DETERMINING THE MODEL OF TOURISM BUSINESS DISTRICT (TBD) IN COASTAL RESORTS: A CASE STUDY OF TURKEY

ABSTRACT

Coastal resorts, whose dominant economic activities are those of providing an array of recreational services to tourists, reflect this specialization in their land-use patterns. Therefore, the business districts in coastal resorts have a unique morphology, landscape, and land use. However, the literature reflects that there is limited attention to the tourism business districts (TBDs) that have developed in coastal resorts. Moreover, few empirical studies have been conducted in developing countries, such as Thailand, China, and Turkey, as well as developed ones such as United States, Canada, and Italy. This study discusses the TBDs located in Turkey’s coastal resorts in terms of location, form, and function. The findings are presented statistically, and detailed maps are presented to explain the TBDs from a geographical and practical perspective. In this study, ArcGIS 10.5 software has been used to perform spatial analysis of the data. The main findings include that Turkish TBDs have similar characteristics in terms of location, form, and function compared to other coastal resorts worldwide. Therefore, it is possible to say that these similar features constitute a model in terms of land use. In addition, the statistical findings of the study are largely similar to those found in the literature.

Keywords::

• coastal resorts
• GIS
• land use
• tourism business district
• Turkey

The increasing demand for beach holidays has brought the emergence of a number of coastal resorts, and the planning of many new ones, worldwide. In response, several descriptions of the pattern of physical morphology of coastal resorts are available (Barrett 1958; Stansfield and Rickert 1970; Lavery 1971; Smith 1992; Weaver 1993; Andriotis 2003). Most of these descriptions are focused on the existence of such elements as promenades, central business districts (CBDs), tourism business districts (TBDs), recreational business districts (RBDs), zoning patterns of development, and the patterns of streets in relation to transport opportunities (Andriotis 2006). TBDs are examined as a specific research topic among these areas.

Although tourism-oriented business areas were investigated with different approaches, such as recreational retail district (Stansfield 1969), central tourist districts (Burtenshaw et al. 1991), leisure business districts (Maguire 1995), and RBDs (Stansfield and Rickert 1970) in different academic studies, it can be said that similar characteristics were determined in these areas, especially in terms of location, form, and function. Therefore, these common features emerged as a reality in coastal resorts. However, it is possible to say that the number of studies drawing attention to this topic is limited. Through a literature review, only few empirical studies were found having been conducted in developing countries such as Thailand, China, and Turkey, as well as developed ones such as the United States, Canada, and Italy. Likewise, little has been written about TBDs. This negligence of past research is suprising if somebody considers the strikingly effects of coastal areas’ TBDs. The current study, which deals with the TBDs of Turkish coastal resorts, was conducted taking under consideration all the aforementioned gaps in the literature.

Although Turkey is a peninsula country surrounded by seas on three sides and has world-renowned tourism centers, it is only very recent that TBDs have been the subject of academic interest in the country. Among the limited research, Akengin and Dinç (2020) examined the coastal resorts of Alanya and Manavgat on the Mediterranean coast and compared the CBD and RBD in these areas. Işık and Usun (2022), on the other hand, examined the TBD of Kusadasi’s coastal resort, located on the Aegean coast, in terms of location, form, and functional characteristics. In addition to these two studies, it is expected that the current study will contribute to the relevant literature.

This article discussed the TBDs of Turkish coastal resorts in terms of location, form, and function. The spatiality of TBDs was the focus of the study. The main research questions of the study include how is the situation in TBDs, which have emerged in Turkey, compare to other developed and developing countries where tourism is an important source of foreign income sources? Do business districts in the coastal resorts of Turkey reflect the characteristics of TBDs? Is it possible to identify a model specific to Turkey?

Regarding the TBDs, it is difficult to know which data to collect, how to analyze them, and how to do spatial data analysis at microscale. Only a few past studies have explored their morphology and instead most attempted to classify and map the business districts in these areas according to their functions. For this reason, it is noteworthy that this paper discusses only some relevant aspects of the TBDs of coastal resorts. In particular, the location, form, and functional characteristics of these areas constitute the focus of this study.

Literature Review

Studies on the morphology and land use of coastal resorts have been published for several decades. A pioneering study on the subject was conducted by Gilbert (1939) more than 80 years ago. Following Gilbert, Wolfe (1952) studied Wasaga Beach in Ontario, and Barret (1958) coastal resorts in England and Wales. Barret (1958), in his PhD thesis, proposed one of the first conceptual morphological models of recreational land-use zonation of coastal resorts. Stansfield (1969) investigated recreational land-use patterns within an American seaside resort. Lavery (1971) studied the urban morphology of a typical British seaside resort and compared RBD and CBD. He identified land use of that resort which is composed of a beach, hotel zone, boarding houses, and residential areas.

