Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма, 2020, том 14, № 2

Современные проблемы 
сервиса и туризма

Научно-практический журнал

2020
Том 14 №2

УЧРЕДИТЕЛЬ:
Федеральное государственное 
бюджетное образовательное 
учреждение высшего образования 
«Российский государственный 
университет туризма и сервиса» 
(Москва).
Журнал основан в 2007 г.
Выходит 4 раза в год.

ОСНОВНЫЕ СВЕДЕНИЯ
О ЖУРНАЛЕ:
DOI: 10.24411/1995–0411
ISSN: 1995–0411
eISSN: 2414–9063
Зарегистрирован в Федеральной 
службе по надзору за соблюдением 
законодательства в сфере массовых 
коммуникаций и охране культурного 
наследия (свид-во о регистрации СМИ 
ПИФС77–31758 от 25.04.2008 г.).
Включен в Перечень ведущих 
рецензируемых научных журналов 
и изданий ВАК РФ (распоряжение 
Минобрнауки России № Р-161 от 
30.09.2015), в которых могут быть 
опубликованы основные результаты 
диссертационных исследований.
Включен в наукометрические базы 
РИНЦ, Google Scholar, UlrichsWeb 
и др., индексируется в базе данных 
научной электронной библиотеки 
eLibrary.ru.

Ссылки на журнал при цитировании 
обязательны. Редколлегия не всегда 
разделяет высказанные авторами 
публикаций мнения, позиции, 
положения, но предоставляет 
возможность для научной дискуссии.

ПОДПИСКА НА ЖУРНАЛ:
Индекс в объединенном каталоге 
«Пресса России» –  Р81607;
через Интернет на сайтах arpk.org, 
pressa-rf.ru, ural-press.ru, delpress.ru; 
редакторская подписка:
editor@spst-journal.org

КОНТАКТЫ:
Адрес редакции: 141221, РФ,
Московская обл., Пушкинский р-н, 
д. п. Черкизово, ул. Главная, 99, к. 1.
Тел./факс: (495) 940-83-61, 62, 63,  
доб. 395; моб. +7(967) 246-35-69
Web: http://spst-journal.org
e-mail: redkollegiaMGUS@mail.ru,
editor@spst-journal.org

ОТПЕЧАТАНО:
ИП Копыльцов П.И.
394052, Воронежская область, 
г. Воронеж, ул. Маршала Неделина, 
д.27 кв. 56
Тел.: 8 950 7656959
e-mail: Kopyltsow_Pavel@mail.ru
Усл.печ.л. 11,38. Тираж 500 экз. 
Заказ № 1132.

ПЕРЕВОД: 
Афанасьева А.В. –  к.геогр.н., доц.

гЛАВНЫЙ РЕДАКТОР

Афанасьев О.Е. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, лауреат 
Государственной премии Украины в области образования, д.геогр.н., проф.

