Business School
PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION PROJECTS IN NORTH KARELIA
Master’s thesis Tourism Marketing and Management
Juuso Kakkonen (306445)
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND Faculty
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business studies
Department Business School Author
Juuso Kakkonen
Supervisor
Raija Komppula Title
Perceived benefits of cross-border cooperation projects in North Karelia Main subject
Tourism Marketing and Management
Level
Master’s Thesis
Date 3.10.2021
Number of pages 71 + 1
Abstract
Cross-border cooperation is collaboration between neighbouring border regions of two or more countries who aim to solve common issues and stimulate general development of the border region. At the same time tourism is one of the fastest growing industry and hence the key driver of socio-economic development. Therefore, tourism and cross-border cooperation has become an integral part of regional development strategies in border regions and peripheral areas.
This study aims to gain understanding of the perceived benefits of tourism cross-border cooperation development projects in North Karelia region. The objective of this research is to bring out insights from partnering organizations about the projects in order to enhance the benefits in the future programmes and projects.
This study was conducted by utilizing qualitative research methods. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews. The study contains interviews of nine partnering organisations from eight different tourism related development projects from Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020 programme. The participants of the study were Finnish partnering organizations from the North Karelian region. Data was analysed by using qualitative content analysis.
The findings of this research shows that the cross-border cooperation development projects have been able to bring benefits to the programme region and partners by strengthening the cooperation between two countries, developing new practical solutions, stimulating the knowledge transfer, and creating awareness about the programme region and actors in it. In order to enhance the benefits in the future initiatives, the projects should focus on planning the continuity of the projects, consider the project language to tackle the language barrier, identify the concrete need of the projects and carefully consider what kind partners the projects require in order to be successful.
Key words
Cross-border cooperation, tourism development, network approach, North Karelia, Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO Tiedekunta
Yhteiskuntatieteiden ja kauppatieteiden tiedekunta
Yksikkö
Kauppatieteiden laitos Tekijä
Juuso Kakkonen
Ohjaaja
Raija Komppula Työn nimi
Rajat ylittävän yhteistyön kehityshankkeiden koetut hyödyt Pohjois-Karjalan alueella Pääaine
Matkailun markkinointi ja johtaminen
Työn laji
Pro Gradu -tutkielma
Aika 3.10.2021
Sivut 71 + 1 Tiivistelmä
Rajat ylittävä yhteistyö tarkoittaa kahden tai useamman maan välistä raja-alueiden yhteistyötä, jolla pyritään ratkaisemaan aluetta koskevia haasteita, sekä stimuloimaan alueen yleistä kehitystä.
Matkailuala on globaalisti yksi nopeimmista kasvavista aloista, ja täten myös avainasemassa alueiden sosioekonomisessa kehityksessä. Tämän johdosta rajat ylittävä yhteistyö ja matkailuala voidaan nähdä tärkeinä osina raja-alueiden kehitysstrategioissa.
Tämä tutkimuksen tavoitteena on saada ymmärrys rajat ylittävien matkailun kehityshankkeiden koetuista hyödyistä Pohjois-Karjalan alueella. Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on tuoda esiin projekteihin osallistuneiden partneriorganisaatioiden näkemyksiä projekteista, jotta hyötyjä voitaisiin vahvistaa tulevaisuuden kehitysohjelmissa ja projekteissa.
Tässä tutkimuksessa käytettiin kvalitatiivisia tutkimusmenetelmiä. Tutkimusaineisto kerättiin puolistrukturoiduilla haastatteluilla. Tutkimuksessa haastateltiin yhdeksää partneriorganisaatiota, kahdeksasta eri rajat ylittävästä matkailun kehityshankkeesta, jotka olivat osa Karelia ENI CBC 2014- 2020 kehitysohjelmaa. Tutkimuksessa haastateltiin suomalaisia organisaatioita Pohjois-Karjalan alueelta. Tutkimusaineisto analysoitiin laadullisen sisältöanalyysin avulla.
Tutkimuksen löydökset osoittavat, että rajat ylittävän yhteistyön kehityshankkeet ovat luoneet hyötyjä niin ohjelma-alueelle, kuin hankkeisiin osallistuneille partneriorganisaatioille. Hankkeet ovat onnistuneet vahvistamaan maiden välistä yhteistyötä, luomaan alueelle uusia käytännön ratkaisuja, stimuloimaan maiden välistä osaamisen ja tiedon siirtoa, sekä luomaan näkyvyyttä alueelle ja sen toimijoille. Jotta hankkeiden hyötyjä voitaisiin vahvistaa tulevaisuuden ohjelmissa, projektiorganisaatioiden tulisi keskittyä hankkeiden jatkuvuuden varmistamiseen, harkita ohjelman virallista kieltä kielimuurin poistamiseksi, tunnistaa tulevaisuuden projektien konkreettinen tarve ja tarkoitus, sekä harkita tarkkaan minkälaisia yhteistyökumppaneita tulevaisuuden hankkeet tarvitsevat ollakseen onnistuneita.
Avainsanat
Rajat ylittävä yhteistyö, matkailun kehittäminen, toimijaverkkoteoria, Pohjois-Karjala, Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020
1 INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1 Background of the study... 1
1.2 Research gap... 2
1.3 Key concepts ... 5
1.4 Context and target group of the research... 6
1.5 Structure of research ... 12
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 13
2.1 Cross-border cooperation ... 13
2.1.1 Defining cross-border cooperation... 13
2.1.2 Cross-border cooperation and tourism development ... 17
2.1.3 Facilitators & success factors of CBC projects ... 21
2.2 Network approach ... 24
2.2.1 Defining Network approach ... 24
2.2.2 Issue-based networks ... 25
2.2.3 Goal congruence ... 28
2.3 Framework... 29
3 METHODOLOGY ... 30
3.1 Research approach ... 30
3.2 Methods of data collection ... 32
3.3 Methods of data analysis ... 35
4 FINDINGS ... 37
4.1 Reasons behind joining the project ... 37
4.2 Goals of the project ... 39
4.2.1 Goal setting process ... 39
4.2.2 Goals and expectations towards the development projects ... 40
4.2.3 Contributing factors of fulfilment of the project goals ... 41
4.3 Benefits gained from the projects ... 43
4.4 Challenges during the project ... 46
4.5 Development suggestions for future projects ... 48
5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ... 52
5.1 Discussion of the findings ... 52
5.4 Critical evaluation of the research ... 61
5.5 Suggestions for future research ... 63
REFRENCES ... 64
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Positioning of the study. ... 4
Figure 2. Levels of cross-border cooperation (Timothy & Teye 2004). ... 15
Figure 3. The relationship between borders and tourism (Timothy 2001) ... 17
Figure 4. Focal partnerships in tourism cooperation (Prokkola 2011). ... 19
Figure 5. Levels of cross-border partnerships (Timothy 1999). ... 20
Figure 6. Issue-based networks (Dredge & Pforr 2008). ... 27
Figure 7. Theoretical framework of this study. ... 29
Figure 8. The methodologial framework of the research. ... 31
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Facilitators & success factors of CBC projects ... 23
Table 2. Organisations of the study ... 34
Table 3. Reasons behind joining the project ... 37
Table 4. Goal setting process ... 39
Table 5. Goals and expectations towards the projects ... 40
Table 6. Contributing factors of fulfilment of project goals ... 42
Table 7. Benefits gained from the projects. ... 44
Table 8. Challenges during the project. ... 46
Table 9. Development suggestions for future projects ... 48
APPENDIX
Appendix 1. Interview questions form
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Tourism has been identified as one the most important industry in global economy, as it has significant effects on the local socio-economic development (UNWTO 2021a; Kostoppulu et al.