In the early 1980s, Butler (1980) proposed a model for the development of coastal tourism resorts. When the tourism area life-cycle model is evaluated in terms of TBDs, it is noteworthy that important determinations were made by Butler (1980) about the formation and development of these areas. According to Butler (1980), during the exploration stage, there are no specific facilities on offer to visitors; at the involvement stage facilities start to be constructed and basic initial market area for visitors can be anticipated; the development stage reflects well-defined tourist market areas; and finally, at the consolidation stage, coastal resorts have well-defined RBDs. Thus, Butler detailed the evolution of RBDs/TBDs in parallel with the evolution of coastal resorts.

Smith (1992) divided the development phase of coastal resorts into eight phases and made suggestions for planning. He stated that the coastal resort was transformed to a city in phase eight of the development phases and there is a clear separation of RBD and CBD. Meyer-Arendt (1993) divided the morphologic pattern of resort evolution in the Gulf of Mexico into four phases, including exploration, infrastructural development, settlement expansion, and intensification. He started with the development of RBD from the infrastructural-development phase. In the same year, Weaver (1993) divided the land-use model in the Caribbean Islands into five categories: specialized tourist zone, CBD, local neighborhoods, resort strips, and rural areas. Andriotis (2003, 2009) analyzed coastal resort morphology based on the Cretan experience and divided land use into three zones: high-density tourism zone, lower density tourism zone, and rural areas. Several other studies conducted by Andriotis (2001, 2005, 2006) examined the trends of land-use elements in the stages of exploration, involvement, consolidation, and stagnation of the resort-cycle evolution.

All models on coastal resorts land use have revealed that coastal areas adjacent to tourist attractions are high-density tourism zones. These zones generally correspond to the business districts of coastal resorts. Contrary to the coastal resort morphological studies, the number of academic studies having examined tourism-oriented business districts in terms of form and especially function is quite limited. Pioneering studies on this subject include Stansfield (1969), who explained the features that distinguish tourism-related business districts from other business areas. Stansfield and Rickert (1970) stated that seasonal businesses such as hotels, food and beverage facilities (restaurants, cafes, bars, pubs), souvenirs, clothing shops, and jewelers that provide services to tourists in coastal resorts are usually gathered linearly. They also distinguished RBD from other business districts.

The term RBD, which was suggested by Stansfield and Rickert (1970), has been extensively used in the literature (Taylor 1975; Pigram 1977; Meyer-Arendt 1987, 1990, 1993; Smith 1992; Weaver 1993; Brent 1997; Bao and Gu 1998; Andriotis, 2003; Li and Tao 2003; Boniface and Cooper 2005; Battino et al. 2014; 2015; Liu 2014; Zhu et al. 2015, 2017). However, several authors used different terms to conceptualize the tourist and visitor-oriented business districts. Honky-tonk (Wolfe 1952), tourist-based business district (Stansfield 1969), recreational retail district (Stansfield 1969, 131), central tourist district (Burtenshaw et al. 1991), TBD (Getz 1993; Yi and Xiao 2018), leisure business district (Maguire 1995), and central tourist district (Zhu et al. 2015) are some of these terms. The common point of these landscapes is that they express business areas that are completely aimed at visitors and focused on pleasure entertainment/pleasure consumption. These characteristic features distinguish tourism-related business areas from other business areas that are focused on production trade. In this study, the expression TBD is preferred. While RBD includes urban tourism as well as tourism urbanization, TBD specifically evokes coastal resorts. RBD can include the residential population as well as tourists, while TBD is aimed to focus only on tourists.

The first empirical examples of a limited number of studies on TBDs in the literature were made by Stansfield (1969) in Ocean City (United States). One year later, Stansfield and Rickert (1970) studied Ocean City, Wildwood, and Niagara Falls. In these studies, the locations and forms of RBDs/TBDs were emphasized and the shops in these areas were classified according to their functions. Niagara Falls was studied by Getz (1993), who unlike Stansfield, proposed the concept of TBD to express tourism-related business districts. Taylor (1975), in his study in East London Seaside (South Africa), classified RBDs according to their functions and stated that at least 50 percent of the shops in these areas should consist of businesses that provide services to tourists. Meyer-Arendt (1990) studied seasides along the Gulf of Mexico, and Pearce (2001) studied the city of Christchurch (New Zealand). In recent years, academic studies on TBDs have been intensifying in developing countries such as China, Thailand, and Turkey (Cohen 1995; Li and Tao 2003; Liu 2014; Zhu et al. 2015, 2017; Akengin and Dinç 2020; Işık and Usun 2022; Usun 2022). Investigation of TBDs in developing, as well as developed countries, is important in determining whether there is consistency between the findings of studies on this subject. (Table 1).

