Thailand’s Cruise Port Management in Comparison with Best Practice Ports

Main Article Content

SURAPORN MULKUNEE
Paithoon Monpanthong

Abstract

This research aimed to compare Thailand’s potential port management for cruise tourism with best practice ports, employing quantitative research methodology. The data were collected by using questionnaire from 450 cruise passengers with purposive sampling from those who visited Laem Chabang port, Phuket port, and Samui port and experienced on shore excursion. Afterwards, data were analyzed by computer program employing related statistics which were mean, standard deviations. The result revealed that overall performance of port condition was low which port security, port terminal, and port infrastructure was low. In terms of port service founded overall performance was low which timeliness of service as low and service quality of staffs, immigration formality was moderate accordingly.

Article Details

How to Cite
MULKUNEE, S., & Monpanthong, P. (2024). Thailand’s Cruise Port Management in Comparison with Best Practice Ports. Phuket Rajabhat University Academic Journal, 20(1), 120–148. retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/pkrujo/article/view/263735
Section
Research article

References

Andriotis, K., & Agiomirgianakis, G. (2010). Cruise visitors' experience in a Mediterranean port of call. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(4), 390-404.

Chua, B. L., Lee, S., & Han, H. (2017). Consequences of cruise line involvement: A comparison of first-time and repeat passengers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(6), 1658-1683.

CLIA. (2016). Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) 2013 North America Cruise Industry Update. Report.

CLIA. (2020). The Economic Contribution of the International Cruise Industry Globally in 2019.

Douglas, N., & Douglas, N. (2004). Cruise ship passenger spending patterns in Pacific island ports. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(4), 251-261.

European Commission. (2009). Tourist Facilities in Ports: The Economic Factor. Policy Research Corporation; p.1-65. CLIA. (2013).

Gibson, P. (2006). Cruise Operations Management. The Management of Hospitality and Tourism. Oxford: Elsevier.

Jordan, L. A. (2013). A critical assessment of Trinidad and Tobago as a cruise homeport: doorway to the South American cruise market?. Maritime Policy & Management, 40(4), 367-383.

Lekakou, M.B, Palli, A.A. and Vaggelas, K. G. (2009). Is this a home-port? An analysis of Cruise’s industry’s selection criteria. Department of Shipping Transport & Trade, University of Aegean, Greece, p.1-18.

Monpanthong, P. (2018). Efficiency of cruise port management: A comparison of

Pallis, A. A., Vitsounis, T. K., De Langen, P. W., & Notteboom, T. E. (2011). Port Economics, Policy and Management Content Classification and Survey. Transport Reviews, 31(4), 445-471.

Phuket and Singapore. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 26(4).

Ramkissoon, H., & Nunkoo, R. (2011). City Image and Perceived Tourism Impact: Evidence from Port Louis, Mauritius. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 12(2), 123-143.

Satta, G., Parola, F., Penco, L., & Persico, L. (2015). Word of mouth and satisfaction in cruise port destinations. Tourism Geographies, 17(1), 54-75.

Singapore, M. B. C. C. (2015). Marina Bay Cruise Centre Singapore Celebrates Fifth Anniversary. Retrieved from www.seatrade-cruise.com

Thurau, B., Seekamp, E., Carver, A. D., & Lee, J. G. (2015). Should Cruise Ports Market Ecotourism? A Comparative Analysis of Passenger Spending Expectations within the Panama Canal Watershed. International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(1), 45-53.

UNWTO. (2016). Sustainable Cruise Tourism Development Strategies - Tackling the Challenges in Itinerary Design in South-East Asia. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.