art is managed and developed, and the reasons for its installation.
References
Adelaide Festival (n.d.) History of the Adelaide Festival of Arts. Available from: http://www.adelaidefestival.
com.au/servlet/Web?s=2290869andaction=changePageandpageID=792949593. Accessed 10 March, 2010.
Allen, J., O’Toole, W., McDonnell, I. and Harris, R. (2002) Festival and Special Event Management, 3rd edn.
Wiley, Milton, UK.
Allen, J., O’Toole, W., Harris, R. and McDonnell, I. (2008) Festival and Special Event Management, 4th edn.
Wiley, Milton, UK.
Arts Council (2008) Great art for everyone. Available from: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/publication_
archive/great-art-for-everyone-2008–2011. Accessed 3 February, 2010.
Bakers Associates (2008) Glastonbury Festivals 2007 economic impact assessment. Available from: http://
www.mendip.gov.uk/Documents/Finaland20ReportLOWRES.pdf. Accessed 10 March, 2010.
Bowdin, G., Allen, J., O’Toole, W., Harris, R. and McDonnell, I. (2006) Events Management, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.
Business Tourism Partnership (2005) Business Tourism Leads the Way. Business Tourism Partnership, London, UK.
Crompton, J. (1979) Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research 6, 408–424.
Crompton, J. (2003) Adapting Herzberg: a conceptualization of the effects of hygiene and motivator attributes on perceptions of event quality. Journal of Travel Research 41, 305–310.
Crompton, J. and McKay, S.L. (1997) Motives of visitors attending festival events. Annals of Tourism Research 24, 425–439.
Douglas, N., Douglas, N. and Derrett, R. (2001) Special Interest Tourism. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK.
Econsult (2007) Avenue of the arts economic impact study. Available from: http://www.avenueofthearts.org/
about_facts.asp. Accessed 3 February, 2010.
English Partnerships (2005) Creativity in the Coalfields. English Partnerships, Warrington, UK.
Gelder, G. and Robinson, P. (2009) A critical comparative study of visitor motivations for attending music festivals: a case study of Glastonbury and V Festival. Event Management 13, 181–196.
Getz, D. (2005) Event Management and Event Tourism. Cognizant Communication Corporation, New York.
Getz, D. (2007) Event Studies: Theory, Research and Policy for Planned Events. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
Getz, D. and Wicks, B. (1993) Editorial. Festival Management and Event Tourism 1, 1–3.
Hastings Borough Council (2005) A Strategy for Developing Public Arts in Hastings. Hastings Borough Council Regeneration and Planning Division, Hastings, UK.
Heitmann, S. and David, L. (2010) Sustainability and event management. In: Robinson, P., Wale, D. and Dickson, G. (eds) Event Management. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp. 181–200.
Hughes, H. (2000) Arts, Entertainment and Tourism. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
Jago, L.K. and Shaw, R.N. (1998) A conceptual and differential framework. Festival Management and Event Tourism 5, 21–32.
Masterman, G. (2004) Strategic Sports Event Management: An International Approach. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.
Mathieson, E. and Tapies, X.A. (2009) Street Artists: The Complete Guide. Graffi to, London, UK.
Maunsell, F. (2004) Commonwealth Games Benefi t Study: Final Report. Available from: http://www.nwda.
co.uk/pdf/CGamesReport.pdf. Accessed 4 March, 2010.
Morgan, N. and Pritchard, A. (2004) Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination Proposition, 2nd edn. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
Events, Festivals and the Arts 145
Nicholson, R. and Pearce, D.G. (2001) Why do people attend events: a comparative analysis of visitor motivations at four South Island events. Journal of Travel Research 39, 449–460.
O’Sullivan, D. and Jackson, M.J. (2002) Festival tourism: a contributor to sustainable local economic development? Journal of Sustainable Tourism 10, 325–342.
Public Art South West (2008) Viewpoints. Available from: http://www.publicartonline.org.uk/resources/
viewpoints. Accessed 5 March, 2010.
