BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY School of Applied Disciplines Department of Tourism Administration

TRM 492.01 Tourism Research Topics

The Importance of Intangible and Tangible Resources in Choosing a Tourism Destination: Case of stanbul

Yasemin Aksoy Gnce Malan Nee Roman

Moderator: Maria Dolores Alvarez

Submission date: 02.06.200

ABSTRACT The purpose of the study is to investigate the importance of intangible and tangible resources in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. Whether we could distinguish tangible and intangible resources and also to investigate the most important determinant factors in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. In the highly competitive tourism industry, the importance of tangible and intangible resources important to determine the marketing strategies of the destination. stanbul is the leading city of Turkey and in this study the importance of tangible and intangible resources are analyzed in the case of stanbul. The combination of historical and cultural heritage as well as art life is attracting the attention of the World. There is a movement from mass tourism to cultural tourism in recent years and Istanbul's historical background and its geographical position in terms of intangible and tangible resources carry meaning. According to grouping of the variables from the analysis, it is not possible to distinguish between tangible and intangible resources. The tangible can only be understood and interpreted through the intangible. Tangible and intangible resources are complementary resources and considered as two sides of a coin (ICOMOS, 2008). While considering the importance of tangible resources, the intangible ones support cultural identity and desirability of its preservation to recognize

cultural diversity from the perception of tourists (Smith, 2006). Time period, only targeting four European leisure tourists and using nonprobability sampling are the limitations of the research. The implications that give us clue on how to promote Istanbul. First five important factors according to the respondents are Bosporus scene, cuisine, old palaces and fortresses, historical buildings and architecture in terms of choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. From the findings about demographic factors, except the marital status and income level, there is a significant difference among age groups, nationality, gender, first visit and

educational levels. Lastly, according to the visiting times, there is a tendency to the resources from the historical buildings and old palaces and fortresses to art. Keywords: Destination image, European tourists choice, Tangible and Intangible resources, Istanbul.

Table of Contents

Introduction.. 5

Literature Review.. 6

Research Question 19

Conceptual Model and Operationalization... 20

Research Design and Methodology.. 21

Findings. 22

Limitation.. 32

Implications, Further Research and Conclusion 33

References. 35

INTRODUCTION The fascinating history of Istanbul, from its foundation to the present, is a guide for the curious travelers as well as an evocation of an illustrious past. The city has an impressive history and one of the myth of Istanbul is in the following paragraph that appeals to the visitors. The first historically significant settlement in stanbul was founded by a Megarian colonist named Byzas from Greece. According to legend, before coming here, he consulted the oracle in Delphi to find a new settlement. The answer was opposite the blind. When Byzas and his small colony came to the Bosporus in 657 BC, they saw a small colony living on the Asian shore at Kadky (Chalcedon). They saw the superb natural harbor of the Golden Horn on the European shore and thought those people in Kadky (Chalcedon) must be blind. They called their new settlement Byzantium. After the name of Byzantium, the city name changed in to Constantine, Constantinople, Konstantiniyye, Polis, Stimpol, Estanbul, Istambol and Istanbul (Maxvell, 2008). Istanbul is a destination where various cultures and different civilizations meet throughout the centuries. The combination of historical and cultural heritage as well as art life is attracting the attention of the World. In the city, you can come across with people who have different ethnic backgrounds. In the daytime, the Muslims azans sound mix as with the Christians churches bells sounds. The historical peninsula and the metropol city life are intertwined.

Destinations in order to differentiate themselves from their competitors not only use their tangible resources but also attempt to manage their intangible resources in many very ways. So, intangible heritage is unique and it belongs to the destinations as a competitive advantage all over the other cities. Especially, destinations who are mostly serving for Sunlust tourism are basically providing tourists with the same type of product so, what they do is using various selling strategies in order to accomplish differentiation and more sales. This research will help us understand the cultural heritage of Istanbul with its rich tangible and intangible resources in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. This paper defines the tourism commons holistically as the collection of all tangible and intangible resources and argued that they are to the tourist destination. In sum, the objective of the study is to investigate the importance of intangible resources and tangible ones in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. LITERATURE REVIEW Tourism is an activity that indicates travel to and around a destination, with the purpose of consuming particular features of the destination such as attractions, local culture, accommodation, and catering, sightseeing, entertainment, specialized and general services (Inskeep 1991; Pearce 1989). Recent research, determines that destinations images that also encompass intangible resources such as culture, trade, information. The importance of cultural activities such as international music and film festivals, biennials and international exhibitions have increased and provide recognition of the destinations in the international culture arena (Kuzgun, Gksel,zalp, Somer, Alvarez, 2010).

Since tourism industry is composed of intangible products, and there is a time lags between the purchase of the product and its actual consumption, so that, travelers create a cognitive image of the destination (Mansfeld and Pizam, 1999). The awareness and the image of a destination, from the perception of potential visitors, are essential factors that affect destination competitiveness. A favored image of a destination combined with high level of awareness in an important factor to attract the target market (Crouch and Ritchie, 2003). To understand about urban tourism, we need to know what the tourists want to experience in the cities they visit (Ashworth, 1992). The reasons for the visit of a specific place could be location, function, appearance, and cultural inheritance of the cities. Studying about urban cities provides us interesting findings about uniqueness of the destinations (Pearce, 1993). Studies on tourists destination choices made great strides in understanding how parameters affect the tourist behavior (Lin and Morais, 2008). Cognitive distance, for example, has a significant effect on tourists choices of which destinations they will visit and what routes they will take (Cadwallader, 1976). Another example might be the cuisine (Uraz, 2007). Depending on the eating habit of the visitor, a destination may have an advantage among others just because of the proximity between the cultures. In order to describe a city as a cultural city, it should consist of competitive advantages among peers. These advantages of the city are divided into two cultural dimensions as tangible and intangible resources (Uraz, 2007). Intangible ones include local culture (cuisine, norms, and religion), music and film festivals, and biennials (Uraz, 2007). Tangible resources encompass accommodation, museums and historical heritage among others (Uraz, 2007). Potential travelers usually have limited knowledge about the qualifications of a destination which they have not visited before. For this reason, the image and features of a