РЕДАКЦИОННЫЙ СОВЕТ

Александрова А.Ю. – Московский государственный университет им. М.В. Ломоносова, Лауреат Премии Правительства Российской Федерации в области туризма, 
д.геогр.н., проф.
Андрадес-Калдито Л. – Университет Эстремадуры (Испания), координатор NETOUR, 
PhD, проф.
Ванхилл С.Р.Ч. – Лимерикский университет (Ирландия), PhD, адъюнкт-проф.
Влодарчик Б. – Лодзинский университет (Польша), директор Института географии городов и туризма, PhD, проф.
Гладкий А.В. – Киевский национальный торгово-экономический университет (Украина), д.геогр.н., проф.
Диманш Ф. – Университет Райерсона (Канада), директор Школы гостеприимства и туристического менеджмента Теда Роджерса, PhD, проф.
Дуайер Л. – Университет Нового Южного Уэльса (Австралия), PhD, проф.
Иванов С.Х. – Варненский университет менеджмента (Болгария), PhD, проф.
Корстанье М.Э. – Университет Палермо (Аргентина), PhD, ст. науч. сотр.
Милева-Боянова С.В. – Софийский университет Святого Климента Охридского (Болгария), PhD, проф.
Мюллер Д. – Университет Умео (Швеция), PhD, проф.
Неделиа А.-М. – Сучавский университет им. Штефана чел Маре (Румыния), PhD, доц.
Пулидо-Фернандес Х.И. – Университет Хаэна (Испания), PhD, проф.
Радж Р. – Городской университет Лидса (Великобритания), PhD
Рекоски Р. – Государственный университет Святого Климента Охридского (Сев. Македония), д.юрид.н., проф.
Сааринен Я.Ю. – Университет Оулу (Финляндия), вице-президент Международного географического союза (IGU), PhD, проф.
Сафаралиев Г.К. – депутат ГД Федерального Собрания РФ, член-корреспондент РАН, 
д.физ.-мат.н., проф.
Сигала М. – Университет Южной Австралии (Австралия), PhD, проф.
Теркенли Ф. – Университет Эгейского моря (Греция), PhD, проф.
Тюрнер Л.У. – Университет Виктории (Австралия), PhD, проф.-исслед.
Ульянченко Л.А. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, 
д.экон.н., проф.
Фу Я.-И. – Индианский университет – Университет Пердью в Индианаполисе (США), 
PhD, доц.
Холл К.М. – Университет Кентербери (Новая Зеландия), PhD, проф.
Хью-Августис С. – Государственный университет Болл (США), PhD, проф.
Шовал Н. – Еврейский университет в Иерусалиме (Израиль), Президент Израильской 
географической ассоциации, PhD, проф.
Шпилько С.П. – Президент Российского Союза Туриндустрии, член Делового совета Всемирной туристической организации (UNWTO), к.экон.н.

РЕДАКЦИОННАЯ КОЛЛЕгИЯ

Вапнярская О.И. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, 
к.экон.н., доц.
Евстропьева О.В. – Институт географии им. В.Б. Сочавы СО РАН(РФ, Иркутск), к.геогр.н., 
с.н.с.
Кривошеева Т.М. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, 
к.экон.н., доц.
Лагусев Ю.М. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, д.пед.н., 
проф.
Морозов М.А. – Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации, 
д.экон.н., проф.
Оборин М.С. – Российский экономический университет им.Г.В. Плеханова, Пермский 
институт (филиал); Пермский государственный национальный исследовательский университет; Пермский государственный аграрно-технологический университет им. акад. 
Д.Н. Прянишникова (Пермь, РФ); Сочинский государственный университет (Сочи, РФ); 
д.экон.н., проф.
Саранча М.А. – Российский государственный университет туризма и сервиса, д.геогр.н., 
проф.

ОТВЕТСТВЕННЫЙ СЕКРЕТАРЬ: Афанасьева А.В. – к.геогр.н., доц.

Service & Tourism: 
Current Challenges 

Scientific and practical journal

2020
Том 14 №2

PUBLISHER:
Russian State University
of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow).
Founded in 2007.
Published 4 issues a year.

BASIC INFORMATION
ABOUT THE JOURNAL:
DOI: 10.24411/1995–0411
ISSN: 1995–0411
eISSN: 2414–9063
Journal registered by the Federal Service 
for Supervision of Legislation in Mass 
Communications and Cultural Heritage 
Protection, RF
(Reg. ПИФС 77–21758 issued 
25.04.2008).
Peer-reviewed journal.
The journal was included in the list of 
the leading peer-reviewed scientific 
journals recommended by the Higher 
Attestation Commission for publication 
of thesis results.
The journal is included in the Russian 
Science Citation Index, Google Scholar, 
UlrichsWeb, etc.
The journal is available in the Scientific 
Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru).
All rights reserved.
Citation with reference only.
Disclaimer: http://stcc-journal.org/
index/disclaimer/0–36

