Reviewing Thailand's master plans and policies: implications for creative tourism?

This article was downloaded by: [Hong Kong Polytechnic University]On: 09 February 2014, At: 19:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Current Issues in TourismPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcit20

Reviewing Thailand's master plansand policies: implications for creativetourism?Walanchalee Wattanacharoensila & Markus Schuckertb

a Tourism and Hospitality Management Division, Mahidol UniversityInternational College, Salaya, Thailandb The School of Hotel and Tourism Management, The Hong KongPolytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, People's Republic ofChinaPublished online: 05 Feb 2014.

To cite this article: Walanchalee Wattanacharoensil & Markus Schuckert , Current Issues in Tourism(2014): Reviewing Thailand's master plans and policies: implications for creative tourism?, CurrentIssues in Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2014.882295

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.882295

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcit20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13683500.2014.882295

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.882295

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Reviewing Thailand’s master plans and policies: implications forcreative tourism?

Walanchalee Wattanacharoensila∗ and Markus Schuckertb

aTourism and Hospitality Management Division, Mahidol University International College,Salaya, Thailand; bThe School of Hotel and Tourism Management, The Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity, Kowloon, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China

(Received 14 December 2012; final version received 11 December 2013)

This article contributes to an understanding of how creative tourism is perceived on anational level, by using Thailand as a case analysis. The primary objective of thisarticle is to investigate Thailand’s plans and policies for the creative economy at bothnational and ministry levels in relation to creative tourism. It also identifies how anational strategic plan can provide a blueprint for individual agency master plans toprovide policy support for the development of the creative economy in the tourismsector. Thailand is chosen as an example of how government and related agencies cancontribute to a national creative tourism movement in the country, especially in thelight of the Tourism Authority of Thailand branding campaign to stimulate creativetourism to the destination. The qualitative research methodology through contentanalysis is used to scrutinise the plan and policy contents from the selectedgovernment agencies. The results demonstrate a better view of how creative tourismis positioned in the Thailand context and contribute to a policy study on the creativeeconomy in the tourism sector as well as in creative tourism.

Keywords: creative tourism; creative economy; tourism policy; Thailand

Introduction

Over the past 60 years, the tourism industry has experienced continuous expansion and isnow one of the largest economic sectors in the world. Thailand is at the forefront of thisdevelopment in Asia (UNWTO Tourism Highlights, 2012) for many types of tourism.Many forms of tourism, such as agro-, medical, spiritual, dark and other types of special-interest tourism, have been developed to meet and/or stimulate tourists’ demands(Cohen, 1979; Leiper, 1979; Plog, 1974). In the last 10 years, creative tourism hasbegun to be seen as an alternative travel paradigm (Ohridska-Olson & Ivanov, 2010;Richards, 2011a; Richards & Raymond, 2000) as trends have shifted away from masstourism typologies (such as ‘sea-and-sun’ in the first era and ‘cultural tourism’ in thesecond era) (Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Administration, 2011). Richardsand Wilson (2006) claim that mass tourism, being ubiquitous and large in scale, hasbecome too standardised and commodified and as a result, offers tourists less pleasure.

The lack of time available for creative development in the lives of many people hasled to an increase in demand for meaningful activities and creative forms of tourism,with ‘tourists developing their creative skills on holiday and destinations vying to

# 2014 Taylor & Francis

∗Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Current Issues in Tourism, 2014http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2014.882295

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

mailto:[email protected]

improve their creative offer’ (European Travel Commission, 2006, p. 3). The concept ofcreative tourism was first promoted by Raymond and Richards in the Association forTourism and Leisure Education newsletter of November 2000 (Ohridska-Olson &Ivanov, 2010; Wurzburger, 2008), in which they elaborated on the concept as a newand innovative alternative. Creative tourism involves tourists learning about authenticcultures and creating strong linkages with their hosts, leading to more flexible and auth-entic experiences (Ohridska-Olson & Ivanov, 2010; Richards, 2001, 2011a; Wurzburger,2008). Recently, Richards (2011a, as cited in Richards & Marques, 2012, p. 4) expandedthe definition to cover a wider scope of activities and value chain elements. As Richardsexplains, creative tourism now

includes a wide range of creative experiences in which the ‘creative’ content can be fore-grounded or used as a ‘creative backdrop’, and in which the level of tourist and ‘local’ involve-ment in the production of the experience can be high or low. (p. 4)

Hence, the new definition of creative tourism not only refers to actively engaging tourists increative activities, but also capturing a continuum of ‘low’ to ‘high’ local creativeconsumption.

Previous studies have also linked the idea of creative tourism with the experience-seeking society described by Schulze (2005) and the experience economy proposed byPine and Gilmore (1999) or the concept of using experience rather than the passive con-sumption of commoditised products and services by tourists to increase value (Fernandes,2011; Pikkemaat & Schuckert, 2007; Richards, 2011a). Having a unique and memorableexperience has become an important factor in customer satisfaction (Fernandes, 2011;Oh, Fiore, & Jeoung, 2007), reflecting the post-industrial phenomenon, and at the sametime, it promotes a destination’s competitive advantage.

Recently, Thailand has utilised the creative tourism concept to promote its destinations.In early 2012, it promoted itself as part of a creative tourism campaign launched by theTourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) which was driven by the concept of ‘the first creativetourism destination in Asia’ (2010b, emphasis added). The TAT is under the aegis of Thai-land’s Ministry of Tourism and Sport (MoTS), whose role is to market Thailand as a touristdestination. The creative tourism campaign was promoted to implement the policy objec-tive of developing a creative economy. The creative economy was the key agenda itemof the 11th National Economic and Social Development (NESD) plan (TAT, 2010a),which acts as a policy blueprint for the country.

The TAT campaign stimulated research interest in how Thailand’s tourism plans andpolicies support the creative tourism movement. Since the TAT is a public organisationunder the aegis of the MoTS, such interest also extended to the MoTS’s plans and policiesas a whole. Furthermore, on the basis of researchers’ personal observations, a centre ofexcellence (CoE) known as the Creative Academy for Cultural and Heritage Tourism(CCHT) has been set up in response to the policies of the Ministry of Commerce (MoC)and the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) to promote the creative economy in Thai-land’s tourism sector. Chiang Mai in Northern Thailand has also sought to be recognised asa creative city within the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation’s(UNESCO) Creative Cities Network (Chiang Mai Creative City [CMCC], 2010). Theseinitiatives have obviously arisen from the creative economy policy set out in the 11thNESD plan, and they complement other campaigns such as the ‘creative city prototypes’shown in Table 1.

2 W. Wattanacharoensil and M. Schuckert

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

Researchers have become aware of the responses of various government agencies to thecreative economy policy, some of which contribute to the promotion of creative tourism inThailand. Their interest has, therefore, turned towards an examination of government pol-icies and how they can help support the development of creative tourism and position thecountry as the leading destination for such activities in Asia. The reason for analysing plansand policies at both national and ministry level is that this approach provides a frameworkof development strategies. Investigating the plans and policies of the National Economicand Social Development Board (NESDB) and other ministries insofar as they relate totourism will not only enable us to clarify and explain how they will steer Thailandtowards the creative tourism movement, but also provide a vivid view of the developmentagenda for the creative economy in the tourism sector and the collaborative linkagesamongst the key ministries.

Against this background, this is the first study to scrutinise both the national plan andthe ministries’ policies in Thailand. To achieve this goal, the following plans and policiesemanating from four government bodies are scrutinised:

. National plan formulated by the NESDB

. Tourism development plan and policy formulated by the MoTS

. Master plan formulated by the MoC

. Master plan formulated by the Ministry of Culture (MoCul)

The reasons for selecting these documents are explained further in the Methodologysection. However, it is important to note at this point that in the Thai context, the importanceof the ‘master plan’ and ‘policies’ at national and ministry level share a similar interpret-ation. The master plan acts as a blueprint for the creation of national and ministry policy.For example, the 8th National Policy and Strategic Report of the National ResearchCouncil of Thailand (2012–2016) states that it has been ‘created for the purpose ofmaking a policy and master plan for national research’ (2012, p. 5, translated from the orig-inal Thai). Hence, the national policy documents included in this research consist of boththe master plans and ministry policy plans, subject to availability.

In order to achieve the aim of this study, the following research objective is addressed:to investigate plans and policies for the creative economy at the national and ministry levelsin the specific context of creative tourism in Thailand.

Table 1. Ten provinces selected as ‘creative city prototypes’ in response to the Creative Thailandpolicy.

Province Creative points of interest

Chai Nat Rice varietiesChiang Rai Doi Tung development – replacing opium poppy cultivation with cash cropsChiang Mai HandicraftsNan Antiques and lively city atmospherePhetchaburi Sugar palmMahaSarakham A city of learning, focused on community developmentYala Bird cityLop Buri A city of renewable energy innovationLampang Creative ceramicsAng Thong Drum making

Note: Thai Government Public Relations Department (PRD) (2011).

Current Issues in Tourism 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

To achieve this objective, the following research questions will be answered:

(1) In what areas will the 11th NESD plan promote the development of the creativeeconomy in the tourism sector and contribute to creative tourism?

(2) What policy statements from the selected ministries will help to promote the devel-opment of the creative economy in the tourism sector, and how will they contributeto creative tourism?

