Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (2)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (2)
Schlagworte
- Bildungstourismus (1)
- Coopetition (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Kulturelle Entwicklung (1)
- Kulturmanagement (1)
- Kulturpolitik (1)
Institut
- Kulturarbeit (2)
Kulturentwicklungsplanung
(2013)
Current social challenges and declining public funds are bringing culture practitioners and local communities closer together. The culturally interesting synergy effects of co-operative efforts are increasingly encouraging those working in the culture sector to pull together. The result is an alternating process of competition and co-operation reflected in the term ‘co-opetition’ (Voesgen 2009). Brandenburger and Nalebuff (2009) even view ‘co-operative competition’ as the most important success strategy for companies. Not only are co-operative relations among cultural organisations and cultural projects growing, but there is also more collaboration between culture and industry, culture and social organisations, and teamwork in many other configurations. One field that would be unthinkable without co-operation is cultural tourism (for more detailed analysis see Pröbstle 2011a, 2011b, 2011c). According to the German Tourist Association (DTV) ‘culture is the most important attraction factor’ for city tourists (DTV 2006: 13). It is therefore not surprising that the public sector, local tourist organisations and commercial tourist service providers in Germany (such as cultural tourism specialist Studiosus), have recently been relying on the pulling power of cultural tourism. Cultural organisations are also targeting ‘cultural tourists’. Cultural tourism can strengthen cultural enterprises both by increasing the number of visitors, and by profiling culture as an image and locality factor (Hausmann 2002: 50; Klein 2007: 284). The marriage of culture and tourism is seldom smooth, however. Critics argue that private tourist companies and cultural organisations are unable to speak the same language (cf. McKercher and Du Cros 2002: 14; Schwark 1996: 121; Wolber 1999: 140). However, Buri (2009a, 2009b) argues that there is some convergence between these apparently contrasting organisations. Regardless of one’s position, it is clear that no form of tourism can exist without co-operation. The need for teamwork in (cultural) tourism is rooted in the nature of tourism products. The tourist does not judge the quality of the individual services consumed, but rather the overall experience. The creation of experiences requires a co-ordinating mechanism (among others Freyer 2007: 96ff.; Steingrube 2003: 441; Stolpmann 2007: 24). However, there are many obstacles to co-operation, including rigid organisation structures and cultures, competing interest groups, and political issues (Steingrube 2003: 451f.). It is clear that culture and tourism providers often have different aims, attitudes and procedures, although this is not a problem specific to cultural tourism. The tourist system generally constitutes a pot pourri of unequal partners, who have no alternative but to work together owing to the particular quality of tourism as a product.