Development Prospects of Uzbekistan’s Tourism and

Hospitality Industry by Utilizing the EU Experience

Soultana Tania Kapiki ATEI of Thessaloniki

P.O. Box 141, 57400 Thessaloniki, Greece tkapiki@tour.teithe.gr

Marufjon Tarikulov Tashkent State University of Economics

49, Uzbekistan Str., Tashkent-100003, Uzbekistan marufjon78@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this paper is to describe the status quo

regarding tourism and hospitality in Uzbekistan and three

European countries for the period 2007-2012, as well as to

evaluate the development models implemented by the EU

tourism industry and examine which of these models could

be utilized by the Uzbek stakeholders so as to advance and

boost the country’s tourism evolution.

The methodological approach includes: record of tourism

facts and figures in three EU countries, namely in the UK,

Greece and the Czech Republic as well as review of the

different tourism development strategies they implement;

analysis of the Uzbek tourism and hospitality industry and

identification of the distortions and problems hindering the

development of tourism in the country; comparative study

of the data and recommendation of the most appropriate

developmental model to be implemented in Uzbekistan in

order for the country’s tourism to flourish.

The survey shows that the tourism potential of Uzbekistan

is being exploited to a much lower level from its capacity.

The tourism industry and its corresponding products are

dependent on few certain destinations. Lack of qualified

human resources is also a drawback. High level of

bureaucracy related to incoming and outgoing tourism is

observed. Among the three EU developmental models that

have been examined in this paper, it seems that the Czech

model is the most suitable one to be applied in Uzbekistan.

The study is based mostly on secondary data provided by

the tourism authorities of the respective countries and this is

a limitation in this paper. Primary data collected through

questionnaires and interviews and their in-depth analysis

would provide more tangible and useful results.

The findings of this paper may contribute to the

amelioration of tourism in Uzbekistan and trigger further

investigation of the country’s potential for sustainable

growth.

Keywords

Tourism development, hospitality, Uzbekistan

ICTM 2014, Skyline University College, Sharjah, UAE

1. INTRODUCTION

Tourism is considered to be a source of economic growth

worldwide. Tourism spending serves as an alternative

form of exports, contributing to an ameliorated balance of

payments through foreign exchange earnings (Katircioglu,

2009). A balanced and harmonic growth of tourism along

with other basic economic sectors, such as agriculture and

industry, ensures the production of tourist products, as well

as food products and capital equipment which are necessary

for the satisfaction of tourist needs or wishes. As a result,

the development of tourism is generally considered to

contribute positively towards economic growth.

Taking into account that a large proportion of tourist

expenditures are spent on the consumption of non-traded

goods and services in the host country, there exist

factors, which can have either a positive or an unfavorable

impact on economic growth. Non-traded goods and

services are not exportable in the traditional sense,

because their price is not determined in the international

market, but in the local market (Balaguer & Cantavella-

Jorda 2002).

In the last decades, international tourism has been gaining

importance in the economies of many countries. It

continued to grow throughout the world, in line with

vigorous world economic expansion especially in

countries with high tourist outflows (World Bank, 2012).

In 2012 the number of tourists worldwide went up to

1,035 million. By region, Europe remained the leading

tourist destination with 534.2 million visitors, posting a

market share of 51.6% (UNWTO Tourism Highlights,

2013).

The purpose of this paper is to describe the status quo

regarding tourism and hospitality in Uzbekistan and three

European countries (namely the UK, Greece and the Czech

Republic) for the period 2007-2012, as well as to evaluate

the implemented development models and examine which

of these models could be utilized by the Uzbek stakeholders

so as to advance and boost the country’s tourism evolution.

The above information and facts are entirely missing from

the contemporary literature and thus, we conducted our

survey both in the three EU countries which are considered

to be MEDC (More Economic Developed Countries) and

Uzbekistan which is a LEDC (Less Economic Developed

Country), so as to identify answers to the research problem.

For the achievement of our goals, we examine empirically

the correlation between economic growth and tourism

development in a multivariate model that consists of the

hotel supply in the three EU countries and Uzbekistan for

the period 2007-2012 (Table 1); the number of international

tourist arrivals (Figure 2); the international tourism receipts

(Figure 3); and, the UNESCO world heritage sites by country,

by using the comparative statistics analysis technique.

The reason lying behind the choice of the three mentioned

EU countries and Uzbekistan (an evolving tourist

destination located in Central Asia) is twofold. First, the

three European countries in question attract a large number

of tourists but they implement different tourism

development models and strategies, a fact that makes it

valuable for us to analyse different approaches. Second, we

consider that as a result of this analysis we will be able to

select the best model and practices which might be of value

for the development of the Uzbek tourism industry.

The economies of the UK, Greece and the Czech Republic

have evolved very differently during the last century.

Different governance structures and economic policies have

created very distinct paths for the economic growth of the

countries. Given that these three European countries have

some similar tourism features, as for example cultural

tourism, but diverse paths of economic growth, it seems an

interesting pursuit to analyse the relationship between

tourism and economic growth and the social impact of

tourism within the framework suggested above.

The paper has been divided into four main sections: the

section one includes the Introduction and the Literature

Review in which we refer to various studies and

publications related to tourism development. The model

specification and data issues, as well as statistical analysis

combined with some essential figures related to the Uzbek

tourism sector and compared with the three European

countries are presented in the section two (Methodology).

The Key Findings are listed in the section three. And,

finally, concluding remarks as well as recommendations on

the development of the Uzbek tourism sector based on the

findings of the present study are given in the fourth section

(Conclusions).

1.1. LITERATURE REVIEW

Tourism is a dynamic, evolving, consumer-driven force and

is the world's largest industry, or collection of industries.

Tourism plays a foundational role in framing the various

services that hospitability companies perform. Tourism

affects other industry sectors, such as public transportation,

foodservice, lodging, entertainment, and recreation. In

addition, tourism produces secondary impacts on businesses

that are affected indirectly, which is known as the multiplier

effect. From a social and cultural perspective, tourism can

further international understanding and economically

improve poorer countries (Walker, 2010).

