The impact of socio-demographics on tourist behavior. analyzing segments of cultural tourists visiting Coimbra

The impact of socio-demographics on tourist behavior analyzing segments of cultural tourists visiting Coimbra Elisabeth Kastenholz (ekast@egi.ua.pt), Maria João Carneiro (jmaria@egi.ua.pt), Celeste Eusébio (maguiar@egi.ua.pt) University of Aveiro, Department of Economy, Management and Industrial Engineering

The impact of socio-demographics on tourist behavior analyzing segments of cultural tourists visiting Coimbra 1. Introduction The present paper reveals results of a study undertaken with the cultural tourist market interviewed when visiting Coimbra in summer 2004, yielding a number of 322 valid responses. The study was integrated in a European research project, coordinated by ATLAS (Association for Tourism and Leisure Education), with the objective of analysing the motivations, socio-demographic profiles, consumption patterns and destination images of cultural tourists in different countries. The objective of the present study was to identify different cultural tourist segments based on a set of socio-demographic variables and to further analyze differences existing between these groups in terms of travel behavior. Results point at a clear distinction between a wealthier, older group of tourists, with a higher level of education, contrasting with a poorer, younger and less educated group. These clusters or culture tourist segments were further analyzed with regard to other aspects of their socio-demographic profile and their travel behavior, revealing significant differences between groups. Results may help understand the culture tourist market and contribute to an improved target marketing to each group, simultaneously understanding the actual and potential role of each group for the destination area in question. 2. Cultural Tourism In the tourism literature there isn t much agreement amongst researchers about what cultural tourism means. This concept has been widely used, but it is also widely misunderstood. Richards (1994:99) corroborating this idea, defends that cultural tourism is a difficult concept, partly because of its potentially wide scope, but also because the term

culture itself has many possible meanings. Some researchers use a narrow definition of cultural tourism, while others choose a broader one. Medlik (2003: 48), for example, defines cultural tourism in a narrow sense as special interest holidays (vacations) essentially motivated by cultural interests, such as trips and visits to historical sites and monuments, museums and galleries, artistic performances and festivals, as well as lifestyles of communities, while he also includes in a broader sense activities with a cultural content as parts of trips and visits with a combination of pursuits. However, for quantifying cultural tourism, this kind of definition is sometimes difficult to use. In this case, it is more adequate to use a technical definition of cultural tourism. Bonink and Richards (1992) suggest the following technical definition of cultural tourism: all movements of persons to specific cultural attractions, such a heritage sites, artistic and cultural manifestations, arts and drama outside their normal place of residence. This definition will be used in this paper. Although there are many difficulties to achieve a consensual definition of cultural tourism, both academics and policy makers agree that the importance of cultural tourism is undeniable and increasing worldwide. A study carried out in 1997 revealed that 25% of the Europeans who went on holidays had visited cities and that, for European holidaymakers, historical interest was the fifth most important criteria for choosing the travel destination (EU, 1998). Cultural tourism has also been identified as one of the most rapidly growing areas of global tourism demand, with an increase of 15% in the last decade (WTO, 2001a). Nowadays it already accounts for about 10% of the tourism arrivals worldwide (WTO, 2001b). There is a general perspective that the market of cultural tourism is likely to be composed of travellers with high socio-economic status, high levels of education, adequate leisure time, and often having occupations related to the cultural industries and education (Richards, 1996; WTO, 2001b).