Table 1 Key Works on Tourism Business District

Study Area	Country	References
Ocean City	USA	Stansfield 1969
Ocean City, Wildwood, Niagara Falls	USA/Canada	Stansfield and Rickert 1970
East London Seaside	South Africa	Taylor 1975
Gulf of Mexico Seaside	Gulf of Mexico	Meyer-Arendt 1990
Niagara Falls	USA/Canada	Getz 1993
Hang Dong, Sankampaeng	Thailand	Cohen 1995
Christchurch	New Zealand	Pearce 2001
Suzhou	China	Li and Tao 2003
Sassari	Italy	Battino et al. 2014
Guangzhou	China	Liu 2014
Beijing	China	Zhu et al. 2015
Quianmen	China	Zhu et al. 2017
Alanya and Manavgat	Turkey	Akengin and Dinç 2020
Kuşadası	Turkey	Işık and Usun 2022

Tourism in Turkey

The tourism industry of Turkey started to develop in a planned fashion since the 1960s (Bozok and Şahin 2013, 260). Putting into effect the Tourism Facilities Regulation in Turkey in 1965, the foundation of the Association of Turkish Travel Agencies in 1972, and offering of credit opportunities to develop hostels in the same year, make up the main developments in the tourism sector (Yağcı 2003, 203). In the 1970s, Kuşadası was declared a first-degree tourist center and tourist pilot region (Emekli 2001). Toward the end of the 1970s, the Southern Antalya Tourism Development Project was carried out to create a bed capacity that could respond to mass tourism in the short term in an area of 80 km in the southwest of Antalya (Kemer). Similarly, the East Antalya Tourism Development Project was initiated in the eastern part of the city of Antalya (Side) (Doğanay and Zaman 2013). In the early 1980s, importance was given to the development of cruise tourism and the extension of yachting (Bozok and Şahin 2013). In 1983, tourism centers on the coastline between Çanakkale and Mersin were identified, and the public lands there were assigned to investors through leasing (Akış-Roney 2011). In 1992, the Mediterranean-Aegean Tourism Infrastructure and Coastal Management Law came into effect. In 2005, Didim was declared a cultural and tourism protection and development zone.

As a result of the neoliberal policies adopted in Turkey, especially since the 1980s, tourism has become one of the leading sectors offered to the foreign market. Along with policies and tourism incentive laws, infrastructure and superstructure have been developed in the south and west coasts appropriate for 3S (sea-sand-sun) tourism (Bozok 1996, 68). Especially along the coastal areas of Turkey, these tourism investments have accelerated the urbanization processes of the settlements, as well as the administrative centers that have preserved their rural structure. Çeşme, Kuşadası, Didim, Bodrum, Marmaris, Fethiye, Kemer, Antalya, Side (Manavgat), and Alanya were urbanized as settlements opened to coastal tourism (Doğaner 2001, 25).

The tourism sector has affected the demographic characteristics, spatial development, morphological structures and urban land uses of these cities in many different ways (Akengin and Dinç 2020). This effect showed itself with the rapid increases in population and employment in the 1980–1990 period, when tourism investments and incentives were at the highest level. In the specified period, population growth rates in the cities mentioned varied between 59 percent and 164 percent. However, Turkey’s population growth rate has never exceeded 29 percent in any census period. In addition to the population data, the changes in the labor force data of the Turkish Statistical Institute for the years 1985 and 2000 also point to the tourism urbanization process. During this period, the labor force growth rate varied between 85 percent and 440 percent. Located on the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts and developed with a focus on the 3S tourism, these cities also lead the way in Turkey’s current accommodation and overnight stay data. As a matter of fact, these ten cities account for 35.9 percent of the bed capacity in Turkey’s accommodation facilities and 51.3 percent of the number of overnight stays in these facilities (Table 2).

Table 2 Population and Labor Force Growth, Accommodation and Overnight Statistics of Coastal Resorts in Turkey

	Population growth		Labor force growth (%)		Accomodation (2019)		Overnight (2019)
	1980–1990	1990–2019	1985–2000	2005–2019	N	%	N	%
Çeşme	116	26	85.0	188.2	396.523	0.7	715.315	0.6
Kuşadası	77	44	106.6	122.7	1.314.895	2.3	3.542.058	2.2
Didim	103	64	165.8	204.5	212.157	0.4	651.159	0.4
Bodrum	76	23	188.3	134.5	1.332.109	2.4	4.439.756	2.8
Fethiye	59	48	130.2	133.5	234.919	0.4	1.006.504	0.6
Marmaris	75	27	440.0	82.4	1.024.150	1.8	3.687.724	2.3
Kemer	164	38	368.6	50.5	2.595.100	4.6	12.726.502	8.0
Antalya	78	44	119.4	141.5	2.718.497	4.8	11.375.831	7.1
Manavgat	99	51	206.8	146.8	5.349.683	9.5	24.914.012	15.7
Alanya	86	35	176.1	153.3	5.059.057	9.0	18.516.398	11.6

