Tourism is a sector that is characterized by being influenced by constant change and ignorance of what the future holds; For tourist destinations this becomes a great challenge since many external and internal factors can affect their performance, either positively or negatively.
In order to achieve adequate future management, prepare for changes in the environment and guarantee the competitive position of tourist destinations, it is necessary to know all the conceptualization and methodology related to the management and planning of tourist destinations.
The present work has as objective the foundation from the theoretical and methodological point of view of aspects related to the management and strategic planning of tourist destinations.
Conceptualization of the tourist destination
The definition of tourism is based on two main axes: the set of activities carried out by tourists (and the goods and services they carry with them) and the fact that these activities are carried out in places other than their usual environment and in certain conditions (temporality and non-profit reasons). The materialization of these activities in spaces outside the usual environment refers to the concept of tourist destination.
Zayas (2014) has identified the following as the most representative criteria of the destination concept:
- Destination as a defined area, area, site or geographical place; Destination as a center of tourist production, that is, as the confluence between supply and demand or space where the tourist experience occurs; Destination as a system, cluster, development pole or network of suppliers depending on the tourist activity; Destination as a circuit or multi-destination; Destination as an image perceived or created by travelers, experts in tourism and the media; Destination as a motivator of travel; Destination as a mobile space; Destination as an integrated project.
UNWTO (2007) has established that the tourist destination represents the basic unit of analysis in tourism. Three perspectives are recognized: the geographical (an easily recognizable area with geographic or administrative limits that tourists visit and where they stay during their trip), the economic (the place where they stay the longest, in which they spend a relevant sum of money and in which the income from tourism is considerable, or potentially considerable, for the economy), and the psychographic (the one that constitutes the main reason for the trip). Also, the destination is served by the public and private sectors, and can be an entire country, a region, an island, a village or a city, or an independent attraction center.
In general, the tourist destination is conceived as ¨an independently identifiable area, which is promoted as a place that tourists can visit and where one or more government agencies or organizations coordinate the tourism product it offers¨. (European Communities, 2002; quoted in Zayas, 2014)
For Valls (2007), the tourist destination is ¨ a certain geographical space, with its own characteristics of climate, roots, infrastructure and services, and with a certain administrative capacity to develop common planning instruments, which becomes central attracting tourists through perfectly structured products and adapted to the desired satisfactions, thanks to the enhancement and arrangement of the available attractions; endowed with a brand, and that is marketed taking into account its integral nature ¨.
The aforementioned author considers that the tourist destination is ¨the base management unit for tourism policies¨ and defines the following functions of tourist destinations
Valls (2007) explains the functions of the destination as follows:
- Quality of life of citizens
Use of space to live; for exchange; to produce; to create, share roots; to develop fun, sports and leisure activities.
- International competitiveness
To export; attract capital; become a center of world-wide events; be at the forefront of technologies and networks; attract tourists and visitors.
- Superior economic development
Economic profitability; social profitability; environmental profitability.
- Satisfactions
The satisfaction of citizens and tourists is loaded with a psychological content of personal improvement, where variables such as feelings, feelings, thoughts, actions and relationships play an important role, which in turn will depend on the relationship of the tourist with the environment of supply and citizens.
The previous explanation allows an insight into the multifactorial nature of the tourist activity and the interconnection of the different actors that coincide in a tourist destination.
According to Ejarque (2005), the destination can be conceived as ¨an integrated system in which resources, attractions and companies are offered together to tourists with a series of facilities and services that have been designed for their satisfaction and that they allow each tourist to experiment to their liking and make combinations according to their preferences¨.
On the other hand, there are numerous definitions of fate that are supported by cluster theory. Such is the case of Bigné et al. (2000) that in a work on marketing define the destination as ¨an area shaped by the systemic relationship between resources and infrastructures and services that endows it with its own unit and entity that allows its recognition, which implies the existence of limits between which the tourist perceives his vacations as a global experience through the integration of services and products¨. (Bigné, Font, & Andreu, 2000)
In this same sense, J. Cerveró (2002) defines it as ¨ the local sphere formed by the relationship between companies and services, infrastructures, support and complementary services that make up the experience of the tourist as a whole¨.
