Tourism Competitiveness in three Scandinavian countries

What do you come up with when it comes to Northern Europe?

You might be thinking about Viking, Snow activities, or even a high level of happiness?

Scandinavia refers to a group of three countries in Northern Europe; Norway, Sweden, and Denmark because of their shared cultural and historical endowments. According to the Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2019, despite the fierce competition, three Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, and Denmark) are highly competitive in the overall ranking of tourism competitiveness, ranking 20th, 21st, and 22nd, respectively. Also, looking at pillar performance, with a few exceptions, the three Scandinavian countries are similar in many of the 14 rankings.

This article will define Norway, Sweden, and Denmark as one region as "Scandinavian Tourism" and analyze and discuss the difference between the three countries and the region’s strengths and weaknesses. and try to find the differences.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Scandinavian Tourism

The three Scandinavian countries highly ranked overall performance and pillar performance, making them relatively competitive destinations.

The common strengths of the three countries are,

(1) ICT Readiness
(2) Environmental Sustainability
(3) Human Resources, and Labor Market.

On the other hand, the top 3 weaknesses are,

(1) Price Competitiveness
(2) Natural Resources
(3) Tourist Service Infrastructure.

If the priority places on "overcoming the weaknesses" rather than "strengthening the strengths" (because the advantages are primarily hardware related; once reinforced, it can use for a long time), the three weaknesses need to be improved.

However, it is unrealistic to try to improve the Price Competitiveness because it would change the structure of the state.

Therefore, the key to competitiveness will be developing products and programs that utilize natural resources and tourist infrastructures such as accommodation or resort facilities. Although due to the differences in geography and tourism policies among the three countries, the same measures may not always be successful; unlike Denmark, which lacks a proactive approach to tourism development, Norway and Sweden have a lot of potential. Also, this paper suggests enhancing “LST” which is the combination of luxury tourism and sustainable tourism.

Tourism Competitiveness in three Scandinavian countries

In the overall rankings, the three Scandinavian countries rank 20th, 21st, and 22nd, respectively. Moreover, many of the 14 indicators of pillar performance show that the three Scandinavian countries are in an interactive ranking pattern. As described earlier, having excluded Price Competitiveness as a weakness, the critical areas for improving Scandinavian tourism to enhance competitiveness are the Natural Resources and Tourist Service Infrastructure.

Figure 1. Scandinavia pillar performance ranking overview, created from The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2019

Natural Resources, which is ranked by the number of UNESCO World Heritage Sites and the size of national parks and nature reserves, is a far cry from the public image of the Nordic region with all three ranking in the low 50s. Looking at the number of UNESCO natural heritage sites in the three countries, it is surprising that only Sweden has one (UNESCO, 2021). In the case of Denmark, this can be attributed to THE END OF TOURISM in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, which declares that its tourism resources are its citizens, without competition based on general tourism resources (Wonderful Copenhagen, 2017). Thus, Denmark is not supportive of lobbying to increase the number of World Natural Heritage sites and enhance the tourism industry.

On the other hand, both Norway and Sweden seem to be taking a proactive stance in expanding tourism more than Denmark, as it shows in Prioritization T&T in pillar performance. For instance, Norway has a long-term and detailed strategy for 2030 (VisitNorway, n.d.). Also, Jämtland Härjedalen, a province in the center of Sweden, clearly stated that “the tourism industry is a primary industry” (Jämtland Härjedalen, 2018, page.7) in its strategy paper.

Therefore, different policies and stances for tourism exist between the three countries. Also, the scarcity of Natural Resources is, on the contrary, an indication of a positive attitude toward nature conservation. According to Grobetrender, sustainable tourism has been very successful in Norway and Sweden, ranking high in the world rankings (Grobetrender, 2021, page.1). Therefore, the combination of luxury tourism, which minimizes the risk of destruction, and sustainable tourism (referred to as LST), have great affinity and potential.

Luxury Tourism and Sustainable Tourism

Especially, Norway and Sweden, which are geographically rich in natural resources, have a lot of possibilities to become the world's leading countries in LST, depending on the development of products and programs. In the two countries, there are some unique nature-themed luxury hotels. For example, in Norway, the Whitepod Eco-luxury Hotel is a glass-walled cabin cottage built into a fjord (Manshausen, n.d.).

Also, The Sala Silvermine Hotel is a hotel built in a silver mine cave that is deeper than any other in the world (Sala Silvergruva, n.d.) in Sweden. In other words, Norway and Sweden do not need to seek UNESCO World Natural Heritage level Natural Resources to increase their competitiveness ranking. Instead, it needs to improve its unique tourist services (adequate quality accommodation, resorts, and entertainment facilities) and infrastructure (such as car rental and ATMs) included in Tourist Service Infrastructure that directly affects customer satisfaction. However, environmental protection should still be a prerequisite for all development; for instance, all rental vehicles should be electric vehicles that do not emit CO2.

CONCLUSION

Although the three Scandinavian countries surveyed in this report have a lot of similarities such as high prices or rich natural resources, this report discovered that tourism policy is different in Denmark compared to Norway and Sweden.

In addition, the trend of "luxury market" and "sustainable tourism" in Norway and Sweden has great potential. In particular, Norway and Sweden are expected to improve their competitiveness ranking by improving their Tourist Service Infrastructure. However, environmental protection is a prerequisite for all tourism development, and the two counties consistently should maintain their tourism policy of environmental protection.

REFERENCES

World Economic Forum (2019). The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2019 World Economic Forum (WEF). Retrieved October 15, 2021,from https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TTCR_2019.pdf.

UNESCO World Heritage. “World Heritage List.” UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Retrieved October 15, 2021, from
https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/.

Grobetrender. (2021) “Sweden Ranked Best Country in the World for Sustainable Tourism.” Globetrender, 8 July 2021, October 15, 2021, from https://globetrender.com/2021/07/08/sweden-best-country-sustainable- 

Sala Silvergruva. (n.d.) website features panoramic images of their hotels
 ( https://www.salasilvergruva.se/. )

MANSHAUSEN. (n.d.) website features panoramic images of their hotels
 ( https://www.manshausen.no/. )

VisitNorway. (n.d.) Visit Norway Insights, Retrieved October 15, 2021, from https://business.visitnorway.com/en/english/.

Jämtland Härjedalen. (2018) ”Jämtland Härjedalen – leaders in nature based experiences” Strategy 2030: For the Tourism Industry Retrieved October 15, 2021, from
https://jht.se/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/strategy_english_lowres.pdf.