Methodological Approach

In this study, a land-use model of Turkish coastal resorts was developed by analyzing the business districts of ten coastal resorts namely Çeşme, Kuşadası, Didim, Bodrum, Fethiye, Marmaris, Kemer, Antalya, Alanya, and Manavgat. These are the most important coastal resorts of Turkey (Usun et al. 2022). Undoubtedly, Turkey’s tourism centers are not limited to these ten cases. Especially on the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts, there are other coastal resorts such as Bozcaada, Ayvalık, Datça, and Kaş. New ones are also added day after day. However, when choosing coastal resorts, various important variables were considered. These variables include population size, number of accommodation facilities, overnight stays, foreign tourist arrivals, labor force in tourism sector, presence of world-famous beaches, and tourism investment focus. Therefore, purposive sampling (Yavan 2014, 166) was used to explain the sample to satisfy certain criteria.

In this article, TBDs, which are a type of land use specific to coastal resorts and developed with a focus on 3S tourism in the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts of Turkey, were examined in terms of location, form, and functional features. The most important stage of this study was the drawing of detailed maps where the TBDs could be concretely illustrated. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology offers significant opportunities for the development of modern tourism applications to analyze spatial data (Barringer et al. 2002; Connell and Page 2008; Prameshwori et al. 2021). Three applications of GIS for further resort-morphological study can be suggested. Resort morphology is influenced by many interconnected factors; both morphological features and impact factors can be displayed using GIS tools. Second, GIS provides numerous functions to evaluate and analyze morphological characteristics, such as the accessibility of tourist facilities to attractions or transport nodes, the spatial cluster or dispersion of activities in a resort, and the like. Third, remote sensing (RS) and GIS techniques are suitable for tracing and forecasting morphological transition (Liu and Wall 2009).

GIS, which is an important and very popular software for spatial analysis, has been used in a limited number of studies on TBD (Maguire 1995; Battino et al. 2014; Zhu et al. 2015, 2017). Form and function maps were drawn. ArcGIS 10.5 software was used in the analysis of spatial data. The boundaries of TBDs were determined and the location of these areas within the city boundaries was revealed. The area covered by the cities and tourism business areas was calculated with the help of GIS. Then, the forms (morphology) of the business districts of the cities were mapped. The morphologies of the business districts were drawn using GIS Esri Basemap updated satellite images. In this study, the following form-factor index (Qian et al. 2012) was used to statistically explain the morphological characteristics of business areas: $X=A/L^2$ (Qian et al. 2012, 158).

In this model, L refers to the length of the axis of the studied area, and A refers to the area. The value of X indicates the morphological character of the shape of the studied area. A standard circle is ideally the most compact shape, with an X value of $\pi$ /4 (X = 0,78). A low value of X indicates that the studied area has developed a linear form that spreads a long -$L$- axis (Qian et al. 2012, 158). We calculate the values of $X$ of the TBDs in Turkey.

After the location and form characteristics of the TBDs were determined, the stage of mapping the stores in these areas according to their functions was started. Each shop located in the TBDs of the ten coastal resorts was shown with a polygon and a total of approximately 10,000 polygons were drawn. Due to the different sizes of business areas, the number of polygons that make up the business area of each city was different from one other. After the polygons were drawn, attribute data (functions) were entered into these polygons. To determine what function the shops serve, urban information systems, Google Earth street views, and city plans were used. In addition, field observations were made by the authors in the tourism centers under study between 2017 and 2022. Fieldwork was carried out both in the tourism season and in the off season to identify tourism-oriented businesses more accurately.

In July and August, when the tourism season is at its busiest, observations were made for approximately two weeks for five years. In the off-season (especially in January and February), the duration of the fieldwork was kept shorter. While planning the fieldwork, tasks were distributed between the authors who have conducted studies on the Mediterranean coast (Akengin and Dinç 2020; Andriotis 2003, 2005, 2009; Işık and Usun 2022; Usun 2022). Accordingly, the data set was checked and the deficiencies were corrected. During the observations, tourist attractions were determined, changes in tourist activity during the day and night were observed, and streets open to traffic and closed to traffic were observed. On the other hand, tourist activity that changes from the center to the environment (density of touristic traffic, land values, and the number of businesses decrease and also tourism-oriented businesses replaced by local ones) was evaluated on the spot.

After showing the functions of the shops on the maps, these shops were classified according to their functions. The branches of the activities in the TBDs were categorized under three groups: hospitality oriented (hotels, restaurants, and catering, disco-bar, and such); tourism-oriented (change office, tattoo, gift shop, real estate, jewelry), and supplementary (coiffeur, pharmacy, furniture, cosmetic, banking house, grocery, offices). The observations of the TBDs and the experiences of the authors were effective in the classification.