2015; Cardenas-Garcia, Sanchez-Rivero & Pulido-Fernandez 2015). The ongoing global pandemic has highlighted the importance of the industry. According to UNWTO (2021b), only during the year 2020 the pandemic caused loss of 74% of international tourist arrivals, which has caused a loss of US$1,3 trillion of tourism exports and has put 100 to 120 million tourism jobs at risk. Over the past decades, rapid and continuous growth has made tourism one of the fastest growing industry in the world, and therefore a key driver for socio-economic development (UNWTO 2021a). It has an ability to enhance economy, but also the viability and standard of living, especially in underdeveloped regions (Stoffelen & Vanneste 2017.) Kostopoulou et al. (2015) also states that, tourism can attract foreign currency, create jobs, and develop international relations. Because of this identified potential and significant growth of tourism, governments and local authorities have increasingly started to integrate tourism in their development strategies, which also contain the concept of cross-border cooperation (Kostopoulu et al. 2015.)
Traditionally international borders have been seen as barriers which are limiting flow of tourism, communication and services between neighbouring countries and societies, but instead borders should be seen as possibilities for cooperation (Timothy 1999; Prokkola 2007). Cross-border cooperation (CBC) can be regarded as one of the European Union’s (EU) cornerstones of supporting sustainable development through cooperation between EU countries and EU’s external boarder areas (European Commission 2020). This is highly supported by the fact that as a continent Europe has high density of countries in relation to its size, meaning that 60% of EU territory can be considered as border areas, and hence third of the European people are living in those areas.
(Castanho et al. 2017). In addition, CBC plays key role regarding European Neighbourhood Policy and strategic partnerships with Russia (European External Action Service & European Commission 2014).
This study investigates tourism focused cross-border cooperation projects in North Karelia region.
The research contains only the perspectives of Finnish partnering organizations due to the issues related language barrier. Uncertainty regarding the English language skills among the Russian partners and the lack of Russian skills of the author led to the decision to exclude the Russian partners from the study. Author’s natural interest towards tourism development and international alliances worked as a key driver for this research. The study region was selected based on the specific interest towards Finnish-Russian cooperation. There are three ongoing EU funded cross- border programmes that involve cooperation between Finland and Russia. These programmes are Kolarctic CBC, South-East Finland-Russia CBC and Karelia CBC, which is the programme investigated in this study.
1.2 Research gap
Border regions and cross-border cooperation can be considered as significant research topics, with an increasing focus on economic development and governance (Liberato, Alén, Liberato &
Domínguez 2018). As a phenomenon cross-border cooperation is also gaining increasing academic attention from the tourism perspective (Prokkola 2008; Liberato et al. 2018). Extensive number of studies have investigated tourism related cross-border cooperation projects as a tool for regional development. For example, Kostopoulou et al. (2015) investigated the potential of integrated rural tourism development projects in Greece-Bulgaria border region, while Badulescu & Badulescu (2017) investigated the role CBC in rural tourism development at Hungarian and Romanian border region. Both studies indicated that cross-border cooperation initiatives had positive impacts on the development of border regions. Success factors of CBC projects have also gained academic attention. Castanho, Loures, Fernández & Pozo (2016) were able to identify 14 critical success factors in Cross Border Cooperation (CBC) projects. According to Castanho et al. 2016, recognizing critical success factors in CBC projects and strategies is vital in order to achieve the sustainable development. Kurowska-Pysz & Szczepanska-Woszczyna (2018) state that sustainable cross-border cooperation is based on relationships of people and institutions, good planning and support mechanisms, and environment and general atmosphere of border regions.
There are several studies considering cross-border cooperation initiatives in Finland. E.g. Prokkula (2007; 2008; 2010) has studied the role of cross-border cooperation in tourism development at Swedish-Finnish border region. Also, the Finnish-Russian border region has gained significant attention in regarding CBC (Fritsch et al. 2015; Koch 2017; Koch 2018; Makkonen et al. 2019.) However, the studies considering cross-border cooperation between Finland and Russia in tourism context are limited. Makkonen et al. (2018) conducted research regarding cross-border knowledge and innovation transfer in tourism and culture related development projects in Karelia ENPI CBC 2007-2013 programme. Also, Kahila, Fritsch, Zimin, Sillanpää and Ålander (2016) conducted mid- term evaluation study of CBC ENPI funded Kolarctic CBC 2007-2013 programme, which contained tourism related projects. Therefore, there is a research gap in academia regarding ongoing programme (2014-2020) and projects, which means that this research can be regarded as topical. At the same time academia is lacking research regarding tourism related CBC projects and perceived benefits from ongoing projects and programme region.
Makkonen, Hokkanen, Morozova and Suharev (2019) point out the importance of understanding that cross-border cooperation takes place in networks. Both Gibson (2005) and Kostopoulu et al.
(2015) argue that networks have enormous effect on economic development. Yet the research and evaluation of cross-border network has not gained significant attention in academia (Makkonen et al. 2019). Therefore, this study will also contribute to the lack of cross-border network research in the programme region.
Objectives and Research questions
This study aims to gain understanding of the perceived benefits of tourism cross-border cooperation development projects in North Karelia region. The study represents the perspective of the partnering organizations of the tourism development projects. The objective is to bring out insights from partnering organizations about the projects, in order to enhance the benefits and positive impacts in future programmes. At the same time, organization are able to express their view regarding development programme and what could be done better in order to enhance the benefits.
