外文翻译--旅游目的地品牌标识：以斯洛文尼亚为例.doc

本 科 生 毕 业 论 文外 文 资 料 翻 译 专 业 XXXXXX 班 级 XXX班 姓 名 XXXXXX 指导教师 XXXX（讲师） 所在学院 XXXXXXXXXXX 附 件1.外文资料翻译译文;2.外文原文 译文一：旅游目的地品牌标识：以斯洛文尼亚为例关键词：品牌标识；品牌；概念；斯洛文尼亚；旅游目的地；品牌认知摘要：本文从供应方角度探讨旅游目的地品牌标识的概念，对比研究，此研究侧重于需求驱动的、游客感知的旅游目的地品牌标识。研究人员和从业人员从标识和形象感知两个视角得出一个结论，在适当的地方，品牌概念分析是必不可少的而且应该是交织在一起的。但是，这项研究认为旅游目的地品牌的调查主要是从形象感知视角。因此，研究提供的从供方视角深入了解的缺乏可能导致对旅游目的地品牌的可能性和局限性有不平衡的看法，甚至误解和疏忽。本文介绍了一个理论框架，它的目的是分析旅游目的地标识，特别是对斯洛文尼亚的实证研究。简介不像许多科学的贡献涵盖产品主题品牌（和很少的服务和企业品牌），旅游目的地品牌线的研究仅仅才处于起步阶段。尽管早些时候对旅游目的地环境传递品牌理念存有怀疑，但这一概念无疑引起了旅游目的地的研究人员和从业人员的兴趣。虽然目的地品牌似乎是一个最新的研究领域，但在目的地标识研究的替代标签下，部分主题已被覆盖，并且调查期超过30年是一个问题。然而， 里奇和里奇指出，在旅游目的地的背景下，利用品牌理论发展一个连贯的和普遍接受的框架是必不可少的。虽然一个旅游目的地可以被品牌化，但对旅游目的地环境的品牌原则转让有很大的忧虑。因为它的应用没有敏感的包容和考虑公共空间的意义，这可能导致变为商业取向，它运行具有破坏标识特征的风险，如社会关系、历史、地理和通过扩展可能破坏一个地区的地方特色。反之，在全球化背景下，对创造和维持一个独特的竞争优势来说，地方的标识会作出重要贡献。在全球和各级地方， “不同寻常”的历史自然文化概念认识的提高与标识形成的过程有关，那正是游客所要寻找的。因此，开发一个旅游目的地品牌应坚持一个连贯的理论框架并且利益相关者应该共同支持它，这是至关重要的。至今，从需求方的角度，绝大部分的旅游目的地已被研究讨论、审查了品牌概念。这引起了许多以一个消费者形象感知的方法探讨旅游目的地的研究。例如，安霍尔特的国家品牌指数是一个很好的例子。这是第一个世界目的地品牌排名的分析，并自称代表目的地的人的总认知已经波及国家能力的六个领域，包括旅游，并代表对目的地品牌评价的不同观点。与此相反，旅游目的地品牌引起了人们兴趣，一些年前，供方、业主/管理视角是本研究的核心。根据许多调查员的结论，我们的做法可能是不当的，即品牌的概念应该从供给和需求两方面加以分析。德切纳东尼甚至还说，现代品牌分析应把品牌理念和品牌标识概念的本质看作是交织在一起的。这有几个使供给的研究角度与旅游目的地品牌标识有关的理由。首先，从一个利益相关者包容性的角度决策来说，考虑潜在影响和向舆论引导者反应目的地品牌标识战略和增加东道国人口，显得越来越重要。其次，在全球化时代，人们种对主题的标识产生了新兴趣，不是作为一种替代以片面的，需求为导向的角度研究旅游目的地品牌标识的观点。第三，由于学科界限模糊，包括社会、文化、历史和自然科学，这就要求不断增长关于地方标识和知识缺乏的理论观点，特别是在较小的国家。在我们的研究中，一个很好的例子是在2004加入欧洲联盟（欧盟）斯洛文尼亚。随着欧盟的扩大，双方的联盟和其个别成员国需要定义自己的标识。斯洛文尼亚，一位欧洲最小的成员国之一，在本研究中，目前面临奋斗的双重挑战是审查，既要保持地方特色，扎根于民族标识，又要合法关注有关可能无可挽回地削弱其文化遗产的外来影响。特别是，为审查旅游目的地标识的概念和应用研究结果来应对斯洛文尼亚如何能发展其旅游目的地品牌标识问题，本研究采用了一种理论框架，从而在连续性的力量和变化之间找到一种平衡。品牌标识最近，很多注意力投入到了品牌标识的商业概念和文献管理之中。虽然各个作者已不能接受一个共同的定义，他们有一个共同的看法，即从供方角度品牌标识的发展是一个理论概念最好的理解。卡普费雷（p . 71）提供了一个非常简单的、明确的解释以了解品牌的标识，对品牌概念强调供方角度的意义：“在我们懂得如何理解之前，我们必须知道我们是谁”。根据他的解释，旅游目的地应该定义其品牌和内容，而不是消费者。旅游目的地是一个复杂的概念，它是基于各种不同的产品，服务和经验；由不同的利益相关者（旅游产业部门，公共部门，政府，目的地管理组织，当地人）与各种所有制形式所管理，往往没有一套恰当等级制度的规则为利益相关者所遵循。在这样的背景下，品牌标识可以作为一个网络图绘，依次演示历史、民族和文化的关系来开发一个共同的看法，这成为共同行动/或反对改变的基础。作为供应方的概念涉及企业所有者和旅游管理者的决策权力，标识的作用则为以前的定义打下基础。此外，一些定义确定标识的作用具有双重目的在分析品牌上从内部一方面，和另一方面随后计算品牌资产包括对特定品牌消费者价值累积的总和以及他们的信心和对品牌的忠诚度。品牌标识概念的多重角色在调查中反映出来。例如，科普菲尔例如，科普菲尔介绍的称为品牌标识棱镜的六边形模型。它是基于六个核心组成部分：体质，性格，文化，关系，反射或形象和自我形象。后来，德切纳东尼的模型适应于卡普费雷的品牌标识棱镜。前者观念的品牌标识就其视觉和文化而言，相应地驱动所需的定位、个性和随后的关系，所有这些都是后来代表反映利益相关者的实际和理想的自我形象的。在我们看来，艾克和约阿希姆斯塔勒的品牌领导模式文献中的三个理由是到目前为止最突出的一个。第一，该模型是系统的。在品牌标识的发展中发挥作用的众多的组成部分和理论的品牌可以很容易压倒一切。因此，有需要提供指导使决策者利用三相结构审查问题：战略进程的分析；旅游目的地品牌标识系统分析和品牌标识实施过程。其次，该模型是综合，即，其品牌领导力模型突出的主题在其广度。该模型包括战略和富有远见的管理者的角色而不是限制讨论他们的战术和反应的作用。它的重点问题是在战略品牌控制上，即，列出什么品牌就应该站在有关的利益相关者的角度，包括客户和随后沟通所需要的企业形象是一致的，有效的。最后，该模型是务实的，因为它认为决策者应参与制定和实施企业战略。既有战略眼光的决策者和他们的企业文化对目的地的品牌战略应该有重大影响。在实践中，这意味着一个目的地品牌标识战略不应该允诺目的不能或不愿意提供的东西。译文二：具有竞争力的靠近家乡的旅游目的地的目标品牌定位摘要：虽然品牌学在20世纪40年代就已经兴起，第一个与目的地品牌相关的出版物却直到半个世纪后才出现。对102个作者关于74个目的地品牌出版物的回顾发现（1998-2007），至少有9个研究方面存在不足和缺陷，值得引起研究人员的重视。尤其是，缺乏对检验品牌定位在何种程度上提高了品牌标识价值的研究。本文的目的是报告澳大利亚昆士兰2003年至2007年跟踪调查的品牌资产调查结果。基于消费的品牌资产分级研究提供了有效的监测目的地品牌随着时间推移的变化。调查结果中的一个关键意义发现过去4年的时间里5个目的地品牌没有发生任何的变化。这个结果证明在竞争市场中目的地地位变化只会在一个很长的时间里慢慢变化。表格中的74个目的地品牌的案例研究，研究论文，概念文件和网页内容的分析，为学生和研究人员在当前领域内提供了有效的资源。 关键词：目的地品牌;消费者的品牌资产;短休息;目的地形象;目标定位导言 自从品牌学开始于1940年（参照盖斯特，1942），人们一致认识到品牌化提供给充满同质化产品的组织企业们以不同的手段去区分其产品（艾克，1991 ，加德纳和利维， 1955，凯勒，2003 和科特勒等人，2007）。对于目的地来说，旅游供应市场的竞争正在变得越来越激烈，产品类似度惊人，而行之有效的市场区分使产品变得可替代。（派克，2005年）例如，约70%的国际旅游者仅仅访问10个国家，使剩余的国家旅游办事处（NTOS）争夺30%的国际游客总数。（摩根，普里查德，与自豪，2002年）追求分化是品牌明确的定义，这里最常见的变化是艾克提出的（1991，第7页）：品牌是一个区分的名称和/或符号（如标志、商标或包装设计）旨在确定的商品或服务的任何一个卖方或一群卖主，并从这些竞争对手中区分这些物品。然而，在前言的第一个问题的地方品牌和公共政策，编辑西蒙安霍尔特（2004年，第4页）建议“几乎没有人同意，究竟是什么造成品牌的意思是”在描述的地方品牌做法类似于狂野的西部。