1) Brief Description of the Cultural Tourism Product
Cultural tourism is the transportation of a person to a city or a country outside of their home residency to visit a tourism attraction, with the main purpose to participate in a unique experience while collecting new information to fulfill their cultural desires (Whyte, Hood and Whyte, 2012).
The new cultural tourism product this report is going to present is a new heritage package exclusively thought for the French Pyrenees. The purpose of this guided tour would be to discover and learn about the heritage of the prehistoric era in France. During the tour, the participants would get an overview of daily life of prehistoric people through museum visits, workshops and cave visits. It also intends to help the region to develop an alternative sort of tourism and extend its offer to another class of tourists. Indeed, sport and outdoor tourism is predominant in the Pyrenees with winter sports like skiing and summer sports like hiking. This new and unique tour of prehistoric heritage will help the region to put a spotlight on France’s biggest collection of prehistoric remains and to diversify its tourism (France.fr, 2018).
This tour would take place over three days and give an exceptional experience to everyone participating. The coach would be departing from Toulouse at 9:00 am as it is a tourist hotspot and one of France’s largest cities, easily accessible by plane, train or road transportation, and only few hours away from the first site. On the first day, clients would visit the Mas d’Azil cave which is located at 90 mn drive from Toulouse as well as the underground riviere of Labouiche where the group will have a guided tour on board of a boat. On the second day, they would visit the prehistoric park named Parc de la Préhistoire which would offer a wide range of workshops such as hunting and prehistoric painting to discover the daily life of the Magdalenian ancestors who were living in the Niaux cave. The cave, which is famous for its arts, would then be visited. To conclude the day, two different options would be offered. Either a guided visit or a speleological hike of the Lombrives cave. On the last day, they would visit both the dinosaurs museum of Espéraza and the prehistoric museum of Tautavel before returning to Toulouse at around 16:00 pm. The tour would also include accomodation in local bed and breakfasts and all meals would take place in local restaurants to help the region to support and develop its local businesses.
This tour would be offered from May to September as many sites close during winter time. It would take place twice a week. One of the weekly tour will be held in French and the other one in Spanish as well as English. This choice was made because of the proximity of Toulouse from Spain and of the sites from the spanish border. The coach will only be able to contain 15 people as some caves are small and narrow. A higher number would affect the interactivity of the experience as the tour guides would not be able to be heard and share their knowledge to everyone.The tour would be available to everyone but the participants should be able to walk for a long time and in good physical shape as some tasks may be physically challenging. The tour is also recommended for families as we would offer fun interactive activities and workshops for kids.
This tour would be a fun, unique experience and is suited to people who are interested in learning more about arts, history and geology. The advantages of the tour are that the tourists would be able to relax and enjoy their holiday without having to worry about planning and organising any visits by themselves and will receive a deeper knowledge from professional guides.
2) Critical Justification of the Product
It is really important for every new product created to be realistic and realisable for it to become successful. In this section, we will give a critical justification and explain why the product described above fits in this category. We will first have a look at the theoretical perspectives and secondly the market rationale of the product.
2.1) Theoretical Considerations
We will approach three different theories to support this new cultural package: postmodernism and the product, authenticity of experience, and finally experience economy and the product.
2.1.1) Postmodernism and the product
The changes of the society has created a new era called postmodernism. The postmodern era can be defined as the change of point of view people have on tourism. Tourists are shifting from a traditional and simple touristic experience towards a better specialised one. Postmodernism is breaking fences of what cultural tourism used to be (Urry, 1990). The postmodern era allows new kind of experience to emerge. Indeed, in addition to the mass market tourism, some new and unique touristic products and experiences have appeared (Sharpley, 1996). Indeed, some niche market products have been created and are often of better quality than mass market experience due to the technology which is changing the tourist consumption of the experience. Indeed, postmodern tourists live in a world full of technology and have the possibility to compare and choose the best product that fit their needs. This is why the new niche market products are better quality and offer a better touristic experience than the mass market ones. People nowadays see tourism differently. As it was once only perceive as travelling geographically is not the case anymore. Tourism is surrounding us in our everyday life. According to Zotic et al (2014), tourism is not perceived as a economic activity but a way of living. Tourism is not defined by one activity anymore but is open to multiple new types.
According to Munt (1994), postmodern tourism consists of two distinct framework. The first one is called ‘simulational’ and the second is classified as the ‘other’. ‘Simulational’ postmodern tourism refers to simulated theme park or other artificial attractions – for instance Harry Potter studio – as the typical postmodern experience (Baudrillard, 1983). They could be classified as ‘pseudo-events’ (Boorstin, 1964). The ‘other’ focuses on the research of the real and natural (Munt, 1994). This ‘other’ framework is in line with Maccannell idea of authenticity – which will be explained later.
The tour described above fits in this new postmodern era. Indeed, it is a specialised market that can be confirmed by the lack of competition in the region. As well, it will allow tourists to visit site that are not popular from the mass market. The product offers a wide range of different activities that will help satisfy the different needs of tourists. The tour will fulfill the new tourists demand of a better specialised quality experience focusing on the tourists needs.