The main research question
• What kind of concrete benefits partnering organizations have gained through Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020 programme
The supportive research questions
• What kind of actions are needed for the future in order to enhance the benefits of the development projects?
• What kind of expectations and goals the partnering organization had towards the development project?
• What kind of challenges partnering organizations experienced during the development project?
This study discusses cross-border cooperation, tourism development and network approach in order to gain understanding of what kind of benefits the partnering organisations have gained through the development projects. The focus of the study is to understand how the benefits of the tourism related cross-border cooperation projects could be enhanced in the cross-border network. The positioning of the study is presented in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Positioning of the study.
1.3 Key concepts
Cross-border cooperation
Cross-border cooperation (CBC) can be described as collaboration between neighbouring border regions of two or more countries (Merdeiros 2015; Kurowska-Pysz & Szczepanska-Woszczyna 2017), with the aim of forming and strengthening relations between communities, local authorities (Badulescu & Badulescu 2017), as well as with public and private organisations (Sousa 2013).
CBC seeks to provide solutions to the common challenges (Sousa 2013; Badulescu & Badulescu 2017) and stimulate the general development of the border region (Castanho et al. 2017).
Tourism development
Tourism development can be defined as set of strategic activities to drive destination development, so it generates value for individual actors (Haugland, Grønseth & Aarstad 2011). It can be regarded as crucial economic element in peripheral regions, due to its ability to create economic development (Ianigolo & Rissanen 2020).
Issue-based Network
Network describes the relationships between different actors, (e.g., public and private organisations, civil societies etc.) and how those are utilized in solving common issues, sharing resources, and planning collective actions (Dredge 2006). Issue-based networks are based on cooperative relationships where actors of the network aim to solve identified common issue through collective action (Brito 1999).
Goal congruence
Goal congruence can be defined as an agreement of official policy or operative goals among the members of organization or networks which are responsible of delivering the policy (Lemaire
2019). Purpose of the goal congruence is to increase cooperation between actors, so that they would achieve their goals more efficiently (Lundin 2007).
Border regions
In this study, the border region is considered as territorial unit formed by two or more countries, who share common border between sub-national territories. (Perkmann 2007; Rajčáková &
Švecová 2013). This study also discusses about internal and external border regions. According to European Union’s official statistical office Eurostat (Eurostat 2020), internal border regions are types of regions where EU member states and/or EFTA countries share a border region, while external border region refers to border shared between EU member states and non-member countries (Eurostat 2019).
1.4 Context and target group of the research
Euregio Karelia
This study will investigate the cross-border development projects conducted in North Karelia, which is part of Euregio Karelia region (Euregio Karelia 2020). Euregio Karelia is a cooperation area formed by the combination of Finnish provinces, North-Karelia, Kainuu and Northern Ostrobothnia, and by Rebuplic of Karelia from Russian Federation. The purpose and common vision of the Euregio Karelia is to develop the living conditions of the cooperation area through collaboration. Legally it can be regarded as a international community, which comblies the legistalation of Russian Federation in Rebuplic of Karelian region, and the Finnish legistaltion in Finnish regions of the cooperation area. It’s a continuous process where collaboration is carried out for common goals in both sides of the border. Community’s goals are to encourage and promote the cross-border activities and drive the holistic development of region. (Euregio Karelia 2020.) European Union’s funded CBC programmes has been fundamental part of the development and cooperation of Euregio Karelia region. Between 2014-2020 the region has in total of 61 projects
funded through Karelia CBC programme, with allocated budget of 42,6 million euros (Euregio Karelia 2020.) According the project portal CBC projects (2020a), from those 61 projects, 12 were tourism related projects, which contained partnering organizations in North Karelia. From those 12 development projects, eight projects were selected to this study based on the fact that the development project have ended or are about to end soon.
Karelia Cross-Border Cooperation Joint Operational Programme 2014-2020
Karelia cross-border cooperation joint operational programme 2014-2020 is a regional development programme which aims to enhance the practical cooperation between Finland and Russia. The programme is supported and co-funded by Finland, Russian Federation, and by the European Union’s European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) allocations. (Karelia CBC 2019.) The Karelia CBC joint operational programme area is divided into core region, adjoining and major economic, social and cultural centers (picture 1). The programmes core regions in Finland are North-Karelia, Kainuu and Northen Osthrobotnia Region. The Rebuplic of Karelia is represnted as core region from Russia.
The core region’s needs and issues has defined the startegy and objectives of the Karelia CBC programme (Karelia CBC 2019a).
Picture 1. Programme region. (Karelia CBC 2020)
Objectives of the Karelia CBC programme has been developed based on the identified challenges in the programming area. Both sides of the border are suffering of decreasing and ageing population due to low birth rate, extensive retirement rate and incapability to keep working aged people in the area. High unemployment rate is visible especially in the Finnish side of the border, while unemployment amongst young people is common challenge in the programme area. The general objective of the programme is to contribute to the programme region so that it would become attractive place to work and live, as well for businesses to locate and operate. (Karelia CBC 2019.) This study focuses on tourism related development projects. The descriptions of the development projects are presented individually below.
Kalitka-the development of cross –border gastronomic tourism
Kalitka development project started on 1st November 2018 and ended on 31st October 2020. Goal of the project was to develop gastronomic tourism services based on border region’s common food culture by increasing cooperation between the tourism companies, restaurants, local producers and administrations in the North Karelia and Karelian republic region. Purpose of the cooperation was to create new opportunities in the field of gastronomic tourism on both sides of the border. Main measures to achieve project goals was investigation of the project region current situation, barriers and opportunities considering gastronomic tourism, improvement quality of existing services in border region, and establishment transboundary gastronomic tourism route, which offers possibility to experience the specialities of the cultural cuisine in both sides of the border, get familiar with local food production and chance to consume environmentally friendly products. In addition, new marketing tactics are developed to increase the number of visitors, and establishing culinary studio, which purpose is to enhance the competence of local entrepreneurs. Project and its measures aimed to stimulate the social and economic development of the region. (Karelia CBC 2020a.)