According to some authors (e.g. Schuster, 1993; Heilbrun and Gray, 1993, cited by Richards, 1996), the education of visitors is a strong determinant of cultural participation, with the difference in participation rates across educational levels being evidenced as greater than across income levels. Based on this strong relationship between the education level and cultural participation rate, it is possible to forecast an increase in world cultural tourism, because an expansion of worldwide educational opportunities can be observed. The kind of visitors occupation is another important determinant of cultural tourism demand. Cultural tourism is particularly popular amongst people with occupations related to culture. A cultural tourism research project, elaborated by ATLAS in 1992 demonstrated the importance of cultural occupation for cultural consumption. In this study almost 20% of all cultural visitors interviewed had an occupation which was related to the cultural industries (Richards, 1996). The socio-economic status of visitors is another factor that influences cultural consumption. People with higher levels of income and mobility in general reveal greater levels of consumption of cultural activities. Several studies have demonstrated this kind of relationship (e.g. Schuster, 1993; Merriman s, 1991, cited by Richards, 1996). Apart from the above described variables influencing cultural tourism demand, other factors may be: more leisure time availability, increase of standards of living and the increase of senior tourism. Although the growth of the cultural tourism market is widely recognised and specific characteristics of this market have been identified, several authors state the importance of recognizing the growing differentiation within specific tourist markets (Poon, 1993). In this context, segmentation studies are increasingly popular amongst planners and managers of destination areas, since they may contribute to a more cost-effective design and promotion of more satisfactory tourism products.

3. The relevance of segmentation for tourist destination marketing Kotler (1994: 264) stated that the heart of modern strategic marketing can be described as segmenting, targeting and positioning, with segmentation being the essential first step in the direction of a target marketing approach. The concept of segmentation was introduced by Wendell Smith (1956, cited by Baker, 1991), based on the argument that groups of consumers can be defined in such a way that their purchasing behavior would be relatively homogeneous. Middleton (1988) suggests that segmentation may be defined as a process of dividing a total market, such as all tourists, into manageable sub-groups... (permitting) more cost effective marketing, through the design, promotion and delivery of purpose built products aimed at satisfying the identified needs of target groups. Similarly, Weinstein (1987, as cited by Loker and Perdue, 1992) explains: Good market segmentation research provides operational data that are practical, usable, and readily translatable into strategy. The selection of a relevant segmentation basis, i.e. the characteristic according to which segments are distinguished, is essential for a useful structuring of the market. A large range of variables have been suggested in the general marketing (Kotler et al., 1999) and tourism literature (Mill and Morrison, 1992; Pender, 1999; Kotler et al., 1995). Generally sociodemographic variables such as nationality, age, income or education have been considered as quite usable, since they are easy to assess (Lawson, 1994) and have also been identified as relevant determinants of tourist behavior (e.g. Baloglu and Brinberg, 1997; Kastenholz, 2002; Gitelson and Kerstetter, 1990). As discussed before, in the context of educational and cultural tourism, one may consider particularly the tourist s educational level as relevant, but also age differences may have an impact on different tourist behavior, with level of income also being considered as an important determinant of consumption patterns in the culture tourism context.

Guiltinan & Paul (1994: 71) explain that firms may find some segments more attractive than others because of variations in segment size, growth potential, or competition. In the case of tourism, one could add because of the existence of certain features of the destination, best fitting the needs of specific segments and because of overall destination development concerns (Kastenholz, 2002: 79). Beane & Ennis (1987: 20) state, in this context, that segments can be perceived as opportunities. A company (here: destination) with limited resources needs to pick only the best opportunities to pursue. Nowadays, in destination marketing the emphasis is shifting from competition between (destinations) on the basis of price to the management of destinations in order to present a consistent range of services intended to satisfy particular types of tourists (Laws, 1995: 26). McKercher (1995) stresses the limited control tourism marketers often have over the product mix and new product development and the little flexibility of complex destination products, suggesting a need for managing the market-portfolio rather than the product portfolio. Consequently, segmentation may also be used as a tool for managing demand, which may be particularly useful within a strategy of sustainable tourism development. Specifically, a destination may choose the most interesting target segment(s), based on a range of criteria that reveal the segments attractiveness from a sustainability point of view, associated with long-term economic profits, social, cultural and environmental benefits versus costs (Kastenholz, 2004). Additionally, this analysis permits directing diverse tourist groups within a larger destination area and along the year to enhance the overall benefits and minimize possible negative impacts of tourism.

