urban tourism in developing countries: in the case of melaka (malacca) city, malaysia

This article was downloaded by: [The University of Manchester Library]On: 02 December 2014, At: 00:01Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Anatolia: An InternationalJournal of Tourism andHospitality ResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

Urban Tourism in DevelopingCountries: in the Case ofMelaka (Malacca) City, MalaysiaHAIRUL ISMAIL a & TOM BAUM ba Department of Urban and Regional PlanningFaculty of Built Environment , Universiti TeknologiMalaysia , 81310 UTM, Skudal, Johor, Malaysia E-mail:b Department of Hospitality and TourismManagement , The University of Strathclyde , 94,Cathedral Street, Glasgow, G4 OLG, Scotland E-mail:Published online: 01 Aug 2011.

To cite this article: HAIRUL ISMAIL & TOM BAUM (2006) Urban Tourism inDeveloping Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) City, Malaysia, Anatolia:An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 17:2, 211-233, DOI:10.1080/13032917.2006.9687187

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2006.9687187

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13032917.2006.9687187

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2006.9687187

Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Anatdla: An International Journal of Tourism and Hcspltallty Research Volume 17, Number 2. pp. 211-233,2006

Copyright CD 2006 anatolla Printed In Turkey. All rights reserved

1303-2917/06 $20.00 + 0.00

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) City, Malaysia

HAIRUL ISMAIL Department of Urban and Regional Planning Faculty of Built Environment Unlversiti Teknoiogl Malaysia 81310 UTM. Skudai. Johor Malaysia Emall: [email protected]

TOM BAUM Department of Hospltallty and Tourism Management

The University of Strathclyde 94, Cathedral Street

Glasgow 64 OLG Scotland

€-ma//: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the context that provldes understanding of the building blocks of the urban tourism concept In developing countries. This is based on the geographical and historical position of Meiaka Clty as an example of such phenomena in developing countries. The themes focus on several considerations and Issues from the perspective of geographical and historical position. The flrst is the Initiative to develop Melaka Clty as a tourism destination while the second theme highlights the limitations of Meiaka's posl- tlon compared to other cltles. The last theme contlnues the sequence of dlscusslons wlth a focus on recent attention on urban tourlsm development and the future expectations of what tourism can contribute to Meiaka Clty and the State. impilcatlon of this study provide better lnslght into the concept of urban tourism and It significance as pictured by those responsible for urban development, as part of the need for cltles in developing countries to expand their economic and physical boundaries.

Key words: urban tourism, tourism development, developing countries. Southeast Asia, Maiaysla.

Halrul krnall Is lecturer at Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Unlversltl Teknoiogl Malaysia, Malaysia. He has Bachelor of Urban 81 Regional Planning and MSc. In Tourlsm Planning from Unlverslti Teknologi Malaysia and a PhD In Tourism from the University of Strathclyde. Scotland. Hairul's main research interests are in the flelds of urban tourism, urban plannlng and tourism In developing countries. lorn h u m Is Professor of International Tourism and Hospltallty Management In the University of Strathclyde, Scotland. He has BA and MA degrees from the University of Wales and a PhD In Tourism from Strathclyde. Tom's research Interests are tourism and development with a partlcular focus on human aspects relating to this area. He Is a widely publlshed academic author, consultant and educator.

Volume 17 Number 2 . Winter 2006 . 21 1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


INTRODUCTION Although the existence of urban tourism has been subject to much criticism and questioning (e.g. Ashworth 1989,1992; Law 1991,1993), subsequent discussion, especially in the 1990's, by various author (e.g. Page 1995; van den Berg, van der Borg and van der Meer 1995; Judd 1995; Murphy 1997; Mazanez 1997; Tyler, Guerrier and Robertson 1998; Judd and Fainstein 1999) managed to establish urban tourism, in the early 20003, as a distinctive knowledge area within both the urban development and tourism disciplines (Pearce 2001a; Page and Hall 2003). The conceptualization of urban tourism can be seen through the position of cities as tourism destinations and is further described through approaches that take into account supplylfacility and demandluser. In relation to cities as tourism destinations, Blank (1994) notes that cities are places where various major facilities such as transport, hotel and event infrastructure are located. He identifies five major factors that characterise cities as tourism destinations:

Major travel nodes that serve as gateways or transfer points to other destinations. High populations that attract large numbers of tourists who are visiting friends and relatives. Focal points for commerce, industry and finance. Concentrations of services such as education, health and government administration centre. Places that offer a wide variety of cultural, artistic and recreational experiences.

Several other approaches can also be identified that range widely across various perspectives. Page (1995), for example, gives specific reference to cities as tourism destinations where image and status are based on function (e.g. capital, historic cities and purpose-built integrated tourist resorts). Authors such as Law (1993,1996,2002) uses understanding of the size of the city and origin of tourists as reference point. Similarly, cities as tourism destinations can also be determined in terms of tourist experiences (Blank 1996), and urban space development (Fainstein and Judd 1999). Nevertheless, Law (1996: 3) argues that existing typologies are still 'bound to be crude and over simplistic', although they provide better descriptions of cities as tourism destinations. This is because each city is unique and the characteristics that exist in playing tourism role, direct or indirectly, are more complex than has been thought.

In addition to this, approaches through supply/facility and demandluser are also ways in which urban tourism can be conceptualized (Ashworth 1989, 1992; Page 1995; Law 2002; Page and Hall 2003). According to Ashworth (1989), understanding urban tourism through its supply-side or facilities has advantages of visibility, identifiability and the ability to be mapped and located. One of the most quoted descriptions of urban tourism in term of supply is the one

21 2 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hairul lsmail - Tom Baum

pictured by Jansen-Verbeke (1986), who represents this form of tourism by way of three categories. These are:

Primary elements that consist of activity places or formal urban activities, and leisure settings, which are derived from physical characteristics, and social or cultural features. Secondary elements as facilities that could increase the attractiveness of the primary product. These are also referred to as supporting facilities or services such as accommodation, food and various forms of recreational opportunities. Additional elements as added value to primary and secondary elements. They are also referred to as ancillary facilities consisting of infrastructure relating to transportation, tourist information and others basic facilities expect- ed in a tourist city.

Primary elements normally become a principal consideration in urban tourism development but could be difficult to determine as independent tourist functions as these elements are not isolated entities (Jansen-Verbeke 1986). These also operate as amenities for residents and are complicated in terms of motive and reasons for visitation. At the same time, categories such as additional facilities probably are essential to complement primary or secondary elements in order to make up the complete tourism product (Hinch 1996). In this context, these three elements can be very difficult to separate.

