Seasonality on Gotland - a local business perspective

(1)

20019

Examensarbete 30 hp

Juni 2020

Seasonality on Gotland - a local

business perspective

(2)

Teknisk- naturvetenskaplig fakultet UTH-enheten Besöksadress: Ångströmlaboratoriet Lägerhyddsvägen 1 Hus 4, Plan 0 Postadress: Box 536 751 21 Uppsala Telefon: 018 – 471 30 03 Telefax: 018 – 471 30 00 Hemsida: http://www.teknat.uu.se/student

Abstract

Seasonality on Gotland - a local business perspective

Petter Svensson

Seasonality in tourism has been present in the literature for decades. It is a universally phenomenon connected to climate and institutional factors which contributes to an imbalance in demand. It can be expressed through numbers of tourists, bed nights and expenditure. Seasonality is most obvious in peripheral destinations and it has generally been described as an issue that needs to be solved. Previous studies have put much attention on macro levels which includes how destinations could mitigate seasonality and create all-year around tourism. This study examines seasonality at a micro level by using Gotland as a case. The aim of the study was to explore perspective of Gotlandic nature-based tourism companies on seasonality, all in order to increase the understanding on seasonality aspects in tourism. The data collection was performed through semi-structured interviews with nature-based companies on Gotland. The results of the study indicate that lifestyle motives are strong for running a

nature-based company on Gotland and the short, intense summer-season make it possible. Seasonality is therefore not considered as an issue that needs to be urgently solved. Other themes related to sustainable destination development such as carrying capacity, employment, possibilities of growth and regional strategies are also being deeply discussed in this study.

20019

(3)

Acknowledgments

Firstly, I want to thank the companies participating in this study which all contributed with important data that enabled me to reach the aim of this study. Moreover, I would like to thank my supervisor Daniel Wolf-Watz for his dedicated support throughout the whole master thesis process. Finally, I would like to send a big thank you to all students and teachers

(4)

1.Introduction

Seasonality in tourism is considered to be one of the most worrying aspects, that most destinations have to deal with all year around (Weaver and Lawton, 2015). It has been described in the literature as a cycling pattern that repeat itself each year (Jang, 2004). It is usually a question about an imbalance in the demand, and can be expressed through the number of tourists, their expenditure and bed nights (Butler, 1994). The literature also defines two basic origins of the seasonality phenomenon. One is natural seasonality that refers to a regular variation in natural conditions, especially those associated with cyclical climate changes throughout the year in terms of temperature, precipitation, wind and daylight (Allcock, 1989; Butler, 1994). The second type of aspect grouped under the label of

institutional factors connects to the social norms and practices of society (Hinch and Hickey, 1997). These factors are typically based on religious, cultural, ethnic, social, and economic considerations, characterised by religious, school, and industrial holidays (Butler, 1994).

Variations in tourism demand is one of the most dominant policy and operational concern of tourism interest both in private and public sectors (Baum, 1999). In tourism literature, seasonality is therefore widely seen as a problem to be tackled at policy, marketing, and operational levels. As pointed out by Baum (1999) the general disadvantages with seasonality in a destination is usually connected to:

• short business operating season with periods of closure or a reduced level of operation • the need to generate a full year's revenue with in a short operating season while

servicing fixed costs over a twelve-month period

• the consequent problems of attracting inward investment in tourism

• problems in maintaining the supply chain on the basis of a short operating season • problems in ensuring sustained support from transport providers such as airlines and

shipping companies.

• short-term employment rather than sustainable long-term jobs

• problems of maintaining service and product quality standard s in the absence of permanent, long-term employees (p.6).

Accordingly, destinations, spend considerable time, money and effort to modify the patterns of seasonality through the development of strategies created to extend low seasons, or to establish an all-year around destination (Hinch, and Jackson, 1997).

(7)

problems (McEnnif,1992). However, some research does claim that there are possible benefits from seasonality. For example, with regard to employment, Flogenfelt (1988) highlights that tourism jobs frequently complement other areas of traditional employment such as forestry, fishing or agriculture and, therefore, seasonality is not as problematic as normally described. Hartmann (1986, p. 31) presents another powerful argument in this regard by expressing that the “dead seasons are the only chance for a social and ecological environment to recover fully”. Butler (1994, p. 335) similarly argues, “while areas may experience very heavy use during peak seasons, in the long run they may well be better off than having that use spread more evenly throughout the year”.

The aspect of seasonality is considered to be an obstacle for destination development and most research in tourism seasonality have focused on which strategies and policies destinations, public-private tourism organisations should use to mitigate it and extend the tourism season. The research points out negative and positive aspects, however research on micro level is missing. Therefore, it would be interesting to explore how micro tourism businesses recognize the phenomenon of seasonality, and how their perceptions align with public and private tourism organisations ideas of having all year around operation or an extension of the tourism season.

1.1Aim and research question

Aspects of tourism seasonality are most obvious in peripheral areas (Lundtorp, 1999). Located in the middle of the Baltic see, the Swedish island of Gotland is no exception. Mainly attracting visitors with warm weather-activities, seasonality issues have been present for a long period of time. Both public and private organisations have extensively highlighted the importance of creating new seasons on Gotland to mitigate seasonality. Several attempts, such as trying to extend the seasons with different events, have been made by the region of Gotland and the Destination Marketing Organisation (Gotlands förenade besöksnäring). However, Gotland is still a designated summer destination with a short operating high season during June, July and August. The island is known for its nature tourism and offers popular activities such as: hiking, biking, horse-back riding and sunbathing.

(8)

How are the seasonal variations being perceived by local nature-based companies on Gotland?

What motivates their perceptions towards seasonality?