4. The Empirical study 4.1. Objectives and methodology These data are part of an international research project the Atlas Cultural Tourism project global surveys 2004 that was coordinated by ATLAS (Association for Tourism and Leisure Education). The objective of this project was to obtain data from cultural tourists travelling worldwide in order to better characterise the international cultural tourism market. For this purpose, surveys were carried out in diverse countries of several continents in order to interview tourists that were visiting cultural tourism attractions. The questionnaires included questions concerning the socio-economic profile of the visitors (e.g. age, nationality, educational level, income) as well as questions about their travel behaviour (e.g. accommodation and forms of transport used, duration of stay, arrangement of the trip) and destination images of the visitors. The objective of the here presented paper is to analyse whether, in the broad market of cultural tourism, it is possible to distinguish market segments with different socioeconomic characteristics, specifically in terms of age, educational level and income. If segments could be identified, it would be another objective to analyse whether they differ in terms of travel behaviour, justifying different approaches by suppliers and marketers of cultural tourism products. In this paper, the data analysed only concerns the questionnaires, administered in Coimbra (N=322) by a research group of the University of Aveiro. 4.2. Coimbra as a cultural tourism destination Coimbra is located in the Central Region of Portugal, between other important cities of the country, Porto and Lisbon. Coimbra is one of the country s most important cultural cities, with European-wide relevance. Here, visitors may participate in several cultural activities and visit interesting monuments.

Coimbra has one of Europe s oldest universities with interesting academic traditions, where the Queima das fitas is only one example. This city is also famous by its traditional song fado de coimbra and by its medieval walls, monasteries (e.g. Santa Cruz and Celas), museums (e.g. Machado de Castro Museum) as well as the Cathedral. Ten miles to the south of this city the most important roman archaeological site of Portugal is located Conímbriga -. Statistical data reveals that in this city are located only 0,9% of the country s total hotel accommodation capacity, being occupied by also 0,9% of total bednights. However, Coimbra is one of the most important tourism destination within the Central Region of Portugal. Here are located about 7% of the region s hotel accommodation capacity, that capture almost 11% of nights spent in the tourist accommodation mentioned (INE, 2004). Differing from the rest of the Central Region, inbound tourism is the most important tourism market of Coimbra, where about 53% of the nights spent in hotel establishments correspond to foreign demand. The most important foreign markets of this city are, with decreasing order of relevance: Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Netherlands, USA and the UK (INE, 2004). In this city the here presented survey was carried out, specifically, at one of the city s most important cultural tourism attractions, the University of Coimbra. 4.3 Analysis of results 4.3.1. Socio-demographic profile and travel behavioural of the sample Visitors interviewed were mainly foreigners (90,7%), with very high educational levels (82% had a degree equivalent or superior to a Bachelor) and the majority of them were employed (74%) or students (21%) (see table 1). Among those who were employed, there was a predominance of professionals (doctors, lawyers, teachers), and also a considerable

quantity of directors/managers (19,6%) and persons with a technical profession (technicians, nursing) (17,2%). These professions are probably related to the high level of education within the sample. Although some respondents have very high incomes (20,4% have an annual household gross income superior to 30,000 ), there seems to be a considerable balance among respondents in terms of income, since there are also 20,4% of respondents having annual gross incomes lower or equal to 10,000 (table 1). Table 1 Socioeconomic characteristics of cultural visitors interviewed in Coimbra N Valid N Valid percentage percentage Age Nationality 19 or younger 13 4,1 Portuguese 30 9,3 20-29 116 36,4 Foreigners 291 90,7 30-39 80 25,1 40-49 57 17,9 Gender 50 or older 53 16,6 Male 150 47,2 Female 168 52,8 Income (annual household gross income) Current position 5,000 Euro or less 33 12,0 Employee 196 61,6 5,001-10,000 Euro 23 8,4 Self employed 39 12,3 10,001-20,000 Euro 31 11,3 Retired 11 3,5 20,001-30,000 Euro 36 13,1 Housewife/man or carer 5 1,6 30,001-40,000 Euro 39 14,2 Student 67 21,1 40,001-50,000 Euro 34 12,4 Unemployed 1 0,3 50,001-60,000 Euro 22 8,0 More than 60,000 Euro 56 20,4 Current ocupational group Director or Manager 49 19,6 Educational level (highest level) Professional (doctor, lawyer, teacher, etc) 100 40,0 Primary or secondary school 29 9,1 Technical profession (technicians, nursing) 43 17,2 Vocational education 28 8,8 Clerical/ Administration 34 13,6 Bachelor, Master or Doctoral degree 262 82,1 Service and sales personnel 19 7,6 Manual and crafts worker 5 2,0 The sample was also considerably balanced in terms of age and gender. As far as age is concerned, approximately a third of the sample were 40 or older, with just slightly more (40,5%) being 29 or younger (table 1). The majority of the respondents were travelling with their partner (40,5%) and a lot of them were also accompanied by friends (26,2%) or by their family (24,3%) (table 2). Only a very small percentage were travelling alone (7,5%) or in tour groups (7,2%). The large majority (70%) had used the car to travel to the region and only a small number opted for the airplane, the coach or the train (only around 13% chose one of these options,