CONTACTS:
Editorial office: 141221, Russia, Moscow 
region, Pushkino district, village 
Cherkizovo, 99 Glavnaja str., build. 1.
Tel./fax: +7.495.940 8361, 62, 63, add. 
395; mob. +7.967.246 3569
Web: http://stcc-journal.org
e-mail: redkollegiaMGUS@mail.ru,
editor@spst-journal.org

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY:
Alexandra V. Afanasieva,
PhD in Geography

INTERPRETER:
Alexandra V. Afanasieva,
PhD in Geography

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Oleg E. Afanasiev – Russian State University of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow), PhD  
(Dr.Sc.) in Geography, Professor, Laureate of the State Prize of Ukraine in the sphere of education

EDITORIAL COUNCIL

Anna Yu. Aleksandrova – Lomonosov Moscow State University (RF, Moscow), PhD (Dr.Sc.) 
in Geography, Professor
Lidia Andrades-Caldito – University of Extremadura (Spain, Caceres), NeTour Coordinator, 
PhD in Economics, Professor
Frederic Dimanche – Ryerson University (Canada, Toronto), Directorof the Ted Rogers 
School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, PhD, Professor
Larry Dwyer – University of New South Wales (Australia, Sydney), School of Marketing, Australian Business School, PhD, Professor
Yao-Yi Fu – Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (USA, Indianapolis), PhD, 
Associate Professor
Аlexander V. Gladkey – Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics (Ukraine, Kyiv), PhD 
(Dr.Sc.) in Geography, Professor
C. Michael Hall – University of Canterbury (New Zealand, Christchurch), PhD, Professor
Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis – Ball State University (USA, Muncie, Indiana), PhD, Professor
Stanislav H. Ivanov – Varna University of Management (Bulgaria, Varna), Vice Rector for 
Academic Affairs and Research, PhD,Professor
Maximiliano E. Korstanje – University of Palermo (Argentina, Buenos Aires), PhD, Senior 
Researchers
Sonia V. Mileva-Bojanova – Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” (Bulgaria, Sofia), PhD 
(Dr.Sc.), Professor
Dieter K. Müller – Umea University (Sweden, Umea), PhD, Professor
Alexandru-M. Nedelea – Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava (Romania, Suceava), PhD, 
Associate Professor
Juan I. Pulido-Fernandez – University of Jaen (Spain, Jaen), PhD, Associate Professor
Razaq Raj – Leeds Beckett University (UK, Leeds), PhD
Risto Rechkoski – State University “Sv. Kliment Ohridski” (North Macedonia, Bitola, Ohrid), 
PhD (Dr.Sc.) in Law, Professor
Jarkko J. Saarinen – University of Oulu (Finland, Oulu), Vice-President of the International 
Geographical Union (IGU), PhD, Professor
Gadzhimet K. Safaraliev – Chairman of the State Duma RF (RF, Moscow), PhD (Dr.Sc.), Professor
Noam Shoval – Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Israel, Jerusalem), PhD, Professor
Sergey P. Shpil’ko – Chairman of Moscow Tourism Committee (RF, Moscow), President of 
the Russian Union of Travel Industry, member of the Business Council of the World Tourism 
Organization, PhD in Economics
Marianna Sigala – University of South Australia (Australia, Adelaide), PhD, Professor
Theano S. Terkenli – University of the Aegean (Greece, Mytilene), PhD, Professor
Lindsay W. Turner –Victoria University (Australia, Melbourne), College of Business, PhD, 
Research Professor
Ljudmila A. Ulyanchenko – Russian State University of Tourismand Service (RF, Moscow), 
PhD (Dr.Sc.) in Economics, Professor
Stephen R.C. Wanhill – University of Limerick (Ireland, Limerick), PhD, Adjunct Professor
Bogdan Wlodarczyk – University of Lodz (Poland, Lodz), Director of the Institute of Urban 
and Tourism, PhD, Professor