2. Understanding seasonality in tourism

The seasonality issue in tourism literature have been examined for several decades and it has mainly focused on a few specific aspects. According to Cannas (2012) research concerning tourism seasonality can be grouped in four different areas:

• Causes • Effects

• Measurements • Policies

Since Gotland is a well-known summer destination with a visitor peak during summer, the aspect of measuring the level of tourism seasonality will not be examined in this study. This study is focused on understanding the seasonality aspect from a local tourism business perspective on Gotland and the areas of causes, effects and policies make up the framework of this study. The theoretical section will help to better understand the complex concept of tourism seasonality and at the same time enable the author to draw conclusions and compare findings from this study with previous research.

2.1 Causes of seasonality

Seasonality in tourism demand is a universally recognized phenomenon. It is caused by similar conditions and scholars have been identifying and classifying different causes

throughout the years. (Allcock, 1989; Bar On, 1975; Blas Nogueira et al, 1968; Butler, 1994; Butler and Mao, 1997; Baum, 1998; Baum and Hagen, 1999; Calantone and Johar, 1984; Grant et al., 1997; Hartmann, 1986; Mourdoukoutas, 1988; Higham and Hinch, 2002; Cannas, 2012)

(9)

Baum and Hagan (1999) identify one causal factor: climate which is held main responsible for seasonal variations. Natural seasonality often affects remote and peripheral destinations, especially those where the outside temperature varies a lot depending on the seasons

(Corluka, 2019). Generally, as Hartman (1986) and Butler (1994) highlight, the seasonality increases with the distance from the equator. Natural seasonality is therefore most difficult to mitigate at high-latitude, peripheral destinations where most of the nature-based tourism activities depend on climate-bonded attractions and where tourism rely on weather and climate conditions (Smith,1990). Destinations relying on mainly outdoor facilities are the ones most likely to experience high levels of natural seasonality which influence their tourism businesses (Koenig and Bisho, 2005). Smith (1990) and Grant et al (1997) give examples from costal resorts and countryside attractions, where the patterns of tourist activities is highly weather dependent.

Another climate related reason behind seasonality could be the geographical location. Bar On (1975, p.2) looked at arrival data from 16 different countries and concluded that some areas have a “… a very strong high season with negligible tourist activity during the rest of the year”. This is often the situation for remote, peripheral, destinations and as Jeffrey and Barden (2001, p. 123) point out in their analysis of seasonality in hotel occupancy rates in England ‘‘seaside and remote or peripheral hotels generally have pronounced or extreme seasonality’’. Allcock (1989) also indicate that remote and peripheral destinations can face difficulties when trying to develop a new all-year around product due to the dependency on natural limitations.

(10)

The institutional causes are according to Cannas (2012) stable over long time, such as the timing of Christmas, some appears in discreate intervals, like vacations, some various predictably, e.g. Easter. Social customs, and especially holiday periods, intensify the tendency for summer-time peaks in the Northern Hemisphere and winter-time peaks in tropical destinations (ibid).

2.2 Effects of seasonality

Numerous scholars have identified different effects of tourism seasonality. Wall and Yan (2003) claim that the impacts have increased their importance due to the growth of mass tourism. The number of businesses highly depending on tourism has therefore grown which reduce their possibility to adept to seasonal variations (Cannas 2012). Other scholar such as Baum and Haugen (1999) recognize that the impacts of seasonality depend on the location of the destination and the location of the tourism business within a destination. It is connected to the variety of physical condition and the nature of attractions (Cannas, 2012).

However, in the literature, the effects of seasonality can be divided into to three main categories: economic impacts, socio-cultural impacts and ecological impacts. Economic impact of tourism seasonality concerns problems connecting to the loss of revenues due to the ineffective use of resources and facilities (Sutcliffe and Sinclair, 1980; Manning and Powers, 1984; William and Shaw, 1991). The literature also identifies that seasonality have an

important role on employment (Ball, 1988, 1989; Ashworth and Thomas, 1999; Baum, 1993; Flogenfelt, 1988) where the biggest issue is the difficulty to recruit and retaining full time staff. Getz and Nilsson (2004) also identify that for individual businesses the negative impacts result from unused capacity and related inefficiencies, which restricts return on investment even if the operations are profitable. Extreme differences between seasons also tends to result in difficulty in attracting investors and lenders, and problems in attracting and keeping the skilled employees who prefer all-year employment (ibid). The use of the natural environment is considered to be heavy in a high-seasonal destination and will impact on the ecological carrying capacity of a destination (Manning and Powers, 1984).

(11)

studies claim that when an ecological and socio-cultural perspective is taken, the off-peak season provides a time to recover (Butler, 1994; Higham and Hinch, 2002). Murphy (1985) note that seasonality is not generally bad for everyone, and that local residents are in need of stress release from the maintaining and catering of tourists all year around. He also explains that to some destinations, the end of the tourist season can be seen as “the light in the end of the tunnel” (Butler,1998, p.11). Hartman (1986) identify that a highly seasonal destination does not provide as much income as an all-year around destination would. Nevertheless, he also points out that tourism should be good for the whole destination and that seasonality should not just be evaluated in economical terms, the social aspect and ecological base have to be included as well (Hartman, 1985, p.31).

2.3 Policies and strategies

As mention before, Seasonality is often referred to as a problem for many destinations and both public and private stakeholders generally work hard to reduce it (Getz and Nilsson, 2004). A review by Baum and Hagen (1999) look at development policies for peripheral destinations in Great Britain, Scandinavia and Canada and highlight “extending the season” or “reducing the impact of seasonality” (p.299). as main goals. Coopers and Lybrand Consulting (1996) described in a report for the Canadian Tourism Commission seasonal variations in tourism demand as problematic. They stress that strategies and policies are needed to solve ‘‘one of the biggest challenges currently faced by the Canadian travel industry” (p.1).

Weaver and Lawton (2002) suggest six matching strategies to counteract seasonality issues.

1. increase demand outside peak season, 2. reduce demand in peak season,

3. reallocate demand, 4. reduce supply 5. redistribute supply

6. restructure supply (p.211-213).