The authors conducted fieldwork at the coastal resorts that make up the research area, both during the tourism season and out of season. Especially in the tourism season, they determined which types of tourist businesses serve intensively. Global companies (McDonald’s, Starbucks) and local souvenir shops in TBDs, as well as shops appealing to the culture of the visitors (British fish and chips, Chinese sushi, Italian pizza, Irish pubs, and American bars), were influential in the tourism-oriented classification. In addition, signs and price tags for tourists were observed. After the branches of the activities were determined by purpose, their statistical values were calculated. Then, it was discussed whether these values have similar characteristics with the statistical findings in the literature. Thus, the characteristics of the functional structure as well as the location and form features of the TBDs were determined.

Results

location and form

TBDs differ from other business districts with their unique locations and forms because they are based on tourist attraction—the sea of coastal resorts—rather than upon proximity to residential areas or transportation routes (Stansfield and Rickert 1970, 213). In accordance with these statements, the TBDs under study are located on the seacoast, in regions of high tourist attraction. TBDs in Çeşme, Kuşadası, Fethiye, and Kemer are located on the west coasts of the cities, while in Didim, Bodrum, Marmaris, Antalya, Manavgat, and Alanya they are located on the south coasts of the cities. In these districts, there are world-famous beaches, such as Altınkum, Konyaaltı, Side, Cleopatra, and Long Beach, as well as historical and cultural attractions such as castles, temples, amphitheaters, museums, ports, and Turkish baths (Table 3).

Table 3 Comparison of TBD in Ten Coastal Resort

	Location	Attractions	Function/Service	Market positioning
Çeşme	Ancient downtown	Shopping Mall	Shopping	Domestic tourist
	West of the city	Castle	Entertainment	International tourist
	Near the marina		Catering/beverage
Kuşadası	Ancient downtown	Traditional Street	Shopping	International tourist
	Between port and marina	Shopping Mall	Entertainment	Domestic tourist
		Traditional food	Catering/beverage	Residents
		Castle
Didim	South of city	Beach	Catering/beverage	International tourist
	Near the marina		Entertainment
Bodrum	Ancient downtown	Traditional Street	Shopping	International tourist
	South of the city	Shopping Mall	Entertainment	Domestic tourist
	Between port and marina	Castle	Catering/beverage	Residents
		Museum
Marmaris	West of the city	Beach	Shopping	International tourist
	Near the marina	Shopping Mall	Entertainment
	New urban area		Most large hotels
Fethiye	Southwest of the city	Castle	Catering/beverage	International tourist
	Near the marina	Museum	Entertainment	Domestic tourist
	Ancient downtown	Amphitheater	RBD & CBD
Kemer	East of the city	Outdoor Museum	Catering/beverage	International tourist
	Near the marina	Camping area	Entertainment
Antalya	Ancient downtown	Traditional Street	Entertainment	International tourist
	Near the marina	Beach	Shopping	Domestic tourist
		Castle	Catering/beverage	Residents
Manavgat	Ancient downtown	Traditional Street	Most large hotels	International tourist
	Historical Peninsula	Amphitheater	Entertainment
	South of the city	Museum
		Temple
Alanya	Ancient downtown	Traditional Street	Entertainment	International tourist
	Historical Peninsula	Castle, Shipyard	Catering/beverage	Domestic tourist
		Cave and Museum	RBD & CBD	Residents
		Beach

In addition to authentic locations, seasonal businesses that serve tourists are linear in form along coastal resorts (Stansfield and Rickert 1970, 215). This is one of the characteristic features of TBDs. To quantitatively reveal the forms of TBDs under study, a form-factor index was performed, confirming that TBDs in Turkey have a linear form. For instance, even in Manavgat and Alanya, where the X value is the highest, these values were calculated as 0.11 and 0.12, respectively. X values below 0.10 were calculated in all the other tourism centers (Table 4). This, as well, demonstrates that Turkish TBD are rather linear in form. The development of these districts in a narrow (deep) area from the sea was critical in the emergence of this linear structure. As a matter of fact, TBDs lie along the coastal boardwalks, which are mostly used by tourists for viewing the scenery and relaxation.

Table 4 Rates of the Shape of the TBDs

	TBD area (km^2)	Long axis (km)	X	Urban area (km^2)	TBD area/Urban area
Çeşme	0.09	1.4	0.05	37.0	0.01
Kuşadası	0.44	2.10	0.09	45.20	0.97
Didim	0.93	3.70	0.07	22.80	4.08
Bodrum	0.40	2.13	0.09	25.28	1.58
Marmaris	1.37	7.30	0.03	12.14	11.29
Fethiye	0.39	2.80	0.05	15.35	6.10
Kemer	1.32	2.50	0.05	5.92	22.30
Antalya	1.44	11.15	0.01	167.20	0.86
Manavgat	1.41	3.60	0.11	38.52	3.66
Alanya	2.48	4.48	0.12	21.86	11.34

Examining the coastal resorts reveals various ratios. For example, in Kemer, the most striking example in this regard, the TBD covers almost one quarter of the city, some 22.30 percent; in other locales, the TBDs cover an area of approximately 11 percent in Alanya and Marmaris, and less than 1 percent in Antalya and Kuşadası (Figure 1). This suggests a relationship to city size, as Antalya and Kuşadası constitute the largest urban areas examined in the study.