From a geographical perspective, the destination has also been defined as a system, but in this case emphasizing spatial aspects to a greater extent. In Vera et al. (1997) it is pointed out that a destination is a ¨ territorial system (…), although its specific characteristics are conditioned, first and globally, by factors such as current legislation or the technology available in the place where it is located, its positioning It is given by its physical and perceptual accessibility, by its promotion and marketing strategy, and by the expectations that tourists place on it.
Barrado (2004) in his definition of the tourist destination, starts by pointing out that following the line of a relational approach, ¨the destination should be interpreted as a complex systemic reality, integrated at the same time by the elements that make up the tourism system and by the elements of the territorial system, as well as evidently by the relationships that are established between them¨.
The destination system must be seen not in the analysis of the isolated elements that make it up but from the perspective of an understanding of its interdependencies.
The destination must be understood as a subsystem formed by spatial (territorial resources, infrastructure, etc.), administrative (political legislation,) and productive elements (factors and resources of production, agents, investment, etc.); as well as for the set of their interrelationships and the effects that are produced that are fundamentally sectoral (some goods and services produced and consumed in situ) and geographic (new landscape realities, changes in previous territorial relations, perception of the territory, images, etc..). (Barrado, 2004)
According to Boualem, Reda and Bondarenko (2011) the most elaborate definition of the term "destination" is given by the Encyclopedia of Tourism. She incorporates very interesting features such as: the concept of a circuit as a set of multi-destinations and the so-called "moving destination", the classic example of which is the cruise (Halloway, cited by Bull, 1994).
In general, destinations are artificially divided by geographic and political barriers, which sometimes confuse consumers. (Perelló, 2002) ¨However, it is increasingly recognized that a destination can be a perceived concept, that is, that it can be interpreted subjectively by consumers, depending on their travel itinerary, cultural background, reason for the visit, level of education and previous experience ¨. (Bigné, Font, & Andreu, 2000)
Summarizing all of the above, it can be said that a tourist destination is ¨a geographical area or area that has attractive tourist resources and infrastructure and services capable of satisfying the needs of the tourist who visits it. It has limits of a physical nature, of a political context and of perception by the market¨.
Another important aspect that must be taken into account when talking about tourist destinations is the term life cycle of the destination.
Life Cycle of the Tourist Destination
"The life cycle is the state of evolution of the destination framed in specific development conditions." (Valls, 2007)
Butler (1980) is recognized as the first to present a market adaptation of the life cycle of products to tourist destinations and, really, is the most widely used and found model in the literature. The fundamental modification that it made refers to the introduction of two more stages with respect to the traditional product marketing model: exploration and the involvement of destination actors in tourism development.
In the Exploration phase, a low number of tourists are received, generally with high purchasing power, nature lovers, seeking solitude and isolated destinations, adventurous tourists, come in an unplanned way. Tourists are attracted to basic or primary resources: natural, cultural and historical, there are no infrastructures created for the development of tourism.
During the Involvement phase, local initiatives to provide services to tourists begin. The arrival of tourists increases rapidly as many imitate the initial explorers. The tourist product and the necessary basic infrastructures are developed.
In the Development Phase the number of tourists grows and purchasing power decreases. The offer grows and diversifies. The characteristics of the destination can be modified.
The Consolidation Phase is generally reached when the number of tourists is greater than that of residents. The tourist product-destination is easily accessible and produces great benefits at low cost; demand stabilizes and supply increases, and tourism becomes the engine of the local economy.
Stagnation is the most critical phase of a destination because questions are opened to the future, settling in a stage of uncertainty. The offer of the destination has gone out of fashion. The demand comes from the lower economic classes and often the resident population does not receive them with hospitality.
After its stagnation, fate enters Decline and dies or Rejuvenates, thanks to the introduction of new attractions that revitalize it.
It is necessary to point out that the time that elapses between each phase or stage is different between various destinations because their characteristics and the conditions existing in each are different.
