




































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

59

SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR 
COMPETITIVENESS 

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ1, Jakob BEDNARIK2, Miha LESJAK1

1University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, 
Slovenia

2Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, Gortanova 22, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Corresponding author:
Maja URAN MARAVIĆ 

University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies Turistica, Portorož, Slovenia
e-mail: maja.uran@fts.upr.si

ABSTRACT

This paper assesses the competitiveness of Slovenian sport tourism destinations 
and compares it with other domestic destinations and those abroad. The methodology 
is based on different destination competitiveness models. An integrated instrument of 
the sport destination competitiveness was developed and tested for validity of content 
and used to assess the competitiveness. There are eight main hypotheses tested. The re-
search results confirm the main hypothesis − that Slovenian tourism managers believe 
Slovenian destinations are more competitive at home than abroad. The contribution of 
the research lies in the fact that it has applied the generic instrument for measuring 
destination competitiveness on sport tourism destinations and, for the first time, their 
competitiveness is measured in Slovenia.

Keywords: tourism, destination competitiveness, sport tourism, Slovenia.

KONKURENČNOST SLOVENSKIH ŠPORTNOTURISTIČNIH 
DESTINACIJ

IZVLEČEK

Destinacije s športnoturistično ponudbo v Sloveniji morajo nenehno izboljševati 
svojo konkurenčnost. Ta članek govori o analizi konkurenčnosti slovenskih destinacij s 
športnoturistično ponudbo ter jih primerja z drugimi destinacijami v Sloveniji in v tu-

original scientific article                  UDC: 338.48-6:796(497.4)
received: 2015-07-28



60

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

jini. Metodologija je zasnovana na podobnih raziskavah destinacijske konkurenčnosti 
doma in v tujini. Za namen raziskave je bil razvit integriran inštrument za merjenje 
konkurenčnosti športnoturistične destinacije, ki je bil obenem tudi testiran za vse-
binsko veljavnost. Testiranih je bilo osem hipotez. Glavna hipoteza je potrjena, in si-
cer da so po mnenju turističnih managerjev slovenske destinacije bolj konkurenčne 
doma kot v tujini. Glavni prispevek te raziskave je v razvoju inštrumenta za merjenje 
konkurenčnosti športnoturističnih destinacij in v dejstvu, da je takšna raziskava prvič 
opravljena tudi v Sloveniji. 

Ključne besede: turizem, konkurenčnost destinacij, športni turizem, Slovenija

INTRODUCTION

Global tourism supply is infinite, with destinations facing tough operating condi-
tions nowadays. Successful strategic planning and development of tourist destinations 
require appropriate tools to best assess the operational situation. Such tools help to 
identify the situation better and, at the same time, they can be used to design easier and 
clearer measures for improvement. In addition, they also contribute to the coordination 
of various tourism destination stakeholders. One of the most well known tools to assess 
such situations is the model of destination competitiveness. 

Tourist destinations (e.g. cities, regions or sites) are no longer seen as a set of dis-
tinct natural, cultural, artistic or environmental resources, but as an overall appealing 
product available in a certain location: a complex and integrated portfolio of services 
offered by a destination that supplies a holiday experience which meets the needs of the 
tourist. The tourist destination can thus produce a compound package of tourist services 
based on its indigenous supply potential (Cracolici & Nijkamp, 2008). 

Numerous definitions of destination competitiveness were proposed in literature 
but there seems to be no generally accepted statement of the term. Researchers have 
proposed different definitions of destination competitiveness from various approa-
ches. Crouch and Ritchie (1999) examined the definition in terms of the economic 
prosperity of destination residents, which is consistent with the view raised by World 
Economic Forum. This approach is specifically applicable to the international-level 
destinations. It is considered reasonable to examine destination competitiveness with 
the focus on economic prosperity, since the nations (destinations) compete in the in-
ternational tourism market to foster the economic well-being of their residents, as well 
as the opportunity to promote the country as a place to live in, trade with, invest in, 
do business with, play sport against, etc. (Dwyer & Kim, 2003). Studies by Crouch 
and Ritchie (1999), and Dwyer and Kim (2003) represent the main works on tourism 
competitiveness, not only in the construction of conceptual models and in the under-
standing of competitive factors, but also in the search of certain measuring systems 
that can compare tourism destinations (Parra-Lopez & Oreja-Rodriguez, 2014). There 



ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

61

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

is no method available that can be used to integrate “hard” and “soft” factors into a 
single index (Dwyer & Kim, 2003).