Ritchie, J. (1984) Assessing the impact of hallmark events: conceptual and research issues. Journal of Travel Research 23, 2–11.
Robinson, P. (2009) Public Art and Regeneration in Insights. VisitBritain, London, UK.
Sefton Council (n.d.) Antony Gormley’s ‘Another Place’. Available from: http://www.sefton.gov.uk/Default.
aspx?page=6216. Accessed 16 March, 2010.
Sharp, J, Pollock, V. and Paddison, R. (2005) Just art for a just city: public art and social inclusion in urban regeneration. Urban Studies 42, 1001–1023.
Smith, M.K. (2006) Tourism Culture and Regeneration. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
Tusa, J. (1999) Art Matters: Reflecting on Culture. Methuen, London, UK.
Yeoman, I., Robertson, M., Ali-Knight, J., Drummond, S. and McMahon-Beattie, U. (2004) Festival and Events Management – An International Arts and Culture Perspective. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
Yoon, Y. and Uysal, M. (2005) An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management 26, 45–56.
© CAB International 2011. Research Themes for Tourism
146 (eds P. Robinson, S. Heitmann and P.U.C. Dieke)
Christine Roberts
This chapter provides an understanding of sport and adventure tourism as a subcategory of mainstream tourism. The chapter begins with an appreciation of ‘sport’ and ‘tourism’ as separate entities, combined to form a new and exciting phenomenon; with ‘adventure’
emerging as a result of the industry’s zestful and heterogeneous nature.
In order to fully understand the diversity of sport and adventure tourism alongside its interrelations, challenges and future oppor- tunities (both in business and academia), this chapter provides an overview of the industry, depicting specifi c typologies of sport and adventure tourism. The sport and adventure tourist is then explored, including profi les, motivations and behaviours. From here, an exploration into market size, trends and providers emerges, with an emphasis on industry strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
This is followed by industrial impacts from the macro and micro environments that shape the sport and adventure tourism phenomenon as it stands today. An exploration into such aspects allows industry professionals and students of this subject to hold a greater appreciation and understanding of the industry, sustaining its importance, potential and growth.
Introduction
Sport-associated travel is a multifaceted leisure phenomenon that has grown signifi cantly over the last 30 years, birthing the emergence of adventure tourism as a key feature. Types of sport tourism include passive, active and
nostalgic formations, with adventure tourism as a subcategory of mainstream sport tourism, usually falling into the ‘active’ category. While the industry holds well in terms of longevity, the focus of academic inquiry is a more recent feature. Therefore, our current knowledge of sport and adventure tourism is growing yet incomplete; changes in politics, social behaviour and economic activity further transgress the current body of knowledge, adding scope for further exploration.
Working Defi nitions
For the purposes of appreciating the size and heterogeneity of the industry, a working defi n- ition of sport and adventure tourism is needed.
On its own, the realm of sport holds a diff erent meaning to diff erent groups of society. This is also true for the realm of adventure and that of tourism. An appreciation of these diff erentiated meanings, therefore, demonstrates the chal- lenges of attempting to classify such a dynamic industry. For the purposes of providing a better understanding of the industry and frameworks for research, a breakdown of the defi nitions for
‘sport’, ‘tourism’ and ‘sport and adventure tourism’ as a whole will now be attempted.
Sport
There is no single defi nition for sport; the phenomenon is multifaceted and interpretations vastly diff er. Variations in the description of sport emerge due to a variety of factors, but
Sport and Adventure Tourism 147
mainly due to: (i) the element of competitive- ness; and (ii) the level of physicality. Many authors support the need for a winner and loser, while others question such a necessity. Similarly, while some authors dictate the inclusion of physicality for an activity to be classifi ed as a sport, others refute such notions. None the less, most authors agree that sport is a microcosm of society, exhibiting characteristics of social politics found in almost all societal settings. Frey and Eitzen (1991) described sport as:
structured confl ict and competitiveness in controlled settings … rules are formal, generalizable, and enforced by formal regulatory bodies (e.g. National Collegiate Athletic Association-NCAA); the outcome is serious for individuals and organizations not actually participating in the physical activity, and winning (the outcome) is more important than participation (the process).