The destination, as a system made up of various components that interact in a given space and whose result is the offer of services, requires the necessary coordination between the ¨actors¨ present in it to show the visitor an environment where adequate fluidity prevails and harmony and that is able to meet your needs and expectations. Given these requirements, the management of the tourist destination is relevant.
Management of tourist destinations. Models on the subject.
The role of destination management is to administer and support the integration of different resources, activities and agents involved through appropriate policies and measures, which requires both governmental decision-making and functional powers (planning, organization and control of business activities). (Manente, 2008)
The issue of destination management has become a relevant issue in recent decades as a consequence of the sustained development of tourism, both on the demand and supply side, and has been developed in response to the new trends observed in the tourism market., marked on the one hand by the increase in competitiveness on a global scale, and on the other, by the strong emergence of paradigms such as that of sustainability and local development. (Manente, 2008; Gómez, Torres and Menoya, 2012)
In the world some theoretical and empirical models of destination management have been developed, some have studied the factors of competitiveness and in others the economistic vision of tourism has prevailed, its verticality and the priority of private entities in the success of these management mechanisms.
There has been an agreement to recognize as the main actors involved in the tourist destination the public and private sectors, non-profit organizations, the media, tourists and the receiving community. (Bigné et al. 2000; Perelló, 2004)
Among the basic models is that of Leiper (1979), adapted in 1990 and later assumed as a theoretical reference from that decade on, as it managed to focus attention on the concept of tourist flow (Martin, 2006). It explains tourism as a relationship of exchange between regions that generate travelers and regions of tourist destination, through en route transit regions where the components of the tourism industry are located.
Shortly before Miossec (1977, cited by Martín, 2006) presented the interactions of four elements in the process of developing a destination:
- The destination itself and its characteristics The role of transport Patterns of behavior of tourists Attitudes of decision makers and residents of the destination
Other models are that of Mill & Morrison (2002) and that of McKercher & Wong (2004). The first represents a broad model of the tourism relations system, where the fundamental sectors and parts that intervene in the tourism system and their interrelations are identified. Above all, it constitutes a correct vision of the endogenous tourism subsystem, but “it lacks a holistic vision, since there is another set of aspects that influence and, sometimes, determine the development of tourist flows and which should not be neglected at the time of define the scope of the tourism system ”. (Martín, 2006)
Similarly, McKercher provided a model based on chaos theory, which attempts to explain the different interactions between the various components that reflect the functioning of tourism, although it also lacks comprehensiveness, since it derives above all from the sociological aspects of the tourist phenomenon (Martín, 2006) ignoring other key elements.
Finally, the so-called Pentagonal Model of the Tourism System appears (See Figure 4), which attempts to solve the insufficiencies of the previous models based on a multisystem conception of tourism, by making large subdivisions of it in: endogenous or properly tourist subsystem, exogenous subsystem or tourist environment and macro environment or general environment. The elements of the endogenous and exogenous subsystems and their links make up the "content" of the tourist phenomenon, inserted in a process of interrelations with the macroenvironment that it calls "tourist dynamics", "tourist operation" or "tourism process", which leads to results or "impacts". (Martín, 2006)
One of the best known and most cited models is the one proposed by Crouch and Ritchie in 1999 and perfected in 2003 (See Annex 1). It is a hierarchical model in which destination management constitutes an intermediate level between a higher level made up of destination policy, planning and development, and a lower level based on destination resources and attractions. According to this model, destination management is made up of a diverse set of activities: organization, marketing, quality of service, research, human resource development, financing, visitor management, and resource and crisis management. Crouch and Ritchie's model is an open system,since it generally takes into account the influence of the macroenvironment and the competitive microenvironment in which the destination must adapt in order to compete.
For its part, the World Tourism Organization (2007) proposes a model in which a destination management body (DMO) leads companies and coordinates activities to enhance the various elements of the destination. Three main functions stand out: the marketing that attracts tourists, the delivery of services to meet their expectations and the creation of an environment that favors the development of the destination.