On the other hand, destination competitiveness models cannot be directly applicable 
to the destination that primarily offers sport tourism. In order to compete in the growing 
sport tourism market, it is crucial for destinations to develop a profound understanding 
of how competitive they are. To assess competitiveness of such destination it needs to 
be explored what sport tourism supply encompasses.

Currently, there are a number of authors (e.g. Hinch, Higham, Hall, Weed, Gibson 
in Uran Maravić et al., 2014), who have dealt with the definition of sports tourism. 
Slak Valek (2008) concluded in her doctoral thesis that the most suitable definition for 
marketing sports tourism in the Slovenian context is that sports tourism is a journey 
that stimulates the individuals to temporarily depart from their usual environment with 
a motive to actively participate in sports, watching sports or visiting sports and tourist 
attractions.

Sports tourism refers as well to the direct and indirect tourism benefits related to 
a consumer who travels to watch and / or to participate in sports-related activities or 
events. Expenditure in the tourism industry generally is considered an invisible export, 
as it involves the transfer of money from overseas consumers for a domestic-based 
service. Sports tourism is considered a niche market, but one which has received gre-
ater attention from policy-makers in recent years. It has been facilitated by, among 
other things, technological change, changing social attitudes and circumstances, and 
increasing regional accessibility due to the rise of low-cost air travel. In order to assess 
competitiveness of sports tourism destination, one has to add to general destination 
competiveness models a section where sports tourism supply is assessed. The sports 
tourism supply is composed of different sports that are supplied in the destination. It has 
to be pointed out that Mike Weed (2009) in his meta-analysis of the progress in sports 
tourism research found just one research where destination competitiveness had been 
assessed. Most of the research examines the benefits of the sports tourism or characteri-
stics of sport tourists. This also suggests that sports tourism supply is in its developing 
stage, where not all the methods known in tourism planning processes are deployed. 

METHODOLOGY

Following and adopting the model developed by Omerzel Gomezelj & Mihalic 
(2008), a survey was conducted to determine the competitiveness of destinations, com-
paring them to other Slovenian destinations and to foreign destinations. As suggested 
by Omerzel Gomezelj & Mihalic (2008), a set of indicators of destination competiti-
veness was chosen. Special emphasis was given to sports supply. Most indicators of 
macro environment were omitted.

The survey was administered from July to September 2014. The respondents were 
managers at local and regional tourism organisations in Slovenia. The whole instrument 
consisted of 60 items. In total, 38 fully completed questionnaires were returned, 20 for 



62

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

comparison with domestic destinations and 18 for comparison with foreign destinati-
ons. The respondents amount to 83 % of all overnight stays in Slovenia, so we can say 
that the sample is sufficiently representative.

The respondents were asked to rate a series of statements (on a 5-point Likert scale, 
for each of the 60 competitiveness indicators). The ratings ranged from one (well below 
average) to five (well above average). For clearer assessment of respondents’ asses-
sments to the indicators, the results are grouped into the seven categories. For each of 
these groupings, tables were produced, where mean and standard deviations for each 
group are displayed together. The SPSS standard package for personal computers was 
used for this purpose. At this stage, items were tested for normality. We did not test for 
other assumptions since we used a standard scale.

Based on the research questions for this study, seven hypotheses were proposed to 
determine the differences between destination competitiveness, at home or abroad. One 
hypothesis was added to address the question of whether destinations were more com-
petitive in terms of sport or non-sport (tourism) supply. The hypotheses are as followed:

H1: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of transport.
H2: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of hospi-

tality.
H3: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of primary 

supply.
H4: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of secon-

dary supply.
H5: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of sport 

supply.
H6: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of tourist 

services.
H7: Destinations are more competitive at home than abroad in the field of desti-

nation image.
H8: Destinations are more competitive in non-sports than sports supply.