Background to the study

The creative tourism campaign was first launched in early 2012 by the TAT under the theme‘Discover the Other You’. It was a global effort which set out to serve various purposes. Thecampaign was planned in order to attract more repeat visitors in the off-season months and tostimulate Internet and social media discussion (TAT, 2012). TATalso observed the increasingimpact of creative tourism and recognised that it was becoming more popular as touristssought out direct experiences of local cultures and locals’ way of life and traditions. Althoughit may appear that the goal of TAT was to market and stimulate existing demand for tourism,the selection of creative tourism as the guiding concept was also a response to current gov-ernment policies as set out in the 11th NESD plan (TAT, 2010).

Looking back at the roots of the creative economy concept, the Thai government adoptedthis idea to develop and nurture the creative potential of goods and services in Thailand and toreduce dependency on first- and second-sector industries (UNESCO Cultural News, 2011).The main initiative for this movement came from the 2008 Creative Economy Report of theUnited Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2010), which showedthat Thailand ranked 19th amongst creative goods exporting countries. In 2009, the CreativeThailand policy was launched and the creative economy became a priority sector within the10th NESD plan (UNCTAD, 2010). By adapting UNCTAD’s creative industry frameworks,the NESDB identified 15 creative industries in four main clusters (see Table 2) based on Thai-land’s potential and competitiveness. The selected industries are seen as highly competitivefor the nation as they create competitive advantage by world economic standards. Forexample, according to the UNCTAD Creative Economy Report, in 2008, Thailand wasranked the fourth and seventh largest exporter of design and visual art, respectively(UNCTAD, 2010). As the Thai economy counts tourism as a major source of income fromthe service sector (Santos-Duisenberg, 2012), the selected industries also include CCHT aspart of the road to developing the creative economy in Thailand.

The creative economy was formally initiated in August 2009 with two aims: to promoteThailand as a hub of the creative industries in South East Asia and to boost the economiccontribution of national creative industries from 12% to 20% of gross domestic product by2012 (UNCTAD, 2010). In 2010, the NESDB cooperated with the United Nations Devel-opment Programme to work out strategies for developing the creative economy by focusingon three areas (PRD, 2010):

. the creative industries,

. industries related to the creative economy and

. the environment for the creative economy.

In August 2012, the establishment of the National Creative Economy Agency (NCEA) wasapproved by the Cabinet and the National Policy Committee on the Creative Economy. TheNCEA is supervised by the Secretariat to the Prime Minister and works on the


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

implementation of creative economy projects and securing funding for development (‘Newagency’, 2012). The creative economy in Thailand has since focused on the application ofcultural capital together with innovation, knowledge and creativity to drive the value cre-ation of goods and services and stimulate the economic growth of the nation (Suptha-weethum, n.d.).

In this policy area, and also in the NESDB’s (2008) presentation on Thailand’s CreativeEconomy, the tourism and service sector is regarded as one of the key economic sectors (theothers being agriculture and industry) that could contribute significantly towards the long-term development of the country. The NESDB suggested that the tourism industry couldcreate new products and services to drive the development of the sector and strengthenThailand’s position as a leading worldwide tourist destination. In doing so, the tourismsector has been encouraged to include cultural elements such as life history into its productsand services and/or to promote cultural tourism specifically. Service sectors were also to besupported in order to shift the country into a service-driven economy in areas where it couldhighlight the Thai cultural identity, such as film or media.

The development of creative tourism is one angle on the overall stimulation of the crea-tive economy in the sector. Although both activities utilise cultural capital and share many

Table 2. Models of the creative industry.

UK DCMS modelConcentric circles

model UNCTAD model Thailand model

Advertising Core creative arts Heritage or culturalheritage

Heritage

Architecture Literature Traditional culturalexpressions

Crafts

Art and antiquesmarket

Music Cultural sites CCHT

Crafts Performing arts Arts Thai traditionalmedicine

Design Visual arts Visual arts Thai foodFashion Other core cultural

industriesPerforming arts Art

Film and video Film Media Performing artsMusic Museums and libraries Publishing and printing

mediaVisual arts

Performing arts Wider culturalindustries

Audiovisuals Media

Publishing Heritage services Functional creations PublishingSoftware Publishing Design BroadcastingTelevision and radio Sound recording New media Film and videoVideo and computer

gamesTelevision and radio Creative services Music

Video and computergames

Functional creations

Related industries DesignAdvertising FashionArchitecture AdvertisingDesign ArchitectureFashion Software

Note: Adapted from UNCTAD (2010).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

approaches to increasing creative tourism products and services, the former is underpinnedby a principled theoretical model, whilst the latter is effectively the implementation of thecreative economy concept in the context of the tourism sector with the goal of stimulatingeconomic growth. Having said that the promotion of the creative economy in relation to thetourism sector can benefit creative tourism in many ways. The scrutiny of the national planand ministries’ policies will help to identify the strategic moves that support the develop-ment of creative tourism throughout Thailand.

Literature review

Before the advent of creative tourism, cultural tourism was created primarily to enable tour-ists to avail themselves of cultural absorption and meaningful learning experiences. Areport by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development shows that thedemand for cultural tourism increased from around 200 million in 1995 to over 350million in 2007 (Richards, 2011b), a 75% increase over 12 years, although the validityof the methods used by different organisations to gather survey data can be questioned(McKercher & Chan, 2005). According to Richards and Wilson (2006), who proposefour main types of cultural development strategies for urban regeneration, once it hasbeen developed and applied, cultural tourism is regarded as something that is copiedacross the globe in many destinations: in other words, it has become a ‘serial reproduction’(p. 1210). Instead of capturing cultural capital in the form of intangible assets and experi-ences, destinations have exploited their tangible cultural assets and turned cultural tourisminto a mass consumption event. Such commoditisation and simplification (also known as‘McDonaldization’: Ritzer, 2009) reduces the chances of tourists developing deeperemotional connections and experiences within such cultural destinations.

Development of creative tourism

On the basis of this analysis, a new focus on creative tourism has been proposed. By apply-ing creativity as a process to the development of tourism destinations whilst utilising theunique cultural capital of each one, a new paradigm shift has been established. Thismeets the evident need to develop new types of cultural tourism to coincide with consu-mers’ need for self-realisation (Richards, 2011b) and to draw tourists into an authenticexperience once they are able to participate in activities. Compared to traditional culturaltourism, creative tourism goes beyond just the tourist gaze (Ohridska-Olson & Ivanov,2010; Urry, 1990). It provides more than just an opportunity to see, view and contemplatecreative activities and allows participation (Ohridska-Olson & Ivanov, 2010). Dance, crafts,singing, painting and festivals are all crucial in creating genuine interest and increasingtourists’ absorption into the cultural capital and activities which are the key elements ofcreative tourism.

An early definition of creative tourism was put forward by Richards and Raymond(2000), who described it as tourism ‘which offers visitors the opportunity to developtheir creative potential through active participation in learning experiences which are thecharacteristics of the holiday destination where they are undertaken’ (p. 18, emphasisadded).

Richards and Wilson (2006) emphasise that creative tourism ‘depends far more on theactive involvement of tourists’ (p. 1218). UNESCO’s definition of creative tourism, asstated in the 2006 Creative Cities Network Report, emphasises the boundary reductionbetween host and guest in a process where the visitor ‘has an educational, emotional,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

social, and participative interaction with the place, its living culture, and the people who livethere’ and feels ‘like a citizen’ (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organ-ization [UNESCO], 2006, p. 2). This reduction in the gap between host and guest lessensthe ‘stranger’ condition that normally occurs when tourists enter a new region and increasestheir feeling of involvement. Richards and Wilson (2006) explain, ‘creative tourisminvolves not just spectating, not just ‘being there’, but reflexive interaction on the part oftourists, who are usually thought of as ‘non-producers’ in traditional analyses’ (p. 1218).This allows tourists to develop a deeper emotional connection by absorbing everyday cul-tural experiences through active participation at the host destination (Ohridska-Olson &Ivanov, 2010).

Richards (2011a) also pointed out that the forms of creative tourism being developed inthe urban context range from very active and creative involvement to passive viewing. Thisled to the scope and concept of creative tourism being adapted and the model being revised(Richards & Marques, 2012). Due to the development of creative tourism movementsaround the world both in urban and countryside destinations, such activities now gobeyond a definition that simply uses cultural tourism as a fundamental development andoffers a narrow range of learning experiences to include many other ways of using creativityto supplement tourism products and activities. However, the expansion of the conceptupholds the core idea of creative tourism, in that it still promotes authentic and experientialencounters that involve tourists deeply in local life and create synergistic exchanges of ideasand skills. Such creative tourism can be seen more as a networked approach where rela-tional, social and intellectual capital within the network is strengthened (Richards &Marques, 2012) and becomes the rigid element that binds tourists to the destination. AsRichards and Marques (2012) propose, the new forms of creative tourism include thefollowing:

. a means of involving tourists in the creative life of the destination;

. a creative means of using existing resources;

. a means of strengthening identity and distinctiveness;

. a form of self-expression/discovery;

. a form of ‘edutainment’ – education as self-realisation and entertainment;

. a source of ‘atmosphere’ for places; and

. a source for recreating and reviving places.