According to Ashworth (1989), the significance of supply-sideffacilities can be better explained when the nature of demandfusers in the city is under- stood. He lists four basic questions as to how the nature of users provides a key to understanding the dynamics of urban tourism in relation to 'who visits cities?', 'what do tourists do in cities?, 'why tourists visit cities? and 'how do tourists perceive cities?'. In relation to these questions, there is a need to assess various motives behind tourists' decisions to visit the city, and thereby, to develop a typology of the urban tourist. Several attempts can be elaborated in seeking to understand this aspect (e.g. Page 1995; Burtenshaw, Bateman and Ashworth 1991; Hall and Page 2002; Shaw and Williams 2002; Page and Hall 2003). For example, Burtenshaw et al. (1991) conceptualise the functional areas of tourist demand in the city through an understanding that different visitors seek different attributes during their visit in a particular city. Ths is based on the characteristics of the city that focus on branding such as 'the historic city', 'the culture city', 'the nightlife city' and 'the shopping city'. It is clear, from these examples, that there are a multitude of motivations as- sociated with visitation in urban areas. Nevertheless, these authors also argue that existing typologies of urban tourists are very simplistic and too basic, and therefore further examination is required (Pearce 2001a; Shaw and Williams 2002; Hall and Page 2002). This issue provides evidence of the attributes of urban tourism, although some motives/reasons of visitation may not even be seen or necessary as categories of tourism activities. This aspect of demand

Volume 17 . Number 2 Winter 2006 21 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) City. Malaysia

significantly influences the particular characteristics of urban tourism compared to other forms of tourism, or even from one city to other city.

Instead of these arguments, whether in terms of city characteristics as tourism destinations or through the supply and demand side, the term of 'urban tourism'itself also can become a chaotic concept within the understanding of those responsible for urban and tourism development. Ashworth (1989) notes that those interested in tourism have tended to neglect the urban context in their studies, while those interested in urban studies have been negligent in understanding the importance of tourism in the city. Nonetheless, understanding of the urban tourism concept has steadily progressed to its present state of development, involving the examination of strategies that in many ways are able to described the basic framework of urban tourism (e.g. Law 1991; Van den Berg et al. 1995; Law 1996; Hinch 1996,1998; Sharpley and Roberts 2005).

However, it can be argued that many of the descriptions of what constitute urban tourism are based on the experience of developed countries (Ismail and Baum 2004). Understanding of the presence of urban tourism in developing countries is still immature and receives limited attention (Oppermann, Din and Amri 1996; Oppermann and Chon 1997), despite some initial attempts in relation to cities such as Lucknow and Simla in India (Singh 1992; Jutla 2000), cities in Caribbean Island locations (Weaver 1993); Xianrnen in China (Begin 2000) and Johannesburg in South Africa (Rogerson 2002).

Therefore, an underpinning theme of this paper is an attempt to undertake in-depth analysis of differing perspectives relating to how urban tourism ac- tually has evolved in developing countries compared to developed countries. It is clear that there is a gap in current research and there is a need to exam- ine urban tourism from other perspectives than that which are drawn from experience in Western Europe and North America. Different forms of urban development in developing countries, such as Malaysia, may result in the location of tourism in a different place within the urban hierarchy. Oppermann and Chon (1997: 78) suggest that urban tourism development may be subject to different factors in developing countries compared to developed countries and therefore 'the transfer of urban tourism concepts from developed to developing countries may be inappropriate'. On the other hand, Mullins (1999) contends that, despite rapid economic development in Southeast Asian cities, similar impacts of international tourism to that experienced in the cities of developed countries may also be applicable to cities in developing countries. Cit- ies in developing countries are generally in an expansion phase and tourism is used as a catalyst for development. These counter arguments require empiri- cal investigation. There is, however, little argument with respect to the need to invest in tourism resources and infrastructure in order to enhance economic activities and expanding physical growth in the cities of developing countries. By contrast, in developed countries, urban centres are frequently in a decline phase with a decreasing population and may face employment opportunity shortages. Therefore, tourism is seen as part of a regeneration strategy and focuses on approaches such as the preservation of heritagehistorical resources.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hairul lsmail- Tom Baum

THE EXISTENCE OF URBAN TOURISM CONCEPTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

In seeking to understand what constitutes urban tourism in developing countries, several attempts by tourism researchers and urban geographers to de- scribe urban tourism in developing countries can be identified. For example, according to Singh (1992), the role of tourism in the city of Lucknow in India is part of a concern to secure its heritage assets, as a means to secure open spaces, and in the context of a battle against pollution by reinforcing efforts to increase the quality of the urban landscape. Similar issues are addressed by Bhattacharya (1992) in the context of Da rjeeling and Sikkim in the Hima- layas. Weaver (1993) introduces models of urban tourism space in a number of Caribbean islands, in which tourism has a strong influence in the process of urbanisation and where cities play a role at a regional level as gateways or hubs of tourism activities for the whole of the region.

Further studies focus on the examination of tourism activities and development in cities such as Simla in Northern India (Jutla 2000) and Xianmen in China (Begin 2000). Visual image, on the basis of the perception of tourists and local residents in the city of Simla has identified distinct images of the city from these differing locations (Jutla 2000). In the city of Xianmen in China, the attention is on the geography of tourist businesses that have led to hotel distribution planning and influenced urban morphology and the pattern of city development (Begin 2000). Direct debate in this regards is also addressed by Rogerson (2002) in considering tourism in the city of Johannesburg in South Africa in a way that is linked to urban economic regeneration and highlights growing policy initiatives, interventions and development planning with respect to the potential of tourism. Despite these studies, the existing literature and research remains representative of a fragmented interest in various tourism themes without clear indication of the application of the concept of urban tourism in the context of the development of a particular region.

The Context of Southeast Asia

The initiative of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), in hosting Visit ASEAN Millennium Year 2002 demonstrated the importance for Southeast Asian countries of attracting investment, industry and tourism to their cities (Kotler et al. 2002). Tourism plays a primary role in urban development for many large cities or so called Extended Metropolitan Regions (EMR) in the region (Hall & Page 2000; Page & Hall 2003). Mullins (1999) identified three main characteristics that influence urban tourism or tourism urbanisation in Southeast Asia, namely:

Tourists as the demand-side for tourism product. Economic suppliers such as those who manufacture, market and sell goods and services to tourists.

Political actors that use 'political means' to project urban development.

Volume 17 . Number 2 . Winter 2006 21 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


From these perspectives, a clearer description of the role of the city, particularly in structuring tourism activities, can be painted. For example, through an analysis of tourism at regional and international level, Mullins (1999: 246) notes that most of the largest cities in Southeast Asia recognise that they can take tourism as a means to 'expand consumption opportunities' through tourist demand. Taking this opportunity, the effort of the political actors in government has sought to provide an environment conducive to a tourism economy and, therefore, to those selling goods and services to tourists. In addition, much tourism infrastructure, such as hotels and various other forms of accommodation, are normally centred in the capital city, or the major economic centres of the country (Oppermann 1993).

According to Sinclair and Vokes (1993), with increasing demand for tourism in the Asia Pacific region in the late 1980's and early 1990's, there is clear evidence of international hotel management companies obtaining good sites for hotels in gateway cities such as Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta. Kotler et al. (2002) note that tourism and the business of hospitality have emerged as viable development options for Asian countries, especially for their cities, which are generally focused on tourist demand that combines business activities and personal travel. In this regard, large cities such as Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore attempt to cater for activities such as conventions, trade shows and business meetings, while smaller cities such as Melaka in Malaysia attempt to market themselves on the basis of the city's culture and architecture as key selling points within the country and the Southeast Asia region (Kot- ler et al. 2002). However, it is important to recognise that smaller cities may also be able to promote tourism and business meeting at relatively lower cost compared to larger cities. This also explains reasons why a number of cities in countries such as Malaysia are able to promote themselves for activities such as medical tourism as they can offer cheaper options compared to their larger neighbours in the region, such as Singapore, and market these services to visitors from Indonesia and other countries in the region (Musa 2000).