RESULTS 

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for the item groupings. We analysed mean 
comparison data for domestic destinations with the mean comparison data for foreign 
destinations for each grouping. For that purpose, eight new variables were introduced. 
The new variables were computed through SPSS procedures as the total mean of indi-
vidual groupings. That was followed by an independent T-test to check the hypothesis 
(Table 2). 

The Transport grouping consisted of five items, measuring competitiveness in 
terms of destination accessibility with different modes of transportation. The items 
were: accessibility by air, road accessibility, railway accessibility, transport from air-
port to destination and price competitiveness of air travel. The mean value in Transport 



ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

63

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

grouping is 3.39 and is higher when comparing their own destinations to other domestic 
destinations. The T-test proved that the difference was statistically significant. We can 
confirm H1.

The Hospitality grouping consisted of five items: hotel accommodation, other 
accommodation facilities, price of accommodation services, food and drink and the 
price of food service. The mean value of all the items in the Hospitality grouping 
was higher in terms of being more competitive at home (the mean value is 3.45) than 
abroad (the mean value is 2.90) and the difference was statistically significant. We 
can confirm H2.

Table 1: Descriptive statistics.

DESTINATION N Mean Std. De-
viation

Std. Er-
ror Mean

TRANSPORT
SLOVENIAN 20 3.3900 .72104 .16123

FOREIGN 18 2.7333 .67213 .15842

HOSPITALITY
SLOVENIAN 20 3.4500 .65172 .14573

FOREIGN 18 2.9000 .67650 .15945

PRIMARY SUPPLY
SLOVENIAN 20 4.0000 .51866 .11598

FOREIGN 18 3.6111 .79418 .18719

SECONDARY SUPPLY
SLOVENIAN 20 2.9150 .65556 .14659

FOREIGN 18 2.4889 .73155 .17243

SPORT SUPPLY
SLOVENIAN 20 2.8519 .65251 .14591

FOREIGN 18 2.4274 .63513 .14970

SUPPORT SERVICES
SLOVENIAN 20 3.4286 .65219 .14583

FOREIGN 18 3.0635 .81142 .19125

IMAGE
SLOVENIAN 20 3.1250 1.13410 .25359

FOREIGN 18 2.3472 .92410 .21781

NON-SPORT SUPPLY
SLOVENIAN 20 3.3848 .53313 .11921

FOREIGN 18 2.8573 .59545 .14035

COMPETITIVENESS 
TOTAL

SLOVENIAN 20 3.3086 .52818 .11811
FOREIGN 18 2.7959 .57495 .13552

Source: Own calculations.

The Primary Tourism Supply grouping consisted of three items: natural attracti-
ons, cultural attractions and fees for visits to natural and cultural attractions. The mean 
values for all the items in the Primary Tourism Supply grouping were higher (the 
mean value being 4). The T-test showed that the difference was not statistically signi-



64

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

ficant. It is interesting that in other studies there is an emerging trend in high value for 
the primary tourist supply (natural and cultural attractions), but it is also clear that these 
resources are not optimally exploited. We cannot confirm H3.

The Secondary Tourism Supply grouping consisted of 10 items: shopping, festi-
vals, MICE, theatre, cultural events, museums and galleries, casinos, nightlife, amu-
sement parks and fees for visit of the attractions. The mean value for all the items 
in the Secondary Tourism Supply grouping was higher for the destination when 
compared with other domestic destinations than if it was compared with destinations 
abroad. The T-test showed that the difference was not statistically significant. We 
cannot confirm H4.

Table 2: Independent T-test.