The management of tourist destinations in the XXI century
Tourism is a highly competitive and constantly evolving global industry. In this changing context in which new proposals appear every day around the world to attract tourists, innovation, sustainability, universal accessibility and use of technologies become essential allies for improving the competitiveness of tourist destinations. That is why a new tourist model has been created, which has been called an Intelligent Tourist Destination. This concept encompasses an innovative tourist destination, consolidated on a state-of-the-art technological infrastructure, which guarantees the sustainable development of the tourist territory, accessible to all, facilitates the interaction and integration of the visitor with the environment,increases the quality of your destination experience and improves the resident's quality of life.
In 2013 a Subcommittee on Tourist Destinations created on the proposal of Segittur began a process of standardization of the requirements, indicators and metrics applicable to a tourist destination so that it is considered a Smart Tourist Destination (DTI). As a result of this work, the first UNE 178501 System for the Management of Intelligent Tourist Destinations: Requirements was created, making Spain the first country in the world to standardize, with the high-level structure defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), a management system so that it can be implemented by those destinations that want to become smart tourist destinations and that seek the recognition of an evaluation body.
This model consists of improving the quality, sustainability and accessibility of destination management, through the efficient incorporation of innovation and information technologies in the provision of services and making them more competitive.
The normalization of the smart tourist destination encompasses the processes by which the managing entity of the destination manages all its areas of competence in a strategic way to satisfy the needs of the tourist taking into account the planning processes of the trip (before), of stay in the destination (during) and back to the country of residence (after).
The UNE 178501 Standard (AENOR, 2013) proposes four axes on which an Intelligent Tourist Destination must be based:
- Innovation: Internal and external innovative management approaches that translate into significant improvements oriented to activities before, during and after the stay at the destination through the implementation of innovation management tools, with competitive intelligence being one of them.Technology: Through the incorporation of technologies (information, communication, energy improvement, etc.) and technological surveillance that allow the use and application of data and content on markets, customers and products, a increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of destination processes and services. Accessibility: Universal accessibility and universal design as a way of adding value to all initiatives developed by stakeholders.It extends to the entire tourism value chain: buildings, services, personnel training, transportation, environments, web access, among others. Sustainability: Sustainability contemplates the rational and efficient management of (environmental) resources, quality of life of tourists and residents (sociocultural) and business competitiveness linked to the economic vector.
Requirements that every Smart Tourist Destination must meet
- It must have as its backbone the visitors, but without forgetting the benefit for the resident, it must have a government team that makes decisions in an agile way, that is not afraid of change and that generates synergies with the private sector. integrate all actors in decision-making and, of course, must be open to new ideas. Transparency in the information generated must be present from the beginning in the transformation process. This will allow analyzing the effects of the measures adopted and assessing them in real time. Preserving the visitor's right to privacy. The data must be aggregated and anonymous, unless the visitor voluntarily offers their data to receive personalized information. Infrastructures (communications, energy, connectivity, etc.) play a key role.Destiny must be aware that it is not only about having the ability to undertake investments, but also keeping them operational and in excellent condition.
Benefits of the DTI Model
- Governance, sustainability and accessibility. Destination competitiveness. Differentiation. Resident quality of life. Public-private collaboration. Tourist-resident relationship. Destination-business relationship. Profitability and attractiveness of the destination.
Summarizing the heading, it can be said that destination management is the coordinated management of all the elements that are part of a tourist destination. It implies planning and development of the destination where an action plan is established to be executed by the managing entity, in coordination with the different actors involved in management; development of tourism products and services that define the central axes of action of the destination and constitute an exceptional experience for the tourist; and its promotion and communication.
In short, destination management represents a key strategy for them, with a view to satisfying an increasingly demanding consumer, ensuring sustainable development and maintaining or retaining a position of strength in the tourism market.
Methodology for strategic planning applied to the tourist destination.
In the case of tourism, strategic planning has turned out to be very appropriate, considering that the sector is strongly influenced by the permanent changes that take place in the near environment, and also in regional, national and international contexts (Popovich & Toselli, 2006). In other words, in tourism, given the diversity of components and the complexity of the actors and sectors involved, it requires the formulation of policies and a planning system articulated in various orders and levels so that rational and balanced management is possible of the available resources.