respectively). People were mainly travelling for a short-break in the Region of Coimbra (56,8% stayed between 1 and 3 nights) and 25% didn t intend to stay overnight in this region (table 2). Table 2 Travel behaviour characteristics of cultural visitors interviewed in Coimbra N Valid N Valid percentage percentage Kind of persons Cultural attractions people people are travelling with have visited or are planning to visit Alone 24 7,5 Monuments 236 76,4 Partner 130 40,5 Historic sites 223 69,3 Family 78 24,3 Religious sites 172 55,7 Friends 84 26,2 Museums 169 54,9 Tour group 23 7,2 Heritage/crafts centres 65 21,0 Other 0 0,0 Art galleries 37 12,0 Traditional festivals 33 10,7 Duration of the stay in Coimbra Theatres 13 4,2 (number of nights) Classical music events 11 3,6 0 77 25,1 Dance events 10 3,2 1 91 29,6 World music events 7 2,3 2 to 3 84 27,4 Cinema 4 1,3 4 to 7 29 9,4 Pop concerts 4 1,3 8 to 14 21 6,8 More than 14 5 1,6 Having already visited the city before 61 19,0 Accommodation Sources of information people have Hotel 143 45,3 consulted about the city before arriving there With family and friends 49 15,2 Guidebooks 188 59,9 Caravan/ tent 43 13,6 Family/friends 141 44,9 Bed & breakfast/room in private house 25 7,9 Internet 118 37,6 Other 21 6,6 Previous visit 35 11,1 Second residence 10 3,2 Tourist board 30 9,6 Self catering accommodation 10 3,2 Travel agency 24 7,6 Youth hostel 9 2,8 Tour operator brochure 16 5,1 Own home 8 2,5 Newspapers/magazines 15 4,8 Other 15 4,8 Forms of transport TV/radio 3 1,0 Own car 121 37,8 Hire car 103 32,2 Arrangement of the trip Air 45 14,1 All inclusive package 33 10,6 Coach 42 13,1 Train 39 12,2 Transport booked separately Walking 13 4,1 Booked via travel agent or tour operator 40 15,8 Local transport (bus, metro, taxi) 10 3,1 Booked via Internet 55 21,7 Other 4 1,3 Made own travel arrangements directly (phone, fax) 75 29,6 Bicycle 3 0,9 Nothing booked in advance 83 32,8 Motorcycle 0 0,0 Accommodation booked separately Booked via travel agent or tour operator 26 11,9 Booked via Internet 27 12,4 Made own travel arrangements directly (phone, fax) 60 27,5 Nothing booked in advance 105 48,2 Amongst those who wanted to stay some days in the region there was a clear preference for staying in hotels (45,3%), with houses of friends/relatives (15,2%) and caravan/ tents (13,6%) being the following favourite means of accommodation. The cultural attractions that more people wanted to visit were monuments (76,4%), historic sites (69,3%), religious

