprocess.”

(Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,2005:33)

Theindividualsthatarerepresentingtheirassociationororganizationinapartnershipornetwork,

areplayinganimportantrole.SelinandChavez(1994)foundduringtheirresearchaboutsuccessful

partnerships,thatpersonalcharacteristicswerehighlyimportantinacollaborativenetwork.Beside

the individual characteristics, the unique mix of personalities represented, can influence the

dynamicwithinthenetwork.Theyfurtherarguethatthatastrongleaderofthegroupisimportant

withqualitiessuchas:“motivation,commitment,enthusiasm,vision,patience,openmindedness,

perseverance, and an ability to get other people excited” (Selin and Chavez 1994: 8). Group

dynamicsisalsofoundtobeanimportantelementrelationtosuccessforapartnership.Thatthe

individualsare feelingwelcomedandaregettingalong,and there ishonesty,directnessandno

hidden agendas. The group furthermore needs to be able to “adjust to each other, and reach

consensusondifficultdecisions”(SelinandChavez1994:10).

Powerrelations

Actornetworkscan,asexplainedintheprevioussections,beahighlycomplexstructurewithmany

differentkindsofplayersinvolved.Tounderstandthecomplexityofatourismcollaborationandthe

challengesinvolvedincreatingandmaintainingit,itisindeedinterestingtogainaninsighttothe

powerrelationsbetweenactorswithinanetwork.

Throughthecourseofsocialsciencehistory,thedefinitionand influenceofthetermpowerhas

changedseveraltimes.Powerisatermthatthatisoftenviewedasastronginstitutionalforcethat

isexercisedoveraweakerbodyinanalmostphysicalandtangiblemanner.This,morephysicaland

authoritarianperspectiveonpower,wasexploredbyMaxWeber(Weberin:Månson,2007:100).

Power,accordingtoWeber,isoftenusedinbureaucracybypoliticiansorgovernmentofficialsto

gaininfluenceoverothersthroughlaw-makingandpolicyand“[…]Hewhoisactiveinpoliticsstrives

forpowereitherasameansinservingotheraims,idealoregoistic,oras‘powerforpower’ssake,’

thatis,inordertoenjoytheprestige-feelingthatpowergives.”(Weber,1921:2).

39

Tofurtherspecifythetermpowerandruleandinwhichformsandsituations it isperformedor

exercised,Weberdivideditintothreedifferentcategories:power,authorityanddiscipline(Månson,

2007:100).Authorityisexercisedbyhigherrankedinstitutions,entitiesorpersonsandismeasured

intheprobabilityforlowerrankedtodisplayobediencetotheirorders.Powerperformedthrough

authorityiswhatisseenaslegitimatebythesociety.Disciplineisamoreschematicandpromptly

way of showing obedience to commandments issued. Finally, power in any social relation, as

explainedabove,istheabilitytoenforceoneswillevenagainstthosewhoareshowingresistance.

Weber’sthoughtsandtheoriesmostlyevolvesaroundpowerinabureaucratic,governmentalor

politicalformwherekey-pointssuchasrules,lawsandregulationsareimportantfactors(Weber,

1921).

Inthestreamofpowertheoryevolvingaroundthemoretangibleaspectsofit,FrenchandRaven

(1959)suggestedatypologyofpersonalorinterpersonalpower.Thetypology,TheBasesofSocial

Power,consistsof5differentpowerstructures:Coercive,Reward,Legitimate,ExpertandReferent,

and“[…]inthistypology,socialinfluenceisdefinedasachangeinthebelief,attitude,orbehaviour

ofaperson–thetargetofinfluence,whichresultsfromtheaction,orpresence,ofanotherperson

orgroupofpersons[…]”(ErchulandRaven,1997:138).Thus,thetypologyisdescribingfivedifferent

powerstructuresthateachhasthepotentialtomakepersonAchangethebeliefsandbehaviourof

personB (ibid.). PersonAandPersonB iswhat FrenchandRavendescribes as, respectively an

influencingagentandatargetperson.

AsopposedtoWebersandFrenchandRavensalmostphysicalanddirectdefinitionsofpoweras

somethingthatcanbeachievedandexercisedby individualsorthestate,FrenchthinkerMichel

Foucaultpresentedaradicallydifferentangleonthesubject.Inthisdefinition,powerisaubiquitous

phenomenonthataffectsoureverydaylivesinwaysthatwearenotaware,andthatweoftenare

unable to control (Jiménez-Anca,2012). Foucaultexplainspowerasanunpredictable force that

appear in relationships and tensions between individuals, and unlike Webers theories, power

cannot be achieved and maintained because of its relative nature (Cheong and Miller, 2000;

Jiménez-Anca,2012).

40

Previouslyinthischapter,someofthemostimportantmainstreamsofpowertheorywithinsocial

sciencehavebeenpresented.FromWeber’spowerassomethingconcreteandFrenchandRavens

precise definitions of influence factors toMichel Foucault’s omnipresent power that influences

almostallaspectsoflife,ithasbeenestablishedthatthestreamsofresearchinthisarearepresents

differentstartingpoints.ItcanbearguedthattheFoucaultpresentsamorepositiveviewonthe

conceptofpowerinsociety,andthefactthatitiscreatedthroughsocialrelationsisseenmoreas

anadvantagethanadisadvantage(WearingandMcDonald,2010).

The first steps towards research on power relations in networks and between actors and

stakeholdersandtherealizationsoftheimportancethese,canbetracedbacktothefirsthalfofthe

20thcenturywiththebeginningofmanagementtheory.Earlyresearchwasmostlycentredaround

the internalstructuresoforganisationsandwhat internally influencedthepowerstructuresand

hierarchical foundations, but in the laterhalf of the centurymore recognitionwas given to the

externaldriversthatinfluencesthedevelopmentandsustainabilityofanorganisation.Inthelate

1970’sPfefferandSalacnik(2003)suggestedthatorganisationsoftenwereentangledinnetworks

ofinterdependenciesandsocialrelations,andthatquitealotofexternaldriversweredecisivefor

anorganisationsdecisionsanddevelopment.

Basedonnetworkrelationships,organisationaltheoryandpolicyplanning,severalresearchershave

sinceappliedandreviewedtheseaforementionedpowertheoriesandtypologiesinacontemporary

tourismcontext(CheongandMiller,2000;BramwellandMeyer,2007;Dredge,2006;Beritelliand

Laesser,2011).

CheongandMiller(2000)usedthetheoriesofMichelFoucaulttoexaminedifferentpowerlevelsin

tourism,andproposesthatFoucauldianpowerexistsinalltourismsystems.Thetourist,thetourism

managementorganisationsandthelocalscanallbothbetargetsandagentsofpower,andthelevel

ofpowerrelationsisdynamicandareunderconstantchangethroughoutthedevelopingprocessof

atourismdestination.

In the contribution to the understanding of local network management and the blurred line

betweenpublicandprivatepartnerships,Dredge(2006)appliedaFoucauldianperspectiveon“[…]

41

howpowerrelationshavebeenimbeddedinthediscoursesbetweenactorsandagencies.”(Ibid.),

andamongotherpointsconcludedthatthepowerandinfluenceofastakeholderoractormayvary

inaccordancetothenumberofnetworkstheyareamemberorapartof.Additionally,anemphasis

ison“[…]investigatingthe‘softer’andlesstangiblesocialandculturalaspectsofnetworksthrough

in-depthqualitativeinquiry.”(Ibid.)

Incontinuationofpolicynetworksresearchandthepowerrelationsthatlieswithin,Bramwelland

Meyer(2007)examinedthetourismpolicydevelopmentandpowerrelationsbetweenactorson

the East German island Rügen during a 10-year period during the integration to the unified

Germany.Theyargue that“[…]whilepower isperformedandcannot simplybe ‘possessed’, the

actorsconcernedmayperceiveittobesomethingthatpeopleeitherhaveorlack.”(ibid.)Intheir

researchtheyconcludedthatactorssuchasthedestinationmanagementorganisationoftheisland

werenotperceivedbyotheractorstobeas influentialasonemightthink.BramwellandMeyer

(ibid.) also concluded that someof themost influential actors in thedestination sharedmutual

membershipsoforganisationsornetworks.

Basedonresearchconductedonatourismnetwork inanalpinetouristdestinationBeritelliand

Laeser(2011),suggestedatypologyofpowerdimensionthatcanbeappliedwheninvestigatingthe

perceiving of influence reputation among actors in a network.With inspiration from literature

withinthefieldofnetworkandorganisationtheoryandexistingpowerrelationstheory,Beritelli

andLaesser(ibid.)presentedatypologyconsistingoffourdifferentdimensionsofpowerthatcan

bevaluablewheninvestigatingrelationsbetweenactorsinatourismnetwork.Thefourdimensions;

‘Hierarchy’, ‘Process power’, ‘Knowledge’ and ‘Assets’ each represent areas inwhich the actors

perceiveeachother’sinfluencereputationandpowerinthenetwork.

• The hierarchical dimension represents a belief that the higher a stakeholder or actor is

placedinthehierarchy,themorepowerandinfluencetheyhave.

• Processpowerisavariablethattakesintoconsiderationanactor’s“[…]positioninaspecific

process/mechanism[…]”(ibid.:1302)thatotheractorsinanetworkmightnotpossess,thus

placingthemhigheronthescaleofinfluencereputation.

42

• Theknowledgedimensionleansalittletowardtheprocesspower,withtheexceptionthat

itbasedmoreontheexpertise,skillsandknowledgeofindividualinanetwork.

• Thelastdimension,‘Assets’,isthemosttangibleoneinthesensethatitismeasuredonan

actor’spossessionofassetssuchas;land,propertiesandfinancialstate.

Intheircasestudyonactors’perceptionofeachother’sinfluencereputationinthealpinetourist

destinationtheyusedthefourpowerdimensionsinqualitativeinterviews.Respondentswereasked

toidentifythemostimportantandinfluentialactorsinthenetwork,andwasfurthermoreaskedto

namethepowerdimensionordimensionsthatwerecrucialtotheirchoice.BeritelliandLaesser

(ibid.) concluded thatknowledgewas themostdominatingpowerdimension in thedestination,

because respondents valued the importance of other actors’ ability to contribute to tourism

developmentandinnovationinthedestination.

Anotherpossiblewayofmeasuringanactororstakeholderspowerlevelandinfluenceinanetwork

areby lookingatthe levelofthreattheyexposetothenetwork(SheehanandRitchie,2005). In

Sheenan and Ritchies (ibid.) study, amore tangible and ‘hard’ definition of power is used and

actors/stakeholderswithmoreassetsandkey-resourcesareseenasabiggerthreat,andthushave

morepower,thanthesmalleroneswithinanetwork.

During the last coupleofdecades, the conceptofpowerhasbecomean increasingly important

subject in tourism research and further within the concepts of network relations, policy and

development. Especially a Foucauldianviewofubiquitouspower creating in social relationshas

gained recognition and acceptance among tourism researchers (Dredge, 2006; Bramwell and

Meyer,2007;CheongandMiller,2000;WearingandMcDonald,2010).

Inthisthesis,powerrelationstheorywillbeusedtogainanunderstandingofrelationsbetween

tourismactorsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse,theLTO’s,thelocalgovernmentandtheirpositioning

inrelationtoeachother,thetourismassociationsandthelocalgovernment.TheFoucauldianview

ofpowerwillbetakenintoconsiderationwhenlookingforunderlyingmeaningsandthe“[…]way

differentplayersconstructandcommunicatetheirownandothers’positionsandthewayinwhich

power relations have been embedded in the discourses betweenactors and agencies.” (Dredge,

43

2006:273).Furthermore,byapplyingthethoughtsandideasbehindBeritelliandLaesser’s(2011)

powerdimensionframework,wemightbeabletogainamorethoroughunderstandingofhowthe

actorsandLTO’sperceiveeachother,andespecially,howtheyperceivethebiggertourismnetwork

facilitatorssuchasSlagelsemunicipalityandVisitVestsjællandandhowthesepowerdimensionsare

influencingthedevelopmentoftourismcollaborations.

44

Analysis

Thepurposeofthefollowingchapteristopresenttothereadertheanalyticalfindingsthathasbeen

derivedfromthequalitativeempiricaldatacollection.Aspresentedinthemethodologychapter,

the qualitative data has been collected through an observation study of a municipal tourism

workshopandsevensemi-constructedinterviewswithactorsacrossthedestination.Basedonthe

theoreticalconsiderationspresentedinthepreviouschapter,theempiricalresultswillbeputina

relevanttheoreticalperspectiveinordertogainanunderstandingofhowtourismcollaborations

are understood andused in themunicipality of Slagelse andwhyprevious attempts have been

unsuccessful.

The analysis structure is inspiredbyDredges suggestiononhow to approach andunderstanda

network(Dredge,2006.P.271-274).Firstly,theinterestingmaintourismactorsinrelationtothe

research question and their strategies are looked in to. Secondly, the focus will be at the

collaboration between these major tourism actors, and how their approach is in relation to

collaboration ingeneral. Thirdly, itwillbe interestingto investigatehowcollaborationbetween

these actors are influencing collaboration in the rest of the tourism network. Fourthly, in the

discussion,thefindingsandimplicationswillbefurtherdiscussedinrelationtothetheoreticalfield.

Theapproachtotourismcollaborationfromnationalleveltolocallevel

Thefirstpartoftheanalysiswillpresenttothereaderalookathowtourismcollaborationsarea

partofthetourismstrategiesfromthenationalleveltothelocallevel.Forthefurtheranalysis,by

drawingona theoretical fieldwithinpolicyplanningand stakeholdernetworks, it is relevant to

investigatehowtheconceptoftourismcollaborationsareencouragedonanationallevel,andhow

itisfurtherincorporatedandcarriedoutatdestinationleveltothelocallevel.

Collaborationcanbeonmanydifferentlevels(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010),and

cancomeinmanydifferentforms.Thissectionintenttogainanunderstanding,ofhowandifthe

national tourism strategy is can be argued to be a part of an intercededmultileveled strategy

(Haugland,Ness,Grønseth&Aarstad,2010:p.274-280).This isdone in relation towhatstated

before,thatcollaborationsareonmanylevels,andisthereforeinterestingtoseeifthenational

45

tourismstrategycanbeseenthroughthesystem,allthewaytothesmalldestinationsatthelocal

level.

Firstly,thispartoftheanalysiswillstartfromthetoplevelwiththenationaltourismstrategy,and

thenmove on to KL – Kommunernes Landsforening (Local Government Denmark), which is an

organisationformedbyallthemunicipalitiesinDenmark.Thiswillgiveafoundationofknowledge

to further understand how the concept of tourism collaborations are incorporated in The

MunicipalityofSlagelse’stourismstrategy.

TheDanishGovernment’stourismstrategy

Danish and international tourists spend around 95 billion Danish kroner in 2014, and fulltime

employed around 115.000 people, which means tourism has a massive effect on the Danish

economy.TheDanishgovernmentpublished“DenmarkinGrowth–TheNationalTourismStrategy”

(appendix J) in September 2014, which is the national strategy on how to develop the Danish

tourismindustry.

WhatthegovernmenthassetasDenmark’sstrengthpositionswhenitcomestoattractingtourists,

iscoastalandnaturetourism,urbantourism,meetingandbusinesstourism.

The National Tourism Forum is a tourism organization, which board members are leading

stakeholders in the Danish tourism industry, is one of the initiatives from the strategy. In the

strategy,TheNationalTourismForum’sresponsibilityaredescribed,andtheycanbeperceivedas

anationalDMO,withthepurposeofleadingtourismdevelopmentfromthenationallevel.Their

responsibilitiesarebeingdescribedas:

“The National Tourism Forum will strengthen the coordination of public tourism

development, and cooperation between VisitDenmark and the three tourism

developmentcompanies.Withafocusingondevelopingcoastalandnaturetourism

development,urbantourism,businessandmeetingtourisminDenmark,will leadto

benefitforthetotalgrowthinDanishtourism”

(AppendixJ,DenmarkinGrowth–TheNationalTourismStrategy–2016.P.7)

46

The primary responsibility in relation to tourism development andmarketing, is carried out by

tourismorganizations,whicharefinanciallysupportedbythegovernment.ThisiswhatMorrison

(2013)termsDestinationPartnerships,wheretourismstakeholdersjointogetherinapartnership,

because as he puts it “1+1 equals more than two” (Morrison, 2013, p. 192). One of these is

organizations created from a partnership is VisitDenmark, which main objective is to attract

internationaltourists.VisitDenmarkhasmanysmallerpartnersatthedestinationlevel,forexample

VisitVestsjælland,whichcanbecategorizedasoneoftheDMO’sinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.

Thenationaltourismstrategyemphasisalotonpublic/privatecollaborations.“Clearprioritiesand

enhanced cooperation between public actors and private tourism companies, should promote

synergyandefficientuseofresources,andincreasethepublictourismdevelopment’srelevancefor

privatetourismcompanies”(AppendixJ,DenmarkinGrowth–TheNationalTourismStrategy2016:

6). Different scholars have also mentioned how development emerge by join resources and

competencesincollaborativenetworks(JamalandGetz,1995:LankfordandHoward,1994:Gray

1989:JamalandStronza,2009:Morrison,2013).

Relevanttothissectionoftheanalysisisthegovernment’sviewoncollaborationfromthenational

leveltothelocallevel.ThisiswhatHaugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad(2010)describesasmulti-

leveledstrategy,wherethestrategycanbeseenthroughthewholetourismsystem.

“Coordinationofpublictourismdevelopmenteffortshasbeenstrengthenedwiththe

establishment of the National Tourism Forum, and the three tourism development

companies. But there is still potential in improving and focusing cross-border

cooperation between state, regional, municipal and local actors, e.g. through the

establishmentofbindingpartnerships,sotherewillbeachievedthegreatestpossible

effect of the deposited funds. It is also central that public/private partnerships are

continuouslydevelopedandinnovated”.

(AppendixJ,DenmarkinGrowth–TheNationalTourismStrategy2016:29)

KLhasacentralroleinimplementationoftheDanishtourismstrategyatthemunicipalitylevel,and

isthelinkbetweenthegovernmentandthelocalgovernments,sotheanalysisofstrategieswillnow

continuebylookingatKL’sperceptionofhowcollaborationshouldinfluencetourismdevelopment.

47

KL–LocalGovernmentDenmark

As argued by scholars such as Long, (1994) Elliot, (1997)Godfrey, (1998) andHall (1998), local

governmentsarebecomingmoreandmoreinvolvedintourismplanninganddevelopment.Thisis

alsothecaseatthelocalgovernmentofSlagelse,butbeforetouchinguponthedestinationlevel,a

closer look at a reportmade by KL is relevant. KL is a Danish interest organisation, which is a

collaborationbetweenDenmark’s98municipalities.Theorganization’smission is tosupport the

common interests of the municipalities, and to contribute in helping the municipalities solve

administrativeandpolitical task in thebestpossibleway.Furthermore,KL isplaying the roleas

negotiator between the local governments and the Danish government, where economic

negotiationsaretheprimaryfocus(kl.dk,27/4-2017).

KLismakinganalysesandsuggestionsonmanyareasthatareofinteresttolocalgovernments,and

tourism is one of these areas. In September 2016, KL published an article concerning how

collaborationinthetourismsectorisnecessarytogainsuccess.

“Growth inDanishtourismdemandsthatwestrengthenpublic-privatecooperation.

Weneedtobebetteratcoordinatingandlinkingourinvestmentssothatwemakethe

mostofthefundsweeachinvestincreatingattractiveoffersforthetourists.”

(kl.dk,27/4-2017).

Followingthearticlecamethereport,AttractiveDestinations–TourismPolicySuggestionsforLocal

Governments (Appendix K, Attractive Destinations – Tourism Policy Suggestions),which lists six

differentsuggestionsonhowlocalgovernmentscanboosttourismatthedestinationlevel.