Creative tourism does have its critics as well as supporters. Those supporting creativetourism (Ohridska-Olson & Ivanov, 2010; Richards, 2011a; Richards & Marques, 2012;Richards & Raymond, 2000; Richards & Wilson, 2006; Wurzburger, 2008) focus on itspositive relationships to the sustainability of cultural capital, the strong relational capitalbetween hosts and guests leading to in-depth absorption and authentic experiences, andthe use of creativity as a core value of destination development. On the other hand,critics point to the paucity of hard or empirical evidence to support the benefits of creativetourism and claim that it is more of an ‘aspiration than a reality’ (Miles, 2010, as cited inRichards, 2011a, p. 1244; Pratt, 2008) or that it is just a mantra of policy-makers and aca-demics who use the term in an uncritical way (Long & Morpeth, 2012, as cited in Richards& Marques, 2012). Furthermore, in terms of implementation, most of the creative economypolicies (perceived as the umbrella or embracing concept of creative tourism) of variousdestinations, along with academic studies, focus almost exclusively on urban developmentrather than indigenous communities (Bell & Jayne, 2010), reflecting an imbalance intourism development strategies.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

Tourism plans and policies

The study of tourism plans and policies is important in understanding the route taken by thedevelopment of a destination. Hall (2008) identifies three reasons why tourism policyshould be studied:

(1) to understand the shaping of policy decisions and their impact,(2) to provide information about solutions to practical problems and to feed this into

the policy process and(3) to understand the interests and values involved in policy and planning processes

(p. 10).

Scott (2011) argues that these reasons do not yet provide adequate justification forstudying tourism plans and policies in particular as there are many other elements thatare more important to address. The fact that tourism policy involves governmentcooperation (in terms of political stability, the legal and financial framework, and serviceand infrastructure: Elliott, 1997, as cited in Scott, 2011) and pervasiveness (in terms ofvisa and currency restrictions, border security, markets, and mitigation of the impact onlocal culture, society and the environment) makes the study of tourism policy complicatedand also important. Moreover, tourism in itself combines many conceptual disciplines,making the creation and implementation of related policy more complex. On top of allthis, government tourism policy may take the form of indirect activity, whereby officialactions influence tourism as a by-product of an interest in some related area, or direct inter-vention, whereby governments actively seek to influence tourism or an aspect of it inpursuit of a policy objective (Airey, 1983, as cited in Scott, 2011).

Studies of tourism policy employ various analytical frameworks, such as the rational(Cohen, 1988), institutional (Dredge & Jenkins, 2003), social (Vernon, Essex, Pinder, &Curry, 2005) and network (Pforr, 2006) approaches and content (York & Zhang, 2010)and frame (Wu, Xue, Morrison, & Leung, 2012) analysis. The rational approach is basedon the scientific approach which focuses on providing factual knowledge and analysis.However, it has been suggested that this approach neglects the dynamics within the environ-ment and cannot provide the analytical tools to investigate context (Stevenson, Airey, &Miller, 2008). The institutional approach focuses on ‘the organisational power, rules, invest-ment incentives, and constraints that influence policy development and implementation’(Scott, 2011, p. 26). The social approach looks at the interactions between individuals ororganisations. The network approach focuses on policy communities where people interactwith networks, resulting in informal patterns of association, and on considering the dynamicof these complex relationships by examining how these patterns shift and change (Wray,2009, cited in Scott, 2011). Content analysis is based on the investigation of the text of pol-icies and related sources to identify the dimensions of the specific topic of study and is widelyused in tourism policy studies (Wan & King, 2013; Wang & Ap, 2013; York & Zhang, 2010).

The current movement in creative tourism

Since the idea of creative tourism was introduced and developed, many destinations haveput the concept into practice in order to promote their cultural capitals as principle assets.Creative tourism campaigns or activities have been launched in various destinations, suchas Thailand, Taiwan, and South Africa (see Rogerson, 2006; Tan, Kung, & Luh, 2013),since it is believed that the concept will promote economic and social benefits in thedestinations.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

The success of a creative tourism strategy depends on national government policy andgovernmental bodies being geared towards its development. Many countries’ strategiesinvolve collaboration amongst various governmental agencies. For instance, in Taiwan,the scope of the cultural and creative industry and the relevant regulatory authoritiesmainly come under the remits of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Council for CulturalAffairs, and the Ministry of the Interior. The study by Tan et al. (2013) elaborated that crea-tive tourism (described as creative life industry [CLI]) in Taiwan is seen as part of the cul-tural creative industries. The scope of CLI includes all businesses that use creativity orcultural accretion as the basis for providing useful products or services, employing com-pound management, using innovative methods to achieve a re-production capability, andproviding learning experience activities in the areas of food, clothing, accommodation,travel, sport, or entertainment. Therefore, the key driver which pushes forward creativetourism in Taiwan is done under a business focus, mainly by small and medium enterprises.

Rogerson’s (2006) study on South Africa’s potential movement on creative tourismrevealed that a solid foundation for establishing a nexus between creative industries andtourism has been established in South Africa and that this development relies on thenational government to discover and develop the economic potential of cultural industriesthrough the Cultural Strategy Group and the Creative South Africa Initiative. Rogerson alsoobserved support for creative industries being undertaken at provincial and local level, andboth mechanisms have given cities such as Johannesburg the opportunity to become proac-tive in the creative industries sector of urban economic development in South Africa.

Recently, the importance of creative tourism as an important concept in promotingmulti-cultural experiential trips across Southeast Asia under the six creative travelthemes has been addressed in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)(ASEAN Briefing, 2013). The region is observed to have its own special character interms of cultures and heritages which support authentic and meaningful engagementsand the tourism experience. Creative travel themes are, therefore, being included as partof the implementation of the ASEAN Tourism Strategy 2012–2015, and the emphasis pro-moted by the ASEAN nations will be addressed through the national governments of thosecountries (Association of Southeast Asian Nations, 2013).

The creative economy and the tourism industry

Until now, there has been no consensus on the meaning and definition of ‘the creativeeconomy’ (Creative Thailand, 2010; European Commission, n.d.; UNCTAD, 2008), withthe definition used depending on the purpose and scope of operations. However, theleading definitions are discussed in this section. In its 2008 report, UNCTAD stated that the

creative economy is an evolving concept based on creative assets potentially generating econ-omic growth and development. It can foster income generation, job creation, and export earn-ings while promoting social inclusion, cultural diversity and human development. It embraceseconomic, cultural and social aspects interacting with technology, intellectual property, andtourism objectives. (2008, p. 4)

In fact, the term ‘creative economy’ first appeared in 2001 in John Howkins’ book about therelationship between creativity and economics (UNCTAD, 2010). According to Howkins(2002, p. xiv), ‘a creative economy consists of transactions in creative products and itssize is measured as the product of the value of the goods and the number of such trans-actions’ (Creative Metropoles, n.d.). Another definition used by the Boston RedevelopmentAuthority (BRA, 2005) in the specific context of city development states that a creative


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

economy constitutes (1) any direct activity in which individual creativity and skill isbrought to bear which is characterised by innovation and originality and leads to the cre-ation of intellectual property in the form of copyright; (2) any activity (up- and downstream)which directly contributes to creative activities such that the product would not exist in thesame form without it; and (3) the activities of the self-employed since the creative industryincludes many freelancers (BRA, 2005). At the heart of the creative economy lies the crea-tive industries (UNCTAD, 2010), which are categorised depending on who is responsiblefor implementation. Creative industry models are also applied in the international context,such as the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) model in the UK, the Con-centric Circles Model and the UNCTAD model (see Table 2).

The Creative Economy Report by UNCTAD (2010) states that the creative economy‘embraces economic, cultural and social aspects interacting with technology, intellectualproperty and tourism objectives’ (p. 10). The BRA (2005) addresses the specific linkbetween creative industries and tourism, seeing them as reciprocal. Tourists provide apotential market for many creative industries and hence are revenue generators, and theindustries themselves may also be part of a package that attracts people to a destination(BRA, 2005). Accordingly, tourism policies and activities should be developed in orderto maximise these benefits and foster deep linkages with the creative economy, especiallyin the developing nations. A concerted effort should also be made to develop inter-ministrypolicy frameworks and linkages in order to ensure that local creative industries can capturea greater share of tourists’ expenditure. Creative businesses should be able to supply goodsand services of good and sufficient quantity in order to respond positively to tourist demand(UNCTAD, 2010). An increasing number of municipalities and local governments world-wide are using the concept of the creative city to formulate urban development strategies(UNCTAD, 2010; see also Evans, 2009) in order to reinvigorate growth with a focus onculture and creative activities and to promote themselves as tourism destinations.

To date, no study has yet addressed the policy dimension of the creative economy with aspecific focus on the tourism sector, including creative tourism. However, some studies oncreative economy policies have identified implications for tourism, many of which relate tourban development (Evans, 2009; Ho, 2009) or policy analysis (Kong, Gibson, Khoo, &Semple, 2006).

Methodology

The primary objective of this paper is to investigate Thailand’s plans and policies for thecreative economy at both national and ministry levels in relation to creative tourism. Aqualitative methodology based on document analysis with the use of an interpretive para-digm and content analysis was used. The selected documents were drawn from four gov-ernmental agencies: NESDB, MoTS, MoC and MoCul.