一直缺乏连贯性，确定什么构成目的地的品牌，不仅在行业内和学术界（见布莱恩等人，2005，帕克和派崔克，2006和塔什哲和科扎克，2006 ）。迄今为止最全面的定义是由布莱恩等人提出。（2005年，第337页），而贝松 、赫伯特和皮特（1999）品牌功能的模型从买方和卖方的观点是这样表述的：目的地品牌的一系列营销活动包括：（1）支持建立一个名称，符号，标志，文字标记或其他图形，便于识别和区分的目的地;（2）不停传达一种和目的地相关的难忘的旅游经历的期望；（3）有利于巩固和加强游客和目的地之间的情感联系；（4）减少消费者的搜寻成本和感知风险。总的来说，这些活动有助于建立一个目的地形象，积极的影响消费目的地的选择。品牌话因此被认为可以为供求双方同时带来好处。提高品牌的区分度可以有效的形成产品的优势，例如，如增加购买意向（柯布瓦尔格伦，比尔和敦修，1995年），降低成本（凯勒，1993年），增加销售，价格优惠，提高客户忠诚度（艾克，1991和艾克，1996）。旅游目的地营销机构的优势（DMO）包括增加分化对地方提供类似的福利的潜力，增加目的地的忠诚度和增加利益相关者的产量，如当地旅游企业和旅游中介机构。其优势包括便于决策通过降低搜寻成本，减少风险，并有可能增强炫耀的价值。 大多数研究报告的重点与目的地品牌特征和应用相关见例如，（克罗克特和伍德，1999，豪尔，1999 ，2001年05月和摩根等，2002）。一个需要越来越多注重的区域是跟踪记录品牌随着时间推移的提高程度。也就是说，品牌标识在何种程度上目的地品牌的定位和重新定位的广告系列已有效地提高品牌资产相一致。这在旅游学里是一个重要的差别，原因是：1.日益激烈的竞争（见摩根普里查德和皮哥特，2002年）2.旅游目的地营销机构（DMO）从上世纪90年代以来越来越高的投资水平3.复杂的政治性质，DMO的品牌决策和加强问责制，以利益相关者（见派克，2005年）4. 长期性的重新定位的目的地的形象在市场上（见加特纳与亨特，1987年）。一般情况下，一些研究人员在世界各地都指出，目的地营销目标缺乏市场调研监测效力，如在澳大利亚（见卡森等人，2003和普罗塞尔等，2000），北美洲（马斯博格，1999年和希恩和里奇，1997）和欧洲（多尼卡斯赛瑟，2003年）。 本研究的目的是跟踪2003年至2007年之间近距离目的地品牌定位问题。为达到这一目的，要运用到以效能等级分级的消费为基础的品牌资产（CBBE）测试。CBBE首先倡导的（艾克，1991年）和（艾克，1996年）和最近的（凯勒，1993年）和（凯勒，2003年），以补充传统的资产负债表的品牌资产的措施。以目的地市场营销的概念，CBBE是值得考虑的目的地管理组织。然而，潜在的CBBE目的地最近才引起注意的学术研究（见高耐尼克，加特纳，2007和布，巴塞，巴洛格2009）。 文献综述在营销学文献中，第一篇关于品牌化的文章出现在20世纪40年代（例如见客，1942）。第二十世纪下半叶，学者们对品牌化这一研究领域的兴趣明显地高速增长，当时估计有789位作者发表了 766 篇主要的学术文章（帕帕多波洛斯，2002和安霍尔特，2002）。第一篇真正关注旅游目的地品牌化的学术文章是1998年多森（Dosen）、 弗兰赛维克（Vransevic）和普雷贝扎克（Prebezac）对克罗地亚品牌的适度性分析。同年，普里查德和摩根发表了第一篇旅游目的地品牌案例研究文章，探讨了威尔士的品牌战略发展。外文资料一：译文题目：旅游目的地品牌标识：以斯洛文尼亚为例原稿题目：Tourism destination brand identity:The case of Slovenia原稿出处：Journal of Brand Management，2008，Vol. 15 Issue 3， p177-189Tourism destination brand identity:The case of SloveniaKeywords: brand identity ; brand ;concept ; Slovenia ;tourism destination ;branding ; perceptionAbstract：This paper explores the concept of tourism destination brand identity from the supply-side perspective，in contrast to those studies that have focused on the demand-driven， tourists perceived tourism destination brand image. Both researchers and practitioners have concluded that an analysis of the branding concept from both the identity and perceived-image perspective is essential and should be intertwined， where appropriate. This study，however， argues that investigations of tourism destination branding have primarily been conducted from a perceived-image perspective.Therefore，the dearth of studies offering an insight into the supply-side perspective may lead to an unbalanced view，misunderstandings and oversights concerning the possibilities and limitations of tourism destination branding.It introduces a theoretical framework designed to analyse tourism destination identity，particularly for the case study of Slovenia.Introduction Unlike the many scientific contributions covering the theme of product brands (and rarely service and corporate brands)，the research line of tourism destination brands is merely in its infancy Despite earlier scepticism about transferring the brand concept to the tourism destination context， that concept has definitely attracted the interest of tourism destination researchers and practitioners of late. Although destination branding appears to be one of the newest research areas，the topic has been partly covered under the alternative label of destination image studies， which has been a subject of investigation for more than 30 years. Ritchie and Ritchie，however， stated that the development of a coherent and commonly accepted framework is essential for using branding theory