Green Nature Based Solutions in Tourism to reduce negative impact on the environment Green Nature Based Solutions in Tourism to reduce negative impact on the environment project started on 18th October 2018 and ended on 31st March 2021. The general goal of the project was to enhance and increase the environmental efficiency of the tourism companies in the cross-border region with ecologically and economically viable solutions. The main measures to achieve the project goals are thorough analysis of the problems regarding tourism industry and environmental impact in the region, developing and piloting of ecologically and economically viable solutions among actors of tourism field, and educating the main actors and target groups about environmental sustainability and green solutions by organising seminars and field trips (CBC projects 2021b.)
Business and information cooperation in the area of booking of small accommodation online
Business and information cooperation in the area of booking of small accommodation online project started on 22nd October 2018 and ended on 30th September 2019. The main goal of the project was to introduce the small companies providing accommodation services in Russian and Finnish markets with convenient and affordable booking and sales systems. Main actions were developing the wildacha website by gathering and updating the needed information from the companies, research of tourist behaviour in the cross-border region, organising educational events and webinars for the service providers regarding marketing of tourism and accommodation services. (CBC Projects 2021c.)
Ethno-cultural potential in tourist industry of border territories
The project started on 3rd December 2018 and ended 3rd November 2019. The goal of the project was to identify development opportunities regarding tourism products which utilize common ethno-cultural resources. Main measure to achieve this goal, was conducting a thorough research about demand of tourism products in border region and how companies utilize ethno-cultural products in their business. Based on the research results, guidelines and recommendation regarding ethno-cultural tourism products will be created and shared with local operators and businesses in the North-Karelia and Karelia Republic region. (CBC Projects 2021d.)
InterActivity History
The InterActivity History project started 8th October 2018 and ended 30th September 2020. The goal of the project was to create interactive museum services which were based on the local culture- identity. The main activities included developing new museum experiences, events, and the museum infrastructure, beginning new archaeological research at Kurkijoki, translating the information about the archaeological findings, including local community into development
project, developing, and producing souvenirs and sharing information about the project, museum, new services, and project results through widespread of media channels. (CBC Projects 2021e.)
Karelian Art-Residency Network and Art Tourism
The project was carried out during 9th October 2018 and 30th September 2020. The main goal of the project was to improve the cultural services and products of the region through collaboration and resources of art-residency network. The main activities of the projects included improvement of the working conditions of visiting artists by opening new art residencies and studio, supporting the education and knowledge exchange between tourism-culture sectors professionals, creating contacts in the both sides of the border, organising seminars about art-residencies and art-tourism, creating new transboundary cultural services and products in collaborations with project partners and border network, marketing and creating awareness of cross-border art tours and services..
(CBC Project 2021f.)
Employers meets youngsters
Employers meet youngsters project was carried on 8th October 2018 and 31st March 2019. The main goal of the project was to identify the need of future labour force in tourism and hospitality industry in the core programme region and find ways to connect future workforce and employers in order to prevent the threatening shortage of workforce in the tourism and hospitality industry.
One of the main activities was conducting analysis of current situation regarding the work force and future needs, in collaboration with Sortavala Tourism association, the tourism and information centre of the Republic of Karelia and tourism entrepreneurs from North-Karelia region. In addition, the willingness, and possibilities of companies to participate international trainee exchange programme was investigated, organising meetings with local companies and educational institutions, find out how to study programmes resonate with need of employers and test out the electronic job-search channels between students and employers. (CBC Project 2021g.)
1.5 Structure of research
This research has been divided into five main chapters. The first chapter is introduction which familiarizes reader into the topic by introducing the background of the study, research gap, key concepts and context and target group of the research. In the next chapter the theoretical framework of this study is presented. This chapter contains theory and previous research about cross-border cooperation and network approach. It gives the reader a deeper understanding of cross-border cooperation and how it is utilized in the tourism development. Also, facilitators and success factors of CBC projects are discussed. Network approach section gives the reader a general understanding about network approach and issue-based networks and applies these to tourism and CBC context.
Finally, the theory section discusses about the importance of goal congruence in efficient goal achieving process. Third section presents in detail the research methods of this study explaining what was done and why. In the fourth section, the findings of the research are presented. The final chapter of this study contains conclusions and discussion of this study. It discusses and reflects the findings with previous research and theories. The chapter also introduces the theoretical and managerial implications of this study, gives critical evaluation the study and suggestions for the future research.
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Cross-border cooperation
2.1.1 Defining cross-border cooperation
Commonly borders are thought as a lines separating sovereign territories (Hoseason 2010).
However, borders are not only separating spatial elements, but also have other diverse functions (Jaschitz 2013). Geographically and politically speaking, international borders have been traditionally seen as a barriers to limit and regulate the movement and trade (Saarinen & Timothy 2013; Liberato et al. 2018) and symbolise territorial control (Prokkola 2007). However, Sendheart (2014) sees borders as multidimensional social processes. According to this perspective, borders can be viewed as social practices of spatial differentiation and institutions, which are established and regulated through political decision making and legal texts. This means that borders are continuously reshaped based on the political, cultural, and economic practices of the border region.
Hence, instead of understanding borders as visible or separative lines, they should be understood as a processes of bordering. Noferini, Berzi, Camonita & Durà (2019) comply to this view, by processes, where the meaning and functions of the borders are determined by the neighbouring states. Cross-border cooperation is seen as a tool to support these bordering processes by acting as a “bridge” in the border areas and decrease the separative effect of the borders. (Sendhart 2014.) Cross-border cooperation and multinational alliances are nowadays playing significant role in regional development strategies (Saarinen & Timothy 2013; Sarmiento-Mirwaldt & Roman- Kamphaus 2013; Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018). It is also a key element for European Union in supporting sustainable development in European border areas (European Union 2020). The phenomenon of cross-border partnerships became visible in Europe after the World War II.
Because of the socio-economic devastation caused by the war, countries began to seek partnerships with their neighbouring countries in order to find stability and economic growth. It was thought that by opening the borders, nations are able to increase and expand the production and consumption of goods, which eventually would lead to economic healing. Through the
collaboration, countries aimed to decrease the production costs and expand their market in order to stimulate the economic development. (Saarinen & Timothy 2013.)