This defi nition refl ects desired inequalities based on the demonstration of superior levels of skill and physicality. Winners are separated from losers and the drive for elitism is not only desirable but of supreme importance. However, left-wing idealisms for sport, namely ‘sport for all’ policies, discern that sport is a fundamental right for all and off er numerous benefi ts to society. Policies for equal access and encouraged participation have loosened the idealism of sport as an institutionalized, competitive domain, transforming it into an entity that houses ‘all forms of physical activity, which through casual or organized participation, aim at improving physical fi tness and mental well- being, forming social relationships, or obtaining results in competition at all levels’ (Council of Europe, 2001). This defi nition neglects the inclusion of competitiveness and elitism.
Instead, the act of participation as a benefi cial activity is prominent. Therefore, activities that do not necessitate a winner and loser (e.g.
dancing) could be categorized as a sport. Both defi nitions, therefore, assume some level of physicality involved; however, there are numerous activities, namely snooker, darts, chess and fi shing, that invoke limited physical eff ort yet meet all other criteria as dictated by popular sport defi nitions. For the purposes of this chapter, therefore, a combination of
varying levels of competition and physicality will be considered relevant to the defi nition of sport, as it is believed that the extensive scope of activities that either require or refute the need for winners and losers, elitism and ranging levels of physical exertion have all driven forward the size and vastness of sport and adventure tourism within today’s society.
Sport and adventure tourism
As demonstrated, diffi culties are experienced in defi ning sport and tourism as separate entities.
Understandably, therefore, a combination of the two proves equally taxing. In addition to the previously explored defi nitional variance is the challenge of placing emphasis within either the realm of sport or that of tourism. When separate, each discipline prevails as a dominant feature of both industry and academia. When combined, however, the power of domination is interchangeable across these two fi elds, proving to be fl uid and complex in nature. To ascertain the fi eld of dominance, motives for participation must fi rst be understood. It should, therefore, be queried as to whether the primary motive for participation derives from the desire to be involved within a sport (whereby tourism is a secondary component) or whether the act of tourism provides the principal motivation for participation and subsequent involvement in sport is purely incidental. Simply put, does the participant travel for the purposes of engage- ment within sport, or is the involvement in sport merely a consequential feature of the participant’s stronger desire to travel? As a result of this uncertainty, academics have compiled slightly diff erentiated defi nitions: a sport-focused (sport tourist) defi nition may be ‘a temporary visitor staying at least 24 hours in the event area and whose primary purpose is to participate in a sports event with the area being a secondary attraction’ (Nogawa et al., 1996), whereas a travel-focused (tourism sport) defi nition is ‘persons travelling to and/or staying in places outside their usual environ- ment and participating in, actively or passively, a competitive or recreational sport as a secondary activity (Gammon and Robinson, 2003).
The aspect of adventure is a more recently observed phenomenon, falling into a subcategory of tourism, whereby sport may or may not be included. For example, travelling to a destination for the purposes of rock climbing constitutes as ‘sport adventure tourism’, whereas an activity such as backpacking constitutes adventure travel, but is not overly sport-based. It is important to draw this distinction between the inclusions of ‘sport’ and
‘adven ture’, as they are very diff erent subjects yet may be dually applied to the same activity.
The Ministry of Commerce (1996), New Zealand, defi ne adventure tourism as ‘com- mercially operated activities involving a com- bin ation of adventure and excitement pursued in an outdoor environment’. For an activity to be deemed ‘adventurous’, qualifying elements need to be in place involving perception of risk, excitement, newness and discovery. Participants voluntarily put themselves in a situation where they believe they are taking a step into the unknown; a place where they will face challenges and gain something valuable from the experience (Swarbrooke et al., 2003). The concept of ‘adventure’ entails the inclusion of action. Therefore, active recreation involving physical, intellectual or emotional involvement is assumed but not always present. Again, defi nitions are problematic in that individuals experience and describe adventure diff erently;
while an activity may be described as adven- turous by one individual, others may disagree.