Fig. 1 Forms and locations of Turkish TBDs.

Functions

Among Turkey’s TBDs, the business district with the highest number of businesses is located in Alanya. The most important reason for this is that the Alanya TBD is centrally located in the city instead of developing along the coast, while at the same time it exhibits the characteristics of a CBD with functions that meet the needs of both the locals and tourists. This shows that the traditional CBD is intertwined with the tourism sector, thus functioning as a TBD (Akengin and Dinç 2020). 1.229 (55 percent) of the 2.238 business establishments in the Alanya TBD are hospitality-oriented. Fethiye’s TBD presents a similar situation to Alanya’s TBD. In Fethiye’s TBD, especially as you move away from the coast, the businesses that provide services for tourists are replaced by those that meet the supplementary needs of the local people. There, the ratio of tourism-related businesses within the total business district is 45 percent. The rates determined in the TBDs of Alanya and Fethiye are much higher than the TBDs of other cities, where services directed to tourists are much more prevalent. These ratios are determined to be 91 percent in Side, 90 percent in Antalya, 87 percent in Çeşme, 85 percent in Didim, 85 percent in Marmaris, 81 percent in Kuşadası, 81 percent in Bodrum, and 74 percent in Kemer.

Hotels, restaurants, and catering (HoReCa) are the most important branchs of activity in the Turkish tourism industry (Figures 2 and 3). Among the 10 cities that make up the study area, the cities with the highest rates of businesses operating in the HoReCa sector are Antalya (57 percent), Çeşme (45 percent), Didim (43 percent), and Side (36 percent) (Table 4). There are uninterrupted accommodation facilities in the coastal part of Antalya, stretching from Konyaaltı Beach to Kaleiçi. Restaurants and cafes are mostly concentrated in the castle. In the town of Çeşme, the heart of HoReCa is Alaçatı. In Alaçatı, where an old Greek village underwent a tourism-oriented functional transformation, most of the businesses consist of boutique hotels, food and beverage, and cafes. Stretching along Altınkum Beach, Didim’s TBD has many accommodation facilities, and its food and beverage density is due to the attractiveness of its world-famous beach. A similar situation is observed in Side. The accommodation facilities in Side, one of the most important beaches in Turkey, are dense along the coast from the historical peninsula to the west. Food and beverage facilities and cafes are located in the historical peninsula. Among tourism-oriented activity branches, the rate of entertainment facilities (club, disco, pubs) is higher in Antalya’s TBD (Figure 2 and Table 5), in particular the Kaleiçi area, where entertainment facilities are the most concentrated.

Fig. 2 Functions of TBDs on the Turkish Mediterranean Coast.

Fig. 3 Functions of TBDs on Turkish Aegean Coast.