The general strategies that Weaver and Lawton (2002) present can also be recognized in peripheral locations where the key initiatives to counterattack seasonality include:(1)events and festivals; (2)market diversification ; (3)product diversification and (4)structural and environmental response (Baum and Hagen, 1999). Butler (1994) argues similarly and

(12)

using differential pricing and tax incentives on a temporal basis, encouraging the staggering on holidays, encouraging the domestic tourism in off season, and providing off-season activities such as festivals and conferences” ( p.335).

However, the most common strategy to mitigate seasonality are to focus on events and festivals, which can create a whole “new” season in the off season at many destinations (Andersson and Getz, 2009; Baum, 1998; Baum and Hagen, 1999; Brännäs and Nordström, 2002; Getz, 1998, 2008)

Events and festivals take many different forms but they usually have a lot in common including predictable duration when the community and visitors engage in an individual activity or series of linked activities of a cultural, religious, sporting or common interest nature (Baum and Hagen, 1999). In terms of seasonality the focus is mostly on mega-events that will attract many visitors to a destination (Hall,1992; Getz,1998). In peripheral

destinations however, a focus on small-scale, community-driven events and activities are of a great relevance (Baum and Hagen,1999). Spencer and Holecek (2007) identified that the ways individual local businesses tackle seasonality involves hosting small events in low season. This is to spread demand and help fill existing capacity whilst reducing demand and providing additional capacity at peak times.

Galloway (2008) points out that for many individual tourism operators where the climatic conditions are related to their business, it is accepted that their business will only be open for some parts of the year. The seasonal aspect is therefore accepted by many small tourism companies, and the ability for them individually to mitigate problems associated with big variations in seasonal demand are low, even though strategies are developed (Galloway, 2008).

3. Method

(13)

seasonality is highly present, and many stakeholders are trying to find ways to deal with seasonality. Previous studies on seasonality have focused mainly on macro levels, from a regional destination development perspective. Studies on micro levels is missing and Gotland is as destination visited mainly by people interested in experiencing nature. To focus on nature-based companies is therefore interesting, since the activities they offer are essential travel reasons to Gotland.

To use a case study as research design is preferred for several reasons. Seasonality is a complicated topic and a case study offers a way of investigating complex social units including multiple variables that is of potential importance to understand the phenomenon (Merriam, 2009). A case study is focused on one single case and the issue of generalizability is present, however much can be learned from one particular case (ibid). Erickson (1986) stresses that the general lies in the particular and what we learn in one particular case can be transferred to similar settings. It is up to the reader to decide what can be translated to her or his context. One can not generalise from one case, but it is not the main aim of qualitative research. A case study does not try to simplify what cannot be simplified and acknowledges that there are no simple answers (Merriam, 2009).

The data collection was based on primary data from interviews. The focus of the study is local nature-based businesses perceptions on seasonality on Gotland and how they view this phenomenon. A qualitative approach using interviews is preferred since it is a question about gaining a deeper understanding of the subject.

According to Bryman (2011) this type of research method put emphasises on the words in the data collection and analysis instead of numbers as in the quantitative research. Bryman (2011) also stresses that the qualitative research can be seen as inductive in relation to theory and practice and that theory is generated through the basis of the research results. The method is therefore based on the data collection that is taking place in this study, compared to

qualitative research, which is focused on testing theory, which is a deductive approach. Finally, previous findings will be connected to the result of the study. It means that a type of abduction will be present in this study, when the research moves between previous research and collected data to be able to gain a deeper understanding, successively.

(14)

the research question and reach the aim of the study. The study area of Gotland was

examined and companies offering nature-based activities where listed. Around 20 companies on Gotland could be identified however several of them turning out to be inactive. Therefore, only companies with an active homepage, where clear nature-based activity offerings were available got contacted. The companies were contacted through e-mail and by phone. The potential interviewees received information about the aim of the study and why their contributions to the study would help to answer the research questions.

3.1 Interviews

(15)

Figure 1: Information about the companies participating in the study.

3.2 Data processing

The interviews were transcribed separately direct after each meeting. To transcribe right after the interview is recommended since the interviewer still have the topic fresh in his mind and can relate to the interview situation. The transcription was made by the author of the study which is important since it is advantageous to have great knowledge about the subject to be able to secure details that will help to answer the research question. (Kvale and

Brinkmann, 2009). A transcription has been recommended by some scholars (Mergenthaler and Stinson,1992) to be as close to an exact reproduction of the conversation as possible. That has been the case in this study, however as McLellan et.al. (2003, p. 66) point out:

(16)

transcribed verbatim; and identify specific speech patterns, vernacular expressions, intonations, or emotions”.

Consequently, the researcher alone decides what will be transcribed and what will be left out. At some point, regardless of the will to transcribe correctly, a textual data will never

encompasses all that takes place during an interview (Mishler, 1986; Kvale, 1996) and that is why the researcher alone decide what is considered necessary to transcribe.

With permission from the interviewees all five interviews were recorded by means of the authors’ smart phone, to be able to return to the recordings afterwards and listen repeatedly. The recordings enabled the writer to go through the material in the best possible way and it is an essential method when creating useable data from interviews (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). The data collected from the semi-structured interviews resulted in a thematic analysis where the author search and identifies themes that appear in the interviews (Bryman, 2011). The data from the interviews were coded, which is described as a way of separate, label, compile and organise data (ibid). Finally, the codes where thematised and became the result of the study.

4. The island of Gotland

The island of Gotland is the largest Swedish island located in the southern region of the Baltic sea, between the Swedish mainland and the Baltics (see figure 2). Gotland is a province that includes the islands of Fårö and Gotska Sandön to the north and Karlsö island to the west. The population is estimated to be around 60 000 of which 23 000 live in Visby, the residence town of Gotland. There is no county council on Gotland, instead, healthcare, public transport and other traditionally county-level activities are managed by Region Gotland. The region is also responsible for regional development issues, also including tourism aspects.