In its simplest form the multiplier effect is how many times

money spent by a tourist circulates through a country's

economy. Money spent in a hotel helps to create jobs

directly in the hotel, but it also creates jobs indirectly

elsewhere in the economy. The hotel, for example, has to

buy food from local farmers, who may spend some of this

money on fertilizer or clothes. The demand for local

products increases as tourists often buy souvenirs, which in

turn increases secondary employment

(http://geographyfieldwork.com/TouristMultiplier.htm).

Over the last decades, the growth and development of

tourism as both a social and economic activity has, by any

stretch of the imagination, been remarkable (Sharpley,

2009). In 1970, the total worldwide international tourist

arrivals amounted to just 165.787 million; by the start of the

new millennium, that figure had risen to 696 million and

since then international tourism has continued its growth. In

2011, 980 million international arrivals and $1.031billion

international tourism receipts were recorded (UNWTO). In

2012 the international tourist arrivals surpassed the

milestone of 1 billion tourists globally for the first time in

history and it is foreseen that they will grow by 3-4% in

2013 (UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, April 2013).

In 2000 the total number of jobs generated directly in the

travel and tourism industry plus the indirect and induced

contributions was 788,3 million. In 2012 the total number

declined in 688,8 million jobs (SETE, 2013). Despite this

decline, tourism remains one of the world's most important

sources of employment and for many developing nations it

represents a large percentage of gross national product and

a way of gaining a positive balance of trade with other

nations (Walker, 2010).

The economic development level affects virtually all

aspects of tourism development, including the size and

features of tourism demand, the availability and adequacy

of tourism resources, the characteristics of tourism

development, the organization and management of the

industry, and the impacts of the tourism development.

Therefore, while leisure travel has become a mass

consumption item in developed countries it is still a luxury

in the developing world (Zhen-hua Liu, 1998).

The tourism development model of any country can

determine not only the level of tourist activity but also

sociocultural changes in these countries. Each country has

its own historical development, cultural traditions,

geographical location, local citizens’ involvement and

acceptance of the tourism industry. This is why the

selection of a development orientation can be difficult.

Gartner (1996) argues that the eligible type of development

model for each area depends on the level of public support

for tourism development, resources and attractions

currently in place, level of government involvement and the

size of expected market.

In a pioneer paper, Krapf (1961) concluded that tourism has

a “special function” in developing countries, a function

which he defined in terms of a series of “economic

imperatives”, as follows:

Exploitation of the countries’ own natural resources.

International competitiveness due to favorable terms

of trade.

An ability to provide internally many of the goods and

services required.

Improved balance of payments.

Social utility of investments in tourism: employment

generation and multiplier effect.

Balanced growth.

Krapf alluded that tourism has a perceived ability to

generate, from limited investment in plant and

infrastructure, large sums of capital which may be

transferred to other sectors of the economy. Such action

positively contributes to growth of the developing country

through the multiplier effect of tourism, the creation of

employment, enhancement of education and

professionalism, increased public pride, public revenue,

foreign direct investment and foreign exchange earnings.

After more than 50 years, Krapf’s emphasis on tourism’s

contribution to economic growth and the notion that

tourism has a special function in this regard is still widely

held among the people.

Tourism being a large-scale activity has both positive and

negative effects on the economy, as well as on society and

the environment. Among many other authors, Loon &

Polakow (2001) argue that the economic benefits brought

by tourism development do not always translate into

socioeconomic benefits and environmental sustainability.

However, the majority of researchers and policy makers

agree that tourism enhances infrastructure development and

the redistribution of resources to further the amelioration of

poverty.

Khamidov (2010) mentioned that the tourism industry has

become a top priority in most of the destination countries

and there is increased competition among the countries to

attract tourists. In the face of worldwide increased

competition, Uzbekistan lacks far behind in attracting

relatively larger number of foreign tourists, mainly due to

inadequate and ineffective promotional strategies of the

industry; lack of sufficient funds; low quality of

promotional materials and their improper distribution; and,

perceived negative image of potential tourists about

Uzbekistan. The author also emphasized the importance of

the competition and in order to attract a significant number

of foreign tourists, Uzbekistan needs to give priority to

effective promotional activities. In addition, tour operating

firms need to give proper attention in developing the

promotional materials and special care is required to

incorporate the factors affecting the choice of potential

tourists. Without effective and sufficient promotional

activities from both the public and private sector, there is no

possibility or little possibility to emerge tourism as a major

contributor to the national economy.

Tourism researchers have long been advocating the

importance of tourism destinations to perform appropriate

marketing mix strategies so as to promote the right tourism

products and services (Ahmed & Krohn, 1992; Mill &

Morrison, 1985 as cited in Law et al., 2004). After having

visited the official destination marketing organizations’

websites of Korea and Japan (two of the most visited

destinations by Hong Kong travellers), the authors

commented that these destinations have developed their

websites in a way that promote Hong Kong travellers’

favourite activities such as food, sightseeing and shopping.

From the practical point of view, it is obvious that for

designing effective marketing mix strategies, a country or

organization has to target the appropriate markets first and

then plan product positioning and sales (Deb et al., 2013).

The Uzbekistan Tourism industry is lagging far behind this.

Tukhliev and Kudratov (2007) described the current

situation of Uzbekistan’s tourism industry and the followed

marketing strategies in their research book “Uzbekistan

Tourism Industry”. The authors comment that the

Uzbekistan tourism industry cannot achieve any remarkable

progress compared to other neighbouring (Central Asian)

countries, although the country is endowed with many

tourism attractions. Their criticism is focused mainly on the

failure of the Uzbek National Tourism Board to develop

and launch any dynamic and effective promotional strategy.

Furthermore, they propose the creation of an independent

organization to perform the marketing activities of the

Uzbek National Tourist Board and of the tourism

destinations administered by it. In addition to that they

strongly recommend formulating and implementing the

proper marketing strategy so as to fully exploit the potential

of the tourism market and to avoid any aimless policies

towards mass tourism development in Uzbekistan.