sites (55,7%) and museums (54, 9%), followed at some distance by heritage/crafts centres(21%), art galleries (12%) and traditional festivals (10,7%) (table 2). Not many people intended to attend musical events or to go to the theatre or to the cinema. The average travel expenditure of respondents was 456. However, taking into account the high standard deviation of this variable (693 ). Differences in total expenditure levels may be a consequence of different duration of stay, constitution of the travel group, as well as different individual spending patterns. Only few respondents (16%) had already visited Coimbra before (table 2). Information about the city was acquired, mainly through guidebooks (59,9%), the respondents family/friends (44,9%) and the internet (37,6%). Only a small number of people was travelling in all inclusive packages (10,6%). Amongst the others, there was a large number who had not booked accommodation (48,2%) or transportation (32,8%) in advance (table 2). However, the majority had undertaken one kind of reservation and most reservations were done directly (by phone or fax) or by internet. 4.3.2. Differences between clusters To identify groups of visitors that differed in terms of socio-economic profile, a hierarchical cluster analysis of the visitors of the University of Coimbra was undertaken. The age, educational level and annual gross income of the visitors were used as input data for this analysis. The cluster analysis was done applying the Ward s method and, as a measure of similarity, the Squared Euclidean Distance. In order to avoid biases due to the different scales of the variables, these were standardized. Two clusters were identified through this analysis. Chi-square analyses and Mann-Whitney U tests were carried out to better characterize the clusters and identify the major differences that existed between them (see tables 3 and 4). One of the clusters cluster 1 -

is composed of tourists with a higher level of education, being relatively wealthier and older. In contrast, cluster 2 is formed by poorer, younger and less educated individuals. Table 3 Differences between the two clusters of cultural visitors interviewed in Coimbra, concerning socio-economic characteristics Cluster 1 Cluster 2 N=176 N=96 (64,7% of respondents) (35,3% of respondents) Level of Chi-square tests (%) (%) significance Chi-square d.f. Age 19 or younger 0,0 100,0 20-29 34,0 66,0 30-39 76,7 23,3 (a) 101,496 4 40-49 93,0 7,0 50 or older 100,0 0,0 Income (annual household gross income) 5,000 Euro or less 12,5 87,5 5,001-10,000 Euro 21,7 78,3 10,001-20,000 Euro 29,0 71,0 20,001-30,000 Euro 38,9 61,1 (a) 149,432 7 30,001-40,000 Euro 94,9 5,1 40,001-50,000 Euro 100,0 0,0 50,001-60,000 Euro 90,5 9,5 More than 60,000 Euro 96,4 3,6 Educational level (highest level) Primary or secondary school 21,1 78,9 Vocational education 61,9 38,1 (a) 17,415 2 Bachelor, Master or Doctoral degree 68,5 31,5 Nationality Portuguese 42,3 57,7 (b) 6,234 1 Foreigners 66,9 33,1 Gender Male 70,9 29,1 (b) 4,313 1 Female 58,8 41,2 Current position Employee 75,0 25,0 (a) 22,366 1 Self employed 81,1 18,9 (b) 5,103 Retired * Housewife/man or carer * Student 17,0 83,0 (a) 65,243 1 Unemployed * Current ocupational group * Legend * not possible to perform the analysis because there were few people answering affirmatively to this question and, consequently, more than 20% of the cells of the crosstabs table had expected values lower than 5. (a) p<0,01 (b) p<0,05 These segments were further analyzed with regard to other aspects of their sociodemographic profile and their travel behaviour, revealing significant differences between

groups. It is clear that there is a high prevalence of foreigners and individuals who were professionally active in cluster 1 than in cluster 2 (table 3). In contrast, there was a predominance of students in cluster 2, eventually explaining the fact that cluster 2 had a relatively lower level of income. In terms of travel behaviour it is interesting to notice that, despite there is not a significant difference between the two groups concerning the duration of their stay in Coimbra, respondents from cluster 1 spent more money during their stay than those from cluster 2. However, respondents from cluster 2 are more likely to travel alone or with friends, whereas those belonging to cluster 1 tend to travel with their partner or family, which may partly explain the differences in travel spending patterns. There seem to be some differences between individuals from these groups concerning the accommodation they prefer. People from the wealthier cluster (cluster 1) were more likely to stay in hotels than those from the other cluster, whereas the opposite happened concerning bed and breakfast option (table 4). Visitors of cluster 1 were also more likely to rent cars than visitors of cluster 2, whereas the opposite happened concerning the use of the train. Although not many differences were found concerning the kind of attractions people wanted to visit, visitors from cluster 1 demonstrated to be much more interested in visiting museums than the other group. As far as travel arrangements are concerned, the main difference found between clusters is that the wealthier visitors were more likely to book transportation via internet than the other visitors. This trend, probably related to the higher levels of income and education of visitors belonging to cluster 1, should not be ignored by tourism suppliers and, especially, by those who commercialize these products.

