Article Title Page

Cruise Passengers’ Satisfaction: Cartagena de Indias Author Details Author 1 Name: Juan Gabriel Brida Department: School of Economics & Management University/Institution: Free University of Bolzano Town/City: Bolzano Country: Italy Author 2 Name: Nicolás Garrido Department: Departamento de Economía University/Institution: Universidad Católica del Norte Town/City: Antofagasta Country: Chile Author 3 Name: María Jesús Such Devesa Department: Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales University/Institution: Universidad de Alcalá Town/City: Madrid Country: Spain Corresponding author: María Jesús Such Devesa Corresponding Author’s Email: mjesus.such@uah.es Acknowledgments (if applicable): n/a Biographical Details (if applicable): Juan Gabriel Brida, PhD in Economics, he teaches Mathematics and Tourism Economics. His research interests include Tourism Economics and Growth Economics. Nicolás Garrido, PhD in Economics, he teaches Economics. His research interests are Tourism Economics and Regional Economics. María Jesús Such Devesa, PhD in Economics, she teaches Applied Economics and her researches focus on Tourism Economics. Structured Abstract: Purpose - This paper aims to explain the onshore satisfaction of cruise passengers in the port of call of Cartagena de Indias using a questionnaire given to 1,361 passengers of 28 cruise ships during October and November of 2009. Design/methodology/approach - Factor analysis and cluster analysis. Findings - The results suggest that although visitors held a high overall satisfaction of the onshore experience, there are two dimensions that require the attention of tourist policy makers: the city infrastructure (traffic, noise, cleanliness and infrastructure) and the general shopping experience. In particular, the worst experience seems to be related to street vendors. Moreover, there is evidence that tourists from the United States of America are more exigent of being fully satisfied. Research limitations/implications - The survey contained was only conducted in the months of October and November. Future research can also include the repetition of the study in different seasons and compare with our results. The study shows that there is a good potential for the growth of tourism activity of the destination because over 52% of the participants declared their intention of return to the city as land tourists and more than 60% will recommend the destination to their friends. Originality/value - The application of known methodologies to an emergent destination in which many stakeholders are involved and concerned about cruise tourism evolution and its effects on the destination. Keywords: Customer services quality, Tourism management Article Classification: Case study

For internal production use only Running Heads:

Cruise Passengers’ Satisfaction: Cartagena de Indias

1. Introduction

The cruise tourism industry has been the fastest growing segment of the global travel

sector, with an average annual growth rate of passengers of 7.4% for the period of 1990-2007

(see Brida and Zapata (2010), Dowling (2006) and Cruise Lines International Association

(2010)). This growth in cruise tourism is expected to continue into the future, as only a small

proportion of the population that has the resources to take a cruise have done so (Chase and

McKee, 2003). Nevertheless, this fact is a changing reality. This form of tourism accounts for

only about 2% of the worldwide total leisure tourists, but the numbers have been increasing

rapidly: from about 4 million people who took a cruise vacation in 1990 to more than 14

million in 2009 (Brida and Zapata, 2010). Cruises represent the following paradigms of

globalization: physical mobility, international capital that can be relocated anywhere and at

any time, crews coming from different countries in the same ship, no national or international

regulations and marine registrations that are optimally selected. A cruise ship can be

considered a destination itself. It represents all four facets of the tourism industry:

transportation, accommodation (including food and beverages), attractions and tour

operators. Thirteen million people took a cruise in 2008, with the industry predicting that more

than 30 million people will do so in 2015 (Cruise Lines International Association, 2010). Cruise

tourism can benefit a destination by increasing or improving foreign exchange earnings, profit

and taxes, employment, positive externalities and economies of scale (Dwyer and Forsyth,

1998). From another point of view, cruise tourism requires less infrastructure compared to

stopover tourism at a tourist destination (McKee, 1998).

The rapid expansion of the cruise industry has produced considerable research interest

over the last decade. This research considers several studies on cruise passengers’

segmentation, motivation, satisfaction and behavior related to the cruise tourism experience

but not studies on destinations (Clancy (2008); Diedrich (2010); Duman and Mattila (2005);

Henderson (2009); Ikeda and Jaswar (2002); Johansson and Naslund (2009); Kwortnik (2006

and 2008); Macpherson (2008); McCarthy (2003); Lemmetyinen and Go (2010); Li and Petrick

(2008 and 2010); Lobo (2009); Miller and Grazer (2002 and 2003); Park and Petrick (2009);

Petrick (2003, 2004a, 2004b, 2005); Petrick and Sirakaya (2004); Petrick and Li (2006); Petrick

et al. (2006, 2007); Pratt and Blake (2009), Teye and Leclerc (2002); Vogel (2009); Weaver

(2005); Yarnal and Kerstetter (2005)). There are fewer studies on cruise passengers’

satisfaction with a visit to a particular destination, the intentions of a cruise passenger of

returning to a port of call as a land tourist or the different impacts of cruise tourism in a

particular destination (Andriotis and Agiomirgianakis (2010); Braun et al (2002); Dwyer et al.

(2004); Chase and McKee (2003); Gabe et al. (2006); Hannarong et al. (2006); Hosany and

Witham (2010) Seidl et al. (2006, 2007)).

