• Save
PhD Proposal Presentation:  Shape up or ship out: the power and politics of cruise itinerary development
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

PhD Proposal Presentation: Shape up or ship out: the power and politics of cruise itinerary development



Cruise ships wander the world’s oceans and waterways, providing memorable holiday experiences for their passengers whilst the cruise lines themselves can be characterised as the poster child for ...

Cruise ships wander the world’s oceans and waterways, providing memorable holiday experiences for their passengers whilst the cruise lines themselves can be characterised as the poster child for globalisation. Much has been written about the cruise industry, but very little outlining the itinerary design process from the perspective of the cruise line. The candidate seeks to examine this process, focusing on the role of power. That power will be analysed in the context of the political economy of the destinations visited by cruise ships: (a) how that power is applied in destinations which vary as to their distance from the centre of power and their stage of destination development; and (b) the factors which impact the exercise of that power. A Global Value Chain approach will be used to operationalise this theoretical discussion to demonstrate how a regional itinerary chain is constructed. In this case, the region is Oceania. The research is novel not only because it seeks to analyse the role of power in itinerary design, but also because the candidate will be interviewing the corporate decision-makers themselves, something that has not been studied within the cruise industry.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

PhD Proposal Presentation:  Shape up or ship out: the power and politics of cruise itinerary development PhD Proposal Presentation: Shape up or ship out: the power and politics of cruise itinerary development Presentation Transcript

  • Shape up or ship out: the power and politics ofcruise itinerary development Wendy R London 13 September 2012 Supervisors: Dr Adam Weaver Dr Karen Smith
  • What this presentation is aboutSetting the scene  Experience and an addiction to cruise  The commercial nature of the cruise industry  A very brief history of cruisingThe research  Current focus in cruise tourism research  Proposed researchLiterature, theory and  Powerframework  Political economy  Decision theory  Global, operational and organisational factors  Global Value Chain analysis  The regional itinerary chain  Conceptual framework  Research structureResearch methods  The research paradigm  Case study: Oceania  Selection of cruise lines  Selection of informants - interviewing elites  Data collection and data analysisTimeline
  • Wendy‟s experience and an addictionto cruise – “total cruise immersion” Experience  Entrepreneur – CruiseBubble.com (soon to launch) A web platform and associated value-added services to promote and sell authentic NZ goods and experiences to visiting cruise passengers  Consultant – Cruise Strategy Ltd (www.cruisestrategy.com) Consultant to wannabe ports and destinations; governments and economic development agencies  Occasional free-lance writer and blogger Addiction to cruise  21 cruises, >500 days at sea  Sailed every major sea (except the Baltic, and that‟s next year‟s adventure)
  • The commercial nature of the cruiseindustry Poster child for globalisation Large transnational enterprises which exercise power to control their markets (Bianchi 2011) Substantially unregulated Impressive statistics (CLIA 2012) Consistent annual growth  7.5% (1980-2011) Total passengers  225 million (1980-2011) 2011 Summary  16,365,000 pax  69% from US/Canada  31% from ROW  103% occupancy  Avg cruise length: 7+ days
  • A very brief history of cruising c 50 BC 1840 1853 Early 1900s 1912 June 1958Cleopatra takes First trans-Atlantic Cornelius Ocean liners begin White Star Line Beginning of a leisurely cruise when Vanderbilt to appear to launches three commercial trans-cruise down the Cunard‟s mail charters a provide luxury ultra-luxurious Atlantic air travelNile in her barge ships began paddlewheel travel between the ships to challenge virtually ends taking paying steamer, hosting US and Europe Cunard market for North passengers 25 guests on a Atlantic liner travel luxury cruise on the Baltic 1970s 1980 1999 2010 2011 The age of Norwegian Cruise First ice skating Royal Caribbean‟s 50 years of leisure cruising Line‟s Norway rink at sea Allure of the Seas cruising in Newtakes off, initially became the first (Voyager of the becomes the Zealand to the mega-ship Seas) largest cruise ship Caribbean, (formerly the SS afloat abetted by the France) (5400 passengers) TV series, The Love Boat
  • Current focus in cruise tourismresearch Current research focuses on topics such as: Passenger expenditure and Douglas & Douglas 2004 economic impacts Dwyer & Forsyth 1993; 1998 Environmental impacts Klein 2005a Positioning and types of ports McCalla 1997 Marti 1990 Port selection by luxury cruise Barron & Bartoleme Greenwood 2006 lines The nature of ships Weaver 2005a; 2005b
  • The research: proposed – andcontributionHow do cruise lines decide where to go? Focus on Political Contribution: power economy Global value chain approach Factors Destinations Destinations which far from the in various Assembling impact the centre of stages of different travel exercise of power development destinations power which are interchangeable both at the Contribution design and execution stagesInterviewingelite decision-makers in thecruise industry
  • Power: the ability to choose Visit Consider Call into a port Assess as a potential port Avoid Skip entirelySubstitute AbandonReplace one port Not return to aat the expense of port previouslyanother visited Re-visit Subsequently call into a port after avoiding or abandoning it