These organisations were chosen for the following reasons. Firstly, the NESDB pro-vides a key strategic plan for the country as a whole which serves as a blueprint for min-istry-level policy development. It is, therefore, important to understand what it saysabout the development of the creative economy in Thailand and how it contributes totourism in general and creative tourism in particular. Secondly, the MoTS is the ministrywith lead responsibility for tourism. Its development plan is in effect the leading statementof tourism policy under the rubric of the National Tourism Development Plan (Ministry ofTourism and Sport, 2012, p. 11). Its public-facing organisation, TAT, also promoted thecreative tourism campaign in early 2012. If the concept of creative tourism is to be executedin Thailand, the MoTS will take the lead on this. Thirdly, the MoC plays an important role


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

in the creative economy of Thailand. Its subsidiary, the DIP, is also mentioned by theNESDB as one of the key mechanisms for the development of the creative economy.The DIP established the Creative Academy (CA) to support the creative knowledge ofthe country and also set up the concept of the ‘creative economy for cultural and heritagetourism’ to support Thailand’s creative industry model. It was, therefore, logical to inves-tigate the MoC’s master plan and the DIP’s strategies in relation to this sector. Lastly, theMoCul’s master plan was included because cultural capital is a key driver of the creativeeconomy, especially in tourism. Such an investigation will provide insights into how cul-tural capital can be developed and utilised as part of the development of the creativeeconomy in this sector in particular.

All plans and policy documents published by these agencies were investigated on thebasis of two core questions: First, what are the strategic areas that support the develop-ment of the creative economy, especially in the tourism sector, and secondly, to whatextent do these strategies contribute to creative tourism? Furthermore, as part of theexamination of the MoTS’s plan, the work of its main institutional collaborators in pro-moting the creative economy in relation to tourism was also reviewed. The resultssupport the selection of these ministries in this study. The MoC and the MoCul arethe two agencies most involved in collaborating with the MoTS in executing the stra-tegic development of the creative economy in the tourism sector. This confirms theimportance of selecting and analysing their master plans on the same basis and scopeas the 11th NESD plan.

Content analysis was the main research method used in this study. Gray and Densten (1998)describe this method as the systematic analysis of textual data already coded for pattern andstructure examination and confirmation, category development and aggregation into perceptibleconstructs. It is a common method in public policy research (York & Zhang, 2010). For thisstudy, the units of analysis are text units that correspond to the themes of creative tourism orthe development of the creative economy in relation to tourism. The text units are in theforms of words, phrases or sentences. Systematic processing of the content analysis wascarried out to identify the scope of each of the documents mentioned above. The output ofthe content analysis will help clarify the conceptual meanings embedded in the plans toenable a better understanding of the creative tourism movement in Thailand.

The 11th NESD plan is available for download from the NESDB website in twolanguage versions, Thai and English. Only the English version is used in this paperto avoid the risk of misinterpretation. The master plans of the MoC and MoCul arealso available on their websites, but only in Thai. The author conducted a carefuldirect translation of both documents from Thai to English, focusing mainly on the sec-tions covering strategy in general and the creative economy in particular. In order toensure content reliability, another academic working in the field of tourism was askedto review the translations and provide comments. The corrected versions were thensent to her for final cross-checking.

There are other parties involved in the creative economy and creative tourism move-ment in Thailand, such as the Office of Knowledge Management and Development; theThailand Creative and Design Centre; Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Adminis-tration, which is directly within the Office of the Prime Minister; and the recently estab-lished NCEA under the Secretariat to the Prime Minister. However, because theobjective of this study is to investigate plans and policies at the national level and theseagencies are primarily responsible for policy execution, they were excluded from thescope of the study (Figures 1 and 2). Figures 1 and 2 display the selected government struc-tured and the diagram of research methodology.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

Findings

The national master plan and its strategies for the creative economy and creativetourism

Five of the six strategic objectives set out in the 11th NESD plan have direct implicationsfor the development of the creative economy:

Figure 1. Overview of government structure and the influence of the NESD plan on selected govern-ment agencies.Note: Adapted by authors; shaded area denotes the institutional focus of this study.

Figure 2. Diagram of research methodology.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

(1) to promote the just society;(2) to promote human development towards a sustainable lifelong learning society;(3) to restructure the economy towards quality growth and sustainability;(4) to create regional connectivity for social and economic stability;(5) to manage natural resources and the environment to achieve sustainability.

The sixth objective (strengthening the agricultural sector, food and energy security)does not include any reference to creativity and is therefore omitted from the analysis.

Based on objective one, to promote the just society, the creative elements of the planinvolve the use of creative media as one of the channels that provide equal opportunitiesfor citizens to share creative ideas and allow consumers to participate in producing and dis-seminating information. Such development aims to increase grassroots diversity and effi-ciency and promote job creation in the manufacturing and service sectors so as to bringabout an improvement in labour productivity and creativity, which will generate a secureincome for farmers. The second element, human development towards a sustainable life-long learning society, has the purpose of developing critical and creative thinking abilitiesamongst people in all age groups and encouraging them to become resilient, culturallyaware, and loving and to have integrity and unity despite their cultural heterogeneity.This approach to human development will result in a more caring and sharing societyand also generate the development of innovation and cultural products that support the crea-tive economy. Hence, human capital will be supported and developed through education inscience and technology, arts and culture at the primary to tertiary education levels. Some ofthe mechanisms which will be used to promote human development as part of this strategyinclude promoting creative media which support creative learning and allow peopleto express creative ideas, tax incentives to produce learning channels through which toexpress these ideas, and new social institutions to produce an environment conducive tosuch development. The third strategy, restructuring the economy towards quality growthand sustainability, emphasises fostering innovation and creativity, environmental matterssuch as promoting clean energy, restructuring the creative sectors, promoting creative clus-ters, and diversifying creative products and services by at least 5% per year. This incorpor-ates the development of creative cities which will promote the establishment of ecologicalprinciples to be applied to the physical infrastructure as well as human resources, regu-lation, and management. An environment that promotes learning and key personnelalong the supply chain of the creative and innovative industries also needs to be supportedto promote the creative economy. More importantly, this part also directly addresses thenotion of promoting tourism. Part three of the strategy states that the plan aims to‘manage tourism to achieve balanced and sustainable growth by focusing on activitiesthat are creative and environmentally friendly’ and to ‘take into account the carryingcapacity of tourists attractions so as to elevate the standards of service businesses’(NESDB, 2012, p. 81). It also states that the ‘quality and sufficiency of infrastructureshould be increased’ and that tourism ‘should be a reflection of Thai lifestyle, cultureand national resources’ (NESDB, 2012, p. 81)

Alongside the development goals of the strategy, support for effective processesthrough which to acquire intellectual property rights is also mentioned. Laws, rules, regu-lations and incentives are to be adjusted for the product and service sectors to reduce therisks in trade, investment and marketing. The fourth objective, the creation of regional con-nectivity for social and economic stability, aims at cooperation with neighbouring countriesto promote the creative areas of the economy plus research and development. And finallythe fifth objective, managing natural resources and the environment to achieve


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

sustainability, stresses the use of local knowledge to support creative services and productsfor the transition to a low-carbon society. This includes the development of environmentallyfriendly cities with an emphasis on integrated urban planning, the expansion of greenspaces, and the promotion of energy efficiency. Furthermore, the cultural, social and eco-logical aspects of this are addressed along with the creative use of areas.

From these five strategic objectives, it can be seen that the intention to promote the crea-tive economy of Thailand is to be executed through various mechanisms, such as the crea-tive media and environment; tax incentives, laws and regulations; institutions which willdevelop the nation’s human capital in terms of various creative abilities; and the launchof products, services and businesses and support for industries which will enhance the crea-tive economy. Figure 3 illustrates the ‘creative’ notions interlinked within the five strategicobjectives and their relationships with the creative economy.

In terms of creative tourism specifically, although this term is not used directly in thenational plan, the many creative developments listed could provide fundamental supportfor it. The plan addresses the enhancement of the role of the service sector, especiallybusinesses with high potential, including those in health care and tourism. The developmentof these services should ‘support qualitative tourism . . . and best practices in community . . .

together with the use of local knowledge to generate the creative products and services fortransition to a low carbon society’ (NESDB, 2012, p. 121). Such a proposal that includesthe development of creative products and services, encouraging creative personnel, desig-nating creative cities, encouraging creative ideas, stimulating creative learning and teach-ing, and emphasising the use of cultural capital, constitutes a grounded infrastructurewhich can make a very important contribution to promoting creative tourism.

Figure 3. How ‘creative’ words are embedded and connected to the strategies of the NESD’s 11thplan.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

When further analysed in terms of the purpose of the NESD plan to encourage a balancebetween social and economic development, it can be seen that the five strategic objectivesdescribe these two types of development in a balanced way across a wide spectrum ofissues. The development of the tourism sector in the social context will ensure thattourism reflects Thailand’s lifestyle, culture and national resources as well as encouragingsustainable growth. Creative elements are addressed in tourism activities, as it is ensuringan environmentally friendly process. The growth of tourism has to be based on the balanceduse of Thailand’s social, cultural and physical capital.

Ministry master plans and their strategies for the creative economy and creativetourism

The three ministries studied here set out their proposals for supporting the creativeeconomy in their master plans, which also cover the benefits the individual role andfocus of each agency can bring to creative tourism. All three have set out their strategiesfor development within a specific time frame (see Table 3). The strategy of the MoTS isaligned with the 11th NESD plan, whereas the other two ministries’ schedules coverdifferent periods. Nevertheless, most of the selected plans address the developmentrequired to support the creative economy of Thailand and also set out some ideas thatcan contribute to creative tourism.