place as a travel destination are likely to be critical elements in the destination choice process, irrespective of whether or not they are real representations of the place has to offer (Crompton and Um, 1990). Destination choice is very important part of the travel plan and cities has to create differences to get the first place on visitors choice. In tourism marketing, images that have of a destination which is influenced by books, novels, movies, TV and newspaper reports or word of mouth (Gun, 1988), rather than by advertising and promotion, these explain us how people perceive a place. This perception is the first stage in the awareness of a person in destination choice (Sealy and Wickens, 2004). In 2000, Istanbul has an objective to increase its competitiveness through culture and also to be a top city for arts and culture. Istanbul will be using its European Capital of Culture 2010 as a contributory factor for reanimating the tangible and intangible heritage which the city has owned for centuries. While experiencing quite different nations and their own culture, Istanbul accomplishes its City-growth through this cultural process. Hence, Istanbuls unique; mix culture has become a powerful mean of city branding in the competition for investors and popular for visitors (Uraz, 2007). Istanbul, being considered as a historically dominant city, has large distribution of cultural capital and pictographic buildings (Newman, 2005). Moreover, Newman (2005) states that such dominant cities are less flexible in terms of changing trends in cultural development. Instead of culture springing from the inner workings of our cities, we see it as a way to make our cities work... (Jonathan Glancey, The Guardian, 29 March 2003 cited in WilksHeeg, S. And North, P. 2004). Local culture is the most dominant factor for the destinations. As Glancey illustrates the current perception of culture today perfectly adopts the new experiences for local society because it consists of symbolic values. Culture helps community

differentiate themselves from each other as it is unique to one city, even to a single district (Scott, 2000). Culture, in addition, alters the creative methods through cities or regions (Kunzmann, 2004). It encourages creative action in city development (Landry, 2000) though mutually sympathizes with the creative class that can also change the culture of a city (Florida, 2002). Including Istanbul, all destinations are selling their features that are composed of both intangible and tangible resources either for wander-lust tourists or sun-lust tourists. Both intangible and tangible resources rely on each other when it comes to understanding the meaning and importance of each (ICOMOS, 2008). Intangible resources and tangible resources are two sides of the same coin, both carry meaning and helping store in memory humanitys past. Furthermore, both tangible and intangible resources rely on each other when it comes to understand meanings and importance of each individually (ICOMOS, 2008). For a destination, its image is very significant as affecting its success in tourism and its potential visitors. The image of Turkey affects the image of Istanbul (Kerimolu, 2006). The political problems, economic conditions and the effect of the religion of Turkey have a negative effect on the Istanbuls potential visitors (Kerimolu, 2006). Actually, the natural and cultural values of the city have a more impressive effect on visiting Istanbul than any other artificial attractions (Kerimolu, 2006). The tourism commons are heterogeneous and variable that are composed of natural and built tangible and intangible resources (Briassouli, 2002). There is a deep- seated interdependence between the intangible cultural heritage and the tangible ones. This point was reinforced as that cultural heritage should speak through the values that people give it and not the other way round. However, the tangible can only be understood and interpreted through

the intangible (Smith, 2006). While considering the importance of intangible resources, the intangible ones support cultural identity and desirability of its preservation to recognize cultural diversity from the perception of tourists (Smith, 2006). Destinations intangible resources that have intrinsic productive values that are used to describe aesthetic, spiritual, and symbolic or other social values people may associate with a site. For example; places genius loci, smellscape and soundscape, legends, films, festivals, dances, poetry, which has an effect on intangible resources (ICOMOS, 2008)? UNESCO also defines intangible heritage as being all forms of traditional and cultural works originating in a given community. These works consist of oral traditions, music, arts and all kind of special skills that are connected with culture. For many populations, the intangible the vital heritage is source of the identity that is deeply rooted in history (Kirshenblatt- Gibmlett, B, 2004). The basic factor which can be determined as an intangible resource and creates differentiation among destinations is Places genius loci. The feeling of the place grants its own identity and its main position that refer to its main characteristics to the place. If we have a closer look at Istanbul, the city has been welcoming numerous people from different ethnic roots, natinalities and religions for centuries by showing its multiculturalism (Karla, 2009). In Istanbul, in the beginning of classical Roman religion a genius loci was the protective spirit of a place and the idea was about, being the Emperor's genius which is the genius loci of the entirety of the "place" of the Roman empire (Day, 2002). Between 17th and 19th centuries, the sounds of the cities are completely different than todays noises. In 20th century, people try to escape the city sound whereas in the old times sounds of the city are the main source of information. There are many different sounds in a city. In the history, people heard the noise of the horse shoes, but now they hear the sound of traffic.

Bells of the old towns transformed into alarm clocks. The sound of swords disappeared, the bombs sound come into play. (Garriorch, 2003) The soundscape of the stanbul become a topic for a documentary movie Crossing the Bridge: The Sound of stanbul. In the movie, the different types of music, music culture and the relationship between the society, politics, and life explained. (Martinson, & Schulz, 2008) Another important part of intangible resources is legends of destinations. As popular belief would have it, the Harem was an intimate area in which women were educated and groomed for a life outside the harem if they could not bear the sultan any children in Ottoman Emperor (Goodwin, 2006). In addition, Goodwin makes an important contribution to traditional discussions of the Harem by debunking the myths and stereotypes of Harem life on the grounds that much of what has been said is just hearsay, gossip, and fantasy. Every detail of Harem life was governed by tradition, obligation and ceremony. Harem means private in literature. The women of the Harem had to be foreigners, as Islam forbade enslaving Muslims. Girls were bought and then would be schooled in Islam and Turkish culture and language, as well as the arts of make- up, dress, music, reading, writing and dancing (Lott, 1865). Another intangible resource of Istanbul is Films and Festivals. The festival is the showcase par excellence for the presentation of intangible heritage (UNESCO). One fourth of all 1000 cinemas in Turkey are located in Istanbul (Kabil, 2009). Film making is one of the main industries other than festivals that have a strategic importance for the city; due to their ability to influence image or the synergy that they provide with other touristic activities (Enlil et al, 2008). There have been many films about Istanbul like, Dracula in Istanbul (1953), Killing in Istanbul (1967), Istanbul, Keep Your Eyes Open (1989), Spice Girls: Live in