Navruzzoda (1996) mentioned that possessing outstanding

tourism resources is not sufficient to lure the optimal

number of tourists to a tourist destination. According to the

author, tourism promotion plays an important role in

enhancing the competitive edge of one tourist destination

over another because of tourists’ image of a destination and

the attitude of tourists toward that destination seem to be

two of the most important factors responsible for this

variation. As a result, the aggressiveness of the promotion

campaigns launched by tourist destinations has added a new

dimension to competitiveness and has resulted in increasing

numbers of image advertisements in travel and tourism

literature and in the mass media which leads the tourist

destinations to spend billions of dollars annually on image

building and image correction promotion programs.

The author also concluded in his study that in order to

formulate the promotional strategy, the destination’s

promotion strategists should identify the respective images

of different constituents of the total image, and not just one

total image. By determining the most significant

constituents of a destination’s tourist image, the

destination’s promotion strategists should direct

promotional efforts towards inducing a more favourable

image based on those constituents. The appropriate positive

image constituents could then be emphasized in the

promotional programs which may help a destination to re-

emerge from the effects of negative image(s).

The development of tourism in a destination can be

described through three types of tourism development:

Life Cycle Models. The Butler’s (1980) Life Cycle

Model is based on MEDC tourism and it is the most

acceptable model in this category.

Morphological models. The morphological models

explain the morphology of beach resorts recognizing

and determining zones of tourism activity. Weaver’s

model (1993) which recognizes five zones of intensive

tourism activity (Specialized Tourist Zone; Central

Business District; Local Neighbourhoods; Resort Strip;

and, Rural Areas) is probably the most important

morphological model.

Enclave models. The tourism development in the

LEDCs, is traditionally organized with the Enclave

Development method. This type of development allows

the governments to potentially invest in limited

resources at geographically determined and isolated

areas, while at the same time it allows the development

of one product aimed primarily at the tourism market of

the West. Britton’s (1982) Core-Periphery Enclave

Model is one of the well-known models in this category.

A considerable number of less developed countries have

adopted this method. In our opinion Uzbekistan is one

of them.

2. METHODOLOGY

As the main aim of the study has been set to analyse the

tourism development models in three popular European

destinations (the UK, Greece and the Czech Republic) and

to critically assess them in comparison to that of the Uzbek

tourism development model, we start by scrutinizing each

of the above mentioned destinations’ current situation.

The UK

With the creation of VisitEngland in 2009, the tourism

industry has now a dedicated body to provide the leadership

to market England, drive forward developments in quality,

ease of access and sustainability and to improve data

collection and market intelligence.

The Strategic Framework for Tourism 2010-2020, launched

in April 2010, identified the headline 5% growth in value,

year on year, over the next decade. This figure, identified in

the 2010 Deloitte report ‘The Economic Contribution of the

Visitor Economy: UK and the Nations’, is an ambitious

target given the highly competitive marketplace and that

England is a mature destination compared to the new and

emerging destinations around the globe.

Considering this ambitious target, the competitive

environment VisitEngland work in and the reduced

promotional spending by English destinations, there is a

clear need for improved and better coordinated marketing

activities in order to achieve the above objective.

If achieved, this would result in an additional £50 billion in

expenditure and the creation of 225,000 jobs. This would

significantly outstrip the performance of other major sectors

of the national economy such as manufacturing. If no

growth were achieved the result would be significant job

losses and the demise of a wide range of tourism

businesses.

The Strategic Framework for England’s tourism provides

the coordinated approach needed for the public and private

tourism sector to work together on four key Business

Objectives. These key objectives will be the foundation for

achieving the collective vision to maximize tourism’s

contribution to the economy, employment and quality of

life in England.

The key business objectives are the following:

• To increase England’s share of global visitor markets.

• To offer compelling destinations of distinction.

• To champion a successful, thriving tourism industry.

• To facilitate greater engagement between the visitor and

the experience.

These key objectives formulate the essence of the tourism

development strategy of the UK for the forthcoming years,

namely for the next 5-year period.

Regarding the trends in the domestic and international

tourism market, the situation is as follows:

Domestic tourism

In 2010, the financial climate continued to be challenging,

and this impacted the tourism activity by UK residents, with

both domestic and outbound trip volumes declining by 6%

compared to the previous year. Inbound travel to the UK

fell by one percentage point during the year, reflecting the

financial instability in many other countries around the

world.

Recent years have seen wide variations in performance by

trip purpose. Despite a 7% year-on-year decline in holiday

trips in 2010, the “staycation” effect persisted for a second

year, and the number of domestic holiday trips taken last

year (2010) was actually 10% higher than in 2008. By

contrast, the number of business trips taken declined for the

fourth consecutive year.

It is clear that the trend to holidaying at home (or

“staycation”) is not purely a result of financial hardship –

which, by implication, would mean that trip taking would

be likely to revert back to pre-2009 levels as the economy

stabilizes. In fact, the trend to domestic breaks derives from

a mix of increased trip taking by some, combined with trips

switched from abroad by others – but importantly, in almost

all cases, the experience of holidaying at home has been an

overwhelmingly positive one (Bernstein & Kudat, 2009).

As a result, consumers expect to increase (beyond 2011) the

number of domestic holidays they take in the future. In

other words, as the financial climate improves, though we

may well see an uplift in outbound travel, this will not

necessarily be at the expense of domestic breaks.

For the coming year (2014), much will depend on the extent

to which consumer concerns about the economy translate

into real hardship, and some may find themselves having to

sacrifice breaks (at home and abroad) that they currently

hope to take. However, considering the longer term, the

domestic holiday experiences of the past two years, and the

shift in attitudes that these have caused, there is a real

opportunity for domestic tourism beyond the current period

of economic uncertainty.

International visits

In 2010, visits to the UK fell by 1% – the third consecutive

decline in annual trip volumes – leaving visitor numbers at

pre-2004 levels, though spend held steady after two years of

marginal growth, a result of the relative weakness of

sterling since late 2008, (VisitBritain.org).

