(1) Professor, Head of Geography of Tourism Department at Sofia University ‘St. Kliment Ohridski,’ (2) Associate professor, (3) Associate professor, (4) Chief asssistant professor, ,
(5) Chief assistant professor – same department
(1) vasil.marinov@gmail.com, (2) elidogramadjieva@gmail.com, (3)
mariana.assenova@gmail.com, (4) epetkova@hotmail.com, (5) manager@bohemia.bg
1 2 3 4 5
Grounded on the understanding that tourism policy-making should wisely consider business perceptions and expectations, the paper reveals destination product development and marketing priorities as seen by the representatives of the accommodation and the intermediary tourism sectors in Sofia Metropolitan Area, Bulgaria. It discusses specific results of a wider questionnaire-based survey conducted in 2013, which is an example of successful collaboration between the academics, the local authorities, and the tourism business in the pursuit of a more informed destination management policy. Based on the comparative analysis of the opinions expressed by the two target groups, conclusions and recommendations are drawn regarding the future activities of Sofia local authorities in the field of destination product development and marketing. Yet, the survey results should be farther considered for compliance with the views of other stakeholders, as well as in terms of the balance between public benefits and costs. Key words: Sofia metropolitan area, destination marketing, business perceptions, priorities
Introduction
Sofia is the capital and the largest city of the Republic of Bulgaria, with a population of 1 million people and some 1.3 million in the metropolitan area that covers 1 349 km² including also three smaller towns1 and 34 villages.
Founded seven thousand years ago, Sofia is among the oldest cities in Europe and the remnants of its rich past that can be seen today alongside modern landmarks hold the considerable potential of heritage tourism development. A
1 Bankya, Novi Iskar and Buhovo have the status of separate towns within Sofia Municipality
52
large number of public institutions and business companies are located there, thus attracting a lot of business visitors. As a big city, Sofia also has the opportunity of developing other typically urban types of tourism such as event, entertainment, sport, shopping tourism, etc.
Wider Sofia metropolitan area has even more to offer as the city is surrounded by a number of mountains including the Vitosha Nature Park (2 290 m) which is less than 10 km away from the city center, suggesting well-preserved biodiversity and year-round outdoor activities. The adjacent valleys are featured by 31 mineral water deposits of different chemical composition and temperature ranging from 20ºC to 81ºC (Penchev and Velichkov, 2011). There are thermal water springs in the very city center while the nearby town of Bankya (17 km away from Sofia) is officially declared a spa resort of national importance.
Noteworthy cultural, historical and religious sites are to be found in Sofia suburban areas such as the UNESCO enlisted Boyana Church with its unique frescoes dating back to the 12th century, the 14th-century Dragalevtzi Monastery, and the National History Museum that is housed by the former State Council Residence in the outskirts of Vitosha Mountain. Furthermore, the capital city is surrounded by a belt of monasteries known as the Sofia Holy Mount. The monasteries have originated at different times (from the 4th to the 20th century) and are currently in different state – from completely destroyed to fully functioning. Not all of them could become tourist attractions but 17 monasteries have been recently assessed as potential tourist sites (Sofia Holy Mount, 2013).
Evidently, Sofia Metropolitan Area has at disposal a considerable potential for development of a wide range of tourism products – either ‘urban’ and ‘non-urban’ types of tourism. However, the existing potential is largely unemployed and so far Sofia has not been widely recognized as a highly attractive tourist destination. According to the municipal statistics (Sofia tourism in figures, 2013) the volume of accommodation supply accounts for 420 registered establishments with a total number of 10 203 rooms and 17 963 bed places. The 33 000 employees in the accommodation and the food-and-beverage sectors comprise about 5% of the whole employment in the capital city. The volume of tourism demand is represented by nearly 900 000 overnight visitors (including more than 500 thousand foreigners), nearly 1.6 million nights spent (about 1 million by foreigners) and revenue from accommodation of nearly 100 million BGN (about 50 million EUR). Although with a relatively small accommodation capacity, Sofia ranges in Bulgarian top 5 municipalities by the number of arrivals and nights spent as well as by foreign overnight visitors and revenue from accommodation (NSI, 2013). However, some indicators reveal rather unfavorable situation in terms of facilities utilization - relatively low room occupancy rate (40%), much lower bed occupancy rate (24%) and very short average duration of tourist stay (1.8 overnights per person).