Istanbul (1997), Crossing the Bridge: The Sound of Istanbul (2005), Mission Istanbul (2008), Istanbul(2011) which are showing its features to the audience from all around the world. Religion has been an integral motive for the travellers and is usually considered as oldest form of travel (Jackowski and Smith, 1992). Religiously motivated travel has become widespread and has integrated with the growth of tourism in the modern era (Lloyd, 1998). Furthermore, venerated places are now being accepted as cultural and historic sites. Mosques, churches, synagogues and cathedrals are used in tourism literature, as evidenced in the recent marketing efforts (Olsen and Timothy, 1999). Moreover, spiritually motivated travel could be considered as an essential identity for Istanbul (Demirci, 2006). The religious places represent an important phenomenon that involves the tourism industry. Religion and spirituality are the most common motivations among the travellers (Timothy and Olsen, 2006). Religious places such as churches, synagogues and mosques take determinant place among tourists attractions and as destination choice (Timothy and Olsen, 2006). Istanbul as a multicultural city has a lot of religious places and it indicates that Istanbul has a potential to welcome a variety of people all around the world( Demirci, 2006). Although belly dance is not located as an item on the Islamist governments website, it is still a primary tourist attraction for Istanbul and Turkey (Potuolu-Cook, 2006). Turkish belly dance emphasis on real and imagined connections to an Ottoman past within the relation with Islamist and secular neoliberal projects in post-1980s Istanbul (Potuolu-Cook, 2006). Folklore, namely folk dance, is considered as an intangible cultural heritage (ICH) or a living heritage, built over the triple integration of the conceptual framework: folk, nation and tradition. The relationship of folklore with tourism, places it in a

mercantilisation/touristification process, as a reality in accordance to the post-modern, postfordist and globalized society we live in (Henriques and Joo, 2008).

Istanbul has inspired many poets through the centuries (Halman, 1997). stanbul, capital of two great empires, confluence of Asia and Europe, has called forth poetry throughout her long history, from paupers and sultans, natives and visitors alike. When Mehmet, the Conqueror first wandered through the ruins of the Byzantine palace, it was with the words of the Persian poet Firdusi on his lips: The spider spins its web in the palace of the Caesars, An owl hoots in the towers of Afrasiab'. Since then the silhouette of thousand-yearold domes and tapering minarets, the sunsets reflected nightly in a thousand palace windows and the bustle of her markets has inspired Sultan Sleyman, W. B. Yeats and Nzim Hikmet, amongst others, to salute one of the world's most remarkable cities (Orga, 2008). Traditions of the specific destination provide identity to that specific city across all cultures and are reflected in the diversity of art facts and achievements that compose tourism activities (Mowforth and Munt, 1998: 109). According to Joliffe, The word tea has a number of connotations. It can refer to a plant, a beverage, a meal service, an agricultural product, an export, an industry, an art, a religion or a dedicated past time. (2003, as cited in Hall, et al, 2003). As Joliffe stated, tea has a special place in terms of touristic activities. Tea is served as hot, sweet and strong in tulip shaped glasses that has an important place in the Turkish culture as a kind of oasis for giving a break to the modern life and all the pressures of daily routine also a way to socialize with others (Hall, et al, 2003). Another important resource is Turkish coffee that is served as strong and sweet and downed with equal gusto generally after meal in order to help to digest the food. Fortune telling ritual also is coming at the end of coffee; the cup is tipped upside down on the saucer and allowed to cool, sometimes with a ring on the top or a coin. Once cooled, the shapes in both the cup and saucer used as a way to read the past and the future with the influence of horoscopes, the spiritual world also superstition (Bal, t, 2009).

Third example of the most visual example of traditional resource is the evil eye that consist of blue and white eye motif that also known as the Eye of Medusa is a sign of good luck and a way for protection from the bad spirits. The evil eye bead is very common especially as a souvenir sometimes as pendants, sometimes key chains, stickers or magnets (Bal, t, 2009). Architecture shows the visible image of the city and has always played a special role in tourism. It is an expression of lifestyles and spirit of the epoch and culture (Winkler, 2008). Istanbul has mixture of architectural structures which is influenced from all civilizations located before. The city has many architectural structures that are significantly coming from different civilization. Walls of Constantinople, originally constructed by the emperors, historical buildings, statues, mosques, columns, churches, synagogues, palaces, castles and towers and functional constructions which came from ancient Greek, Byzantine, Genoese, Ottoman, also Turkish republic (Necipolu, 2001). According to Sahin, Safak and Baloglu, Seyhmus, second popular attraction in stanbul is Bosporus and third popular activity in stanbul is taking Bosporus cruise/boat tours. Bosporus is a result of stanbuls unique geographic location between two continents Europe and Asia. (Sahin, & Baloglu, 2011) It is a 20 km long sea strait connecting Black Sea and the Marmara Sea. There are hills, valleys around the both sides of the strait. Composition of unique architecture and natural beauty attracts foreigners as well as locals themselves. (Baytin, Canbay Turkyilmaz, Kran, & Tunbis, 2003) Moreover, Toka (2009) indicates that Istanbul is also the host city of Turkish music culture. Cultural diversity of the city enriched the structure of Turkish Music culture. The author also highlights that arabesque music in 1980s has developed as a subculture by reflecting the lifestyle and perceptions of rural immigrants to Istanbul.

