Tài liệu Nâng cao năng lực cạnh tranh cụm ngành du lịch ở tỉnh an giang

i CERTIFICATION I certify that the research has not been submitted for any degrees. I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, I have acknowledged all sources of information and support. The study does not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City or the Fulbright Economics Teaching Program. Author Hoang Tu Uyen ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT My deep gratitude to Dr. Jonathan R.Pincus for his thoughtful and patient supervision and encouragement. My special thanks to Dr. Vu Thanh Tu Anh, Phan Chanh Duong and the teachers at the Fulbright Economics Teaching Program for their inspiration. Love to family and friends. iii ABSTRACT This thesis studies the competitiveness of the tourism sector in An Giang province, using the cluster approach. The thesis applies an adjusted Michael E.Porter model to evaluate the competitiveness of the tourism cluster in An Giang and finds that even though An Giang province attracts a large number of tourists every year, revenue from the tourism sector is relatively small compared to its competitors, and the activities in the cluster target the low-end market segment. Moreover, spiritual tourism in An Giang province does not demonstrate much growth potential. The tourism sector in An Giang province is duplicating the offerings of other destinations and does not have clear competitive advantages. Therefore, the thesis recommends that the government should not invest heavily in promoting spiritual tourism but should improve the business environment by enhanced infrastructure, education and promotional campaigns. The thesis also suggests that the province should shift its focus from spiritual tourism to heritage tourism. Key words: tourism sector, cluster, spiritual, heritage iv CONTENTS CERTIFICATION.................................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................... iii ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................................................................ vi LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF CHARTS .............................................................................................................................. viii LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................ ix 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................1 1.1. 2. 3. 1.1.1. Clusters & the competitiveness of clusters .......................................................................1 1.1.2. The Tourism cluster in An Giang .....................................................................................7 1.2. Research Objectives .................................................................................................................8 1.3. Research Questions ..................................................................................................................8 1.4. Organization of the Research ...................................................................................................9 METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................................10 2.1. Research methods...................................................................................................................10 2.2. Research models.....................................................................................................................10 FINDINGS .....................................................................................................................................11 3.1. An Giang as a gateway to the Mekong Delta .........................................................................11 3.2. The performance of the current tourism cluster .....................................................................14 3.3. Determinants of regional competitiveness in tourism ............................................................21 3.3.1. Given local nature endowment .......................................................................................22 3.3.2. Competitiveness at the regional level.............................................................................25 3.3.3. Competitiveness at the firms level ..................................................................................32 3.4. 4. Background of the problem ......................................................................................................1 The diamond model of competitiveness ..................................................................................35 3.4.1. Factor conditions (input conditions) ..............................................................................36 3.4.2. Demand conditions .........................................................................................................38 3.4.3. Related and supporting industries..................................................................................40 3.4.4. Context for firm strategy and rivalry .............................................................................41 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................43 4.1. Discussion ..............................................................................................................................43 4.1.1. Summary of the current situation ...................................................................................43 4.1.2. Opportunities..................................................................................................................44 v 4.1.3. 