This contrasts with global travel activity that according to

UNWTO was grown by 7% around the world in 2010 and

by 3% in Europe, which was affected by a number of one-

off factors, including the volcanic ash cloud and severe

winter weather (UNWTO 2011).

As in the domestic market, UK inbound trends vary by trip

purpose. The number of holiday visits increased by 1% in

2012, following 6% growth the previous year, while visits

to friends and relatives fell back for the second successive

year. There was moderate growth in business travel over the

past twelve months, but business trip activity remains well

below pre-recession levels.

Over the coming year, VisitEngland will, in partnership

with VisitBritain, continue to focus its activities on the

mature markets (near Europe, and English-speaking long-

haul markets), which account for the majority of inbound

spend to the country, and which are likely to be receptive to

messages about travel beyond the capital,

(VisitEngland.org).

Assuming that 2014 is more “normal” than 2010-2013,

UNWTO predicts global growth in arrivals of 4-5% for the

coming year, but recognizes high unemployment as an

ongoing concern, as well as the “tendency towards

introducing and increasing taxation on travel” (UNWTO

2013).

The impact of the economic stability of individual nations

on UK inbound travel is clear from the 2012 trip volumes,

which show a growth in trips from Germany, Belgium and

Sweden (among others), but double digit declines from

Spain, Ireland and Greece, while travel from North

America, where the economy remains fragile, also fell

back. 2014 performance in England’s core inbound markets

is therefore likely to be heavily influenced by the speed of,

and confidence in, economic recovery across both the

Eurozone and the USA (Bernstein & Kudat, 2009).

With regards to the economic effect of the tourism strategy

to be employed, the following findings are made:

The Figure 1 below illustrates that in the future people are

predicted to take shorter and mid-term breaks in England. It

highlights that short breaks are best positioned to drive

incremental trip-taking behaviour, while mid-length breaks

would primarily be taken at the expense of overseas trips,

impacting future messages and communication channels.

This correlates with the commitment segments and their

short/long break-taking habits.

Figure 1. Duration of stay of foreign tourists in the UK

Source: VisitBritain.org

Greece

Greece attracts more than 15 million tourists each year, thus

contributing by 15% to the nation's Gross Domestic Product

(GDP). Greece has been an attraction for international

visitors since antiquity for its rich and long history and

more recently for its glorious Mediterranean coastline and

beaches (Dritsakis, 2011). The Greek islands are among the

most visited places in the Mediterranean Sea.

In November 2006, Austria announced that Greece was

their favourite tourism destination giving optimistic hopes

for the future (Fotiadis, 2009).

According to a survey conducted in China in 2011, Greece

was voted as the Chinese people's number one choice as a

53% instead of trips abroad

20% in addition to trips normally taken 17% instead of shorter trips to England

10% instead of longer trips to England

46% in addition to trips normally taken 37% instead of trips abroad 17% instead of longer trips to England

64% instead of trips abroad 19% instead of shorter trips to England

18% in addition to trips normally taken

64% instead of trips abroad

19% instead of shorter trips to England 18% in addition to trips normally taken

tourist destination. Furthermore, Greece has been actively

trying to secure a large share of Chinese tourists per year,

highlighted by the large presence of Greek tourist

informative brochures and other activities at the 2006

Beijing International Tourism Expo.

In 2012, 6.088.287 tourists visited only the city of Athens,

the capital city. The same year, the country welcomed over

16.5 million tourists (World tourism barometer 2012), the

contribution of tourism to GDP amounted to 16.4%, while

the total employment in tourism (688,800 jobs)

corresponded to 18.3% of the workforce.

Although Greece has always been a popular tourist

destination, it has been criticized sometimes for lagging

behind other Western European nations in terms of tourism

infrastructures and amenities. However, this has been

greatly improved since the 2004 Athens Olympic Games.

Nowadays, Greece has a very good hotel infrastructure and

offers high quality services to the visitors. As a result, the

tourism consumption increased considerably since the turn

of the millennium, from US$ 17.7 bn. in 2008 to US$ 29.6

bn. in 2012 (SETE, 2012).

Compared to the rest of the world, the Greek tourism has

achieved satisfactory performance. According to data

published by the World Tourism Organization (WTO), in

2012 Greece was in the 17th position as regards the number

of international tourist arrivals and 23rd as regards the

international tourism receipts. This data proves that the

Greek tourism is one of the few sectors of the national

economy that is competitive at a global level (SETE, 2013).

Tourism in Greece is run by the Ministry of Tourism and

the Greek National Tourism Organisation (GNTO). The

main purpose of the Greek National Tourism Organization

is the organization, development and promotion of

the Greek tourism. Its responsibilities include the promotion

of new types of tourism in order to combat the tourism

sector's seasonality. Nowadays, the marketing campaign of

GNTO is mainly directed towards experience seekers and

not towards mass tourism (Dritsakis, 2011).

However, the tourism campaign is undergoing a significant

change as city-breaks and conference tourism are promoted,

along with cultural and wellness tourism. The impact of the

new campaign will hopefully result in increased tourist

revenues.

The official website of the Greek Tourism Organization is

(http://www.visitgreece.gr/) both in Greek and in English

and the organization’s current logo is “Greece, All Time

Classic”. On this website visitors can find, among others,

presentations of the country’s tourism destinations, as well

as detailed information on the Organization’s activities

(press releases, e-Press Kit, etc.). There is also the

possibility of direct interface with the social media

managed by the GNTO (Facebook, Twitter, Flickr,

Google+, Foursquare, Youtube).

The main priority within the tourism strategic planning of

Greece for the next years is the creation of a powerful and

differentiated product portfolio. Six “main” products have

been determined, as well as a series of “complementary and

specialized products”. The main product categories are: sun

and beach; nautical tourism; city break; medical tourism;

cultural/religious tourism; and, MICE. The supportive

categories include the agro/eco/gastronomic tourism and the

organization of various activities. The other specialized

categories are the elderly tourists; the well-being; and, the

visiting acquaintances/friends. For each of the main

products a specialized plan has been developed including

the proper market strategy and segmentation, as well as

infrastructure improvement and promotion strategy (12th

SETE Conference “Tourism and Development”, 2013).