(17)

Tourism on Gotland had its start in the middle of the 19th_{century when the industrialisation} flourished in Sweden. Steamboats lines between the mainland and Gotland were introduced, which reduced the travel time to the Island to ten hours (Länsstyrelsen, 2014). However, the real large increase in tourist arrivals occurred in 1938 when the Swedish holiday law was introduced. It resulted in packed boats including tourists with bicycles and tents arriving on Gotland, during summer. In 1955 the first ferry allowing cars on board was put into service, and the number of visits to Gotland reached up to 80 000, with the majority of visit taking place during the summer months (ibid). Since then, the visitor number have increased and in 2001 Gotland was the 5th largest tourist destination in Sweden based on the total number of guest nights (Gotland in Figures, 2017). In the year of 2016, a new record was set with over one million overnight stays at Gotland’s commercial accommodation facilities (ibid).

Figure 2: Location of Gotland. Own illustration based on Google maps.

4.1 Strategies on Gotland

(18)

season to other times of the year. Efforts such as improving the accessibility to the island, with ferry and aviation, creating new travel reasons or create events have been attempts to extend or create new seasons on Gotland. The Medieval week in August or Christmas

markets in winter are examples on events created for mitigating seasonality and creating new seasons on Gotland.

Despite efforts the tourism peak season still occurs during summer, and the occupancy rate are high during the summer months and low during the rest of the year. Out of one million overnight stays in the year of 2017 over 70 percent took place during June, July and August (see figure 3).

Figure 3: Number of guest nights (monthly) which shows clear variations between summer months and the rest of the year. Source: Region Gotland (2019).

The numbers indicate that Gotland, still is a designated summer destination although attempts have been made to create a more all-year around destination. Region Gotland (2019) also identifies that the number of open tourism businesses are high during the summer months and lower during the rest of the year (see figure 4).

Figure 4: The number of open tourism businesses and their occupancy rate during 2017 Source: Region Gotland (2019).

(19)

In the year of 2019 Region Gotland created a regional tourism strategy: Regional

besöksnäringsstrategi för Gotland. The vision for Gotland is to be perceived as the most sustainable and attractive destination in northern Europe by 2027. The strategy consists in trying to be a destination popular for both Swedish and international visitors all year around. To reach this goal they want to create a thematically based product portfolio, clear visitor routes and coordination between actors, organizations, images, academia, and civil society (Region Gotland, 2019). The strategy includes: to create clear travel reasons outside the peak season, and to develop events that supports new seasons and improve opportunities to reach tourist sites outside of Visby, without car (ibid). To do this, the destination needs to develop three visitor routes (stråk) on Gotland: South, North and East, where a package of attractive activities, accommodation and food needs to be developed. The visitor routes could for instance be open different days during low season, which means that the companies along the different routes do not have to be open every day during low season. Consequently, the visitor can stay on the different routes every week but not on every route every day. The ambition is therefore to have one route open every day during low season (Region Gotland,2019).

5. Results

Seasonality on Gotland have been discussed with deep commitment from the interviewees. The topic has awakened emotions, and the companies have had strong opinions about seasonality on Gotland. The result from this study divides into themes that was the most central during the data collection. The result covers causes for seasonality, effects from seasonality and strategies, policies for dealing with seasonality.

5.1 Reasons for seasonal fluctuation Climate and weather

The result from the study highlight multiple reasons for un uneven annually business

operation. All interviewees point out climate factors as one of the main causes for seasonality fluctuations. The companies point out that Gotland’s value proposition has always been sun and bath and that is the reason for a high visitor peak in summer. Since the companies in this study offer nature-based activities, the nature steers their ability to offer certain activities to potential customers. One tourism operator active in a nature reserve says:

(20)

On the contrary, some companies claim that the activities offered are not per see impossible to offer during off season. One activity offered by three companies, mountain-biking can for instance be offered all-year around as long as the winter is free of snow. Other water-based activities such as surfing, or fishing are also possible to offer during the winter months. “…Cold water surfing could potentially attract visitors here during the winter months…” [Eric]. Golf is another activity which can be provided during the winter months depending on weather conditions. However, as several facilities of the companies are built for the warm summer-season the nature-based activities can still be hard to offer during the winter months.

“…Our facility today is not fit for winter habitation; it is entirely built for the summer season…” [Peter]

Other interviewees point out other weather-related factors when trying to be open during low season. Early snow creates issues such as road maintenance, sanding of roads and

enlightenment are present, which becomes an obstacle, both practically and economically for the nature-based businesses.

Institutional factors

The companies also point out institutional factors as reason for seasonality. The industry vacation in Sweden, have led to the visitor peak in July and August. Three companies point out the fact that Gotland as destination only have one real target group: Mälardalen. The number of visitors is therefore highly connected to the institutional factors in that specific area around Stockholm, where school breaks and public holidays contribute to visitor peaks.

“…One of the reasons for seasonality fluctuations is that we put to much focus on Mälardalen as a target group and they all have vacations at the same time…” [Anton]

Lifestyle motives

Lifestyle entrepreneurship is also identified as a reason for the uneven tourism business operation period. Most of the companies were focused on operating in the high season, during the three summer months and spending time elsewhere during the rest of the year. As an example, Eva has been running her tourism business for two seasons and one of the reasons for starting the business is connected to her lifestyle:

(21)

Geographical factors

The geographical location of the destination Gotland is another main cause for seasonal variations according to the companies of this study. The number of connections to the island with both aircraft and ferry lines are uneven during the year which contributes to visitor numbers and seasonality. Three companies in the study have identified several difficulties regarding the geographical location: (1) the accessibility to the island, (2) the price on getting to the island with both ferries and aviation and (3) the lack of available tickets.