4.2. Challenges ......................................................................................................................44 Recommendations...................................................................................................................45 4.2.1. The choice of mutual development .................................................................................45 4.2.2. Investment in infrastructure ...........................................................................................46 4.2.3. Consideration of the proposed An Giang airport ..........................................................46 4.2.4. Investment in education ..................................................................................................47 4.2.5. Creation of tourism business associations .....................................................................47 4.2.6. Creation of heritage tours ..............................................................................................48 4.2.7. Less investment on spiritual tourism projects ................................................................48 4.2.8. Promotional campaigns .................................................................................................48 4.3. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................50 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................51 APPENDICES........................................................................................................................................56 vi ABBREVIATIONS 2009 Census 2009 Population and Housing Census AGPC People Committee of An Giang province AGU An Giang University An Giang An Giang province ATIPC An Giang Trade and Investment Promotion Center FDI Foreign Direct Investment GSO General Statistics Office HCMC Ho Chi Minh City ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization MDTA Mekong Delta Tourism Association PCI Provincial Competitiveness Index SME Small and medium size enterprise vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: South Carolina industries’ dependence on tourism .................................................................6 Table 3.1: Tourism destinations in An Giang (listed by district) ...........................................................16 Table 3.2: Airports in the Mekong Delta ...............................................................................................30 Table 3.3: Structure of An Giang’s enterprises (2004 – 2009) ..............................................................33 Table 3.4: Structure of An Giang’s enterprises (divided by size of capital and number of employees) (2004 – 2009) .........................................................................................................................................34 viii LIST OF CHARTS Chart 3.1: An Giang’s demographic structure in 2010 ..........................................................................12 Chart 3.2: Total retail sales of goods and services – current prices (1995 – 2010)................................12 Chart 3.3: Composition of An Giang’s economy from 2000 to 2010 ....................................................13 Chart 3.4: Number of tourists served by the hotels in An Giang (2001 – 2010)....................................18 Chart 3.5: Structure of domestic tourism in 2009 ..................................................................................18 Chart 3.6: Average expenditures per day of domestic tourists in 2009..................................................19 Chart 3.7: Tourists’ average daily expenditures in An Giang from 2000 to 2010 .................................19 Chart 3.8: Number of tourists served by the accommodation units and length of stay ..........................20 Chart 3.9: Revenue from tourism activities (2009 – 2011) ....................................................................20 Chart 3.10: Revenue per tourist in 2011.................................................................................................21 Chart 3.11: GDP per capita (constant prices) of An Giang, Can Tho, Kien Giang, Tien Giang and Tay Ninh from 2000 - 2010 ...........................................................................................................................24 Chart 3.12: Volume of passengers in An Giang, Can Tho and Tay Ninh (2001 – 2010) ......................25 Chart 3.13: Percentage of drop – out students from 5 to 18 years old in 2009 ......................................26 Chart 3.14: Proportion of development investment expenditure of An Giang from 2000 – 2010 .........28 Chart 3.15: PCI of An Giang province in 2010 and 2011 ......................................................................33 Chart 3.16: Revenue of the enterprises in tourism sector in An Giang (2001 – 2010) .........................37 Chart 3.17: Increase of foreign tourists from 1996 – 2011 ....................................................................39 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Determinants of regional competitiveness.............................................................................3 Figure 1.2: Diamond model of competitiveness ......................................................................................4 Figure 1.3: Cluster development ladder ..................................................................................................6 Figure 3.2: Map of the transport network from An Giang to larger Mekong Delta ...............................13 Figure 3.3: An Giang tourism’s cluster map ..........................................................................................15 