The tourist destinations are immersed in situations of great competition, where the limits of the sector and the forces of the environment are continually changing, and if you do not react in time it will mean going to a worse situation. In this sense, it is important to carry out planning, that is, to recognize and analyze the opportunities and threats that the environment presents for the destination, the strengths and weaknesses of the destination compared to that environment, and the selection of a strategic commitment that better meet the aspirations of the organizations that manage tourist destinations and other interest groups (tourists, local community, business sector and non-profit organizations) in relation to the destination.
Strategic planning is one of the keys to managing tourist destinations. (Bigné, Font, & Andreu, 2000) It is defined as an instrument that allows managing change and thinking about the best possible future, considering the particular characteristics of the environment where it is inserted, as well as the participation and consensus of the actors involved in said processes. It is also characterized by the existence of leadership in the direction of the territory, which allows motivating the actors involved in the process of channeling all their efforts and resources around the achievement of the proposed objectives. From its application, it is possible to identify strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities, enhancing or taking advantage of certain internal and external conditions,as well as minimizing or overcoming adverse circumstances.
Likewise, it is related to forecasting, anticipating future changes or events, trying to guide them for the well-being of a territory or organization. In this sense, those who are in charge of administration, management or leadership, however, can use planning as an instrument that allows to establish clear and well-defined objectives, appropriate strategies to achieve them and use of the necessary resources that will lead to results. expected. (Ossorio, 2003)
In particular, the strategic planning process is concretized or materialized in the formulation of a strategic plan, which constitutes a document in which consensual medium and long-term objectives are reflected that allow transforming the current reality, while becoming an instrument that guides thought towards action, since actions to be followed are promoted in advance and the real ways and means to carry them out in order to achieve the proposed goals are defined. In this sense, a strategic plan becomes an instrument that contributes to the development processes of a territory by allowing the definition and ordering of the actions of individual actors to achieve a common and shared goal. (DEMUCA-CEDET Foundation, 2009)
There are various models or methodological schemes for strategic planning in the bibliography consulted. The models that are evaluated are that of Vera et al. (1997), Ivars (2003), UNWTO, Bigné and also the structure used in the strategic plans of the destinations Ecuador, Barcelona and Piriápolis.
Vera et al. (1997) structure planning into "three basic variables" in planning. The first, the institutionalization of the strategic plan, through the agreements of the public or private organizations that promote the plan; The second refers to the methodology, which should be articulated in terms of analysis, diagnosis, development of strategies, programs, actions, and follow-up mechanisms. Thirdly, it refers to the commitment of the agents involved in the implementation of the plan. In turn, it establishes as a methodological proposal for the elaboration of the plan three phases. These are: the Objective Definition Phase, the Analysis and Diagnosis Phase and the so-called Bases for management. (See Figure 5)
Another contribution is the model proposed by Ivars (2003) and its phases can be seen in Figure 6: Figure 6: Ivars Tourism Planning Model. Source: Ivars (2003)
This model is summarized in four implementation phases:
- Plan Organization and Preparation Phase. Research and Analysis Phase. Formulation and Proposal Phase. Follow-up and control phase.
On the other hand, UNWTO (2011) establishes a strategic planning model consisting of four phases to devise a strategy aimed at promoting efficiency in destination management. These phases are:
- Assessment of the situation (where are we?) With respect to the tourist competitiveness of the destination. A strategic framework (where would we like to be?) For the future growth of tourism based on the conclusions of analysis of the situation. An integrated plan (How do we achieve it?) to address essential capacities through specific programs and projects, budget indicators and monitoring mechanism to implement the strategic framework. Institutional management and performance management mechanisms (how do we organize ourselves to achieve and measure success?), including an adequate organizational system for the management and implementation of future tourist activities in the destination.
Each of these phases must have the participation and association between private agents and the public sector in order for it to be carried out.
