**2. Literature review**

#### **2.1 Cultural tourism products**

The tourism product is complex as the varied elements of service, hospitality, free choice, consumer involvement, and consumption of experiences must be actualized in some way [22]. According to [23] people do not buy products for the sake of the product itself, they buy them for the benefits they provide or the problems they solve. Hence any discussion of products must be made from the perspectives of consumer.

From marketing perspective, the term product is defined as anything that can be offered to a market for attention, acquisition, use or consumption that might satisfy a need or want [24]; and by applying this to tourism context, [5] defined cultural tourism products as anything that can be offered to tourists for participating in cultural tourism to satisfy their cultural needs and wants by using the cultural tourism resource as basis". According to [11], the cultural tourism product is composed of two products. First there is the core product, which is the major cultural tourism supply (monuments, cultural events, local culture and etc.) and the related specific cultural tourist services, such as information and education. Secondly there exists the additional product, which includes the general tourism product elements and the related tourist services (general tourist facilitates and services and transportation infrastructure).

Further extending the definition provided by [11, 23] conceptually viewed products as having three levels: a core product which specifies the benefits of use, a tangible product which transforms these benefits into something to be consumed, and an augmented product that adds extra value.

According to them, the core product is the most important feature for it describes the core benefit or solution provided by its use. As they contend,

*"It answers the questions of 'what personal needs is the product really satisfying' and 'what benefits does it offer ME'? …… The appeal of adopting a marketing approach is that the core problem being solved can vary widely, even for largely similar products. This variation enables different providers to position their product uniquely according to the benefits being promoted." ([23], p. 155).*

The tangible product according to them represents the physical manifestation of the core product that facilitates the need satisfaction. They give examples detailing,

*"It is the historic fort that is entered, the battlefield site that is visited, the museum that is seen, the cultural tour that is joined, or the festival that is attended. The tangible product is not the core experience provided. It is the means by which the core need can be satisfied." ([23], p. 155).*

The final level in their classification constitutes augmented products, which provide additional features above and beyond the tangible product that add value and facilitate easier satisfaction of the core need. It could be something such as a free shuttle to and from the hotel, the provision of umbrellas for rainy days, a souvenir at the end of a tour, or a money back guarantee.

Slightly different approach developed by [9], which is called 'product culture model' views cultural tourism products in terms of four elements. These are *essence of product*, which the consumer receives to fulfill a need; *real product*, which encompasses those features that distinguish a product from those in the market; *processed real product,* where marketing interventions via promotional materials are done; and *additional product*, which explain the additional benefits and services added to the core one. At the heart of the model is *real product*, which encompasses the five product lines: tangible symbolic representations, intangible symbolic representations, staged symbolic representations, replicated symbolic representations, and transferable symbolic representations.

It can be concluded that though several cultural tourism product definitions and models exist [19], almost all of them place culture at the heart of the models with learning being the major core product.

#### **2.2 Cultural tourists**

Cultural tourists are an easily recognizable market niche [25]; and in wide body of literature [23, 26–29], they are highly regarded as visitors who tend to stay longer, spend more and travel in low seasons. In addition to this, they are also older, better educated, and more affluent than the traveling public as a whole [13] where women constitute a significant share. Furthermore, cultural tourists join in more activities than other tourists [26]. However, according to [30], these characteristics do not reliably represent cultural tourists; and as a result of this, there are several cultural tourism typologies [12].

The majority of cultural tourist typologies that exist these days are either adopted or elaborated versions of framework developed by [23]. This typology, which was tested in Hong Kong in 1999 and adopted widely by governmental and quasi-governmental agencies, identifies five types of cultural tourists based on centrality of trip purpose and depth of experience at destinations. First there is the *purposeful cultural tourist* to whom cultural tourism is the primary motive for visiting a destination, and the individual has a deep cultural experience. Then they identified the *sightseeing cultural tourist* to whom cultural tourism is a primary or major reason for visiting a destination, but the experience is shallower. The *serendipitous cultural tourist* is the one who does not travel for cultural tourism reasons, but who, after participating, ends up having a deep cultural tourism experience; while to the *casual cultural tourist, cultural* tourism is a weak motive for visiting a destination, and the resultant experience is shallow. Finally there is the *incidental cultural tourist,* who tourist does not travel for cultural tourism reasons but nonetheless participates in some activities and has shallow experiences. They concluded that most cultural tourists at a multi-product destination can be classified as casual or incidental; and

**323**

**Figure 1.**

*Map of Sidama region, Ethiopia.*

*Marketing Cultural Resources as a Tourism Product DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93869*

**3. Methodology**

has a population density 452p/km2

and in most cases, foreign tourists [11].

the researcher was drawn to the study area (**Figure 1**).

that the share of purposeful cultural tourists at most places is quite small, meaning

These categorizations of cultural tourists reflect the difference between formal and more informal modes of learning [12]. This classification scheme by [23] is more comprehensive in that it incorporated deeper discussions on cultural tourist typology efforts that had been conducted previously [31–32] who entirely emphasized on motivation aspect. [31] for example identified three types of cultural tourists: the genuine cultural tourist, who chooses a holiday because of its cultural opportunities; the culturally inspired tourist, who makes a once in a life visit to a specific site or attraction; and the culturally attracted tourist, who would like a few cultural attractions at destination they choose for other reasons. This classification was more or less similar to ATLAS study that identified 'specific' and 'general' cultural tourists [26, 33].

Sidama Region is one of the 14 administrative states in Ethiopia. The region covers a total area of 72,000 square kilometers and is located in southern hemisphere around Equator in Horn of Africa at 6°14'N and 7°18'N latitude and 37°92′E and 39°19′E [20]. With the population of over 4 million inhabitants, the administrative structure of Sidama region constitutes 21 *woredas* (districts), 532 rural *kebeles* (counties) and 4 town administrations. With over 592, 539 households, the region

populated areas in the state [20]. The cultural and ethnographical riches of Sidama make it attractive to academic and industrial inquiries and this is the major reason

This research adopted a descriptive research design employing a survey-based quantitative research approach. This is because quantitative approaches are common in cultural tourism research and have been in use since [34] work on the motivations of American cultural travelers. As [11] contend, the practice of conducting surveys of cultural tourists is well established in destinations around the world. This is mainly because of the advantages surveys provide in studying visitor activities, motivations, behavior and expenditure patterns. Surveys are also a useful means of monitoring trends over time. Several surveys in cultural tourism involve visitors

, which makes it one of the mostly densely

products must be geared for a tourist seeking a shallower experience.

*Marketing Cultural Resources as a Tourism Product DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93869*

that the share of purposeful cultural tourists at most places is quite small, meaning products must be geared for a tourist seeking a shallower experience.

These categorizations of cultural tourists reflect the difference between formal and more informal modes of learning [12]. This classification scheme by [23] is more comprehensive in that it incorporated deeper discussions on cultural tourist typology efforts that had been conducted previously [31–32] who entirely emphasized on motivation aspect. [31] for example identified three types of cultural tourists: the genuine cultural tourist, who chooses a holiday because of its cultural opportunities; the culturally inspired tourist, who makes a once in a life visit to a specific site or attraction; and the culturally attracted tourist, who would like a few cultural attractions at destination they choose for other reasons. This classification was more or less similar to ATLAS study that identified 'specific' and 'general' cultural tourists [26, 33].