Figure 3.4: Determinants of regional competitiveness in tourism in An Giang .....................................22 Figure 3.5: Distances from An Giang and Tay Ninh to HCMC and Phnom Penh.................................22 Figure 3.6: Percentage of high school graduates....................................................................................26 Figure 3.7: Locations of An Giang, Can Tho, Ca Mau, Rach Gia and Phu Quoc airports ...................29 Figure 3.8:Location of industrial zones and tourist sites in An Giang province ....................................32 Figure 3.9: Diamond model of competitiveness in An Giang ................................................................36 Figure 4.1: Promotional campaigns targeting at tourists........................................................................49 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background of the problem 1.1.1. Clusters & the competitiveness of clusters Clusters as a new economic concept “Cluster” is an emerging term in today’s economics. Michael E. Porter (1998) claims that clusters have a prominent role in maintaining the competitiveness of nations. He defines a cluster as a “geographic concentration of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field,” which includes suppliers of specific inputs, providers of specialized infrastructure, manufacturers of complementary products and companies in related industries (Porter 1998, 199). He also states that when the companies and institutions get together in clusters, their whole value is greater than the sum of each separate part, and “clusters, broader than industries, capture important linkages, complementarities, and spillovers of technology, skills, information, marketing, and customer needs that cut across firms and industries” (Porter 1998, 205). Clusters promote both competition and cooperation (Porter 1998). Clusters will affect productivity growth, with “productivity” defined as “the value created per day of work and unit of capital or physical resources employed” (Porter 1998, 209). Porter states that clusters are of foremost importance since they provide better access to employees, suppliers, specialized information, complementarities, institutions and public goods. Clusters also encourage improved measurement and motivation. Besides, clusters also help drive the direction and pace of innovation as well as stimulate the formation of new businesses (Porter 1998). Ferreira and Estevão (2009) believe that clusters generate static externalities (cheaper access to product factors) and dynamic externalities (enhanced learning and motivation). The tourism cluster Tourism has recently been considered an “economic growth engine with particular focus at the regional level” (Ferreira and Estevão 2009, 1). Botti et al. (2008) prove that the industry is a prodigious source of value creation and employment, especially in places with no other alternative economic advantages. 2 Ferreira and Estevão (2009, 5) define the tourism cluster as a “geographic concentration of companies and institutions interconnected in tourism activities”. Generally, tourism clusters are associated with tourism products and destinations. Tourism achieves positive economic outcomes through clustering (Roberts 2000). The industry is extremely suitable to the application of the cluster concept because the satisfaction of the customers (tourists) comes from both the attraction of the destination and the quality of related businesses such as hotels, restaurants, shopping centers and transportation (Ferreira and Estevão 2009). Nordin (2003) observes that the experience of tourists is based on the overall impression of the destination visited, and every single factor needs systematic development. In general, destinations like clusters are formed naturally. However, to achieve their full potential, they need support (Nordin 2003). Braun (2005) says that tourism clusters’ growth needs a critical mass of firms and also the important elements of strategic infrastructure such as hard, financial and human resource infrastructure. The competitiveness of tourism clusters Dominguez (2001, as cited in Ferreira and Estevão 2009, 9) states that the competitiveness of a tourism cluster depends on the tourism businesses’ capacity to attract visitors who “offset the costs of business development, and reward the capital invested, in an equal or above manner of the opportunity cost.” Some elements of tourism cluster competitiveness are invisible and immeasurable (Dwyer and Kim 2003). Objectively measured elements of the competitiveness of a tourism destination (tourism cluster) are visitor numbers, market share, tourist expenditure, employment and value added by the tourism industry, and the subjectively measured ones are “richness of culture and heritage” and “quality of tourism experience” (Dwyer and Kim 2003, 375). There are models that can be applied to measure the competitiveness of a destination and a specific cluster. Determinants of regional competitiveness Adjusting Porter’s framework to a regional scale to analyze national competitiveness, Vu Thanh Tu Anh et al. (2011) mention three factors that affect the productivity of a region, namely: (i) regional natural endowments; (ii) competitiveness at the regional level; and, (iii) competitiveness at the firm level. 