Section 2: Disciplines and Areas of Study
3. Longitudinal elements
2.9 Nodal Functions
Nodal Functions 85 constant in Congonhas, which affected the
entire aviation system in the country.
Another special feature illustrated in Fig. 22 (left diagram) is nodes C and E because the entire con- nection to or from node A occurs through E, and all connections to or from node D occur through C.
This makes node E the gateway to node A and, consequently, the exit from A to the rest of the network (the same is true for the node C/D rela- tionship). According to Burghardt (in Pearce, 2001a, p. 937), there are four attributes of gateway cities: (i) these cities are ‘in charge of the connec- tions between the tributary area and the rest of the world’ and they develop ‘in positions that have the potential to control the flow of goods and people’;
(ii) they usually develop, in the contact zones, dif- ferences in the intensities and types of production;
(iii) although the local ties are important, the gate- ways are best characterized by long-distance com- merce connections; and (iv) they are strongly committed to transport and trade.
One aspect of a gateway is the notion of inter- mediateness, which can be ‘expanded by an asso- ciation with a function of stopover, from where visitors are sent to other centres or resorts’ (Pearce, 2001b, p. 31). Gateways can generally be com- pared with a funnel through which travellers con- verge from different routes to gain access through a certain point and from where they can either disperse or converge, depending on the function of the other node. Another method of illustrating the concept of the gateway is presented in the diagram proposed by Burghardt (1971) (Fig. 23), in which this nodal function is classified as a node in a traf- fic flow system (panel I) or as an interconnection link between two matrices (panel II). Due to the
locations of the hubs and the gateways in the transport network, these two nodal functions are privileged to obtain an intense flow of travellers who pass through them to reach other nodes. This function lends the gateways the added advantage of capturing the passing traffic, with some travel- lers stopping and becoming tourists. Two exam- ples of hubs that have taken advantage of the flow of passengers to expand their tourism destinations are Singapore (Asia) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In both cases, the national airlines (Singapore Airlines and Emirates, respectively) cre- ated in-flight services with excellent international recognition that increasingly captivated new and old passengers (Lohmann et al., 2009). With the significant flow of passengers who currently use both the Changi and Dubai airports as hubs, numerous incentives have been created to encour- age these passengers to take advantage of passing through the hub to become acquainted with the hubs as tourism destinations. Among these promo- tions are incentives for shopping tourism, includ- ing the purchase of airfares combined with hotel stays at significantly reduced rates, in addition to a range of services provided by the existing infra- structure of the airports (Lohmann et al., 2009).
For example, at Changi Airport in Singapore, pas- sengers waiting for more than 5 hours between flights can take a free bus from the terminal to tour the city and can even choose between two different itineraries. Regarding the gateways, Mistilis and Dwyer (1999) demonstrated that these nodal functions are in a privileged position to host exhibitions, conventions, meetings and incentive events compared with tourism destina- tions that are not gateways.
A
B E
F C
D
A
E G
B C
D
F
H
I
G
I H
Fig. 22. Theoretical example of a grid network (left), converted to a hub spoke (right).
86 Chapter 2.9
Operationalizing
In his doctoral thesis on the conversion of passen- gers on ferries that connect the North and South Islands of New Zealand to tourists, Lohmann (2006) operationalized the concepts of gateway and tour- ism destinations using three variables: (i) the reason for travel to the gateway; (ii) the number of nights spent at the gateway; and (iii) the trip index (TI) to the gateway (see Chapter 4.8, this volume). To analyse the propensity of passengers who make the connection between the islands to become tourists at the gateways (in this case, Wellington in the North Island, and Picton in the South Island), the author proposed the categorization of the ferry users under four different types, as displayed in Fig. 24:
● Gateway travellers (GTs) are defined as passen- gers who do not stay at the node and whose main reason to go there is the connection between the islands. In this case, it becomes clear that the reason for travel to the node is its function as a gateway, with no further involvement with the tourism sector.
● Stopover visitors (SVs) are classified by two situ- ations. In the first situation, the traveller is not
staying overnight at the node but has another major reason to go there besides the connection between the islands (SV1). The second situation occurs when the traveller is staying overnight at the node, as long as they are spending more than one night away from home on this trip (TI = 100) and has another primary reason to travel to the node in addition to taking the ferry to travel to another island (SV2). SVs can be characterized by their interaction with the node beyond its role as a gateway. Although a greater engagement with the tourism sector is not estab- lished, particularly among those travellers who are not staying overnight at the node, at least the existing interaction is stronger than in the case of gateway travellers, who are simply passing through the node.
● Overnight gateway visitors (OGVs) are those who remain for a single night at the node, as long as they are spending more than one night away from home during the trip (TI ≠ 100) and the travel between the islands is the main reason for travelling to the node. The only difference between the gateway traveller and the overnight gateway visitor is that the latter remains for one night at the node.
I. The gateway as the connecting node in a system of traffic flows
II. The gateway as the link between two matrices of interconnections Service
Area
Regional or Local Matrix
Major National
Matrix National Core Area
Fig. 23. Diagram of the gateway as a node and as a link. (From Burghardt, 1971.)
Nodal Functions 87 ● Passengers staying two or more nights are clas-
sified as destination tourists (DTs), regardless of the main reason for travelling to the node.
