外文翻譯--可持續(xù)性能提升旅游目的地競爭力嗎？（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　1700單詞，1萬英文字符,3000漢字</p><p>　　文獻出處：Cucculelli, Marco, and Gianluca Goffi. Does sustainability enhance tourism destination competitiveness? Evidence from the Italian Destinations of Excellence

2、[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production (2015)：1-13. </p><p><b>　　原文 </b></p><p>　　Does sustainability enhance tourism destination competitiveness? Evidence from Italian Destina

3、tions of Excellence</p><p>　　Marco Cucculelli, Gianluca Goffib</p><p><b>　　Abstract </b></p><p>　　This paper extends the Richie, Crouch (2000) model on destination compe

4、titiveness by introducing a set of sustainability indicators and testing their role in explaining the competitiveness of a tourism destination. The model is tested on a unique dataset of small Italian “Destinations

5、of Excellence”, i.e., outstanding tourist destinations recognized by prestigious national and international awards. Both a principal component analysis and a regression analysis are applied to test the empirical va&

6、lt;/p><p>　　Keywords: Sustainability; Tourism; Destination competitiveness; Italy </p><p>　　Tourism is one of the fastest-growing industries in many countries around the world, and the main source

7、of foreign income for a significant number of developing countries. Therefore, the study of tourism destination competitiveness (TDC) has attracted the attention of policy makers, public and private organizations, a

8、nd tourism researchers (Pearce, 1997, Crouch and Ritchie, 1999, Kozak and Rimmington, 1999, Buhalis, 2000,Hassan, 2000, Dwyer and Kim, 2003 and Enright and Newton, 2004). </p><p>　　After the milestone s

9、tudy by Ritchie and Crouch, 2000 and Ritchie and Crouch, 2003, a number of theoretical models have been developed to explain destination competitiveness (De Keyser and Vanhove, 1994, Hassan, 2000, Heath, 2002 and Dwyer a

10、nd Kim, 2003), as well as to analyze the competitive positions of tourism destinations ((Sir?e, Mihali?, 1999; Dwyer et al.2003; Enright, Newton, 2004; Gomezelj, Mihali?,2008). Many authors have highlighted the rela

11、tionship between sustainability and the comp</p><p>　　However, the large debate on the role of sustainable development has partly overlooked the call for a deeper empirical test, and there is still no clear

12、empirical evidence of sustainability's role in explaining the competitiveness of a destination. The empirical models developed in the TDC literature (e.g., De Keyser, Vanhove, 1994; Sir?e, Mihali?, 1999; Dwyer e

13、t al. 2003; Enright,Newton, 2004; Gomezelj, Mihali?, 2008) provide very useful insights into destination competitiveness, but partly neg</p><p>　　This study aims at contributing to this literature by integra

14、ting a basic model of TDC (Ritchie and Crouch, 2000) with features related to sustainability. To test the relationship between factors of sustainability and TDC, we operationalize the conceptual approach by analyzin

15、g a number of indicators we have found to be important in defining sustainability. The study also has the potential to offer a more comprehensive assessment of the factors that influence TDC. We follow the Dwye

16、r et al. (2003</p><p>　　Furthermore, little empirical work has focused on small tourism destinations, and practically no research on TDC has been applied to small destinations such as villages or small

17、towns. The existing literature has mostly dealt with countries or large geographical areas, whereas the issue of TDC has been assessed by considering the prevalent role of large tourist destinations. However, t

18、here are a number of countries where a significant part of the tourist competiveness actually relies on small pl</p><p>　　We selected small Italian “destinations of excellence” as those that have been awarde

19、d important international (“Blue Flag”) and national certifications (“Orange Flag,” “Most Beautiful Villages in Italy,” “Blue Sail”). To test the role played by sustainability factors on the competitiveness of a tou

20、rist destination, we studied the relationship between TDC, measured by four dependent variables (environmental impacts, socio-cultural impacts, economic impacts and tourists' satisfaction), and some e</p><

21、p>　　The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 sets the theoretical framework. Section 3 gives details about the empirical analysis (variables, case study, data and methodology). Section 4 provides a

22、 discussion of the main findings. Conclusions are drawn in the last section of the paper. </p><p>　　Sustainability and competitiveness in small tourism destinations </p><p>　　Many stud

23、ies and models have identified destination competitiveness by using the lens of high visitor numbers and market share as contributing factors to a competitive destination. This view has a major limitation in that it

24、 ignores the sustainable perspective of not overloading the carrying capacity of a destination, or preserving its environmental integrity (Croes, 2010). Many authors seem to agree that the competitive destination is

25、 the one that preserves natural and cultural resources and in</p><p>　　The concept of sustainability was introduced to tourism from the notion of sustainable development, following the publication of the Wor