3 Figure 1.1: Determinants of regional competitiveness Competitiveness at the firm level Business environment & infrastructure Cluster development Business’s practice & strategies Competitiveness at the regional level Cultural, social, medical & education infrastructure Fiscal, credit policies & Economic structure Given local natural endowments Natural resources Geographic position Scale of regional economy Source: Porter, E. (1990), adjusted by Vu Thanh Tu Anh et al. (2011) Natural endowments refer to the factors naturally owned by the regions such as natural resources, geographic position and scale of the local economy. It is not always true that favorable natural endowments will lead to a high degree of competitiveness of a region and vice versa (Vu Thanh Tu Anh et al. 2011). Facing pressure from unfavorable conditions, such as lacking natural resources or having an adverse climate, necessary strategies and innovation will be generated, thus enhancing competitiveness. For example, Japan and Korea have proved that countries can create and maintain high competitiveness without the support of natural resources, while many countries blessed by nature such as Nigeria and many other African countries seem to suffer from the “curse of natural resources” (Sach and Warener 1995). Competitiveness at the regional level includes the infrastructure of culture, society, health and education, which is usually called “soft infrastructure,” together with fiscal and credit policies and the economic structure of the region. The last determinant of regional competitiveness refers to competitiveness at the firm level. This determinant includes the business environment and infrastructure, the capacity of the clusters and the strategies and business practices in the region. 4 Diamond model of competitiveness Porter (1990) believes that the success of every company that competes in the market comes from the economic environment, institutions and government’s policies. He also emphasizes that the main indicator of competitiveness is productivity. He proposes a framework of competitive performance, depicted as a “diamond model”, consisting of (i) factor conditions; (ii) firm strategy, structure and rivalry; (iii) demand conditions; and (iv) related and supporting industries. Porter later adds (v) government and (vi) change/chance as “events out of control of the company”. Figure 1.2: Diamond model of competitiveness A local context that encourages investment and sustained upgrading, e.g. intellectual property protection Open vigorous competition among local based rival Government Film Strategy Structure & Rivalry Factor conditions Demand conditions High quality, specialized inputs available to firms: • • • • • • Human resource Capital resources Physical infrastructure Information infrastructure Scientific & technological infrastructure Natural resources Source: Porter, E. (1990) A core of sophisticated and demanding local customer(s) Related & Supporting Industries Availability of capable, locally based suppliers and firms in related industry Presence of clusters instead of isolated industry Unusual local demand in specialized segments that can be served nationally or globally Customer needs that anticipate those elsewhere 5 The first facet of the model is about factor conditions, which Porter and many other authors place much emphasis on. Factor conditions are also called “input conditions” – or raw materials. In tourism, factor conditions play such an important role that Nordin (2003) even claims that without these conditions, there would be no tourism activity. Factor conditions are usually classified as “basic production factors” such as land, labor, capital, natural and cultural resources and “specialized factors” (Nordin 2003, 21). Among these, specialized factors – things that are not inherited but created – are vital to competitiveness. The specialized factors of the tourism industry include human resources trained in tourism, infrastructure to access natural resources, capital markets to finance long-term tourism projects and wide coverage of public services (Inman 2002 – as cited in Nordin 2003). Demand conditions refer to the needs and wants of consumers. Local demand is very important since the proximity of companies to their customers increases their responsiveness and shortens communication channels (Nordin, 2003). Nordin (2003) also states that both domestic and foreign visitors contribute to local demand of tourism. Porter (1998) believes that the sophistication of consumers is crucial. Smeral (1998) says that sophisticated tourists’ needs require recognizing new trends and new production possibilities early on. Therefore, anticipating consumers’ wants are vital to developing tourism activities. Porter (1990) insists that in an intensively competitive environment among local companies, the pressure to innovate and constantly improve is created. Therefore, long-term competition should be considered as a driver of innovation. In the tourism industry, destinations compete in terms of services, prestige and market share (Nordin, 2003), and it is not surprising that the high degree of rivalry may lead to improved standards and new products. Nordin (2003) concludes that the competitiveness of a destination is defined by “the degree of specialization, by its diversity, the quality of suppliers and operating network” (Nordin 2003, 23). The term “related and supporting industry” is related to the development of all factors in a cluster. There is no general agreement about the dependence of each single related industry depends on tourism, but Flowers and Easterling (2005) propose a grid, ranking industries by their dependence on tourism for the tourism cluster in South Carolina. The grid can be more or less applied to other tourism clusters. 6 Table 1.1: South Carolina industries’ dependence on tourism





Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3