Barutcugil (2009) states that Istanbul is also a city with its vein and calligraphy art. Improvement of vein arts has prospered the city both culturally and historically by considering the historical root of this art. Istanbul acquires many intangible elements reflecting its rich differentiating culture. Turkish Cuisine as a local culture is a significant cultural and historical factor because it is one of the oldest and richest cuisines in the World (Kuzgun, et al, 2010). Foreign institutions as being one of the intangible resources, in Istanbul also serve as cultural factors since they are enriching the culture of the city. Tosun, ztrk and zpnar (2009) state that these organizations introduce own culture, art and language while strengthening the links between two cultures. The availability of libraries is another cultural element of Istanbul. Libraries are known as community centers since they are centers of education, culture and socialization (Bayir, 2009). It is seen that tourism is subject to weather and climate, with sun, sand and sea travel decisions to a large extent being based on perceptions of warm, sunny environments. Likewise, winter tourism is built on expectations of snow. Hence, tourism is dependent on climate variables such as temperature, and humidity (Smith, 1993; de Freitas, 2001). Accordingly, it is not surprised that climate change will affect travel behavior, both as a result of altering conditions for holidaymaking at the destination level and climate variables perceived as less or more comfortable by the tourists. Climate as a component of destination image, is one of the psychological characteristics of a city helps us measure destination image (Echtner and Ritchie, 1991). Another important part of destination resources is tangible resources that are having actual physical existence. Examples of a destination tangible resources are: accommodation facilities of the city, Palaces & Fortresses, Towers, Pillars, Monuments,

Bazaars, Libraries, and Museums, Nightclubs, (Getz, 2002), Dining facilities and Well-known Roads, Handicrafts, Souvenirs, Traditional dress (Ritchie and Crouch, 2003). The first component of the Istanbuls tangible resources is accommodation facility. Istanbul is a world-famous tourist attraction center owing to its unique location, nature and history. The restructuring process of the 1980s focused on the tourist industry as a means of promoting economic development, and the number of hotels in Istanbul increased dramatically (Dkmeci, Balta, 1999). The first hotel in Istanbul is Hotel Pera Palace in 1892. Shortly after, a series of hotels, including Tokatlyan's hotel and the Bristol hotel, were opened in Beyolu district. As of 2007, Municipality Licensed, there are 561 Hotels, 1 motel, 77 pensions, 1 holiday village and 1 camping place and Ministry Licensed, there are a total of 394 accommodation establishments in Istanbul, which are classified as both qualified and unqualified. Among them, 339 are hotels (Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Investment and Enterprises, 2005). Hamams were the public place for Turkish Women that eventually became as the womens coffee-house where all the news about town is spoken (Melville, 1925). The accountants of the Western travellers about hamams give a deeper understanding in Turkish culture when the outsider attends in some traditional ceremonies in the baths (Ylmazkaya, 2003). Other components of the tangible assets are Palaces & Fortresses, Towers, Pillars, and Monuments. The first palace in Istanbul is The Old Palace situated in Beyazit. Later, the Topkapi Palace was built (the New Palace) in Sarayburnu During the last period of Ottoman Empire. And then, Kavak Palace in Uskudar was demolished during construction of Selimiye Military Barracks. Another important palace is Seaside Palace built in Besiktas in the period of Mahmut II was made demolished by Abdulmecit and replaced by the Dolmabahce Palace

(1818-1856). In addition to palaces, there are 3 Fortresses in Istanbul. Anatolian Fortress: It was built in the period of Beyazit I to control sea transport of Byzantium (end of l4th century). Mehmet II had Rumelian Fortress built on the opposite shore and also Yedikule Fortresses in Altinkapi (1457-1458) was shaped like a star. Ottoman treasury was protected here for a while. Bazaars are important shopping facility for both touristic and local selling. Auction rooms and antiquity markets built out of stone against fire constitute the master buildings of business life of the Ottoman Period in Istanbul. Earliest example of these is the Inner Auction Room (Old Bazaar) made in the period of Mehmet II. The largest auction building of the Ottoman Architecture from the standpoint of number of domes is the Sandal Bedesteni (New Bazaar). Julie Pardue who came to this city in the l9th century states; "The market of Istanbul is one thousand and one night tale for Europeans. Neither the historical value of the hippodrome nor the earnest magnificence of Hagia Sophia is as interesting as the shopping area of this city situated among three seas. Istanbul Market shines like the magic lamp of Alaaddin." Museums are one of the most important part of the tangible resources of a destination. Istanbul has many museums such as Archaeological Museum, is located in Osman Hamdi Bey Yokusu, Gulhane, Eminonu, was built by the end of 19th century, Haghia Sophia Museum is located Sultanahmet Meydani, Eminonu was the ancient Byzantine church, built by Justinian I between 532-537, St. Savior in Chora (Kariye) Museum is located Edirnekapi, Fatih was Ancient Byzantine church which was first built in the 6th century, and also Painting & Sculpture Museum is located Dolmabahce Sarayi, Besiktas was opened in 1937 in the crown prince suites of Dolmabahce Palace by the order of Ataturk. Furthermore, Libraries are also one of the basic factors that have an effect on visitation to the destination. In the Ottoman

Empire, independent or as a part of Complexes started in the l7th century. The oldest example is the Kprl Library (1661). Nightclubs are an important part of the functional image of the destinations is an important determinant in terms of entertainment part of the travel. Entertainment districts are characterized by theaters, restaurants, clubs, cafes, pubs, themed clubs (Burtensaw, 1991). When we come to the Dining facilities of a destinations, William Shakespeares quotation All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players; they have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts is a good application for dining out experience that is one of the tangible resources of a destination. The players in a dining place consist of managers, staff, and customers that all have different specific roles in different part of this experience. However, there are many opportunities for each player to exchange roles within this enduring cycle. For example, when a server leaves his/her working place and went out for dining, (s) he automatically takes the customer role. And thanks to this role play, each meal event can enable to meet tourists expectations and provide memorable experiences to influence tourists decisions (Gibbs, Ritchie, 2003). In the case of Istanbul, the dining facilities are providing variety of cuisine alternatives that are carrying cultural footprint of the Ottoman Empire and other civilizations as well as current culture. Therefore, Visitors have an opportunity to experience old times cuisine in many dining facility. Last but not least, Well-known roads in the destinations have important role as a tangible resources. Preoccupation with city image has meant increasing attention to creating touristic places which can attract attention and symbolize the positive attributes or image the city wishes to convey since touristic places frequently represent not simply the city, but also