The discussion, at international level, also involves the role that cities play as hubs and as centres for transport, responsible for shaping the regionalisation of tourism patterns and activities in Southeast Asia (Mullins 1999; Page 2001; Pearce 2001b). With reference to the cities of Southeast Asia, Page (2001: 85) notes that 'the evolution of gateways and hubs is increasingly being recog- nised as a powerful spatial entity that may influence the nature of the produc- tion system that is going to shape the regionalisation of tourism patterns and activities within Southeast Asia'. For this reason, it can be seen that international tourism is one of the central developments in the Southeast Asia region and its growing cities, especially in the principal countries for tourism such as Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand (Mullins 1999). For a city or country such as Singapore, the aim is clear, that is to play a major role as the gateway for Southeast Asia for international tourists (Low and Heng 1997). As noted by Go (1997), international travellers that visit major cities in developing countries, such as Southeast Asia, usually visit more that one city or country in a given


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

H a i ~ l lsmail -Tom Baum

trip. That makes cities important as an intra-regional market for tourism and highlights this as one of the main features of the Asian travel market.

Within this context, Mullins (1999) suggests that countries such as Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore have become main entry points (or gateways) for tourism to Southeast Asia. This is strongly related to urbanization that places major cities in these countries as hubs for international tourists in the region through the use of transportation systems such as airports, highways and the railways that link them. In addition, Page (2000,2001) highlights the concen- tration of investment by government and the private sector for air transportation in major gateways or cities such as Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Sin- gapore to be developed as main access routes to the region (e.g. new airports - Kuala Lumpur International Airport and Bangkok International Airport). This increases the existing and future urban tourism potential of these large cities but, in many ways, also influences the potential of other, more remote tourism locations in Southeast Asia. Thus, transportation and infrastructure play a significant role in identifying cities in Southeast Asia for tourism. Simi- larly, Pearce (2001b) notes that cities in Southeast Asia, especially major cities, can be seen as nodes that play multiple and complex functions. This includes tourism, where the roles of cities as gateways consequently link one node to another for regional tourism activities in the region. In this case, major cities such as Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Bangkok also act as generators of domestic and intra-regional tourist flows to smaller cities such as Kuching and Kota Kinabalu in East Malaysia, and provincial cities such Chiang Mai and Phuket in Thailand, which are popular as dispersal nodes for nature and beach based tourism activities.

Mullins (1999: 250) argues that, in Southeast Asia, 'the more dynamic and capitalist the economy, the more urbanized the country and the greater the likelihood of having the infrastructure and facilities to cater to international tourists'. As a result, these cities are involved in competition to build up the image and infrastructure for urban-based tourism through their mega shopping malls, theme parks and an emphasis on event tourism or MICE (Low and Heng 1997). The effort is also part of their initiative to diversify the tourism product where the infrastructure or facilities and market for tourism already exist. This includes attempts to extend existing restaurant facilities, sports, cultural amenities and entertainment for the international market. Re- garding this, Kotler et al. (2002) also notes that the struggle to compete with each other involves other Asian cities outside Southeast Asia such as Hong Kong and in Taiwan, in seeking to lead and have the best facilities in terms of luxury hotels, museums and theatres.

However, although a city such as Kuala Lumpur or any tourism location in Ma- laysia appears to be in competition with neighbouring countries, they also complement each other as part of packages within Southeast Asian multi-destination tourism (Khalifah and Tahir 1997). For example, despite an argument about how neighbouring countries accept Singapore as the main gateway to Southeast Asia (Pearce 2001b), there is also a view, in countries such as Malaysia, that Sin-

Volume 17 . Number 2 . Winter 2006 . 21 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malaax) Ci, Malaysia

gapore is a partner rather than competitor that benefits both countries (Kha- lifah and Tahir 1997; Low and Heng 1997). This is because of the opportunity for Malaysia to receive tourist flows from Singapore on the basis of the close proximity of certain tourism locations in the south of Peninsular Malaysia so that products can be complementary (e.g. urban and beach). Furthermore, there is evidence that countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Philippines are 'attempting to develop cross-border enterprise zones, which may involve some subsidiary interest in tourism' (Kotler et al. 2002: 309)

At the same time, the high population of major cities in Southeast Asia also contributes to the significant growth of theme parks, which then become international tourism icons for cities (Teo and Yeoh 2001). Despite developments that spark concern about modem 'Disney-type' entertainment such as Sunway Lagoon (Klang Valley/Kuala Lumpur-Selangor region) and Fantasy Island in Singapore, there are also attempts to adopt local images as a way to preserve the 'kampung' (viIlage) that exists in the city for tourism. This has led to the emergence of ethnic cultural theme areas, for example in Singapore (Malay Village and Little India), despite the wider and rapid urban development of the city. According to Teo and Yeoh (2001: 146), this form of cultural theme area is part of what has been called 'localism', defined as 'a powerful political agenda which shapes not only the meaning of being local but also how the local is portrayed to the external world'. A similar point is also addressed by Hall and Page (2000) in that the historical background of centres or cities in Southeast Asia, during colonization, has invited migration from various races, resulting in multi-ethnic cultures in these areas. This has al- lowed these cities to promote ethnic diversity or 'differentness' as shown in Singapore where multiculturalism has been promoted for tourism purposes in a way that appeals to 'global consumerism' (Hall and Page 2000: 18).

With regard to the discussion of urban tourism in the context of cities in Southeast Asia, the next section in this paper will consider more localised perspectives with specific reference to Melaka City in Malaysia. This section develops the underpinning theme of this paper, that the experience of cities in developing countries, with regard to urban tourism, has distinct characteristics which set them apart from the picture of city-based tourism generally addressed in the literature and drawn from locations in the developed world.

Further Analysis of Urban Tourism in Developing Countries

The fundamental idea of this paper is to reflect the concept of urban tourism as it has emerged and is pictured in developing countries in comparison to developed countries. As discussed earlier, the different forms of urban development in developing countries may locate tourism in a different place in the urban hierarchy. Oppermann and Chon (1997: 78) suggest that urban tourism development may be subject to different factors in developing countries compared to the developed world and therefore 'the transfer of urban tourism concepts from developed to developing countries may be inappropriate'. On the other hand, Mullins (1999) points out that, despite the recent and rapid

21 8 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


economic development of Southeast Asian cities, the same impacts of international tourism in cities of developed countries may also apply to cities of developing countries.

If there has been intensive consideration of urban tourism in the cities of developed countries, the same attention is also required to address this theme in relation to cities of developing countries. In this context, to what extent does the nature and elements that exists in the cities of developing countries build on the established concept of urban tourism? What are the similarities or dif- ferences due to the different nature of how the cities in developing countries have evolved? The discussion in this paper will address these aspects of the urban tourism concept with the complexity that exists in Melaka City in Ma- laysia as an example of urban tourism in developing countries.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted in-depth interviews as the form of data collection that was best able to provide answers for the study. In depth-interview and a sampling frame that focuses on 'those responsible in urban and tourism development' helps the researcher to understand the context and situation of urban tourism and provides idea as to how urban tourism is perceived. The discussion of findings in this paper focuses on ideas relating to this theme. The in-depth interviews were used to identify themes or sub themes that provide understanding that are major concerns with regard to the aims of the research.