  • Theories of power General theories of power  Foucault doesn‟t work – too social  Lukes (1974) – a good fit  Two dimensional view, requiring choice  Introduces the question of control Tourism-specific descriptions of power  For the most part, cast in terms of tourism consumption; participatory development; hosts and agencies; etc  A commercial view is beginning to evolve, applying a Global Value Chain approach to tourism (eg Mosedale 2006; Clancy 2008; Tejada et al 2010; Lapeyre 2011, etc)  Relevant in, eg, commercial negotiations  Focus here: determine whether the success (or failure) of a cruise line‟s negotiations within destinations are determinative of the cruise line‟s choice of destinations
  • Political economy Thank you, Adam Smith (1776) “The social production of existence” (Peet & Thrift 1989) No single theory or belief Plenty of commentary on the application of political economy to tourism, but not much on the application of tourism to political economy (Clancy 2011; Britton 1991) Applicable to the cruise industry? Very!  Exemplifies globalisation, deterritorialisation and neo-liberalism  Mobile capital, people and information (Hazbun 2004)  Fits neatly into Britton‟s (1982) three-tiered hierarchy of international tourism Level Description Top Global tourism company; headquarters in major, industrialised centre Middle Operating from within the destination, with branch offices and associated commercial interests of the global tourism company operating in conjunction with their local tourism counterparts Bottom Small scale tourism enterprises which are marginal to but dependent upon the tourism companies in the middle tier
  • Decision theoryWhat makes the cruise lines‟ (almost) absolute power (almost)absolute? Going back to Lukes (1974), there is choice and therefore uncertainty Decision theory facilitates the analysis of choice in the face of uncertainty (Simon 1959) Underpinning the itinerary decision-making process are three categories of factors; decision-theory will determine the weight and importance of each
  • Decisions, decisions - impacting factors Category Context Purpose Examples Global Relevant to all Analyse the Political Taxes and levies (PESTEL) organisations environment Economic Economic conditions external to the Social Passenger behaviour Beyond the organisation Technological Port infrastructure cruise lines‟ Environmental Climate control Legal Regulations Organisa- Totally within Provide a Corporate Financial, ethical, legal tional the control view of the Organisational Bureaucratic, hierarchical of the culture of the Decision-makers Seniority, expertise organisation organisation Customer culture Loyalty, importance of customer feedback Operational Relates to the Determinative Factors within Budget, crew selection, cruise lines‟ of the the cruise line’s fleet management control operations commercial success or Factors which Tourism policy, maritime failure of an may need to be law, competitive climate itinerary negotiatedSources: Adapted from the candidate’s own knowledge; Yeoman & Ingold 2000; Cabezas 2008; Kaulbars 2007;Klein 2005a; 2005b; 2006; Dowling 2006; Lemmetyinen 2009; McCalla 1997; Marti 1990; Papatheodorou 2006;Kotler, Bowen & Makens 1996; Dwyer & Kim 2003.
  • Global Value Chain (GVC) analysis GVCs trace the power which flows through the itinerary planning process and determine how the relevant commercial relationships (nodes) are organised (governance): How power and governance impact the way in which cruise lines establish, negotiate and manage the commercial relationships which are necessary to operate their itineraries and which are often based in the destinations they visit De-construct the production process and consider each component individually: (Clancy 2002)  organisational strategies  technological change  government policies Objective: to find out how and to what extent cruise lines exercise their power over other nodes in the chain in order to design commercially successful itineraries
  • GVC and tourism Historic reluctance to apply GVC analysis to tourism is giving way to its application, eg:  UK tour operators‟ effect on destinations (Mosedale 2006)  SME tourism businesses in Andalusia (Tejada et al 2010)  Provisioning of cruise ships (Clancy 2011) Trunfio et al (2006) provide the “hook” for applying GVC analysis to this project Trunfio et al Cruise lines Tour operators occupy a This fragmentation is also central position in the GVC evident in the onshore because they connect component of cruise ship suppliers, intermediaries itineraries – and can be and consumers extended to orchestrating how potential ports fit into place
  • Nodes in the regional cruise itinerarychainNode DescriptionCorporate Repository of powerheadquartersItinerary planners Decide where to send shipsGatekeepers Impact the ability of passengers to get to or enter their port of embarkationSuppliers Organisations and individuals who provide products and services to the cruise line in respect of their shipsItinerary The types of ports which a ship might visit, including the home (turnaround) port
  • The regional itinerary chain Eureka! Let‟s go here! Itinerary:
  • Conceptual framework: putting it alltogether
  • Research question How do cruise lines decide which ports to visit? This question begs two further questions: (a) How is power exercised during the itinerary development process? (b) Does the power which the cruise lines harbour confer upon them an asymmetric advantage over their onshore suppliers and: (i) if so, how is that power manifested, or (ii) if not, what activity by onshore providers is capable of challenging that power?