1. Strongdestinations–“Collaborateonsupportingtourisminitiativesandinvestinthestrong

Danishdestinations.”

2. Newopportunitiesforcoastalandnaturetourism–“Tomakeuseofthenewopportunities

inthelawtoimprovethequalityofthecoastaltourismproductsinclosecooperationwith

localactors.”

3. Digital tourist information – “Marketing is based on the destinations attractions and is

closelycoordinatedwiththetourismindustry”

48

4. Culture and events as drivers of growth – “Linking cultural institutions' experience

productionwithproductdevelopmentinprivatetourismcompaniesanddojointmarketing”

5. Competitive companies – “Collaborate across using business tourism to strengthen the

competitiveness of Danish strength positions, focusing on attracting international

investmentandlabour”.

6. Strengthen collaborations with the tourism industry – “Set goals for the physical

developmentoftheDanishdestinationsincooperationwiththetourismindustry.Workon

developing cooperation between municipalities, landowners and professions that can

increaseinvestmentandtherebyliftthetourismproduct”

(AppendixK,AttractiveDestinations–TourismPolicySuggestions)

Thisisaverybriefresumeofthesixsuggestions,butwhatisinterestingistheunderlinedkeywords.

These words like collaborate, cooperation, coordinate and joint, gives a strong indication that

collaborationandpartnershipsisaconceptwhichbenefitsarewellrecognizedfromhighupinthe

tourismorganizationsystem.Thequestioniswhetherornotthenationallevelunderstandswhatit

requires from the destination level to carry out thesewell-meaning strategies and suggestions,

becauseitiseasyfromthenationalleveltoadvocatecollaborationissuchanunspecificmanner,

withoutaconcreteimplementationstrategy.

Thesixsuggestionsspanwideinrangeinrelationtofocusandstrategy,buttheyhaveallincommon

thattheycanboosttourism.Morrison’s(2013)suggestionsonwherecollaborationandpartnership

willvalueadestination,linkscloselytothesesuggestionsaswell.Hearguesthatmarketing,product

development,planningandcommunityrelations,allcangainfromworkingtogetherandcoordinate

(Morrison2013:193).JamalandGertz(1995)alsoarguesthatwhenatourismstrategyfocuseson

involvinglocalstakeholders,bothprivateresidentsandbusinesscommunity, itcancontributeto

betterpublic/privaterelationship,andmakethedevelopmentprocessatadestinationgoeasier

(Jamal&Gertz,1995).

Collaborations and partnerships are being taken seriously by the Danish local government

organisation,KL,sowhatisnowinterestingtoinvestigateishowcollaborationsandpartnershipsis

approachbythelocalgovernmentofSlagelse.

49

ThelocalgovernmentofSlagelse

“Localgovernmentsinmanycountriesarebecomingincreasinglyinvolvedinavariety

of activities to boost tourism, including destinationmarketing, strengthening local

tourism industrynetworks,andoffering incentives inorder toattract investment in

newtourismdevelopment”

(Long,1994;Elliot,1997;Godfrey,1998;Hall,1998:InDredge,2001:356)

Alocalgovernmenthastheresponsibilityofmanyelementsregardingadestination,whichincludes

manydepartmentswithinthelocalgovernment(Dredge,2001).Itisonlyonedepartmentwithin

thelocalgovernmentofSlagelse,theCulture,LeisureandTourismdepartment,whichdirectlyhas

tourism as focus area, but tourism development demands cooperation among almost every

department.This,ofcause,makesthetourismplanninganddevelopmentacomplexedtask,anddo

callforsuccessfulcollaborationstoreachobjectives.TheCulture,LeisureandTourismdepartment,

willfromnowonbereferredtoasthetourismdepartment,sincethatisthedepartmentwithinthe

departmentthatisworkingwithtourismrelatedprojects.

VisitDenmarkis,asmentionedinthenationaltourismstrategy,anationalpartnershipcreatedby

thegovernment, todo tourismdevelopmentat thenational level.Adestinationpartnership,as

Morrison(2013)callsit,isalsoestablishedondestinationlevelsalloverDenmark,andSlagelseis

notanexception.VisitVestsjælland(visitvestsjaelland.dk,28/4-2017)isapartnershipbetweenthe

threemunicipalitiesofSlagelse,KalundborgandSorø,whichprimaryresponsibility isto leadthe

tourismdevelopment.ThelocalgovernmentofSlagelseispaying4millionDanishkronerayearto

VisitVestsjælland, which is described as binding partnerships in the Danish tourism strategy

(AppendixJ,DenmarkinGrowth–TheNationalTourismStrategy2016:29).Accordingtothe2017

agreement between the three municipalities and VisitVestsjælland, it is expected that

VisitVestsjællandtakesonthefollowingtasks:

• “To facilitate themeeting across actors and partners, to develop products and package

tourismproducts

50

• Toundertakeallexternalmarketingofthetotaldestination

• Tosupportprofessionalizationof theactorsandcommercializationof theproducts in the

destination

• Providinganattractive,inspiring,user-friendlyandupdatedplatform(visitvestsjælland.dk)

availabletoactors,touristsandpotentialtourists

• Being a trustworthy partner for tourism associations, city offices, tourist inspections and

relevantlocalnetworks

• Tobeapartofthemarketingofsingleandrecurringevents,thatcanattractparticipantsor

touristsfromalargergeographicalarea

• Beingthecommonknowledgeresourceregardingtourism

• Toparticipateinrelevantnationalandregionalcollaborationsandnetworks”

(AppendixH,AgreementwithVisitVestsjælland:1)

An organization like VisitVestsjælland has, in contrast to a political organization like a local

government,thepossibilitytohavepayingpartners/members.Boththenationaltourismstrategy

andthetourismdevelopmentsuggestionsbyKL,isadvocatingtheneedofjoiningresourcestostand

stronger,andtoquoteMorrison(2013)again–“1+1equalsmorethantwo”(Morrison,2013:192).

ByhavingVisitVestsjælland’spartnerscontributetoajointmarketingcollaboration,themarketing

effortismuchmorelikelytoreachfar,andattractingmoretouriststothedestination.

ThethreelocalgovernmentsdoalsohaveresponsibilitiesinthepartnershipwithVisitVestsjælland:

• “Toactivelyparticipateinjointownershipandcontributetostrengtheningandcooperation

• TosupporttheeffortsandobjectivesoftheVisitVestsjælland'sstrategy

• Toactasalinkbetweenthelocalactorsandthecompany.

• Tosupportallparties'understandingofresponsibilitydistribution

• EncourageactorstouseKultunaut(kultunaut.dk)asacommonplatformforallevents”

(AppendixH,AgreementwithVisitVestsjælland:1)

VisitVestsjællandhas in thebeginningof2017publishedtheirstrategy,andthe fourmain focus

areasofthestrategyis:

• “Bettercollaborationinthedestinationacrosstourismactorsandmunicipalities

51

• Network,businessandproductdevelopmentintheindustryinlinewiththedestinationbrand

• Betterutilization,increasedcapacityandqualityoftheaccommodations

• Brandingandmarketingofthetotaldestination”

(AppendixL,VisitVestsjælland-2017Strategy:8)

TheDevelopmentDepartmentwithinthelocalgovernmentofSlagelsehasdevelopedafour-year

plan, regarding Tourism Policy Consideration (AppendixM, Tourism Policy Considerations). The

report’sobjectiveistodeterminewhattourisminitiativesisrelevantoverthenextfouryears.This

cannotbecategorizedasatourismstrategy,butitismorefunctioningasastatementofintent.The

reasonthatareportlikethisismadeinpoliticalorganisations,isthatfutureprojectismuchmore

likelytobeapprovedbythecitycouncil, ifthecitycouncilearlierhasacceptedareport,arguing

thattheseinitiativesmightberelevantinthefuture.

“Thecoordinatedeffortsandcooperationbetweentourismactorsinthemunicipality

must be strengthened. Thismeans that effective value chainsmust be established

betweentransport,accommodation,dining,trade,attractionsandevents.Thesevalue

chains are embodied in business concepts that can create comprehensive package

solutions for tourists. In2016, themunicipalityof Slagelsehas initiated thegrowth

initiative"coastalandnaturetourism"tostrengthenthattourismsegment.”

(AppendixM,TourismPolicyConsiderations:5)

TheTourismPolicyConsiderationreport isnotofficialyet,but ithasbeenapprovedby theCity

CouncilofSlagelse,andwillbeofficiallypublishedinAugust2017.Again,thecollaborationbetween

public and private actors is a key element, as we saw in the national tourism strategy, KL’s

suggestionontourismdevelopment,andthedestinationpartnership(Morrison,2013)betweenthe

threemunicipalitiesandVisitVestsjælland.

Asmentionedabove,oneof the focuspointsover thenext twoyears is thecoastalandnature

tourismproject,launchedin2016.Itisthetourismdepartmentthatareworkingwiththisproject,

withPukKirkeskovHvistendal asproject leader.As a sidenote, the coastal andnature tourism

projectiswhereChristoffer(oneoftheresearchers)isemployedasaparttimestudentemployee.

52

Thecoastalandnaturetourismproject’svisionistocommunicatethemanyexperiencesthe180-

km long coastline provide in municipality of Slagelse. The goal is to create collaboration and

developmentacrosstourismactorsandactivities,thatwillendinbookableexperiencesthateasily

canbe communicated to thepotential tourists. Theproject runsover a 3-yearperiod, andwas

launchedin2016.PukandChristofferbecameapartoftheprojectfromthestartof2017.

Thefivemainthemesoftheprojectare:

• Natureexperiences

• Bodyandmind

• Culinaryexperiences-locallyproducedfood

• Activeholiday

• Theseaandthecoast

(AppendixN,CoastalandNatureTourism:1)

As a department within the local government, the project cannot create commercial tourism

products,butthestrategyistocreatepartnershipsandcollaborationsbetween“large,aswellas

smalltourismactors,andmusthelpcreatecohesioninthetourismindustry.Aconnectionthatis

expressed in the way TheMunicipality of Slagelse ismarketed as an active and scenic tourism

destination”(AppendixN,CoastalandNatureTourism:8).

Most of the work done with this project can be seen as what Morrison (2013) describes as

DestinationTeam-building,becausewhatPukandChristofferisdoingarefacilitationofmeetings

and workshops, where the objective is to create the right environment for tourism actors to

cooperateandcreatepartnerships.Thespecific initiativesdone through theCoastalandNature

Tourism-projectwillbeanalysedlater.

TourismassociationswithinthedestinationofSlagelse

VisitVestsjælland is a commercial organisation with paying partners, who does tourism

developmentandtourismmarketingfortheirpartners.Whatcanbearguedtobeaside-effectof

that partnership between the local government and VisitVestsjælland, is that VisitVestsjælland

mainlyareworkingfortheirpartners,meaningthatyoumustbeapartnertogetthebenefitsof

promotiontopotentialtourist.

53

WithinthemunicipalityofSlagelsethereisthreetourismassociations,whicheachareanetworkof

tourismactorsinSlagelse,KorsørandSkælskør.Thesedestinationpartnerships(Morrison,2013),

are runbyvolunteer tourism individuals,whoallareusing their free time to tryandbetter the

collaborationintheirlocaldestination.TheycanbecategorisedasaLTO,localtourismorganisation,

whichisatermusedbyDredge(2013)todescribealocaltourismdevelopmentgroup.Eachofthe

touristassociationshasthedisposaloftourismfundsgivenbythelocalgovernment,andhasthe

responsibilityofgrantingtourisminitiativesafinancialsupport.

Manyof theboardmembersofeach tourist associationsarepensioners,whichmeans that the

averageageisquitehigh.Thismaybeinfluencingthelevelofcollaborationbetweenthethree,as

manyofthemwasalsomembersbeforethemergingofthethreeoldmunicipalitiesin2007.Thisis

subjectofinterestthatwillbetoucheduponandexaminedlaterintheanalysis.

Even though they might not see themselves as direct stakeholders in tourism, the business

associations in Slagelse, Korsør and Skælskør, does also play a role as non-profit tourism

organisations.Theyarethevoiceofthelocalbusinessowners,butmosttheofbusinessesarenot

directlyinvolvedwithtourism.Thiscaninfluencetheirwillingnesstocooperate,sincetheymight

havedifficultiesseeinghowtourismcancontribute togeneratinggrowth,whichalso in theend

affectsthem.

ThestrategyfromBusinessSlagelse,whichisthebusinessassociationinSlagelse,doestouchupon

tourismandcollaboration.

• “We ensure growth in Slagelse city and in The Municipality of Slagelse, by attracting

customers/tradersandguests/touriststothearea

• We optimize cooperation between companies, organizations, schools, associations and

SlagelseMunicipality”

(business-slagelse.dk,2/5-2017)

Subconclusion–Officialtourismstrategiesfromthenationleveltothelocallevel

Haugland, Ness, Grønseth and Aarstad (2010) argues that there are three main levels, the

actor/local level, thedestination levelandthe largergeographical level,andforthatreason it is

important to incorporate an integrated multileveled strategy (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth and

54

Aarstad,2010).Throughtheaboverun-throughofstrategiesfromgovernmenttourismstrategy,

KL’s tourism strategy and the local government’s strategy, there is a red line in relation to

partnershipsandcollaboration.

AccordingtoHaugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad(2010),tourismmustbeapproacheddifferently

atdifferentlevels,andwhenlookingatthestrategiestheybecomemorespecific,theclosertothe

locallevelitgets.

Oneofthecommonthemeswhenlookingatall thestrategies iscollaborationandpartnerships.

Both the government strategy and KL’s strategy are stressing the importance of destination

partnerships(Morrison,2013)andbindingpartnerships,whichhasbecomeapartofthestrategy

fromthe localgovernmentofSlagelse,byco-creationVisitVestsjælland.Thepartnership iswhat

Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad(2010)termsinter-destinationbridgeties,sinceitstretches

across the municipality border by being a partnership with the municipalities of Sorø and

Kalundborg.KLsuggestthatjoiningresourcesinapartnershiplikeVisitVestsjælland,willmakethe

destinationstandstrongerinacompetitivetourismmarket.

Coastal andnature tourism seems tobewhere thegovernmentandKL seespotential, and this

strategy is adoptedby the local governmentof Slagelse.Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad

(2010) argues that by incorporate a destination image and brand, and channelling distributed

resourcesandcompetenciestowardsadestination’sstrengthpositions,itwillleadtodestination

development.

Through the coastal and nature tourism project, the local government of Slagelse is trying to

coordinatetourisminitiativesatthedestinationlevelandthelocallevel.Thestrategyistointegrate

localactorsinnetworks,whichthencanleadtotourismproductsforthetourists.

55

Asmentioned,thelocalgovernmentofSlagelsedoesnotatthispointhaveatourismstrategyfor

thefuture,butdohavetourismpolicyconsiderationconcerningwhattofocuson.Asseenabove

however(figure1),tourismdevelopmentisgoingonatdifferentlevels,wherethetourisminitiatives

have inter-destinationtiestobothneighbourmunicipalitiesandnational tourismstrategies.The

threetourismassociationshavecreatedlocalcollaborationnetworks,andcollaborationbetween

localactorsisafocusareawithinthecoastalandnaturetourismproject.

Tourism collaboration seems to be of great importance for both the local government,

VisitVestsjælland,thetouristassociationsandthebusinessassociations,butwhatisnowinteresting

toinvestigateishowwellthecoordinationandcollaborationisbetweentheseorganizations.The

collaborationbetweenthesecaninfluencehowtourismactorsperceivethetourismdevelopment

withinthedestination.

Figure2Integratedmultileveledstrategy(Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010:p.280)

Anupcomingtourismstrategyforthemunicipalityof

Slagelse

LocalTouristassociationsCreationofcollaborationbetweentourismactors

VisitVestsjællandandadaptationofCoastalandNatureTourism

CoastalandNatureTourism

56

ThenextsectionwilllookattheinitiativesdonebythelocalgovernmentofSlagelse,especiallythe

coastalandnaturetourismproject,toencouragecollaborationbetweentourismactors,bothpublic

andprivate.

Thetourismdepartment’sapproachtoencouragetourismcollaboration

Inthispartoftheanalysis,acloserlookatthemethodsusedbythetourismdepartmenttocreate

collaborationamongactors,willbepresented.Throughsemi-constructedinterviewswithactorsin

themunicipality,andanobservationstudyofaworkshop,wehavegainedinsightuponhowthe

tourismdepartmentareattemptingtoraisethelevelofcollaborationbetweentourismactorsand

what instruments(Dredge,2016)theyareusing intheencouragementprocess.Morrison(2013)

arguesthat“therearesomanydiversetourismstakeholdersinadestinationthattheDMOoften

hastobeproactiveinbringinggroupsofspecificpeopletogethertodealwithparticularissuesor

opportunities”(Morrison,2013.P.192).

Workshop–Observationstudy

OnMarchthe24th2017,thetourismdepartmentofSlagelse’scoastalandnaturetourismproject,

incollaborationwithLandudviklingSlagelse(LAG)andthethreetourismassociations,facilitateda

tourismworkshop.Theworkingtitleoftheworkshopandthemainthemewas“Howdowecreate

betterconditionsfortourisminthelocalareathroughcollaboration?”,anditwasattendedby82

guestsrepresentingdifferentactorscomingfromvariousplacesinthemunicipality.Asmentioned

inthemethodologychapter,theactorsrepresentedattheworkshopwasmainlycentred inand

aroundthethreelargestcitiesinthemunicipality:Korsør,SlagelseandSkælskør,andwithafew

comingfromoutsidethoseareas.

Timelineandinterestingobservations

The flow and timeline of the workshop was following a tight schedule, with the chairman of

LandudviklingSlagelse,TroelsBrandtasamoderator.Hestartedtheworkshopbyholdingatspeech

aboutthetourismsituationinthemunicipalityandwhichdirectionLandudviklingSlagelsewantit

togo.Hespokeaboutthefundsthatactorsinthemunicipalityhavetheopportunitytoapplyfor,

and informedabout themore technicaldetailsof theapplicationprocess.Most interestinglyhe

57

emphasisedthathepreferstobeworkingwithsmallergrassrootsprojectsintourism,ratherthan

“bigandshinytourismplans”.Itseemedlikehetriedtostartoffonagoodnote,andbyproviding

theservicebyexplainingtheapplicationprocess,andshowinghisinterestinthesmallertourism

actors present, to show them that LAG sees their place in the “collective responsibility for the

ongoingdirectionofthedestination”(Gray1989:236).

Thefirstpartoftheworkshopwasdedicatedtothepresentationofnewinitiativesandprojects

whichallhavereceivedfundingfromLandudviklingSlagelse.JamalandStronza(2009)arguesthat

“identifying and sharing future collaborative interpretations; appreciating a sense of common

purpose” (Jamal&Stronza,2009). Alsopresentingwas thecoastalandnatureproject fromthe

municipalityofSlagelsewhichwaspresentedbyprojectleaderPukKirkeskovHvistendal.Shemade

atbriefpresentationofthethoughtsandideasbehindtheproject,andencouragedtheactorsat

theworkshoptosupportit,andthattheywerewelcometocontactheriftheyhadanyquestions

concerningtheproject.Shefurthermoreemphasised,thatinordertoreachthetourismpotential

ofthedestination,actorsmustuniteincollaborationsthatisnotonlylimitedtolocalareas,butalso

reaches beyond these. As she described in the interview, she saw different purposes with the

workshop,andoneof themwas tocommunicate thecoastalandnature tourismproject to the

tourismactors(AppendixG.PukKirkeskovHvistendal,Projectleader–CoastalandNatureTourism,

00:04:44.01).Shetherebyusedtheworkshopasaninformationinstrument(Dredge,2016).