The data was drawn from fieldwork in Melaka City, conducted between April and June 2004 (approximately 3 months). GUM (2002) has identified four main groups of planners in tourism and decision makers in tourism development. These are the public sector (government), the business sector (private), the non-profit sector (including NGOs representing local communities) and pro- fessional consultants. The selection of informants for in-depth interviews was intended to achieve inclusion of all these categories of planners in the case study. It is important for the research to addresses the departments, agencies, organisations, or associations that can relate to these categories of planners.

A total of 21 in-depth interviews were conducted and these can be divided into three categories. The first category involved government agencies from Melaka State departmentslagencies and the Melaka City local authority (8 respondents), federal planning organisation (3 respondents) and the federal tourism organization (2 respondents). The second category included tourism associations from the private sector and Non-Government Organisations (4 respondents). The third category was tourism and planning consultant (4 respondents). The respondents were identified as 'those responsible in urban and tourism development' and selected based on their position and experience (e.g. Director of Planning and Development Control Division, Melaka Historical City Council and Chairman of Melaka Historic City Tourist Guides Association). They thus, represent decision makers in planning and implementation in Melaka. In this case, the respondents were selected on the basis of a combination of criteria.

Volume 17 Number 2 Winter 2006 21 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


The criterion for selection of respondents was based on their position and experience (e.g. Melaka State Director of Town and Country Planning Depart- ment and General Manager of Melaka State Tourism Action Council). Their knowledge, for example, through attending high level meetings in the state government, is important for the research to understand decision-making and implementation in planning for tourism. The process of using 'snowball' sampling was applied, whereby each interviewee helped the researcher to determine other personnel, who were eligible and qualified, as possible respondents. The snowball process continued to identifying the namefperson and organisation as suggested by previous interviewees, until those interviewed covered almost all organisations within the local tourism sector structure that are relevant to tourism and planning for Melaka City. In this context, there was no definitive target number that had to be achieved when the fieldwork began, but the aim was that the total number of the respondents should represent most of the organisations involved in tourism and planning in Melaka City.

For this research, the researcher using an open-ended question approach which involved outlining a set of issues that are to be explored before interview- ing begins, and which serves as a basic checklist during the interview to make sure that all relevant topics were covered. According to Patton (2002), open-ended questions offer the persons being interviewed the opportunity to respond in their own words and to express their own personal perspectives. Thus, a number of basic questions for this research were designed and worded to guide the dialogue, or conversation, without interfering with the spontaneous flow of the interview. Generally, these basic questions refer to themes such 'what are the elements characterize tourism in this city?', 'why these elements are so important?' and 'how do you picture the advantage of these elements for tourism compared to other cities?' This set of basic questions was also employed as a brief list of memory prompts for areas to be covered. The interview guide questions were designed following the criteria that they should avoid leading and complex or multipart questions, in order to make it easy to modify them during interviews (Bryman 2001). Where appropriate, new questions raised from previous interviews were also used with other respondents, in order for the researcher to determine understanding of certain aspects or issues that exist. Therefore, the set of basic questions developed from one interview to another, depending on whether the question was appropriate to that particular respondent.

In this context, the position and responsibility of the respondent in that particular organisation influenced how far the scope of the basic questions were discussed or answered. Therefore, the dialogue that refers to a particular question took longer or was in more depth some respondents than with others, where the respondent thought it was more relevant to their knowledge and involvement. Further questions or follow-up questions developed during the interviews. This sustained the dialogue, which was interesting in order to understand the whole topic under discussion, and provoked further answers

220 . Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


to any relevant issues. In-depth interviews, as conducted in this research, al- lowed the respondents to express, as precisely as possible, their comprehen- sion of themes and issues in their own terms and words.

Melaka City as Case

The selection of Melaka City as a case was based on the city's potential to be a prominent city in illustrating functions of tourism compared to the other locations in Malaysia (Figure l). This assessment was based on the following:

Melaka City was declared a Historical City on 15th April 1989, which then boosted and established its image as a core historic tourism destination in Malaysia compared to other cities such as Penang. This initiative was supported by the effort to designate the zoning of land use specifically for tourism and an attempt to maximise the potential of historic and cultural resources. At the same time, Melaka City not only shows the characteristics mentioned in the first criteria but also functions as capital city for Melaka State. There- fore, it also received intensive development of infrastructure supported its role as a centre of 'modem tertiary services' including activities such as shopping, MICE tourism and events, even though in terms of image in Ma- laysia, Kuala Lumpur is still the leader for these type of tourism activities. Melaka City demonstrates strong interest by government to use tourism for its development in a way that is a well planned, 'boosterist' approach and provides an established market for domestic and international tourists in Malaysia. It is also shows more prominent functions in term of land use for tourism development compared to others cities.

This historic city includes attractions reflecting culture and heritage such as (1) monuments and building from the Portuguese, Dutch and British colonial eras from as long as 500 years ago, (2) the Peranakan community (Baba Nyonya, Portuguese and Chetti that assimilate with local culture), (3) antiqui- ties (especially from European Colonial), and (4) many others modem form of tourism development features such shopping, MICE tourism and events in relation to it role as mentioned above. Therefore, the unique attributes of Melaka City provide an interesting case to be examined.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE CASE

Each of the cities in Malaysia has developed differently and has their own place in history. One similarity that can be concluded is that tourism has played and continues to play an important role in the process of urbanization and shapes the economy and physical expansion of Malaysian cities (Ismail and Baum 2004). In many ways, these cities (e.g. Melaka City, Kuala Lumpur and Penang) are able to operate with different entities or advantages, but at the same time complement each other in providing a complete experience of ur-

Volume 17 . Number 2 . Winter 2006 . 221

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Ndh-Samr Highway

Figure I. Location of Melaka City and Melaka State

ban tourism activities for the nation. For tourism development in Melaka City, a general description of progress can be illustrated (Figure 2). This chart, in general, describes the conceptual process of tourism development from year to year and identifies key events such as the role of government leadership and key efforts such as moves to declare Melaka City as an Historical City.

The need for cities to expand in terms of economic and physical growth, and a competitive edge between cities has forced Melaka State to create its own economic identity by strengthening the specific image of Melaka City for tourism. This is also identified as a significant reason that has led to the pri- oritization of tourism. The opportunities derived from existing assets such as historical and cultural heritage and the emergence of tourism in the late 1980's have attracted interest at a national level. In parallel with the new phenomenon of urban conservation and heritage

tourism in the early 19901s, concepts in this regard began to be accepted and implemented. Meanwhile, the endorsement of Acts between 1976 and 1988 relating to urban conservation in Malaysia, indirectly supported the initiative to preserve historic and cultural heritage. According to Ahmad (1998) and Hassan et al. (2002), the potential for tourism increasingly received attention as one of the resources that could generate economic benefits for the city. In addition, Henderson (2002) indicate that colonial heritage is an accepted fea- ture in the former Straits Settlements (e.g. Melaka, Penang and Singapore)

222 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hairul lsmail - Tom Baurn

lntenslty of tourlsrn A development

The change of several leadersh~p (19951999) and emnomy crisis (1997) slowing down , - - the momentum for tourism development I New leadership placing

twrism as a prbrily in I tourism development Heritage tourism as a w r e tourtsm product came along as part of conservation efforl ' - - - I t

Mdaka Ci was declared as Historical City on 15"April 1989 to boost its image as 4- - - - -,

New leadership placing tourism as one of the important sector after manufacturing ' industry

Year I I I I I

1957 1960 I I 1 b

1970 1980 1990 2&

I 4- Tourism is part of educational trip related to Melaka developed as tourist Tourism

the history of Melaka State destinaticm both development with and Melaka City for Malaysian domestic and international varms themes

- Figure. General description of findings

with efforts directed at its conservation, driven by various motives including an awareness of potential economic returns from tourism. This effort was supported by the initiative to diversify tourism products in Malaysia and the wider search for identity or image, and therefore, to create favourable tourism destinations in Southeast Asia (MOCAT 1991).