  • Research structureResearch paradigmCritical theoryLinked to power (Kincheloe & McLaren 2005; Guzzini 1993; Ogbor 2000) Ontology – historical realism, as voiced by informants Epistemology – value-mediated subjective relationship Methodology – dialogue, ie interviewsResearch methodology Case study (Oceania) Interviewing elites Data collection and data analysis
  • Why Oceania?Attribute DescriptionNature of the case Encompasses wealthy, developed and developing destinations as well as urban areas, hinterland and undeveloped areas, most of which are far from cruise line headquarters Experiencing tremendous cruise growth – ranks 8th in top destination league tables and 101.2% increase in bed days over past 5 years (CLIA 2012) Increase in cruise activity will generate interest as to power and political economyHistorical background A blend of Colonial and Commonwealth states and aboriginal culturesPhysical setting Remote region with wide variety of scenery, climate and geological featuresEconomic, political, legal Wide variations in economies, political stability, metropolitanand aesthetic context development and other societal and geo-political attributesOther cases recognising Existing research as to passenger expenditure andOceania economic impacts in the region
  • Oceania – where the action is Source: Cooper & Hall 2005, p 2
  • Typical itineraries Source: HAL 2012
  • Selection of cruise lines Two main criteria for selection:  Target market (market segment)  Presence in Oceania Likely to be based on the Pacific Rim 3-Star/ 4-Star Luxury/ Speciality contemporary boutiqueSubstantial presence P&O Australia Holland America Paul Gaugin Captain Cookin Oceania (Sydney) (Seattle) (Seattle) (Sydney)Ships may be homeported Carnival Australia Princess Orionin Oceania and/or make (Sydney) (Los Angles) (Sydney)frequent voyages in aseason Royal Caribbean (Sydney office)Little or no presence Cunard Seabourne Windstarin Oceania (Los Angeles) (Seattle) (Seattle)No ships based in Star Cruises CrystalOceania and/or make few (Singapore) (Los Angeles)or no voyages or portcalls in the region
  • Selection of informantsCruise line decision-makers from a cross selectionof cruise lines Elites responsible for itinerary development May involve more than one decision-maker in any given cruise line and in more than one location Will be identified and contacted directly and through gatekeepers
  • Data collection Interviews Semi-structured, in a variety of venues The number of informants per cruise line is likely to vary as to number and location Published sources Academic literature, industry sources and web-based information
  • Data analysis – analytical framework Possible decision-making outcomes (based on how successfully the cruise line is able to wield its power) Successful Unsuccessful negotiation negotiation • Consider • Substitute • Visit • Avoid • Revisit • Abandon Corporate organisation; power and decision-making location/absence of regional offices Type of decision-making process Indicative factors Market segment influencing Degree of presence of ships in the region Type of port Port location Sophistication/organisation of local tourism infrastructure and providers Factors external to the cruise line (PESTEL) Other factors
  • Timeline and research locations 2012 2013 2014 August October January April July October January April July October to to to to to to to to to to Sept December March June Sept Dec March June Sept DecProposalfinalised/acceptedHECapplicationprocessResearchdesignFieldresearch – Australia One or two US tripsinterviews Asia Dependent on informant availability(offshore)DataanalysisWriting up
  • Hooked on knowing more?The secret life of cruisingTourism Management Seminar10 October 201212:00 – 13:30Just cruisin‟PGSA Seminar8 November 201216:30 – 18:00 King Neptune and Queen Codfish
  • Thank you!! Questions? Comments?