Following thepresentationbyPukKirkeskovHvistendal, theactingdirectorofVisitVestsjælland,

AnetteMoss,askedpermissiontospeak.SheexplainedthatVisitVestsjællandwerethereforthe

actors,andthattheywilldowhattheycantohelpmakethemmorevisible.Shespokeinalowand

nervoustoneandpeoplepresentwerecomplainingthattheycouldnothearwhatshewassaying.

AnetteMossdidnotpresent anythingnew initiativesorprojects, but insteadusedher timeon

speakingabout the importanceof creatinggrowth in tourism in thedestination,and that if the

tourismactorshaveanygoodideas,theyarealwayswelcometocontactVisitVestsjælland.Thatlast

remarkinterestinglyseemedtoprovokesomedeepsighsamongsomeoftheaudienceintheroom.

JetteSøndergaard,theownerofHotelPostgaardeninSkælskør,whoweresittingoppositeusatour

tablewerealsoshakingherheadquietlyatthelastremark.Importantinrelationtothesenervous

58

andpoorlycommunicated inputsfromAnetteMoss, is it tosaythatVisitVestsjællandareatthe

momentlickingtheirwoundsafteraratherturbulenttime.ThedirectorofVisitVestsjællandover

thelastcoupleofyears,hadbeenabsentforthefewlastmonthsof2016,andwasdismissedin

December2016.AnetteMossthenbecamethetemporarydirector,arolesheclearlydoesnotfeel

comfortablein.IthasalsocoursedVisitVestsjællandtoneglectsomeresponsibilitiesinrelationto

their partners, which could be seen in the way some of the tourism actors responded to the

presentation.

Following the speech by Anette Moss, three other tourism actors each presented their

LandudviklingSlagelsefundedprojects:

• GerlevParkhaveinvestedinmakingsheltersforbicycletourists,andtheywereencouraging

othertourismactorstobooktheseandmakeuseofthem.

• GuldagergaardspokeabouttheCeramicsFestivalinSkælskørthattheyhavebeenfacilitating

forthe lastcoupleofyears.Thefestivalhasbeenanunexpectedsuccess,and isgrowing

biggereachyear.

• Ninjalandisafacilityforchildrenandchildishsouls.

The representative fromGerlevParkwas theonlyof the last threeproject-presentingactors to

includethesubjectofcollaboration.Maybebecauseofthis,TroelsBrandtofLandudviklingSlagelse

after the last presentations briefly mentioned the importance of contributing and sharing in a

network.

Duringthelastpresentations,italreadyseemedasifseveralpeopleintheaudiencewasbeginning

toloseinterestorfocus,andwasinsteadlookingattheirphonesorwhisperingwitheachother.The

plannedhalfhourbreakatthispointthereforeseemedtobewelcomedbymanyoftheattendees.

Afterthebreak,itwastimeforthelastsixprojectpresentations:

• OstebørsenisafarmanddairyinVemmelevwhichisspecialisinginusinglocalproductsof

thebestquality.

• Dybkærgaardhas a farm shop that is selling locally producedgoods and from their own

foundry.Theyarealsorentingoutbicyclestotourists.

59

• AveryenthusiasticmarinebiologistfromKorsørpresentsaprojectwheretouristsgetthe

opportunitytogetahands-onexperiencewiththewildlifeoftheGreatBelt.

• WinterbathingFestivalinKorsør.Asthenameimplies,thisisafestivalforwinterbathers

andtheyarehopingtohavemoretouristsvisiting.

• AgersøCulturalCentreispresentingthenewplansforguidedtoursontheislandofAgersø.

ThepresenteristhankingLandudviklingSlagelseforthefundsandfortheeasyapplications

process.

• PukHvistendalfromthemunicipalityisagainspeaking,andthistimemoreconcretelyabout

aprojectcalledBedandBike.Abicycle route that is running througha largepartof the

municipality.

AlotoftimewasusedonthesepresentationsofLAGfundedtourismactors,whichPerThuesen

fromthetourismassociationofSlagelseclearlydidnotlike:“Thenitturnsoutthatafourthofthe

meetingisusedonpresentingthefundedprojectsfromLandudviklingSlagelse!?Whatthehell is

that?So,itendedupwith2x20withtheworkstationrotationswheretheactorscouldtalkwith

eachother”(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation:00:22:39.00).Hefeltthatthe

presentations took toomuchof the time that could havebeenusedon creating collaborations

betweentourismactors.PerThuesensawtheworkshopasaninformationalinstrumentcarriedout

by Landudvikling Slagelse and the tourism department, but has originally hoped it as an

organizationalinstrument(Dredge,2016).IfwelinkthattowhatJetteSøndergaardsaid:

“Well,yougettheopportunitytogotoregionalmeetingsandworkshopsforfree,and

gainaccess tonew informationon the tourismarea.But I reallymiss somesortof

headlineforthesemeeting-oftentheyjustsaysomethinglike‘feelfreetobringalong

newideasandsuggestions’,butnothingevercomesoutofthis.”

(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,Postgaarden:00:19:14.05)

Firstly, this link to Jamal andGetz argumentabout “Collaboration for community-based tourism

planningwillrequireaperceptionthatdecisionsarrivedatwillbeimplemented”(JamalandGetz,

1995:198). Secondly, thepresentationswere inspiringand they showedhowtourism ideascan

becomeareality.Italsogavesomesortofguidancetotheworkshop,bythepresentationfromPuk

60

Kirkeskov Hvistendal telling the audience about the coastal and nature tourism project. It is

understandable that concrete collaborations do not emerge from sitting and listing to

presentations,butinspirationsismuchneededinadestinationthatsostronglyneedtolearnhow

tocollaborate.

Afterthepresentations, itwastimefortheworkshopparticipantstobedividedintofivegroups

withfiveworkstations,spreadevenoutintheouteredgesoftheroom.Thefivegroupswouldthen

begiven15minutesateachworkstationbeforerotatingontothenext.Therewasonlyplanneda

halfhour,sotourismactorshadonlytimetoattendtwooftheworkstations.Thethemesofthefive

workstationswere:

• Localfood

• Artcrafts

• Activeholiday

• Coastandwater

• Localhospitality

Duringtheserotations,insteadofattachingourselvestojustonegroup,wedecidedtodivideand

followdifferentgroupssowecouldgetafeelingoftheatmosphereamongthedifferentactors.We

noticedhowsomeactorswasabitmoreconcernedandcriticalofthetourismsituationintheregion

than we initially thought when the workshop began. At one of the workstations a group was

discussing their concerns about the increasing digitalisationof the tourism infrastructure in the

region.Theyweretalkingabouthowwebsitesandmobile-appshavebecomeprioritizedinfavour

ofthephysicalandtangiblebrochures,andhowtheyfeelthatthemunicipalityisneglectingthis

part.Duringtheworkstations,PukKirkeskovHvistendaltalktosomeladiesaboutthebenefitsof

TripAdvisor,andhowitisagoodplatformfortouriststolookupanattractionoranaccommodation.

Theladies,whowerearoundtheirsixties,didnotknowTripAdvisor,butdidatthesametimenotat

allseehowanyoneonewouldbeusingit,sincetheydidnotknowitthemselves.

Duringthepresentationsinthefirstpartoftheworkshoptherewasnotmuchinteractionbetween

theactors,andeventhoughthemoderatoronmanyoccasionsencouragedtheparticipantstoask

61

questions,mostofthemdidnotsayanything.Thereforitwasinterestingtonoticehowmanyof

them opened up and showed to have some strong opinions and ideas for improvement and

developmentinthetourismarea.Therewaslivelydiscussionabouteverythingfromhowtoimprove

thevisibilityofthesmallershopatthedestinations,tohowlocalartisansandfoodproducerscan

bemoreinvolvedintourism.

Itcanbearguedthattheworkstationswereopeninguptoomanyareastofocuson,forthetourism

actorstochanneltheircollaborativethoughts.Byhaving5workshopsdealingwithwidelydifferent

areas tocreatecollaborationaround,mayhaveresulted insporadic ideas fromdifferentactors.

Maybebyhavinganarrowerfocuspoint,itcouldhavesimplifiedthecollaborationprocess.

Picture2Tourismactorsgatheredatoneoftheworkstationsduringtherotations.(Source:Ownpicture)

At another workstation, we witnessed a heated debate, where the chairman of a local angler

associationinoneofthethreebiggercitiesseemedtobequitehot-headedaboutsomething.As

62

mentioned inthemethodologychapter,wespokewithagovernmentofficialduringdinnerwho

informedusthatthechairmanoftheanglerassociationwashavinganotheragendathantourism

development.Hewantedthemunicipalitytobememberafishingorganisationthatalsooperates

within the fieldof angler tourism.As amemberof thisorganisation, themunicipalitywouldbe

committing itself to keeping a high standard of its rivers and streams and thus improving the

conditionsforanglers.Thechairmanalsoarguedthatthefishingorganisationwouldbeabletodo

marketingforanglertourisminthemunicipality,wheretothegovernmentofficialnoted,thatsuch

a marketing agreement is already in place with VisitVestsjælland. The official implied that the

chairmanwasonlyseekingmembershipofthefishingorganisation,becauseitwouldimprovethe

anglerfishingconditionsforthelocals.

Accordingtothegovernmentofficial,itisnotuncommonthattheagendasofsomeoftheactors

aremoreconcerninglocalinterestsandbeneficialdevelopmentforthelocals,andthatatworkshop

issometimes,forsome,seenasagoodplacetodosomelobbyactivityinthatdirection.

Morrison(2013)describestheimportanceoftourismplannersinvolvingthelocalcommunityinthe

planningprocess,becauseitwillresultinlessissueswiththecommunity.Thisargumentcanalsobe

turnedaround,becausethelocalcommunitycanalsohavetheirownreasons,outsidetheofficial

agenda,fortakingpartininplanning,asshowninthisexample.Thisalsotellsussomethingabout

the “[…] complex relationships between local government, LTOs, industry and the community.”

(Dredge,2006:279)andthatstakeholderscanhavemembershipsofmorethanonenetwork(ibid.)

Inthiscasetherelationshipisevenfurthercomplicatedbyanactorwithanagendanotrelatedto

tourism,butinsteadmightbeexploitingthedevelopmentoftourismcollaborationstogainbenefits

forhisownorganisation.

Theworkstationrotationroundswerethelasteventoftheworkshop,anddinnerwasservedafter

that.Afterdinner,chairmanofLandudviklingSlagelseandmoderatoroftheevent,heldanending

speechwherehethankedtheparticipatingtourismactorsforagoodandprofitableworkshop.His

speech ended with him saying “[…] the ball is now thrown onto your half of the court.”, thus

indicatingthatitwasnowuptothetourismactorstobuildonthecollaborationsandrelationships

thathadbeencreatedduringtheworkshop.“’Feelfreetobringalongnewideasandsuggestions’,

butnothingevercomesoutofthis”(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,Postgaarden:00:19:14.05),as

63

JetteSøndergaardsaid.Thesecommentscomingfromtheprimarytourismstakeholders,cangive

thetourismactorsthefeelingthattheyfromnowonareresponsibleforbringingnewideas,butas

Per Thuesen argued, 2x20 minutes cannot change the tourism actors’ competences. Jette

Søndergaardfurtherdescribedherfeelingabouttheseworkshops:

“IparticipatedinameetingthatVisitVestsjællandhadarrangedforthetourismactors

intheregion,andwedidnotreceiveany"concreteinformation"atall.Insteadthey

wantedustowritedowninputs,butinputsforwhat?!Itwasoneofthesemeetings

that I would call a ‘nonsense meeting’ where nothing concrete comes out of it.”

(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,Postgaarden:00:40:44.00)

AccordingtoJetteSøndergaard,thisisexactlywhatalwayshappensatthemeetingsorworkshops

–theyarefilledwithgoodintentionsandtheparticipatorsarebringingupalotofideas,butthey

areneverfollowedupbyanyone,thustheyarestartingoverateachmeeting.Thisleadsbackto

what Jamal and Getz (1995) argues: “Collaboration for community-based tourism planning will

requireaperceptionthatdecisionsarrivedatwillbeimplemented”(JamalandGetz,1995:198).

Outcomesoftheworkshop

Thispartoftheanalysissectionwillanalyseupontheoutcomesofthetourismworkshopdescribed

above.Asnotedintheabovesection,weobservedhowtheactorsindifferentsituationsinteracted

differently,andespeciallyduringtheworkstationrotations,dialoguebetweenthemwaslivelyand

alotofideasforimprovementandnewinitiativeswaswrittendownonthewhiteboards.Butone

thingisthegoodintentionsandideas,anotherthingishowtheoutcomeis,andifitinrealitycreates

collaboration among the actors. According to Morrison (2013), the tourism workshop can be

categorisedasameasureininternaldestinationteambuilding.Adevelopmentinitiativelikethat,

should often be carried out by a strong DMO, with the ability to encourage partnerships and

collaborationsamongactors.Throughtheinterviewswithactorsinthedestination,itbecameclear

thattherearewidelydifferentattitudestowardshowsuchworkshopscouldbenefitthedestination.

A tourism actor who find herself benefiting from the workshops is Susanne Andersen from

Dybkærgaard, who showed a remarkably more positive attitude towards the than Jette

64

Søndergaard.AtDybkærgaard theyhave just recently,during the last coupleofyears,begun to

engagethemselvesintourismactivitiesandassheexplains:

“[…]becauseasanewcomer in tourism, it is nice tohave someguidance.And the

workshopshavealsobeengoodforus...wehavebeengettinginputsandgottento

meettheothers,anditgivesyounetwork.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard:00:09:01.21)

SusanneAndersen therebysees theworkshopsandmeetingasawelcomeopportunity tomeet

otheractorsandlearnfromthemoreexperiencedones.Buttheyhavealsobeensuccessfulinusing

theworkshoptoestablishacollaborationwithothertourismactors.Duringtheinterview,Susanne

mentionedthat theyatDybkærgaardare in theprocessofdevelopingcollaborationswithother

actorsintheirarea:

“[…]andIamgoingtohavemeetingwithothersinthearea,St.GallaandDenBlåCafé

todevelopideas...somethinglike‘Ifyourentabicyclehere,youcangovisitthereor

there’.Forexample,Trelleborg...itisnotthatfaraway,andmaybewecouldmention

thatinourbrochures.Weareprovidingsuggestionsfortourstothetourists.Maybe

they could drive their rented bicycles up to Lisbeth and see her beautiful cows.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard:00:06:00.19)

Onthequestionofthesecollaborationinitiativesaresomethingtheyhaveengagedinbythemselves

oriftheyhavebeenencouragedbythelocalgovernment,SusanneAndersenanswered:

“Yes,ithasbeenwiththehelpofthemunicipalityofSlagelse.Itallstartedwiththat

wewereattendingatourismworkshopinMarch.BrankafromSt.Gallacameoverto

me,andwebegantalkingaboutmakingsomethingtogether.Wetalkedaboutthese

toursforexample.Andsincethenwehaveheldmeetingsanddevelopedideas.Andat

oneofthemeetingswehadMiefromVisitVestsjællandjoininginalso.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard:00:07:27.27)

Here,SusanneAndersenisspecificallymentioningtheworkshopinMarchasanexampleofhow

collaborationhavebeencreatedbetweentourismactors.

65

The interviewswith the twoactors, JetteSøndergaardandSusanneAndersen,haveshownthat

there are widely different opinions on the usability and outcome of such a workshop. But an

interviewwithPerThuesenfromSlagelseTourismAssociationalsorevealedthattheworkshophad

notbeenexecutedandfacilitatedthewayitwasintendedtobe,asbrieflytoucheduponearlier.As

thechairmanofSlagelseTourismAssociation,hewasamongtheinitiatorsandinitialentrepreneurs

behindthetourismworkshop,andinitiallywantedittobefocusedaroundcollaborationsbetween

tourism actors. On the day of the workshop Per Thuesen was surprised to see how the time

allocationtocollaborationactivitieshadbeenplanned.Accordingtohim,waytoomuchtimewas

beinggiventoLandudviklingSlagelseandtheirprojects,andashewithaconsiderablyangriertone

explained:

“[…]fastforwardtoGerlevattheworkshopinMarch.Thenitturnsoutthatafourth

ofthemeetingisusedonpresentingthefundedprojectsfromLandudviklingSlagelse!?

Whatthehellisthat?So,itendedupwith2x20withtheworkstationrotationswhere

theactorscouldtalkwitheachother.Thatishowlittletimethatwasusedonthefuture

tourism collaborations in the municipality of Slagelse. And us smaller tourism

associations,whatdidwegetoutofit?Absolutelynothing!”(AppendixF,PerThuesen,

SlagelseTourismAssociation:00:22:39:00)

Asitturnsout,itwasnotapartoftheplansthatLandudviklingSlagelseshouldbetakingupsomuch

ofthetimeattheworkshop.AndduringtheinterviewwithPerThuesen,itisnotdifficulttosense

thathefeelsthattheworkshopwastakenoverbybiggerstakeholdersforself-promotion,instead

ofhelpingthesmallertourismactorsinthemunicipality.Heinitiallywantedthelocalgovernment

tobethemainfacilitatorfortheworkshop,andhewantedthemayortobeinvolvedsothatactors

couldfeelthattourismisanareathatarebeingsupportedandlistenedtofromhigherinstances

also:

“Inthebeginning,Iwassayingthatitshouldbethelocalgovernmentwhoshouldstart

itup.Iwantedthemayortobeinvolvedalso,butthenhewaslateattheworkshop,

andthenIknewthathewasnotreallyinterested.Tourismisabigbusiness,eveninthe

municipalityof Slagelse, and themayor is likeaCEOof that. So, I thought thathe

shouldbeinvolved.Ihadwantedhimtosayacoupleofwords.Insteaditendedupwith

66

beingakindofsalescampaignforLandudviklingSlagelse,whichisfine,butnotata

workshop like that. We need to plan these workshops better.” (Appendix F, Per

Thuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation:00:30:25:07)

Ingeneral,PerThuesenalsohadawishthatmoreregulartourismactorshadattendedtheworkshop

andthatthereweremore“[…]theoriststhanpractitioners.”(Ibid.:00:37:17:28).Itisinterestingto

noticehowPerThuesen isusing the term ‘theoretical’ and ‘theorists’ in relation to the tourism

meetingandworkshops.The‘theorists’inhisdefinitioninthiscontext,aresomeone“[…]placedat

some shelves above us where we apparently do not belong.” (Ibid.: 00:25:58:23). Here he is

specificallyreferringtothetourismdepartment,VisitVestsjællandandLandudviklingSlagelse,who

aretheonesresponsibleformakingnewstrategies,allocatingbiggerfunds,andwho,accordingto

him,aremostlysittinginofficesandrarelytakingahands-onapproachtogetafeelingofwhatis

reallygoingonwiththetourismactorsinthemunicipality.

PerThuesen’sviewontheworkshopandtheoutcomeofit, isrepresentingadifferentapproach

thanthatofthetwoformerlycitedtourismactors.Throughhisworkasachairmanofthetourism

association in Slagelse, he is representing a link between the slightly higher instances like the

tourismdepartmentandVisitVestsjælland,andthenthesmallertourismactors.Hewasalsoapart

oftheinitialplanningprocessoftheworkshop,andthereforbecameawitnesstohowtheprocess

slowlywasbeingtakenoverbywhathecallsthe‘theoretical’,untileventuallyundertheworkshop

itself,tobetakenoverbyLandudviklingSlagelsewho,inhisopinion,useditasakindofmarketing

tooltopromotethemselves.