The significance of heritage and cultural assets to the economy of cities such as Melaka and Penang, have been promoted as primary or fundamental attractions for urban tourism (Ahmad 1998; Hamzah 2002). In many ways, the development of urban tourism in cities such as Melaka is similar to the phenomenon that exists in many European countries where historic buildings have been restored and converted into tourism products such as museums, art galleries, restaurants and tourist centres (Ahmad 1998). Similarly, Ahmad and Badarulzaman (2003) addresses that, in the interest of promoting sustainable heritage tourism, the adaptive re-use of old buildings in five Malaysian heritage cities (including Melaka) for heritage hotels has enhance the building functions, architectural significance and property values.

Nevertheless, several issues are raised in relation to the over-focus on particular assets such as the historic core compared to other urban tourism resources and necessary support elements (Hamzah 2002). This includes the claims that the authentic natural and historic landscapes of Melaka State and Melaka City have been rapidly forsaken because of the large scale of tourism development

Volume 17 Number 2 Winter 2006 223

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


elsewhere in Malaysia (Cartier 1998). In addition, Cartier (2001) also addresses issues that face tourism planners, heritage professionals and government officials in presenting a city such as Melaka for tourism consumption in an appropriate way.

As a result, this has provided a significant advantage for the Melaka City to focus on tourism for the economic benefits to the whole State. The leadership of the public sector or government has significant power to bring tourism development into reality with strong control over the private sector and various non-government agencies. They can also use a wide range of measures within the resource-base of the city to encourage tourism activities once tourism is seen as a significant driving force that is able to fulfill the ambitions and needs for the economic expansion of the city.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The findings of this study guide us to certain conclusions that have implications in understanding the concept of urban tourism in the cities of developing countries. The understanding can be seen in three aspects of discussion, which are Melaka City as tourism destination, Melaka City compared to other cities and the city's tourist product development.

Melaka City as Tourism Destination

Compared to other urban functions in Melaka City, historical heritage is an entity that requires protection for tourism. The findings of the study reveal that heritage has been able to make Melaka City grow in recent years to become one of the most important tourism destinations in Malaysia. Melaka City is well known as the oldest city in Malaysia, which is seen as a 'natural museum' and is confined to one area that is easy to reach, especially in the inner city area. This advantage also has been used as a backdrop for all events and economic activities. The appreciation of heritage tourism was not only a response to its physical assets but included aspects of intangible cultural heritage tourism. Melaka City, apart of its monuments or buildings, has a rich blend of cultural mix that has become another source of attraction and image for Melaka State tourism. This attribute has made the city easy to promote. Therefore, for the state government, it is a matter of how to exploit the situation and promote further these advantages. In this context, Melaka City was able to establish and distance itself from other cities in Malaysia.

The position of Melaka City, which is located between Kuala Lumpur and Sin- gapore (approximately 2 hours), also provides advantages in terms of visitation. The existing image increases interest to include Melaka City as part of an itinerary by those who visit Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. However, this finding has also pointed to arguments that this proximity has made Melaka City just a stopover point, or a staging point destination for tourism. Melaka City in this context is only part of one compact itinerary, which is organized by tour operators based in cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Singapore.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


As a tourism destination, Melaka City tends to be synonymous with Melaka State. This is partly because, in the 1980's, tourism emerged from the city, based on the image of conservation and cultural. The interpretation of historical facts in national education also indirectly influenced the early growth of Melaka City as a tourism destination. The focus at this stage was in the inn& city where many historical monuments and buildings were located. Conse- quently, the importance of tourism has stimulated the urbanization process in Melaka State. The need to secure Melaka City's heritage as core tourism activities has forced other forms of development to take place outside Melaka City. This concern has moved several functions such as administration and modem tourism development to the Ayer Keroh area. This has caused a further process of urbanization in Ayer Keroh away from Melaka City. These areas are now the most developed areas in Melaka State, and are under the administration of Melaka Historical City Council. In this case, one of the motivations that led to the process of urbanization was derived from the intention to expand tourism activities. This included aspects other than heritage, which gave opportunities for areas such as Ayer Keroh to be developed with modem tourism products such as theme parks, especially focused on the domestic tourists.

In this context, the findings reveal that tourism has been used not only for economic growth, but also to support the expansion of the city in term of its physical environments. For cities in developing countries such as Melaka City, the purpose of tourism development is about expanding physical and economic growth from what can be referred as a 'small' to a 'large' city, allow- ing the process of tourism urbanization to develop from low amenity areas to high amenity areas. This tourism urbanization process is similar to other areas in ~ a l a ~ s i a . However, there is an argument that the process of urbanization in Melaka City has rather less to do with tourism. This is because the inner city is no longer conducive as a working environment for activities such as administration since government departments or agencies have expanded and therefore require more space outside the city. The problem of traffic management is also part of the reason. The findings indicate that the process of urbanization in the Ayer Keroh area may have less to do with efforts to secure the inner city for tourism, but rather to take advantage of the road interchange on the North-South Highway and the route into Melaka City (refer to Figure 1).

Nevertheless, tourism has contributed to placing a different emphasis on the functions of different areas. Melaka City or the inner city no longer serves as the capital city in terms of administration since most areas have changed to focus on tourism functions, especially with an historical image. At the same time, the Ayer Keroh area, or the new urbanization area along the route into Melaka City is now another city in Melaka State, with administration functions and a modern tourism product. Thus, the findings reveal that tourism development in these urban areas is more intense, and the position of tourism as an important urban function is more prominent, compared to rural areas of Melaka State.

Volume 17 . Number 2 Winter 2006 225

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Cwntries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) City, Malaysia

Melaka City Compared to Other Cities

There are limitations to the ways by which Melaka City can portray its image as a tourism destination compared to other cities. Melaka City has to compete with Kuala Lumpur and Penang. which are already established for international urban tourism in Malaysia. The only advantage for Melaka City is its stronger heritage image, while the range of infrastructure and facilities that can contribute to tourism activities are fewer. For example, Melaka City does not have advantages such as an intemational airport on a scale that can be compared to Kuala Lumpur, Penang and Singapore, which provide better opportunities for visitor or tourist activity. As a result, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore act as gateways to Melaka City for intemational tourists. While this might be seen as a disadvantage to Melaka City, MOCAT (1991) highlight that this relationship is essential in offering a complete product for the Kuala Lumpur-Melaka Corridor to provide the complete diversity of city, town, country and resort tourism in Malaysia. This is important in promoting tourism on a national scale. Furthermore, the relationship between Kuala Lumpur, Melaka and Singapore provides evidence that cities in Southeast Asia are important as an intra-regional market for tourism, and therefore acts as one of the important features to define urban tourism in developing countries. This condition can be interpreted as cities complementing each other in providing a complete package as a multi-tourism destination, and they therefore act as a tourism business partners rather than competitors within Southeast Asia.