26、ld Commission on Environment and Development Report, known as the Bruntland Report (WCED, 1987). Even though after a quarter-century the world is an enormously different place (Sneddon et al., 2006), and the Report

27、has been criticized for its central approach (Adam, 1990) and the lack of attention given to power relations among local-to-global actors (Lélé, 1991</p><p>　　Tourism researchers have been trying t

28、o define sustainable tourism development (STD) for many years. Despite the fact that it is widely accepted that STD is a long-term goal (WTO, 1992), or a concept that is constantly evolving (Inskeep, 1991) and intri

29、nsically dynamic (Liu, 2003), there is no standard definition for “sustainable tourism destinations” (Tepelus and Cordoba, 2005). Lee (2001, p. 314) observes that, “Since destinations are unique, so are su

30、stainable development issues in these dest</p><p>　　However, there is an emerging consensus that STD aims to minimize environmentally negative impacts, preserve cultural heritage, while at the same time prov

31、ide learning opportunities, including positive benefits for the local economy and contributing to the enhancement of local community structures (Weaver, 2005). </p><p>　　Practical evidence shows that ST

32、D can not only stop further deterioration, but it can also contribute towards the appreciation of the destination (Aguiló et al., 2005). Various mass tourism destinations are trying to move toward a more sustai

33、nable approach for the tourism development model (Fortuny et al., 2008 and Rodríguez et al., 2008). Mass tourism was initially considered incompatible with the notion of sustainability (Krippendorf, 1987, Butle

34、r, 1991 and Valentine, 1993), as they were seen </p><p>　　Hence, economic benefits for locals and the minimization of environmental and social repercussions could be complementary aims in every kind of desti

35、nation: the key factor could be managing and controlling the tourism activity. That is the main reason why we aim to demonstrate that a more sustainable tourism policy and destination management could have a positiv

36、e impact on destination competitiveness. </p><p>　　Furthermore, two other aspects of sustainability need to be considered. Firstly, Liu (2003) and Kastenholz (2004) observe that sustainable tourism

37、 cannot be achieved without proper management of tourism demand. Notwithstanding, demand issues have often been neglected in the sustainable tourism debate. This may be due to the fact that the concept of susta

38、inability was simply transposed from the broader concept of sustainable development, where the nature of demand is considered as a given conditi</p><p>　　Secondly, many authors agree that the competitive des

39、tination is the one that increases well-being for its residents in the long term (Crouch and Ritchie, 1999, Bahar and Kozak, 2007, Dwyer and Kim, 2003 and Heath, 2002). In this sense, Bramwell, (1996) observed that

40、“l(fā)ocals” need to be empowered in order to move towards sustainable tourism development: if tourism is an income-generating sector for local communities, and it can have a multiplier effect, then the host population has t

41、o feel empow</p><p>　　Based on the previous analysis, sustainability is initially regarded here in the sense of sustainable tourism policy and management, but also in the senses of both empowerment of locals

42、 and responsible tourist demand. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis: </p><p>　　Hyp.1: In small-scale tourism destinations, there is a positive relationship between sustainability and tour

43、ism destination competitiveness (TDC).</p><p><b>　　譯文 </b></p><p>　　可持續(xù)性能提升旅游目的地競爭力嗎？來自意大利的目的地證據(jù)</p><p><b>　　馬爾科，詹盧卡</b></p><p><b>　　摘要 &l

44、t;/b></p><p>　　本文通過引入一組可持續(xù)性指標，繼承了里奇,克勞奇(2000)關(guān)于目的地競爭力的模型，并測試了解釋旅游目的地競爭力的作用。這一模型選擇在意大利 “優(yōu)秀的旅游目的地”獨特的數(shù)據(jù)集測試，即，優(yōu)秀旅游目的地享有盛譽的國家和國際獎項。主成分分析和回歸分析被應(yīng)用于測試模型的實證效度。實證結(jié)果表明,可持續(xù)發(fā)展能對作為因變量的競爭力指標產(chǎn)生積極影響。此外,可持續(xù)性變量的影響比其他變量具有更大

45、的價值,從而確定可持續(xù)性發(fā)展是影響一個旅游目的地競爭力的關(guān)鍵因素。 </p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：可持續(xù)性;旅游業(yè);目的地競爭力;意大利 </p><p>　　旅游業(yè)在世界各地的許多國家都是一個增長最快的行業(yè),是大量發(fā)展中國家外匯收入的主要來源。因此,研究旅游目的地競爭力(STD)吸引了政策制定者、公共和私人組織和旅游研究人員的關(guān)注, (皮爾斯,1997年, 克勞奇和里奇,1999年,科扎