Furthermore, several developments in the institutional

environment of the Greek tourism took place recently. We

quote below some of the most significant institutional and

administrative regulations which are currently in force:

Marine tourism is a major sector for Greek tourism. In

2012 the Ministry of Tourism modified the existing

legislation for the creation and operation of tourist ports.

A redefinition was given for tourist ports in order to

include nautical sports vessels and to distinguish for

clarity in three separate categories: marinas, anchorages

and shelters. The General Secretariat for Tourism now

has all the powers of location, administration,

management, operation, control and maintenance of

electronic records of tourist ports. The hotel port which

was a particular category of port was abolished. A

number of issues are also dealt with, mostly related to

the creation, process and operation of marinas, the

operation rules on the marinas and the rights of the

management body.

A new form of integrated accommodation called

“Tourist accommodation complex” has been

established. It includes 5-star hotels combined with

furnished homes and special tourism infrastructure on

an area of at least 150,000 sq.m. The houses can be sold

or leased for 10 years minimum, while the proportion of

the houses should not exceed 30% of the total build-up

area of the complex.

The activation of the Special Agency for Promoting and

Licensing Tourism Investments which approves and

authorizes as "one stop service" tourist investments of

over 300 beds, tourist accommodation complex and

installations of special tourism infrastructure, marks the

first implementation of the new policy by the Ministry

of Tourism.

In the ever changing landscape of special forms of

tourism, the form of fishing tourism has been

introduced. Fishing tourism consists in providing

business packages of tourism services and goods related

to fisheries, aquaculture, sponges and to all the cultural

and gastronomic environment of fishing communities

(ITEP-Research Institute for Tourism & Hellenic

Chamber of Hotels, 2013).

The Czech Republic

The country’s government is the main actor interested in

strengthening the country’s image as a major tourist

destination.

At present nobody doubts that the Czech Republic is among

the popular and well-established tourist destinations in

Europe. The interest of tourists in spending their holiday in

this country has grown significantly, especially after 2004,

when the country joined the European Union. Behind the

increase in the number of tourists travelling to the country

and spending more days in the tourist regions also lies a

new promotion concept for the Czech Republic and a

broadening of the network of representatives abroad in

Europe and further afield (Cavlek, 2005).

The state funded Czech Tourist Authority was set up in

1993 to promote the country as an attractive tourist

destination abroad and in the domestic marketplace. The

Czech regions, towns and commercial entities are important

partners of the agency in the promotion of the country. The

agency comes under the Czech Ministry for Regional

Development. Since 1st August 2003 the agency’s official

title has been the Czech Tourist Authority – CzechTourism

(further CzechTourism or the CzechTourism agency).

As regards long-term tourism research, the CzechTourism

is focusing a large part of its activities on countries which at

present make up the largest sources of incoming tourism to

the Czech Republic. These are first and foremost the

neighbouring countries (Germany, Austria, Slovakia and

Poland) and then come the European countries with high

numbers of tourists travelling abroad (Belgium, France,

Italy, the Netherlands, Great Britain, Russia and Spain).

Since 2003 the CzechTourism has also been targeting

Scandinavia. The most important markets further afield are

primarily Japan, Canada and the USA. It should be added

that recently the agency has extended its activities to other

potential markets, especially the Middle East and South

East Asia (Cavlek, 2005).

As part of its objectives, the CzechTourism agency is

forming short and medium term strategies for the promotion

of the Czech Republic abroad. At the beginning of 2008 a

new strategy was implemented which is to run until 2015

and from which stem all the key marketing activities. These

concentrate primarily on the promotion of the so-called

National Products, five locations, possible excursions into

the surrounding area and 2 seasonal products.

The routes for the excursions fan out from the main

locations. The purpose of the excursions is to introduce

tourists to more areas in the surroundings and so cover

other tourist attractions in the given region. The Prague –

Munich corridor is also being focused on. The seasonal

products are Christmas and Easter. At these times of the

year a visit to the Czech Republic is particularly interesting

as the country comes to life with a festive atmosphere and

ancient traditions. The CzechTourism also presents

interesting cultural and sport events held in the Czech

Republic and focuses on promoting the country as a new

golfing destination.

The CzechTourism offices abroad now represent the

country around the world and more are set to open. The

activities of these offices focus on promoting the Czech

Republic as an ideal destination for a relaxing holiday. At

present 80% of the tourists who come to the Czech

Republic are from countries where the CzechTourism

agency has an office (czechtourism.com).

CzechTourism works closely with journalists and all other

types of media in the following ways:

o The agency issues press releases which are distributed

to journalists by e-mail. Alternatively, they are available

on their website. They are devoted to the latest

developments in tourism, culture and sport and to more

long term topics related to interesting tourist

destinations in the Czech Republic such as historical

towns, castles and chateaux, UNESCO sites, spas, etc.

o An INFO-bulletin also keeps those interested informed

about what is happening in tourism, culture and sports.

Every two months it brings information on events which

could be of interest to visitors. INFO-bulletin is

available in English, German and Russian and to receive

it those interested can register at the website mentioned

above.

o Images are also available free of charge from the

CzechTourism media gallery. Here one will find

photographs, videos, e-postcards and basic footage

which can be used by TV and film companies.

o For journalists, TV crews and tour operators, the

CzechTourism arranges individual and group press and

fam trips. Group fam trips are based on a certain theme.

Interesting itineraries generally combine visits to Prague

and other regions of the Czech Republic. Individual

press trips are tailor made to suit the wishes of the given

journalist and the range of services the agency provides

is agreed on beforehand.

o An invaluable source of information for journalists and

the general public alike are the web pages of

www.CzechTourism.com where reliable information on

the Czech Republic is available in 17 languages. Subject

to prior agreement, companies can place a link to the

CzechTourism website on their website.

Official participation of the CzechTourism agency in

international tourism trade fairs, working jointly with other

tourism bodies, is also an important part of the promotion

of the Czech Republic. A list of trade fairs is available on

the agency’s website. The agency also organizes workshops

and presentations in those countries where it is represented.