The research on tourist satisfaction in the cruise industry is analyzed in two different

and complementary contexts: tourist satisfaction on board and tourist satisfaction in a port of

call. Most of the published work has been focused on the former area of research, in which

social interaction, spatial distribution and services are well defined. For instance, Kwortnik

(2006 and 2008) explored how the leisure cruise service environment, the “shipscape”, affects

the cruiser’s emotions and onboard behavior. The author showed that the service

environment is fundamental for the onboard satisfaction of customers. Yarnal and Kerstetter

(2005) analyzed how social interaction in a group vacation in a cruise ship space might create

more meaningful passenger experiences. The authors made suggestions about making playful

spaces on the cruise ship to enhance customer satisfaction. In this line, Duman and Mattila

(2005) proposed that consumers’ affective responses are directly related to perceived value in

highly experiential service settings, such as cruising. Petrick (2003, 2004a, 2004b, 2005),

Petrick and Li (2006) and Petrick et al. (2006, 2007) showed, using structural equations and

other techniques, that the SERV-PERVAL factors of perceived quality, emotional response,

monetary price, behavioral price and reputation are related to cruise passengers' post-cruise

cognitive assessments of perceived value, satisfaction, and intentions to repurchase. The work

done by Hosany and Witham (2010) identified the underlying dimensions of cruisers’

experiences and their relationships with cruisers’ satisfaction and intention to recommend. For

instance, they found that females value entertainment, esthetics and escapism more than

males, and young guests (30 and younger), compared to the other age segments, find

entertainment as the most important dimension. Moreover, the authors concluded that

overall, cruisers expect a fun, relaxing get-away experience with plenty of excitement. These

results can be used by cruise management to understand the diverse nature of cruisers’

experiences and create a more tailored environment.

Tourist satisfaction in a port of embarkation, disembarkation or a port of call has

received less attention than cruise passengers’ satisfaction. Andriotis and Agiomirgianakis

(2010) studied cruise ship passengers’ motivation, satisfaction and likelihood of return to the

port of Heraklion in Greece. They employed a self-completed questionnaire with Likert-type

scale questions to analyze motivation and satisfaction. The highest satisfaction was expressed

for the feeling of personal safety and security, followed by the friendliness of local residents

and attitude of local shopkeepers and staff. On the other extreme, the lowest satisfaction was

expressed about the time available on the island. Gabe et al. (2006) analyzed 568 surveys filled

out by ship passengers that visited Bar Harbor in 2002 and concluded that respondents’ place

of residence in relation to the port has a negative effect on the likelihood of return. Moreover,

time available in the port was also expressed as being correlated with tourist satisfaction.

In the present study, we investigate the satisfaction of cruise passengers with their

visit to Cartagena de Indias to identify the main factors influencing their experience at the

destination. We describe different aspects of the experience of the cruise passengers at the

destination to understand the levels of satisfaction considering various factors.

In addition to the economic impact, cruise activity can provide a destination with an

additional benefit of showcasing the touristic attractions to thousands of people who may

return as independent land tourists. In fact, this argument is generally used by policy makers

to give incentives to the cruise lines in order to be a port of call of their routes. During the visit

to a cruise destination, passengers have the opportunity to experience the attractions of the

area, and the level of the passengers’ satisfaction with the visit may influence the likelihood of

a return visit. This possibility indicates that it is necessary for administrators and officials at

cruise destinations to study onshore satisfaction of cruise passengers visiting the destination.

Destination managers, local governments and policy makers in Cartagena de Indias can profit

from this information by formulating private and public development and marketing strategies

for cruise tourism. Satisfied tourists are more likely to return to the same destination and are

more willing to share their positive traveling experience with their friends and relatives. This

finding is supported by empirical evidence (Alegre and Cladera, 2006, Juaneda, 1996; Lau and

McKercher, 2004; Kozak, 2001 and 2002; Petrick, 2004a; Yoon and Uysal, 2005).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the different factors affecting a cruise ship

passenger’s satisfaction of his or her visit to Cartagena de Indias. The empirical analysis is

based on data from passenger surveys conducted during the second semester of 2009. The

sample of the survey consists of 1,361 cruise passengers interviewed before their return to the

cruise ship. In the survey, information was requested on the tourists’ socio-demographic

characteristics, expenditure levels and satisfaction levels. The questionnaire included the

following items: number of hours on land, quality of the port services, tourist attractions (such

as leisure parks), quality of transportation, cleanliness and hygiene, the presence of friends

and/or relatives on the cruise, familiarity with the destination, safety, tranquility, prices,

general satisfaction with the visit and amount of the expenditures in tours, cultural activities,

tourist attractions, souvenirs, medical costs, transportation and restaurants.

This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we present an overview of the cruise

industry in Cartagena de Indias and descriptive statistics of the main characteristics of cruise

passengers arriving in this country. Section 3 provides a description of the data and

methodologies, and in the subsequent section we present the empirical results. Conclusions

are summarized in the final section.