Defi nitional challenges of sport and adventure tourism are born from individual descriptions of sport, tourism and adventure, alongside descriptions of these entities when combined. Naturally, these defi nitions need some amount of unity in order to provide scope for frameworks of research. On a wider spectrum, these challenges also aff ect providers in terms of whether responsibility for gover nance lies within councils for sport or tourism boards, thus encompassing contrasting policy issues. Regard- less of the chosen defi nition, sport and tourism are now inextricably linked, leading to the new development of sporting oppor tunities through tourism and, equally, tourism opportunities through sport. As explored in later sections, sport and adventure tourism is subcategorized by the nature of participation, namely ‘active’
forms, whereby the individual actively participates in a sport, and ‘passive’ forms, where the individual passively participates through means of spectatorship. Defi nitions can be further subcategorized dependent on the nature of involvement or level of activity. As shown in Fig. 11.1, sport tourism falls into two camps: ‘hard’ and ‘soft’. Gammon and Robinson (2003) proclaimed that when referring to sport tourism, ‘hard’ forms involve high-level competition in sporting events such as Wimbledon or the Olympics, whereas ‘soft’ forms refer to active recreational activities such as fun runs or cycling events. Soft forms also encompass spectatorship – a lucrative com ponent of the sport tourism industry. For tourism sports, the
‘hard’ forms refer to holiday-makers who choose holiday locations that off er sports and activities as a secondary component to the travel experience. ‘Soft’ forms of tourism sports refer to a visitor’s incidental participation in sport.
Adventure travel is also defi ned with similar categories. ‘Hard’ adventure travel generally encompasses risk, physicality and challenge within unknown territories, whereas ‘soft’
adventure travel requires less physical eff ort and a minimal sense of danger. Both forms of adventure, however, involve an intimate experience with the environment and culture of the destination (Swarbrooke et al., 2003).
When participating in hard adventure travel, participants should be prepared for all weather conditions, sleeping arrangements and dietary restrictions. Examples include climbing expeditions, arduous treks, hang-gliding, rock climbing, white-water kayaking, and wilderness survival. Soft adventure travel encompasses activities with less physical risk and lower physically demanding involvement; participants will generally have less experience as the activity is less demanding. Trips of this nature generally off er more in terms of convenience, such as sleeping and travel arrangements. Examples include horseback riding, rafting, canoeing, cross-country skiing, surfi ng and walking tours.
Industry Overview
While academic research into the fi eld of sport and adventure tourism has emerged relatively
Sport and Adventure Tourism 149
recently, sport-related travel has been observed for centuries. Travelling with a specifi c purpose to participate or view a sports event can be traced back as early as the Ancient Greek Olympic Games in 776 BC (Hudson, 2003).
Today, sport and adventure tourism has reached phenomenal heights globally, with mass participation in holiday sports, both actively and passively. As key marketing initiatives and media attention grows, ever more individuals are immersed into the sport and adventure tourism phenomena. Improvements in mass education have demonstrated the health and recreational benefi ts of active involvement, further increasing participation rates. Travel operators and other travel-related providers often market their products alongside the provision of sport or adventure-based activities, such as hotels promoting their facilities due to the inclusion of sports provision or stating their close proximity to hallmark stadiums. Examples such as these demonstrate how the product of tourism can be enhanced by the inclusion of sport-based commodities.
Vast increases in the provision and popularity of spectator-driven tourist oppor- tunities have become apparent. Travel and short- term stay within a destination far from home for the sole purpose of passive participation within a chosen sport prove lucrative, particularly for mega events such as the Olympics, the Wimble-
don Tennis Championships and the Tour de France. Partici pation is increased where the popularity and scale of the sport are strong, such as football – a globally signifi cant sport that hosts mega events such as the FIFA World Cup.