 
 Group
 

T-test for Equality of Means

t df Sig. 
(2-tailed)

Mean 
Differ-
ence

Std. Er-
ror Dif-
ference

95% Confidence 
Interval of the Dif-

ference

Lower Upper

TRANSPORT 2.894 36 .006 .65667 .22690 .19650 1.11683

HOSPITALITY 2.551 36 .015 .55000 .21558 .11279 .98721

PRIMARY 
SUPPLY 1.805 36 .079 .38889 .21546 -.04809 .82587

SECONDARY 
SUPPLY 1.894 36 .066 .42611 .22498 -.03018 .88240

SPORT SUPPLY 2.028 36 .050 .42457 .20935 -.00001 .84915

SUPPORT SER-
VICES 1.536 36 .133 .36508 .23773 -.11705 .84721

IMAGE 2.301 36 .027 .77778 .33796 .09236 1.46320

NON-SPORT 
SUPPLY 2.881 36 .007 .52742 .18305 .15618 .89867

COMPETITIVE-
NESS TOTAL 2.865 36 .007 .51273 .17894 .14982 .87563

Source: Own calculations.

Respondents were asked to assess how well sports tourism products are represented 
in their destination. The Sport Tourism Supply grouping consisted of 26 items: sport 
sites, sport events, supply of active holidays, ski slopes, cross-country skiing, hiking, 
cycling, golf, tennis, climbing sites, cave activities, sailing, rafting, kayak, canoeing, 



ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

65

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

fishing, swimming sites, adrenaline activities, sport animation programs, professional 
sports preparation programs, sport camps, team building programs, medical sports tou-
rism, sport museums, sport shops, sport equipment rentals, sport agencies and charges 
for sport activities. On average, respondents believe that the Sport Tourism Supply in 
their destinations is more competitive at home than abroad. The T-test proved that the 
difference was statistically significant. We can confirm H5.

The Support Tourist Services grouping consisted of seven items: information in 
the Tourist Information Centre (TIC), information on sport tourism products in the TIC, 
tourist information on the web and in printed media, sport tourism product information 
on the web and printed media, organised visits to tourist attractions, tourist animation 
and tourist information in travel agencies in the tourists’ home towns. The mean value 
for all items in the Support Tourist Services grouping was higher for domestic de-
stinations (the mean value being 3.42) than for foreign destinations (the mean value 
measured 3.06). The T-test proved that the difference was not statistically significant. 
We cannot confirm H6.

The Destination Image grouping consisted of items related to perceptions of the 
destination’s image. These items were images of the tourist destination, images of the 
destination’s tourist products, global visibility of tourist products and global visibility 
of the destination’s sport tourist products. The mean value of all items in the Destinati-
on Image grouping was higher for the destination when compared with other domestic 
destinations than for foreign destinations. The T-test proved that the difference was 
statistically significant. We can confirm H7.

An extra variable was added. This variable consisted of all non-sports items. We 
wanted to know whether the destinations were more competitive for sports supply ver-
sus other tourism supply. The results indicated a higher mean value for non-sports su-
pply – or in other words – the respondents believe that they are more competitive in 
tourism supply than in sports tourism supply. We can confirm H8.

DISCUSSION 

The mean value for all 60 items was higher where the destination was compared 
with other domestic destinations than if it was compared with foreign destinations. The 
T-test proved that the difference was statistically significant. We can confirm the gen-
eral hypothesis that destinations are more competitive at home than abroad as assessed 
by the respective group of respondents. 

One of the major goals of this research was to develop and test the instrument 
for sports destination competitiveness for its validity, especially for content validity. 
Through in-depth discussion with tourism managers it was pointed out that some of 
the items were more difficult to assess objectively then others. That confirms the major 
weakness of these kinds of models and their measurement instruments, as noticed by 
many authors (Dwyer, Knezevic Cvelbar, Edwards, & Mihalic, 2012; Omerzel Gome-
zelj, 2006). Looking at Armenski, Gomezelj, Djurdjev, Ćurčić, & Dragin (2012) and 



66

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

Mulec and Wise (2013) works, natural (inherited) resources are among the most com-
petitive. This has been confirmed with the findings in this research as well.