2.1.2) Authenticity of experience
The concept of authenticity as a reference to reality has been discussed by scholars for many years. It appeared as a conceptual problem in the 1980s and 1990s and is still creating debates nowadays (Timothy and Boyd, 2006). Authenticity is a really important notion when it comes to cultural tourism (Richards, 2007). However, to provide a unique simple definition seems really complicated. One of the reason is that authenticity might be perceived differently by each individual. Indeed, the perception of authenticity happens inside the person. It is subjective to someone’s social conditioning and not to the experience they are receiving. That is why, tourists experiencing the same tourist experience might disagree on the authenticity of this one. One could find it entirely authentic, while another one could find it entirely inauthentic, and a third one could be in the middle (Gilmore and Pine, 2007).
According to Maccanell (1976), the reason for someone to travel is to search for a place that is real and get a authentic experience of that place. He suggests that a key characteristic for the post-modern tourists is authenticity and that in a modern society, tourists have lost tany understanding of basic life and connection with reality. Boorstin (1987) believes that the experience of modern tourists is often pretty inauthentic and that they are too shallow to care if the experience they are having is indeed authentic. It brings the idea by Maccanell (1976) of ‘staged authenticity’. This notion is in essence based on the observation that the experience presented to the tourist is artificial and do not demonstrate the truth. The aim is to create an event to present culture in a more appealing way for tourists to consume it. The modern tourist having no real notion of authenticity will consider the experience as authentic (Maccanell, 1976). It is not uncommon for a product or a site to be recreated in an exact duplicate of the authentic one. While cultural tourism are more likely to not perceived it as authentic, postmodern tourists are likely to have another approach. Indeed, people have the tendency to live in a ‘hyper-reality’ which creates the notion of ‘genuine fakes’. People do not make a difference between the real and the un-real, between what is authentic and what is unauthentic (Brown, 1996).
According to Steiner and Reisinger (2006), it exists two different types of authenticity. One as the genuine, real event, place or product. This first type refers to the concept of ‘objective authenticity’ (Wang,1999). The other type is the one referring more to someone’s true self.
Existential authenticity is another form of authenticity. It suggests that people need to find the real and true in themselves first (Wang, 1999). Tourists experiencing existential authenticity are looking to escape from their responsibilities and their everyday life. They are seeking for a way to relax and not having any constraints while keeping actively participating. They are more likely to contribute and to be involved in the experience, which suits a guided tour, and are looking for a participation experience over a passive observation one. They are looking to participate in local activities and to feel as a part of the local community so they can escape from what they already know through their daily lives (Smith et al, 2010). This is due to people feeling insecure in a never ending evolving world, thus the search to be a part of something unusual for them (Castells, 2004).
Tourists are still looking for authenticity but might show it from different perspectives. For cultural tourists to get a exceptional experience, the objective authenticity is the key (Smith, 2009). Whereas, postmodern tourists are looking for a entertaining experience and it is adequate for them to participate in fake authentic experiences (Cole, 2007).
The cultural product presented here is reflecting the notion of authenticity. Firstly, it combines objective authenticity by showing real caves, prehistoric arts as well as prehistoric artifacts, that would attract cultural tourists but as well the tour is made for people to enjoy themselves and be entertained with the activities planned in the prehistoric parc which would suit the postmodern tourists. Moreover, the tour is really participative and interactive as it is a small group with a private guided tour. It will allow the tourists to participate and put their input in the tour. In addition, all meals and accomodation are within the local community, which would allow the existential authenticity seeker to discover a different culture. This new, unique tour is expected to satisfy a pool of tourists selectively attracted by this kind of unique experience.
2.1.3) Experience economy and the product
The concept of ‘experience economy’ was established by Pine and Gilmore (1999) in the late 1990s. This theory is taken from the point of view of the tourist and not from the business. As the society was changing, the tourists’ perceptions of a good cultural experience were evolving as well. Pine and Gilmore (2011) created the model based on four dimensions – called ‘realms’ – that an experience should should consist of. They are ‘Entertainment’, ‘Education’, ‘Esthetics’ and ‘Escapism’. The tourists need to feel captivated and enjoy the experience, need to learn and gain knowledge, need to enjoy its surroundings and the beauty of the site and need to feel like they can evade their daily life.
Moreover, tourists feel the need to be involved and to participate in cultural experience. They need to interact with their surrounding and the other people around them. The best way for tourists to have an exceptional cultural experience is for them to be engaged with it. The more, the tourists will be participating in the experience, the more, they will remember it (Smith, 2009). The stimulation of their senses as well as their participation will help them reach a better memorable experience.
The package created would contain the four element of Pine and Gilmore’ theory. Indeed, the ‘entertainment’ would be made by the different guided tours – boat, speleology – but as well by the different workshop they will attend. The ‘education’ part would be reached thanks to the knowledge of the guides. The tourists would be able to enjoy the unique and exceptionals surroundings around them and admire the ‘esthetics’ of the different sites. And to conclude, the tour is created so the tourists can ‘escape’ their daily life and discover a new environment. They would also be advised to be actively participating in the tours by asking questions and participating in the activities.
The new cultural product has been analysed through the postmodernism, the authenticity and the experience economy theories. We will now have a look at the potential market of the product.
