Title Page
Culture, Communication and Globalisation
10th semester
AalborgUniversity
Spring 2008
Supervisor: Anette Therkelsen
Hand-in-date: June 2nd 2008
Containing488,191 keystrokes ~ 187 pages
This Master’s Thesis is composed by the following:
______
Jette Lynnerup NielsenIna Frausing Thomsen
______
Julie Marie Vanghaug EspelundAnne Rytter Asferg
Abstract
What initially sparked our interest in Dubai was the rapid speed by which ideas and ambitions were carried out. The pre-understanding we gained of Dubai through various media was one of innovation and high aspirations manifested in structures such as Burj Dubai and The Palms. We found that the Dubai brand is surrounded by what we label the –est mentality, that is, striving to be the best, the tallest, and most luxurious, and so on. When looking closer at Dubai in a tourism context, we found that there was a difference between our pre-understanding of Dubai and what is marketed on the official tourism website; what we categorize as attraction and destination level, respectively. In this thesis, the selected attractions, Burj Al Arab, Burj Dubai, Dubailand, The World, and The Palms, constitute the attraction level, while the Department of Tourism and Commerce Marketing (DTCM) makes up the destination level. We investigate what the apparent discrepancy between what is marketed at attraction and destination level entail for the branding of Dubai in relation to the modern tourist. Thus, we find it important to examine which values these two levels display. In our pre-understanding, we also gained an image of Dubai as hyper-real and inauthentic and, therefore, we explore how the notion of authenticity is represented at attraction and destination level and how this relates to the modern tourist.
To set the scene, chapter 2 provides a historical overview of Dubai with focus on Dubai as a tourist destination. It also contains a short presentation of the official tourism website and the selected attractions. Chapter 3 introduces our meta-theoretical reflections and methodological considerations. Our meta-theoretical positioning is based on social constructivism and hermeneutics and, on this basis, we argue for a reflexive and context-specific approach to qualitative studies. In the methodological considerations, we take a more practical approach in that we reflect on our selection of empirical data, the sender/receiver relationship, generalizability, and our selection of theory.
In chapter 4 and 5, we establish our theoretical framework in relation to tourists and destination branding, respectively. Chapter 4 discusses the characteristics of modern tourists and the development of tourism moving from mass tourism to flexible production, as presented by Poon (1993). We add some perspectives to the concept of modern touristsby including Urry (1990) and Sheller & Urry (2004), who go into detail with tourists’ consumption of the performed tourist destination. This leads to a discussion of the concept of authenticity in a tourism context. Here MacCannell (1973), Cohen (2004), and Wang (1999) are included to discuss the three different aspects of authenticity, namely objective, constructive, and existential authenticity, which all prove to be highly relevant in this thesis. Chapter 5 is based on the thoughts of Pedersen (2005), Hankinson (2001, 2004, 2007), and Kavaratzis & Ashworth (2005, 2007) in relation to destination branding with special focus on leadership, stakeholders, brand identity, and positioning. Kavaratzis & Ashworth are also included when arguing to which extent destinations can be seen as products or corporations. Based on chapter 4 and 5, we make a short overview of our theoretical framework in chapter 6.
Chapter 7 contains our analysis, which is divided into two parts; one dealing with the destination level and one dealing with the attraction level. We find that both levels accentuate roughly the same values in their branding. The –est mentality is present at both levels as well as the values of uniqueness, innovation, and flexibility. However, we find that the values on the DTCM’s website have a more local, past, and present anchorage than the values found at attraction level, which are more anchored in a future and global frame of reference. A disparity is also obvious in relation to authenticity where we find that the aspects of authenticity focussing on the object, that is, objective and constructive authenticity, are accentuated, to a higher degree, at destination level, whereas existential authentic is stressed more in the branding at attraction level.
In chapter 8 and 9, we discuss our findings and make concluding remarks on our problem formulation. We discuss the three types of discrepancy found in our analysis. Firstly, we investigate which values are present in the branding at both attraction and destination level, and here we find that it is predominantly the same values which are represented at the two levels. The discrepancy lies in the fact that these values are anchored differently in temporal and spatial dimensions. Secondly, we establish that our pre-understanding of Dubai does not correspond to the actual message communicated on the DTCM’s website. We believed that structures and attractions such as Burj Al Arab, Burj Dubai, The World, The Palms, and Dubailand were a huge part of the Dubai brand. We found that these aspects are not prominent in the DTCM’s branding of Dubai, which instead accentuates the cultural and historical aspects of Dubai. Thirdly,we conclude that there is a lack of communication between the two levels as the attractions, constituting the attraction level, refer to the overall brand of Dubai, whereas the DTCM lacks references to the various attractions. On this basis, we conclude that there is a clear discrepancy between the two levels and that this has the consequence for modern tourists that the message communicated through the brand becomes fragmented even though the identity is rather consistent. However, modern tourists are, to a higher degree, more capable of dealing with a less holistic message. The discrepancy also has consequences in relation to the viability of the brand as we believe that the branding on the official tourism website does not exploit the full potential of the destination. Thus, we believe that combining what is branded at the two levels would prove fruitful. In this connection, we also see a potential in making more use of Sheikh Mohammed as a unifier in the overall brand as he seems to be an omnipresent and public figure.To conclude, we find that there is a conflict between the DTCM’s vision of making Dubai the world’s leading tourist destination and the destination product which they present. Based on our analysis, we find that there is much more to Dubai.