On the other hand, Bigné (2000) considers that four phases are necessary for the strategic planning of the destination. They can be seen in the following figure:
The following table shows the structure used in the strategic plans for Ecuador, Barcelona and Piriápolis.
Table 1. Procedure used in strategic plans for tourist destinations.
| Strategic plans | Structure |
|
Ecuador PLANDETUR 2020 |
1. Strategic Diagnosis
2. Strategic Direction (Mission, Vision, Values and Principles) 3. Strategic Formulation (Strategic Objectives) 4. Implementation (Operational Plans) 5. Control |
|
Barcelona 2020 |
1. Diagnosis
2. Proposals 3. Follow-up |
|
Strategic Plan Piriápolis 2020 |
1. Diagnosis
2. Formulate Strategies 3. Implement Strategies 4. Evaluate Results |
Source: Own elaboration from the aforementioned strategic plans.
As it could be observed in the previous methodologies, some authors suggest the need to plan in three or four phases, and incorporate some aspects to a greater or lesser extent, but in contrast to this, most agree that an analysis phase is necessary and diagnosis, a strategic phase and another phase where the plan is developed and evaluated. Each of the aspects that are added to the plan will be determined by the conditions of each destination.
In the diagnostic phase, an external analysis is carried out where the tourist market, competition, sector, relevant environmental trends and their implications for the tourist destination and / or the business units (companies) that are directly or indirectly involved in the provision of products and services to create or facilitate the tourist experience. An internal analysis is also carried out that consists of identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the destination.
Likewise, the authors agree that a SWOT analysis should be carried out to clarify the type of situation in which the destination is.
In the strategic phase, the mission of the plan and the objectives are defined (Where do you want to go?) And the strategies and actions aimed at achieving the objectives set by the plan are established.
In the last phase, said plan must be put into operation and subsequently control its execution to correct the existence of possible deviations that may affect compliance with the established objectives.
Another one of the revised methodologies about tourism planning is the one presented by the Ministry of Tourism of Mexico that gives the municipality an essential role. The following figure shows the steps by which planning is achieved:
The previous methodology does not depart from the essence of the other mentioned models, even when it is not an instrument of strategic planning. The same imbricates the development of the tourist activity to the formulation of strategies and action programs protected in a previous diagnosis.
In the Caribbean area, interesting proposals have also been made for the strategic planning of tourism, such is the case of Schulte (Schulte, 2003), who defines the strategic plan as “an integral project of the local territory as a tourist product, understood as the sum of very different realities (landscape, companies, infrastructure, equipment, social environment, heritage, etc.). His model is presented in the following figure:
Bibliography
- Acerenza, M. Á. (1985). Strategic planning of tourism: methodological scheme. Estudios Turísticos, 85, 47-70.Adjuntament de Barcelona. (2016). Barcelona Strategic Tourism Plan 2020: Strategic Diagnosis. Adjuntament of Valencia, Regidoria de Turisme. (2016). Strategic Plan Proposal 2017-2020: Valencia Tourism, towards 2020. Obtained from www.visitvalencia.com/Dcs//PlanEstrategico2020_24-11-2016.pdf(2013). UNE 178501 Standard Management System for Smart Tourist Destinations: Requirements. (2017). Strategic Plan for Tourism Development in Piriápolis 2020-Piriápolis Tourism Cluster. Malaga's town hall. (2016). Strategic Tourism Plan for Malaga 2016-2020. Málaga.Barrado, DA (2004). The concept of tourist destination. A geographical-territorial approach. Estudios Turisticos, 45-68.Bigné, JE, Font, X., &Andreu, L. (2000). Marketing of Tourist Destinations: Analysis and Development Strategies. Madrid: ESIC Editorial.Blanco, J. (2015). White Paper on Smart Tourist Destinations. Madrid: LID Editorial Empresarial.Brintrup, JA (2014). Formulation and elaboration of a strategic