Tourismstakeholdernetwork

In the planning process of theworkshop, Puk KirkeskovHvisendal from the coastal and nature

tourism project, facilitated a meeting where tourism associations, business associations and

VisitVestsjællandwas invited. Svensson,NordinandFlagestad (2005)argues that all destination

planninganddevelopmentmustincludeallkeypublicandprivatetourismactorstobeefficient,so

itwas interesting to investigate Puk KirkeskovHvisendal’s reason behind including these in the

planningprocess:

67

“Thatworkshophaddifferentpurposes.Firstofall,therehadbeenalongingwishfrom

thesmalltourismassociationstobeinvolvedbecausetheyfeltthattheyhadbeenkept

outside. So that is why theywere at themeeting. Theworkshopwas also held so

everybody could be informed at once about the new project, but also to bring a

messageaboutthatthelocalgovernmentreallywanttodosomethingabouttourism

now.ThereasonwhyVisitVestsjællandwasatthemeetingwasofcoursebecausethey

areourmarketingpartner.”

(AppendixG.PukKirkeskovHvistendal,Projectleader–CoastalandNatureTourism,

00:04:44.01)

Linkingherresponsetocollaborativetheoryisquiteinteresting,sinceshementionsthebenefitsthe

otherstakeholdersbeinginvolvedintheplanningprocess,butitseemslikeitisonlyfortheirsake.

JamalandGetz(1995)arguesthatstakeholdersmustfeelthattheyhavesomekindofsayinginthe

planningprocess,but thatwasnot the caseduring themeeting.Per Thuesen from the tourism

associationinSlagelseevencomplainedabouthowhefelttheworkshopwasgoinginadifferent

direction,comparedtowhatheoriginallyhadplan,becauseashesaid:

“Theideaofthisnetworkworkshopcomesfromme,becauseIthoughtthatweneeded

somethinglikethat.So,weheldameetingtoplantheworkshop.Duringthemeeting

afterashorttime,Ihadtostopandsaythat'thisisbecomingtooacademicnow'.That

wasnottheplanatall-Iwantedtoplananetworkworkshopandinsteadweended

uphearingaboutstrategies.Andthatisfine,butforanothermeeting.”

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,TourismAssociationofSlagelse,00:22:39.00)

PukKirkeskovHvistendal’sreasonbehindinvolvingthestakeholderswasexactlyhowPerThuesen

experiencedthemeeting,butunfortunatelythatwasnotpositive.PerThuesenhadhopedtoreach

solutions to the different agendas, “by dealing constructively with differences”, and a “joint

ownershipofdecisionsisinvolved”(Gray1989:236).

PukKirkeskovHvistendalshowedthoughthe interviewthatshestronglybelieves that theother

stakeholdergroupsshouldbeapartofplanningnetwork,butitseemslikeitismorethepurposeof

informingthem,ratherthanlettingthembeapartoftheplanningprocess.

68

According to Puk, “there is no doubt that there is a distance between the work that we and

VisitVestsjællanddo,andthenwhatthetourismassociationsaredoing”(AppendixG.PukKirkeskov

Hvistendal,Projectleader–CoastalandNatureTourism,00:10:25.06).Rhodes(1997)hastouched

uponthissubject,anddescribeshow issuesoftenemergewhenpublicstakeholdersandprivate

stakeholders are joining in networks. Svensson, Nordin and Flagestad "implies that neither

governmentnorbusiness is inchargeoftheprocessbutthattheinterdependencybetweenthem

maybecrucial”(Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,2005:32).Otherscholars(Gray1989:Lankford&

Howard,1994:Waddock,1989:JamalandGetz,1995)hasalsotalkedabouttheinterdependency

between actors, and itmight be here the leading stakeholders is lacking. VisitVestsjælland are

commercialandtheirgoalistofinanciallyprofit,andthetourismandbusinessassociationshasthe

interest of their local community to represent, and the tourism department has a long-term

objective.

Onthe5thofMay,PukandChristofferfacilitatedafollow-upmeetinginrelationtotheworkshop,

where the outcome of theworkshopwas discussed. Besides evaluation on theworkshop, new

initiativesfromthecoastalandnaturetourismprojectwasdiscussed.AsPukdescribeditwiththe

firstmeetinginMarch,thismeetingwasalsousedtoinformtheotherstakeholdersaboutwhatis

goingon,ratherthanincludingthem.

Even though Puk Kirkeskov Hvistendal and Per Thuesen does not completely agree about the

purpose if these stakeholdernetworkmeetings,andone ishaving long-termobjectivesand the

otherhavingshort-termobjective,itappearsthatbothsidesseethebenefitsofthenetwork.Puk

caninvolvethestakeholdersinthecoastalandnaturetourismproject,eventhoughtheyhavelittle

to say in relation todiscussion-making (Gray1989). It is the idea that the tourismandbusiness

associations,VisitVestsjællandandthetourismdepartmentshallmeetacoupleoftimesayearin

thetourismstakeholdernetwork,anddiscusstheongoingtourismdevelopment

To analyse this tourism stakeholder network further, Svensson, Nordin and Flagestad’s (2005)

frameworkwillbeused.Itcontainsthreeaspectsofapartnership,butcansuccessfullybeadapted

toacollaborativeplanninganddevelopmentnetworkastheoneanalysedinthesection.Thefirst

aspectisinclusiveness,whichlookatthestakeholdersinvolvedandtheroletheyareplaying,and

69

why they are a part of the network. The second is accountability, which focuses on what

responsibilitieseachstakeholderhas,andfinallyitleadsustothelastone,coherence,whichisthe

stakeholders’abilitytocollaborate,andrelatestounderstandingofinter-dependence(Jamaland

Getz,1995)andrecognitionofcommonissues,andthebenefitofsharingresources.AsSvensson,

NordinandFlagestadargues,“Thepresenceofpartnershipsdoesnotguaranteethattheymakea

difference,letaloneaddvaluetotheprocess”(Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,2005:33).

Inclusiveness

As emphasised both in the national tourism strategy and in KL’s tourism suggestions for

municipalities,collaborationbetweentourismandthebusinesssocietymustbestrengthened,and

byincludingbothtourismassociationsandbusinessassociations,thetourismstakeholdernetwork

canensurethattheyatleastcommunicate.Whatisinterestinghereiswheretothelineisbetween

tourism and business actors. For example, all the restaurants in the centre of Slagelse are not

consideredapartof the tourismactornetwork,botduring thesummerasignificantamountof

revenuecomesfromtourism.Hopefullybyjoiningthebusinessandtourismassociations,thegap

between them can be narrowed. Puk Kirkeskov Hvistendal’s reason behind involving these

associationsistocommunicatetheworkdonethroughwithherproject,sincetheassociationsis

thecommunicationchanneltothelocalactors.

ThelasttourismstakeholderwhoisapartofthenetworkisVisitVestsjælland,andtheirbasisfor

beinginthenetworkistheirroleasmarketingorganisation.VisitVestsjællandisalsotouchingupon

somedevelopmentareasinrelationtotourism,sothenetworkisalsofunctioningasacoordination

networkbetweenthekeytourismstakeholders.AsMorrison(2013)describesit:

“TherearesomanydiversetourismstakeholdersinadestinationthattheDMOoften

hastobeproactiveinbringinggroupsofspecificpeopletogethertodealwithparticular

issuesoropportunities”

(Morrison,2013.P.192).

Accountability

Withoutitbeingofficial,itappearsthattheresponsibilityoftheassociationsistofocusontheshort-

termobjectives that isof interest to their localactors.Puk,and thecoastalandnature tourism

70

project’sresponsibilityistocommunicatethewhatisbeingworkoninrelationtothelong-term

objective,whichissometimesconflictingwiththeassociationsbecause,asPerThuesenargues,they

feelleftout.Svensson,NordinandFlagestad(2005)describesthisarea“Thisisahighlysensitive

issuethatmightthreatenthelegitimacyofpartnerships,andthisiswherethedistinctionbetween

publicandprivateismostevident,andalsomostcontroversial”(Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,

2005: 33). This is something thatwas shown through the interviewswithPer Thuesen andPuk

KirkeskovHvistendal,astheydidnotseemtobeonthesamepage.Eventhoughitcoursesissues,

itisimportantthatbothshort-termandlong-termobjectivesarebeingmanageatadestination,

anditcanbedifficultforoneorganisationtobeinchargeofboth.Itisthereforarguablethatthe

stakeholders involved in this tourism stakeholder network must accept their differences in

objectives,andasGray(1989)argues“Solutionsemergebydealingconstructivelywithdifferences”

(Gray1989:236).

Coherence

Inthetourismstakeholdernetwork,itappearsthattherearetwogroups.Thevoluntarybusiness

andtourismassociationsononeside,andVisitVestsjællandandthetourismdepartmentonthe

otherside.Aspreviouslydiscussed,oneofthereasonsarethedifferenceinobjectives,butanother

isthelevelofresourcestheypossess.Thefactthattheassociationsisrunbyvoluntaryworkerscan

make it difficult to get them to be 110% involved in initiatives, which is understandable. Puk

Kirkeskov Hvistendal also mentions these issues when voluntary associations move in to the

planningprocessofacommercialmarket(AppendixG.PukKirkeskovHvistendal,Projectleader–

CoastalandNatureTourism,00:10:25.06).

Ifallstakeholderscouldbeensuredafinancialgrowthbysupportinginitiatives,thecollaboration

mightbegoingeasier.AnotherissueiswhatWoodandGray,(1991)isarguing,thatstakeholderis

autonomous,duetothefacteventhoughtheyatsomelevelarecollaborationinthenetwork,they

stillhavetheirowninteresttocareforfirst.

Thetourismstakeholdernetworkisbenefittingthecollaborationbetweenthekeystakeholdersat

the destination, which hopefully will benefit the collaboration between the local actors. Even

though there are issues in relation to objective, it is important for the destination’s further

71

developmentthatthestakeholdersarecollaborating,andeachtakesresponsibility inrelationto

theirroleinthenetwork.

PukKirkeskovHvistendalwasaskedifshefeltthattourismstakeholdernetworkwassomethingthat

shouldbemaintained:

“Yes,becauseitcanhelpremovethebarriersinthedifferentareasofthemunicipality.

Becauseitseemslikethetourismactorsknowhowtocollaborate,sothenextstepis

tomaketheassociationandorganisationallevelcapableofcollaborating.So,ifyoufor

examplemakeawinterbathingfestivalinKorsør,thenyouaskthesurroundingareas

iftheywanttojoininandmaybeyoucantriplethenumberofvisitors.So,Idefinitely

think that it is something that should be continued. And I actually think that it is

somethingthatVisitVestsjællandshouldbemoreinvolvedin.”

(AppendixG.PukKirkeskovHvistendal,Projectleader–CoastalandNatureTourism,

00:06:02.01)

In this section of the analysis, the instruments used by the local government to encourage

collaboration between tourism actors was examined. Two instruments of collaboration

encouragement were identified: A tourism workshop and facilitation of tourism stakeholder

network for the tourism planning stakeholders on the destination level. These methods were

initiallythoughtofasorganisationalinstrumentstoencouragecollaborations,butwiththeinclusion

of Landudvikling Slagelse the instruments were led towards a more informational level with

promotionofownprojectswhich.ThechairmanofSlagelseLTOwasparticularlydissatisfiedwith

thisprocessandfeltthattheyhadmovedtoofarawayfromtheoriginalintentions.

Hopefully by further developing the tourism stakeholder network these misunderstandings of

intentionscanbelimited,andthecollaborationinthedestinationlevelcanstrengthened.

Collaborationinthelocaltourismactorlevel

Throughourliteraturereview,wehavelookedatthedifferentcollaborationsandpartnershipsthere

existswithinadestination. Inthissectionoftheanalysis,wewanttoanalyseuponhowtourism

actorsperceivecollaborationandpartnership initiatives,andhowtheyexperiencecollaboration

betweentourismactors,tourismnetworksandthetourismdevelopmentorganisations.

72

AsDredge(2006)argues,tourismnetworks,canbehardtoidentifysincetheycanbebothformal

andinformal,andactorscanbepartofdifferentnetworksandcollaborationsatthesametime.The

same thing goeswith collaborations and partnerships, but by studying the tourism network of

Slagelse closely, different kinds of collaboration emerged. When actors are part of different

network,itoftenbringsalongdifferentinterests.Anexampleofthisistheanglerattheworkshop,

who clearly, under coverofbeing interested in angler tourism, lobbied forhisown local angler

network.

Many scholars have described the benefits of collaboration and partnerships (Dredge, 2006;

Morrison,2013;JamalandGertz,1995;Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad,2010;VanderDuim,

2007),whichcanconvincetourismactorstojoinincollaborativenetworks,but“evidenceislacking

onhowactorschoosetocooperate”(Beritelli,2011:607).Byanalysingtheinterviewswithtourism

actors,itishopedtogainanunderstandingofhowtourismactorsperceivecollaboration.

Two different types of collaborations have emerged through the research: the collaborations

activelycreatedbythetourismdepartmentorVisitVestsjælland,andthecollaborationscreateby

thetourismactorsthemselves.

Networkscreatedbydestinationteambuilding

Everytourismactorwhowasinterviewed,wasapartneratVisitVestsjælland,whichmeansthatthey

areapartofalargertourismnetwork.Thanispurelyaquincedense,andnotsomethingwehad

plannedfor.Thereweredifferentkindsoftourismactorsinterviewed,suchashotels,campsitesand

rentalservices,soitmustmeanthatVisitVestsjællandhasawidediversityofpartners.Boeslunde

Camping, Musholm Holiday and Conference Centre and Dybkærgaard’s perception of

VisitVestsjælland’stourismnetwork,andtheperceivedbenefitsofit,wasquitepositive.Susanne

fromDybkærgaarddescribeshowVisitVestsjællandhashelpedthemasanewtourismactor:

“Ithasbeenbeneficialforus.Becauseasanewcomerintourism,itisnicetohavesome

guidance.Andtheworkshopshavealsobeengoodforus.Wehavebeengettinginputs

andgottentomeettheothers,anditgivesyounetwork.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:09:01.29)

73

Susanne’smotivationforjoiningtheworkshopswasthecompetenciesshewouldgetaccesstofrom

theotherattendeesasanewtourismentrepreneur,but itwasalsotoexpandhernetwork.She

furthertellsusthatanemployeefromVisitVestsjællandgavehertheideatostartherbikerental

business,andbythathelpedhertodevelopherproduct.

HansLarsen,fromBoeslundeCampingdidalsomentionthebenefitsofagoodnetworkbetween

businesseslikehisown,anetworkhegotthroughVisitVestsjælland’sworkshops.Hedescribeshow

himandtheothercampsitesintheareaaresendingtouristsbetweeneachother,iftheircampsites

arefullybooked.Hefurtherpointsouthowimportantthatis,becauseiftouristsgetthefeelingthat

it istoohardtofindaplacetostayinthearea,thentheywillnotcomeback(AppendixB,Hans

Larsen,BoeslundeCamping,00:02:40.06).Thisargumentisinterestingbecauseitindicatesthathe

andtheothercampsitesareseeingtheirtourismbusinessesasapartofalargerpicture.Heknows

thatitdoesnotonlymattertohaveagreatcampsitefortourists,thetourists’overallperceptionof

theserviceatthedestinationasawhole,isequallyasimportant.

TineJensenfromMusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre,hadastatementthatelaboratesthe

pointHansLarsenwastalkingabout.Sheexplains:

“Rightnow,throughVisitVestsjælland,weareworkingonimprovingthecollaborations

between different actors in themunicipality.We need to help each other bringing

attentiontothedifferentthingsandplacesthatyoucanvisitandexperience inthe

area.Wehaveagreatpotentialforotheractorsintheareawhocanbenefitfromour

visitorsforexample.Forexample,thereshouldbenoproblemforusinadvertisingfor

canoerentalorbikerentalplaces,becauseintheendwewillallbenefitfromit.”

(AppendixB,TineJensenMusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre,00:03:41.09)

ThisiswhatGray(1989)listsasoneofthecriteriaforasuccessfulcollaboration.Hearguesthat“the

stakeholdersmusthavecollectiveresponsibilityfortheongoingdirectionofthedestination”(Gray,

1989:236),anditseemslikeMusholmHolidayandConferenceCentreandBoeslundeCampingare

awareofthat.JamalandGetz(1995)hasthisinter-actorresponsibilityastheirsecondproposition

onhowacollaborationbetweenstakeholderswillbenefitadestination.“Collaborationwillrequire

recognitionofindividualand/ormutualbenefitstobederivedfromtheprocess”(JamalandGetz,

1995:197).Theproblemwithinterdependentcollaboratenetworksasthese,arethatthetourism

74

actorsinvolvedcannotbeguaranteedthattheirinvolvementwillbenefitthem(Svensson,Nordin

andFlagestad,2005:33).Acollaboratearrangementisthereforealsoamatteroftrust,andhaving

thecouragetotakepartinit.

Thetourismactorsweinterviewedseemstoappreciatethebenefitsofbeinginalargerorganised

network,aswewillcategoriseVisitVestsjælland’spartner-networkas.Itcameasabitofasurprise

thattheactors’generalrelationshipwithVisitVestsjællandwassopositive,sincetheearlystagesof

research has shown some rumours that tourism actors were unsatisfied with the tourism

organisation.Thereasonforthisdissatisfactionshouldberootedinthattourismactorsdidnothear

fromVisitVestsjællandaftertheybecamepartners.Tothis,HansLarsenfromBoeslundeCamping

said:

“I have always gotten the help I needed, whether it was technical support to my

homepage,orquestionaboutmarketing.Ithinkthereasonthatactorsmightnotfeel

they receive guidance, is because they are not putting an effort into trying to get

answers.VisitVestsjællandhasalotontheirplate,soactorscannotexpectthemtojust

dropbyontheirowntosolvetheirproblems.”

(AppendixB,HansLarsen,BoeslundeCamping,00:06:10.21)

It ishardtofindthemotivationbehindwhythereperhapsshouldhavebeensomeactorsbeing

disappointedwithVisitVestsjælland,buthisargumentaboutbeingproactiveinapartnershipishard

toarguewith.

OneactorwhoisnothappyaboutVisitVestsjælland,isJetteSøndergaardfromHotelPostgaarden,

butshestill chooses tobeapartner.“Rightnow,weare runningwith thecheapestpartnership

"package"fromVisitVestsjælland,andIcannottellifwearegettinganyvaluefromit”(AppendixA,

JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,00:15:41.11).

So,JetteSøndergaarddoesnotseethesamebenefitsasHansLarsenandTineJensen,whichGray

(1989)andJamalandGetz(1995)arguesmustberecognisedbyactorsinvolvedinacollaboration,

for them to see the value. We asked Jette Søndergaard what her partnership package at

VisitVestsjællandcontained,andshesaid:

75

“Well,yougettheopportunitytogotoregionalmeetingsandworkshopsforfree,and

gainaccess tonew informationon the tourismarea.But I reallymiss some sortof

headlineforthesemeetings.Often,theyjustsaysomethinglike‘feelfreetobringalong

newideasandsuggestions,’butnothingevercomesoutofit.”

(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,00:19:14.05)

ThefactthatshestillisapartneratVisitVestsjælland,butdoesnotseethebenefits,issomething

thatunfortunatelywasnot investigated further. The reason couldbe that she still is amember

becauseofalackofabettersolution.Atourismactorlikeahoteldoesnotwanttostandalone,and

thefactthatsheisstillapartofthelargesttourismnetworkgivesanindicationthatshebelievesin

thewhole“1+1equalsmorethantwo”(Morrison,2013).