2. The cruise activity in Cartagena de Indias

The excellent natural conditions of Cartagena de Indias have led to an increase in

cruise activity in the tourism industry. However, little is known about cruise tourism

development at this destination. Cruise passengers are excursionists arriving at Cartagena de

Indias on board the ship and returning to the ship each night to sleep on board. As they do not

strictly spend the night in an accommodation structure in the country, they are not included in

the category of tourists. Cruise tourism constitutes an increasing share of all tourism visits to

the country, accounting for approximately one in five tourist arrivals in 2009. On average, the

time that an overnight tourist remains at the destination is approximately five days, whereas

that of a cruise passenger is less than five hours. Cruise ships first arrived in the country in the

1990s. According to data provided by the Sociedad Portuaria Regional de Cartagena, 246,951

cruise passengers arrived aboard cruise ships during the 2008/2009 cruise year (that is, the

twelve months beginning in May 2008 and ending in April 2009). These passengers included

242,144 in-transit passengers and 4,807 passengers embarking on their cruises in Cartagena de

Indias. Of the in-transit passengers, an estimated 205,822 passengers (85% percent)

disembarked and visited Cartagena de Indias. Table 1 shows the number of arrivals during the

period from 1998-2009. Note that during the period from 2001-2007, there was a decline in

activity because the corporations Royal Caribbean International and Carnival Cruise Lines

decided to retire their ships as a consequence of the U.S. recession and potential effects of the

9/11 terrorist attacks.

INSERT TABLE 1 NEAR HERE

Only in 2009 did the quantity of cruise ships (168) arriving in Cartagena exceed the

number reached in 1998 (161), but the number of cruise passengers presently arriving at the

destination (about 270,000) has almost doubled the number in 1991. Three cruise lines hold an increasingly large market share of the cruise tourism industry in

Cartagena de Indias, accounting for more than 60% of all cruise ship passengers in 2009:

Carnival Cruise Lines, Royal Caribbean International and Star Cruises. Note that this degree of

market power could provide particular negotiation challenges to current and potential port

communities. Cruise tourism visitation in Cartagena de Indias is strongly seasonal, with more

than 98% of all arrivals occurring during the October–April period (Table 2). The arrivals of land

tourists to Cartagena de Indias have two peaks, one in the period of December-January and

the other in June-August. As a result, cruise tourists only produce crowding effects on tourist

experiences during the winter season.

INSERT TABLE 2 NEAR HERE

The majority of cruises having Cartagena de Indias as a port of call last from four to

seven days and include up to five port stops. The fact that most cruise ships stay around five

hours means that cruise passengers can only participate in a limited number of activities.

When cruise passengers arrive at the port, they can stay on board, join a guided excursion or

tour, explore the city on their own or hire a taxi for sightseeing. The most popular sites for

cruisers in Cartagena de Indias are the Old City, the San Felipe castle, the Pierino Gallo

shopping area and the Heredia theater.

3. Data and methodology

Given the scarcity of data on the expenditure behavior of cruise visitors in Cartagena

de Indias, the Ministry of Tourism of Colombia decided to conduct this study. On the bases of

literature review and discussions with principal agents of the cruise industry in the city

(including port managers, tour operators and local and national government tourism offices), a

questionnaire was designed. The questionnaire was given to onshore visitors before their

return to the cruise ship during October and November of 2009. The questionnaire was

administered by previously trained assistants. The questionnaire comprised 23 questions,

which can be arranged in four sections (see Appendix 1). The first section collects demographic

information, such as age, marital status, education level and nationality. The second section

asked respondents to give information about the trip, such as their main reason for choosing

it, how they paid for the cruise trip and previous cruise experiences. The third section

contained questions about the visitors’ expenditure behavior: how much had the visitor spent

on board per day, the number of hours spent out of the port in Cartagena de Indias, and the

amount of purchases made during the onshore time in 10 categories. Finally, in the fourth

section, tourists were asked to indicate their satisfaction with the port of call on a 20-item,

five-point Likert-type scale ranging from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied.” The

questionnaire was translated into two languages: Spanish and English.

The population of this study consisted of passengers and crew older than age 18 who

disembarked from cruise ships arriving to the city of Cartagena de Indias between September

27 and November 14 of 2009. During this period, 28 cruise ships arrived at the port, with a

total of 42,936 passengers (see Appendix 2). The questionnaire was asked of 1,451 visitors, but

as a consequence of revisions to the results, only 1,361 valid questionnaires were left. The

questionnaire was taken just minutes before the visitors returned to the cruise ship.

A number of statistical techniques were applied to the data. First, descriptive statistics

(including frequency distributions, means, standard deviations, medians and frequency

distributions) were computed to have a first look at the profile of cruise ship passengers (see

Table 3).

INSERT TABLE 3 NEAR HERE

The sample consisted of 51.3% male and 48.7% female respondents. More than 65% of

respondents were North Americans, 16.7% were Venezuelans, and about 9% were Europeans.