2.2) Market Rationale
To conclude on this part of the report, the potential of the market needs to be discussed. Firstly, France’s cultural tourism will be addressed, followed by the needs and motivations of the tourists.
2.2.1) Cultural Tourism in France
France has always had a strong connection to cultural tourism. French people have always affiliated culture and tourism with the notion of heritage (Richards, 1996). In 1991, a study has proved that 46 percent of attraction visits in France are cultural sites (Monferrand, 1994). Moreover, almost 80 percent of foreigners surveyed in 1992 stated that they would spend less than a week in France (ATLAS, 1992). The French people have always been interested in cultural tourism as proven by the figures above and France as always been able to attract people from all over the world for its cultural sites. That is why, the tour created is over 3 days – respecting the less than a week statistic – and in multiple languages .
The leading demographic of the tour would most likely be French but eventually, the main purpose of the tour would be to open up the Pyrenees region to other demographics of people. That is why the tour would be conducted in multiple languages. The rationale for having the tour in Spanish is because the pyrenees region is spreading over both France and Spain. The tourists from Spain will be able to come over to France easily as it is nearby. A survey made in 1989 showed that culture was important in the choice of the destination by 66 percent of Spanish people (Chazaud, 1994). The choice of English was made because it is one of the most widely spoken languages across Europe and in the same survey as aboved, 62 percent of English are looking for culture.
Moreover, the choice of Toulouse as departure and arrival destinations was made because it is the 4th largest city in France – approximately 460 000 inhabitants in 2013 (Insee, 2016) – but as well because Toulouse as a rich historical and cultural heritage. The tour would help the city to grow up as a cultural destination as most of the participants of the tour are believed to stay in the city after or before the tour.
2.2.2) Tourists needs and motivation
As stated by Du Cros and McKercher (2015), one of the main feature in cultural tourism to attract the targeted market is to invent a cultural experience which is “ unique, exciting and offers ‘one of a kind’ encounters”. To be successful, a product needs to meet the consumers’ needs.
Taking support on McKercher and Du Cros (2003) and their cultural tourism typology, the target market of this particular product can be identified. Indeed, two out of the five different types of cultural tourists would suit this tour. The first one would be the ‘purposeful cultural tourist’ whose main reason to pick a destination is to get an in depth knowledge and experience of culture and heritage. The second one is the ‘sightseeing cultural tourist’ whose main aim while choosing a destination is similar to the ‘purposeful cultural tourist’ but is as well looking for an experience which is entertaining. These two types of cultural tourists are the primary target market of this product as the tour offers a great knowledge of culture and heritage but in an interactive and entertaining mode
In addition, the experience is unique to each individual as they all make their own decisions on what activities or workshops they would like to attend. Indeed, during their visit at the prehistoric parc, they will have the choice of several activities and would be free to choose the one that matches best their needs. This unique personal experience within a touristic package adds value to the tour (Sharpley, 1996).
3) Impacts for the Product and Recommendations for their Management
To conclude on this report, the benefits and negatives of the product as well as some recommendations for their management will be approached.
The main impact would be the boost of the economy in the region. Indeed, the tour would bring more tourists to the region. They will purchase goods, eat in local restaurants, sleep in local bed and breakfasts which will help the growth of the local economy. It will help create more jobs within the local community to keep up with the demand. Indeed, the tour guides will be hired from the locals with a recommendation for history and tourism students from local universities as it would help them for their career and as well would provide the tourists with in depth knowledge by passionate and involved people. The tour will also take the participants to small to medium local businesses only in order to keep the benefits within the community and avoid it to be spread to big corporation or outside the country.
Another benefit would be the changing image of the region. Indeed, creating a tour like the one presented here will help the region put forwards its hidden gems. The region is not for now popular for its prehistoric remains but for its sports activities. It would help the region develop cultural tourism and spread pride in the community. It is really important to make the community proud and wanting to help as the support of the hosts are the key to create a successful product. Indeed, if the community is not on board with the project, it will create negativity around it and will impair the perception of the product for potential users (Mossberg and Getz, 2006).
On another hand, the tour would also create some negative impact. There is a risk of degradation of some of the sites due to more people coming in. However, the tour has only a capacity of 15 people to avoid an over-crowding of some fragile site to help preserve the heritage and authenticity of the sites. Moreover, some of the money earned from the tour would be redistributed to help the preservation and conservation of the sites and artifacts. All necessities will be taken to avoid degrading historic sites but as well to avoid disturbing the locals. This brings to another negative impact which is the air and noise pollution as well as the littering. It is an inevitable impact when bringing a large amount of people at the same place at the same time. It would be advised before each stop to everyone to throw their litter in different bins inside the coach. Moreover, the guide would try to have the group never standing in open spaces at the same spot for a long period of time. Concerning the air pollution, the coach would be a low-emission gas vehicle and the driver would be instructed to always turn the engine off on idle positions.
For this tour to be successful, it will require the help of several stakeholders such as the local authorities, the involvement of the city of Toulouse as well as the region, the help from the visitors attractions, tourism organisations and the local community (Macleod, 2013).