  • References A to D Barron, P & Bartoleme Greenwood, A 2006, “Issues determining the development of cruise itineraries: a focus on the luxury market,” Tourism in marine environments, vol3, no 22, pp 89-99. Bianchi, R 2011, “Tourism, capitalism and Marxist political economy,” pp 18-37, in Mosedale, J ed 2011, Political economy of tourism, Routledge, London. Britton, S 1982, “The political economy of tourism in the third world,” Annals of tourism research, vol 9, pp 331-358. Britton, S 1991, “Tourism, capital, and place: towards a critical geography of tourism,” Environment and planning D: society and space, vol 9, pp 451-478. Cabezas, A 2008, “Tropical blues: tourism and social exclusion in the Dominican Republic,” Latin American perspectives, issue 160, vol 35, no 3, pp 21-36. Clancy, M 2002, “The globalization of sex tourism and Cuba: a commodity chains approach,” Globalizations, vol 5, no 3, pp 405-418. Clancy, M 2008, “Cruisin‟ to exclusion: commodity chains, the cruise industry, and development in the Caribbean,” Globalizations, vol 5, no 3, pp 405-418. Clancy, M 2011, “Global commodity chains and tourism: past research and future directions,” in in Mosedale, J ed 2011, Political economy of tourism, Routledge, London. Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) 2012, 2012 industry update, CLIA, Ft Lauderdale, http://www.cruising.org/sites/default/files/pressroom/2012CLIAIndustryUpdate.pdf Cooper, C & Hall C M 2005, Oceania: a tourism handbook, Clevedon, Channel View Publications. Douglas, N & Douglas, N 2004, “Cruise ship passenger spending patterns in Pacific Island ports,” The international journal of tourism research, vol 6, no 4, pp 251-261. Dowling, R ed 2006, Cruise ship tourism, CABI, London. Dwyer, L & Forsyth P 1993, “Assessing the benefits and costs of inbound tourism,” Annals of tourism research, vol 20, pp 752-768. Dwyer, L & Forsyth, P 1998, “Economic significance of cruise tourism,” Annals of tourism research, vol 25, no 2, pp 393-415. Dwyer, L & Kim, C 2003, “Destination competitiveness: determinants and indicators,” Current issues in tourism, vol 6, no 5, pp 369-414
  • References G to M Guzzini, S 1993, “Structural power: the limits of neorealist power analysis,” International organization, vol 47 no 3, pp 443-478. Hazbun, W 2004, “Globalisation, reterritorialisation and the political economy of tourism development in the Middle East,” Geopolitics, vol 8, no 2, pp 310-334. Holland America 2012, Australia/New Zealand & South Pacific, http://www.hollandamerica.com/cruise-destinations/australia-new-zealand-cruises Kaulbaars, J 2007, Itinerary planning & Venice: cruise destination, Seminar Paper, University of Plymouth, Plymouth. Kincheloe, J & McLaren P 2005, “Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research,” pp 303-342, in Denzin N & Lincoln Y 2005, The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3d ed, Sage, Thousand Oaks. Klein, R 2005a, Cruise Ship Squeeze: The new pirates of the seven seas. New Society Publisher, Canada. Klein, R 2005b, “Turning water into money: the economics of the cruise industry,” pp 261-269, in Dowling, R ed 2006, Cruise ship tourism, CABI, London. Kotler P, Bowen, J & Makens, J 1996, Marketing for hospitality and tourism, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. Lapeyre, R 2011, “The tourism global commodity chain in Namibia: industry concentration and its impacts on transformation,” Tourism review international, vol 15, pp 63-75. Lemmetyinen, A 2009, “The coordination of cooperation in strategic business networks – the Cruise Baltic case,” Scandinavian journal of hospitality and tourism, vol 9, no 4, pp 366-386. Lukes, S 1974, Power: a radical view, Macmillan, London. McCalla, R 1997, “An investigation into site and situation: cruise ship ports,” Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, vol 89, no 1, pp 44-55. Marti, B 1990, “Geography and the cruise ship port selection process,” Maritime policy and management, vol 17, no 3, 157-164. Mosedale, J 2006, “Tourism commodity chains: market entry and its effects on St Lucia,” Current issues in tourism, vol 9, nos 4-5, pp 436-458.
  • References O to Y Ogbor, J 2001, “Critical theory and the hegemony of corporate culture,” Journal of organizational change management, vol 14, no 6, pp 590-608. Papatheodorou, A 2006, “The cruise industry: an industrial organization perspective,” pp 31-40, in Dowling, T ed, Cruise ship tourism, CABI, London Peet, R & Thrift, N 1989, “Political economy and human geography,” pp 3-29, in Peet, R & Thrift, N eds, New models in geography, Unwin Hyman, London. Smith, A 1776, An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, republished 1994, Random House, New York. Tejada, P, Santos, F & Guzmán, J 2011, “Applicability of global value chains analysis to tourism: issues of governance and upgrading,” The service industries journal, vol 31, no 10, pp 1627-1643. Trunfio, M, Petruzzellis, L & Nigro, C 2006, “Tour operators and alternative tourism in Italy: exploiting niche markets to increase international competitiveness,” International journal of hospitality management, vol 18, no 5, pp 426-438. Weaver A 2005a, „Spaces of containment and revenue capture: „super-sized‟ cruise ships as mobile tourism enclaves,‟ Tourism geographies, vol 7, no 2, May, pp 165-184. Weaver A 2005b, „The McDonaldization thesis and cruise tourism,‟ Annals of tourism research, vol 32, no 2, pp 346-366 Yeoman, I & Ingold, A 2000, “Decision-making,” pp 111-130, in Ingold, A, McMahon-Beattie, U & Yeoman, I 2000, Yield management: strategies for the services industries, 2nd ed, Continuum, London.