EDITORIAL BOARD

Ol’ga I. Vapnyarskaya – Russian State University of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow),  
PhD in Economics, Associate Professor
Oksana V. Evstropeva – V.B. Sochava Institute of Geography SBRAS (RF, Irkutsk), PhD (Dr.Sc.)  
in Geography, Senior Researcher
Tatiana M. Krivosheeva – Russian State University of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow),  
PhD in Economics, Associate Professor
Yuriy M. Lagusev – Russian State University of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow), PhD  
(Dr.Sc.) in Pedagogic, Professor
Mikhail A. Morozov – Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation 
(RF, Moscow), PhD (Dr.Sc.) in Economics, Professor
Matvey S. Oborin – Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Perm Institute (branch); 
Perm State National Research University; Perm State Agro-Technological University named 
after Academician D. N. Pryanishnikov (Perm, Russia); Sochi State University (Sochi, Russia); 
PhD (Dr.Sc.) in Economics, Professor
Mikhail A. Sarancha – Russian State University of Tourism and Service (RF, Moscow), PhD  
(Dr.Sc.) in Geography, Professor

Содержание

5

КОЛОНКА ГЛАВНОГО РЕДАКТОРА 

Новые формы туризма – глэмпинг, тематические парки, отдых выходного дня

ЛОКАЛЬНОЕ В ГЛОБАЛЬНОМ: ФОРМУЛА ТУРИЗМА 

7
Шерешева М.Ю., Шарко Е.Р.
Прошлое и будущее тематических парков:впечатления клиента как козырная карта

18
Морозова Н.С., Янкович А.И. 
Кинотуризм как инновационная составляющая экономики впечатлений

28
Безрукова Н.Л.
Глэмпинг: понятие, виды и перспективы развития в России

38
Меньшиков П.В., Кузнецова Н.В., Коробченко А.И., Голубчиков Г.М., Арпентьева М.Р. 
Психолого-педагогические аспекты глэмпинга: туризм как практика развития человека

РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ РАЗВИТИЯ ТУРИСТСКОГО СЕРВИСА 
 

50
Анохин А.Ю., Кропинова Е.Г. 
Научно-практические аспекты организации маршрутов выходного дня в природной среде с 
использованием технологий активного отдыха

64
Оборин М.С. 
Виртуальный туризм как инновационное направление социально-экономической деятельности 
региона

72
Стахова Л.В.
Мобильное приложение тематического парка как ключ к управлению доходами

РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫЕ СТУДИИ ТУРИЗМА 

84
Подсолонко В.А., Подсолонко Е.А., Афанасьев О.Е. 
Мультипликативная роль современных видов туризма в развитии муниципальных территорий и 
занятости населения

96
Цапук Д.А.
Услуги загородной рекреации: мнения потребителей 

НОВЫЕ ТУРИСТСКИЕ ЦЕНТРЫ 

105
Ивлиева О.В., Шмыткова А.В.
Тематические парки как одно из направлений развития туризма в Ростовской области

114
Хетагурова В.Ш., Крюкова Е.М.
Современное состояние и тенденции развития этнографического туризма в Московской области 

124
Очилова Х.Ф.
Организация этнопарков в Ташкенте

131
Амелькина Д.В. 
География туризма выходного дня на урбанизированных территориях  
(на примере Самарской области)

Content

5

EDITOR’S NOTE 

New forms of tourism: Glamping, amusement parks, weekend vacation

LOCAL IN GLOBAL: FORMULA FOR TOURISM 

7
Sheresheva M. Y., Sharko E. R.
Past and future of theme parks: Customer experiences as a trump card

18
Morozova N. S., Yankovich A. I.
Film-induced tourism as an innovative component of the experience economy

28
Bezrukova N. L. 
Glamping: The concept, types and development prospects in Russia

38
Menshikov P. V., Kuznetsova N. V., Korobchenko A. I., Golubchikov G. M., Arpentieva M. R. 
Psychological and pedagogical aspects of glamping: Tourism as a practice for personal development