The aim of these events is to keep local companies and

media up to speed on the Czech Republic as far as tourism

is concerned and above all to give Czech service providers

the opportunity to introduce their products and forge new

contacts with local tour operators.

The Czech Republic has great potential in the field of

congress tourism as it can provide services comparable to

those anywhere in the world and it is also considered to be

one of the safest destinations worldwide. For this reason

CzechTourism is working on the promotion of the Czech

Republic as an ideal congress and incentive destination.

The marketing activities of the congress and incentive

department include presentations and workshops in key

places and participation in a series of tourism trade fairs

focusing on MICE business. To complement the

presentations abroad, although this is not a condition, the

congress and incentive department arrange fam and press

trips.

Another important activity of the CzechTourism agency is

the publication and distribution of promotional materials

abroad. These up to date, general, thematic and regional

brochures and booklets are printed in 17 languages.

In 2004, the first ever television advertising campaign on

the Czech Republic via 5 pan-European TV stations

attracted potential visitors from abroad and helped to build

up the country’s image. Further advertising campaigns

targeted at neighbouring countries (e.g. Poland, Austria,

Germany & Slovakia) followed.

The CzechTourism is also involved in other activities. For

instance it acts as the organizer of the longest running film

and multimedia tourism film festival TOURFILM, it

participates in the joint promotion of the Visegrád Four

group of States (the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary

and Poland) on overseas markets, it organises a competition

for employees of travel companies which offer holidays to

the Czech Republic, the main prize being a place in a fam

trip and the title of “Expert on the Czech Republic” and is

engaged in many other activities.

The preceding analysis of the status quo regarding tourism

and hospitality in EU, provides a valuable insight on how

the three European destinations popular among tourists

have evolved as such and sheds lights on the strategies that

could be useful for the development of the Uzbek tourism

industry. This becomes even more viable when considering

that each of these destinations have their own specialized

niche in their destination attractiveness component.

Thus, the examined EU countries can serve as three

different types of models for the tourism development

strategies of the emerging markets, such as Uzbekistan,

where tourism while being largely unexploited, remains a

potential key for currency inflow and cash generation,

consequently kicking off the economic growth.

Uzbekistan

Though Uzbekistan compares unfavourably in terms of

tourism development level and lags far behind in any given

component of tourism, it can use the experience of the

European countries to formulate its own tourism

development model (Hamidov 2010).

After gaining its independence in 1991, Uzbekistan has

begun to structure and organize its tourism industry. As a

result of the implemented organizational and structural

changes, a new system of state regulations and control was

established, preconditions for infrastructure development

were created, and the mechanism of preservation and

restoration of cultural and historical attractions was

ensured. New institutions and relations in the world market

were established almost from the scratch and international

tourism arrivals started increasing. In a few years this

growth reached the 25% per annum. Many experts believe

that currently the tourism sector has a limited impact on the

national economy of Uzbekistan, and its potential is not

used to its full extent (Tukhliev & Kudratov 2007).

In many cases the local stakeholders have no clear

understanding of the characteristics of tourism demand and

which type of services should be provided in order to

satisfy the tourists' needs and wants. The ability to influence

the demand depends on how well the supplier of

goods/services knows the customer, his needs and

preferences. Furthermore, there are no published study

results on the profile of the foreign tourists. Each tourism

company identifies and creates such a profile by studying

its own clients. This is certainly not enough to gain an

understanding of the overall picture and give answers to the

questions of who, when, with what purposes, and with what

kind of demands arrives in Uzbekistan.

According to the information provided by Uzbek tour

operators, almost 90% of leisure tourists arriving in

Uzbekistan are of middle and old age. They mainly visit

cultural and historical attractions while undertaking a trip

from Tashkent to Samarkand, Bukhara and Khiva (which is

the standard and the most popular tour provided by local

travel agencies), (Navruzzoda, 2009).

The majority of foreign tourists visiting Uzbekistan come

just once and usually make only the above mentioned

standard tour. The elder tourists expect high quality and

special services that will ensure their comfort. They spend

their money not as easily as the younger people. Lifestyle,

habits, values, attitude to leisure and ways of getting the

knowledge about the world of today's youth completely

differs from those of the older generation at the times of

their youth. This implies that there is no guarantee that this

small tourism flow arriving currently in Uzbekistan will not

exhaust itself in some time.

The Table 1 below, as well as the Figures 2, 3 and 4

provide evidence on how the Uzbek tourism market

compares to the three European tourism destinations.

Table 1. Hotel supply in the UK, Greece, the Czech Republic & Uzbekistan (2007-2012)

Sources: Office for National Statistics-UK, SETE-GR, Czech Statistical Office, NC Uzbekturizm

Figure 2. International tourist arrivals (2007-2012)

Sources: SETE, based on data provided by the UNWTO (World Tourism Barometer, June 2013) and NC Uzbektourism

0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

International Tourism Receipts (US $ billion)

48,246,3

38,6

32,435,1 36,4

15,717,6

14,812,7

14,6 12,9

7,8 8,9 7,9 7,1 7,6 7

0,051 0,064 0,099 0,121 0,180 0,252

UK

Greece

Czech Republiс

Uzbekistan

Figure 3. International tourism receipts (2007-2012)

Sources: World Bank & UNWTO Tourism Highlights (2013 Edition)