The practical implications of the study are relevant to tourism stakeholders and 
planners. Tourism is run under the pressure of tourists, managers, economists, capitali-
sts and the local community and these rarely share common ideas and expectations. The 
destination competitiveness analysis does not only analyse the current situation but it 
gives, above all, a common ground or a list of the weaknesses that need to be annulled 
in order to better compete on the international tourism market. If the research sample 
is representative enough, the stakeholders have problems disputing the results and the 
actions that need to be taken.

We also see many opportunities for further research, especially in the context of 
further testing the instrument for its reliability and validity. 

CONCLUSION

The link between sports and tourism in tourist-developed countries is growing 
stronger, which is also reflected in the tourist product design. This is not just a tempora-
ry trend in modern tourism development. In this respect, Slovenia is lagging behind the 
competing countries, as it has not yet prepared a strategy for how to best develop and 
market itself as a sports tourism destination. 

Sports tourism products would definitely help to position Slovenia better on the 
international tourist market. The results of this study will help to identify and overcome 
the key obstacles in the development of tourism and sports supply.

REFERENCES

Armenski, T., Gomezelj, D., Djurdjev, B., Ćurčić, N., & Dragin, A. (2012). Tourism 
destination competitiveness – between two flags. Economic Research, 25, 485–502. 
VIEW ITEM

Cracolici, M. F., & Nijkamp, P. (2008). The attractiveness and competitiveness of tourist 
destinations: A study of southern Italian regions. Tourism Management, 30(3), 336-344. 
VIEW ITEM

Crouch, G. I., & Ritchie, J. R. (1999). Tourism competitiveness and social prosperity. 
Journal of Business Research, 44 (3), 137-152. VIEW ITEM

Dwyer, L., & Kim, C. (2003). Destination competitiveness: determinants and indicators. 
Current Issues in Tourism, 6 (5), 369-414. VIEW ITEM

Dwyer, L., Knezevic Cvelbar, L., Edwards, D., & Mihalic, T. (2012). Fashioning a de-
stination tourism future: The case of Slovenia. Tourism Management, 33(2), 305-316. 
VIEW ITEM

Mulec, I., & Wise, N. (2013). Indicating the competitiveness of Serbia's Vojvodina Re-
gion as an emerging tourism destination. Tourism Management Perspectives, 8, 68–79. 
VIEW ITEM

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1316074942/fulltext?accountid=31479
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026151770800112X
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296397001963
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13683500308667962
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261517711000744
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211973613000421


ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 6 • 2015 • 1

67

Maja URAN MARAVIĆ, Jakob BEDNARIK, Miha LESJAK: SLOVENIAN SPORT TOURISM DESTINATIONS AND THEIR ...,  59–67

Omerzel Gomezelj, D. (2006). Competitiveness of Slovenia as o Tourism destination. 
Managing global transitions, 4(2), 167-189. VIEW ITEM

Omerzel Gomezelj, D., & Mihalic, T. (2008). Destination competitiveness: applying dif-
ferent models, the case of Slovenia. Tourism management, 29(2), 294-307. VIEW ITEM

Parra-Lopez, E., & Oreja-Rodriguez, J. R. (2014). Evaluation of the competiveness of 
tourist zones of an island destination: An application of a Many-Facet Rasch Model. 
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 3(2), 114-121. VIEW ITEM

Slak Valek, N. (2008).The suitability of tourism supply of destination for a sports-active 
tourist demand: doctoral dissertation. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of 
Economics. 

Uran Maravić, M. Bednarik, J., Pišot, R., Sedmak, M., Lesjak, M., & Rameša, M. 
(2014). Analysis of sport tourism in Slovenia. Ljubljana: Slovenia Tourist Board.

Weed, M. (2009). Progress in sports tourism research? A meta-review and exploration of 
futures. Tourism Management, 30(5), 615-628. VIEW ITEM

http://www.fm-kp.si/zalozba/ISSN/1581-6311/4_167-189.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261517707000714
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212571X13000796
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026151770900017X

	_ENREF_26
	_GoBack
	_GoBack
	_GoBack
	_GoBack
	BM3
	_GoBack
	_GoBack