Incrementally, more attempts have been made to bring sport into general society, such as increased running events through local community areas and skateboarding based in inner-city areas, whereby active and passive participation is sought not only by local residents but also the travelling sport enthusiast. The sheer size, value and interest in sport and adventure tourism have driven academic intrigue. At present, sport and adventure themes are not only written about as subcategories within tourism literature, but as hybrid phenomena in their own right, born from sport and tourism, forming a new fi eld of research. Academic journals are now publishing within this signifi cant area, namely, The Journal of Sport and Tourism and the Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education. Sport and tourism are solely interrelated; sport benefi ts tourism just as much as tourism benefi ts sport.
While it is true that in some areas, changes in today’s economic climate and adaptations of international markets have stunted sport and adventure tourism activity, such changes have forced the industry to adapt and evolve, leaving more choice and exciting possibilities for the sport and adventure tourist.
Sport and tourism
Sports tourism
Hard definition
Examples:
Olympic Games Wimbledon London Marathon
FIFA World Cup
Examples:
Fun run Skiing Surfing Cycling tour
Examples:
Centre Parcs Butlins PGL Adventure
Sports cruises
Examples:
Swimming Table-tennis
Mini golf Water polo Soft definition Hard definition Soft definition
Tourism sports
Fig. 11.1. Hard and soft forms of sport tourism. (Adapted from Gammon and Robinson, 2003.)
Typologies of Sport and Adventure Tourism
Early work within the fi eld of sport and adventure tourism typologies made the distinc- tion between active and passive participation.
From here, frameworks for the study of sport tourism have advanced to subcategorize more specifi c components of the industry. Sport tourism generally falls into the very broad camps of: (i) passive/event tourism, whereby tourists visit a sports event for the purposes of spectating; (ii) active tourism, whereby the tourist physically participates in the sport, and;
(iii) nostalgic tourism, referencing the tourist who visits a destination for the purpose of paying homage to a person or event. There is, however, some fl uidity between these three components as it is possible for a tourist to engage in more than one activity during the same trip. For example, an individual vacation- ing for the primary purpose of spectating at sport events may also choose to visit a hallmark stadium in the surrounding area. Sport tourism supply comes with much variation and is generally referred to as the typologies of sport tourism. One of the fi rst presented models of sport tourism typologies subcategorized resorts, vacations, sports museums, multi-sport festivals and sports facilities as typologies (Redmond, 1991). The Sport Tourism International Council (STIC) built upon this work by presenting a framework of fi ve typologies, namely attrac- tions, resorts, cruises, tours and events (Hinch and Higham, 2001). These categories are further subcategorized by theme-inclusions, such as adventure (further subcategorized as
soft and hard forms), health and fi tness, and leisure. Other models attempt to defi ne and confi ne more specifi c aspects of sport and adventure tourism. Linking in the realm of health, Hall (1992) devised a framework that plots the level of activity against the level of competitiveness to derive a nine-category matrix (Fig. 11.2).
This framework is particularly useful as it identifi es activities undertaken for the purposes of recreation from those of competitiveness, while still incorporating the traditional typological distinction of active and passive sport and adventure tourism modalities.
Participant profi les
By creating a defi nitive typography of sport and adventure tourists, it is believed that industries are better equipped with the knowledge to attract and sustain business with target markets. Academics also classify tourists for purposes of research, observing and predicting behaviours and motivations in order to inform frameworks for future application.
Traditionally, the typifi ed sport tourist will be white, male and middle class. This profi le of participation closely follows that of sport in general. Understanding this trend is fairly simple; fi rst, the socialized manifestation of male dominance within the sporting world has always been apparent – a trend that has inevitably fi ltered into sport and adventure tourism. Second, from our understanding of class dominance throughout the history of sport tourism, alongside the exclusivity,
Fig. 11.2. Hall’s (1992) model of adventure, health and sports tourism.