in a tourism destination context.Although a tourism destination can be branded，considerable care should be taken in the transfer of branding principles to a tourism destination context. Because its application without sensitive inclusion and consideration of the significance of public space may result in a commercial orientation，which runs the risk of spoiling the identity characteristics such as social relationships，history and geography and by extension may destroy an area s sense of place. In turn， within a global context place identity can contribute importantly，to the creation and sustenance of a distinctive competitive edge. Raising awareness of the historical nature of the concept of culture in relation to the extraordinary ，that tourists are in a search for， is relevant in the processes of identity formation at both global and local levels. Therefore，it is essential that the development of a tourism destination brand should adhere to a coherent theoretical framework and be jointly supported by its stakeholders.The vast majority of tourism destination studies to date have addressed and examined the brand concept primarily from a demand-side perspective. This has resulted in numerous studies that examine tourism destinations from a consumer-perceived-image approach. For instance，the Anholt Nation Brands Index is a case in point. It is the first analytical ranking of the world s destination brands，and purports to represent the sum of people s perception of destinations across six areas of national competences， including tourism，and represent various perspectives on destination brand evaluation. In contrast，a supply-side，owner / managerial perspective on tourism destination branding that attracted interest only some years ago is at the core of the present study. Our approach may appear to be awkward in light of the conclusion of many an investigator， namely that the branding concept should be analysed from both the demand and supply perspectives. De Chernatony even goes on to say， that modern brand analysis should treat both the brand identity concept and brand image concept as intrinsically intertwined. There are several justifications that render a supply-side research perspective on destination brand identity relevant. First， from a viewpoint of stakeholders inclusive decision making it is becoming increasingly important to consider the potential effects and reactions to a destination brand identity strategy on leading opinion makers and，by extension，a host population at large. Secondly， in the era of globalization there is a renewed interest in the theme of identity，not in the least as an alternative viewpoint to the one-sided，demand-driven perspective on a tourism destination brands image. Thirdly，as a consequence of blurring of disciplinary boundaries， including the social-，cultural-，historical-and natural sciences，there is a rising demand for theoretical perspectives on the subject of place identity and a dearth of such knowledge， particularly among in the smaller nations. A case in point is Slovenia，the context of our study， which joined the European Union (EU) in May 2004. With the expansion of the EU，both the Union and its individual member states need to define their identity. Slovenia，one of the EUs smallest members， presently struggling with the dual challenge of maintaining a sense of place， grounded in national identity，and the legitimate concerns raised about foreign influences that may irrevocably erode its cultural heritage is examined in this