When we talked to Jette Søndergaard she gave the impression that she attends all tourism

meetings,workshopsandconferencesinthedestination,butshestillhasthefeelingthatshedoes

notgetanyvalueoutofthem.Atthetourismworkshop,arrangedbythecoastalandnaturetourism

projectandLandudviklingSlagelse,asmentionedintheobservationstudy,wehadthepleasureof

sittingatthesametableasher.Asitwasalsotoucheduponinearlierintheanalysis,itwasnoted

howsheshowedalmostaresigningattitudeandwasshakingherheadwhenthemoderatortalked

abouthowthisworkshopwouldgenerategrowthinthetourismdestination.Itwasalsointeresting

tonotice if sheduring theworkstation rotationswouldcontactotheractors,andactively try to

expand her network that could lead to collaborations. This was not the case, and instead she

seemedtokeeptoherselfduringtheserotations.

ThisbehaviourfromJetteSøndergaardcanbelinkedtowhatHansLarsenwasemphasising;You

mustbeproactiveinanetwork,becauseyoucannotexpectpeopletocarryyoutogrowthwithout

beinganactivepartofacollaboration.

Herargumentabouthermissingasortofheadlineforthesemeetingsissomethingwehaveheard

before.Waddock (1989)argues thatactors involved incollaborationsneedsclear recognitionof

issues,forthetocollaboratetowardsasolution.Butitcanbehardtosetaheadlineforaworkshop

thatdoesspeaktoalltourismactorsatadestination.JetteSøndergaardtoldduringtheinterview,

thatshebelievedthatthedestinationshouldbepromotedasaVikingdestination,H.C.Andersen

76

destinationandMatadordestinationfromtheoldDanishtv-show.Ifaheadlineforacollaborate

workshopgetstospecific,itcancoursesomeactorstostayhomebecausetheydonotseetheir

businessfitintotheprogram.VisitVestsjælland’sworkshops,andthecoastalandnaturetourism

workshop,allhavecarriedthesametheme;“letscreatecollaborations”,butnotaconcreteagenda

onhowtodoit.

Astoucheduponearlier intheanalysis, is facilitatingacollaborationbetweenDybkærgaardand

Ostebørsen. SusanneAndersen told in the interview that during theworkshop, she andBranka

Lugonja(aglassartist)fromSt.GallaGlaskunst,startedtalking:

“ItstartedwiththatwewereattendingatourismworkshopinMarch.BrancafromSt.

Gallacameovertome,andwebegantalkingaboutmakingsomethingtogether.We

talked about these tours for example. And since thenwe have heldmeetings and

developed ideas. And at one of thesemeetingswe hadMie fromVisitVestsjælland

joininginalso.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:07:27.27)

Shefurtherdescribeshowthepartnershipisaclassicpartnership,wheretouristscanrentbikesat

DybkærgaardandthengetasortofdiscountatSt.GallaandtheBlåCafé.This isanexampleof

tourismactors beingproactive, and getting valueout ofworkshop. Theopen-minded approach

seemedtobemoreproductivethatJetteSøndergaard’stimeonherphoneduringtheworkshop.

SelinandChavez(1994)hastoucheduponindividuals’attitudeinacollaborativenetwork,andit

caneasilybeadaptedtotheestablishmentofitaswell.Intheirresearch,itwasshownthatnetworks

withindividualswhoweremotivational,committed,enthusiastic,hadpatience,wereopenminded

andhadanabilitytogetotherpeopleexcited,weremuchmorelikelytosucceed.

Thenextsectionoftheanalysiswillbeexaminingthecollaborationscreatedbythetourismactors

themselves,andhowtheywerecreated,andhowtheactorsperceivethesecollaborations.

77

Networkscreatedbythetourismactorsthemselves

Most of the collaborations and partnerships that has been identified, has been facilitated by

VisitVestsjælland, through their partner workshops. A tendency discovered is that these

collaborationsonlyappearsbetweenactorsthataregeographicallyclosetoeachother.Ofcourse,

thatmightbeforpracticalreasons,butitcaninfluencethestrengtheningofthedestinationasone

jointdestination.Itcausesthedestinationtobedividedintomanysmallerdestinations,wherethe

actorsprotecttheirownlocaldestination.Anotherargumentcouldbethatthetourismactorsdoes

not recognise thetourists’mobilitywithinadestination.Most touristsdonotsit in their rented

holiday house all week, but seek to explore the destination they are visiting. A more open-

mindednesstoencouragetouriststoreachallareasofthedestination,couldbedonethroughlong

distancecollaborations.

InterestinglyitwasfoundthatoneofthelargertourismactorsinthemunicipalityMusholmHoliday

andConferenceCentre,foundithardtocreatetourismpartnershipswithothertourismactors:

“Well,youcansaythatoneoftenmeetssomeoneandthenwetalkabouthowitcould

benicetodoorcreatesomethingtogether,butitishardforustofigureouthowtodo

it.Collaborationsbetweenactorscanoftenbecomplicated:Areweallowedtotake

money for advertising for a canoe rental for example? Do we make a written

agreement? Because we of course all want to make a little profit from these

collaborations. As I understand it, there are a lot of actors who are interested in

collaborations,andVisitVestsjællandmakesiteasierforus.”

(AppendixB,TineJensen,MusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre,00:05:39.20)

So,MusholmHolidayandConferenceCentreismissingsomesortofguidance,andVisitVestsjælland

isprovidingthecompetenciesforthemtosuccessfullycreatecollaborations.Itisagainimportant

torememberthatyoumustbe,asMusholmare,apayingpartnertoreceivethesebenefits.It is

interestingthatMusholm,asoneofthelargertourismactors,aresayingthattheyarelackingthe

competencestocreateactortoactorcollaborations.Thelackofcompetencesateachtourismactor,

couldbethereasonwhycollaborationbetweenactorsisnotsowidespread,andactorsmayalso

notrecognisethebenefitsitcanbring.

78

Inalloftheinterviewsconductedforthisresearch,Skælskørisalwaysbeingreferredtoasalocal

communitywhosupporteachother,andwherecollaborationcomeseasierthaninotherpartsof

thedestination.JetteSøndergaardfromHotelPostgaardeninSkælskør,talksabouttwoevents,The

PotteryFestivalandDrengerøvsaften(aneventformostlymen,withbeers,oldcarsandbikes,and

theshopsareopenallnight),whichstartedoutassmallevents.Thetwoeventshavegrownalmost

toatoolargeofascaleforthecity,andthereasonithasbeenpossibleisbecause“therearealot

of passionate people in Skælskørwhoare alwayswilling to help in setting up events and such”

(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,00:30:07.28).

Asmentionedearlier,wehavefoundthatthemunicipalityofSlagelseisdividedintosmallerlocal

destinations,whicharemoreorlesssuccessfulintheirtourismdevelopment.Theinitialapproach

wastolookatcollaborationsinthemunicipalityasawhole,butthereisatendencytowardsthat

thecitiesinsidethemunicipalityseemtobeworkingasindependentlocaldestinations.Thenext

section will therefore look at these local destinations within the destination, and look at how

collaborationsareatthelocallevel.

Theoldmunicipalityborders–localtourismnetworks

This section will look at the cities of Skælskør, Korsør, Slagelse and Bisserup, since they the

interviewshasshownthatthelocalshasnotforgottenhowthetheywereseparatemunicipalities

beforethemergingofmunicipalitiesin2007.Bisserup,wasinfactapartoftheoldmunicipalityof

Skælskør,butishasbeendiscoveredthatthey,maybebecauseoftheirgeographicallocationinthe

outskirtsofthemunicipality,hasbecometheirownlocaldestination.

Itmustberecognisedthatthecommunitiesstillfeelastrongconnectiontohowtheyusedtobe

independent municipalities, and it is therefore interesting to investigate how it affect tourism

collaboration. Both in relation to how their local tourism community is functioning, but more

impertinently,howcollaborationbetweenthecitiesisaffectedbythemerging.

79

Skælskør

ThecityofSkælskørhasbeenmentionedasatextbookexampleofhowcommunitybasedtourism

shouldplayout. JetteSøndergaardfromHotelPostgaardenhas,asbeforementioned,describes

howthelocalcommunityissupportinginitiatives,andhowshe“onadrivethrough,cameacross

thislittlewonderfulplacecalledSkælskør.Ithadalotofinterestingandcharmingfeaturesforthe

tourists,suchasacosyharbourinthemiddleofthecity,andhadalovelybeachnotfarawayfrom

herewith a fantastic view to the small islands, theGreat Belt Bridge and the ships passing by”

(AppendixA,JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,00:01:27.19).Thescenery,andthefactthat

therewasanabandonedbuildingrightnexttotheharbour,convincedhertostartherhotel.

TheareaaroundSkælskørissomethingspecial,andthetourismexperienceisalotdifferentthan

going toa larger city likeSlagelse. It isamore rural tourismarea,andpromoteamore relaxed

atmosphereasSusannefromDybkærgaardalsopointsout:

“Henrik(husband)andIwasinSkælskørtwodaysago-whenyouarriveinthecity...

theculture,landscapeandnatureinvitesacertainkindofpeople.Andtheyhavegreat

naturallightinSkælskør-thatisreallysomethinganartistisappreciating.Soofcourse,

theyhavealotofartistsinthecity.Therearenoconcretehousingsorbigmainroads.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:02:08.23)

AsmentionedbySusanneAndersen,Skælskørhasmanyartistsamongtheirresidence,andtheir

galleriesareattractionsinthemselves.Theseactorshavecreatedanetwork(kunstkit.dk),tojoin

theirresourcesinastrongerattempttoattractart-interestedtouristtothelocaldestination.

The fact that the area is quite unique, compared to other areas in themunicipality, can be an

explanationonwhytheirinternalcollaborationaresosuccessful.Theyhavesomethingvaluableto

protect,andtheirrathersmallsizemightmakeinitiativeseasiertomanage,sincetherearenotso

many stakeholders involved. Jamal andGetz (1995: 197) talks about how stakeholders need to

recognisethebenefitsfromdevelopingcommunitybasedtourism,andhowthelocalcommunity

play an important role. Jette Søndergaard has mentioned how local residents are supporting

initiatives,butdifferentinterestgroupsarealsocollaborationandjoiningresources.Anexampleof

this,isthenewlylaunchedwebsite(skonne-skaelskor.dk,19/5-2017),whereresidentsandtourists

80

cangetinformationaboutshopping,restaurant,eventsandsoon.Theyevencreatedanappfor

mobileusers,anditisallcreatedandfinancedbylocalbusinessesandassociations.Skælskørasa

cityhastheirownspecificsiteonVisitVestsjælland'swebsite,butapparently,thatwasnotenough.

ItcanalsobeseenaswayforSkælskørtobeindependent,andnothastorelyondestinationtourism

organisation.ThisagainshowsthestrengthofthecommunityinSkælskør,andhowtourismactors

andthebusinesscommunitycanworktogether.Somethingthatwasmentionedinboththenational

tourismstrategyandKL’stourismsuggestions,aswaytoboosttourism.

It almost seems like that the community in Skælskør are so proud ofwhat the relatively small

communityhasestablishedinrelationtoeventsandactivitiesfortourists,thattheyseethemselves

as“better”thantheotherpartsofthedestination.Theyrelysomuchontourism,anditappears

thattheydonottrustthedestinationleveltourismorganisation’sabilitytoleadtheirdevelopment,

so theyhave taken the responsibilityby creating somany local initiatives. This course the local

destinationofSkælskørtodriftawayfromtheideaofSlagelsebeingonejointdestination.

PerfromSlagelseTourismAssociationwasaskedaboutmergingthethreetourismassociations,and

inhisanswer,hedescribedhowwellthetourismcommunityinSkælskørisfunctioning,whichisthe

resultofapartnershipbetweenthetourismassociationandthebusinessassociation.Insomeway,

itseemedlikeheenviedthewaythecommunityinSkælskørissowell-functioning.Accordingto

PerThuesen, the fact that thecommunity inSkælskøraresocoordinated in relation to tourism

developmentandsupportingeachother,isoneofthereasonswayhedoesnotseeSkælskørever

want tomergewith the other tourismassociations (Appendix F, Per Thuesen, Slagelse Tourism

Association, 00:52:40.16). At the rate collaboration is emerging within Skælskør, it is

understandablethattheydonotwhattogetclosertoKorsør,sincetheymightfearthatKorsør’s

lackingabilitytocollaboratecaninfluencewhatSkælskørhasestablished.

Bisserup

InBisserup,ToniAndersen fromthetowncouncilwas interviewed,originally to investigatewhy

noneofthetourismactorsfromtheareaattendedthetourismworkshop.Whatwassurprisingly

found,wasawell-functioningsmalltownwithathrivingtourismlife.Theyhaveanactiveharbour,

aninnwithaccommodations,acampsite,tworestaurants,afishshopwhodeliversmokedfishto

81

themostprominentrestaurantsinCopenhagen,andaverywell-functioninglocalcommunitywith

550residents.

The town council which Toni Andersen represents arrangesmany events throughout the year.

AccordingtoToni,thetourismactorsinBisseruphaveahealthyrelationship,andarecoordination

eventstogether,butshewouldnotdescribeitasatourismnetwork(AppendixD,ToniAndersen,

LocalCouncilBisserup,00:15:18.09).Itappearsthatthetowncouncilispartlyatourismnetwork,

andthatmightbeenoughconsideringthetown’srelativelysmallsize.ItwaslearnedthatBisserup

isundertheSkælskørTourismAssociation,buttheyarenotengagedinanyactivecommunication

oractivitiestogether.WebelievethatthelackofcommunicationbetweenBisserupandthetourism

associationinSkælskør,isduetothefactthatbothtownsaremoreinterestedinprotectingtheir

own localdestination.Thetwotownsarealsoquitesimilar in relation to their tourismproduct,

whichmighthavecoursedsomecompetitionbetweenthetwo.

TonidescribedhowattractiveBisserup is for tourists,whichcauses the towntobepackedwith

visitorsduringthesummer.Anoutcomeofthishasbeenthattheyinthecommunityfeelthatthey

actuallyhavetoomanytourists,asToniAndersenexplained:

“Yes,Iactuallybelievethat.Personally,Idonotgotothebeachhereinthesummer

months,andIknowthatothersstayawayfromtheretoo.Therearesimplytoomany

people.”

(AppendixD,ToniAndersen,BisserupTownCouncil:00:08:27:12)

JamalandGetz(1995)hasthisasoneoftheirpropositionsforcommunitybasedtourism:

“Tourismdevelopment thatexceeds thecarryingcapacityof theeconomic,natural,

andsocioculturalenvironmentwillimpactnegativelyontheoveralltourismindustryof

thecommunity,duetothecloseinterrelationsoftheelementswithinthecommunity's

tourismsystem.”

(JamalandGetz,1995:197)

Touristsinterfereswiththeeverydaylifeoftheresidence,anditseemslikeabitofadilemmafor

them.AsTonidescribes, theyareclearlyproudof theirability toattract tourists,and inasmall

82

communityliketheirs,allthewonderfulrestaurantsandshopscouldnotsurvivewithoutthemany

visitorsduringthesummer.

WetoldToniabouthowVisitVestsjællandmarketthedestinationtopotentialtourists,andifthey

werebeingmarketed.Sheanswered:“Ithinkweshouldbealittlecarefulbecauseweareasmall

place - careful not to be too visible” (Appendix D, Toni Andersen, Local Council Bisserup,

00:13:48.19).

Aftertheinterview,ChristoffergrabbedtheopportunitytotalktoheraboutasummercalendarPuk

andChristofferaretryingtocreate.Theyarecollectingeventsfromalloverthemunicipality,sothe

touristsknowwhat isgoingonduringtheirstay. IncontexttoToni’searlieransweraboutbeing

careful,shetoldChristofferthatshecouldnotgivethatinformationbeforeconsultingwiththerest

oftowncouncil.

Bisserup iswithout a doubt awell-functioning local destination,which exactly receive the right

numberoftouristseachyear,maybeeventoomany–andtheyareactivelytryingnottopromote

themselves further. A reason for their strong community could come from the merging of

municipalities,sincetheyoriginallywishedtobeapartofNæstved,insteadofSlagelse.Theyare

geographicallyalongdistancefromSlagelse,anddonot,accordingtoToniAndersen,feelapartof

themunicipalityofSlagelse.Theyactuallyfeel in-betweentwomunicipalities,whichhaveforced

themtocreatetheirownstronglocalcommunity.IfitisthegeneralperceptioninBisserup,they

havefoundcommonground,andarenowworkingtogethertosolvejointlyrecognisedissues.

Korsør

IthasbeenhardtoreallygettothebottomofthetourismsituationinKorsør.Fromotherpartsof

themunicipalitywe have heard that Korsør is perceived as the ugly duck of the three cities of

Slagelse,KorsørandSkælskør, inrelationtocollaborationwiththegoalofdeveloptourism.This

viewthatKorsørdoesnotwishtobepartofamajortourismcooperation,isrootedinthattheir

tourismassociationisnotwillingtoattendmeetings,orparticipateinstrengtheningcollaboration

betweenthemunicipalityandtourismassociations.Astoucheduponinthemethodologychapter,

wehavetriedtogetaninterviewwiththechairmanofthelocaltourismassociationinKorsørto

givehissideofthestory,buthehasnotrespondedtoourmailsorcalls.

83

SusanneAndersenfromDybkærgaardhadaninterestingviewonwhycollaborationsinKorsør is

hardtoestablish:

“IthasalwaysbeenthatwayinKorsør.ItisdividedintoKorsørandHalsskov.Thereis

thebeautifulsideofHalsskovandthenthemoreboringandbleaksidethatisKorsør-

andyouhavetopayattentiontobothofthesesideswhenyouwanttourismtogrow.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:03:05.03)

Korsørusedtobetwoseparatetownsyearsback,butgotmergedintooncity–Korsør.

PerThuesenfromthetourismassociationinSlagelsealsohadsomethingtosayaboutthesituation

inKorsør:

“ThereisalsoaproblemwithHalsskovandKorsør-theyarealmostenemies,andwhen

youcannotevenuniteacity,howhardwillitthenbetouniteamunicipality?”

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:52:40.16).

Thefact thatKorsørusedtobetwocities is influencingtheirmotivationtocollaboration,which

seemsquitesillytobehonest,butthesamethinggoeswiththeoldmunicipalitybordersaswill

analysedlater.

The LTO– local tourismorganizationasDredgedescribes, are thepeakbodyof a local tourism

destination.Theyshouldbethelinkin-betweenactorsandthelinkbetweenprivatetourismactors

and the public tourism department (Dredge, 2006: 270). They should encourage openness and

collaborations,butitseemsliketheyaredoingfarfromthat.JamalandGetzarearguingthesame

thing:

“A convener is required to initiate and facilitate community-based tourism

collaboration. The convener should have the following characteristics: legitimacy,

expertise,resources,plusauthority,andmaybederivedfromagovernmentagency,

anindustryfirm,orgroupsuchasthelocalChamberofCommerce,orthelocaltourist

organization”

(JamalandGetz,1995:198)

84

The chairmanof Korsør TourismAssociation is in fact amember of the local government’s city

council,sothefactthathedoesnotsupporttourismcollaborationanddevelopment,evenbecome

moreabsurd.PukandChristofferdoesalsohaveproblemsgettinghimtoattendtourismstrategy

meetingwith the tourismdepartment and thebusiness associations, so it is not only actors he

neglectstocollaboratewith.