Another limitation for Melaka City is in terms of population. In Kuala Lumpur, high population provides demand for facilities such as shopping, nightlife entertainment and restaurants and MICE activities at an international standard. This make these facilities easy to be sustain even without patronage by visitors or tourists. It is also a dilemma for Melaka State to develop and establish an international airport without having a large population, if the reason is only to cater for international tourists. For this reason, it is not easy for Melaka City to introduce the same image as portrayed by Kuala Lumpur. However, there is a view that this condition is not significant considering the stage of development in Melaka City, which is still expanding its economic development particularly through tourism. Therefore, the efforts of Melaka City are part of attempts to improve over time and it is not necessary to see its current state in terms of competing with other cities. The need to expand includes the city's role as a hub for regional tourism in the southern part of Malaysia, as well as developing and promoting tourism as an alternative destination at national level.

The findings also reveal that there is a different dependency in Mefaka City on its tourism economy compared to other cities in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur, in many ways, did not develop and depend only on tourism, while the level of Melaka City or Melaka State dependency on tourism is high, with clear ambitions to make Melaka City a major tourism destination. In addition, Kuala Lumpur and Penang initially did not give emphasis to promoting the city with characteristics of their tourist image, but, coincidently, gained advantage

226 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hairul lsmail -Tom Baum

from intense infrastructure development after independence in 1957. Intense infrastructure development after independence has provided Kuala Lumpur and Penang with a dominant role and a 'pre-touristic structure' for the tourism industry in the early phase of international mass tourism (Oppermafi 1993; Oppermann and Chon 1997). This established them with a 'gateway effect', or point of distribution (or connectivity) to other areas of the country, and a better scale of infrastructure due to their importance at national level.

In this context, it is the matter of the scale of certain activities such as MICE, shopping and entertainment that makes Melaka City different compared to cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. However, the uniqueness of Melaka City in historical or heritage terms and image is incomparable. The findings also reveal claims that cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Singapore are less vibrant when compared to Melaka City in term of living cultural aspects. Even cities that seem similar, such as Georgetown in Penang, are different because of the existing urban communities such as the Portuguese and Chetty that live in the heart of Melaka City. By contrast, there are limitations with regard to the image of historical monuments and buildings that can be portrayed when compared to other world-class tourism destinations in Southeast Asia such as Borobudur in Indonesia and Angkor Wat in Cambodia. Nevertheless, this is differentiated by the fact that most of the physical heritage components in Melaka are located in the city. The existence of intangible cultural resources such, instead of dependence on tangible aspects such as buildings, have made Melaka City interesting as an example of an urban tourism destination in the developing world.

This study demonstrates how communities living in urban villages such as the Portuguese community; Malay Kampungs such as Morten and Chetty; the Peranakan Baba Nyonya village; or the Chinese communities make Melaka City very different from cities in developed countries. In this case, Melaka City does not does not offer the attributes of a large capital city with modem infrastructure or massive commercial facilities but offers things that are rich in meaning such as a way of life, food, clothes and other things related to cultural heritage. This gives a good example of a model of a vibrant city that is made up of people rather than structures or buildings. This has given Melaka City a principal consideration in the decision to commit to urban tourism development based on cultural heritage resources. On the other hand, other cities such as Kuala Lumpur and Singapore have advantages in terms of services and infrastructure that are an opportunity to stimulate primary tourism elements or image by using modem aspects such as business, shopping, entertainment and MICE tourism.

Tourist Product Development

As tourism development in Melaka City was still at an early stage, the introduction of diverse various tourism themes was used as part of the further development of the destination. The motive was to attract tourists from wider markets by using sectors such as shopping, health and education. Accord-

Volume 17 . Number 2 . Winter 2006 . 227

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) City. Malaysia

ing to Mill and Morrison (1985), this can be referred to as a demand-oriented strategy, or strategy with the intention to enlarge demand. The aim in Melaka City has been to increase spending through services such as accommodation and food. In addition, efforts to introduce various themes by using other sectors have been part of an attempt to reduce dependency on heritage products in Melaka City, while at the same time supporting heritage tourism. The nature of the city as a centre for various activities has made Melaka City easy to develop with the concept of a multi-motivation tourism destination, whether incidental or intentional. For example, by introducing health and education, the state government is seeking to attract not only individuals that require these services, but also their relatives. Further demand for services or activities is required, which includes the potential that visitor may be interested in partaking in activities related to heritage tourism during such visitations.

For health and education, future potential as tourism themes and a main motive of visitation is promising. Melaka City, in the context of Malaysia and the Southeast Asian region, can provide lower and cheaper services compared to Kuala Lumpur and Singapore for visitors, especially those from Indonesia. In this case, health and education has began to place itself with heritage as the three basic products for tourism in Melaka City. The efforts are also seen as a means to improve the services sector through tourism, as part of the aim to meet developed state status by generating 60% of the Melaka State economy through services. These future tourism products are of advantage to the expansion of areas such as Melaka City since smaller cities are able to promote tourism related activities at relatively little cost compared to larger cities.

In relation to this, there is issue relating to the use of tourism definitions in refer- ring to these other sectors. Such development is more likely to take advantage from the image of Melaka City as a tourism destination and may not really be within the definition of a tourism theme. At the same time, every visitor from outside Melaka State can be defined as a tourist. In this case, the findings disclose the pressure to have another sector by using tourism as means and an interpretation of what such visitors are. As a result, there are concerns about how much these various themes really contribute to the further growth of tourism. The question may be raised as to how these themes can be sustained in the future. The condition is even more critical when several heritage tourism products have difficulty in generating sufficient income, such as the museums, while quality is an issue with regard to souvenirs that are not really representative of Melaka City.

The findings also reveal bigger issues such as authenticity and tourist experience of the tourism product. For example, the interpretation of some historical buildings, is criticized as being too weak, while some tourism events do not meet the objective of introducing Melaka City as an historical destination. Arguably, the shortage of ideas in improving existing heritage resources is one of the reasons why the state government has turned to other themes. It is not surprising if, in some cases, tourism products or attractions only appeal to local markets because of the standard of the product. These issues have


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


been identified since early stages of tourism development in Melaka City, and the findings disclose that they still exist today. The issues relate to the planning and management of urban tourism and are caused by two conditions. The first is the over focus on assets of an historical nature compared to necessary supporting elements. The second is in relation to the early response to re-create or invent history at a national level, with over promotion and over theming of certain locations of Melaka City. This has resulted in the sameness of almost every city in Malaysia with less individuality in terms of historical aspects such as cafes and ethnic souvenir shops.