About 76% of cruise tourists traveling to Cartagena de Indias were married, and more than

62% were 56 years old or older. Cruise tourists visiting Cartagena de Indias had a medium/high

education level and were experienced as cruise tourists. Cruise ships are in Cartagena de Indias

for an average of 6 hours per visit. Because their visit is so brief, the majority of cruise tourist

expenditures come from tours, local transportation, food and beverage, jewelry, souvenirs and

handicrafts. The length of time a visitor spent shopping in the local markets had a substantial

impact on the amount of money he or she spent. The number of hours that the visitor stayed

on shore was positively correlated with dollars spent, indicating that respondents who spent

little time in the market spent little, if any, money. This correlation gives support to long-held

local beliefs that the visitors are not going to buy if they do not set foot in the shops, and the

longer the visitors are kept occupied in the shops, the more they will spend. Consistent with

other destinations (see Seidl et al., 2006 and 2007; Braun et al., 2002 and Douglas and Douglas,

2004), some 90% of passengers disembarked, and 10% remained on board. Approximately

64.5% of those who chose to disembark pre-purchased local tours; the remaining 35.5% did

not purchase tours.

4. Data analysis

In the questionnaire, there were 20 Likert-type questions exploring the visitors’

satisfaction of the onshore experience. The questions accepted five possible answers ranging

from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” on topics as diverse as available infrastructure,

information, relationship with locals, transport system, prices and weather. Taking the mean of

the answers as a simple indicator of satisfaction, we found that the tourists in the sample held

high overall satisfaction of the onshore experience in Cartagena de Indias, as shown in the

descriptive summary in Table 4.

INSERT TABLE 4 NEAR HERE

Note that social interaction with the locals made up the two extremes in the ranking of

satisfaction. On the one hand, tourist guides and bus and taxi drivers received the highest

mean satisfaction degree, whereas on the other hand, the interaction with street sellers

received the lowest degree of satisfaction. To explore if the total information available in the

tourists’ answers could be reduced to a set of conceptual factors, we applied principal

components analysis using the rotation method varimax with Kaiser normalizationi. The Kaiser-

Meyer and Olkin measure of sampling adequacy in this case was 0.945, revealing that the

observed correlation coefficients were close to the partial correlation coefficients. Moreover,

the Bartlett’s test rejects the null hypothesis that the correlation matrix is an identity matrixii.

Both criteria conclude that the strength of the relationship among the variables is strong and

the number of variables and the sample size are appropriate; therefore, it is possible to

proceed with the reduction of information technique. To determine the number of factors, the

criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1 was used. The results are presented in Table 5.

INSERT TABLE 5 NEAR HERE

In all cases, the loading to the factors of each variable was greater than 0.55, so all the

variables were presented. Factor 1 and factor 2 explained more than 78% of the total variance,

and each factor explained almost half the explained variances of 46% and 31%, which were the

first and second factors, respectively. Notice that the first factor makes a group with all the

variables having a mean higher than 4.17 in Table 4. Equally, the second factor collects all the

variables with a mean lower than 4.17 in Table 4. The sample mean of Table 4 is related to the

two factors, explaining 78% of the total variance. Thus, the two factors represent the simple

satisfaction of the tourists. On the one hand, the first factor captures the items that satisfied

the tourists’ expectations. On the other hand, the second factor captures the items that

tourists think are not good enough. The second factor represents the areas on which the

tourist policy makers of Cartagena de Indias should focus. Looking at factor 1, it can be said

that the visitors are satisfied with the general port infrastructure (welcome and port and

service infrastructure), the tourist information, the entertainment offered by the city (variety

of leisure activities, tourist information and historical centre) and the work done by people

directly related to the visit of the city (tourist guides, transport and language communication).

Factor 2 shows that there are problems related to the city infrastructure (traffic, noise,

cleanliness and infrastructure) and the shopping experience (attitude of local shopkeepers,

street vendors, general shopping experience and prices). Looking at the comments added by

the tourists, the problems with city infrastructure is related to a lack of WCs, lack of elevators

at the fortress, lack of infrastructure for aged tourists and places where the visitors can be

protected from the weather. The not-so-good shopping experience is related mainly to the

aggressive behavior of street vendors. Factor 2 represents the main source of information for

increasing the satisfaction of visitors. This satisfaction enhances the positive image of the port,

which is translated into a greater likelihood of return. Using the variables active in factor 2, a

cluster distribution of the tourist was made. The tourists are allocated in clusters according to

the probability distribution of the variables. The 9 variables are assumed to be multinomial and

independent. The two clusters identified were selected to maximize the Schwarz’s Bayesian

Criterion (BIC). Cluster number 1 has identified the individuals with less than extremely

satisfied answers. Cluster number 2 collects all the individuals with answers that are lower

than extremely satisfied. The valid sample is split into 46.3% and 53.7% of individuals in

clusters 1 and 2, respectively.

Table 6 explores whether the probability of being less than extremely satisfied, i.e., the

probability of being in cluster 1, depends on characteristics of the tourist. The hypothesis is

that there are tourists who are systematically more likely not to be extremely satisfied.

INSERT TABLE 6 NEAR HERE

There are two attributes of the tourist that have influence on the probability of being

less than extremely satisfied. First, tourists from the United States of America are more likely

to be less than extremely satisfied. Second, tourists who visited Cartagena de Indias before are

less likely to be less than extremely satisfied. Thus, tourists from the United States of America

seem to be more exigent, and therefore there are more difficulties for them to be fully

satisfied. The accumulation of experiences of the tourists can leave memories that can

influence their probability of visiting or suggesting to other tourists the same destination.