Slagelse

WhenwelookatSlagelseasacity,tourismhasnotbeenapriorityforthebusinesses.Slagelsehas

awell-functioningbusinesscommunity,andthatmightbethereasonwhytourismhasnotbeen

prioritised.Ofthethreelargercitiesinthemunicipality,itisSlagelsetherehasthefewestamount

ofactualtourismactors,likemuseumsandhotels,buthasmorecafés,restaurantsandnightlife.If

welookatSkælskørandBisserup,therevenuetourismbringstothecommunityiswhythereisso

many businesses that can survive, which contributes to the quality of the everyday life of the

residents.Slagelse isnotdependentontourists,or theymightnot recognisehowmanytourists

takingdaytripstothecityfromotherareasofthedestination.PerThuesenfromthelocaltourism

associationarguesthatthey,inrelationtotourismdevelopment,“[…]havethehardestconditions

fortourismbecausewehavenotbeenthatusedtoitbefore”(AppendixF,PerThuesen,Slagelse

TourismAssociation,00:09:29.01).

Per Thuesen seem to be a man with his heart in the right place when it comes to tourism

development,anditisevidentthatheisputtingalotoftimeandeffortintosupportingthetourism

networkofSlagelse.WetoldhimaboutthenationalandKL’stourismstrategy,andhowtheyboth

stressingtheimportanceoftourismactorscollaboratingwiththebusinesscommunity.Weasked

himwhathisthoughtswereonthatkindofcollaboration:

“Tobehonest, itworks like shit.There I said it.We tried to sitdownand talkwith

BusinessSlagelse.TheywanttoopenanewbusinessofficesomewherehereinSlagelse

-andIalsowanttoopenanewtourismoffice,andthatistotallydumbthatweare

goingtositintwodifferentplaces.Thecustomersarealmostthesame,becausethe

businessesinthecityarealsobenefittingfromthetouristwhobuystheirproducts.So

whydon'twecombinethesethings?”

85

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:18:25.08)

ThetourismassociationinSlagelseisoneofthereasonswhytourisminthecityofSlagelse,andthe

wholemunicipality,ismovingintherightdirection.PerThuesenaschairmaniswithoutadoubtthe

mainreasonthatthetourismassociationishavingagoodrelationshipwiththeactors,duetothe

timeheisputtingintoit.Everyonewetalkedtoduringourresearch,mentionedhiminonewayor

theother.SusannefromDybkærgaarddescribedhowmuchsheappreciatedthecollaborationwith

him:

“Yes,hewasoneofourveryfirstcontacts,whichotheractorsarealsosaying.Heis

verygood,andhasagreatapproach.WemethimonetimeinSorø,atameetingthat

VisitVestsjællandwasfacilitatingin2015.Ashorttimeafterthat,hecametovisitus

hereatDybkærgaard.Hecameinandwehadacupofcoffeeandhejustwassodown

toearth.”

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:18:18.02)

Shefurthersaidthatshedidnotunderstandhowhecanputsomucheffortintoavoluntarytask.

PerThuesenisequerryfortheroyalfamilyonCopenhagen,sohemusthaveabusyschedule.

AfterPerThuesenbecamethechairmanofSlagelseTourismAssociation,heestablishedamentor

arrangementforthetourismactors.Eachoftheboardmembersispairedupwithafewtourism

actors,sotheactorsalwaysknowwhotocontactinthecasethattheyneedsomeguidance.

Linked towhatSusanneAndersen saidaboveaboutPerThuesenbeingdown toearth, shealso

describedhowdifficultitisforanewtourismactortofigureoutwhotocontact,andwhohasthe

responsibilities of what areas - local government, VisitVestsjælland or the tourism association

(AppendixE,SusanneAndersen,Dybkærgaard,00:20:17.11).

ThementorarrangementfromthetourismassociationcanbelinkedtowhatJamalandGetz(1995)

calls a tourism convener (Jamal and Getz, 1995: 198), a person who has the competencies,

knowledge and authority. Of cause the boardmembers from the tourism association does not

possessanyauthority,buttheycanhelpguidingintherightdirection.

86

Collaborationbetweenthefourcities

Thetourismassociationsplayacentralroleintheoveralltourismnetworkofthemunicipalityof

Slagelse.Theyareeachrepresentingtheinterestfromthelocalactorlevel,andaretheconnection

to the tourism department, by being a part of collaborative networks with both the tourism

departmentandthethreebusinessassociationsandVisitVestsjælland.

Unfortunatelyforthedevelopmentofcollaborationsacrosscities,(666)itseemstherelationship

betweenthethreecitiesofSlagelse,KorsørandSkælskørarenotthatgood,andJetteSøndergaard

from Skælskør are even describing the relationship between Skælskør and Korsør as a rivalry

(appendixA,JetteSøndergaard,HotelPostgaarden,00:27:26.23).

PerThuesenfromthetourismassociationinSlagelseexplainedhisthoughtsonwhythereisthe

problematic relationship between the cities, when we asked him if he could still feel the old

municipalitybordersandhowtheymightaffectcollaboration:

“Yes, indeed.Onemustacknowledgethat.Theyarestill there. IthinkthatSkælskør

andKorsørhavebeenseeingSlagelseasthebigbrotherwhohastakenitallnow.All

thattheyhadbeenbuildingupthroughdecadeshasnowbeenremovedbecauseithas

become a "greater municipality". And then there are these, may I say, "older

gentlemen"whohaveahardtimelettinggoofit.”

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:09:29.01)

Thefactthatmostoftheboardmembersinthethreetourismassociationsisaround65,mightbe

thereasonwhytheyarehavingtroubleseeingthemunicipalityofSlagelseasonecoherenttourism

destination.Thelackofcollaborationbetweenthetourismassociationsisalsorecognizedbythe

tourism department. Puk Kirkeskov Hvistendal describing how she does not feel that they are

collaboration,orevencommunication(AppendixG,PukKirkeskovHvistendal,ProjectleaderCoastal

andNatureTourism,00:11:55.24).

We(SørenandChristoffer)weretalkingaboutthemergingofthemunicipalitiesinDenmarkin2007.

We are both around 30, and cannot really remember how itwas before themerging.We also

concludedthatwebothlivedinamunicipalitywhichdidnotchangename,butjustbecamelarger

sinceothermunicipalitiesmergedwithit.ThisisperhapswhyPerThuesenfromSlagelseseemsto

87

thinkthatitisabitsillytohaveconflictsaboutit,becauseheisfromthemunicipalitywhichjust

became larger in 2007. But he does, to some extent, understand how the other two old

municipalitiesmightfeelthatSlagelsehasbecomethe“bigbrother”intherelationship.

PerThuesenhimselfisreachinghisretiringage,soheisapartofthe“oldgentlemen”,butitseems

likeheistryingtounitethethreetourismassociations.

“LastyearIgotandinvitationtovisitthevintagebusmuseuminSkælskør.Iwasvery

exciting,andthemayorwasthere. Iwasvery impressed.Troels fromLandudvikling

Slagelsewasalsothere,andwealltalked.Thisresultedinthattheyearafteratthe

VikingFestivalinTrelleborg,wegotthesevintagebussestodriveinsteadoftheregular

busses.BythatweareindirectlysupportingthetourisminSkælskør.”

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:10:29.12)

PerThuesenisdescribinghowtheassociationsinSlagelsereceive225.000dkr,Korsør150.000dkr

andSkælskør75.000dkr,andhowSkælskørfeltthattheywerenotgettingenough.

“ThisiswhereIhavechosentoopenup,becausewecannotliveinamunicipalitywith

threelargetourismassociationsthataregoingincompletelydifferentdirections.So,I

arrangedsomemeetingsbetweenus.Skælskørwasquick toback itupwhile ithas

beenabitslowerwithKorsør.Sometimestheyarenotansweringourrequests.”

(appendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:10:29.12)

So,PerThuesenisactivelytryingtoreachoutandstartingcollaborationnetworkbetweenthethree,

but as we have seen before, the tourism association in Korsør are not willing to attend these

networkmeeting.Astheexamplewiththebussesabove,thetourismassociationinSlagelseare

financiallytryingtohelpKorsørwithaballeteventthissummer.Perisdescribingitas“akindofflag

wavingfromourside”(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation,00:10:29.12).

TherelationshipbetweenSkælskørandSlagelseisstrong,butaccordingtoPerThuesenitisKorsør

who is blocking an overall collaboration between the associations. Tine Jensen fromMusholm

HolidayandConferenceCentre,whichisjustoutsideofKorsør,describeshowshecouldfeelonthe

locals that theysee themselvesas“fromKorsør -youarenot fromthemunicipalityofSlagelse”

88

(AppendixB,Tine Jensen,MusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre,00:10:35.17). If thegeneral

attitudeinKorsørisassuch,collaborationbetweenKorsørandtherestofthemunicipalitycanbe

hardtoestablish.

Asdiscovered,SkælskørandBisseruphavecreatedsomethingspecialforthemselves,butwhenthey

are strong local destination, it damages their willingness to involve other areas in their

development. The local community in the cities appears to affect the ambition of a joint

collaborativedestination,andthelocals’protectionoftheir“oldmunicipality”insomewaycourses

themcompetewitheachother.

Powerrelationsamongactors,LTOsandDMOs

Thispartoftheanalysiswill,throughthedatacollectedfromthesemi-constructedinterviewswith

tourismactorsandtheobservationstudy,investigatethepowerrelationsthatareinfluencingand

maybeevenhamperingthedevelopmentoftourismcollaborationsinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.

Asitwaspresentedtothereaderinthetheorychapter,inspirationtakenfromtheframeworkof

the four power dimensions, proposed by Beritelli and Laesser (2011), will be taken into

considerationaswellasDredges (2006) thoughtsonthecomplicatedrelationship thatcanarise

between tourism department and LTO’s. By analysing which dimensions are dominant in the

municipality,afurtherunderstandingofthechallengesofatourismcollaborationmaybeachieved.

The following partwill analyse upon the interviews and the observation study, and attempt to

determinewhichpowerdimensionarethemostdominant.

Hierarchicalpower

Duringtheresearch,therehasbeenfewindicationsofhierarchyasbeinganimportantinfluence

factoramongtourismactorsinthemunicipality.Interestinglyitseemsthatthehierarchicalpower

dimensionisadominantfactorbetweentheLTO’s,thetourismdepartmentandVisitVestsjælland.

PerThuesen,chairmanofSlagelseTourismOrganisation,wasseveral timesduringthe interview

hintingatapossiblehierarchicalstructurethat,tosomeextent,ishamperingthedevelopmentof

tourism collaborations in the municipality. When describing the work that Slagelse Tourism

89

Associationaredoing,andhowtheyaretryingtomakecollaborationsbetweenthesmalleractors,

PerThuesensaid:

“[…] they are small businesses and instead of them individually fighting for new

costumers, they shouldmarket themselves togetherwith others to create a bigger

market.And if thatdoesnotwork, thenwemust findsomeother ideas.Andthis is

perhaps the part where I think this whole collaboration thing is lacking - us, the

grassrootsintourismassociationsagainstVisitVestsjælland,therearenosupportat

all.Theyaresitting‘uphere’andwearealltheway‘downhere’.”(AppendixF,Per

Thuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation:00:07:34:22)

ThelastremarkaboutVisitVestsjællandbeing‘uphere’andthetourismassociationbeing‘down

here’ is particularly interesting in relation to a power dimensional aspect. It indicates that Per

ThuesenconsidersthehierarchicalpositionofVisitVestsjælland,assomeoneplacedabovethem,to

beaconstraint inthedevelopmentoftourismcollaborationsforthesmalleractors.Later inthe

interviewthelocalgovernmentisalsothetargetofthesamehierarchicalcriticism.Whenspeaking

abouthisdisappointmentof theexecutionandoutcomeof theworkshop,andhowthetourism

associationswasnotenoughinvolved,hesaid:

“[...] the local government does not understand it at all. And it is the same with

VisitVestsjælland.Theyareplacedatsomeshelvesaboveuswhereweapparentlydo

notbelong.Icanworkonthatleveltoo,butthatitnotwhatIamhiredfor.Iamhired

totakecareofandhelpactorswhomaybearehavingtroubleatgettingthemselves

established or things like that.” (Appendix F, Per Thuesen, Slagelse Tourism

Association:00:25:58:23)

HeistherebyindicatingthatthelocalgovernmentandVisitVestsjælland,becauseoftheirhigher

positions inthehierarchy,arenotcapableofsatisfyinglyworking inthe interestsofthetourism

actors.

Processpower

Processpowerinvolvesthecontroloverresourcesorworkflowsthatotheractorsinanetworkmight

bedependenton,butnoneoftheinterviewswithactors,northeLTOinSlagelsehasdirectlygiven

90

theimpressionthatitisanimportantpowerdimension.ItcanbearguedthatPerThuesenindirectly

areimplyingthatthelocalgovernmentandLandudviklingSlagelseareimportantbecausetheyare

responsible for allocating funds for tourismprojects. Theallocationof funds itself, can to some

degree be interpreted as a process power, and it can also be argued that strategies and

collaborationstherebycanbeinfluencedbyit.

Knowledgepower

BothPerThuesenofSlagelseTourismAssociationandSusanneAndersenfromDybkærgaardsees

knowledgeasanimportantfactorinthedevelopmentofatourismcollaboration.PerThuesenstates

severaltimesduringtheinterviewthathe,intermsoftourismexperience,isstillabeginnerthat

hasmuchtolearninthatfield,andthushintsthatheseesactorswithknowledgewithinthefieldof

tourismasinfluential.

Assetspower

WhenbeingatourismactororLTOinthemunicipalityofSlagelse,itseemsthatitcanbeeasierto

gain influence if one is controlling more financial resources than another. According to Per

Thuesen'sremarksaboutLandudviklingSlagelseandtheiractivitiesatthetourismworkshop,where

hecriticisesthemforovertakingtheagendatopromotetheirownbusinessandinterests,itseems

thattheyareinapositiontodothisbecausetheyareinafinancialstrongpositionbecauseofthe

EU-fundstheyaremanaging.Itmustalsobenotedthattheonlytourismactorswhohadspeaking

timeinfrontoftheassemblyattheworkshop,werethosewhohadalreadybeenawardedwith

funds for theirprojects.ThisallowsLandudviklingSlagelse topromoteprojects thatare in their

interest,andtheyarethusinapositiontosteertourismdevelopmentinthemunicipalityincertain

directionsandgaininfluenceuponhowtourismcollaborationsareformed.

RelationsbetweenlocalgovernmentandtheLTO’s

Duringtheresearch, itwasnotedhowtheLTO’s inthethreebigcitiesofSlagelse,Skælskørand

Korsørarehavinganotablycomplicatedrelationshipwitheachother.PerThuesenmentionshow

thetwoothertourismassociationshavefeltthatthemoneyfromthelocalgovernmenthasbeen

distributedunfairly:

91

“Thesefundshavebeendividedintoathree-two-oneratio,whereSlagelsegetsthree,

KorsørgetstwoandSkælskørgetsone.Andyoucouldfeelthattheythoughttheywere

notgettingenough.

ThisiswhereIhavechosentoopenup,becausewecannotliveinamunicipalitywith

threelargetourismassociationsthataregoingincompletelydifferentdirections.So,I

arrangedsomemeetingsbetweenus.Skælskørwasquick toback itupwhile ithas

been a bit slower with Korsør. Sometimes they are not answering our requests.”

(AppendixF,PerThuesen,SlagelseTourismAssociation:00:10:29:12)

Thisfeelingofbeingtreatedunfairlybythelocalgovernmentmightbetracedbacktothemerging

ofthethreeoldmunicipalities.AndaccordingtoPerThuesen,thetwoothershavefeltthatSlagelse

hasbeenprioritisedattheexpenseofthem:

“IthinkthatSkælskørandKorsørhavebeenseeingSlagelseasthebigbrotherwhohas

taken itallnow.All that theyhadbeenbuildingupthroughdecadeshasnowbeen

removedbecause ithasbecomea"greatermunicipality".Andthentherearethese,

mayIsay,"oldergentlemen"whohaveahardtimelettinggoofit.Andtheproblemis

that Slagelse, which is the biggest (also economically), we also have the hardest

conditions for tourism because we have not been that used to it before.” (Ibid.:

00:09:29:01)

ThestrainedrelationshipbetweenthecitiescanalsobeheardinJetteSøndergaard'sstoryofher

hotelandthepridethatthelocalsocietytakesinit.Hereitbecomesobviousthatthereisalmosta

typeofcompetitiongoingonbetweenSkælskørandKorsør,andthattherealmostisakindoflocal

patriotismamongtheresidentsinSkælskør:

“Justbeforeweopened,Igotnervousthatwewouldnotbeabletosellourroomsand

thattouristswouldnotliketheplace-IguessIwasabitcarefulbackthen.Buttoday,

HotelPostgårdenseemstobeapopularplaceinourlocalsocietyandpeopleseemto

beveryproudofthehotel.AndpeoplearenothidingtheirprideofHotelPostgården,

especiallytowardsKorsørwithwhomwehaveabitofarivalrybecausetheyarelike

92

an old enemy.” (Appendix A, Jette Søndergaard, Hotel Postgaarden Skælskør:

00:27:26:23)

Tine Jensen fromMusholmHolidayandConferenceCentrealsoconfirms that inKorsør, theold

bordersareinducingthesamekindoflocalpatriotism.Whenquestionedaboutherperceptionof,

ifthemunicipalityisfunctioningasacoherentdestination,sheanswered:

“Iknowthatthemunicipality,ifyouaskPuk(projectleaderatthemunicipality),she

wouldsaythatitisonebigunit.Iamnotoriginallyfromthisarea,somaybeIseeit

differently, butmy experience is that you are from Korsør - you are not from the

municipality of Slagelse. There are definitely still some signs of the old borders.”

(AppendixB,TineJensen,MusholmHolidayandConferenceCentre:00:10:35:17)

Lookingatthesestatementsfromthedifferentrespondents,itcaneasilybeinterpretedasifboth

SkælskørandKorsørareimmunetocommunicationandcollaborationproposals.ButPerThuesen

explainsthatSkælskørhasbeguntosoftenup,andthattheyareshowingsignsofwillingnessto

collaboratewiththeLTOandthetourismdepartment.Ontheotherhand,Korsørareapparently

muchhardertoconvince,evenwithacarefulapproach:

“ThenwehaveKorsør. Theyhave this big event this summerwith the royal ballet,

wheretheyhavetousealotofmoney.Andtherearetryingtoseeifwecanhelpwith

asmallamountofmoney,whichwedonothavethatmuchof,butyoucanseeitasa

kindof"flagwaving"fromourside.Toshowthemthatwearewillingtohelpifthey

wantourhelp,becausetheyareseeingusassomethingelse,assomeonewho"takes

itall".Butthatistheoldmunicipalitybordersspeaking,whereasithasbecomemuch

better with the relation to Skælskør.” (Appendix F, Per Thuesen, Slagelse Tourism

Association:00:10:29:12)

Again,itisworthtomentionthat,accordingtoPerThuesen,thereasoningforthisunwillingnessto

collaborate fromKorsør’s tourism association is because of the remains of the oldmunicipality

borders.

93

Fromtheinterviewsconducted,thereisageneralpointtowardshierarchyasbeingperceivedasthe

most influential power dimension among tourism actors in themunicipality. The LTO’s and the

actors seem to be working on a similar power level, while the tourism department and

VisitVestsjællandareperceivedasbeinginastrongerinfluentialpositionmostlybecauseoftheir

higherplacedhierarchicalstatus.Thepowerdimensionsofassetsandprocesspowerarealsobeing

deemedasimportant,andthesetwodimensionsareinthiscaseinsomewaysinterconnected.The

allocationsof funding seemtobe themain reasoningbehindandan important factor for some

actors.

Individualpowerrelations

It is interestingtonoticehowrespondentsareoftennamingotheractors individually insteadof

namingthebusinessesandinstances.Thisgivestheimpressionthattherearesomespecificpower

relationsbetweenindividualsthatarealsoinfluencingtheabilitytocreatetourismcollaborations.