Nonetheless, there is an increasing number of tourist arrivals from year to year, which has been seen as a positive signal for Melaka State and Melaka City tourism. Based on the findings, several key segments of tourists can be identified. A majority of local tourists are school children and their parents or teachers that are interested in historical aspects of Melaka City. The number of domestic tourists is higher than foreign tourists. For foreign tourists, a majority of them visit Melaka City as an historical part of Malaysia, which is con- nected to their history, or to world history. One important tourist segments is that VFR visitors especially with regard to tourists from Singapore, or Malay- sia's major cities such as Kuala Lumpur. This is because many Melakans in the 1950's and 1960's moved to other states or countries for better job opportunities. This is also part of the reason why Melaka City receives trips from tour operators based in Singapore and Kuala Lumpur as they have business rela- tions with communities living in Melaka City. It has been acknowledged (e.g. Blank 1994; Law 1996) that one of the major factors that characterize cities as tourism destinations is a high population, which makes the city an attractive destination to visit friends and relatives. While this is true in Melaka City, the findings interestingly reveal that these relationship have given opportunity for them to have tourism related business to establish networks for tourism businesses between cities in the context of the Malaysia-Singapore region.

As most tour operators for foreign tourists are based in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, this influences the choice of products that will sell in Melaka, with exception of the independent tourists such as backpackers. It is for these tour operators to chose which product they want to give most emphasis, whether in Kuala Lumpur, Singapore or Melaka City. In relation to this, there is concern about tourist spending in terms of time and money since the agents control the itinerary of visits. The situation also gives the hotel and restaurant sectors difficulties in seeking higher returns income.

In terms of duration of stay, European visitors seem to stay longer in Mela- ka. This is due to their appreciation of aspects such as heritage and the level of spending by them is higher compared to Asian tourists such as those from China. The findings reveal that the market from Europe is the preferred visitor for Melaka City. This is because of their appreciation of the heritage value not only in terms of monuments or historical buildings, but also the unique cultural aspects of urban communities. Moreover, the 'nostalgia' factor for


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Melaka (Malacca) Ci, Malaysia

Europeans and their history outside Europe has made urban tourism in Mela- ka City more appropriate in terms of image and quality of visit.

Another issue relates to seasonality for domestic tourist arrivals that de- pends on weekends and school or public holidays. The need for the state government to create more events is raised in the findings, in order to allow for more continuous arrival of domestic tourists since many of the attractions in Melaka City are most likely to be visited just once. This is to cater for the problem of seasonality and to encourage repeat visitation. In this case, the advantage of events to justify development of urban tourism is also seen to be appropriate in Melaka City among those responsible in tourism and urban development. With the historical background and position of Melaka City as a centre of activities, it is seem to be easier for Melaka City and the government to coordinate events or MICE tourism throughout the year.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Three themes emerged that address the characteristic of cities in developing countries that contribute to the concept of urban tourism. It is clear that the advantages of heritage tourism as an entity for Melaka City have made the city easy to promote. Melaka City also has a role in representing the image of the State. Both of these factors in many ways have influenced and led the urbanization process caused by tourism activities.

This paper has also identified several features of Melaka City compared to other cities. The discussion reveals that there are limitations in terms of image, infrastructure and urban scale for Melaka City in comparison with other cities in promoting tourism (e.g. Kuala Lumpur and Singapore). However, this has been differentiated by the dependency of Melaka City on the tourism economy. The evidence provided highlights further the importance of intangible resources, such as culture, that make urban tourism in cities of developing countries important. In addition, the expectation that cities have with respect to urban tourism development can be seen through the introduction of various new tourism themes. Nevertheless, the findings reveal that the need for further urban development by expanding tourism activities has raised several issues in relation to the definition and future of such tourism themes. This is despite an increasing number of tourists from year to year and the ability of Melaka City to attract certain segments of the market. The condition was also influenced by choices with regard to products and tourist spending, and domestic tourism issues related to seasonality and tourist arrivals.

To recapitulate, this paper reveals that the image and concept of urban tourism basically relate to three categories of destination. These are as historical city, as the capital city of Melaka State, and as a place of unique physical and cultural blend in the inner city, which collectively lead and influence Melaka City as tourism destination. These images also apply as a model to compare Melaka City with other cities in developing countries, and as an example of urban tourism in developing countries. The existing 'brand' image is also be-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14


ing used to expand other forms of tourism themes, with several issues in relation to the interpretation of tourism. The discussion in this paper gives an in- sight and understanding of elements that build up the urban tourism concept in Melaka City as an example of developing countries.

REFERENCES Ahmad, A.G. (1998). Urban Tourism in Malaysia: Heritages Cities of Georgetown, Malacca and

Kota Bahru. Paper presented at the 2nd International Seminar on European Architecture and Tavn Planning Outside Europe (Dutch Period), Melaka, Malaysia, 2-5 November 1998.

Ahmad, G. and Badarulzaman, N. (2003). Adaptive Re-use for Sustainable Heritage Tourism in Malaysia, Tourism, 51(2):205-214.

Ashworth, G.J. (1989). Urban Tourism: An Imbalance in Intention. In Cooper, C.P. (ed.), Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management (pp. 33-54). London: Belhaven Press.

Ashworth, G.J. (1992). Is There Urban Tourism?, Tourism Recreation Research, 17(2): 3-8. Begin, S. (2000). The Geography of A Tourist Business: Hotel Distribution and Urban Develop

ment Xianmen, China, Tourism Geographies, 2(4): 448-471. Bhattacharya, B. (1992). Urban Tourism in the Himalaya in the Context of Da rjeeling and Sikkim,

Tourism Recreation Research, 17(2): 79-83. Blank, U.E.L. (1994). Research on Urban Tourism Destinations. In Ritchie, J.R. and Gwldner, C.R.

(eds.), Travel, Tourism, and Hospitality Research (2nd ed.) (pp. 181-193). NY: John Wiley. Blank, U.E.L. (1996). Tourism in United States Cities. In Law, C.M. (ed.), Tourism in Major Cities

(pp. 207-232). London: International Thomson Business Press. Bryman, A. (2001). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burtenshaw, D., Bateman, M. and Ashworth, G.J. (1991). The European City: A Western Perspective.

London: David Fulton Publishers. Cartier, C. L. (1998). Mega-development in Malaysia: From Heritage Landscapes to 'leisures-

capes' in Melaka's Tourism Sector. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 19(2): 151-176. Cartier, C. L. (2001). Image Melaka's Global Heritage'. In Teo, P., Chang T.C. and Ho K.C. (eds.),

Interconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia (pp. 193-212). UK: Elsevier Science. Fainstein, S.S. and Judd, D.R. (1999). Cities as Places to Play. In Judd, D.R. and Fainstein, S.S.

(eds.), The Tourist City (pp. 261-272). New Haven: Yale University Press. Go, F.M. (1997). Asian and Australasia Dimensions of Global Tourism Development. In Go, F.M.

and Jenkins, C.L. (eds.), Tourism and Economic Development in Asia and Australasia (pp. 3-34). London: Cassell.

Gunn, C.A. (2002). Tourism Planning: Basic, Concepts, Cases (4th ed.). NY: Routledge. Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (2000). Introduction: Tourism in South and Southeast Asia - Region and

Context. In Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (eds.) Tourism in South and Southeast Asia: Issues and Cases (pp. 3-28). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (2002). The Geography of Tourism and Recreation: Environment, Place and Space (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Hamzah, A. (2002). The Concept of Urban Tourism. Paper presented at the Seminar of The Roles of Government Agencies on Urban Tourism, Kota Kinabalu City Hall, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia, 29-30 January 2002.