Table 4 Differences between the two clusters of cultural visitors interviewed in Coimbra, concerning travel behaviour characteristics Cluster 1 Cluster 2 N=176 N=96 (64,7% of respondents) (35,3% of respondents) Level of Chi-square tests (%) (%) significance Chi-square d.f. Kind of persons people are travelling with Alone 36,4 63,6 (a) 8,419 1 Partner 76,1 23,9 (a) 11,6 1 Family 75,4 24,6 (b) 4,265 1 Friends 45,6 54,4 (a) 14,51 1 Tour group Other * Accommodation Own home * Second residence * Hotel 76,6 23,4 (a) 13,359 1 Self catering accommodation * Bed & breakfast/room in private house 43,5 56,5 (b) 5,216 1 Caravan/ tent With family and friends Youth hostel * Other Forms of transport Air Own car Hire car 74,2 25,8 (b) 5,57 1 Coach Train 42,9 57,1 (a) 8,39 1 Local transport (bus, metro, taxi) * Motorcycle * Bicycle * Walking * Other * Cultural attractions people have visited or are planning to visit Museums 72,3 27,7 (a) 8,335 1 Monuments Art galleries Religious sites Historic sites Theatres * Heritage/crafts centres Cinema * Pop concerts * World music events * Classical music events * Dance events * Traditional festivals Sources of information people have consulted about the city before arriving there Family/friends Tourist information centre Internet Tour operator information * Newspapers/magazines * Local brochures Guidebooks TV/radio * Other Legend * not possible to perform the analysis because there were few people answering affirmatively to this question and, consequently, more than 20% of the cells of the crosstabs table had expected values lower than 5. (a) p<0,01 (b) p<0,05

Table 4 (continued) Differences between the two clusters of cultural visitors interviewed in Coimbra, concerning travel behaviour characteristics Cluster 1 Cluster 2 N=176 N=96 (64,7% of respondents) (35,3% of respondents) Level of Chi-square tests (%) (%) significance Chi-square d.f. Arrangement of the trip All inclusive package Transport booked separately Booked via travel agent or tour operator 81,6 18,4 Booked via Internet 52,0 48,0 (b) 9,903 3 Made own travel arrangements directly (phone, fax) 69,2 30,8 Nothing booked in advance 58,6 41,4 Accommodation booked separately Having already visited the city before Level of Mann-Whitney U tests Mean rank Mean rank significance Duration of the stay in Coimbra (number of nights) 110,3 85,5 (a) Total travel expenditure Legend * not possible to perform the analysis because there were few people answering affirmatively to this question and, consequently, more than 20% of the cells of the crosstabs table had expected values lower than 5. (a) p<0,01 (b) p<0,05 5. Conclusions Cultural tourism may be clearly identified as an important tourism form, with increasing relevance visible in studies and statistics worldwide. Although some studies point at specific features and trends within this market, the here presented study highlights the existence of different cultural tourist segments. The two segments, identified through a cluster analysis, based on educational level, income and age, revealed significant differences in terms of other socio-demographic variables and travel behaviour. One cluster, containing the relatively older, wealthier and more educated respondents, tended to be mostly foreign tourists, travelling with their partner or family, revealed higher expenditure levels, a preference for hotel accommodation, rent-a-car arrangements and internet reservation of transportation, and were relatively more interested in museums. On