Figure 4. UNESCO world heritage sites by country

Source: UNESCO heritage list

Hotel Supply

Number of hotels Number of rooms Number of beds

Years UK

Gre

ece

Cze

ch R

epu

bli

c

Uzb

ekis

tan

UK

Gre

ece

Cze

ch R

epu

bli

c

Uzb

ekis

tan

UK

Gre

ece

Cze

ch R

epu

bli

c

Uzb

ekis

tan

2007 39107 9207 4559 143 616764 367.992 106907 6053 1255693 700.933 248077 11950

2008 39860 9385 4482 157 613346 375.067 111775 6546 1245064 715.857 257849 11690

2009 39024 9559 4469 168 615986 383.008 114452 6810 1238660 732.279 260736 12255

2010 40415 9732 4300 185 648239 397.660 113417 6408 1410836 763.407 255882 11206

2011 40184 9648 4612 230 679038 397.322 115795 6816 1416179 763.668 261858 12223

2012 38939 9670 4672 294 647777 400.433 118960 8460 1410580 771.271 271427 15661

3. KEY FINDINGS

From the data available through the respective tourism

boards and related governing bodies and authorities

responsible for developing and deploying tourism market

strategies, we can see that:

a) Great Britain has developed mainly mass tourism as

well as educational tourism, comprising of hundreds of

English language schools, colleges and universities,

offering language courses and education to foreign

students;

b) Greece represents a classical example of how a country

can exploit its natural advantages, relying basically on

the Sea, Sun and Sand tourism model, making most of it

and attracting a massive flow of tourists annually, while

also enjoying benefits of pilgrimage tourism from such

destinations as Mount Athos and Meteora.

c) The Czech tourism market is focused upon cultural

tourism, relying on tens of distinctive historical sites

that are of interest to tourists, along with recreational

tourism, mainly developed in the Karlovy Vary tourist

destination.

Moreover, the study and analysis of the statistics illustrated

in the Table 1 and in the Figures 2, 3 & 4 provide the

following findings:

The hotel supply in the 3 EU countries during 2007-

2012 is relatively steady, without significant

fluctuations. On the contrary, the number of hotel

units in Uzbekistan is doubled in 2012 compared to

2007. However, it is obvious that the new hotels

which were added in the country’s capacity are small

in size, given that the total number of rooms and beds

in 2012 is only increased by approximately 40% and

30%, respectively, in relation to 2007 (Table 1).

Concerning the international tourism arrivals (Figure

2), the situation is as follows: in the UK and Greece,

there is a decline in the number of tourists, due to the

worldwide economic crisis, although in 2011 this

trend is reversed. On the other hand, the Czech

Republic is having an almost continuous increase,

reaching in 2012 the number of 8,9 million tourists. At

the same time, Uzbekistan is having a relatively small

but steady increase and in 2012 it managed to attract

almost half a million international tourists.

The international tourism receipts (Figure 3) in the

UK and Greece, follow the same path as the

international arrivals. Nevertheless, the decline

between the year 2007 and the year 2012 (24,5%) is

much more considerable in the UK than in Greece

(approximately 18%). In the Czech Republic the

decrease in receipts is around 10%, whereas in

Uzbekistan there is a remarkable increase equal to

400%.

Finally, the Figure 4 shows that the UK has the

highest number of UNESCO world heritage sites,

which as generally admitted attract a significant

number of tourists.

4. CONCLUSIONS

Because tourism is a growth industry, many countries see

the promotion of tourism as a development strategy. The

development of tourism not only creates growth and jobs in

the tertiary sector, but it can have a positive multiplier

effect and cause growth in the primary and secondary

sectors as well.

Despite the fact that the tourism industry was determined to

be one of the priorities for economic development of

Uzbekistan, its potential is underestimated. A

comprehensive policy on tourism development is still

missing. In particular, there is still no clear strategy on

tourism development that could optimize the efforts and

resources targeted at the tourism sector development.

The authors of this paper attempted to provide a clear

understanding of the Uzbek tourism market and conclude

that urgent measures have to be taken should tourism is

considered as one of the key directions of the economic

growth of this gas and gold-rich Central Asian country.

Uzbekistan is striving to get rid of its raw-material export-

based economy and it should turn into a more efficient,

sustainable country, seeing tourism as a lucrative solution

for its goals.

While the Uzbek Government and the tourism stakeholders

can exploit the experiences of all the three European

destinations in question and adopt some of their successful

strategies, the Czech tourism development model can

become exemplary since:

a) The Czech tourism product and market are similar to

that of Uzbekistan because the Czech tourism market

is focused on cultural tourism revolving around

historical sites as well as recreational tourism, which

is also the case in Uzbekistan;

b) The Czech tourism development is a major issue that

is dealt by the Government, thus there is an analogy

with the Uzbek tourism development strategy, since in

Uzbekistan the government has been acting as the key

player to promote tourism development and formulate

strategies for this purpose;

c) The Czech government has put high emphasis on the

human resources development in the tourism sector,

because efficient human resources management in

tourism is one of the key solutions to successful

tourism development. The same trend can be observed

in Uzbekistan, with many new courses being

introduced in several leading universities and colleges,

and with skilled professionals being employed by the

respective tourism faculties.

d) Among the analysed three EU countries, the Czech

Republic’s tourism facts and figures are much

improved in relation to the UK and Greece, despite the

on-going global economic crisis. This proves that the

e) Czech growth model is more successful and,

therefore, more suitable to be applied by Uzbekistan.

A recommendation for the achievement of sustainable

tourism development in Uzbekistan, based on the research

conducted and the observations made in the tourism

sectors of the UK, Greece and the Czech Republic is that

the Uzbek Government should formulate a long-term

development framework for tourism (10-20 years) with

emphasis on: proper policy, strategy and planning;

institutional strengthening; new legislation and

regulations; product development and diversification;

effective marketing and promotion; improvement of

tourism infrastructure and superstructure; increase of the

tourism investments; human resources development; and,

the expected socio-cultural and environmental impacts of

tourism.

Moreover, a short term (three-year) action plan is

essential for priority actions to be undertaken so as to

kick-start sustainable tourism development, and

preparation of several demonstration projects for pilot

areas.

Other recommendations consist of several solutions

related to issues that can stimulate the tourism

development. These include, but not limited to:

Relaxing immigration controls (remove visa

requirements). Uzbekistan is gradually scrapping its

visa requirements for the tourists from several

developed countries.

Improving transport links (airports, roads and

railways). Uzbekistan has rebuilt its main four

international airports (Tashkent, Samarkand, Bukhara

and Urgench, the main tourism destinations in

Uzbekistan), it is updating highway 1 (the country's

principal highway) and is building a new high-speed

rail link running across the country. Uzbekistan

Airlines is also investing heavily in new planes,

having recently bought 3 state of the art Boeing

Dream liners.