study. Particularly，the present study applies a theoretical framework to examine the concept of tourism destinations identity and to apply the studys findings to respond to the issue how Slovenia might develop its tourism destination brand identity so as to find a balance between the forces of continuity and change.Brand IdentityRecently，much attention has been devoted in the business and management literature to the concept of brand identity. Although various authors have been unable to accept a common definition they do share a common opinion，namely that brand identity development is a theoretical concept best understood from the supply-side perspective. Kapferer(p.71) provides a very simple and clear explanation to gain an understanding of brand identity that underscores the significance of the supply-side perspective on the brand concept: before knowing how we are perceived，we must know who we are . According to his explanation，the tourist destination， rather than the consumer， should define both its brand and content. A tourist destination is a complex concept，which is based on a myriad of different products，services and experiences; managed by different stakeholders (tourism industry sector，public sector，government， destination management organisation，locals) with a variety of ownership forms and often without an appropriate hierarchy with a set of rules for stakeholders to adhere to. Within such context，a brand identity can serve as a network picture，which draws，in turn on historical，national and cultural relationships to develop a common view，which becomes the basis for joint action for / or against change. The role of identity as a supply-side concept involving the decision-making powers of business owners and tourism managers is underpinned by previous definitions.Further，some definitions identify the role of identity as having a dual purpose in analysing brands from the inside on the one hand，and on the other to subsequently calculate the brand equity that involves the accumulated sum of the value consumers attach to particular brands，as well as their confidence in and loyalty to a brand.The multiple roles of the brand identity concept are reflected in investigations. For example， Kapferer introduced a hexagonal model called the brand identity prism. It is based on six central components: physique，personality，culture，relationship，reflection or image and self-image. Later，de Chernatony s model adapted Kapferer s brand identity prism.The former conceptualises brand identity in terms of its vision and culture，which，in turn，drive its desired positioning，personality and subsequent relationships，all of which are later presented to reflect the stakeholders actual and aspirational self-images.In our opinion，Aaker and Joachimsthaler s brand leadership model is so far the most salient one in the literature for three reasons. First，the model is systematic. Branding can easily become overwhelming in the multitude of components and theories that play a role in brand identity development. Therefore，there is a need to provide guidelines enabling decision makers to examine issues utilising a three-phased structure: a pre-analysis of strategic processes; a tourism destination brand identity system analysis and a post-brand implementation process. Secondly，the model is comprehensive，that is，its brand leadership model underscores the subject in its breadth. The model covers both the strategic and visionary roles of managers rather than limiting the discussion to their tactical and reactive