While some travellers in this category assert that their main reason to go to Wellington or Pic- ton is the connection between the islands, the fact that they are staying two or more nights indicates that there are other important reasons for going there (DT1). DTs also include those travellers who are staying only one night at the node, provided that this is their only destination (TI = 100; DT2). This type of traveller is classi- fied, based on the Oppermann model, as having a single destination pattern.
Exercise
To further explore this issue, visit the websites of Changi Airport in Singapore and Emirates Airlines and observe their latest marketing strategies for encouraging air travellers to visit Singapore and the UAE.
References
Burghardt, A.F. (1971) A hypothesis about gateway cities.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 61, 269–285.
Hoyle, B. and Knowles, R. (eds) (1998) Modern Transport Geography, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
Lohmann, G. (2006) Developing gateways as tourist destinations: ferry services and nodal functions in Wellington and Picton. PhD thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington.
Lohmann, G., Albers, S., Koch, B. and Pavlovich, K. (2009) From hub to tourist destination: an explorative study of Singapore and Dubai’s aviation-based transformation.
Journal of Air Transport Management 15, 205–211.
Mistilis, N. and Dwyer, L. (1999) Tourism gateways and regional economies: the distributional impacts of MICE.
International Journal of Tourism Research 1, 441–457.
Pearce, D.G. (2001a) An integrative framework for urban tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research 28, 926–946.
Pearce, D.G. (2001b) Towards a regional analysis of tourism in Southeast Asia. In: Teo, P., Chang, T.C. and Ho, K.C.
(eds) Interconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia.
Pergamon, Oxford, UK, pp. 27–43.
How many nights is the passenger spending in the node before/after taking the ferry?
Is inter-island connection the main reason for going to the node?
Is this the sole destination (TI = 100)?
Is inter-island connection the main reason for going
to the node?
Stopover visitor
(SV) (SV1)
(SV2) Gateway
traveller (GT)
(DT2)
Destination tourist (DT)
Overnight gateway visitor (OGV) (DT1)
Zero
One
Two or more
Yes
Yes Yes
No
No No
Fig. 24. Operationalizing the concepts of travellers through the gateway: gateway travellers, stopover visitors, overnight gateway visitors and destination tourists.
(From Lohmann, 2006.)
88 © G. Lohmann and A. Panosso Netto 2017. Tourism Theory (G. Lohmann and A. Panosso Netto) The term ‘tourism public policy’ refers to the guid-
ance given by various levels of government for the development of touristic activity in a particular loca- tion. This guidance should be expressed both in an official document and in other government docu- ments related to the topic. It is advisable to consult representatives from the tourism sector and society when preparing this type of document. According to Edgell and Swanson (2013), a tourism policy should aim to improve the quality of life of local citizens at a particular destination. According to Krippendorf (1982), four primary factors – social, cultural, eco- nomic and environmental – should be considered when establishing a tourism policy. It is also impor- tant to seek to develop the sector holistically, analys- ing and valorizing each component of the tourist system to which the policy will be applied.
There are a large number of studies in tourism public policy. These studies include but are not lim- ited to the following: Elliot (1983, 1997), Richter (1983), Hall (1994), Dredge (1999), Dredge (2006), Stevenson et al. (2008), Farsari et al. (2011) and Wang and Ap (2013). According to Henriksen and Halkier (2012), the various studies show that tourism public policy is particularly focused on the inherent difficulty of orchestrating changes that involve a combination of different services, such as transport, accommodation, attractions and a range of other activities, which are typically offered by small local companies.
According to Dredge and Jenkins (2011), research on planning and policy in the field of tourism is rela- tively new, beginning at the turn of the century. The field has developed under the influence of three fac- tors: first, the growing influence of criticism, which is supported by social constructionism; secondly, an increase in the post-disciplinary research perspective, which opened new investigative frontiers with ele- ments outside the field of tourism; and thirdly, the knowledge gained from reflective practice with attention to ethical values, which has critically stimu- lated interpretive theoretical development.
Tourism public policy should be used to foster tourist development based on actions planned by the sector. According to Fayos-Solá (1996), various changes in the tourism sector, such as the growth of market segmentation, new technologies, new prod- ucts and new forms of management, require gov- ernments to significantly update tourism public policies. He added that tourism public policy has shifted from the pure promotion of destinations to the development of products intended to maintain competitiveness. According to the World Tourism Organization (WTO, 2011), this perspective indicates that countries and regions that want to increase and develop domestic tourism and to succeed in the competitive international market should have a clear public policy that establishes guidelines, strat- egies, objectives and key actions for the sector.
Edgell and Swanson (2013) stated that the role of tourism policy and strategic planning is crucial to eco- nomic prosperity, sustainable management and the quality of life of most communities, destinations and countries. The key to tourism’s growth will thus be to ensure careful and effective planning at destinations.
Wang and Ap (2013), in a study focused on China, identified four factors that influence the implementa- tion of a tourism public policy (i) economic and social macro-environment; (ii) institutional arrangements;
(iii) inter-organizational relationships and coordin- ation structures; and (iv) interest groups.
Government tourism policy often reflects the polit- ical landscape. Usually, there is strong internal debate about the impact of tourism, the amount of financial resources to be invested in developing a tourism pol- icy, and the desired relationship with other govern- ments and states (independent or not), among other factors. Indeed, government policies and government actions can either stimulate or slow the development of tourism, both nationally and internationally.
A political system can be liberal, democratic or totalitarian, and it can be politically right or left wing.
In practice, however, every type of regime should be responsible for tourism. The political system’s domi-