“…How do you get to Gotland? If we had direct flights from London and Berlin, or ferries from Germany Gotland would have been a more all year-around product, but we have just one real connection: Stockholm…” [Anton]

“… Many of those people that are planning to visit us complain about the price to get to the island, both by ferry and airplane…” [Oscar]

“…Gotland has, traditionally had a lack of capacity on the ferries, it means: more people want to go here during some stages of the year (e.g., the autumn school break) than the ferries can handle...” [Anton]

The competition from other destinations is another important reason for the low visitor number outside high season. The weather uncertainty on Gotland is considered high from the interviewees’ perspective and that is why potential costumers select other destinations. During spring and autumn, the water-based activities and golf drives people to other destinations, especially to the south of Europe.

“…The customers are weather sensitive, it can be sunny on Gotland in springtime, but the people don’t take any risks, they rather fly to Portugal, Spain or Greece to play their golf…” [Oscar]

5.2 Effects of Seasonality Carrying capacity

(22)

tourists, even during the busy summer months. Peter who runs a company at a Gotlandic beach offering water-based activities draws parallels to other Island destination where overcrowding is a significant larger issue:

“…Mallorca, which is geographically as big as Gotland has 12 million visitors annually, Gotland has just around 450 000…” [Peter]

Seasonal employment

The tourism seasonality has great impacts on the recruitment of staff members. All companies in the study have seasonal workers that are only hired during the busy

summertime. Several companies have therefore faced problems to get hold of staff member when having open in low season, since the seasonal workers have not arrived at the

destination. Eva recognise this issue:

“…In May, for example, the visitor numbers are low but sometimes we are in need for more Labour, which we can’t get hold of in May… [Eva]

During high season in summer, the ability to recruit employees have been perceived as easy according to the interviewees. They often have seasonal workers that returns every year, and they come from all over Sweden to work on Gotland during summer. One of the reasons behind returning seasonal workers relates to companies’ variety of different activities offered. It makes them attractive workplaces since the companies are more than just an

accommodation facility or restaurant. Anton have been running his company for five years and think it is relatively easy to attract workers to his site.

“… It is always a problem in seasonal tourism to train new employees, but as the job tasks usually are quite easy to learn we don’t recognize it as a big problem…” [Anton]

Recover and repair

The off season in winter months is seen to be a time for recovery and planning for the new season. The companies highlight the importance to be able to look over their facilities during winter and make necessary changes and/or renovations when preparing for the upcoming season. Oscar is managing a golf course and they look over their entire business during low season:

(23)

Multiple companies mention the positive effects from seasonality on Gotland, where the nature have time in off-season to recover from the heavy tourist activity in summer. The warm summer season also requires less energy when it comes to the use of resources. The facilities of the companies are mainly made for the summer which means that heating would have been necessary if being open during wintertime.

“…It might be quite unsustainable to be open all year around, or even in September if the facilities have to be heated with fossil fuel, oil for instance…” [Erik]

5.3 Seasonal adaption Staff reduction

The companies respond to seasonality in various ways. All five companies in the study have seasonal employees and use staff reduction during off-season. The number of staff members increases successively from April to June and reach the top in July and August. When the peak is reached, the number of staff members is decreasing in a similar pace as in spring, until the closing in fall.

“… We are seven people working in May and it stays so until Midsummer. By July, the number is 27 and reduces to seven again in the middle of August…” [Eva]

Pricing

Differential pricing is used by four companies, depending on season and demand. It is however, mainly connected to the lodging business of the companies. The nature-based activities usually stay in the same pricing all year around regardless of season and the price is not reduced neither increased.

“… The pricing on the nature-based activities is at the level which is necessary to be

profitable… We can not reduce the price, then there is no point in being open…” [Anton]

Close down

To close the business during off season is made by all interviewed companies in one way or another. One company is totally closed during off-season, they open the 1st of May and close the 30th of September. Another company is open daily May until September and during weekends until Christmas. The remaining three companies can offer their activities for short periods during low season depending on weather conditions and special costumer demand.

(24)

Other occupations

Several interviewees are leaving the island during the winter months. One of them is running a tourism business at a winter destination and return to Gotland in April. Another tourism entrepreneur leaves Gotland for Spain during winter.

“…We are quite satisfied with the way it is. We like to be in Spain four months during winter, have a time off and return to Gotland to work all summer long. We want it like that…” [Eva] Two of the other entrepreneurs stay on the island and have their seasonal companies as the single source of income. Another company change the value proposition and switch from having tourist as a target group during summer to the local residence of Gotland as their main costumers during winter months.

“…To create another product and reach a new target group, different from the summer tourist have been important to us. It has been achieved through the inside activity centre, which has a season contrary to tourism...” [Erik]

Events as tools

Creating events to strengthen the low season is used as a strategy by several companies. Some companies host events, even though it is done in a limited number. The creation of different events is considered time demanding by some interviewees and that is why

companies are restrictive with the number of events. One interviewee point out that an event can attract many visitors to their site at the event, but the next coming days will be less busy than normal because the people went there during the event. However, two companies are arranging a few sport events yearly to boost the low season, especially in the springtime. It is seen as an advantage to do it in the beginning of the season when the staff just arrived, instead of in fall when the staff is tired after a long busy season. The sport events consist of mountain-bike races, swimming, running, triathlon and golf competition as some example.

“…It is a marketing advantage to host events in spring. You get people early to the island that start to talk and spread words about Gotland. If you host events during September, the people tend to forget about Gotland until next summer…” [Anton]

Extending the season

(25)

companies operating on Gotland. They point out the importance to get the season to start earlier, in May before the Swedish summer school vacations and extend it to the end of September. If they succeed with that, their businesses will boost. Eric, who has been running his company for 20 years is focused on the shoulder season:

“…We want our spring and autumn activity packages to finally flourish. The goal should be to get 10 of them in spring and 10 in autumn. To offer activities during November, December, January, February, and March is not in our strategy, because we don’t need that...” [Eric]

Regional strategies

The work by regional authorities to implement a common strategy for creating a all year around destination have been seen with some scepticism from the nature-based companies. The fact that Region Gotland works and tries to boost the off-season is received positively but the way it is done is questioned. The companies stress the high economical risk of keeping open during off season when connecting to the regional idea of creating different stråk (see chapter 4.1).The companies think that they as entrepreneurs potentially will have to pay a high price if the strategy gets implemented but not successfully.