the nation (Smith, 2005). In the case of Istanbul, Istiklal square in Taksim and Bagdat square in Kadkoy are the famous touristic places in the case of well-known roads in the destination. Shopping becomes a major leisure activity in tourism industry. (Law and Au, 2000) In todays world shopping activity is more than satisfying the necessities of daily needs. To remember the visit of the destination, recreationists and tourist buys clothing, souvenirs, artworks and handicrafts. So, shopping has a significant impact on tourist experience and could be a motivating factor for travel. (Timothy and Butler, 1995; Timothy, 2005) In sum, tourists preferences have started to become increasingly sophisticated as they migrate from mass consumption towards more authentic products and services also personal experiences for new meaning and self-actualization, so the importance of intangible resources has been increasing year by year (Cooper & Hall, 2008). The tourist and the local people with the culture of the destination are dependent on one another. The tourists need for their authentic experience, the living culture and maintenance and improvement of the destination both intangible and tangible resources depend on spiritual and economic development of the local community (Schouten, 2007).

RESEARCH QUESTION Our review of the literature which is stated above has been found relevant in order to determine the research question and the conceptual model of the study. Considering the finding of the literature, two research questions identified:

Which resources both tangible and intangible are most important for European tourists in choosing stanbul as a tourism destination? Is there a relationship between personal factors and the importance given by the tourists to tangible and intangible resources in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination? CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND OPERATIONALIZATION

Broad Conceptual Model

The importance of tangible and intangible resources in choosing destinations will be analyzed. The correlation between the personal factors and importance attributed to tangible and intangible resources will be investigated. The study didnt focus on the destination choice, because the choice has been already made by tourists. Operationalization

In order to measure the importance of tangible and intangible resource affect on destination, the scale was derived from the literature. The correlation between the personal factors and tangible and intanbile resources will be analyzed.

Personal Factors Age Income Gender Education Marital Status Origin Place of Residence

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The study will be carried out through a survey aimed at determining the views of the leisure tourists, who are basically visiting Sultanahmet district, in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination, how important were the intangible resources of the city and the tangible resources of the city for the tourists. Tourist attractions are concentrated in Sultanahmet Region. The most important places are Topkap Palace, Hagia Sophia Museum, Sultanahmet Mosque, the Hippodrome, Grand Bazaar, Basilica Cistern and Musem of Islamic art in the Sultanahmet Square. Therefore European tourists can easily find in Sultanahmet Square.

(Baloglu, 2011)) European visitors (German, UK, Spanish, and French) are the target of the research. The type of the research is descriptive that will be used to reveal summary statistics by showing responses to all possible questionnaire items from the surveys. In the literature, how the leisure tourists perceive the intangible resources and tangible resources are described. The survey will be applied to the tourists as convenience sampling and in four different languages which are English, German, French and Spanish in order not to let the tourists have difficulties from the language of the survey that is only in English. It will be given to tourists who will be around Sultanahmet area during the last 2 weeks of April. The unit of analysis of the study is individual. Data is collected through the personally administrated questions. The time horizon of this research is cross-sectional. Because the data is gathered once, over a period of time. Factor analysis will be used. A sample of 200 tourists (50 from each nationality group) will be surveyed while visiting Istanbul and analyzed by using SPSS 17. The survey instrument will include quantitative questions to better grasp the visitors common and unique perceptions. Sampling The sampling method of the study is quota sampling. Sample of the study consists of 50 individual from each nationality. (UK, Germany, Spain, France) The sample of 200 tourists surveyed in Sultanahmet area In order to increase the responses of the questionnaires, we choose the places where people were resting. FINDINGS

We apply 200 questionnaire and according to responses, our demographic profile of the sample is stated in the table below.

Table 1: Demographic Profile of the Sample

Table 2: Demographic Profile of the Sample After gathering our demographic profile of the sample, before we start analysis, we apply reliability test in order to see our responses reliability and we have 71% Cronbachs

Alpha result that shows that our responses are reliable enough to analyze. We use five-leveled importance scale. 1: Very Important; 2: Important; 3: Neither Important nor Unimportant; 4: Unimportant; 5: Very Unimportant According to this scale, means of the answers given to the questions regarding European tourists perceptions were taken. According to respondents, in the case of Istanbul as a tourism destination, Bosporus scene, Cuisines, Old palaces and fortresses, Historical buildings and Architecture have the highest scores in their choice. These means, these five factors were the effective reasons for their visit to Istanbul as a destination. According to descriptive statistics again, Songs, Soundscape, Language, Libraries and Traditional dress have the lowest score that indicates, these factors do not have any influence in the their destination choice in the case of Istanbul.

Table 3: Descriptive Statics of Variables

Table 4: Descriptive Statics of Variables

Then we applied ANOVA test in order to see whether there is a significant relationship between four different nationalities destination choice in the case of Istanbul. We found out that in terms of Atmosphere of the city, Museums, Smellscape, Traditions, Libraries, Music, Songs, Souvenirs, Handicrafts, Religious places, Architecture, Religion, Hamams and baths there is a significant difference among French people and other nationalities. This shows that French people give more importance to these resources in comparison to other nationalities.