Distribution of Responsibility
1. Introduction (Joint)
1.1 Field of Interest
1.2 Problem Analysis
1.3 Problem formulation
1.4 Structure of the Thesis
2. Case Presentation (JULIE)
2.1 The Historical Background of Dubai (julie(12-13), anne(13-14))
2.2 Tourism in Dubai (jette)
2.2 A Multi-faceted Destination (ina)
2.4 Description of Empirical Data (anne)
2.4.1 Department of Tourism and Commerce Marketing (ANNE)
2.4.2 Burj Dubai & Burj Al Arab(JULIE)
2.4.3 Dubailand (INA)
2.4.4 The World & The Palms (JETTE)
3. Method (ANNE)
3.1 Meta-theoretical Reflections (anne)
3.1.1 Our Positioning - The Relationship between Theory and Empirical Data
3.2 Methodological Considerations (JULIE)
3.2.1 Situating Dubai (JULIE)
3.2.2 Selection of Empirical Data (INA)
3.2.3 Sender/Receiver Relationship (JULIE)
3.2.4 Generalizability (JETTE)
3.2.5 Selection of Theory (ANNE (27-28), INA (28-29), JETTE (29), JULIE (30))
4. The Modern Tourist (Ina)
4.1 Characterizing the Modern Tourist (anne)
4.1.1 Defining of Tourism
4.1.2 The History of Tourism
4.1.3 The Emergence of New Tourism
4.1.4 Summary
4.2 Authenticity – the Real Experience (Ina)
4.2.1 Authenticity in a Tourism Context
4.2.2 Objective Authenticity
4.2.3 Constructive Authenticity
4.2.4 Existential Authenticity
4.2.5 Summary
5. Destination Branding (julie)
5.1 Situating Branding (julie)
5.1.1 Branding and Brands
5.1.2 The Essence of Destinations
5.2 Defining Destination Branding (julie)
5.2.1 A Synthesis of Commercial and Political Factors(JULIE)
5.2.2 The Stakeholder Dimension of Destination Branding (JETTE)
5.2.3 Destinations as Products(JULIE)
5.2.4 Destinations as Corporations (JETTE)
5.2.5 Managing the Destination Image and Identity(JETTE)
5.2.6 Communicative Strategies of Destination Branding(JETTE)
5.2.7 Summary(JETTE)
6. Overview of Theoretical Framework (Anne (78), Ina (78), Julie (79), Jette (79))
7. Analysis (ANNE)
7.1 The Department of Tourism and Commerce Marketing (anne)
7.1.1 Overview of the Website’s Content
7.1.2 Organizational Considerations
7.1.3 Piecing Together a Destination Product
7.1.4 Here and Now in Focus
7.2. Burj Al Arab and Burj Dubai (julie)
7.2.1 Symbols of Dubai
7.2.2 Facilities as Attractions
7.2.3 The Experience of Globality
7.2.4 Appealing to the Modern Tourist
7.3 Dubailand (ina)
7.3.1 Modern Tourists
7.3.2 More Than Just an Attraction?
7.3.3 Mission, Values, and Identity
7.4 The World and The Palms (jette)
7.4.1 Preliminary Considerations
7.4.2 Communicative Means in the Branding
7.4.3 The Identity and Values of The World and The Palms
7.4.4 References to the Destination of Dubai
8. Complementary Reflections (JETTE)
8.1 Discussing the Nuances of Discrepancy (jette (129-132), anne (132-134))
8.2 Discussing the Consequences of Discrepancy (anne)
8.3 Discussing the Potential of the Destination Product (ina)
8.4 Discussing Sheikh Mohammed’s Role in the Dubai Brand (julie)
8.5 Discussing Dubai as a Viable Destination (jette (143-144), anne (144-145))
9. Conclusion (joint)