roles. It focuses on the issue of strategic brand control，that is，setting out what a brand should stand for from the perspective of relevant stakeholders，including customers and subsequently， communicating the desired corporate identity consistently，efficiently and effectively. Thirdly， the model is pragmatic because it recognises that decision makers should be involved in both formulating and implementing the business strategy. Both the strategic vision of the decision makers and their corporate culture should have a significant influence on the destination s brand strategy. In practical terms，it implies that a destination brand identity strategy should not promise what a destination cannot or will not deliver.外文资料二：译文题目：具有竞争力的靠近家乡的旅游目的地的目标品牌定位原稿题目：Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations原稿出处：Tourism Management，2009，Vol. 30 Issue 6：857866Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinationsAbstract：Although the branding literature commenced during the 1940s， the first publications related to destination branding did not emerge until half a century later. A review of 74 destination branding publications by 102 authors from the first 10 years of destination branding literature (19982007) found at least nine potential research gaps warranting attention by researchers. In particular， there has been a lack of research examining the extent to which brand positioning campaigns have been successful in enhancing brand equity in the manner intended in the brand identity. The purpose of this paper is to report the results of an investigation of brand equity tracking for a competitive set of destinations in Queensland， Australia between 2003 and 2007. A hierarchy of consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) provided an effective means to monitor destination brand positions over time. A key implication of the results was the finding that there was no change in brand positions for any of the five destinations over the four year period. This leads to the proposition that destination position change within a competitive set will only occur slowly over a long period of time. The tabulation of 74 destination branding case studies， research papers， conceptual papers and web content analyses provides students and researchers with a useful resource on the current state of the field. Keywords: Destination branding; Consumer-based brand equity; Short breaks; Destination image; Destination positioningIntroduction Ever since the brand literature commenced in the 1940s (see for example Guest，1942)， there has been consistent recognition that branding offers organisations a means for differentiation in markets crowded with similar offerings (Gardner & Levy 1955，Aaker 1991， Keller 2003， Kotler et al 2007). For destinations， effective differentiation is critical given the increasingly competitive nature of tourism markets， where many places offering similar features are becoming substitutable (Pike，2005). For example， around 70% of international travellers visit only 10 countries， leaving the remainder of national tourism offices (NTOs) competing for 30% of total international arrivals (Morgan，Pritchard，& Pride，2002). The pursuit of differentiation is explicit in brand definitions， which have most commonly been variations of that proposed by Aaker (1991，p.7): A brand is a distinguishing name and/or symbol (such as a logo，trademark，or package design) intended to identify the goods or services of either one seller or a group of sellers，and to differentiate t