When we look at the variables in terms of different education level there is a significant difference among the entire group and university graduates, and also again the entire group and post graduates. These indicate different perceptions about Istanbul. Old Palaces and Fortress - Post graduate F: 4,221 Sig: 0,00 Architecture - Post graduate F: 4,649 Sig: 0,00 Historical Buildings - Post graduate F: 3,998 Sig: 0,00 Shopping Facilities - Post graduate F: 3,436 Sig: 0,01 Traditions - Post graduate F: 3,128 Sig: 0,01

Dance - Post graduate F: 3,264 Sig: 0,02 Souvenirs - Post graduate F: 3,345 Sig: 0,02 Smellscape University F: 3,401 Sig: 0,01 Music- University F: 3,163 Sig: 0,02 We also apply again ANOVA test in order to see whether there is a difference among different income level respondents and marital status, but as the test indicates there is no

significant difference among the groups. This indicates that neither income level nor marital status is not a determinant factor in destination choice in the case of Istanbul. Different income levels and marital status do not make any difference in terms of our variables importance in the case of Istanbul as tourism destination. According to different age group of our population, there is a significant difference among the entire group and over 51, also the entire group and over 65, and again the entire group and less than 20 age groups. This indicates different needs about Istanbul. Nightclubs - for over 51, less important factor F: 16,508 Sig: 0,00 Nightlife - for over 51, less important factor F: 17,23 Sig: 0,00 Museums - 51 and over, the most important F: 5,303 Sig: 0,00 Films - for over 65, less important factor F: 2,900 Sig: 0,002 Old Palaces and Fortresses - for under 20 less important factor F: 3,759 Sig: 0,00 Architecture - for under 20 less important factor F: 2,716 Sig: 0,03.

Our responses also differ according to gender. Females and males has different choices in terms of Istanbul. After applying T-TEST, we found that there is a significant difference between males and females. Dining facilities Male t: 4,069 Sig: 0,04 Legends Female t: 7,227 Sig: 0,01 Souvenirs Female t: 8,417 Sig: 0,00. According to T-TEST again, between first visit expectation and previous visit, again there is a significant difference. This indicates that there is a tendency to pay more attention to intangible resources of the city for next visits.

 Festivals- First visit t: 4,147 Sig: 0,04 Historical buildings First visit t: 6,203 Sig: 0,01 Old palaces and fortresses First visit t: 8,288 Sig: 0,00 Art Previous visit t: 4,080 Sig: 0,02

FACTOR ANALYSIS An exploratory factor analysis was performed to see whether there is a clear distinguish between tangible and intangible resources.

KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0,60

Bartlett's Approx. Chi-Square Test of df Sphericity Sig. Table 5: KMO and Barlett s Test

2.331,49 528,00 0,00

First, we looked at KMO and Barletts test to indicate that our results are adequate enough to carry out this research and Barletts Test states that there is an overall correlation between the items that allows us to carry out factor analysis.

Variables / Commonalities Atmosphere of the city Accommodation Cuisine Dining facilities Language Smellscape Soundscape Legend Traditions Bazaars Festivals Nightlife Nightclubs Films

Extraction 0,604 0,714 0,79 0,769 0,447 0,863 0,861 0,603 0,683 0,665 0,659 0,845 0,811 0,727

Books and poems Museums Libraries Art Music Songs Souvenirs Handicrafts Well-known roads Religious places Historical buildings Old palaces and fortress Architecture Religion Shopping facility Dances Bosporus

0,708 0,689 0,53 0,653 0,595 0,751 0,735 0,636 0,579 0,679 0,697 0,759 0,696 0,686 0,375 0,559 0,581 Table 6: Commonality Among Variables

After applying factor analysis, shopping facilities and language were under 0.5 that means that they have low commonalities when we compare them with the rest of the variables. So, they were extracted from the variables and the test carried out without these two variables.

Rotated Component Matrix / Varimax Rotation Variables Old palaces and fortress Historical buildings Architecture Religious places Atmosphere of the city Religion Libraries Bosporus Nightlife Nightclubs Museums Art Traditions Festivals Cuisine Dining facilities Accommodation Soundscape Smellscape Souvenirs Hammams and baths Handicrafts Traditional dress Dances Songs Books and Poems Music Bazaars Legend Films Well-known roads Total 1 0,81 6 0,74 9 0,60 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Cronbach's Alpha

Historical places

0,731

0,65 3 0,64 6 0,61 7 0,48 2 -0,46 0,89 6 0,87 7 0,73 4 0,73 1 0,49 1 0,43 1

Intangible and tangible aspects

0,209

Entertainment

0,894

Cultural activities

0,584

0,83 2 0,83 1 0,63 9 0,92 1 0,87 6

Tourism services

0,679

Feeling of the city 0,74 0,64 0,59 8 0,69 7 0,62 8 Traditions 0,79 1 0,56 7 0,46 2 Antiques

0,835

0,596

0,456

Literature

0,613

0,77 9 0,62 6 0,825 0,459

0,47

0,332

6,399

Table 7 : Factor Analysis for the dimensions of the tangible and intangible variables. The results show that the tangible and intangible resources of the city can be categorized in eleven dimensions which are Old Palaces and Fortresses, Historical Buildings and Architecture in a group that is named as historical places, Religious Places, Atmosphere of the city, Religion, Libraries and Bosporus in another group that is named as intangible and tangible resources, Nightlife and Nightclubs in a group that is called entertainment and so on. From the table, Cronbachs Alpha rate indicates that some of the dimensions have low reliability due to the fact that it is just an explatory factor analysis and that is to say, it is difficult to come up a single definition. However, most of the dimensions have higher alpha rate and shows that there is a mix of tangible and intangible resources. Shortly, it is difficult to separate tangible and intangible resources.

LIMITATIONS

A few limitations of the study should be addressed. First, the time is the major limitation of the research. We could reach our sample only in the spring season at the end of April. If the time limitation was eliminated, a larger sample could be aimed. Another limitation is that we only targeted four European leisure tourists that are German, French, Spanish and English. We also did nonprobability sampling that is to say we could not represent our population well. Another major limitation of our research is that we reached only the tourists who were currently in the Sultanahmet area. Lastly, the survey was found long by the tourists.