Cross-border cooperation is about building collaborative alliances and relations with neighbouring countries, communities, and local authorities (Badulescu & Badulescu 2017). Sarmiento-Mirwaldt
& Roman-Kamphaus (2013) and Noferini et al. (2019) defines cross-border cooperation as an institutionalised and transboundary collaboration which occurs in international border areas between sub-national authorities like regions and municipalities. CBC can be regarded as a tool to solve emerging problems and challenges from various sectors and stimulate the general development of the border region. For example, the challenges can be related to spatial planning, development of infrastructure and accessibility, environment, and tourism. (Badulescu &
Badulescu 2017.) Despines-Zochowska (2013) describes cross-border cooperation as international and regional cooperation, where scale, content, and development issues are highly affected by the political factors and geographic, socio-economic, technological, and institutional circumstances on each side of the border. Timothy and Teye (2004) refer cross-border cooperation as supranational alliances that aim to decrease the barrier effects of the borders, in order to tackle the issues related to trade, economic development, environmental conservation, education, immigration, and tourism.
According to Medeiros (2014) barrier effect in border regions has great effect on the intensity of cooperation in the border areas. Barrier effect can manifest as differences in legislation systems (Medeiros 2015) or socio-cultural disparities (Medeiros 2014). Capello, Caragliu and Fratesi (2018) see three types of barriers. These are institutional, physical, and social-cultural barriers.
Institutional barriers are e.g., differences in currencies or lack of free movement. Physical barriers can simply be any physical obstacles, while social-cultural barrier refers to language and administrative and legal differences. (Capello et al. 2018.)
According to Perkmann (2003), CBC can be defined with four criteria. The first criteria implies that cross-border cooperation initiatives should be facilitated by public agency. Secondly, CBC can be regarded as collaboration of subnational authorities from different nations. Therefore, according to international law, they cannot be regarded as legal subjects, meaning that these subnational authorities are not eligible to complete any international treaties. Hence, CBC between collaborating parties involves informal arrangements and low politics, or in other words, less
hierarchy. The third criteria points out that cross-border cooperation is utilized to solve wide range of administrative problems. Finally, on long-term CBC aims to stabilize the transnational contacts, which refers to institutionalization. (Perkmann 2003).
Levels of Cross-Border cooperation
Timothy (2013) states that it is important to understand that cross-border cooperation can occur in different scales. Therefore, cross-border cooperation can be divided into four different levels that are global alliances, regional cooperation, bilateral cooperation, and inter-local cooperation (Timothy 2013). Timothy and Teye (2004) illustrated these levels according to the scale of cross- border cooperation activities, as presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Levels of cross-border cooperation (Timothy & Teye 2004).
The first and topmost level of the figure is global alliances. This is the largest scale of cross- cooperation, as it can contain member countries from all over the world. Examples of this form of alliances are United Nations (UN), World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (Timothy 2013.) The following and second largest scale of cooperation is the regional cooperation. This kind of cooperation is more geographically limited, cohesive kind of collaboration. Regional cooperation usually contains three or more member countries to form various kinds of alliances, like free trade areas, economic communities, customs unions, and political alliances. European Union (EU) acts as an example of regional cooperation (Timothy 2013). Third level of cross-border cooperation is bilateral cooperation. This level of alliance is formed by the two sovereign nations. Economic dependence of neighbouring country is typical in this kind collaboration. For example, Lichtenstein has formed customs and trade treaties with their larger neighbour Switzerland to stimulate the country’s economic welfare (Timothy &
Teye 2004.) There are similar kinds of alliances between Monaco-France, and San Marino-Vatican City-Italy, where France and Italy take responsibility of international trade of their smaller neighbours (Timothy 2013). The last level of alliances is inter-local cooperation. This kind of collaboration is formed by the smaller regions and areas which are sharing the border with neighbouring countries and communities. Euregions are example of this type of collaborations.
(Timothy 2013.) Timothy and Teye (2004) point out that inter-local collaboration is often seen as efficient and fruitful form of cooperation, because there are no national authorities involved. Hence, this level of cooperation involves less bureaucracy affecting the cross-border initiatives (Timothy
& Teye 2004).
The concept of Euroregions is significant regarding to this study, as Euregio Karelia is the main driver of cooperation and development initiatives in Karelia ENI CBC programme region. Durà, Camonita, Berzi and Noferini (2018) defines Euroregion as a territorial unit, which contains at least two sub-national units from different states. Euregions involves public agencies and private associations from each side of the border, that are jointly aiming to solve common problems of the region related to social, economic, and technical issues (Timothy 2013). Euroregions are processes of socio-economic and political reorganisation of the border region, which is driven by globalization. Hence, Euroregions can be understood as organizations in the middle of cross-border network, with the purpose of driving region’s competitiveness, increase political visibility and obtain European funding (Noferini et al. 2019).
2.1.2 Cross-border cooperation and tourism development
Border regions are commonly considered as remote and peripheral areas, due to their distance between state’s political and economic hub, and therefore the permeability of borders have significant effects on the border regions (Prokkola 2011; Mirwaldt 2012). From tourism perspective, border regions and peripheral areas are often seen as an interesting destinations due to the pristine environments and off the beaten track locations (Prokkola 2011). Borders and tourism have a strong relationship, as travelling usually includes crossing some kind of political boundaries (Prokkola 2007.) Therefore, borders have major implications on tourism. Physical barriers and differing policies and administrative structures between the neighbouring areas may have an influence towards tourism decision making and travel motivations, as well as towards development of infrastructure, and image and marketing of the tourism destination. (Timothy 2001.) Based on the Matznetter’s typology of spatial relationships of borders and tourism, Timothy (2001) suggest that relationships of borders can be described as borders as a barriers, borders as a destinations and borders as a modifiers of the tourism landscape (figure 3).
Figure 3. The relationship between borders and tourism (Timothy 2001)
The first scenario sees border functions as barriers, where economic, socio-cultural, and environmental effects of tourism is highly dependent of the permeability of the borders. Second scenario describes borders as destinations, where the border region is tourism oriented only on the other side of the border. According to this type of border, the people visiting the tourism-oriented border region are also interested to visit the other side of the border, which offer possibilities for tourism development for the non-tourism-oriented side. Third and final typology represents borders as a modifiers of the tourism landscape. This type of border relationship is driven by communication and cooperation initiatives between the border regions. In this case, the collaborative regions operate as one entity, which can be seen as a systems of cultural and natural attractions. (Timothy 2001.)
Tourism development through cross-border partnerships
Due to the peripherality of border regions, cross-border partnerships are efficient way to manage tourism resources in areas located across or next to international borders (Timothy 1999). European border regions have become important and significant territories regarding cooperative tourism development (Liberato et al. 2018.) CBC is fundamental part of sustainable development in European Union, as its main objectives are to enhance the socio-economic development of border regions, tackle collective issues related to environment, public health, safety and security, and facilitate the movement goods and people. (European Union 2021.)