REGIONAL ISSUES OF TOURISM SERVICE 

50
Anokhin A. Yu., Kropinova E. G. 
Scientific and practical aspects of organizing week-end routes in the natural environment using 
technologies of active tourism

64
Oborin M.S. 
Virtual tourism as an innovative direction of socio-economic activity of the region

72
Stakhova L. V.
Theme park mobile app as a key to revenue management

REGIONAL TOURISM STUDIES 

84
Podsolonko V. A., Podsolonko E. A., Afanasiev O. E. 
Multiplicative role of modern types of tourism in developing municipal territories and population 
employment

96
Tsapuk D. A.
Services of countryside recreation: Consumers’ opinions 

NEW TOURIST CENTERS 

105
Ivlieva O. V., Shmytkova A. V. 
Theme parks as one of tourism development directions in Rostov region

114
Khetagurova V. Sh., Kryukova E. M. 
Current state and development trends of ethnographic tourism in Moscow region

124
Ochilova H. F.
Organization of ethnoparks in Tashkent

131
Amelkina D. V. 
Geography of weekend tourism in urbanized territories (the case of Samara region)

колонка главного редактора

EDITOR'S NOTE

НОВЫЕ ФОРМЫ ТУРИЗМА – 
ГЛЭМПИНГ, ТЕМАТИЧЕСКИЕ  
ПАРКИ, ОТДЫХ ВЫХОДНОГО ДНЯ

Вынужденный карантин, самоизоляция, 
опасность пандемии COVID-19 резко актуализировали дискуссию о формах отдыха и туризма в 
посткарантинный период. Вероятность того, что 
человечество отныне будет пребывать в состоянии перманентной угрозы различных вирусов 
и эпидемий, привлекло внимание экспертов отрасли туризма и гостеприимства к тем формам 
туризма, которые способны обеспечить большую его индивидуализацию и персонализацию 
услуг. Хотя, и до того тренд на индивидуализацию туризма достаточно активно нарастал, теперь же, очевидно, он резко ускорится.
Среди наиболее перспективных форм 
туризма и отдыха ближайшего будущего большинство специалистов отрасли чаще всего называют глэмпинги, отдых выходного дня, тематические парки и т.п., которые характеризуются 
достаточной степенью индивидуализации услуг, краткосрочностью отдыха, способностью 
обеспечить яркие впечатления, инновационной 
составляющей. 
Опыт массового карантина и ограничения 
возможности транспортного передвижения в 
самом начале этого периода показал резкий 
всплеск интереса к различным форматам виртуального туризма – стали пользоваться повышенным интересом и спросом онлайн-экскурсии, 
тематические вебинары, виртуальные туры. Но 
достаточно быстро объем туристского онлайнконтента стал настолько многочисленным и 
разнообразным, что столь же резко и быстро 
произошло пресыщение рынка онлайн-продуктами, при чем как в сегменте потребительском 
(виртуальные экскурсии, обзоры, путешествия), 
так и в сегменте профессиональном (тренинги, 
экспертные сессии, школы и пр.). Опыт этого 
периода показал несостоятельность тех прогнозов, в которых ранее говорилось о перспективах роста онлайн-туризма вплоть до замещения 
им традиционных форм отдыха. Этого не произошло. Наоборот, в обществе сформировался 
гигантский отложенный спрос на путешествия, 
что подтвердилось ажиотажным интересом ко 