Asitwastoucheduponearlierinthispartandinthemethodologychapter,severalattemptswere

madetogetincontactandplananinterviewwiththechairmanoftheLTOinKorsør.Beforehand,

Christofferwaswarnedbycolleaguesandhadhimselfexperiencedhowharditwastogetincontact

withthechairman,andthatherarelyparticipatesintourismnetworkmeetings.So,inthiscaseit

canbeinterpretedasifthechairmanoftheLTOinKorsørarehavingahigherlevelofpowerand

influencethantheassociationwhichheisapartof,becausehispersonallackofcommitmenttohis

positionaschairmanisblockingcollaboration.ThesamecanbesaidaboutPerThuesenfromthe

LTOinSlagelse.Asitwasseenearlierintheanalysis,he,asachairman,isverymuchinvolvedin

many initiatives related to tourism, and he ismentioned quite a few times by other actors as

someonewhoarehavingatruecommitmenttodevelopingtourisminthemunicipality.Thefact

that he ismentioned by namemore times than the TourismAssociation of Slagelse itself, tells

something about a relatively high level of power he as an individual has destination tourism

network.BeritelliandLaesserarguesthat indestinationplanning,power innetworks isnotonly

related to organisational structures but “[…] is also the expression of individual perceptions,

recognizabletothestakeholdergroupanindividualbelongs[…]”(BeritelliandLaesser,2011:1307).

94

Thelevelof individualpowerrelationssuggeststhatthesuccessoftheLTO’sandtheirabilityto

collaborateandcreatecollaborations,areverymuchdependentontheindividualswhoareacting

astheirexternalpresence.Similarly,thechairmanoftheanglerassociationwhowasattendingthe

workshopwithaquestionableagenda,wasalsoaninfluentialindividualthatshouldbenoticed.The

wayhespokeoutloudlyandhisalmostaggressiveappearanceattheworkshop,andthewaythat

thegovernmentofficialtalkedabouthim,gaveanimpressionofanindividualwithpowerrather

thananorganisationwithpower.

StateofcollaborationinthemunicipalityofSlagelse

Throughthisanalysiswehave lookatdifferentelements inrelationtohowcollaboration isata

destination, andhow it is influencedbynational strategies. Lastly it has been shownhow local

tourismactorsareinfluencedbycollaborationinthedestinationlevel,orthelackofit.

AsWilson,BuultjensandNielsen(2009)argues,earlierresearchislackinginareaofpublic/private

collaboration,andespeciallypartnershipsbetweenvoluntaryassociationsandcommercialtourism

organizations. What this analysis has offered is a look at how collaborations between local

government, commercial tourism organizations and voluntary tourism association, can be

challengingtoestablish,duetothedifferentobjectivesthatthesestakeholdershave.Ithasbeen

discovered, inrelationtoMartinSandback’sargumentaboutrecognizingthecommercialactors’

short-termobjectiveandtourismdevelopers’ long-termobjective, thatthere isaneedformore

research about how tomanage these differences in objectives, to successfully involve different

stakeholdersinthedevelopingprocessofadestination.

Themethodicalapproachused inthisresearchallowedaqualitativeunderstandingofhowlocal

tourism actors perceive the planning and development carried out by the destination level

stakeholder,suchasVisitVestsjællandandthetourismdepartment.Tourismactorsaretheones

howareincontactwiththetouristsonadailybasis,andthisanalysisshowedthatthereisaneed

for a coherent strategy for them to follow. The absent of a well-functioning destination level

network,havecoursedtheactorstolosetrustinthekeystakeholderorganizations,andageneral

confusionwasfoundinrelationtowhotourismactorssawasthedrivingforcewhenitcomesto

tourism development. The roles between VisitVestsjælland, the tourism associations and the

95

tourismdepartmenthasnotbeenwellcommunicated,anditappearsthattheircurrentrolesare

overlapping.Thisinsufficientuseofresources,bothintermsoffinanceandcompetences,courses

a slow tourismdevelopment,which is a shame sincemanypassionateandenthusiastic tourism

actorswerefoundduringthecollectingofinterviews.

An issue thatwas unfold during the analysiswas the conflict between citieswithin the overall

destination,whichhascreatedsmalllocaldestinationswithinthedestination.Whatwasfoundto

bethecourseofthis,wasthefactthatthemunicipalityofSlagelseusedtobethreemunicipalities

beforethemergingofmunicipalitiesin2007.Thisisahighlyinterestingtheoreticalarea,whichwill

be furtherdiscussed, sinceearlier researchhasnotexploredhow thismergingofmunicipalities

affectscollaborationinthe“new”municipality.Thisareofresearchcanreachfarbeyondtourism

theory,sinceitwasfoundthattheprimaryissueswererootedintheresidents’personalvaluesand

protectionoftheirowncity.

Theoriginalpointofdeparturefortheanalysiswastoinvestigatehowdestinationstrategieswas

influencedbythenationalstrategies,andhowtheyinfluencetourismactors,butwasunfoldduring

theresearchunfoldsomeinterestingnewquestions.ThisissomethingMurdoch(2006),Law(2004)

andLatour(2005)alsoargues,thatstudyingnetworksbygettingcloselyengageintheprocess,can

courseresponsesfromactorstosteertheresearchinanewdirection.

Thesequestionswillnowbediscussed,andsuggestionsonfurtherresearchareaswillbepresented.

96

Discussion

Theanalysissoughttoinvestigatehowcollaborationisunderstoodapproachedondifferentlevels,

withthemainfocusbeingonthedestinationlevel.Collaborationandpartnershipisrecognisedas

beinganimportantroleoftourismdevelopment,bothfromnationaltourismorganisationsandcan

betracedtothelocalgovernmentofSlagelse'stourismstrategy(eventhoughanofficialtourism

strategyisstillabsent).

The point of departure was that if the term ‘tourism collaboration’ is deeply implemented in

strategiesasakeywordfromthenationalleveltothedestinationlevel,howisitperceivedbythe

actorsinvolvedindestinationtourism.

For this research, it has not been too relevant to analyse and discuss what an overall tourism

strategyofthemunicipalityofSlagelseshouldcontain,buttheabsenceofithasaneffectonthe

tourismactors.Thelevelofcollaborationbetweenthetourismdepartmentandthetourismactors

issuffering,anditseemsliketheactorshavelosttrustinbothVisitVestsjælland’sandthetourism

department’s ability to lead the tourism development. At theworkshop and from some of the

tourismactorsinterviewed,itbecameclearthattoomanyinitiativeshavebeenlaunched,andthe

fadedawayagain.Morrison(2013)describeshowtourismactorsneedsacommonobjective,which

canbedonebycreatinganoveralltourismstrategyforthedestination.Astrategythatcanshow

tourismactorsthatthedestinationasawholeismovingforward,andastrategywhichtheactors

cancreateanddeveloptheirtourismproductsinrelationto.

Whatwasfoundthroughtheanalysiswasadivideddestinationinrelationtoseveralaspects.Firstly,

fromthedestinationlevelitwasdiscoveredthattheactorsdidnotseemtoknowwhichorganisation

isfunctioningastheoverallDMO,andtheanalysisalsoshowedthattheremayinfactnotbeaclear

answertothis.Itisinterestingtodiscusstheneedforcleardefinitionofwhatrolesthemaintourism

stakeholdersshouldhave,inordertocreateabetterorganisationalstructureinthetourismsector,

whichcanhelpenhance tourismdevelopment,andcreatebetter trust fromthe tourismactors.

Secondly,whatfurtherwillbediscussedishowlong-termandshort-termobjectiveareinfluencing

thecollaborationandhowitisapproached,andhowthedestinationlevelstakeholdersmightfind

asolutiontothisissue.

97

Thirdly,thedistancebetweenlocaltourismactorsandthetourismstrategiesbeingcarriedoutby

the tourism department and VisitVestsjælland were too far. There is a need for more actor

involvement,andneed for theactors to feelapartofacoherent tourismagenda.Fourthly, the

merging of municipalities in 2007 has had tremendous effect on collaboration within the

destination.IthascausedthedestinationofSlagelsetobe(remain)dividedintodestinationswitha

strong local anchoring and different perceptions of how tourism collaborations should be

approached.

Thegeneralconfusion–Theneedforaclearleader/DMO

Throughtheresearchitbecameclearthatthereisageneralconfusionfromthetourismactors,who

areuncertainofwhotheDMOofthedestinationinfactisandtherebywhoarehavingtheleading

roleinrelationtotourismdevelopment.Severaltimesitwasseenthatactors’showedfrustrations

of being told about different strategic plans, and the many different network meetings and

workshops with different themes, was resulting in lack of trust to the tourism planning

organisations.

Dredge(2006)arguesthat“therolesandresponsibilitiesoflocalgovernmentandtheLTOshouldbe

clearlyfocusedandarticulated”(Dredge, 2006: 278).

The two organisations with the competences and resources to be the DMO, is the tourism

department and VisitVestsjælland. If we look at this from a financial point of view, the local

governmenthasoriginallyoutsourcedtourismdevelopmentandmarketingtoVisitVestsjælland,by

creatingadestinationpartnershipwiththemunicipalitiesofSorøandKalundborg.

VisitVestsjælland’s2017strategyistofocusinproductdevelopment,professionalizationoftourism

actors, and branding of the destination (appendix L). So VisitVestsjælland is officially taking a

structuralandfunctionalapproachtotourismdevelopment,whichisdefinitelyneeded.Butwhat

can be seen as an issue is that these benefits are only for the paying partners, which is

understandablesinceVisitVestsjællandiscommercialbusiness.Withthatbeingsaid,itstillleaves

newactorsandactorswhodoesnotwanttobeapartofVisitVestsjælland’snetwork, inastage

wheretheydonothaveanorganisationtoguidethemandsupportthem.

As discovered during theworkshop, some actors have lost trust in VisitVestsjælland’s ability to

supportthem,butwasisimportanttorememberistheturbulenttimeVisitVestsjællandhashad.It

98

isarguablethattheyarenotinthepositionatthemomenttobeDMO,sincealeadershouldhave

theabilitiestomotivate,createcommitmentandenthusiasm,haveastrongvisionandanabilityto

getotherpeopleexcited(SelinandChavez,1994).DuringtheturbulenttimeinDecember2016,the

staffmembersatVisitVestsjællandwentfromtwelvetofour,andatemporarydirectorwasplaced

inchargeoftheorganisation.

OnthefirstofAugust2016,VisitVestsjællandwillhaveanewdirector,andtherebuildingoftrust

andcredibilitycanbegin,butthatisnotsomethingthathappensovernight.

Thetourismassociations,VisitVestsjællandandthetourismdepartmentareallworkingtowardsthe

sameobjective,thatistocreategrowthinthetourismindustry.Aroundfiveyearsagothetourism

potential inSlagelsewasrecognised,whichcourseddifferent interestgroupstotryanddevelop

tourisminthearea.Butsincetherewasnotajointrecognitionofissuestoaddress(Waddock,1989),

or a collaborativeprocess todeterminewhat thebrand shouldbe, it resulted inadisorganised

tourismeffortfromdifferentgroups.Tourismingeneralhascertainlynotbenefittedfromthat,but

moreimportant,ithasconfusedtourismactorstotheextent,thattheyhavebecomeindoubtabout

whototrustorfollow.

Collaborationis lackingbetweenthethree,whicharecoursingactorstonotknowingwhoisthe

leadingforce.Whatisimportanttonoticeisthemanydifferentorganisationsandgroupsworking

withtourism.Ifwelookisolatedateachofthem,thedestinationofSlagelsehasmanywell-meaning

initiatives,butitmightbebeneficialtomoreclearlydividetheresponsibilities.Thecreationofthe

tourismstakeholdernetworkbetweenthetourismandbusinessassociations,VisitVestsjællandand

thetourismdepartment,mightbethedestinationlevelcollaborationwhichhasbeenmissing,and

asJamalandStronza(2009)argues:“collaborationprovidesforaflexibleanddynamicprocessthat

evolvesovertime,enablingmultiplestakeholdersto jointlyaddressproblemsor issues” (Jamal&

Stronza,2009).Thetourismstakeholdernetworkwillevolveovertime,andprojectleaderinthe

localgovernmentPukKirkeskovHvistendalassuredthatthenetworkisheretostay.

Anotherside-effectoftheuncleardistributionofroles,isthattourismfinancialresourcesarenot

utilizedproperly.BoththenationaltourismstrategyandKL’stourismsuggestionsarearguingthat

joiningof resources isacrucialaspectof tourismdevelopment,somethingthatscholarssuchas

99

Haugland,Ness,GrønsethandAarstad(2010)andMorrison(2013)alsoisarguingfor.Onethingis

thatthelocalgovernmentarespendingfourmillionayearonVisitVestsjælland,butareinfactstill

doingthetasksthemselves,becauseVisitVestsjællandhasnotliveduptotheagreementlately,but

anotherproblemisthetimetourismactorshavetoinvesttoattendthelargeamountofmeetings.

SuanneAndersenfromDybkærgaardcomplainedaboutthemanymeetingsshehastogoto,and

howthesamethingsarebeingdiscussedwithdifferenttourismdevelopers(AppendixE,Susanne

Andersen, Dybkærgaard, 00:22:28.03). It can be argued that this is also leading to a lack of

willingness to support the different networks and tourism planning stakeholders, because the

tourismactorsfeelthatthedestinationlevelisnotcoordinated.

Thereisanimplicationwiththelackofcoordinationandroledistributionbetweenthethreeprimary

stakeholdersworkingwithtourismdevelopment.ItishardtodeterminewhoistheDMO,butitis

betweenthetourismdepartmentandVisitVestsjælland,anditcanbearguedthatitcanbeafine

solution,aslongastherolesandtasksareclearlydividedthem.Whatisinterestingtodiscuss,is

how collaboration within the tourism sector of Slagelse can benefit from a more structured

approach,sothetwoorganizationscansuccessfullycooperatetobeajointDMO.

Acleardefinitionofroledistributionbetweentourismassociations,VisitVestsjællandandthetourism

department

TheleadingforcesinrelationtotourismdevelopmentinthemunicipalityofSlagelse,isthetourism

department,VisitVestsjællandandthetourismassociations-tosomeextent.Theirstrategiesare

overlapping,andtourismactorsareconfusedaboutwhohaswhatresponsibilities,ashavebeen

discussedabove.

Inthefollowingsection,itwillbediscussedhowtherolescanbedividedinawaythatcaneasethe

confusiononthetourismactor level,aswellasonthetourismplanninganddevelopment level,

becauseitappearsthatnoonetrulyknowseachother’sresponsibilities.

Thetourismdepartment

Whatthetourismdepartmentpossesses,comparedtotheothers,islegitimacy,authority,financial

resourcesandtheconnectiontootherdepartmentswithinthelocalgovernment,whocanaffect

100

tourism development. These attributes are necessary to develop long-term tourism initiatives,

which should be the primary focus of the tourism department. But the role of the tourism

department should also be to ensure a constant close relation to the business and tourism

associations and VisitVestsjælland, by further developing the tourism stakeholder network

meetings,asdescribedintheanalysis.

AsarguedbyJamalandGetz,(1995)andGray(1989),stakeholdergroupshavetorecognizetheir

interdependence,andacontinuoussharingofknowledge,jointownershipofdecision-making,and

acollectiveresponsibilityfortheongoingdirectionofthedestination,issomethingthatcanbethe

outcomeofasuccessfultourismstakeholdernetwork.Thetourismdepartmentmustthroughthe

tourismstakeholdermeetings,convincethebusinessassociationsofthebenefitsofjoiningtourism

initiatives.

VisitVestsjælland

The destination partnership with VisitVestsjælland should be limited to marketing, and the

supportingof theirpayingpartners.Theirprimary role shouldbe tomarket tourismactors,and

communicate the brand that derives from the long-term strategy carried out by the tourism

department.Workshops and supporting of actors, is as of now only for the partners, which is

understandablesinceitisaservicethepartnersarepayingfor.TheconcernaboutVisitVestsjælland

onlymarketstheirpartners,hasearlierbeenraised.ItisstronglysuggestedthatVisitVestsjælland

markets all actors, activities and events, because they are by far the strongest marketing

organisation,andtheyhavedoneasuccessfuljobinthepast.Actorsnotbeingmarketedbythem,

willbe leftalmost invisible inthetourismmarketofthedestination,and itcanbehardfornew

tourismentrepreneurstoattracttourists.

Thetourismassociations

Tobeamemberofthetourismassociationsdoesnotcostanything,whichmeansthattheyhavea

lotofthesmalleractorsintheirnetwork.AsDianneDredge(2006)describes,tourismactorscanbe

part of different networks at the same time,which is also the casehere.Many tourismactors,

including Dybkærgaard, are members of both the tourism association of Slagelse, and

VisitVestsjælland.Thetourismassociationsmainroleshouldbetosupportandguidethetourism

actors that are not a part of VisitVestsjælland’s network, to avoid any tourism actors to stand

101

outsideofatourismnetwork.Theirsecondroleshouldbetorepresentthelocaltourismactors’

short-terminterestsatthetourismstakeholdermeetings,facilitatedbythetourismdepartment.

Thiswillensureacloserlinkbetweenthelocaldestinationandthetourismplanningorganisation,

whichPerThuesenarguesarehavingatooacademicapproachforthetourismactorstofollow.

They must encourage their actors to look beyond their local destination, so the continues

collaborationprocesscanbesupportedfromthelocallevel,tothedestinationlevel.Theproblem

isthattheboardmembersatthethreetourismassociationsareallvoluntaryworkers,whichmeans

itishardtodemandthemtodospecifictasks.ThelackofKorsør’sinvolvementincollaborations,

and the absent of support to their members, must be addressed. Slagelse tourism association

carried out a replacement of boardmembers a few years back,which leaded to amuchmore

productiveassociation. Itmightbe time forKorsør todothesame,andmaybereplace the“old

gentlemen”,asPerThuesendescribedthemas.Thelackcollaborationbetweentheassociationsare

influencing theirmembers, so this something thatmust be sortedout on thedestination level.

Individualsmindcanbeeasiertochanges,thanawholeassociation(Trist,1979),sobyhavingthe

rightkindofpeoplecangreatlyinfluencethenetworktheyarein(SelinandChavez,1994)

Recognitionoflong-termdestinationstrategies,andshort-termlocalinterests

Thetourismactorswhowasinterviewedduringthisresearch,allseemedtonotknowmuchabout

whatisgoingoninrelationtoplanninganddevelopmentinthedestinationlevel.Afewofthem

hadsomebasicknowledgeaboutthecoastalandnaturetourismproject,butdidnotfeelapartof

theproject.MartinSandbach, formerheadofResearchat theBritishTourismAuthority,hasan

interestingargumentinrelationtothis:

“Idon’tbelievewehavebeenhonestenoughwithourselves inrecognisingthatour

commercialpartnershaveashort-termviewoftheworldandwe,asNTOs[national

tourismorganisations]arechargedbygovernmenttohaveamedium-termor long-

termoutlook.”

(MartinSandbach,in:Morgan,Pritchard&Piggott,2003)

Thisargumentalignswithwhathasbeenpreviouslydiscussedaboutthetourismdepartmenthaving

along-termobjective,andthetourismassociations,whomarerepresentingthelocalactors,having

102

ashort-termperspective.Itisarguablethatthereasonthatcollaborationsandtrustisdifficultto

establishbetween the tourismdepartmentand the tourismassociations, isdue to thedifferent

timeframestheyhavesetfortheirinitiatives.Dredge(2006)arguesthat“localgovernmentcanonly

representwhatitperceivestobetheissuesandinterestsofthebroadercommunity”(Dredge,2006:

278),whichalignswiththisdiscussion’ssuggestionsonhowtheresponsibilitiesshouldbedivided,

as seen in the previous section. The work carried out by the tourism departmentmay be too

“academic”asPerThuesenargues,butisimportantfortheongoingdevelopmentofthedestination,

thatthetourismdepartmentastheselong-termprojectsasthecoastalandnaturetourismproject.