Table 5 Functions of Shops in Turkey’s Tourism Business Districts

		Çeşme		Kuşadası		Didim		Bodrum		Marmaris		Fethiye		Kemer		Antalya		Manavgat		Alanya
		ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%	ƒ	%
Hospitality-oriented	HoReCa	244	44.5	177	19.1	201	43.2	283	34.2	366	29.4	92	11.6	141	29.7	401	57.0	178	36.0	320	14.3
	Entertainment	6	1.2	34	3.7	22	4.7	11	1.3	44	3.5	14	1.8	3	0.6	49	7.0	21	4.2	25	1.1
	Commercial amusements	46	8.4	2	0.2	2	0.4	3	0.4	2	0.2	1	0.1	-	-	15	2.1	2	0.4	4	0.2
	Marina/Port	1	0.1	2	0.2	2	0.4	2	0.3	3	0.3	1	0.1	1	0.2	2	0.3	1	0.2	2	0.1
	Total	297	54.3	215	23.2	227	48.7	299	36.2	415	33.4	108	13.6	145	30.5	467	66.4	202	40.8	351	15.7
Tourism-oriented	Souvenier	43	7.8	72	7.8	16	3.4	43	5.2	72	5.8	17	2.1	15	3.2	42	6.0	22	4.4	75	3.4
	Clothing, Shoes&Bags	80	14.6	264	28.8	56	12.1	192	23.2	321	25.8	133	16.8	125	26.4	60	8.5	158	31.9	524	23.4
	Jewelry/Accessories	29	5.3	114	12.3	25	5.4	68	8.2	147	11.8	32	4.0	11	2.3	18	2.6	45	9.1	148	6.6
	Change Office	2	0.4	7	0.8	1	0.2	9	1.1	9	0.7	2	0.2	6	1.3	3	0.4	6	1.2	19	0.8
	Tattoo	4	0.7	14	1.5	6	1.3	5	0.6	13	1.0	4	0.5	2	0.4	6	0.9	6	1.2	14	0.6
	Real Estate	2	0.4	5	0.5	43	9.2	8	1.0	14	1.1	15	1.9	2	0.4	3	0.4	1	0.2	46	2.1
	Şekerleme/Kuruyemiş	5	0.9	10	1.1	4	0.9	10	1.2	10	0.8	6	0.8	12	2.5	9	1.3	8	1.7	13	0.6
	Rent a car	1	0.1	9	1.0	2	0.4	2	0.3	4	0.4	11	1.4	9	1.9	14	2.0	1	0.2	6	0.3
	Travel Agency	2	0.4	11	1.2	13	2.8	11	1.3	26	2.1	8	1.0	21	4.5	10	1.4	1	0.2	31	1.4
	Tobacco	7	1.3	-	-	2	0.4	10	1.2	2	0.2	5	0.6	1	0.2	1	0.1	-	-	2	0.1
	Shopping Mall	2	0.4	2	0.2	-	-	1	0.1	4	0.4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Yachting	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	0.5	5	0.4	16	2.0	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Other tourism facilities	-	-	23	2.5	-	-	10	1.2	7	0.6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Total	177	32.3	531	57.7	168	36.1	373	45.1	634	51.1	249	31.3	204	43.1	166	23.6	248	50.1	878	39.3
Supplementary	Hairdresser	4	0.7	11	1.2	10	2.2	26	3.1	29	2.3	45	5.7	22	4.6	7	1.0	8	1.6	107	4.8
	Financial services	14	2.5	18	1.8	-	-	8	1.0	10	0.8	15	1.9	1	0.2	4	0.6	4	0.8	20	0.9
	Pharmacy	6	1.1	-	-	4	0.9	7	0.8	14	1.1	12	1.6	10	2.1	-	-	4	0.8	34	0.2
	Communication	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	2.4	7	1.5	3	0.4	1	0.2	59	2.6
	Cosmetics	5	0.9	8	0.9	2	0.4	10	1.2	11	0.9	12	1.6	-	-	4	0.6	4	0.8	26	1.7
	Market	17	3.1	53	5.6	36	7.7	31	3.7	50	4.0	22	2.8	32	6.8	24	3.4	14	2.8	80	3.6
	Office	-	-	26	2.7	2	0.4	12	1.4	30	2.4	127	16.1	33	7.0	13	1.9	-	-	240	10.7
	Others	28	5.1	65	6.9	16	3.4	62	7.5	50	4.0	182	23.0	20	3.8	15	2.0	10	1.9	443	18.1
	Total	74	13.4	181	19.1	70	15.2	156	18.7	194	15.5	434	55.1	125	26.4	70	15.4	45	9.1	1.009	44.3
Overall		548	100	927	100	465	100	828	100	1243	100	791	100	474	100	703	100	495	100	2.238	100

Clothing, shoes, and handbags constitute the dominant sales activity in tourist-oriented coastal resorts (Figures 2 and 3). Souvenir shops have higher rates in cities such as Çeşme and Kuşadası. One of the most important reasons for this is that cruise tourism has been highly developed, especially in these two cities. Apart from these businesses, other businesses such as visitor-oriented jewelry, exchange office, tattoo parlors, real estate, car rentals, and travel agency are prevalent in all tourism cities.

Discussion and conclusion

In terms of location, form, and function in coastal resorts, TBDs constitute an emergent reality. The statistical findings presented in this article on the TBDs in Turkey led to results that are largely similar to the international literature. The studies on TBDs suggest that these areas are highly attractive. In these districts, there are linear beaches as well as historical and cultural attractions. As a matter of fact, while the characteristics of TBDs were explained in the literature, tourist attractions in this area were also emphasized. In some earlier studies, these attractions were presented in tables (Getz 1993; Li and Tao 2003; Zhu et al. 2017). In the current study, the locations of Turkey’s TBDs and their main attractive features were given. In Turkey’s TBDs, there are world-famous beaches such as Altınkum, Konyaaltı, Long Beach, and Cleopatra, as well as historical attractions such as castles, temples, and amphitheaters.