Tier 4 Tier 5 Hotels Airports Amusement/recreation Restaurant Auto services Manufacturing (e.g., transportation equipment) Retail trade Wholesale trade Advertising FIR (Finance/Insurance/Real Estate) Utilities Communications Agriculture/ Construction 50 – 75% 30 – 50% 15 – 30% 10 – 15% 5 – 10% Source: Flowers and Easterling (2005) In the grid, Flowers and Eastering (2005) conclude that tourism has the strongest effect on the hotel industry. Some other industries such as restaurants, recreation and auto services also significantly depend on tourism. Their dependence is about 50 percent. In addition, tourism also affects other economic activities to a smaller extent. Cluster development ladder McRae – William (2002) explains that clusters progress through a ladder in which the later stages achieve better performance than earlier ones, and working clusters are the ones with the highest competitiveness. They have the critical mass, geographic concentration and active clustering processes. Figure 1.3: Cluster development ladder Wannabe Policy driven Potential Working Latent Source: McRae – William (2004) In her paper, McRae – William (2002) describes a “wannabe” cluster as a so-called cluster that “lacks too many vital economic attributes to benefit from being a cluster” (McRae William 2002, 240), while a “working” cluster shows many favorable characteristics of clustering and high level of interconnection. In the middle, “latent” and “potential” clusters have critical mass and geographic concentration but without active clustering processes. 7 Dwyer and Kim (2003) provide a list of groups of determinants and indicators of a destination’s competitiveness. The model provides a more detailed description of the factors affecting the competitiveness of a tourism destination. Therefore, the ideas of Dwyer and Kim have been employed as a useful benchmark for evaluating the competitiveness of the tourism cluster in An Giang. 1.1.2. The Tourism cluster in An Giang An Giang welcomes a large number of visitors every year. According to official records, the total number of visitors was more than 5.5 million in 2011, and eighty-seven percent of tourists who visited An Giang in 2010 were Vietnamese (Mekong Delta Tourism Association - MTDA 2012). Tourism activities in An Giang basically depend on spiritual tourism, with the center as Ba Chua Xu festival, lasting for four months, from the first to the fifth month of the lunar year. Each year, the festival hosts more than three million visitors, accounting for about 70 percent of the total number of tourists to An Giang every year, according to Huynh Thi Nhu Lam, chair of Tourism, An Giang’s Department of Culture, Sports and Tourism. The seasonal peak of tourism activities in An Giang is between the first and the fifth month of the lunar new year because of the density of the religious festivals during this period of time. During the peak season, about 70 to 80 percent of tourists visit the province. Typically, the tourism cluster in An Giang attracts the following types of visitors: • Pilgrims who visit the destination every year to worship during the Ba Chua Xu festival and some other religious festivals such as the ceremony at Thoai Ngoc Hau tomb. They may also be involved in other activities such as shopping in the duty free zone and shopping centers nearby or visiting pagodas and other religious places. These visitors typically stay for a short while and do not use many tourism services. The majority of this type of tourist is from the nearby provinces, but there is an increasing trend of pilgrims from the northern provinces. • Heritage tourists are mostly foreign tourists, but there are also domestic heritage tourists. They visit the cultural sites such as the Cham and Khmer villages, Oc Eo relic, ox-racing festivals and boat house villages. These tourists usually use more tourism services than the pilgrims. The number of this type of tourists is quite limited. 8 • Sightseeing tourists consist of both domestic and foreign tourists. Domestic sightseeing tourists mostly come from nearby provinces and they only have picnics. Some of the well-known tourism sites are Tra Su Cajuput Forest, Ton Duc Thang Monument, Cam Mountain Entertainment Park, Sap Mountain Entertainment Park and some other theme parks. The provincial government has shown an interest in developing tourism as one of the core economic activities besides manufacturing and processing. Decision 803/QĐ-BVHTTDL of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism in 2010 also claims An Giang, Kien Giang and Ca Mau as the central group to develop tourism activities in the Mekong Delta. In reality, revenue from hotels and restaurants (the main proportion of revenue from tourism) accounted for about 10 percent of budget revenue (VND 1,628 billion in constant prices) in 2010, an increase from 2000 of five percent (VND 345 billion in constant prices). Local government also wants to improve the performance of tourism and make the province the tourism hub in the region. However, the results thus far have fallen short of expectations. In 2011, even though the number of tourists to An Giang made up 32 percent of the total number in the Mekong Delta, revenue from the tourism sector in An Giang accounted for only seven percent of the Delta’s total revenue from tourism (MDTA 2012). Also, spending and the average length of stay among domestic and international tourists are quite limited. It seems like all of the efforts to turn tourism into a flagship of An Giang’s economy have not achieved their goals, thus raising questions about this region’s tourism competitiveness and potential for further development. 