Hassan, A.S., Badarulzaman, N., Ahmad, A.G., Mohamed, B. (2002). Adaptive Re-use of Old Buildings for Heritage Hotels: Prospects and Challenges in the Malaysian Tourism Indus- try. In Wober H.W. (ed.) City Tourism 2002: Proceedings of European Cities Tourism's Interna- tional Conference in Vienna, Austria (pp. 112-122). Austria: Springer Wien.

Henderson, J.C. (2002). Built Heritage and Colonial Cities, Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1): 2.54- 257.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Urban Tourism in Developing Countries: in the Case of Mehka (Malacca) City. Malaysia

Hinch, T.D. (1996). Urban Tourism: Perspective on Sustainability, ]ournal of Sustainable Tourism, 4(2): 95-110.

Hich, T.D. (1998). Sustainable Urban Tourist Attractions: the Case of Fort Edmonton Park. In Hall, C.M. and Lew, A.A. (eds.), Sustainable Tourism: A Geographical Perspective (pp. 1 8 5 198). UK: Longman.

Ismail, H. and Baum, T. (2004). A Place for Tourism Cities of Malaysia: A case of Melaka (Ma- lacca) City, Proceedings of Tourism State ofthe Art ll, Glasgow, 27-30 June 2004.

Jansen-Verbeke, M. (1986). Innertity Tourism: Resources, Tourists and Promoters, Annals of Tour- ism Research, 13: 79-100.

Judd, D.R. (1995). Promoting Tourism in US Cities, Tourism Management, 16(3): 175-187.

Judd, D.R. and Fainstein, S.S. (4s . ) (1999). The Tourist City. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jutla, R.S. (2000). Visual Image of the City: Tourists' versus Residents' Perception of Simla, A Hill Station in Northern India, Tourism Geographies, 2(4): 404-420.

Khalifah, Z. and Tahir, S. (1997). Malaysia: Tourism in Perspective. In Go, F.M. and Jenkins, C.L. (eds.) Tourism and Economic Development in Asia and Australasia ( p p 176-196). London: Cassell.

Kotler, P., Hamlin, M.A., Rein, I., and Haider, D.H. (2002). Marketing Asian Places: Attracting In- vestment, Industry, and Tourism to Cities, States and Nation. Singapore: John Wiley.

Law, C.M. (1991). Tourism as A Focus for Urban Regeneration. In Hardy, S., Hart, T. Shaw, T. (eds.), The Rote ofTourism in the Urban and Regional Economy (pp. 11-18). London: Regional Studies Association.

Law, C.M. (1993). Urban Tourism: Attracting Visitors to Large Cities. London: Mansell Publishing.

Law, C.M. (2002). Urban Tourism: The Visitor Economy and the Growth of Large City (2nd ed.). Lon- don: Continuum.

Law, C.M. (ed.) (1996). Tourism in Major Cities. London: International Thomson Business Press.

Low, L. and Hen& T.M. (1997). Singapore: Development of Gateway Tourism. In Go, F.M. and Jenkins, C.L. (eds.) Tourism and Economic Development in Asia and Australasia (pp. 237-254). London: Cassell.

Mazanez, J.A. (ed.) (1997). International City Tourism: Analysis and Strategy. London: Pinter.

Mill, R.C. and Morrison, A.M. (1985). The Tourism System: An Introductory Text. NJ: Prentice Hall.

MOCAT (Ministry of Culture, Arts and Tourism Malaysia) (1991). Malaysia National Tourism Policy Study: Tourism Product Sectoral Report. MOCAT: Kuala Lumpur.

Mullins, P. (1999). International Tourism and the Cities of Southeast Asia. In Judd, D.R. and Fainstein, S.S. (eds.), The Tourist City ( p p 245-260). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Murphy, P. (ed.) (1997). Quality Management in Urban Tourism. Chichester: John Wiley.

Musa, G. (2000). Tourism in Malaysia. In Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (eds.) Tourism in South and South- east Asia: Issues and Cases (pp. 144-156). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Oppermann, M. (1993). Tourism Space in Developing Countries, Annals of Tourism Research, 20: 535-556.

Oppermam, M. and Chon, K-S. (1997). Tourism in Developing Countries. London: International Thomson Business Press.

Oppermam, M., Din, K. and Amri, S. (1996). Urban Hotel Location and Evolution in Developing Country: the Case of Kuala Lumpur Malaysia, Touristn Recreation Research, 21(1): 55-63.

Page, S. (1995). Urban Tourism. London: Routledge.

Page, S. (2000). Transport and Infrastructure Issues in Southeast and South Asian tourism. In Hall, C.M. and Page, S. (eds.) Tourism in South and Southeast Asia: Issues and Cases (pp. 58- 76). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Page, S. (2001). Gateways, Hubs and Transport Intercomections in Southeast Asia: Implications for Tourism Development in the Twenty-first Century. In Teo, P., Chang T.C. and Ho K.C. (eds.) Interconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia (pp. 84-99). UK: Elsevier Science.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hairul lsrnail -Tom Baum

Page, S. and Hall, C.M. (2003). Managing Urban Tourism. London: Pearson Education. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research 6 Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage. Pearce, D.G. (2001a). An Integrative Framework for Urban Tourism Research, Annals of Tourism

Research, 28(4): 926-946. Pearce, D.G. (2001b). Toward a Regional Analysis of Tourism in Southeast Asia. In Teo, P., Chang

T.C. and Ho K.C. (eds.) lnterconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia, (pp. 27-43). UK. Elsevier Science.

Rogerson, C.M. (2002). Urban Tourism in the Developing World: the Case of Johannesburg, De- velopment Southern Africa, 19(1): 171-190.

Sharpley, R. and Roberts, L. (2005). Managing Urban Tourism. In Lesley, P. and Sharpley, R. (eds.), The Management of Tourism (pp. 161-174). London: Sage.

Shaw G. and Williams, A.M. (2002). Critical lssues in Tourism: A Geographic Perspective (2nd ed.). UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Sinclair, M.T. and Vokes, R.W.A. (1993). The Economics of Tourism in Asia and the Pacific. In Hitchcock, M., King, T. and Parnwell M.J.G. (eds.) Tourism in South-east Asia (pp. 200-213). London: Routledge.

Sigh, S. (1992). Urban Development and Tourism; Case of Lucknow, India, Tourism Recreation Research, 17(2): 71-78.

Teo, P. and Yeoh, B. (2001). Negotiating Global Tourism: Localism as Difference in Southeast Asian Theme Parks. In Teo, P., Chang T.C. and Ho K.C. (eds.) Interconnected Worlds: Tourism in Southeast Asia (pp. 137-154). U K : Elsevier Science.

Tyler, D., Guemer, Y. and Robertson, M. (eds.) (1998). Managing Tourism in Cities: Policy, Process and Practice. Chichester: John Wiley.

van den Berg, L., van der Borg, J. and van der Meer, J. (1995). Urban Tourism: Performance and Strat- egies in Eight European Cities. Aldershot: Avebury.

Weaver, D.B. (1993). Model of Urban Tourism for Small Caribbean Islands, Geographical Review, 83(2): 134-140.

Submitted : 03 April 2006 Resubmitted : 17 /uly 2006 Resubmitted : 31 Iuly 2006

Accepted : 04 August 2006 Refereed anonymously

Volume 17 . Number 2 Winter 2006 . 233

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 0

0:01

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

urban tourism in developing countries: in the case of melaka (malacca) city, malaysia

Documents