IMPLICATIONS, FURTHER RESEARCHES AND CONCLUSION

After doing various analyses once again it is seen that tangible and intangible resources are as ICOMOS (2008) states, two sides of the same coin, both carry meaning and help store in memory of humanitys past. Furthermore, both tangible and intangible resources rely on each other when it comes to understand meanings and importance of each individually. Moreover,

Smith (2006) states that the tangible can only be understood and interpreted through the intangible. While considering the importance of tangible resources, the intangible ones support cultural identity and desirability of its preservation to recognize cultural diversity from the perception of tourists. The results of our tests supported these which were written in the literature review and we come up again the same result that is according to grouping of the variables from the analysis, it is not possible to distinguish between tangible and intangible resources. From managerial implications that we get from our findings, Bosporus scene, cuisine, old palaces and fortresses, historical buildings and architecture are very important factors in terms of choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. These first five important factors give us a clue on how to promote Istanbul.

When it comes to demographic factors, according to the results, except the marital status and income level, there is a significant difference among age groups, nationality, gender, first visit and that make sense in the promotional purposes. Last implication of our findings from previous visit results, shows that tourists who have visited Istanbul for the first time, want to visit old palaces and fortresses and historical buildings and festivals. However, if it is their second or third visit, the t test analysis indicates that they give more importance to art. Finally, for further research, a larger sample size which would be more representative of the population can be used. Besides, this research may be done including all purposes of the travel not only for the leisure. In addition to these, the research may be done for more nationalities not only focusing on four nationalities, for example; we could add Chinese tourists to our target market because China is a growing market in Istanbul and their responses could change the implications on how to promote Istanbul. The research could also cover people who have not come to Istanbul yet, so we can see the difference between these two groups in terms of their perceptions in choosing Istanbul as a tourism destination. Lastly, we only did explatory factor analysis and our findings were not hundred percent reliable. Confirmatory factor analysis may be used to develop the research and to confirm the dimensions of the scale. and educational level

REFERENCES Ashworth, G., J., (1992), Is there an urban tourism, Tourism Recreation Research.

Vol. No.172. pp. 3-8. Bal, H., t, ., (2009), Towards an Analysis of the Signs of the 'Unknown':

Objects with Rituals in Turkish Culture, Vol.12 No. 3 Pp. 365-382. Barutcugil, H. (2009) Ebru Sanati. In Bilgili, Ahmet E. (Ed.), Istanbul Kltr

Turizm. stanbul: TC Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl l Mdrl. Bayir, D. (2009). Istanbulda Kutuphanelerimiz ve Kutuphaneciligimiz. In Bilgili, Ahmet E. (Ed.), Istanbul Kltr Turizm. stanbul: TC Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl l Mdrl.

Baytin, C, Canbay Turkyilmaz, C, Kran, A, & Tunbis, M. (2003). stanbul -Bosphorus as Our Cultural Heritage, the Process of Change Over Time. Proceedings of the XIX CIPA Symposium.

http://cipa.icomos.org/ANTALYA.html

Beyazt, E. & Tosun, Y. (2006). Evaluating Istanbul in the Process of European Capital of Culture 2010. 42nd ISoCaRP Congress 2006

Briassoulis, H.( 2002). Sustainable Tourism and the Question of the Commons. Annals of Tourism Research,Vol.29. No.4. pp.1065-1085.

Burtensaw, D., Bateman, M., Ashworth, G.J. (1991). The European City, A Western Perspective. London, Wiley.

Cadwallader, M. (1976). Cognitive distance in intraurban space. In G. T. Moore & R.

G. Golledge( Eds.) Environmental knowing: Theories, research, and methods.Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchhinson & Ross. Pp. 275- 284. Crompton, J., Um, S. (1990), Attitude Determinants in Tourism Destination Choice,

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 17. Pp. 432-448.

Crouch, G., Rithchie, B. (2003), Competitive Destination: A Sustainable Tourism

Perspective, Cabi Publishing 1st Edition.

Day, Christopher. Spirit and Place: Healing Our Environment. London: Architectural

Press, 2002.

Demirci, K. 2006. Istanbulda Inanc Turizmi ve Onemi. Istanbul Kltr Turizm 2008 Deerlendirmesi. Pp. 335-337.

Dkmeci,V,Balta,N.(1999)European Planning Studies, 1469-5944, Vol. 7. No.1. Pp.

99 109. Dzgn,D. (2010). Life in stanbul I Karagz, The Turkish Shadow Play. Atatrk

niversitesi Trkiyat Aratrmalar Enstits Dergisi, Vol. 17 No. 43. Retrived March 29,2011 from http://e-dergi.atauni.edu.tr/index.php/taed/article/view/2688/2672

Echtner, C. M. and Ritchie, J. R. B. (1991). The meaning and measurement of

destination image. Journal of Travel Studies, Vol. 2. No.2. Enlil, Z., Dincer, I., Evren, Y. and Seckin, E. (2008), Spatial strategies for the

promotion of cultural industries in Istanbul: opportunities and challenges, paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Cultural Policy Research, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, August. de Freitas, C. (2001). Theory, Concepts and Methods in Tourism Climate Research.

Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Climate, Tourism and Recreation, Porto Carras, Neos Marmaras, Halkidiki, Greece. Pp. 320. Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of The Creatice Class. New york: Basic Books. Garrioch, D. (2003). Sounds of the City: The Soundscape of Early Modern European

Towns. Urban History V.30. Pp. 5-25

Getz, D. (2002), Capacity to Absorb Tourism: Concepts and Implications for Strategic

Planning, Annals of Tourism Research. Vol 10. No. 2. 1983, Pp. 239-263.

Glancey, J. (29 March 2003). Bright Lights, Big City. The Guardian.

Goodwin, G. (2006). The Private World of Ottoman Women. London: Saqi Books. Gssling, S. and Hall, C. M. (2005). Tourism and Global Environmental Change:

Environmental, Economic, Social and Political Interrelationships. London. Routledge.

Gunn, C., (1988). Vacationscape: Designing Tourist regions, 2nd Edition, NY: Van

Nostrand Rinhold. Guthrie, J., and P. Gale. 1991 Positioning Ski Areas. In New Horizons Conference

Proceedings. Calgary: University of Calgary. Pp. 551569.

Hall, C. M., Sharples, L., Mitchell R., Macionis, N., Cambourne, B. (2003), Food

Tourism Around the World, Vol. 1.

Halman,

T.

S.