NEW FORMS OF TOURISM: 
GLAMPING, AMUSEMENT PARKS, 
WEEKEND VACATION

Forced quarantine, self-isolation, and the 
danger of the COVID-19 pandemic have sharply 
actualized the discussion about the forms of recreation and tourism in the post-quarantine period.
The likelihood that humanity will henceforth 
be in a state of permanent threat of various viruses 
and epidemics has drawn the attention of experts 
in the tourism and hospitality industry to those 
forms of tourism that can provide greater individualization and personalization of services. Actively 
growing trend towards tourism individualization 
will obviously accelerate dramatically.
Industry experts pointglampings, weekend 
recreation, theme parks, etc. among the most 
promising forms of tourism and recreation in the 
near future, which are characterized by a sufficient 
degree of individualization of services, short-term 
recreation, the ability to provide vivid impressions, 
and an innovative component.
The mass quarantine and restriction of transport movement at the very beginning of this period 
showed a sharp surge in interest in various forms 
of virtual tourism. Online excursions, thematic webinars, and virtual tours began to be of increased 
interest and demand.
But the volume of online tourist content became toonumerous and diverse, and the market 
satiated with online products, both in the consumer segment (virtual tours, reviews, travel) and in 
the professional area (trainings, expert sessions, 
workshops etc.).
The experience of this period showed the inconsistency of forecasts about the online tourism 
growth up to replacement of traditional forms of 
recreation.This did not happen.
On the contrary, excitement of interest in all 
those destinations that were the first to open after 
the quarantine restrictions, confirms a huge deferred 
demand for travel that has been formed in society.
All beach destinations in Russia (Crimea, Sochi) are overcrowded with tourists, operators note 
an increase in demand by 2-3 times, including 
long-term accommodation, the depth of sales has 
increased significantly.

всем тем направлениям, которые первыми открылись после карантинных ограничений. Все 
пляжные дестинации России (Крым, Сочи) переполнены туристами, операторы отмечают увеличение спроса в 2-3 раза, в т.ч. на долгосрочное проживание, существенно выросла глубина 
продаж. Аналогичная ситуация наблюдается и 
в зарубежных странах. Показателен случай открытия первого в посткарантинный период тематического парка развлечений – Диснейленда 
в Шанхае: все билеты были мгновенно, в течение нескольких минут, раскуплены на первый и 
несколько последующих дней. Онлайн-технологии виртуальных туров никогда не смогут полноценно заменить человеку реальные ощущения, 
живые эмоции и собственные впечатления. Они 
будут активно развиваться исключительно как 
инструменты для отраслевого менеджмента и 
маркетинга.
В то же время для отрасли туризма и гостеприимства период пандемии COVID-19 не 
пройдет бесследно. Отрасль вынуждена реагировать на меняющиеся потребности, соответствовать новым аспектам спроса потребителей, 
внедрять повышенные санитарно-противоэпидемиологические стандарты, адаптироваться к 
новым правилам безопасности, создавать более качественную туристскую инфраструктуру. 
Показательно заявление главы Ростуризма о 
готовности со стороны регулятора отрасли спонсировать в форме грантов до 70% затрат бизнеса на строительство кемпингов, глэмпингов и 
эко-отелей по всей стране.
Поэтому в текущем выпуске журнала «Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма» редакция предложила авторам рассмотреть вопросы и проблемы формирования таких новых 
форм туризма и отдыха, оценить их адаптационную способность, возможности и значимость 
в сложившихся условиях для туристов, определить перспективы и обозначить тренды их развития.

Главный редактор, д.геогр.н., проф.  
О.Е. Афанасьев

A similar situation is observed in foreign 
countries.
The case of the opening of Disneyland in 
Shanghai, the first theme park in the post-quarantine period is demonstrative: all tickets were instantly, within a few minutes, sold out for the first 
and several subsequent days.
Online technologies of virtual tours will never 
be able to fully replace real sensations, lively emotions and own impressions.
They will be actively developed exclusively as 
tools for industry management and marketing.
At the same time, for the tourism and hospitality industry, the period of the COVID-19 pandemic will not pass without a trace.
The industry is forced to respond to changing 
needs, meet new aspects of consumer demand, introduce increased sanitary and anti-epidemiological standards, adapt to new safety rules, and create 
a better tourist infrastructure.
The head of the National Agency for Tourism 
made a statement on the readiness of the industry 
regulator to support by grants up to 70% of business costs for the construction of campings, glamping sites and eco-hotels across the country, and it 
is indicative fact.
Therefore, in the current issue of the journal 
"Service & Tourism: Current Challenges", we invited the authors to consider the issues and problems of such new forms of tourism and recreation, 
assess their adaptive capacity, opportunities and 
significance in the current conditions for tourists, 
determine the prospects and outline their development trends.