Fordestinationtodifferentiateitselfonthetourismmarket,thedestinationneedssomekindof

themethatovertimewillbeadoptedbythetourismactors.Forittobecomeacceptedbythelocal

actorsitmustbesomethingthattheyfeelthelocalgovernmentareseeingasalong-termobjective,

andsomethingitisworthtoinvestinfromthelocaltourismactors.

For the local actors to trust the long-termplan of the tourism department, theymust not feel

forgotten.Asmentionedabove,itisheretheroleofthetourismassociationsandVisitVestsjælland

is important, and here they must take responsibility. They must represent the tourism actors’

interestinthedestinationplanningprocess,tomakesurethattheirshort-terminterestisnotbeing

overlookeddoingtheworkwithalong-termdestinationstrategy.

Itmustbeunderstoodbyallmembersasthetourismstakeholdernetwork,thatthelong-termand

short-termobjectivesareequally important for theongoingdevelopment.Butoneorganisation

cannotbe in chargeofboth, so it ishere themembersof the tourismstakeholdernetworkare

interdependent.Svensson,NordinandFlagestad,(2005)arguesthataproblemwithanetworkand

gettingmembersofitinvolvedisthattheycannotsurethattheirpresencemakesadifference.To

takethatargumentabitfurther,itisarguablethatinmosttourismdevelopmentatthedestination

level,theoutcomecanfirstbeseenonthelongrun,sotheassociationsmustbeconvincedthat

theirpresenceovertimewillinfluencethedestinationforthebetter.

103

Localanchoringintheoldmunicipalities,andindividualpowerrelations

Asitwastoucheduponintheanalysis,thisresearchhasshownthatthereisasurprisinglyhighlevel

ofcompetitionbetweenthethreebigcitiesinthemunicipality.Therespondentshaveall,atsome

levelduringtheinterviews,hintedthatthiscompetitionbetweenthecitiescanbetracedbackto

whenitwasstilldividedintothethreemunicipalitiesofKorsør,SlagelseandSkælskør.Theresidents

aretakingabigprideintheircitiesandtheirhistory-whichofcourseisnotunusual,butithasalso

becomeabarrierthattosomeextentisblockingthehealthydevelopmentoftourismcollaboration

betweenthelocaltourismassociations.

Inrecentyears,afterthereplacementoftheirboardmembers,Slagelse’stourismassociationhas

beguntoacknowledgethatthecollaborationandcommunicationbetweenthetourismassociation

areinadequateandthateffortsmustbemadetobuilditup.Thetwoothertourismassociations,

especiallytheoneinKorsør,havebeenshowingareluctancetocreatecollaborationsacrossthe

cities.Sinceitunfortunatelyprovedtobeimpossibletogetinterviewswiththeleadersofthesetwo

tourismassociations,onecanonlyguessabouttheirmotivationsbehindtheirreluctance.Butitis

repeatedlysuggestedintheinterviewsthatthismayberelatedtoapresenceoflocalanchoringand

that some of the boards still consist of members who have been sitting since when the

municipalitieswerenotyetmergedintothecurrentstate.Itishintedthatthetourismassociation

board inKorsør isconsistingof ‘oldgentlemen’whoarenot interested inanycross-citytourism

collaborations in the municipality. This means that the tourism association in Korsør actually

possessesahighlevelofpowerbecausethey,withtheirunwillingnesstocollaborate,areinfluencing

thedevelopmentofamorecoherenttourismcollaborationinthemunicipality.Itcanbearguedthat

thetourismassociationinKorsørcouldsimplybeleftoutofthecollaboration,butthatishardlya

possibilityasitwouldalsoleavethesmallertourismactorsinthecityout.Thesizeandresourcesof

thelocalgovernmentinthemunicipalityarenotsufficientenough,thattheyarecapableofreaching

alltourismactorswithoutthehelpofthelocaltourismassociation,aspreviouslydiscussed.Inboth

Beritelli and Laessers (2011) and Dredges (2006) studies of power relations in networks it was

arguedthattherelationsbetweenactors,LTO’sandlocalgovernmentsintheirspecificstudiescould

be related to a ‘Foucaultdian’ perspective of power. Here it is argued that power relations are

decentralizedandisconstantlyanddynamicallychangingbetweenactorsandindividuals.Inthat

104

perspective,inthiscase,itisinterestingtoseehowthepowerandinfluenceofindividualsareboth

creatingpossibilitiesbutalsoimpossibilitiesfortourismcollaborations.AsSelinandChavez(1994)

proposes, individual characteristics have a significant influence on creating and shaping

partnershipsintourism.

AsthechairmanofthetourismassociationintheSlagelse,PerThuesen,ismentioning,theyhaveat

their tourism association been trying to reach out to the other tourism associations in the

municipality.Hementionsthattheyareassuminga‘bigbrother’roleintherelationshipbyoffering

help,bothfinancialandotherkindsofsupport,tobothKorsørandSkælskør.Asitwastouchedupon

in theanalysis,Skælskørhasbegun tosoftenupandshowsmoreandmore interest increating

collaborationsacrossthecities.Ontheotherhand,thetourismassociation inKorsør isstillvery

reluctanttoattendmeetingsandpreliminarymeasuresfordevelopingcollaborations.Inthisregard,

is it interesting toobservehowPer Thuesen is taking it as amatterof course that the tourism

associationinSlagelsehastotaketheroleofthe‘bigbrother’inthemunicipality.

Byassumingthisroleasthe‘bigbrother’thetourismassociationinSlagelsemaybeinadvertently

pushingtheothers,especiallyKorsør,awaybecausetheywillthenseethemassomeonewhowants

tobethedominantfactorinthemunicipality,andassomeonewhoarenotworkingonequalterms

withthem.Inthesamemanner,thetourismassociationinSlagelseisalso,perhapsunintentionally,

placingthemselveshigherinthehierarchy.Therebygivingthemselvesthesamehigherhierarchical

statuswhich,accordingtoPerThuesen,ishamperingthecollaborationbetweentheLTOinSlagelse

andthelocalgovernment.

Inthesouthernpartofthemunicipality,thetownofBisseruparequietlydevelopingtheirownsmall

well-functioninglocaldestination.Thishashappenedalmostwithoutanysupportfromthetourism

associationinSkælskørandthelocalgovernment.Thus,theyseemsomewhatunaffectedbythe

competitionthatcanbefeltbetweentheothercities,astheydonotreallyidentifywithanyofthem.

BeforethemergingofthethreeoldmunicipalitiestheywereunderthemunicipalityofSkælskør,

butareactuallygeographicallyclosertothecityofNæstved.Thismightexplainwhytheyarenot

showinganykindofengagementtotheoveralltourismdevelopmentinthecurrentmunicipalityas

theymight feel themselves too distanced from tourism actors in the other cities. Instead they

105

actuallyhaveawishtotonedownthetourismactivitiesinBisserupasthecityisclosetoreaching

an overcapacity of tourists during the high seasons, and thus they are not, at the moment,

interestedinbeingdrawnintomoretourismnetworksorcollaborations.

Throughtheanalysis,itwasfoundthattheselocaldestinationswithinthedestinationisrootedin

theresidents,andtheirdesiretoprotecttheir“oldmunicipality”.Whenitisrootedinvaluesand

thedestinationsisledbytourismassociationwith“oldgentlemen”,itisarguablethatitwilltakea

longtimechangethesevalues.Achangeinperceptionandvaluecannotbeforcedbythedestination

level,butitissomethingthatshouldbeworkedtowards.Maybeabetterrelationshipbetweenthe

tourismassociations,caninfluencethelocaltourismactors.

How themerging of municipalities has influenced the understanding and approach to tourism

collaborationisquite interesting,andthisresearchopensupforaseeminglyunexploredfieldof

tourism studies. Thismight shedanew lighton implications thatmayarise in the creationand

development of tourism collaborations on amunicipal level. This research has shown how the

understandinganduseoftourismcollaborationsinamunicipalcanbeaffectedandhamperedby

deeplyembeddedvaluesandmeaningsinindividualsthatstemsfromtheirlocalanchoringanda

weakattachmenttothepresentstateofthemunicipality.

106

Conclusion

Theresearchinthisthesishadthepurposeofexploringhowtourismcollaborationisunderstood

andusedinthemunicipalityofSlagelse.Whenlookingthroughstrategiesandsuggestionsfromthe

national level to the local level, it has shown that tourismcollaboration isbeingperceivedas a

commonelement intourismdevelopment,butthat it lacksaclearspecificationfromthehigher

levels.

The strategies of the local government and VisitVestjælland are very similar, which leads to a

confusion among the tourismactors and tourismassociation. Thiswas seenduring the tourism

workshop,andthetourismstakeholdermeetings,facilitatedbythetourismdepartment.Itappears

thatthedifferenceinlong-termandshort-termobjectives,ishinderingthecollaborationbetween

thetourismdepartment,VisitVestsjællandandtourismassociations,sincetheyallhavedifferent

interestsandexpectationsoftourismdevelopmentshouldbeapproach.Itisrecognisedthatthere

is a need for both short and long-term tourism objectives, but one organisation cannot be

responsibleforboth.Therefore,itissuggestedthatthetourismdepartment,withtheresourcesand

competencestheypossess,isresponsibleforthelong-termobjectives,andthetourismassociations,

withtheircloserelationtothelocaldestinationlevel, isresponsibleforthelocaltourismactors’

short-terminterests.

ThereisaneedforaclearerdefiningofrolesandresponsibilitiesbetweenVisitVestsjællandandthe

tourismdepartment,sincethebothcanbeperceivedasDMOs.Ithasbeenarguedthattheroleas

DMOcanbedividedbetweenthetwo,aslongastheydistributeresponsibilitiesbetweenthem.The

tourismassociationsareplayinganimportantrole,inrelationtosupportingandrepresentingthe

local tourism actors’ interests in the tourism stakeholder network. However, the lack of

coordinationofrolesonthedestinationlevel,combinedwiththelocalanchoring,whichoriginates

fromtheoldmunicipalities,greatlyaffectsthetourismassociationscollaborationwitheachother.

Themerging of the three oldmunicipalities proved to have a great influence on how tourism

collaborationsarenegotiatedandcreatedinthepresentstateofthemunicipalityofSlagelse.

Powerrelationsamongtourismactors,thetourismassociationsandthetourismdepartment,are

largelyinfluencedbysocialrelationsbetweenindividuals,insteadoftheinstancestheyareapart

of.Asuccessfulcollaborationbetweenthesedependsmostlyontheindividualswhonegotiateit,

andtheirapproachtotheirpositionintheirassociation/organisationarehavinganimpactfuleffect

107

onthetourismactors’abilitytocollaborate.Thisresearch,withaqualitativeapproach,hasthrough

itsqualitativefindingspresentedacontributiontotheunderstandingofthe,whathasshowntobe

averycomplex,term‘tourismcollaboration’withinthefieldoftourismnetworkandpowerrelations

theory. Furthermore, therehasbeenpresentedanopening to anunexplored fieldofmunicipal

tourismstudiesinDenmarkandhowthenowdisbandedmunicipalitiesareinfluencingtourism.

108

Literature

Baker,W.(1992).Thenetworkorganizationintheoryandpractice.InR.G.Eccles(Ed.),Networks

andorganizations:structure,formandaction(pp.397–429).Boston:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.

Beritelli,P.;Laesser,C.(2011).Powerdimensionsandinfluencereputationintouristdestinations:

Empiricalevidencefromanetworkofactorsandstakeholders.TourismManagementVol.32pp.

1299-1309

Botterill,D.;Platenkamp,V.(2012)KeyConceptsinTourismResearch.SAGEPublicationsLtd

Bramwell,B.;Meyer,D.(2007)Powerandtourismpolicyrelationsintransition.AnnalsofTourism

Research,Vol.34pp.766-788

Brinkmann, S. (2013). Qualitative Interviewing: Understanding Qualitative Research. Oxford

UniversityPress

Brinkmann, S.; Tanggaard, L. (2010). KvalitativeMetoder: En Grundbog.Hans Reitzels Forlag 1.

Edition

Bryman,A.(2012).SocialResearchMethods4theditionOxfordUniversityPress

CopenhagenCentre.

Crouch,D.;Desforges,L.(2003).TheSensuousintheTouristEncounter:Introduction:ThePowerof

theBodyinTouristStudies.TouristsStudies3:pp.5–22.

Dredge,D.(2006).Policynetworksandthelocalorganisationoftourism.TourismManagement,Vol.

27pp.269-280

Dredge,D.(2016)InstitutionalandPolicySupportforTourismSocialEntrepreneurship

Dredge,D.(2006).Policynetworksandthelocalorganisationoftourism

109

Dredge, D. (2010) Place Change and Development Conflict: Evaluating Public Interest Tourism

Managementvol.31(1)pp.104-112

Erchul,W.P.;Raven,B.(1997).SocialPowerinSchoolConsultation:AContemporaryViewofFrench

andRaven’sBasesofPowerModel.JournalofSchoolPsychology,vol.35,No.2pp.137-171

Flyvbjerg,B.(2006).Socialsciencethatmatters

Fyall, A.; Garrod, B.;Wang, Y. (2012).Destination collaboration: A critical review of theoretical

approachestoamulti-dimensionalphenomenon.JournalofDestinationMarketing&Management

1(2012)pp.10–26

French,J.R.P.;Raven,B.(1959)TheBasesofSocialPower.ClassicsofOrganizationTheory

Gray,B.(1989).Collaborating:FindingCommonGroundforMultipartyProblems.SanFrancisco

Hollinshead, K. (2006). The Shift to Constructivism in Social Inquiry: Some Pointers for Tourism

StudiesTourismRecreationResearch,vol.31(2)pp.43-58

Jacobsen, M. H. (2001). Konstruktionen af Socialkonstruktivismen – begrebsforvirring og

terminologiskanarkiisociologienJournalofSocialTheory,2:3pp.111-132

Jamal,T.;Gertz,A.(1995).CollaborationTheoryandCommunityTourismPlanning

Jamal, T.; Stronza, A. (2009) Collaboration theory and tourism practice in protected areas:

stakeholders,structuringandsustainability.JournalofSustainableTourism,17:2,pp.169-189

Jensen,E.(2001).TheHighImpactofLowTechinSocialWork.OutlinesCriticalSocialStudies.pp.

81–87.

Jiménez-Anca, J. J. (2012)Beyond Power: Unbridging Foucault andWeber. European Journal of

SocialTheory16pp.36-50

110

Kvale,S.(2007).DoingInterviews.SAGE

Lankford,S.V.;D.R.Howard(1994).DevelopingaTourismImpactAttitudeScale.AnnalsofTourism

Research21:121-139

Latour,B.(2005).ReassemblingtheSocial:AnIntroductioninActor-Network-Theory.Oxford:Oxford

UniversityPress.

Law,J.(1994)OrganizingModernity.Oxford:Blackwell.

Law,J.(2004)AfterMethod:MessinSocialScienceResearch.Oxon:Routledge.

Law, J.;Hetherington, K. (1999).Materialities, Spatialities,Globalities. Department of Sociology,

Lancaster

Månson,P.(2007)inAndersen,Heine;Kaspersen,LarsBoKlassiskogModerneSamfundsteori

Morgan, N., J.; Pritchard, A., and Piggott, R. (2003) Destination branding and the role of the

stakeholders:ThecaseofNewZealand.JournalofVacationMarketing

Morrison,A.(2013)MarketingandManagingTourismDestinations

Morrison,A.M.(2013).Destinationpartnershipsandteam-buildingInDestinationMarketingand

Management(chapter6)pp.189-220

Murdoch,J.(2006)Post-structuralGeography.London:Sage.

Nelson,J.;Zadek,S.(2000)PartnershipAlchemy-NewSocialPartnershipsinEurope

NoelB.S.(2012).Community-basedculturaltourism:issues,threatsandopportunities.Journalof

SustainableTourism

Pernecky, T. (2012). Constructionism: Critical Pointers for Tourism Studies Annals of Tourism

Research,vol.39(2)pp.1116-1137

111

Pfeffer, J.; Salancik,G. R. (2003)The External Control ofOrganizations: A ResourceDependence

Perspective.StanfordBusinessBooks

Rhodes,R.A.W.(1997)UnderstandingGovernance:PolicyNetworks,Governance,Reflexivityand

Accountability.Buckingham,Phil.:OpenUniversityPress.

Ritchie, B.W.; Burns, P.; Palmer, C. (2005).TourismResearchMethods: IntegratingTheorywith

PracticeCABIPublishing

Saunders,M;Lewis,PhilipandThornhill,Adrian(2009)ResearchMethodsforBusinessStudents5.

EditionPEARSONEducation

Selin,S.;ChavezD.(1994).CharacteristicsofSuccessfulTourismPartnerships:AMultipleCaseStudy

Design

Sheehan, L. R.; Ritchie, B. J.R. (2005)Destination Stakeholders: Exploring Identity and Salience.

AnnalsofTourismResearch,vol.32pp.711-734

Svensson,B.;Nordin,S.;Flagestad,A.(2005)Agovernanceperspectiveondestinationdevelopment-

exploringpartnerships,clustersandinnovationsystems,TourismReview,Vol.60Issue:2,pp.32-37

Tribe,J.(2005).NewTourismResearch.TourismRecreationResearch30:5–8

Trist, E. L., (1979).New Directions of Hope: Recent Innovations Interconnecting Organizational,

Industrial,CommunityandPersonalDevelopment.

Urry,J.(2002).TheTouristGaze(seconded.).London:Sage.

VanDerDuim,R.(2007).TOURISMSCAPESAnActor-NetworkPerspective.Pergamon

Wahyuni,D. (2012).TheResearchDesignMaze:UnderstandingParadigms,Cases,Methodsand

MethodologiesJournalofAppliedManagementAccountingResearch,vol.10pp.69-80

112

Wearing,S.;McDonald,M.(2002).TheDevelopmentofCommunity-basedTourism:Re-thinkingthe

Relationship Between Tour Operators and Development Agents as Intermediaries in Rural and

IsolatedAreaCommunities.JournalofSustainableTourism,10:3,pp.191-206

Weber,M.(1921).PolitikalsBeruf.GesammeltePolitischeSchriften,pp.396-450

Wilson,E.;Nielsen,N.;Buultjens,J.(2009)Fromlesseestopartners:exploringtourismpublic–private

partnershipswithintheNewSouthWalesnationalparksandwildlifeservice,JournalofSustainable

Tourism,17:2,pp.269-285

Wood, D.J.; B. Gray, (1991). Towards a Comprehensive Theory of Collaboration. The Journal of

AppliedBehavioralScience27

Websites

SlagelseKommune:

http://design.slagelse.dk/grundelementer/logo

Retrieved:30/5-2017

KommunernesLandsforening(KL):

http://www.kl.dk/Om-KL/

Retrieved:27/4-2017

http://www.kl.dk/Erhvervs--og-regionaludvikling/Debat-Succes-i-dansk-turisme-kraver-

samarbejde-id210741/

Retrieved:27/4-2017

VisitVestsjælland:

http://www.visitvestsjaelland.dk/destinationsselskabet-visitvestsjaelland

Retrieved:28/4-2017

113

Kultunaut:

www.kultunaut.dk

Retrieved:5/5-2017

KunsterlagetKIT:

www.kunstkit.dk

Retrieved:10/5-2017

BusinessSlagelse:

business-slagelse.dk/fileadmin/files/pdf/Business_Slagelse_-_Strategi_2016.pdf

Retrieved:2/5-2017

SkønneSkælskør:

https://skonne-skaelskor.dk

Retrieved:19/5-2017