46、克明頓,1999 年,布哈里斯,2000 年,哈桑,2000 年,德懷爾和金姆,2003，恩萊特和牛頓,2004)。 </p><p>　　在里奇和克勞奇 2000 年、里奇和克勞奇 2003 年的研究之后, 學(xué)者們又開發(fā)了許多理論模型來解釋旅游目的地競爭力(凱澤階和威哈特,1994 年,哈山，2000年,希斯,2002 年以及德懷爾和金姆,2003),并分析了旅游目的地的競爭地位(德懷爾，2003 年,恩萊特和

47、牛頓, 2004 年)。許多學(xué)者都強調(diào)可持續(xù)性和旅游目的地競爭力之間的關(guān)系,并提出可持續(xù)發(fā)展可以提高競爭力的不同的側(cè)重點(其中有里奇和克勞奇,2003，哈桑,2000)。 </p><p>　　然而,關(guān)于可持續(xù)發(fā)展的作用的討論在一定程度上忽視了一個更深入的經(jīng)驗 檢驗, 可持續(xù)性的作用在解釋一個目的地的競爭力上仍然沒有明確的經(jīng)驗證據(jù)。關(guān)于旅游目的地競爭力文獻的實證模型開發(fā) (如,凱澤階和威哈特，1994,德懷爾，2

48、003 年,恩拉特和牛頓, 2004 年)為目的地競爭力提供了非常有用的見解,但在一定程度上忽視了可持續(xù)性的作用因素。 </p><p>　　本研究旨在通過整合一個旅游目的地競爭力的基本模型 (里奇和克勞奇,2000)與可持續(xù)性特質(zhì)來豐富相關(guān)文獻。為了測試可持續(xù)發(fā)展的因素和旅游目的地競爭力之間的關(guān)系，運用概念研究方法，通過分析大量指標，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)準確定義可持續(xù)性的重要性。本研究也有提供了一個評估影響旅游目的地競爭力

49、因素的更全面的方法。根據(jù)懷爾 (2003)確定指標列表的方法，它來源于先前關(guān)于旅游目的地競爭力的實證模型和可持續(xù)旅游以及旅游規(guī)劃和管理的研究。 </p><p>　　此外,小的實證研究都集中在小的旅游目的地上,而幾乎沒有關(guān)于旅游目的地競爭力研究已經(jīng)應(yīng)用于小村莊或小城鎮(zhèn)等目的地?，F(xiàn)有的文獻主要涉及國家或大的地理區(qū)域,但是，旅游目的地競爭力問題的主要評估標準是大的旅游目的地。然而,在許多國家，旅游競爭力的重要組成部分

50、實際上依賴于高度分散的小地方,由于高度分散的文化遺產(chǎn)或固有的自然旅游景點。意大利是這種模式的一個典型例子:四個主要目的地城市(羅馬、米蘭、佛羅倫薩和威尼斯)只占對旅游流的一部分,而剩余大部分是由許多小目的地構(gòu)。令人驚訝的是,實證文獻幾乎完全忽略了這些小中心的作用:這些目的地需要關(guān)注,不僅因為他們占總數(shù)的相當(dāng)份額,還因為他們所代表的是一種與許多其他旅游國家相同的旅游模式。因此,將會有更多的讀者對我們的研究結(jié)論感興趣。 </p>

51、<p>　　我們選取小意大利“優(yōu)秀的目的地”，因為那些已經(jīng)獲得過重要的國際(“藍旗”)和國家認證(“橙色旗幟,”“意大利最美麗的村莊,”“藍帆”)。為了測試可持續(xù)性因素對旅游目的地的競爭力的重要影響,我們研究了四個因變量和一些解釋變量，來衡量旅游目的地競爭力與可持續(xù)性之間的關(guān)系(環(huán)境影響、社會文化影響、經(jīng)濟影響、游客的滿意度)。為了減少一大組的獨立變量,我們進行了主成分分析(PCA),如德懷爾 (2004),和旅游目的地競

52、爭力之前的指標截然不同的是到達地、人次、收入或市場份額,提高旅游目的地競爭力的措施來自亨特,1995年, 布哈里斯 2000 年和里奇和克勞奇,2000 年的觀點，他們認識到追求一個有競爭力的目的地建立在平衡在以下不同的目的上:顧客的最佳滿意度,居民的主 觀幸福感(經(jīng)濟健康),原生的自然和健康的文化。 </p><p>　　本文的結(jié)構(gòu)如下。第二部分設(shè)置了理論框架。第三部分給出了詳細的實證分析(變量、案例研究、數(shù)據(jù)

53、和方法)。第四部分提供了主要研究發(fā)現(xiàn)及討論。最后一部分是研究結(jié)論。 </p><p>　　小型旅游目的地的可持續(xù)性與競爭力 </p><p>　　許多研究和模型通過應(yīng)用高數(shù)量游客和市場份額作為目的地競爭因素，明確定義旅游目的地競爭力有。這種觀點有一個很大的局限性,因為它忽略了可持續(xù)的角度，沒有考慮一個目的地的承載能力,或保留其環(huán)境完整性(克羅,2010)。許多學(xué)者似乎認為競爭目標是保護自然