1.2. Research Objectives The research evaluates the role of tourism in An Giang’s social and economic development. By applying an adjusted Porter model, the author evaluates the competitiveness of the tourism cluster and introduces the necessary actions to be taken to enhance the cluster’s performance. 1.3. Research Questions The research will answer the following questions: - How is the competitiveness of An Giang’s tourism sector? - What are the strengths and weaknesses of An Giang’s tourism cluster? 9 - What policy changes are needed to enhance the competitiveness of the tourism cluster in An Giang? 1.4. Organization of the Research The research consists of four chapters. The first chapter provides the foundations for the research, including the background, literature review, research objectives and research questions. The second chapter sets out the methodology of the research, including the process of gathering and analyzing data. The third chapter discusses the findings of the research. Tables and charts are used to support the main conclusions. In the last chapter, the author discusses the findings from the previous chapters, answers the research questions and provides recommendations to enhance the competitiveness of the tourism cluster in An Giang 10 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Research methods The author has employed qualitative research methods in this research. First, the secondary data are collected. The author analysed the collected data to figure out the main problems and built an interview list to dicuss with the experts. After the discussions, the author conducted in-depth analyses and generate the main findings of the thesis. A list of the interviews can be found in the appendices. Secondary data were collected from the Statistical Year Books of the General Statistics Office (GSO), An Giang province’s People Committee (AGPC), the Mekong Delta Tourism Association (MDTA) and other research. Also, another important source of data was from the research of Vu Thanh Tu Anh et al. (2011) of the Fulbright Economics Teaching Program about the competitiveness of the provinces in the Mekong Delta. This information will be organized using the method proposed by Michael E.Porter. All data were processed in excel files and presented in the form of tables, charts and graphs. 2.2. Research models The research is conducted mostly based on the ideas about the determinants of national competitiveness from Professor Michael E. Porter, adapted by Vu Thanh Tu Anh et al. (2011) to a regional scale. The model mentions three groups of factors affecting the competitiveness of a region, including (i) regional natural endowments – geographical features, climate conditions and scale of local economy; (ii) competitiveness at the regional level refers to the so called “macro” economic conditions in a region, such as infrastructure, culture, society value, health, education and local government policies; and, (iii) competitiveness at the firm level, relating to the business environment, technical infrastructure (soft infrastructure), and the development of clusters and firms’ strategies. Also, the author will introduce the competitiveness of the tourism cluster in An Giang through the diamond model (Porter, 1990), which mentions four facets of an industry’s competitiveness: (i) factor conditions; (ii) demand conditions; (iii) firm strategy, structure and rivalry; and, (iv) related and supporting industries. 11 3. FINDINGS The findings are based on the information from data collected and interviews, and are presented in narrative form and in tables, charts and pictures to reveal the competitiveness of tourism sector in An Giang by a cluster approach. The main benchmarks are tourism sectors in other provinces that share many things in common with the tourism sector in An Giang, including Tay Ninh province, Can Tho city and some other provinces in the Mekong Delta. Also, the development of the tourism cluster in An Giang over different periods of time is also taken into consideration. A detailed list of determinants and indicators of the competitiveness of tourism destination as suggested by Dwyer and Kim (2003) is also considered. 3.1. An Giang as a gateway to the Mekong Delta Demographic features An Giang is located in the upper reaches of the Mekong Delta, southern Vietnam. It shares a 100 - km border with Cambodia. Also, An Giang borders Dong Thap, Kien Giang provinces and Can Tho City. Similar to other regions in the delta, An Giang has a fairly flat topography with a criss – crossed river system. Besides the midland area, the province also has a low mountain system, called Bay Nui – That Son (Seven Mountains) which is located in Tinh Bien and Tri Ton districts. The province is home to many ethnic groups. Additionally, it has a large number of pagodas, temples and other religious places. The province is divided into one city, two towns and 8 districts. With a population of around 2.2 million people (2010) living in 3,536 square kilometers, An Giang is among the most crowded provinces in Vietnam, and 30 percent of its population lives in urban areas (2009 Census). The population of the province comprised 12 percent of the total population of the Mekong Delta in 2009 (2009 Census), and the population density is about 608 people per square kilometer, which is much higher than the average population density of the Mekong Delta (246 people per square kilometer) (Statistical Year Book of Vietnam 2010). Educational attainment in the province is relatively low, compared to national standards. In 2010, the number of high school graduates was 43/1,000 people.