The MoTS development plan

The MoTS development plan, which acts as the ministry’s policy framework, for the five-year period 2012–2016 (similar to the 11th NESD plan) was launched in April 2011. Itsquantifiable aims and objectives are to increase the tourism competitiveness of thecountry by not less than five ranks, to place Thailand within ranks one to seven withinAsia, to increase revenues from tourism by not less than 5% and to develop eight newtourism segments based on geographic region. On the basis of these objectives, five strat-egies are proposed for implementation:

(1) to develop the tourism infrastructure;(2) to develop and nourish tourism destinations for sustainability;(3) to develop tourism products and services along with other elements that will

support tourism;(4) to increase the confidence of tourists and to support the growth of tourism; and(5) to support collaboration amongst the public and private sectors, local government,

citizens and the community for tourism resource management.

Table 3. Overview of documents analysed.

Government agencies Plan/policy document (language) Years covered

NESDB National plan (English) 2012–2016MoTS MoTS policy (National tourism development plan) (Thai) 2012–2016MoC Master plan (Thai) 2012–2021MoCul Master plan (Thai) 2007–2016


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

Although the MoTS policy shares similarities with the 11th NESD plan, its focus on crea-tive economy is quite different. Here, creative economy is only addressed as a section fordevelopment rather than forming the fundamental direction of development for the ministry.In the MoTS plan, references to creative economy are found under strategic objective three(to develop tourism products and services along with other elements that support tourism)and more specifically under sub-strategy 3.1 to develop the creative economy, innovationand value-added in tourism (see Figure 4). On the basis of sub-strategy 3.1, seven objectivesare addressed to promote the creative economy in the tourism industry: for example, creatingnew forms of tourism activities to meet the demand and psychological needs. Support for thefilm industry, both locally and through international filmmakers choosing Thailand as alocation, is another provision related to both tourism and the creative industries. Increasinginternational awareness of Thai culture and promoting international meeting incentive

Figure 4. Elements of the strategic plans for the creative economy that relate to the tourism sector.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

conference exhibition and event management and support for investment in sustainable andenvironmentally friendly tourism, along with new types of tourism business such as healthand spa and leisure facilities, one-tumbon(district)-one-product souvenirs and tourism man-agement, have been encouraged. National and international sporting competitions are to bepromoted to support tourism and generate income for the community and the exploration andselection of a brand image representing the uniqueness of each province for marketing pur-poses is another approach to promoting the creative economy in the tourism sector.

In its focus on the concept of creative tourism, however, the MoTS policy does notclearly address this as part of the new segments for development. Most of the newtourism markets mentioned serve different demand types based on geographic region andpsychological need. Cultural capital is the element employed to support related creativeindustries such as film making and events. This is seen as somewhat contradictory to thework of the TAT, the public face of the ministry, which implements the creative tourismcampaign for Thailand. This issue is discussed further below.

Lastly, the MoTS development plan also identifies both internal and external stakeholderswho could collaborate to ensure successful implementation. A total of 19 such collaboratorsare mentioned. The external parties include other ministries such as the MoC and MoCul, theministries of Industry, Education and the Interior and public organisations such as DASTA. Interms of internal stakeholders, the TAT is the major collaborative agency. Amongst all 19 sta-keholders, the discussion of collaboration at the ministry level focuses primarily on the MoCand MoCul, further confirming the correctness of their inclusion in this analysis.

The MoC and MoCul development plans

The MoC master plan identifies five main strategic themes, namely to or promote

(1) smart enterprise;(2) ASEAN One;(3) the value-creation economy;(4) a pro-competitive environment; and(5) a new trade infrastructure.

Within these themes, there are five strategic actions. In terms of support for the creativeeconomy, the focus of the MoC is to support the value-creation economy and use it to gearup Thailand’s economic and trade development. The MoC stresses its role in bringing Thai-land further along the following four directions as well as interconnecting them to drive thenation’s economy and create effective integration:

. Creative economy – linking knowledge, creative thinking, design and intellectualproperty with cultural capital

. Innovation economy – driving the economy base through innovative thinking andaction both by generating new ideas and updating existing products to make themmore useful and more widely used

. Green economy – applying the green concept throughout the value chain

. Social economy – including the community’s needs as a priority and making citizenspart of the process of creating shared value in the market

These objectives in turn give rise to nine strategic actions to be addressed in response to thestrategy (see Figure 4). Those objectives under sub-strategy 3.3 directly address the tourism


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

sector, whilst sub-strategies 3.7 and 3.8 cover creative service clusters and creative productsand services. Sub-strategy 3.3 states that the marketing and branding of tourism productsand services is to be promoted through international media outlets such as the Discoveryand National Geographic channels in order to add premium value to Thai products and ser-vices (MoC, 2012, pp. 2–8). This demonstrates the role of the MoC in supporting market-ing and distribution channels as well as the consumption of creative products and services inorder to support the creative economy of Thailand, including the tourism sector.

The MoC master plan also addresses the internal stakeholders responsible for promotingnew markets and distribution channels for creative products and services. These include theDepartment of Business Development, the Department of International Trade Promotion(DITP) and the DIP. Amongst these stakeholders, the plan states that the DITP and DIP arethe two main bodies involved in pushing forward the third strategic objective for the value-cre-ation economy (MoC, 2012, pp. i–19). Further scrutiny of the strategic plans of these twodepartments shows that the DIP has a direct strategic role in supporting the creativeeconomy in the tourism industry, especially when intellectual property is addressed as oneof the core elements for the creative economy, as identified in the 11th NESD plan. The DIPwas responsible for establishing the CA. The purpose of the CA is to support the strategicplan of the DIP and to develop systems for the management of intellectual property by promot-ing knowledge, supporting creativity, fostering networks and encouraging commercial use.The CA is also responsible for identifying CoEs. These centres are intended to foster collabor-ation between the three parties, namely the DIP, academic institutions and the private sector, inthe 15 creative branches. CCHT is also part of the scope of the CoEs. The CA, therefore, sup-ports the strategic national master plans to promote the creative industries. It also addresses theuse of cultural capital to encourage innovation in many industries and thereby generate incomefor the country through promoting activities such as film, Thai cuisine, sport, tourism anddesign. This helps strengthen the creative element in many other sectors as well as tourism.

Lastly, the content of the MoC’s third strategic objective also mentions collaborationwith external ministries to execute their strategic plans. The main focus of collaborationis with the ministries of Industry, Agriculture and Finance, along with their related federa-tions. The MoTS and the MoCul are not included. This contradicts the statement in theMoC’s own master plan that the tourism sector is one of the industries (alongside transpor-tation) in which Thailand enjoys the greatest competitive advantage over other Asiancountries (MoC, 2012, pp. 1–33).

The master plan of the MoCul covers the period 2007–2016 (MoCul, 2010a). Given itstime frame, it was based on the previous (10) NESD strategic plan 2007–2011. Hence, it isaligned with an earlier policy direction and so does not include the concept of the creativeeconomy. In fact, the strategic direction of that period was based on the ‘sufficiencyeconomy’. This is why the six strategic plans mentioned in the MoCul’s master plan empha-sise the need to preserve and protect national culture, religion and the monarchy and to usecultural capital to increase value in products and services, but do not explicitly address thecreative economy (see Figure 4). In the plan, collaboration with the MoTS focuses mainlyon applying cultural capital to create tourism products and using Thai arts and performancefor leisure and tourism purposes.

Discussion

On the basis of the above review, it appears that the 11th NESD plan, which aims to set outthe direction for the development of the creative economy in Thailand, contributes to crea-tive tourism in many ways. Firstly, it addresses the mechanism that stimulates creative


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

tourism products and services, such as the promotion of learning and media, and empha-sises the role of developing tourism personnel who can be creative and contribute theirknowledge and skills to the sector. It is interesting to note that the NESD plan’s humanresource element has a different emphasis to that of the MoTS, which focuses mainly ongeneral tourism skills development, such as language learning or tour guiding, ratherthan on promoting the general creative dimension of human capital. In the 11th NESDplan, the contribution of human resource development can be read as having both tangible(such as producing creative goods or products) and intangible (such as involving tourists increative learning and activities) elements. Furthermore, the statement on creative cities willencourage many Thai cities and provinces to promote their unique cultural capital for thebenefit of tourism. Amongst the responses to this are the DIP’s ‘creative city prototypes’(see Table 1) for the ‘Creative Thailand’ campaign and the recent proposal that ChiangMai join UNESCO’s Creative Cities Network (CMCC, 2010). The Creative CitiesNetwork can be seen as a fundamental vehicle for supporting creative tourism. Accordingto its launch materials, it aims to promote cultural diversity for creative tourism and sustain-able urban development as the hub of the creative economy (UNESCO, 2006, as cited inChairatana, 2011).

On the other hand, scrutinising the MoTS’s policy shows that the focus of this ministryis to promote the creative economy in the tourism sector. One of its main aims is to endorsenew types of products and activities for newly selected markets. The MoTS’s strategicobjectives (such as developing new markets and activities, adding value to tourism pro-ducts, supporting the worldwide promotion of Thai culture and encouraging the film indus-try) emphasise the value-added elements of tourism products and services in the eightselected markets. This can be distinguished from promoting existing tourism resourcessuch as human and cultural capital and encouraging the various forms of networks andevents to exercise their creative potential to support the tourism sector. The market for crea-tive tourism is not included in the policy as part of the new key markets, presumably for oneof the two reasons:

(1) the Ministry was not aware of the creative tourism market when writing the plan asit was not large enough, or

(2) the Ministry sees creative tourism and the creative economy in the tourism sector asoverlapping in a way which means the development of the latter automatically con-tributes to the former.