“There is no economical buffer in our companies to be open if there are no customers. The margins are to small in tourism, basically.” [Peter]

The lack of will

Several interviewees claim that the will to create all year around tourism is missing.

Especially from the perspective of the tourism companies. The companies can not identify a current organisation on Gotland that works exclusively with the goal to mitigate seasonality and create all year around tourism. There is no common ambition among the nature-based companies which is one of the reasons behind the short operating tourism season on Gotland. “There is no collective will on Gotland, the entrepreneurs are quite happy. If they were not maybe you would have done something about it… [Anton] If a shared will would have been present regarding seasonality the strategies of public and private organisations could have been much more successful and easier acknowledged according to the interviewees.

(26)

6. Analysis

Tourism seasonality is a complex topic and this study confirms that fact. The interviewees have identified seasonality in their own individual way, and the perceptions on seasonal aspects on Gotland are diversified. In this chapter, the result from the study is analyzed and discussed together with previous studies presented in the theory section of this study.

Climate, Lifestyles, and location

The interviewees all identified the most obvious cause for seasonality: the climate aspect. Gotland’s climate invites to a high visitor peak during the warmest summertime in June, July and August. Since the companies in the study are offering nature-based activities, climate is one major issue that put constraints on their businesses. These climate factors have been identified in the literature (Hartman, 1986; Butler, 1994) as being more affected to destinations further away from the equator and indeed, Gotland can be labelled as a high-latitude, peripheral destination with high weather uncertainty. The literature points out (Smith, 1990) that most nature-based tourism depend heavily on climate bonded attractions which can only be offered under the right weather and climate conditions. This is partly true for the nature-based companies on Gotland, however activities such as Surfing, hiking, and mountain-biking are activities that can potentially be offered during winter season. The companies point out that the activity could potentially be offered, however Gotland as a destination must find a new target group.

Lifestyle motives were found in the study, and most of the interviewees were running their businesses because of the seasonal variations. Several companies were satisfied with the short operating business period on Gotland and their start up objective was to have a seasonal business. This has been seen in previous studies at micro levels where entrepreneurs did not have a stated goal of extending the seasonal business and where growth did not play a significant role (Ateljevic and Doorne, 2000; Getz and Nilsson, 2004; Getz and Carlsen, 2000; Galloway, 2008). The unwillingness from the nature-based companies is probably one main reason behind the failure of extending the seasons on Gotland. A common will of stretching the season or creating new seasons have not been identified at a micro level which affects Gotland´s opportunity to be an all-year around tourist destination.

(27)

described as complicated and expensive by the interviewees. They sometimes consider the accessibility to Gotland as a larger issue than their actual ability to offer nature-based

activities all-year around. Allcock (1989) also indicate that remote and peripheral destinations can face problems when attempting to develop a new all year around product due to the dependency on physical limitations.

Sustainability issues

In the literature, multiple studies point out negative effects from seasonality due to a high visitor peak within a limited time frame. It can result in overcrowding and problems with short-term employment (Bar On, 1975; Butler, 1994). In this study, the interviewees have experienced the issue differently. The entrepreneurs claim that their nature-based activities are moveable since they easily can be offered all around on Gotland. They can therefore spread the impact on the environment as well as avoiding crowding. Several companies find it relatively easy to hire personal, and the short summer season on Gotland is rather seen as something positive when starting the recruitment process. However, If the companies open their business temporary during low season hiring people can be problematic but employment connected to seasonality can be seen a small issue in the context of nature-based tourism on Gotland.

Possibilities of growth

The nature-based companies in the study stress the possibility for Gotland to increase the number of visitors, even during the busy summertime. The carrying capacity is has not been reached and overcrowding is not recognized as a problem. Gotland is indeed a very seasonal destination, but the interviewees refer to destinations geographically similar such as

Mallorca, which have very high visitor numbers comparatively to Gotland. Additionally, the activities offered by the companies are often movable and can take place all around Gotland. Especially mountain-biking and the water-based activities which spread out the impacts on the environment.

(28)

Coping with seasonality

The interviewees are adapting to seasonality in multiple ways. It aligns partly with previous research (Butler, 1994; Weaver and Lawton, 2002; Baum and Hagen, 1999) where

differential pricing, staff reduction, extension of the main season and events are noticeable. Staff reduction has been identified as a tool to respond to seasonal variations. All the nature-based companies have few employees hired annually but a dozen employees hired in the peak season.

Differential pricing is being used, in a limited manner but it is rarely connected to the nature-based activities. It is usually connected to the accommodation business of the companies, but pricing is not used strategically to attract visitor during low season. The interviewees are closing their business for some part of the year and those ones having other business either leave the island during wintertime or change their product and target group.

To extend the main summer season have been interesting to the companies, rather than creating new seasons. However, it is a question about few weeks and the will of creating all year around tourism is missing. The companies are relatively satisfied with the situation as it is today, with a high visitor-peak in summertime. To increase the visitor number in the beginning and end of the summer would be nice, but it is not an urgent measure they have to use. Their company’s existence is not depending on shoulder seasons. On the contrary, since the margins are low in tourism the companies find it risky to open their businesses during low season. The budget is limited, and they can not afford to be open if there is no guarantee that visitor will come. Events are also used by the interviewees, especially sport competitions. To create small events is described as an interesting marketing tool but not really strategies that alone would create new seasons, or even extend the main season. It is also considered as time consuming and costly to host events for small nature-based businesses and that is one of the reasons why it is carried out in limited numbers.