 Editor-in-chief, Prof.  
Oleg E. Afanasiev

локалЬное в глоБалЬноМ: ФорМУла тУрИЗМа

LOCAL IN GLOBAL: FORMULA FOR TOURISM

UDC 338.48
DOI: 10.24411/1995-0411-2020-10201
Marina Y. SHERESHEVA
Lomonosov Moscow State University (Moscow, Russia);  
PhD (Dr.Sc.) in Economics; Professor; Research Center for Network Economy, Director;  
e-mail: m.sheresheva@gmail.com. ORCID iD: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8153-7111

Elena R. SHARKO
Lomonosov Moscow State University (Moscow, Russia);  
PhD in Economics; Research Center for Network Economy, Analyst;  
e-mail: ersharko@yandex.ru 

PAST AND FUTURE OF THEME PARKS:  
CUSTOMER ExPERIENCES AS A TRUMP CARD

Abstract. The article discusses the role of customer experiences provided by theme parks that 
are a special kind of tourist attraction forming a unique tourist product. The goal of the study 
is to identify promising ways to boost the quality of theme park design and service in Russia. A 
systematic and situational approach, as well as formal logical analysis and desk research are 
the main research methods. Based on the literature review on the approaches to theme park 
specifics and the role of tourist experiences in gaining customer loyalty, the authors discuss the 
development of theme parks in Russia and abroad, as well as major trends that affect their future development. Among these are: the search to combine elements from different park types; 
networking, both in terms of collaborative relationships with park stakeholders and in terms of 
building networks of parks under a single brand; the creation of unusual theme parks that meet 
the specific interests of niche tourists audiences; increased use of VR/AR technologies. The main 
paths of future research are benchmarking best management practices and the development of 
an adapted system of indicators for theme parks in Russia to assess the quality of tourist product 
provided for park visitors.

Keywords: theme parks, tourism, tourist product, customer experience, attractiveness, innovative technology

Citation: Sheresheva, M. Y., & Sharko, E. R. (2020). Past and future of theme parks: Customer experiences 
as a trump card. Service and Tourism: Current Challenges, 14(2), 7-17. doi: 10.24411/1995-0411-202010201. 
Article History
Received 27April 2020
Accepted 29May 2020

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

© 2020 the Author(s) 
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 
(CC BY-SA 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

УДК 338.48
DOI: 10.24411/1995-0411-2020-10201

ШЕРЕШЕВА Марина Юрьевна
Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова (Москва, РФ); 
доктор экономических наук, профессор; e-mail: m.sheresheva@gmail.com 

ШАРКО Елена Романовна
Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова (Москва, РФ);
кандидат экономических наук, аналитик; e-mail: ersharko@yandex.ru

ПРОШЛОЕ И БУДУЩЕЕ ТЕМАТИЧЕСКИХ ПАРКОВ: 
ВПЕЧАТЛЕНИЯ КЛИЕНТА КАК КОЗЫРНАЯ КАРТА

В статье рассматривается роль впечатлений, получаемых посетителями тематических парков 
как особого вида туристских аттракций, формирующих уникальный туристский продукт. Целью 
представленного исследования является определение перспективных направлений совершенствования и развития создаваемых в России тематических парков, в том числе возможных способов 
повышения качества предоставляемых ими услуг. Основными методами исследования послужили 
системный и ситуационный подход, а также формально-логический анализ и кабинетное исследование. На основе обзора научной литературы, в которой представлены подходы к пониманию специфических особенностей тематических парков и значимости впечатлений туриста в завоевании 
клиентской лояльности, авторы характеризуют развитие тематических парков в России и за рубежом, а также основные тенденции, оказывающие влияние на перспективы их развития. Среди 
основных тенденций могут быть отмечены: комбинирование элементов, характерных для разных 
типов парков; формирование сетей, как в терминах кооперационного взаимодействия со стейкхолдерами парка, так и в смысле развития сети парков, объединенных под общим брендом; создание 
необычных тематических парков, отвечающих специфическим интересам нишевой туристской аудитории; более широкое использование технологий виртуальной и дополненной реальности (VR/AR 
технологий). Основными направлениями дальнейших исследований являются сравнительный анализ 
лучших практик управления и разработка системы показателей для оценки качества туристического продукта, предоставляемого посетителям российских тематических парков.