program for the development of cultural tourism in the Commune of Frutillar. Degree work to apply for the Title of Industrial Civil Engineer, Austral University of Chile, Puerto Montt.Bulnes, D. (2015). Preliminary Design of the Tourism Development Plan. Selected Municipalities of the Mayabeque province for the period 2015-2020. Thesis in option to the Master's Degree in Tourism Management, University of Havana, Faculty of Tourism, Havana.Butler, R. (1980). The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources.Canadian Geographer, 24 (1), 5-12.Cabado, JS (2015). Synthesis of the Strategic Plan of the City of Barcelona. Carballosa, EA (2016). Diagnosis of the tourist behavior of the destination Havana in the period 2012-2015. Thesis as an option to the Degree in Tourism, University of Havana, Faculty of Tourism, Havana, Ejarque, J. (2005). Successful tourist destinations. Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Pirámide.Fariñas, MR (2011). Touristic destinations. Reality and Concept. TURyDES, 4 (11). Municipal Tourism Foundation for Cuenca. (2011). Strategic Tourism Development Plan for the Cuenca destination and its area of influence. Herrera, MG (2008). Strategic planning of sustainable development in tourist destinations of sun and beach. Cayo Las Brujas, Cuba. Itinerarium, 1. Obtained from http://www.seer.unirio.br/index.php/itinerariumLeiper,N. (1990). Tourism Systems. Palmerston North: Massey University Press, López de Ávila, A., & García, S. (sf). Smart Tourist Destinations. Manente, M. (2008). Destination management and economic background: definition and supervision of local tourist destinations. Malaga, Spain.Martín, R. (2006). Principles, Organization and Practice of Tourism (Volume 1). Tourist Studies Center, University of Havana MINTUR (Ministry of Tourism). (sf). Strategic tourism development plan "PLANDETUR 2020". Obtained from http: //www.turismo.gob.ecOsorio, M. (2006). Tourist Planning. Approaches and Models. Quivera, 8 (001), 291-314.Ossorio, A. (2003). Strategic planning. National Office of Management Innovation and National Institute of Public Administration Undersecretariat of Public Management.,Planning and Organizational Reengineering Directorate, Buenos Aires, Pearce, DG (2016). Destination Management Models: Synthesis and evaluation. Tourism Studies and Perspectives, 25, 1-16.Ritchie, JR, & Crouch, GI (1999). Tourism, competitiveness and social prosperty. Journal of business research, 44, 137-152.Schulte, S. (2003). Conceptual and methodological guide for the development and planning of the tourism sector. Santiago de Chile: UN. (2015). Smart tourist destinations report: building the future. Madrid. (2017). Smart Tourist Destinations (DTI): Strategic Vision. Barcelona. (2008). Comprehensive Management of Tourist Destinations. Santiago de Chile.Toselli, C. (2015). Strategic planning applied to tourism development. Some reflections on Argentina's provincial tourism plans.Tourism and Society, XVII, 63-89. Obtained from www: http: //revistas.uexternado.edu.coValls, JF (2007). Management of sustainable tourist destinations. Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Gestión.Vas, GM (2014). Strategic planning as an instrument of tourism policy. Study applied to the Murcia region. Doctoral Thesis, University of Alicante, University Institute of Tourist Research, Alicante, Vera, ea (1997). Territorial analysis of tourism. Barcelona, Spain: Ariel Geografía.Zayas, SM (November 11, 2014). Theoretical framework for managing tourist destinations. Obtained from www.gestiopolis.comStrategic planning as an instrument of tourism policy. Study applied to the Murcia region. Doctoral Thesis, University of Alicante, University Institute of Tourist Research, Alicante, Vera, ea (1997). Territorial analysis of tourism. Barcelona, Spain: Ariel Geografía.Zayas, SM (November 11, 2014). Theoretical framework for managing tourist destinations. Obtained from www.gestiopolis.comStrategic planning as an instrument of tourism policy. Study applied to the Murcia region. Doctoral Thesis, University of Alicante, University Institute of Tourist Research, Alicante, Vera, ea (1997). Territorial analysis of tourism. Barcelona, Spain: Ariel Geografía.Zayas, SM (November 11, 2014). Theoretical framework for managing tourist destinations. Obtained from www.gestiopolis.com