In academia, tourism industry has been recognized as one of the driving forces of economic growth and development in local communities (Fayissa, Nsiah & Tadasse 2008; Prokkola 2008; Cardenas- Garcia, et al. 2013; Badulescu & Badulescu 2017; Stoffelen & Vanneste 2017; Liberato et al.
2018.) Sharpley (2015) also states that tourism has been identified as a great tool of development in rural and peripheral areas, but also in urban areas which are suffering from industrial decline.
Tourism is seen as an industry which can generate long-run economic growth and increase employment, and therefore governments and EU are increasingly supporting tourism-related development projects (Sharpley 2015; Alhowaish 2016). Prokkola (2008) describes the relation of tourism CBC as following; “Cross-border cooperation in tourism is understood as a means of increasing regional competitiveness and sustainability, of strengthening regional identity and
promoting the emergence of functional and imaginary region.” Tourism industry is also a driving force of cross-border regionalization, turning border regions as tourist destinations and places for cooperation (Prokkola 2007).
However, the development of the region should not be singled out to tourism development alone.
Instead, tourism development should be seen as one part of region’s broader development goals.
This means that tourism development and regional development goals should be in line with each other, integrated to serve common interest. This kind of integrated tourism development and planning increases the efficiency and adaptability of goal setting and achievement processes.
(Timothy 1998.)
Hall (1999) describes integrated tourism planning as interactive and collaborative by nature, as it requires active participation and communication between different levels of destination governance, leading organization and stakeholders who are part of the planning process. Integrative tourism development requires four types of cooperation in order to be successful. These four types of tourism partnerships are private and public partnerships, partnerships between governmental agencies, partnerships between administrative levels and partnerships between same level polities (Prokkola 2011). These types of partnerships are illustrated in the figure 4.
Figure 4. Focal partnerships in tourism cooperation (Prokkola 2011).
Private and public partnerships are seen crucial in tourism development, as public sector can provide the needed infrastructure and approvals for private sector actors, while private sector acts as an investor in creating new tourism infrastructure and services that have positive effects on economic growth. Also, to avoid misunderstanding and ensuring smooth processes, vertical and horizontal cooperation between government agencies is required. (Prokkola 2011.) Horizontal relationships refers to actors at same level of governance, while vertical relationships refer to different levels (e.g., local, regional, national) of governmental actors and agencies (Hall 1999).
Prokkola (2011) points out that collaboration between private and public sector is important because individual actors cannot be responsible of tourism development, as there are often differing and conflicting views. Therefore, cross-sectoral cooperation between stakeholders is important in order to achieve more sustainable development of tourism. (Prokkola 2011.)
Timothy (1999) describes cross-border partnerships based on the model of Martinez (1994) typology of levels of cross-border partnerships. The model contains five levels of partnerships, them being alienation, co-existence, cooperation, collaboration, and integration (Timothy 1999).
The model is illustrated in figure 5.
Figure 5. Levels of cross-border partnerships (Timothy 1999).
The first level of partnerships is alienation, meaning that there are no partnerships between neighbouring nations. Second level, co-existence, refers to minimal level of partnership, where neighbouring nations are not actively aiming to solve common problems. As the word indicates, the level of cooperation describes joint efforts to solve common problems, which are related e.g.,
to migration and utilisation of common resources. In the level of collaboration, nations work actively together to solve common problems. There are stable and well-established efforts with some level of equity invested into relationship. Final level is integrated cooperation, where there are no border-related hindrances, and the partners work as one entity. Partners are willing to give up some degree of sovereignty in order to achieve common goals. (Timothy 1999.)
As mentioned in the introduction of the study, Karelia ENI CBC programme is funding in total of 61 projects during 2014-2020 programming period. 12 of these projects were tourism driven and contained partnering organizations from North Karelia. In this regard, it can be concluded that the possibilities of tourism has been also identified in North Karelia region. However, tourism is playing only part of the development programme of the region, meaning that it is integrated in the general development goals of the region that contains other public and private sectors from different industries. Euregio Karelia has been responsible for identifying the common issues in the programme region. Therefore, it can be understood that there is willingness towards in integrated level of partnerships between North Karelia and Republic of Karelia. Euregio Karelia itself is living proof of the partnerships between the regions.
2.1.3 Facilitators & success factors of CBC projects
Cross-border cooperation projects are major part of strategic alliances in European territories, and therefore it is crucial to understand the factors facilitating and supporting the success of these projects (Kurowska-Pysz, Castanho & Loures 2018). One of the cornerstones of this master thesis is to gain understanding of needed actions and practices for the future programmes in order to enhance the benefits of the development projects in North Karelia region. Therefore, it is important to gain understanding of facilitators and success factors of cross-border cooperation projects.
Several authors have investigated success factors and facilitators of cross-border cooperation projects. First of all, project funding is seen as a crucial factor for successful cross-border cooperation projects (Knippschild 2011; Castanho et al. 2016). Castanho et al. (2016), and Castanho, Vulevic, Cabezas, Fernández-Pozo, Naranjo Gómez and Loures (2017) highlighted the importance of movement and connectivity in the cross-border cooperation area, as it enhances the
competitiveness and economic cohesion. Castanho et al. (2016) discovered that definition of clear common objectives and master plans, and promotion of political transparency and commitment considering the project decision making plays crucial role in territorial success in CBC projects.
Kurowska-Pysz et al. (2018) identified five success factors in strategic cross-border cooperation alliances. These factors are well defined goals of the alliance, facilitating and ensuring the participation of various stakeholders with diverse resources, ensuring the coherence of the project, meaning that all partners in each side of the border are working towards the same key objective, making sure that the project or alliance benefits each side of the border and involvement of partners with experience of CBC projects. (Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018.) The goals should be carefully defined based on the social, economic, and environmental conditions in the cross-border region, while including various kinds of stakeholders with diverse resources. This will most likely have positive effects on the synergy of cooperative network. (Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018.)
Tiganasu et al. (2020) studied the beneficiaries of 2007-2013 CBC programmes in Romania- Ukraine-Moldova region. In the study it was concluded that in order to enhance the effectiveness of the CBC programmes, all the involving stakeholders and decision makers of the programme should focus on identifying the weaknesses of regions, so that efficient and integrated territorial development and economic impact can be generated (Tiganasu et al. 2020). Facilitators and success factors has been gathered in the table 1 below.
Table 1. Facilitators & success factors of CBC projects
Success factors & Facilitators Author(s)
Access to EU funding Knippschild 2011; Castanho et al.