Conflicting strategies

(29)

about the ideas of open during off-season and generally: the ideas are great in theoretical terms, but bad practically. The costs to be open, and the uncertainty about the outcome are to high and the companies are doubtful whether tourist would come and visit their sites during off-season. If the will of creating all-year around tourism had been present, the nature-based companies would have done something about it themselves. Several companies mention that ideas coming from a bottom-up approach usually are more successful. It seems like top-down strategies are harder to implement on micro levels and in this case the nature-based

companies are not entirely convinced about the ideas stemmed from the Region of Gotland.

7. Conclusions

Seasonality in tourism is in general regarded as a problem to be tackled at a policy and marketing level. It is a question about an imbalance in demand and are expressed through the numbers of visitors. This study looked at the phenomenon of seasonality from a micro-level perspective. The aim of the study was to explore perspective of Gotlandic nature-based tourism companies on seasonality, all in order to increase the understanding on seasonality aspects in tourism. The entrepreneurs perceive seasonality as something natural to Gotland as a destination and they adept their businesses to seasonal variations on Gotland. It is not perceived as a big problem, even though an extension of the season is interesting. Several aspects motivate to their perceptions. The two basic origins of the seasonality phenomenon: natural seasonality and institutional factors have been identified as motives in this study. The interviewees all stress the fact that their businesses depend on weather conditions and not least institutional factors where the industrial holidays in Sweden contributes to a high visitor peak in summer. However, lifestyle motives are strong for running a nature-based company on Gotland and seasonal variations enables the companies to run their businesses during the warm summer-season. Therefore, an important conclusion from this study is that seasonality is not a big issue that needs to be urgently solved - at least not from the perspective of local nature-based businesses.

(30)

and finding seasonal workers, employed on short time. The nature-based companies find it relatively easy to find seasonal workers and it is not ranked as a big issue in contrast to previous studies.

The overall results from the study differs with the regional strategies initiated by Region Gotland, within which the development of new seasons, traveling reasons and events are main tools for answering seasonality. Great efforts in mitigating seasonality have been done for many decades on Gotland, with limited effect. The question is therefore if sustainable destination development in the context of Gotland includes all-year around tourism? Other sectors might be more suitable for creating employment and tax revenues all year around on Gotland. To this point, the nature-based companies have not been deeply included in the strategic work related to seasonality. To include more stakeholders when identifying

development strategies would make them more powerful and consequently more successful. Broad participation would also strengthen the possibility to implement the strategy. Future studies could look at how other tourism stakeholders, apart from nature-based understand the seasonality aspect and if it is a phenomenon that needs to be counterattacked.

8. References

Andersson, T. and Getz, D. (2009). Tourism as a mixed industry: Differences between private, public, and not-for-profit festivals. Tourism Management. 30. 847-856. 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.12.008.

Ashworth, J. & Thomas, B. (1999). Patterns of seasonality in employment in tourism in the UK. Applied Economics Letter, 6 (11): 735-739.

Ateljevic and Doorne. (2000). Staying within the fence: Lifestyle entrepreneurship in tourism Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8 (5) (2000), pp. 378-392

(31)

Ball, R. M. (1988). Seasonality: a problem for workers in the tourism labour market? Service Industries Journal, 8 (4): 501-513.

Ball, R. M. (1989). Some aspects of tourism, seasonality and local labour markets. Area, 21 (1): 35-45.

Bar On, R.V. (1975). Seasonality in Tourism. A Guide to the Analysis of Seasonality and Trends for Policy Making. London: The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd., Technical Series N. 2.

Baum, T. (1999). Seasonality in Tourism: Understanding the Challenges: Introduction. Tourism Economics, 5(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/135481669900500101

Baum, T. (1998). Responding to Seasonality in Peripheral Destinations, Insights, January, London: BTA/ETB, pp.A107-115.

Baum, T. & Hagen, L. (1999). Responses to seasonality: the experiences of peripheral destinations. International Journal of Tourism Research, 1 (5): 299-312.

Blass Nogueira, M., Casamayor Lagarda, J., Diaz Mier, M. e Rivas P. (1968). La

Estaciolalidad en el Turismo y sus Posibles Correctivos. Cuadernos Monograficos N.11. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Turisticos.

Bryman, A. (2011) Samhällsvetenskapliga metoder. Upplaga 2 Malmö: Liber.

Brännäs, K. & Nordström, J. (2002). Tourist Accommodation Effects of Festivals. University, Department of Economics, Umea Economic Studies N. 580. Umea.

Butler, R. (1994). Seasonality in Tourism: Issues and Problems

A. Seaton, et al. (Eds.), Tourism: The Status of the Art, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 332-339

(32)

Butler, R. (1998), "Seasonality in tourism: Issues and implications", The Tourist Review, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 18-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb058278

Calantone, R. & Johar, J.S. (1984). Seasonal segmentation of the tourism market using a benefit segmentation framework, Journal of Travel Research, 23 (2): 14-24.

Cannas, R. (2012) An Overview of Tourism Seasonality: Key Concepts and Policies. Almatourism - Journal of Tourism, Culture and Territorial Development, [S.l.], v. 3, n. 5, p. 40-58, aug. 2012. ISSN 2036-5195.

Corluka, Goran. (2019). Tourism seasonality- an overview.

Coopers & Lybrand Consulting (1996). Special report on off and shoulder season marketing, for the Canadian Tourism Commission. Ottawa.

Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Whittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. (3rd ed.) (pp. 119-161). Old Tappan, NJ: Macmillan.

Flogenfelt, T. (1988). The employment paradox of seasonal tourism', paper presented at Pre-Congress Meeting of the International Geographical Union, Christchurch, NewZealand,1988

Galloway (2008). Seasonality in the Tourism Industry: Impacts and Strategies. Technical Report, CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd. Australia.

Getz, D. (1998). The Impacts of Mega Events on Tourism: Strategies and Research Issues for Destinations, Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, Proceedings of the 8th

Australian Tourismand Hospitality Research Conference, Gold Coast.