Moreover, as suggested by Andriotis and Agiomirgianakis (2010) in the case of cruise

passengers, the likelihood to return on a land-based vacation may be higher mainly because of

the limited time spent on shore, which may increase the possibility of returning to experience

aspects of the destination that were omitted the first time.

The probability of returning or recommending the port of Cartagena de Indias was studied

elsewhere (Brida and Coletti, 2010). However, it is interesting to explore whether an

individual’s belonging to the group with a less-than-extremely satisfied degree of satisfaction

would influence the probability of return or recommendation. Two binary logistic regressions

were applied using a dummy variable representing individuals who were less than extremely

satisfied. In the first regression, the dependent variable was the probability of return, whereas

in the second regression, the dependent variable was the probability of recommending

Cartagena de Indias. In both cases, there is no significant relation between the dummy variable

and the probability of return or recommendationiii.

5. Conclusions

This study aimed to provide a better understanding of the Cartagena de Indias cruise

experience satisfaction by using a sample of 1,361 cruise passengers. The population of this

study consisted of passengers and crew older than 18 years who disembarked from arriving

cruise ships to the city of Cartagena de Indias between September 27 and November 14, 2009.

During this period, 28 cruise ships arrived at the port, with a total of 42,936 passengers. The

questionnaire was taken just minutes before the visitors returned to the cruise ship.

The results of the study suggest that although visitors had a high overall satisfaction with

the visit to Cartagena de Indias, there are two dimensions that require the attention of the

tourist policy makers and destination managers: the city infrastructure (traffic, noise,

cleanliness and infrastructure) and the general shopping experience. In particular, the worst

shopping experience seems to be related to street vendors’ attitudes. The study also shows

that tourists from the United States of America are more exigent of being fully satisfied. The

findings of our paper provide evidence of the importance of maintaining and improving service

quality and enhancing customer satisfaction. Managers and local policy makers must also

understand how to promote the destination and how to develop this segment of the tourism

market. More and more people in the world choose this relatively new type of vacation. They

have either started their first cruise journey or intend to repeat a cruise vacation. This finding

provides a good opportunity for Cartagena de Indias to attract cruisers arriving to the

destination as land tourists. Nevertheless, stakeholders have to pay attention to the special

characteristics of cruise tourism in terms of destination saturation, particularly on the

following two topics: first, avoiding the collapse of some areas mostly visited by tourists during

some periods; and second, preventing antagonism between residents and tourists, if residents’

perception of tourists evolves according to the Irridex model (Doxey, 1975).

It must be noted that the visit of cruise passengers to Cartagena de Indias is one aspect of

a larger cruise package. Therefore, it is important to satisfy the expectations of the passengers

during their visit to the city to offer both more positive experiences than other ports of call and

to maintain the destination as a cruise port of call, given that there is always the danger of

cruise lines canceling future visits to the destination if passengers are not satisfied. In the same

way, it has to be pinpointed that the cruise tourism industry is being characterized by a

growing competition among destinations, so tourists can easily choose among different

destinations.

According to the literature (see for example Andriotis and Agiomirgianakis (2010);

Gabe et al. (2006); Hosany and Witham (2010); Kozak (2001 and 2002); Li and Petrick (2010);

Petrick (2004a and 2004b); Hui et al. (2007)), a visit to a new destination can produce first-

hand experiences in the minds of tourists, influencing their probability of revisiting the same

destination. In the case of a cruise passenger, this probability could be a good opportunity for

destination managers and policy makers to show the attractions of the place to visitors who

can return to the destination. Satisfaction with the visit is directly related to the probability of

returning to the destination, and cruise passengers who have had a positive experience will

probably return as a land tourist or recommend a visit to the destination. The results show

suitable quality levels must be offered to the visitors, and manager strategies on cruise activity

at Cartagena de Indias must focus on improving the city infrastructure and the shopping

facilities to increase the satisfaction of visitors.

One important limitation of this paper is that it was only conducted in the months of

October and November. Future research can also include the repetition of the study in

different seasons and comparison with our results. The study shows that there is a good

potential for the growth of tourism activity at the destination because over 52% of the

respondents declared their intention to return to the city as land tourists, and more than 60%

will recommend the destination to their friends. Future research can include an additional

survey to determine the percentage of stay-over tourists coming to Cartagena de Indias that

had previously visited the destination as cruise ship passengers and to characterize this

population.

References

Alegre, J. and Cladera, M. (2006), “Repeat visitation in mature sun and sand holiday

destinations”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 288-97.

Alexopoulos, A.B. (2008), “Introducing system dynamics modelling into the passenger and

cruise markets focusing on the marine manpower”, International Journal of Applied Systemic

Studies, Vol.1 No. 4, pp. 436-449.

Andriotis, K. and Agiomirgianakis, G. (2010), “Cruise visitors' experience in a Mediterranean

port of call”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 390-404.

Braun, B.M., Dander, J.A. and White, K.R. (2002), “The impact of the cruise industry on a

region’s economy: a case study of Port Canaveral, Florida”, Tourism Economics, Vol. 8 No. 3,

pp. 281–288.