2016 Definition of clear common objectives and master
plans
Castanho et al. 2016
Identifying the weaknesses of programme regions Tiganasu et al. 2020 Promotion of political transparency and commitment
considering the project decision making
Castanho et al. 2016
Promoting the connectivity and movement between cities
Castanho et al. 2016; Castanho et al.
2017 Facilitating and ensuring the participation of various
stakeholders with diverse resources
Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018
Well defined goals of the alliance Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018 Ensuring the coherence of the project Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018 Alliance benefits each side of the border Kurowska-Pysz et al. 2018
2.2 Network approach
2.2.1 Defining Network approach
There are several kinds of networks affecting our lives, form networks of personal relationships, to networks of businesses and inter-organisational alliances. In general, the concept of network describes the relationships between different actors and entities. (Scott, Baggio & Cooper p 1, 2008.) Gibson, Lynch & Morrison (2005), defines network as a set of relationships with specific goal or purpose. According to Dredge (2006), network theory aims to explain the relationships structures between public and private organisations, and how that effects on their collective action.
Network analysis is an approach the which can be utilized in investigating the exchange of resources among individuals, groups, or organizations (Baggio & Cooper 2008).
Tourism has been identified as an ideal object for network science by several scholars (Baggio 2008; van der Zee 2015; Baggio 2017). Tourism can be regarded as highly networked industry, with set of different actors which makes it complex phenomenon (van der Zee & Vanneste 2015).
It is considered as a fragmented industry due to the remote location from source markets, and high number of small independent companies, and hence the survival of individual operators often lie in networks of collective interests. (Scott, Baggio & Cooper p 1, 2008.) As learned earlier in this paper, tourism and cross-border cooperation initiatives turn cross-border regions as tourism destinations and places for cooperation. Saraniemi and Kylänen (2011) state that destinations consist of different kinds of interacting stakeholders, like local enterprises, public organizations, hosts, and guests. Fyall, Garrod & Wang (2012) state that destinations are not only places for tourist consumption, but also an inter-organisational networks of supply relationships.
Beritelli & Bieger (2013) describes destinations as systems of resources and service providers, and in order to maintain the sustainable development in the destination, these resources and service providers need to be managed. Studzieniecki & Spiriajevas (2019), comply to this view, by stating that in managerial terms, destinations should be perceived as systems, in order to manage and develop tourism. The decisions and actions of independent actors within destination has influence on other actors, therefore goal setting and achieving process of the common objectives, must be coordinated (Manente and Minghetti 2006). Therefore, collaborative actions and cooperation are
crucial parts of the development of tourism destination (Baggio 2010; Ryan, Mottiar and Quinn 2012).
2.2.2 Issue-based networks
Issue based networks are cooperative by their nature. The concept is based on the policy network studies. The idea behind the concept is that the network of actors have identified a certain collective issue which is affecting the system were the actors belong. This system of diverse actors are collectively aiming to tackle issue by utilizing the resources of network actors. (Brito 1999.) Komppula (2000) states that issue-based nets are based on the relationships of different actors who have a common or conflicting interest towards a certain issue. Brito & Silva (2014) describes issue- based nets as following; “issue-based net may aggregate mutual interests of various types of actors through processes of interaction and exchange - e.g. social, economic, or political - whose objective is to cope with a collective issue by changing (or preserving) the shape of the network where its members are embedded.”
The actions that the issue-based network take towards the issue or goal they are dealing with, are called collective actions. Collective actions can be described as events where actors utilize joint assets to create, combine, develop or exchange resources. Collective actions are typical for issue- based nets and networks, as they require common resources in order to be implemented. In tourism context, the actors of the networks can utilize the network relationships for example to create new services or joint marketing activities. It is also possible for the nets to gain outside funding or expertise to enable to activities in collective action. (Komppula 2000.)
According to Brito (1999), issue-based nets can be considered as a parts of larger industrial networks (e.g., tourism industry), and they can appear as many different forms, for example trade unions and formal cooperative initiatives. The term formal means that the issue-based net has formal structures or organisation, and that it’s based on explicit contract. (Brito 1999; Brito & Silva 2014.) However, the issue-based net may contain other informal actors, who do not belong to contractual and formal members of the net (Brito & Silva 2014). Komppula (2000) points out that
issue-based nets can also be created for certain time period to serve specific goals and purpose.
This means that issue-based networks can form a project organisations (Komppula 2000).
Issue-based networks and their emergence in large heterogenous groups is highly dependent of the so-called inner core members. These inner core members are active and highly resourceful actors who together are able to provide the sufficient amount of time, money, or other resources in order to establish the issue-based network. This group of actors is also known as “critical mass”. This critical mass is able to mobilise the needed resources for common good, even though the other members of the group would not give any kind of effort. Therefore, the relationships of these inner core members (critical mass) play crucial role in issue-based networks. This means that emerging issue-based networks should not consider how to gather all the members of the group to serve collective action, but rather form a relationships among small amount actors who have appropriate interests and resources to act and lead the process of collective action. This may result heterogenous actor relationships within the issue-based net. (Brito 1999.)
Dredge & Pforr (2008) state that issue-based networks in tourism networks can be divided into three different types of issues. According to Dredge & Pforr (2008), the issues in tourism are commonly related to community issues (e.g., equity, power, influence, and legitimacy), economic and business-related issues (e.g., creation of new products or cooperative marketing) or environmental issues (environmental resources, like land use). These tourism networks that are experiencing the aforesaid issues can be considered as issue-based networks (figure 6.). The role of tourism policy network is to integrate the issues in the centre of these issue-based networks, and then work efficiently with government and its resources, and facilitate good tourism management and promote good tourism governance. (Dredge & Pforr 2008, p. 70.)
Figure 6. Issue-based networks (Dredge & Pforr 2008).
As learned in this chapter, tourism industry can be viewed as an industrial network within the destination, or as according to this study within the cross-border region which consist various types of actors of public and private organizations. This study focuses on tourism development projects in Euregio Karelia region, which aims to tackle the identified issues or problems in the area through Karelia ENI CBC programme. Based on the understanding of this chapter, the development projects in the region can be seen as issue-based nets, which are aiming to tackle the issues through collective action among the project partners. The relationships of project partners and the joint resources have great affection how the collective actions can be carried out. This means that the partners are the core members of these projects (issue-based nets) to take responsibility for achieving the project goals. As this study is made from the perspective of partnering organizations, this research is particularly interested in how the relationships among the partners have served the collective actions in the projects under the investigation.
