Antecedentes de proyectos de diseño de interiores en vagones ferroviarios

between the adventure tourism industries of Norway and NZ. While NZ have managed to develop and market activities such as jet boating and the luge which are not to be found in Norway, most other activities are similar in the two countries. Different historical, cultural, climatic and economic contexts have shaped the industries in various ways. The following analysis is deemed to be superficial, as an in-depth analysis will go beyond the scope of this thesis. The factors discussed are seasonality, differences in markets and differences in marketing.

Seasonality

Both Norway and NZ can be described as having tempered climates, while parts of the North Island of New Zealand can be regarded as sub-tropical. The tourism seasons of the two countries still differs, were New Zealand’s main season is considerably longer than in Norway. The following graph, based on recent month- wise accommodation statistics from statistics Norway and statistics NZ illustrates this:

Figure 5 International overnight stays in New Zealand and Norway 2013-2014.

Source: Statistics Norway and Statistics NZ.Numbers compiled by Rolf Dahl for the purpose of this thesis.

0 200 000 400 000 600 000 800 000 1 000 000 1 200 000 1 400 000 1 600 000 1 800 000 13 01 13 02 13 03 13 04 13 05 13 06 13 07 13 08 13 09 13 10 13 11 13 12 14 01 14 02 14 03 Yearmonth New Zealand Norge

The graph shows both the longer main season of NZ and also how the year-round traffic is higher in New Zealand than in Norway. The lowest number of overnight in New Zealand is June with about 630 000 overnights. This would be the fourth best month in Norway.

The graph illustrates differences highly relevant for the adventure tourism industry. The short summer season in Norway make it challenging to make a sustainable income. The businesses also become more vulnerable when most of the income must be made in the few months of summer; bad weather or particular incidences such as a closed road or a cut-down in public transport services will have greater impact on the total income. It is also more challenging for the businesses to develop a regular staff; full time employees will rarely be found in adventure tourism businesses following the main tourism seasons. As Flognfeldt (2013) observes, the main growth potential in Norwegian adventure tourism businesses is to develop products which prolong the seasons by e.g. being popular in the domestic market, which is less characterized by seasonality.

The longer main tourism season in New Zealand makes it easier not only to increase yearly income, but also to employ more people full time. One of the reasons for choosing NZ businesses for the case studies is to see how more full time employees influence potential for knowledge development and innovation. Being able to run adventure tourism businesses at least nearly full year round is likely to influence competence levels.

Market differences and differences in average length of stay

The international market has been growing steadily over decades in New Zealand, and it is the growth in these markets which have accounted for the growth in adventure tourism. This may also be seen in light of the average length of stay in NZ, which is 20 nights. New Zealand can be described as a geographical outskirts, so the visits tend to be longer. This leaves much time not only for seeing the country but also for taking part in different nature based activities, both commercial and non-commercially.

No average length of stay was found from international visitors to Norway, but the recent visitor survey (Innovation Norway, 2013) give numbers from some of the main markets; Netherland:15 nights, Germany:14 nights, Scandinavian counties: 7 nights. The numbers are from Norway and NZ are not directly comparable as they are based on different measurement methods. The NZ data are based on visitor arrivals/ departures, while the Norwegian numbers are based on data collection from commercial accommodation providers.

While the domestic market is important for the adventure tourism industry of both countries, the home market is more crucial in Norway. Tourists from Norway have been found to account for about 70% of total amounts of participants (Aas et al, 2006).

The differences must be seen in relation to the costs of visiting Norway and New Zealand. The high prices of Norway surely will scare a large portion of tourists from attending to commercial activities; the budget is rather spent on food and accommodation. Commercial activities must be seen as a supplementary product, which will be dropped in a tighter economic situation. The continued well-being of the Norwegian economy makes the domestic market both the biggest but also the more robust to go after.

The average age of the visitors differs widely between the two countries, a factor which one may assume influences the adventure tourism industry. The age of international visitor to New Zealand is evenly split in four groups between the ages of 20-60 years, accounting for 70% of all international arrivals (Ministry of tourism, 2009). These are: 20-29 years (18%), 30-39 years (18%), 40-49 years (17%) and 50-59 years (17%). The groups below 20 years and from 60-69 are quite the same (13% and 12 % respectively). The median age is 33 years. In comparison the average age of international visitors to Norway is quite high. In the biggest markets counting Germany and the Scandinavian markets the average age is above 50 years. The youngest market is the Chinese with an average of 43 years.

Statistics from NZ, in which adventure tourism is defined as the participation in a long list of specified adventure tourism activities, find that the younger age groups are more likely to participate in adventure tourism activities. The age groups from 20-29 is most likely to participate, and the older the tourists get the less likely they participate in one of the listed activities (Toursim New Zealand, 2013). It should be kept in mind though that relations between age and participation are very dependent on the definitions of adventure tourism being used.

The marketing of adventure

Cloke and Perkins (2002) describe how the relation between New Zealand, adventure, the outdoors and excitement have been promoted consistently since the 1990s. The national campaigns such as 100% pure have also been followed up through local and regional promotion. NZ has been promoted as an adventurous place, and this has had a wider effect than just for the adventure tourism providers. Cloke and Perkins (2002:544) describe how the promotion of New Zealand as an adventurous place “is an important pointer to adventure as a signifier which moves beyond a particular experience to characterize a place or even a nature”. The associations created have served both to promote New Zealand as an adventurous destination and simultaneously to develop adventure tourism activities into a mainstream tourism product.

Nature has always been central in the marketing of Norway, especially with references to the fjords combined with mountains and glaciers. Nature based activities have only recently been brought specifically forth in marketing campaigns. The recent campaign manual exemplifies this shift in emphasis:

Norway’s unique selling point is its beautiful landscape, but research shows that this alone is not enough to attract tourists to Norway. In the Campaign manual 2014 we have sharpened our focus. We will talk about both nature AND culture. We have shifted the focus from talking about looking at beautiful nature to participating in it. We will also move away from showing images displaying the remote to images filled with people and activities” (Innovation Norway, 2013). The effects of this campaign remain to be seen. The slogan following the campaign above; Norway. Powered by nature, gives associations to clean energy (hydropower is a main electricity source in Norway), sustainability and energy; associations quite similar to the one in the successful 100% pure New Zealand slogan.

This chapter has briefly tried to outline some characteristics of the tourism industries of Norway and NZ, and to examine some findings the scale and importance of the adventure tourism industries in both countries. A general finding is that adventure tourism still is regarded as a narrow niche within the tourism industry of Norway, while it has been an integrated part of the marketing of NZ since the 1990’s and has gradually become mainstream tourism products. This is also refelected in the well developed statistics on the adventure tourism industry of New Zealand, and more research undertaken specifically on this part of the industry.

Referring back to Aldrich’s concept of organizational community, adventure tourism as an organizational community of populations seems to be more mature than the corresponding one in Norway. The adventure tourism industry of NZ seems to have higher legitimacy than it does in Norway; the value of the industry is recognized by both the markets and the industry at large.

The cases of this study vary according to business size, locations and type of activities. In the following the eight businesses are briefly presented with emphasis on the early start-ups of the businesses, types of adventure activities on offer at the time of the case studies, business size and structure and main markets. The presentations are mainly based on interviews with the entrepreneurs and/ or managers. The case descriptions are supplemented by images to illustrate the main adventure products and business facilities.