The morphological structure of TBDs (or RBDs) has emerged as a distinctive land-use pattern. In fact, TBDs have been developed linearly in terms of form. This elongate form was revealed in various academic studies of the coastal resorts. For instance, Stansfield (1969) identified linearity as a striking feature in the urban morphology of many New Jersey seashore resort towns (ocean), which are located on elongated islands. Stansfield and Rickert (1970) stated that this linear form developed similarly in the cities of Niagara Falls and Wildwood. Taylor (1975) considered an elongated-strip as the most distinctive spatial distribution of RBDs, which is also illustrated in the case study of an East London seaside resort in South Africa (Taylor 1975). Meyer-Arendt (1990) studied RBDs in the Gulf of Mexico seaside resorts and found that lateral expansion of coastal roads often led to RBD elongation, but RBD core areas usually remained as the central focus of tourist activity.

A similar pattern (t model) was observed by Getz (1993) at Niagara Falls. Eric Cohen (1995) has drawn attention to tourist shopping patterns that developed in Thailand as a consequence of road improvements, growing motorization, and craft promotion. According to Li and Tao (2003), the spatial form and evolution of RBDs in Suzhou (China) are closely related to the city’s spatial expansion. Urban area dispersal is a prerequisite of the emergence of RBDs. Silvia Battino et al. (2014) noted that elongated RBD development along the two main streets connecting Centro Storico and Viale Dante in Sassari. In other studies, on the subject, it has been revealed that RBDs have similar forms (Liu et al. 2014; Zhu et al. 2017).

Among the main findings of this study are that all Turkish TBDs developed in linear pattern, as was also found in other studies (Stansfield and Rickert 1970; Meyer-Arendt 1990). This linearity of TBDs is clearly visible and can be explained by various indices. In a study conducted in Zhapo Town, Junxi Qian et al. (2012) explained that resort’s morphology through statistical methods using the form-factor index and found the form index value to be 0.07. We made statistical calculations of TBD, using the same index. This study revealed that Turkey’s TBDs have a linear form. In this context, the most striking examples are Antalya (X = 0.01) and Marmaris (X = 0.03).

Another conclusion drawn from the study is that TBDs carry on both direct and indirect tourism-oriented businesses in this area. Thus, the findings of this study give an idea about the functional structure of TBDs. Stansfield and Rickert (1970) expressed that tourism-oriented businesses in the RBDs in three North American cities (Ocean City, Wildwood, and Niagara) constitute 70.8 percent, 77 percent, 92.7 percent, respectively, of all businesses in the RBDs. Taylor (1975), who defined TBDs as “tourism facilities,” stated that the businesses directly serving tourists within the sectors that make up the TBD should not be less than 50 percent of the total businesses. Zhu et al. (2017) revealed statistics of leisure businesses in Quianmen (China) that illustrated catering to be the most important form of business in the RBDs, and that three leisure businesses—catering, lodging, and retailing—occurred throughout more than 80 percent of the city.

Akengin and Dinç (2020) studied the TBDs in the Alanya and Manavgat (Side) coastal resorts, located on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey, and determined the ratios of tourism-related shops to total shops was 58 percent and 91 percent, respectively. Işık and Usun (2022) found the ratio of tourism-related shops in the TBD of Kuşadası coastal resort located on the Aegean coast of Turkey to be 69.4 percent. In this study, which deals with the functional characteristics of TBDs on the Mediterranean and Aegean coasts of Turkey as a whole, the ratios of tourism-related businesses were determined to be 91 percent in Side, 90 percent in Antalya, 87 percent in Çeşme, 85 percent in Didim, 85 percent in Marmaris, 81 percent in Kuşadası, 81 percent in Bodrum, and 74 percent in Kemer. In these areas, the high concentration of businesses such as hotels, restaurants, cafes, pubs, tattoo parlors, and exchange offices—all symbols of tourism—was effective in the emergence of these high rates.

As tourism continues to be one of the fastest growing industries in the world, despite the Covid-19 pandemic (Andriotis 2021; Dar and Kashyap 2022; Mimaki et al. 2022; Firdausy 2023; Koh et al. 2023), new coastal resorts will emerge. TBDs, which are the most important spatial components of coastal resorts, will both expand in terms of area and increase in numbers. As TBDs expand, historical buildings and residences that have heretofore been given preservation protection, are threatened with being replaced by tourism-oriented business. Municipalities are now preparing zoning plans aimed to protect historical buildings, as in Kuşadası, Alaçatı (Çeşme), the Old Town of Antalya, and the Historical Peninsula of Side. Therefore, it is possible to say that the protection-use relationship in TBDs will be more intense in the future. Where coastal resorts grow much faster than TBDs, new clusters of business districts will emerge independently of TBDs. This situation will increase the importance of the center, bring along the multistory structures, and create a more complex structure by causing functional diversification.

To conclude, among the main future research priorities having emerged from this study include the need to compare its findings with the characteristics of TBDs in developed and developing countries in a more concrete way, and to test the validity of the models put forward in this regard. In doing so, more empirical studies on the subject will be essential.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).