Brida, J.G. and Coletti, P. (2010), “Tourist’s intention of returning to a visited destination:

cruise ship passengers in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia”, Available at SSRN

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1617894 (accesed 13 December 2010).

Brida, J.G. and Zapata Aguirre, S. (2010), “Cruise Tourism: Economic, Socio-Cultural and

Environmental Impacts”, International Journal of Leisure and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 3,

pp. 205-226.

Chase, G.L. and McKee, D. L. (2003), “The Economic Impact of Cruise Tourism on Jamaica”,

Journal of Tourism Studies, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 16-22.

Clancy, M. (2008), “Cruisin' To Exclusion: Commodity Chains, the Cruise Industry, and

Development in the Caribbean”, Globalizations, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 405-418.

Cruise Lines International Association (2010). 2008 CLIA Cruise Market Overview. Statistical

Cruise Industry Data Through 2007. Available at

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/17337714/2008-CLIACruise-Market-Overview-Statistical-

Cruise-Industry-Data (accessed 15 April 2010).

Diedrich, A. (2010), “Cruise ship tourism in Belize: The implications of developing cruise ship

tourism in an ecotourism destination”, Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 53 No. 5-6, pp.

234-244.

Dowling, R.K. (2006). Cruise Ship Tourism, CABI Publishing, London.

Douglas, N., and Douglas, N. (1999), “Cruise consumer behavior: a comparative study”, in

Pizam, A., and Mansfeld, Y. (Eds), Consumer Behavior in Travel and Tourism, Haworth

Hospitality Press, New York, pp. 369-428.

Doxey, G.V. (1975), “A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants, methodology, and research

inferences”, Sixth annual conference proceedings of the Travel Research Association, San

Diego, CA: Travel and Tourism Research Association, pp. 195-198.

Duman T. and Mattila AS. (2005), “The role of affective factors on perceived cruise vacation

value”, Tourism Management, Vol. 26, pp. 311–323.

Dwyer L. and Forsyth P. (1998), “Economic significance of cruise tourism”. Annals of Tourism

Research, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 393–415.

Dwyer, L., Douglas N. and Livaic, Z. (2004), “Estimating the economic contribution of a cruise

ship visit”, Tourism in marine environments, Vol.1 No. 1, pp. 5-16.

Gabe, T., Lynch, C. and McConnon, J. (2006), “Likelihood of Cruise Ship Passenger Return to a

Visited Port: The Case of Bar Harbor, Maine”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 44 No.3, pp. 281-

287.

Gibson, P. and Bentley, M. (2006), “A study of impacts – cruise tourism and the south west of

England”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 3/4.

Henderson, S. (2009), “Cayamo - a case study of a music themed cruise”, Marketing

Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 27 No.4, pp. 549-557.

Hannarong, S., Albrecht, W. and Dawkins , R. (2006), “Relationship between cruise-ship

tourism and stay-over tourism: a case study of the shift in the Cayman Islands' tourism

strategy”, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 11, pp. 95–104.

Hosany, S. and Witham, M. (2010), “Dimensions of Cruisers’ Experiences, Satisfaction, and

Intention to Recommend”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 351-364.

Ikeda, Y. and Jaswar (2002), “A prediction method of travel demand of cruise ships in Japan”,

Journal – Kansai Society of Naval Architects Japan, Vol. 238, pp. 215–224.

Johansson, M. and Naslund, L. (2009), “Welcome to Paradise. Customer experience design and

emotional labour on a cruise ship”, International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion,

Vol. 3 No.1, pp. 40-55.

Juaneda, C. (1996), “Estimating the probability of return visits using a survey of tourist

expenditure in the Balearic Islands”, Tourism Economics, Vol. 2 No.4, pp. 339–352.

Kozak, M. (2001), “Repeaters’ behaviour at two distinct destinations”, Annals of Tourism

Research, Vol. 28 No.3, pp. 784–807.

Kozak, M. (2002), “Measuring Tourist Satisfaction with Multiple Destination Attributes”,

Tourism Analysis, Vol. 7 No. 3–4, pp. 229–40.

Kwortnik, R. J. (2006), “Carnival Cruise Lines: Burnishing the Brand”, Cornell Hotel & Restaurant

Administration Quarterly, Vol. 47, pp. 286-300.

Kwortnik, R. J. (2008), “Shipscape Influence on the Leisure Cruise Experience”, International

Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 289-311.

Lau, A.L.S. and McKercher, B. (2004), “Exploration versus acquisition: a comparison of first-

time and repeat visitors”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 279-85.

Lemmetyinen, A. and Go, F.M. (2010), “Building a brand identity in a network of Cruise Baltic's

destinations: A multi-authoring approach”, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 17 No.7,

pp. 519-531.

Li, X. and Petrick, J. (2008), “Reexamining the dimensionality of brand loyalty: The case of the

cruise industry”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 25 No.1, pp. 68-85.

Li, X. and Petrick, J.F. (2010), “Revisiting the Commitment-Loyalty Distinction in a Cruising

Context”, Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 42 No.1, pp. 67-90.

Lobo, A.C. (2009), “Enhancing Luxury Cruise Liner Operators' Competitive Advantage: A Study

Aimed at Improving Customer Loyalty and Future Patronage”, Journal of Travel & Tourism

Marketing, Vol.25 No.1, pp. 1–12.