One could also argue that some elements of creative tourism are embedded in the exoticand authentic experiences available through other forms of tourism which are already beingpromoted, and so it is unnecessary to address creative tourism as a specific area for devel-opment. The response to this argument depends on how one views creative tourism: If it isan add-on which could be incorporated into any type of tourism market, predominantly tostimulate new demand, then it might not be necessary to address its individual importance,but if creative tourism is a fundamental type of development in the sector and one of theprincipal conditions for developing the creative economy, then it requires its own clarity,understanding and articulation. The current state of implementation in Thailand seems tofall somewhere between the two.

The TAT’s marketing campaign, ‘Discover the Other You’, launched in early 2012seemed to strengthen the importance of the creative tourism market in Thailand. It setout to brand Thailand as the first creative tourism destination in Asia by including theconcept of ‘Thai-ness’ to inspire visitors ‘to discover another self’ and ‘gain new


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

perspectives on life’ through engagement in six key Thai cultural activities. This approachsupports the main purpose of creative tourism in terms of diverting people from the massmarket and helping them to become embedded in the destination by getting involved inauthentic experiences and cultural learning. The six activities were Thai boxing,cooking, massage and performing arts classes and lessons in rice farming, crafts andweaving, and the Thai language (TAT, 2012). Instead of being driven by the MoTSmaster plan, the factors stimulating the TAT to promote this campaign came from two areas:

(1) the TAT’s response to the creative economy policy, and(2) demands from tourists for this special-interest market.

The campaign promoted the ‘Unique Thai Experience’ through Thai cultural absorptionas a competitive advantage to add value to tourism products. As the Governor of the TATput it,

if entrepreneurs want to capture Creative Tourist market groups, they will have to create addedvalue for their products by presenting an ‘Experience’ to the tourists that makes their productsunique and different. This becomes a sustainable selling point because the experience cannot beeasily imitated. (TAT, 2012)

The demand for creative tourism by tourists who seek unique and authentic experiences hasbecome the main stimulator of the TAT campaign. Thailand, as a supply side for tourismdestinations, can offer rich and unique cultural capital to tourists. Along with the hospitalityand tourism infrastructure, this can help to promote Thailand as a competitive choice ofcreative tourism destination. In its marketing role, the TAT is responsible for launchingand promoting campaigns based on the country’s tourism products in the hope that othergovernment agencies will contribute the necessary infrastructure (human and culturalcapital) to the market in order to balance demand and supply. For creative tourism in Thai-land to succeed, the support of creative and cultural resources, including creative skills fortourism personnel, is necessary to satisfy the needs stimulated by such campaigns. Thismeans that the tourism infrastructure for such a movement needs to be (a) executed aspart of the policy and (b) ready to meet tourists’ expectations and demands.

The plans of the three ministries make frequent reference to the strategic support neededto drive Thailand towards both creative tourism and the creative economy in tourism. TheMoCul contributes to the promotion of many cultural activities and products throughevents, festivals and so on. UNCTAD’s (2010) Creative Economy Report states that the cul-tural policies of developing nations should be broadened to encompass various industriesrather than just protecting cultural heritage alone. This is reflected in the MoCul’s policytowards cultural capital, which does not address the development of a creative economy.

Moreover, the enrichment of creative human resources, which is addressed in thenational plan and supported mainly by the DIP of the MoC, helps to promote humancapital, including that in the tourism sector, so as to ensure creativity is incorporated intoproducts and services. The establishment of the CA and CoEs also promote the dissemina-tion of knowledge into the tourism sector and selected creative industries. All of thesemechanisms contribute to an increase in creative resources in the tourism sector both inthe form of creating new products and activities and encouraging tourism entrepreneurswho will embed cultural capital as a source of creativity and added value. The NESDplan emphasises the role of creative cities, which also help to promote creative tourism.The concept emanates from the Creative Cities Network of UNESCO where cities with


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

rich cultural identities join together to maintain cultural diversity and share their experi-ences of promoting local heritage (UNESCO, n.d.). The idea of promoting creative citiesand embedding their unique cultural capital into the destination leads to creative tourismin both passive (sightseeing and itineraries) and active (learning and joining in with cul-tural/creative activities in a city) forms.

Amongst the three ministries studied here, the MoCul is the one whose plan demon-strates an implicit contribution towards creative tourism development. Since it covers adifferent period to that of the 11th NESD plan, the MoCul plan does not explicitlyaddress the creative economy. Its main strategic objectives are to support, preserve andinstil cultural capital. However, the MoCul has also responded to the creative agendaand has launched several campaigns to support the creative economy, namely

(1) arts and cultural festivals;(2) space for good deeds and wisdom to connect religious bodies and the community;(3) promoting the competitiveness of the Thai film industry;(4) the preservation of the world heritage site in Ayutthaya province;(5) the development of the Sukothai historical park; and(6) the creation of art and cultural product blueprints and the website www.

creativeculturethailand.com (MoCul, 2010b).

Although different strategic plans and their associated actions all contribute towards thedevelopment of creative tourism in Thailand as well as providing some resources to the TATcampaigns, there remains a problematic institutional vacuum. In other words, no singleagency is responsible for ensuring that the campaign to brand Thailand as a creativetourism destination in Asia has been consistently carried out.

By using creative tourism as a marketing theme for the country’s apparent competitiveadvantage, the TAT campaign gives the impression that tourists can expect to encounter aunique Thai cultural experience, both in the background and in specific activities, whenthey visit. There is a need to identify an institution (be it national or local) with lead respon-sibility not only for promoting creative tourism through marketing, but also for ensuring thereadiness of suppliers of creative products and services such as local communities or entre-preneurs. Furthermore, collaboration between the three ministries remains relatively vagueand undeveloped. Each (except for MoCul) has created its own set of role-specific plans andpolicies within the framework of the 11th NESD plan, with an apparent lack of dialoguethrough which to create a shared vision of the key components which could be integrated.According to Ladkin and Bertramini (2002), one of the most important factors in develop-ing a good collaborative approach to tourism planning is a shared development visionamongst all stakeholders. The MoC and MoCul are the two ministries most often referredto in the MoTS’s policy, but in contrast, the MoTS is not listed as an MoC collaboratordespite the latter identifying the tourism sector as a key contributor to the Thai economyand one which should be developed as part of its strategic agenda. As UNCTAD (2010)highlights, if the broader scope of the creative economy is to be realised, significant collab-oration is required between the various ministries and bureaucratic departments. Hence, allthe agencies involved are encouraged to communicate, cooperate and collaborate further tosupport the implementation of their respective plans and policies, especially in regard tocreative tourism.

In the case of Thailand, the reason why collaboration amongst the related ministries isnot effective could be due to many factors. Collaboration has to do a lot with the policyimplications and involves the structure and arrangement for the joint provision of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

http://www.aseanbriefing.com/news/2013/07/18/asean-moves-to-expand-tourism.html


outputs and outcomes (Majumdar, 2006); therefore, joint provision will take place whenparticipant organisations appreciate the interdependent relationship and can foresee thepotential beneficial outcomes of working together (Gray, 1989). However, the interdepen-dence relationship amongst government agencies in Thailand is not promising as a result ofgovernmental agencies’ lack of willingness to collaborate due to their desire to protect theirown individual authority. The collaboration amongst the governmental agencies in this caseshows the weaknesses in terms of both ‘horizontal’ (which refers to agreements betweentwo or more government agencies at the same level of government) and ‘vertical’ (whichdenotes intergovernmental alliances within their administrations) collaboration (Prefon-taine, Ricard, Sicotte, Turcotte, & Dawes, 2000). Clear communication and good collabor-ation between the MoTS and the TAT (the vertical structure) have been found to be weak,including the observed vagueness and weakness of the horizontal structure between thethree ministries discussed above. Lastly, the political reason of the short life cycle of thegovernment also contributes to less collaboration amongst the ministries and drives themto mainly pursue their own agendas.

Conclusion

This paper contributes to our understanding of how creative tourism is planned andimplemented. It also identifies how a national strategic plan can provide a blueprint for indi-vidual agency master plans to provide policy support for the development of a creativeeconomy in the tourism sector. Thailand was chosen as an example of how governmentand related agencies can contribute to a national creative tourism movement in a country,especially in the light of the TAT’s branding campaign to stimulate creative tourism tothe destination.

It can be seen from the analysis of the master plans and policies reported here that arange of contributions to the development of a creative economy in the tourism sectorare envisaged. More importantly, all of the plans contain some form of support for thebroad notion of creative tourism, such as

(1) the support for human resources and tourism entrepreneurs in the 11th NESD planand the CA;

(2) the promotion of Thai cultural capital by the MoTS and MoCul;(3) the collaboration with other creative sectors to promote Thai culture, such as the

making of a film, involving all three ministries;(4) the promotion of cultural events related to tourism by the MoTS and MoCul; and(5) the push for the creative cities movement in the 11th NESD plan and by the MoC.