53
Problems of Sofia tourism development have been a subject of public and academic debate for years (Marinov, 1991; Popova, 2002 a,b, 2003; Matczak and Bachvarov, 2004; Marinov et al., 2012 a; Dogramadjieva, 2011 b;
Dogramadjieva and Marinov, 2013 a,b). Part of the necessary solutions (such as improving the service quality, diversifying the individual products offered and more precise market positioning) is a pure business responsibility. Another, very important part of the decisions is in the hands of local authorities that are in charge of creating favorable business environment and implementing tourism management and marketing at destination level.
Yet, the decisions at destination level have always been a tricky question requiring effective communication with different stakeholders in order to balance contradictory interests, and recognize common needs and priorities.
This is especially valid for the development of the local tourism product and its promotion. Acting as a Destination Management Organization, the Tourism Municipal Enterprise has marketing as a dominant function. Its main role as summarized by the World Tourism Organization (WTO, 2007) is to coordinate the elements within the destination and lead the efforts of stakeholders for its promotion and the provision of services, so that they meet or exceed the expectations of tourists.
Led by the understanding that tourism policy-making should wisely consider business perceptions and expectations, the Tourism Municipal Enterprise of Sofia has initiated a number of questionnaire-based surveys that have been conducted by academics from Sofia University since 20112. Grounded by the need for a better informed and objective-driven tourism policy, these surveys have not only filled significant gaps in tourism statistics but also completed the
‘hard’ data with ‘soft’ information regarding the business view point on important tourism policy issues. Thus, they have served as a communication channel between the business and the public authorities, providing an opportunity for the business to influence the local government decisions.
This paper is focused on some results of the survey conducted in 2013 that was targeted at two groups of respondents - the accommodation and the intermediary tourism sectors. The first group included 173 accommodation establishments with over 8500 beds presenting 46% of all categorized entities and 51% of the available bed places in Sofia municipality. A return rate of 89% was achieved and the whole variety of accommodation units by type, category, capacity and location was covered by the sample. The second group included 35 travel
2 The first study (Dogramadjieva, 2011a) covered four target groups: 1) the accommodation sector, 2) Sofia-based tour operators, 3) cultural institutions and 4) religious sites. The second study (Marinov et al., 2012b) was focused on the accommodation sector only. The third study (Marinov et al., 2013) covered two target groups: 1) the accommodation sector and 2) nation-wide touroperators and travel agencies.
54
agencies, comprising both tour operators and travel agents from all over the country. The return rate was lower (42%) but the respondents exemplified well-established companies with a considerable market share and a wide range of products offered. In the both target groups mostly owners or general executives answered the questions, and rarely – managers at lower level. Thus, high reliability of the study results has been ensured.
The questionnaires consisted of both close-ended and open-ended questions covering a wide range of topics – expectations and assessments regarding the overall business climate and own business development; general vision of destination marketing and joint activities; evaluation of particular tourism-related initiatives of the local authority such as the Tourist Information Center or the newly established Sofia tourist web site (www.visitsofia.bg).
The current analysis deals with just a small part of the results that are relevant to the scope of the paper. It reveals the destination product development and marketing priorities for Sofia Metropolitan Area as seen by the studied business representatives. The respondents’ assessments of different tourism products potential and current state are discussed as well as the main types of tourism to be promoted. Public support to tourism product development and marketing at destination level is also highlighted, including priority marketing activities and financial resources allocation as viewed by the two groups of respondents.
Finally, their readiness for undertaking joint activities with local authorities is discussed – either in terms of general interest expressed and willingness to co-fund particular joint activities.
The methodology of assessing the priorities involves direct questioning (e.g.
which are the priority markets, the priority activities, etc.) completed with analysis of derivative results of several questions (e.g. the gaps derived by comparing the assessments of a given product’s potential and current state).
Results are revealed by different indicators – either means or frequency rates.
Based on the comparative analysis of the opinions expressed by the two studied groups of respondents, conclusions and recommendations are drawn regarding Sofia local authorities future activities in the field of destination product development and marketing.