the other hand, the other segment was relatively younger, poorer and less educated, including many Portuguese and students, travelling alone or with friends, preferring bed and breakfast accommodation and the train as a means of transportation. Consequently, these cluster results may represent a useful segmentation solution, considering the criteria of: measurability, accessibility (i.e. effectively reached and served via some kind of marketing vehicle), substantiality (constituting the largest possible homogeneous group worth going after with a tailored marketing-program ), differentiability (conceptually distinguishable, responding differently to different marketing-mix elements and programs) and actionability (meaning that effective programs can be formulated for attracting and serving the segments ) (Kotler, 1997: 268-269). In conclusion, this segmentation study may be very useful for planners and managers of cultural tourist destinations, revealing the existence of clearly identifiable clusters that not only differ as far as socio-demographics are concerned, but also in terms of travel behaviour and preferences. Thereby, destination planners and managers may increase the attractiveness of cultural destinations, by designing appealing products and promotional strategies to each of the identified segments. References Baker, M. 1991. Marketing: An Introductory Text. 5th edition. London: Macmillan. Baloglu, S. and D. Brinberg. 1997. Affective Images of Tourism Destinations. Journal of Travel Research 35 (4): 11-15. Bonink, G., and Richards, G. (1992). Cultural Tourism in Europe. ATLAS Research Report. London: University of North London.

EU. 1998. Facts and Figures on The Europeans on Holidays. Madrid: European Comission DGXXIII. Gitelson, R.J. and. Kerstetter, D. L. 1990. The Relationship between sociodemographic variables, benefits sought and subsequent vacation behaviour: a case study. Journal of Travel Research, 28 (3): 24-29. INE. 2004. Anuário Estatístico da Região Centro 2003. Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE), Lisboa Kastenholz, E., 2002, The role and marketing implications of destination images on tourist behavior: The case of northern Portugal. phd dissertation, Universidade de Aveiro. UMI dissertation Services. Kastenholz, E., 2004. «Management of Demand» as a Tool in Sustainable Tourist Destination Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 12 (5): 388-408. Kotler, P. 1994. Marketing Management- Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control. 8 th edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Kotler, P. 1997. Marketing Management- Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control. 9 th edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Kotler, P., Armstrong, G. Saunders, J. and V. Wong. 1999. Principles of Marketing. (2 nd European edition) London: Prentice Hall Europe. Kotler, P., Haider, D.H. and I. Rein. 1995, Marketing Places. 2 nd ed. New York, Oxford, Singapore, Sydney: The Free Press Maxwell Maxmillan International. Lawson, R. 1995. Demographic Segmentation. In Tourism Marketing and Management Handbook. Eds. Witt, S. and L. Moutinho. London: Prentice Hall, 306-315. Loker, E.L. and R.R. Perdue. 1992. A Benefit-based Segmentation of a Nonresident Summer Travel Market. Journal of Travel Research (Summer 1992): 30-35.

McKercher, B. 1995. The Destination-Market Matrix: A tourism market portfolio analysis model. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 4 (2): 23-40. Medlik, S. 2003. Dictionary of Travel Tourism & Hospitality. Third edition. Butterworth- Heinemann, Oxford Middleton, V. T.C. 1988. Marketing in Travel & Tourism. Oxford: Heinemann Professional Publishers. Mill, R.C. and A.M. Morrison. 1992. The Tourism System. (2nd edition) Englewood-Cliffs, New York: Prentice Hall. Pender, L. 1999. Marketing Management for Travel and Tourism. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes Poon, A. 1993. Tourism Technology and Competitive Strategies, C.A.B International, Wallingford. Richards, G. 1994. Cultural Tourism in Europe, in Cooper and Lockwood (Eds.), Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management, Vol. 5, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, England, pp.99-115 Richards, G. 1996. Cultural Tourism in Context, in Greg Richards (ed.) Cultural Tourism in Europe, CAB INTERNATIONAL, Wallingford. WTO. 2001a. Cultural Heritage Tourism Development A Report on the International Conference on Cultural Tourism. World Tourism Organization Conference Proceedings. Madrid: World Tourism Organization. WTO. 2001b. Global Forecasts and Profiles of Market Segments. Tourism 2020 Vision. Volume 7. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.