Macpherson, C. (2008), “Golden goose or Trojan horse? Cruise ship tourism in Pacific

development”, Asia Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 49 No.2, pp. 185-197.

McBoyle, G. and McBoyle, E. (2008), “Distillery marketing and the visitor experience: a case

study of Scottish malt whisky distilleries”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 10,

pp. 71–80.

McCarthy, J. (2003), “The Cruise Industry and Port City Regeneration: The Case of Valletta”,

European Planning Studies, Vol. 11 No.3, pp. 341-350.

McKee, D.L. (1998), “Cruise tourism: Assessing its structural and environmental costs”,

Caribbean Affairs, Vol. 8 No.1, pp. 135-147.

Miller, A. R. and Grazer, W.F. (2002), “The North American Cruise Market and Australian

Tourism”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 8 No.3, pp. 221-34.

Miller, A.R. and Grazer, W.F. (2003), “Complaint Behavior as a Factor in Cruise Line Losses. An

Analysis of Brand Loyalty”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 15 No.1, pp. 77–91.

Park, S.-Y. and Petrick JF. (2009), “Examining current non-customers: A cruise vacation case”,

Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 15, pp. 275-293.

Petrick JF. (2003), “Measuring cruise passengers’ perceived value”, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 7 No.

3-4, pp. 251–258.

Petrick JF. (2004a), “The roles of quality, value, and satisfaction in predicting cruise passengers’

behavioral intentions”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 42 No.4, pp. 397–407.

Petrick JF. (2004b), “First timers’ and repeaters’ perceived value”, Journal of Travel Research,

Vol. 43, pp. 29–38.

Petrick JF. (2005), “Segmenting cruise passengers with price sensitivity”, Tourism

Management, Vol 26, pp. 753–762.

Petrick JF. and Sirakaya E. (2004), “Segmenting cruisers by loyalty”, Annals of Tourism

Research, Vol. 31 No.2, pp. 172–173.

Petrick, J. and Li, X. (2006), “What drives cruise passengers’ perceptions of value?” In R.

Dowling (eds)., Cruise Tourism: Issues, Impacts, Cases. (pp. 63-73). CABI Publishing:

Wallingford, UK.

Petrick, J.F., Tonner, C., & Quinn, C. (2006), “The utilization of critical incident technique to

examine cruise passengers’ repurchase intentions”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 44 No.3,

pp. 273-280.

Petrick, J.F., Li, X. and Park, S.Y. (2007), “Cruise Passengers' Decision-Making Processes”,

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 23, pp. 1-14.

Pratt,S. and Blake, A. (2009), “The Economic Impact of Hawaii's Cruise Industry”, Tourism

Analysis, Vol. 14 No.3, pp. 337-351.

Seidl, A., Guillano, F. and Pratt, L. (2006), “Cruise tourism and community economic

development in Central America and the Caribbean: The case of Costa Rica”. Pasos Online, Vol.

4 No. 2, pp.213–224.

Seidl, A., Guillano, F., & Pratt, L. (2007), “Cruising for colones: cruise tourism economics in

Costa Rica”, Tourism Economics, Vol. 13 No.1, pp. 67–85.

Teye, V. and Leclerc, D. (2002), “The White Caucasian and Ethnic Minority Cruise Markets:

Some Motivational Perspectives”, Tourism Management, Vol. 19 No.2, pp. 153-60.

Vogel, M.P.(2009), “The economics of US cruise companies' European brand strategies”,

Tourism Economics, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 735-751.

Weaver, A. (2005), “The McDonaldization Thesis and Cruise Tourism”, Annals of Tourism

Research, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 346-66.

Yarnal, C. M. and Kerstetter, D. (2005), “Casting Off: An Exploration of Cruise Ship Space,

Group Tour Behavior, and Social Interaction”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp.

368-79.

Yoon, Y. And Uysal, M. (2005), “An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on

destination loyalty: A structural model”, Tourism Management, Vol. 26 No.1, pp. 45–56.

i A number of statistical procedures are applied in this paper using the Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences (SPSS Inc.).

ii The statistics have a value of about 5,846, and a p-value of 0.

iii For the probability of return, the coefficient of the dummy was 0.226, with a p-value of 0.22. For the

probability of recommendation, the coefficient of the dummy was 0.09, with a p-value of 0.63.

Table 1: Cruise ship arrivals in Cartagena de Indias, 1998-2009

Year Ships Passengers Crews Year Ships Passengers Crews Year Ships Passengers Crews

1998 161 148,733 76,343 2002 71 85,880 39,299 2006 38 42,024 18,626

1999 162 178,586 86,616 2003 32 31,063 14,335 2007 76 108,892 49,775

2000 117 147,511 73,874 2004 43 38,946 18,312 2008 137 206,691 95,514

2001 127 168,855 80,391 2005 35 41,542 17,993 2009 168 270,257 120,420

Source: Sociedad Portuaria Regional de Cartagena

Table 2: Cruise ship arrivals in Cartagena de Indias in 2009: seasonal variation

Month Ships Passengers Month Ships Passengers Month Ships Passengers

January 26 37,076 May 1 1,240 September 1 1,913

February 24 40,412 June 0 0 October 19 27,838

March 23 38,363 July 0 0 November 20 32,853

April 24 42,784 August 1 1,931 December 29 45,847

Source: Sociedad Portuaria Regional de Cartagena

Table 3: Characteristics of cruise ship tourists to Cartagena de Indias

Residence (% yes): Age (% in category):