Although this clearly implies a large amount of official support for creative tourism,nevertheless, the lack of a clear understanding of the concept, especially in the MoTS,means that the agenda focuses on supporting the creative economy in the tourism sectorrather than on developing creative tourism as a separate concept. It is suggested that brand-ing Thailand as a creative tourism destination, especially as ‘the first one in Asia’ (TAT,2012), is an ambitious move which requires more than just a patchwork of contributionsfrom various parties. Instead, a sound process of preparing the fundamentals throughstrong collaboration is required. Rather than leaving the campaign solely to the TAT, theMoTS should take an active leadership role in pushing forward this new type of tourism,which has the potential to sustain the country’s valuable cultural assets, nourish culturalcapital through creativity and develop positive perceptions amongst tourists as a result of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

their emotional involvement in authentic experiences. All of these things will ultimatelyresult in the sustainable growth of the tourism sector in Thailand.

This analysis also reveals that tourism is inter-sectoral and interdepartmental. It may beassumed that future tasks of defining and assigning competencies, responsibilities andbudgets are likely to be slow and difficult, leading to delayed implementation. Furthermore,these strategic plans are generally vague and lack clear timelines, deliverables and balancedscorecard models to measure the progress of implementation and success.

In terms of implications for politics and practitioners, as time passes, these conceptsshould become more capable of implementation and more measurable in terms of budgetlines, timelines and deliverables as well as more collaborative for departments, agenciesand organisations. Vital to this vision is the selection of one agency to exercise leadershipand control over all activities, budgets and responsibilities.

This exploratory and qualitative analysis has opened a wide field for researchers totackle the topic of creative tourism and its facilitation and implementation throughtourism-related structures. It would be promising, for example, to compare and analysethe concepts held by different countries in terms of approach and facilitation. One couldalso analyse and measure how these concepts are implemented into tourism master plansor how they lead to related activities.

This research does have some limitations. Not all the documents studies are accessiblein English, so only Thai-speaking researchers can verify their content and perform a com-parative analysis to confirm the insights reported here. In addition, content analysis cannotcover the thoughts and concepts underpinning the documents, some of which might benefitfrom an explanation of the ideas lying behind their expression. Furthermore, the selection ofdocuments for analysis could also be questioned as not all of the potentially relevant docu-ments are known or accessible to the researchers.

ReferencesAirey, D. (1983). European government approaches to tourism. Tourism Management, 4(4),

234–244.ASEAN Briefing. (2013). ASEAN moves to expand tourism. Retrieved from http://www.

aseanbriefing.com/news/2013/07/18/asean-moves-to-expand-tourism.htmlAssociation of Southeast Asian Nations. (2013). ASEAN starts promoting experiential and creative

tourism. Retrieved from http://www.asean.org/news/asean-secretariat-news/item/asean-starts-promoting-experiential-and-creative-tourism

Bell, D., & Jayne, M. (2010). The creative countryside: Policy and practice in the UK rural culturaleconomy. Journal of Rural Studies, 26(3), 209–218.

Boston Redevelopment Authority (Research Division). (2005). Creativity: Boston’s core business.Retrieved from Boston Redevelopment Authority website: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/pdf/ResearchPublications/CreateBoston.pdf

Chairatana, P. A. (2011). Creative tourism 2.0. Trendnovation southeast 20th issue. Retrieved fromhttp://trendsoutheast.org/2011/all-issues/issue-20/creative-tourism-2-0/

Chiang Mai Creative City. (2010). Projects and activities. Retrieved from http://www.creativechiangmai.com/en/activities/

Cohen, E. (1979). Rethinking the sociology of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 18–35.Cohen, E. (1988). Tourism and AIDS in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371–386.Creative Metropoles. (n.d.). Concepts and methodological approaches. Retrieved from http://www.

creativemetropoles.eu/uploads/files/cm_directory_of_ci_concepts.pdfCreative Thailand. (2010). The creative economy concept adopted by Thailand. Retrieved from http://

thailand.prd.go.th/ebook/review/content.php?chapterID¼76Designated Area for Sustainable Tourism Administration. (2011). [Creative tourism].

Retrieved from http://www.dasta.or.th/th/Sustain/sub_sustain.php?SystemModuleKey¼Create


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4



http://www.asean.org/news/asean-secretariat-news/item/asean-starts-promoting-experiential-and-creative-tourism

http://www.asean.org/news/asean-secretariat-news/item/asean-starts-promoting-experiential-and-creative-tourism

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/pdf/ResearchPublications/CreateBoston.pdf

http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/pdf/ResearchPublications/CreateBoston.pdf

http://trendsoutheast.org/2011/all-issues/issue-20/creative-tourism-2-0/

http://www.creativechiangmai.com/en/activities/

http://www.creativechiangmai.com/en/activities/

http://www.creativemetropoles.eu/uploads/files/cm_directory_of_ci_concepts.pdf

http://www.creativemetropoles.eu/uploads/files/cm_directory_of_ci_concepts.pdf

http://thailand.prd.go.th/ebook/review/content.php?chapterID=76




http://www.dasta.or.th/th/Sustain/sub_sustain.php?SystemModuleKey=Create



Dredge, D., & Jenkins, J. (2003). Destination place identity and regional tourism policy. TourismGeographies, 5(4), 383–407.

Elliott, J. (1997). Tourism politics and public sector management. London: Routledge.European Commission. (n.d.). Chapter II: Delineating the cultural & creative sector. Retrieved from

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/pdf/doc885_en.pdfEuropean Travel Commission. (2006). Tourism trends for Europe. Retrieved from http://www.etc-

corporate.org/resources/uploads/etc_tourism_trends_for_europe_09-2006_eng.pdfEvans, G. (2009). Creative cities, creative spaces, and urban policy. Urban Studies, 46(5/6), 1003–

1040.Fernandes, C. (2011). Cultural planning and creative tourism in an emerging tourist destination.

International Journal of Management Cases, 13(3), 629–636.Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.Gray, J. H., & Densten, I. L. (1998). Integrating quantitative and qualitative analysis using latent and

manifest variables. Quality and Quantity, 32(4), 419–431.Hall, C. M. (2008). Tourism planning: Policies, processes and relationships (2nd ed.). London:

Prentice Hall.Ho, K. C. (2009). The neighbourhood in the creative economy: Policy, practice and place in

Singapore. Urban Studies, 46(5/6), 1187–1201.Howkins, J. (2002). Creative economy: How people make money from ideas. London: Penguin.Kong, L., Gibson, C., Khoo, L. M., & Semple, A. L. (2006). Knowledges of the creative economy:

Towards a relational geography of diffusion and adaptation in Asia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 47(2),173–194.

Ladkin, A., & Bertramini, A. M. (2002). Collaborative tourism planning: A case study of Cusco, Peru.Current Issues in Tourism, 5(2), 71–93.

Leiper, N. (1979). The framework of tourism: Towards a definition of tourism, tourist, and the touristindustry. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 390–407.

Majumdar, D. (2006). Collaboration among government agencies with special reference to NewZealand: A literature review. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 27, 183–198.

McKercher, B., & Chan, A. (2005). How special is special interest tourism? Journal of TravelResearch, 44, 21–31.

Miles, S. (2010). Spaces for consumption. London: Sage.Ministry of Commerce. (2012). Master plan 2012–2021. Retrieved from http://www2.moc.go.th/

download/article/MOC%20Masterplan%20(Main%20Report).pdfMinistry of Culture. (2010a). Master plan 2007–2016. Retrieved from http://www.m-culture.go.th/

ckfinder/userfiles/files/tools-culture/AWFINAL%20BOOK%20WATTANATUM%20PLAN%20YEAR%2025-11-52-1.pdf

Ministry of Culture. (2010b). [Towards year 9]. Retrieved from http://www.m-culture.go.th/download/wattanatham53-54new.pdf

Ministry of Tourism and Sport. (2012). Tourism development plan 2012-2016. Retrieved from http://www.mots.go.th/download/ImplementationOfThePolicy/NotificationOfTheNationalTourismPolicy.PDF

National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). (2008, September 24). The 10thNational Economic and Social Development and Creative Economy. Retrived from eng.nesdb.go.th/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket¼WgA77T8bwRo%3D

National Economic and Social Development Board. (2012). 11th national economic and socialdevelopment plan (2012–2016). Retrieved from http://www.nesdb.go.th/Default.aspx?tabid¼395

National Research Council of Thailand. (2012). 8th national policy and strategic report. Retrievedfrom http://www.nrct.go.th/th/portals/0/e-book/policy-strategy8th/8th.html

New agency to give creative industries an infusion of funds. (2012, August 27). Bangkok Post.Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/economics/309507/new-agency-to-give-creative-industries-an-infusion-of-funds

Oh, H., Fiore, A. M., & Jeoung, M. (2007). Measuring experience economy concepts: Tourism appli-cations. Journal of Travel Research, 46, 119–132.