54、和文化資源, 為其居民提供更令人滿意的旅游目的地環(huán)境，增加長期福祉 (哈桑,2000 年, 希思，2002 年,里奇和克勞奇,2003，巴哈爾和科扎克,2007)。 </p><p>　　自世界環(huán)境與發(fā)展委員會報告發(fā)布之后，被稱為蘭德報告 (世界環(huán)境與發(fā)展委員會,1987 年)，可持續(xù)發(fā)展的概念引入旅游業(yè)。盡管 25 年之后,世界環(huán)境發(fā)生了巨大的變遷(斯內(nèi)登 2006),該報告批判了其核心方法(亞當(dāng),1990)，

55、認為其缺少對局部到全局權(quán)力關(guān)系的關(guān)注(雷樂, 1991),它是制定可持續(xù)發(fā)展政策的一個重要起點。按照沙普利 2000 的觀點，可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展似乎并不完全符合可持續(xù)發(fā)展的發(fā)展方面,但涉及到了以產(chǎn)品為中心的觀點。 </p><p>　　旅游研究人員多年來一直試圖定義可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展(STD)。盡管人們普遍認為可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展是一種長期目標(世界貿(mào)易組織,1992),或者一個不斷發(fā)展 (英斯基普,1991 年)和動態(tài)(劉,

56、2003)的概念,目前還沒有標準來定義“可持續(xù)旅游目的地”(特佩拉和科爾多瓦,2005)。李(2001,第 314 頁)指出, “由于目的地都是獨特的,因此可持續(xù)發(fā)展問題的問題是這些目的地。 </p><p>　　然而出現(xiàn)了一個共識:可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展旨在最大限度地減少對環(huán)境的負面影響,保護文化遺產(chǎn),同時提供學(xué)習(xí)機會,包括為當(dāng)?shù)亟?jīng)濟和當(dāng)?shù)厣鐓^(qū)結(jié)構(gòu)的增強的積極影響(韋弗,2005)。 </p><p

57、>　　事實證據(jù)表明，可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展不僅可以阻止起惡化,也可以提升旅游目的地的價值(阿奎羅,2005)。各種大眾旅游目的地試圖朝著一個更可持續(xù)的旅游發(fā)展模式發(fā)展(福爾圖尼,2008 年，羅德里格斯等，2008)。大眾旅游最初被認為是不符合可持續(xù)發(fā)展理念的(克里彭多夫,1987 年, 巴特勒，1991 年和瓦倫丁,1993),他 們被皮爾斯(1992)視為對立的一方。布代亞努(2005,第 90 頁)聲稱,“如果不改變大眾旅游實踐的可

58、持續(xù)性，那么可持續(xù)旅游就無法實現(xiàn)?！?</p><p>　　因此,在每個目的地，當(dāng)?shù)氐慕?jīng)濟效益以及環(huán)境和社會影響的最小化是一個補充目標：關(guān)鍵因素可以管理和控制旅游活動。這就是我們證明更可持續(xù)的旅游政策和目標管理可以對目的地的競爭力產(chǎn)生積極的影響的主要原因。 </p><p>　　此外,我們需要考慮可持續(xù)發(fā)展的另外兩個方面。首先,劉(2003)和凱斯特羅(2004)觀察到旅游可持續(xù)旅游的實現(xiàn)

59、離不開對旅游需求的適當(dāng)管理。但是，在可持續(xù)旅游的討論中我們往往被忽略了需求問題。大概由于這一事實,可持續(xù)發(fā)展的概念僅僅是由更廣泛的可持續(xù)發(fā)展理念轉(zhuǎn)化而來的,而本質(zhì)的需求被認為是一個給定的條件。旅游恰恰不是這樣的——供需兩方面需要是驅(qū)動因素——需要考慮旅游目的地競爭力的需求因素 (德懷爾,2003),在旅游目的地競爭力小的情況下也需如此。 </p><p>　　其次,許多學(xué)者同意競爭激烈的目的地能提高居民的長期福利

60、 (克勞奇和里奇,1999 年,巴哈夫和科扎克 2007 年,德懷爾和金,2003 年，希斯,2002)。從這個意義上來講，布拉姆韋爾,(1996)觀察到,為了走向可持續(xù)旅游發(fā)展，“當(dāng)?shù)厝恕睉?yīng)當(dāng)被授權(quán)：如果旅游業(yè)是當(dāng)?shù)厣鐓^(qū)的創(chuàng)收部門,它會有一個乘數(shù)效應(yīng)，主要居民獲得了授權(quán)就能充分參與開發(fā)過程，在小社區(qū)這種情況可能更容易。 </p><p>　　基于前面的分析，從可持續(xù)旅游政策和管理的意義上看，可持續(xù)性最初被認為是