USA 56.6 >56 64.4

Europe 8.8 46-55 16.5

Canada 9.3 26-45 16.8

Venezuela 16.7 16-25 1.6

Other Latin-American countries 5 < 15 0.7

Education: Income (% in category):

Below high school 2.16 < $25,000 8.4

High school 18.07 $26,000-$50,000 14.5

College/degree 56.57 $51,000-$75,000 16.2

Postgraduate 23.20 $76,000-$100,000 10.4

First cruise (% yes) 25.1 $101,000-$150,000 8.0

First visit (% yes) 87.8 >$150,000 7.5

Marital Status (% married): 75.4 Don’t Know/No Answer 34.9

Table 4: Mean ranking of the overall responses to satisfaction statements

Extremely Extremely

Valid Dissatisfied Satisfied Mean Median

Tourist guide in your tour 1207 0.5% 0.3% 1.9% 29.8% 67.4% 4.63 5

Bus and taxi drivers 1068 0.4% 0.1% 2.9% 31.8% 64.8% 4.61 5

Level of language communication by guides and drivers

1142 0.4% 0.6% 2.8% 35.5% 60.8% 4.56 5

Historical centre 1117 0.1% 0.6% 4.8% 40.6% 53.8% 4.47 5

Transportation (buses and taxies) 1196 0.3% 1.1% 3.1% 41.8% 53.7% 4.47 5

Welcome 1246 0.2% 0.5% 3.9% 44.6% 50.7% 4.45 5

Variety of entertainment 1190 0.4% 1.3% 5.8% 46.0% 46.6% 4.37 4

Services and port infrastructure 1194 0.3% 0.8% 5.7% 49.0% 44.2% 4.36 4

Tourist information 1042 0.2% 1.5% 8.3% 44.7% 45.3% 4.33 4

Friendliness of local residents 1129 0.6% 1.1% 9.0% 44.9% 44.4% 4.31 4

Time availability to visit Cartagena de Indias

1251 0.6% 6.0% 5.3% 51.8% 36.4% 4.17 4

Cleanliness of the city 1195 1.0% 4.7% 13.7% 46.4% 34.1% 4.08 4

Attitude of local shopkeepers 1083 1.6% 4.2% 11.2% 55.0% 28.0% 4.04 4

General shopping experience 682 2.1% 4.1% 13.5% 52.6% 27.7% 4.00 4

Infrastructure 1000 0.9% 2.9% 17.7% 55.6% 22.9% 3.97 4

Goods varieties 1059 0.8% 5.0% 15.7% 56.1% 22.4% 3.94 4

Traffic and noise 1144 0.9% 5.3% 22.0% 46.0% 25.8% 3.90 4

Prices 1060 1.4% 6.8% 16.1% 56.0% 19.6% 3.86 4

Weather 1178 3.3% 9.4% 16.0% 44.7% 26.6% 3.82 4

Street sellers 1081 10.1% 17.5% 24.1% 31.4% 17.0% 3.28 3

Table 5: Variables with higher contributions to each factor. The most important variables

suggested by the factor analysis are shown in this table for each factor. Also, the percentage of

inertia shows which factors are those that mostly explain the variability of the original data.

Eigenvalue % of Variance Rotated

Factor 1 9.313 46%

Tourist guide in your tour 0.857

Bus and taxi drivers 0.857

Level of language communications by guides and drivers 0.807

Historical centre 0.749

Transport (buses and taxies) 0.899

Welcome 0.892

Variety of entertainment 0.809

Services and port Infrastructure 0.870

Tourist information 0.748

Friendliness of local residents 0.750

Time available to visit Cartagena 0.716

Factor 2 6.312 31%

Cleanliness of the city 0.747

Attitude of local shopkeepers 0.688

General shopping experience 0.630

Infrastructure 0.695

Goods variety 0.623

Traffic and noise 0.838

Prices 0.567

Weather 0.726

Street sellers 0.831

Notes: Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser

Normalization. Total percentage of explained variance 78.124%.

Table 6: Logistic regression

Dependent Probability of being less than extremely satisfied in factor 2

Coeff. p-value Coeff. p-value Coeff. p-value

Per Capita Expenditure 0.001 0.25 0.001 0.24

USA Tourist 0.40 0.05 0.32 0.09 0.31 0.10

Crew 0.32 0.68

Older than 56 -0.10 0.63

Not First Time in Cartagena -1.11 0.03 -1.11 0.03 -1.11 0.03

More than 4 Hours on Shore -0.07 0.73

Take the cruise ship to Visit Cartagena 0.39 0.19

Take the cruise ship because the itinerary -0.21 0.31

Take the cruise ship because the price 0.18 0.72

Constant -2.22 0.00 -2.31 0.00 -2.37 0.00

Cox & Snell R Square 0.011 0.008 0.006