Deregulation. Uzbekistan is a newly-independent

country in market transition phase, but the government

has to reduce government control and allow more

foreign investments in the tourism sector.

Improving tourism facilities such as hotels and

restaurants. In Uzbekistan international chains like the

Radisson SAS, Dedeman, Le Meridien and Hyatt have

been welcomed along with a rapid expansion of local

hotels but more international brands are needed.

Improving language skills among the young people. In

Uzbekistan English is now the second most spoken

language, yet other languages, especially German,

Spanish and French have to be taught.

Advertising campaigns and links with international

travel agents. Uzbekistan promotes its tourist

destinations by several TV clips on the Euronews

channel and it needs to establish more networks with

international tourism stakeholders.

Creating tourism board and tourist information offices

at home and abroad.

Utilizing any EU or other international funds for

developing the tourism education and improving the

human resource skills in the hospitality sector.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper was written in the framework of the Erasmus

Mundus Tosca II project which is funded by the European

Union.

REFERENCES

Association of Greek Tourism Enterprises (SETE), 2007-

2013.

Balaguer, J., & Cantavella-Jorda, M. (2002). Tourism as a

long-run economic growth factor: The Spanish case,

Applied Economics, Vol. 34, pp. 877-884.

Bernstein, J., & Kudat, A. (2009). Community

Empowerment for Cultural Tourism and Heritage

Protection in Georgia and Uzbekistan. Objectives,

Outcomes and Lessons Learned.

Borgman, C.L. (Ed.), (1990). Scholarly Communication

and Bibliometrics. London: Sage.

Britton, S. (1982). The Political Economy of Tourism in

the Third World. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2),

331 – 358.

Butler, R. (1980). The Concept of Tourist Area Cycle

Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources.

Canadian Geographer, 24(1), 5 – 12.

Cavlek, N. (2005). “The Impact of Tour Operators on

Tourism Development: A Sequence of Events”.

Tourism Development: Issues for a Vulnerable

Industry, Aramberri, J. & Butler, R. (Eds). Printed and

bounded in Great Britain by the Cromwell Press, 174-

193.

Czech Statistical Office (2013). Methodology, Time

series, News Releases archive, Tables, Charts, Tourism

- 3rd quarter of 2013.

Deb, S., Gupta, S. & Sarker, B. (2013). Tourists’

perception of current marketing mix of tourism services

in Bangladesh: an empirical study. International

Journal of Sales & Marketing Management, 2(5), 5-22.

Dritsakis, N. (2011). Tourism development and economic

growth in seven Mediterranean countries: a panel data

approach, University of Macedonia, Greece.

Fotiadis, A. (2009). The role of tourism in rural

development through a comparative analysis of a Greek

and a Hungarian rural tourism area. University of

Pecs, Faculty of business and Economics.

Gartner, W. (1996). Tourism development: principles,

processes, and policies, Wiley & Sons, Incorporated,

John.

Greek Tourism Organization (http://www.visitgreece.gr/),

Accessed December 15, 2013.

Hamidov, O. (2010). Rol turizma v obespechenie

sozialno- ekonomicheskogo razvitiya. Rol turizma v

obespechenii ustouchegogo sozialno ekonomicheskogo

razvitiya. Samarkand.

ITEP (Research Institute for Tourism) & Hellenic

Chamber of Hotels (2013). Performance of Greek

Tourism and developments in the basic figures of the

Greek Hotel Market 2011 – 2012.

Katircioglu, S. (2009): Tourism, trade and growth: the

case of Cyprus, Applied Economics, 41:21, 2741-2750

Krapf, K. (1961). Les pays en voie de développement face

au tourisme: introduction méthodologique, Revue de

Tourisme, 16(3): 82-89.

Loon, R. & Polakow, D. (2001). Ecotourism Ventures

Rags or Riches, Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4),

892 – 907.

Manila Declaration on World Tourism. World Tourism

Conference. Manila, Philippines. 10 October 1980. pp.

1–4.

Navruzzoda (1996). Sovershinstvovanie metodiki ozenki

kachestva turisticheskix uslug. Samarkand.

Sharpley, R (2009). Tourism Development and the

Environment: Beyond Sustainability? School of Sport,

Tourism and the Outdoors, University of Central

Lancashire, UK. 1-8

Tourism in Czech Republic (2011). Facts and Figures.

Tourism Multiplier Effect. Retrieved December 10, 2013

from Barcelona Field Studies Centre,

(http://geographyfieldwork.com/TouristMultiplier.htm).

Tukhliev & Kudratov (2007). Nazionalnaya model

razvitiya turizma v Uzbekistane. Milliy enzeklopediya.

UNDP (2011). Tourism and Poverty Reduction for Least

Developed Countries. Discussion Paper: Strategies in

the Integrated Framework, Palais des Nations, Geneva

Switzerland.

UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, vol. 11, January

2013. Retrieved December 4, 2013 from

(http://mkt.unwto.org/en/barometer).

UNWTO Tourism Highlights, 2013 Edition.

Vellas, F., & Becheril, L. (1995). International tourism.

St. Martin’s Press. Printed in Great Britain. 2-9.

VisitBritain (2013). Monthly Inbound Update: October

2013.

Weaver, D. (1993). Model of Urban Tourism for Small

Caribbean Islands. Geographical Review, 83(2), 134 –

140.

Witt, S. F., Brooke, F., Michael, Z. & Buckley, P. J.

(1995). The Management of international tourism,

Second edition. Great Britain, T.J. Press (Padstow)

LTD, Padstow, Cornwall. 2-10pp

Zhen-hua Liu, (1998). “Tourism & Economic

Development: A Comparative Analysis of Tourism in

Developed and Developing Countries” in C. Tisdell &

K. Roy (Eds.), Tourism and Development: economic,

social, political and environmental issues. Printed in

USA by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Walker, J. (2010). Introduction to Hospitality

Management, Pearson Education, London.

WDI (2013). World development indicators. World

development report, World Bank, Washington, DC.