Getz, D. (2008). Event Tourism: Definition, evolution, and research, Tourism Management, 9 (3): 403-428.

Getz, D. & Nilsson, P. A. (2004). Responses of family businesses to extreme seasonality in demand: the case of Bornholm. Tourism Management, 25(1): 17-30

(33)

Gotland in figures (2017). https://www.gotland.se/104323

Grant, M., Human, B., and LePelley, B. (1997). Seasonality, Insights. Vol. 9, No. 1, 5-9

Hartmann, R. (1986). Tourism, seasonality, and social change. Leisure Studies, 5 (1): 25-33

Hall, C. M. (1992). Hallmark Tourist Events: Impacts, Management and Planning. London: Belhaven Press

Higham, J. & Hinch,T. D. (2002). Tourism, sport and seasons: the challenges and potential of overcoming seasonality in the sport and tourism sectors. Tourism Management, 23 (2): 175- 185.

Hinch, T., Hickey, G. (1997). Tourism Attractions and Seasonality: Spatial Relationships in Alberta. Proceedings of the Travel and Tourism Research Association, Canadian Chapter, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.

Hinch, T. D. & Jackson, E. L. (2000). Leisure constraints research: its value as a framework for understanding tourism seasonality. Current Issues in Tourism, 3 (2): 87-106.

Hylleberg, S. (1992), Modeling seasonality, Oxford University Press

Jang S. (2004) Mitigating tourism seasonality: a quantitative approach, Annals of Tourism Research 31(4), 819–836. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2004.02.007

Jeffrey, D., Barden, R. R. D. (1999). An Analysis of the Nature, Causes and Marketing Implications of Seasonality in the Occupancy Performance of English Hotels, Tourism Economics, Vol. 5, No. 1, 119-140.

Kvale, S & Brinkmann S. (2009). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. Uppl. 2. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Koenig, N., Bischo, E. E. (2004), “Analyzing Seasonality in Welsh Room Occupancy Data”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 31, No. 2, 374-392.

(34)

Lundtorp, S., Rassing, C. R., and Wanhill, S. (1999). The off-season is „no season‟: the case of the Danish island of Bornholm, Tourism Economics, Vol. 5, No. 1, 49-68. https://doi. org/10.1177/135481669900500104

Manning, R. E. & Powers, L. A. (1984). Peak and off-peak use: redistributing the outdoor recreation/tourism load. Journal of Travel Research, 23 (2): 25-31.

Mergenthaler, E., and C. H. Stinson. (1992). Psychotherapy transcription standards.Psychotherapy Research2 (2): 125–42.

Merriam, S.B. (2009). A Guide to Design and Implementation

Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

McEnnif, J. (1992). Seasonality of tourism demand in the European community. Travel and Tourism Analyst3, 67–88

McLellan, E., MacQueen, K. M. and Neidig, J. L. (2003). Beyond the qualitative interview: Data preparation and transcription, Field methods, 15, 1, pp. 63-84.

Mourdoukoutas, P. (1988). Seasonal Employment, Seasonal Unemployment and

Unemployment Compensation: the case of the Tourist Industry of the Greek Island, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 47 (3): 315:329.

Murphy, P. E. (1985). Tourism, A Community Approach. London: Methuen.

Region Gotland. (2019). Regional besöksnäringsstrategi för Gotland. Fastställd avregionfullmäktige 2019-02-25 https://www.gotland.se/102749

Smith K. (1990). Tourism and climate change. Land Use Policy 7(2): 176–180

Spencer D. M. and Holecek D. F. (2007). Basic characteristics of the fall tourism market, Tourism Management 28(2), 491–504. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.03.005

Sutcliffe, C. M. & Sinclair, M. T. (1980). The measurement of seasonality within the tourist industry: an application to tourist arrivals in Spain. Applied Economics, 12(4): 429-441.

(35)

Weaver, D & Lawton, L. (2014). Tourism Management. 5th edition. Milton Old: John Wiley & Sons.

Williams, A. M. & Shaw, G. (1991). Tourism and Economic Development. Western European Experiences (2° ed.). Chichester: Wiley & Sons.

9.Appendix

Interview template

Background question

Q1: Could you tell me a little about yourself and your role in the company?

Q2: How is the company organisation build up?

Q3: How long have you worked with the company and what have you been doing previously?

Main questions

Causes of seasonality

Q4 How does the business look like during a whole year?( what do you think about that?)

Q5 What are the reasons for the seasonal fluctuations? (with a peak-season in summer)

Q6 What are your business aiming at? Is there a dream scenario? How should the business operation preferably look like during a 12-months period?

Effects

Q7. How are you impacted by the seasonal fluctuations? (from a Sustainability perspective)

(E.g Over- Crowding in peak demand periods, lack of capacity, closed facilities in some part of the year, for visitors and locals. Problems in attracting and keeping the skilled employees)

Policies and Strategies

Q8 How do you respond to seasonality? (e.g. staff reduction, using differential pricing, cloing down, other business, all-weather resort facilities, creating events)

Q9 What do you do when(if) the business is closed?

Q10What do you think about:

(36)

• lengthen the main season,

• create events and festivals, which can create a whole “new” season • Encouraging the domestic tourism in off season

• Encouraging international tourism in off season • using differential pricing

Q11How are other actors on Gotland working with seasonal variations?

Q12 What do you think should (if something should) be done by Gotland (the region, tourism organisations, Marketing organisations, local businesses) connected to seasonality aspects?

Seasonality on Gotland - a local business perspective

Examensarbete 30 hp

Juni 2020

Seasonality on Gotland - a local

business perspective

Abstract

Seasonality on Gotland - a local business perspective

Acknowledgments

Table of contents

1.Introduction

2. Understanding seasonality in tourism

2.3 Policies and strategies

3. Method

4. The island of Gotland

5. Results

6. Analysis

7. Conclusions

8. References

9.Appendix

Background question

Main questions