2.2.3 Goal congruence
As already learned before, the core idea of network approach is that the network has common view and purpose, which serves all the actors and members of the network. It is argued that the commitment and level of collaboration is dependent of goal congruence of the network. (Lemaire 2019.) Interorganizational collaboration is based on the idea of putting individual resources together to serve common good and purpose, which can also referred as a collective network.
Organizations who belong in this type of network are aiming to achieve their goals by utilizing the resources of the other participants of the network. Because of this, compatible goals among the network are thought to increase the effectiveness of collaboration and satisfaction among the stakeholders. Compatibility if goals can be referred as goal congruence. (Cuevas, Julkunen &
Gabrielsson 2015.)
Goals and objectives are essential for organizations. In collaborative networks compatible and congruent goals can drive the involving organizations to achieve their goals more effectively (Lundin 2007.) Ouchi (1979) adds that in order to have functioning and effective collaboration, the involving organizations has to form goal congruency in order to strengthen and facilitate their relationship on long-term. Leamaire (2019) defines goal congruence as “the extent of agreement between the official or formal policy goals of political officials and the operative goals of the organizations or networks charged with delivering that policy”. In interorganizational relationships, collaborative organizations are aiming to solve challenges with joint resources and thus reduce the uncertainty amongst network (Lemaire 2019). Lundin (2007) states that goal congruence among actors increases cooperation, and thus helps organizations to achieve their goals more efficiently, which why the goal congruence can be understood as powerful facilitator on cooperative initiatives. Ju & Tang (2011) state that goal congruence is essential part of interorganisational cooperation. Lack of congruent goals may lead to situations where organisations work for differing purposes, affecting on the efficiency of cooperation. This may also cause resistance between cooperative partners. (Ju & Tang 2011.)
According to the theory of goal congruency, the partnering organizations of the projects should be able to achieve their goals more efficiently, due to ability to form congruent project goals. At the
same time it should make the project work itself more fluent among the partnering organizations as everybody are working towards same goals that are based on the collective issues.
2.3 Framework
The theoretical framework of this study is illustrated in the figure 7 below. This research investigates the tourism related cross-border cooperation development projects of Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020 programme. The theoretical framework of the study is formed from cross-border cooperation, tourism development and network approach. The cross-border cooperation describes collaboration between border regions of two or more countries. In this study the cross-border cooperation describes the collaboration between North Karelia and Karelia Republic. This study also provides understanding of tourism development through cross-border cooperation. In this study the tourism development projects are seen as initiatives which are integrated into general development strategies of the border region. The cross-border region in this study is viewed as network of different actors. The development projects of the region are understood as issue-based nets, which are aiming to tackle the common issues through collective action and cooperation. It is also understood that the goal congruence among the partners drives the projects to achieve their goals more efficiently.
Figure 7. Theoretical framework of this study.
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research approach
The research approach of this study is qualitative approach. According to Eriksson & Kovalainen (2016, 4), qualitative research approach aims to provide holistic understanding of the certain phenomenon or issue. It helps researchers to find answers and deeper understanding to very specific questions (Liberato et al. 2018). In business studies qualitative research approach is seen relevant, as it gives possibility to investigate complex business-related phenomena and issues, and critically evaluate the social aspect of the business world and its processes (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 4).
This study aims to gain understanding of perceived benefits of tourism cross-border cooperation development projects through Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020 programme. Additionally, this study aims to provide understanding of perceived challenges during the project and what kind of development suggestions the future projects require in order to be more beneficial. Therefore, to gain deeper understanding how the organizations have perceived the projects, the qualitative research approach was chosen to this study. The research questions of this study are presented below.
The main research question
• What kind of concrete benefits partnering organizations have gained through Karelia ENI CBC 2014-2020 programme?
The supportive research questions
• What kind of expectations and goals the partnering organization had towards the development project?
• What kind of challenges partnering organizations experienced during the development project?
• What kind of actions are needed for the future in order to enhance the benefits of the development projects?
This research is interview based study. The general purpose of the qualitative interviews in research is to produce data. Research interviews are focused on certain topic or issue which helps researcher to answer the research questions of the study. Ideally the questions of the interview should start with “what” and “how” type of questions, so the interviewee would respond openly to the questions. Interviews can be considered as practical way and efficient way to gather unpublished information, but especially interviews are suitable to gain understanding of people’s experiences and point of views. (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 92-93.)
In this study, the research data is gathered through semi-structured interviews, which are analysed using qualitative content analysis method. Data collection and analysis methods are explained in more detail in following chapters. The methodological framework of this research is illustrated in the figure 8 below.
Figure 8. The methodologial framework of the research.
3.2 Methods of data collection
The research approach and research questions determine what type of qualitative interview the study requires. The different types of interviews are, structured and standardised interviews, guided and semi-structured interviews and unstructured, narrative, informal and open interviews (Eriksson
& Kovalainen 2016, 93.) In this study, semi-structured interview was used as a data collection method. Guided and semi-structured interviews uses both “what” and “how” type questions. The interview complies pre-designed themes, topics, or issues, but is more flexible regarding wording and order of the questions compared to structured interview. This makes this type of interview more informal and conversational, yet at the same time it is systematically guided by the topics or issues that the research is about (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 94.)
Interview questions can be divided into very open ended, open ended and closed questions. Closed questions are types of questions which gives respondent a very little control what is talked about, and therefore this type of questions provide shorter answers. While in the other hand open questions tend to produce more speech compared to closed questions, as respondent have more control and freedom to answer to the questions. Example of closed question could be “did you participate to the project?” while open ended question could be “How did you end up joining the project?”.
During the interview, interviewer should avoid presenting too complex question, but ask multiple simple questions instead. This makes answering more easier for interviewee, which likely leads to better results. Therefore, it is recommended to add secondary questions to your primary interview questions during the interview, to gain deeper understanding about the issue under discussion. The interviewer should also avoid leading the interviewee with questions, by forming interview questions as neutral as possible. This means that the questions should not include any kinds of pre- assumptions or pre-given typologies, which might lead interviewee to respond on certain way (Eriksson & Kovalainen 2016, 95-96.)
In this research there were nine (9) semi-structured interviews conducted with the organizations who acted as partner in different tourism related development projects. The interview questions were open-ended and pre-designed based on the research questions of this study, to ensure the sufficient amount of valid data. The goal of each interview was to be relaxed and conversational