Ohridska-Olson, R., & Ivanov, S. (2010, September 24). Creative tourism business model and itsapplication in Bulgaria. In Proceedings of the Black Sea Tourism Forum ‘Cultural Tourism –the Future of Bulgaria’, Varna, Bulgaria. Retrieved from http://culturalrealms.typepad.com/files/creativetourismbm_article_1_lr.pdf


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

http://ec.europa.eu/culture/pdf/doc885_en.pdf

http://www.etc-corporate.org/resources/uploads/etc_tourism_trends_for_europe_09-2006_eng.pdf

http://www.etc-corporate.org/resources/uploads/etc_tourism_trends_for_europe_09-2006_eng.pdf

http://www2.moc.go.th/download/article/MOC&percnt;20Masterplan&percnt;20(Main&percnt;20Report).pdf

http://www2.moc.go.th/download/article/MOC&percnt;20Masterplan&percnt;20(Main&percnt;20Report).pdf

http://www.m-culture.go.th/ckfinder/userfiles/files/tools-culture/AWFINAL&percnt;20BOOK&percnt;20WATTANATUM&percnt;20PLAN&percnt;20YEAR&percnt;2025-11-52-1.pdf



http://www.m-culture.go.th/download/wattanatham53-54new.pdf

http://www.m-culture.go.th/download/wattanatham53-54new.pdf

http://www.mots.go.th/download/ImplementationOfThePolicy/NotificationOfTheNationalTourismPolicy.PDF



http://www.eng.nesdb.go.th/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=WgA77T8bwRo%3D




http://www.nesdb.go.th/Default.aspx?tabid=395



http://www.nrct.go.th/th/portals/0/e-book/policy-strategy8th/8th.html

http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/economics/309507/new-agency-to-give-creative-industries-an-infusion-of-funds

http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/economics/309507/new-agency-to-give-creative-industries-an-infusion-of-funds

http://culturalrealms.typepad.com/files/creativetourismbm_article_1_lr.pdf

http://culturalrealms.typepad.com/files/creativetourismbm_article_1_lr.pdf

Pforr, C. (2006). Tourism policy in the making: An Australian network study. Annals of TourismResearch, 33(1), 87–108.

Pikkemaat, B., & Schuckert, M. (2007). Success factors of theme parks: An exploratory study.Preliminary Communication, 55(2), 197–208.

Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Plog, S. C. (1974). Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant

Quarterly, 14(4), 55–58.Pratt, A. C. (2008). Creative cities: The cultural industries and the creative class. GeografiskaAnnaler

[Annals of Geography]: Series B, Human Geography, 90, 107–117.Prefontaine, L., Ricard, L., Sicotte, H., Turcotte, D., & Dawes, S. (2000). New models of collabor-

ation for public service delivery: Worldwide trends. Working paper prepared for CEFRIO.Richards, G. (2001). The market for cultural attractions. In G. Richards (Ed.), Cultural attractions,

European tourism (pp. 31–53). Wallingford: CABI.Richards, G. (2011a). Creativity and tourism: The state of the art. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4),

1225–1253.Richards, G. (2011b, September). Cultural tourism. Presentation at I Congresso Internacional da

Rota do Romanico [1st National Congress of the Route of the Romanesque], Portugal.Richards, G., & Marques, L. (2012). Exploring creative tourism: Editors’ introduction. Journal of

Tourism Consumption and Practice, 4(2), 1–11.Richards, G., & Raymond, C. (2000). Creative tourism. ATLAS News, 23, 16–20.Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2006). Developing creativity in tourist experience: A solution to the serial

reproduction of culture? Tourism Management, 27, 1209–1223.Ritzer, G. (Ed.). (2009). McDonaldization: The reader. London: Pine Forge Press.Rogerson, C. M. (2006). Creative industries and urban tourism: South African perspectives. Urban

Forum, 17(2), 149–166.Santos-Duisenberg, E. D. (2012, March). Capturing local value, creating global impact creativity and

creating value at the bottom of the pyramid. Paper presented at the Thailand International CreativeEconomy Forum, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from http://www.ipthailand.go.th/ipthailand/ticef2012DOC/Session_3/Edna_dos_Santos-Duisenberg_EDS%20UNCTAD-TICEF%202012_Revised_26_03_12.pdf

Schulze, G. (2005). Die erlebnisgesellschaft – Kultursoziologie der gegenwart [The experiencesociety – contemporary sociology of culture] (2nd ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.

Scott, N. (2011). Tourism policy: A strategic review (CTR contemporary tourism reviews). Oxford:Goodfellow. Retrieved from http://www.goodfellowpublishers.com/free_files/fileTourismPolicy.pdf

Stevenson, N., Airey, D., & Miller, G. (2008). Tourism policy making: The policymakers’ perspec-tives. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 732–750.

Supthaweethum, A. (n.d.). A creative infrastructure: A role for government? Presentation to a meetingof the Department of Intellectual Property, Government of Thailand. Retrieved from http://ihe.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/GEDSG_D1_1145hrs_%20Auramon_Supthaweethum.pdf

Tan, S. K., Kung, S. F., & Luh, D. B. (2013). A model of ‘creative experience’ in creative tourism.Annals of Tourism Research, 41, 153–174.

Thai Government Public Relations Department. (2011, June). Ten creative cities selected as proto-types for ‘creative Thailand’. Retrieved from http://thailand.prd.go.th/view_news.php?id¼5730&a¼2

The Government Public Relation Department (PRD). (2010, December 9). Thailand’s NationalStrategy on Creative Economy. Retrieved from http://thailand.prd.go.th/view_news.php?id¼5403&a¼2

Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT). (2010a). The study of creative tourism investment promotion.Tourism investment geo-informatic system. Retrieved from http://www.tourisminvest.tat.or.th/index.php?option¼com_content&view¼article&id¼352&Itemid¼397&lang¼en

Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT). (2010b). Discover the other you. Retrieved from http://www.discovertheotheryou.com/Article/41/16/activities

Tourism authority of Thailand (TAT). (2012, June). ‘Creative tourism’ campaign generates 24 milliononline visitors. TAT News. Retrieved from http://www.tatnews.org/media-releases-2012/item/310-creative-tourism-generates-24-million-online-visitors

UNESCO Cultural News. (2011, February). Chiang Mai being developed as a creative city. Retrievedfrom http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/culture-news/culture-news-details/article/chiang-mai-being-developed-as-a-creative-city/


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

http://www.ipthailand.go.th/ipthailand/ticef2012DOC/Session_3/Edna_dos_Santos-Duisenberg_EDS&percnt;20UNCTAD-TICEF&percnt;202012_Revised_26_03_12.pdf



http://www.goodfellowpublishers.com/free_files/fileTourismPolicy.pdf

http://ihe.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/GEDSG_D1_1145hrs_&percnt;20Auramon_Supthaweethum.pdf

http://ihe.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/GEDSG_D1_1145hrs_&percnt;20Auramon_Supthaweethum.pdf

http://thailand.prd.go.th/view_news.php?id=5730&a=2












http://www.tourisminvest.tat.or.th/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=352&Itemid=397&lang=en












http://www.discovertheotheryou.com/Article/41/16/activities

http://www.discovertheotheryou.com/Article/41/16/activities

http://www.tatnews.org/media-releases-2012/item/310-creative-tourism-generates-24-million-online-visitors

http://www.tatnews.org/media-releases-2012/item/310-creative-tourism-generates-24-million-online-visitors

http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/culture-news/culture-news-details/article/chiang-mai-being-developed-as-a-creative-city/

http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/culture-news/culture-news-details/article/chiang-mai-being-developed-as-a-creative-city/

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2008). Creative economy report. Retrievedfrom http://unctad.org/fr/Docs/ditc20082cer_en.pdf

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2010). Creative economy report. Retrievedfrom http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditctab20103_en.pdf

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2006). Towards sustainable strat-egies for creative tourism. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001598/159811e.pdf

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.). Creative cities network.Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/creativity/creative-cities-network/about-creative-cities/

UNWTO Tourism Highlights. (2012). Long term trends. Retrieved from http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights12enlr_1.pdf

Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze: Leisure and travel in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Vernon, J., Essex, S., Pinder, D., & Curry, K. (2005). Collaborative policymaking: Local sustainable

projects. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(2), 325–345.Wan, P., & King, Y. (2013). A comparison of the governance of tourism planning in the two Special

Administrative Regions (SARs) of China–Hong Kong and Macao. Tourism Management, 36,164–177.

Wang, D., & Ap, J. (2013). Factors affecting tourism policy implementation: A conceptual frameworkand a case study in China. Tourism Management, 36, 221–233.

Wray, M. (2009). Policy communities, networks and issue cycles in tourism destination systems.Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(6), 673–690.

Wu, B., Xue, L., Morrison, A. M., & Leung, X. Y. (2012). Frame analysis on golden week policyreform in China. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 842–862.

Wurzburger, R. (2008). Introduction to the Santa Fe & UNESCO international conference. A globalconversation on best practices and new opportunities. In R. Wurzburger, T. Aageson, A. Pattakos,& S. Pratt (Eds.), Creative tourism: A global conversation (pp. 15–25). Santa Fe, NM: SunstonePress.

York, Q. Y., & Zhang, H. Q. (2010). The determinants of the 1999 and 2007 Chinese golden holidaysystem: A content analysis of official documentation. Tourism Management, 31(6), 881–890.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Hon

g K

ong

Poly

tech

nic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:50

09

Febr

uary

201

4

http://unctad.org/fr/Docs/ditc20082cer_en.pdf

http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditctab20103_en.pdf

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001598/159811e.pdf

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001598/159811e.pdf

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/creativity/creative-cities-network/about-creative-cities/

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/creativity/creative-cities-network/about-creative-cities/

http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights12enlr_1.pdf

http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights12enlr_1.pdf

Reviewing Thailand's master plans and policies: implications for creative tourism?

Documents

Transcript of Reviewing Thailand's master plans and policies: implications for creative tourism?