(1997).

stanbul

Poems.

Retrieved

March

29,2011

from

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-20343890.html

Henriques, C.

Joo,M. 2008. Folk Dancing, Tourism and Identity. A

Relationship in (de)construction? In: 16th ICOMOS General Assembly and International Symposium: Finding the spirit of place between the tangible and the intangible. ICOMOS, (2008) 14th General Assembly and Scientific Symposium. Inskeep, E. 1991 Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development

Approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Jackowski, A. And Smith, V. L.(1992). Polish Pilgrim Tourists. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol.19. pp. 92-106.

Jenkins, O. H.( 1999). Understanding and Measuring Tourist Destination Image.

International Journal of Tourism Research 1. Pp. 115. Joliffe, J., (2003), The lure of Tea, Tourism Around the World, Vol:1. Kabil, I. (2009), Istanbul ve Sinama, In Bilgili Ahmet E. (Ed.), stanbul Kltr

Turizm. Istanbul: TC Kultur ve Turizm Bakanl Il Mdrl. Karla, B. (2009), ehirlilik Ruhu ve Medeniyet uuru, Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl

Yaynlar. Kerimoglu, E., (2004), Urban Tourism: An Analysis of visitors to Istanbul, Istanbul

Technical University, Institute of Science, Istanbul.

Kirshenblatt- Gibmlett, B. (2004) Worl Heritage and Cultural Economies: Intangible

Heritage as Metacultural Productin. Vol. 54. No: 1-2. Kunzmann, K. R. (2004). Culture, Creativity and Special Planning. Abercrombie

Lecture, Liverpool University/ Department of Civic Design. Kuzgun, et al (2010), Perception Regarding stanbul as a European Capital of Culture. Landry, C. (2000). The Creativity City; A Toolkit For Urban Innovators. London:

Comedia/ Earthscan. Law R, Au N. 2000. Tourism Management. Relationship Modeling in Tourism

Shopping: A Decision Rules Induction. Vol. 21. Pp. 241-249. Lin,C. H., Morais, D.B. (2008), The Spatial Clustering Effect of Destination

Distribution on Cognitive Distance Estimates and Its Impact on Tourists Destination Choices, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 25 Pp. 3-4.

Lott, E.( 1865). Harem life in Egypt and Costantinople. Vol. 1. London. Mansfeld, Y., Pizam, A. (1999), Consumer Behavior in Travel and Tourism, The

Haworth Hospitality Press, Vol. 1. Martinson, S.D., & Schulz, R.A. (2008). Transcultural German Studies. Pp. 239 Maxwell, V. 2008 stanbul City Guide. Lonely Planet. Pp 19-20. Melville, L. 1925. Lady Mary Wortkey Montagu: Her Life and Letters (16891762).London: Hutchinson& Co. Paternoster Row. Mowforth, M. and Munt, I. (1998) Tourism and Sustainability New Tourism in the

Third World. London: Routledge. Necipolu, N. (2001). Byzantine Constantinople: Monuments, Topography and

Everyday Life. Pp. 89.

Newmann, P.(2005). Cultural regeneration, tourist and city government. In

Kucukcekmece Municipality Publication (Eds). Istanbul 2004 International Urban Regeneration Symposium: Workshop of Kucukcekmece District. Istanbul. Pp. 63-69. Olsen, D.H. and Timothy, D.J. (1999). Tourism 2000: Seliing the Millenium. Tourism Management. Vol:20. Pp: 389-392. Orga, A. (2008). stanbul: Poetry of Place. Pearce, P., (1982), The Social Psychology of tourist behaviour, Oxford: Pergamon. Pearce, P., (1993), Fundamentals of tourist motivation, ed. Tourism Research:

Critiques and Challenges, London: Routledge, 113. Pearce, D. 1989 Tourist Development (2nd Edition). Essex: Longman.

Potuolu-Cook, . 2006. Beyond the Glitter: Belly Dance and Neoliberal Gentrification in Istanbul. Cultural Anthropology. Vol. 21. No 4. pp 633660.

Sahin, S. & Baloglu, S. (2011). Brand Personality and Destination Image of stanbul. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 22, Pp. 69-88.

2-3.

Sealy, W., Wickens, E. (2008), Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 24. Pp.

Scott, A.J. (2000). The Cultural Economy Of Cities. London: Pion. Smith, K. (1993) The inuence of weather and climate on recreation and tourism.

Weather. Vol. 48. No. 12. Pp. 398403. Smith, L.(2006). Uses of Heritage. Edition Published by Taylor and Francis e-

Library.NY.

Stansfield, C., and J. Rickert 1970 The Recreational Business District, Annals of

Tourism Researche, Vol. 20. Timothy DJ. 2005. Shopping Tourism, Retailing and Leisure. Channel View:

Clevedon, UK. Timothy DJ, Butler RW. 1995. Cross-border shopping: a North American perspective.

Annals of Tourism Research Vol.22. Pp. 1634. Timothy, D. And Olsen, D. 2006. Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys. Pp.285-287 Tokac, M. S. (2009). Istanbul ve Mzik. In Bilgili, Ahmet E. (Ed.), Istanbul Kltr

Turizm. stanbul: TC Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl l Mdrl. Tosun, N. C., zturk, Z. & zpnar, C. (2009). Istanbuldaki Yabanc Kltr Kurulular. In Bilgili, Ahmet E. (Ed.). Istanbul Kltr Turizm. stanbul: TC Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl l Mdrl. Uraz, A. (2007).Culture for Regenerating Cities: what can Istanbul learn from the

European Capitals of Culture Glasgow 1990 and Lille 2004? MA Thesis: Erasmus University of Rotterdam.

http://www.uptake.com/blog/turkey/istanbul-2010-ecoc_8355.html#ixzz1GajrkVQS http://www.turizm.net/cities/istanbul/museums.html (Access on 27/03/2011) http://istanbul2010culture.com/category/tourism/ (Access on 27/03/2011) http://www.kultur.gov.tr/EN/belge/2-19941/istanbul.html (Access on 27/03/2011)