Ключевые слова: тематические парки, туризм, туристский продукт, клиентские впечатления, привлекательность, инновационные технологии

Для цитирования: Шерешева М.Ю., Шарко Е.Р. Прошлое и будущее тематических парков: впечатления клиента 
как козырная карта // Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма. 2020. Т.14. №2. С. 7-17. DOI: 10.24411/19950411-2020-10201.
Дата поступления в редакцию: 27 апреля 2020 г.
Дата утверждения в печать: 29 мая 2020 г.

Стр. 7–17
Marina Y. SHERESHEVA, Elena R. SHARKO

Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма
№ 2/2020  Том 14

9

Introduction

In the twenty-first century, tourism became an important and significant segment 
of many developed and transition economies. 
Just before the COVID-19 pandemic, the 
worldwide growth in tourist flows peaked. 
In many strategic assessments and forecasts, 
the basic premise was that the higher the 
share of inbound tourism in the country, the 
higher its economic prospects and its image 
in the international arena. Countries rich in 
beautiful and unique natural recreation attractions or with a great cultural heritage felt 
sure to profit from their popularity as tourist 
destinations. Moreover, there was an intensive discussion on the overtourism issues, as 
well as on the ways to optimize the loading 
of the most attractive destinations and to reduce the discomfort and discontent of local 
residents [22; 31]. 
The developments at the beginning 
of 2020 have shown how fragile the world 
economy is, especially the service sector. 
The world tourism industry collapsed so fast 
and crucially that there was real trouble for 
authorities to organize the return of citizens 
that were traveling abroad. Virtually all destinations are now unavailable for tourists. As a 
result, lots of industry actors are bankrupts or 
close to bankruptcy. Thus, in the U.S. a drop of 
80% in 2020 is predicted [29], with the probable total losses of USD 24 billion1.
Nevertheless, life will take its own, as 
the past of human beings witnesses. China 
is a good example: this country was the first 
to enter the coronavirus crisis and the first 
to start an economic revival. As for the tourism industry in China, it was an object of 
government support, with a clear focus on 
domestic tourism, and there are interesting 
results worth mentioning. After the government removed quarantine measures, ticket 
orders have increased by 60%, as compared 
to the same period of the previous year. 
Moreover, there is evidence that equipment for active travel (backpacks, tents, 
etc.) turned out to be among the most 
sought goods ordered in online stores - in 
spite of the fact that options of active travel 

1 cnbc.com/2020/03/11/coronavirus-travel-industry-could-lose-24-billion-in-tourism-from-outside-us.html (Accessed on April, 25, 2020)

previously were not among the preferred 
travel types in China. 
So, the prospects of the tourism industry 
are not fully negative in the long run but the 
struggle for customers promises to be hard 
and uncompromising. It is important for every industry actor and every destination that 
is going to stay alive on the market to be alert 
and ready to meet the demand with adequate 
supply. 
In the article, we will discuss the role 
of customer experiences provided by theme 
parks that are a special kind of tourist attraction forming a unique tourist product, which 
includes a range of entertaining and educational services. Thematic parks are parks created with a certain theme/concept that gives 
the park a unique characteristic and allow 
visitors to interpret its more specific function 
[10; 24]. 
The article structure is as follows. Firstly, 
we provide a brief literature review on the issues parks as tourism marketing objects, as 
well as visitors’ experiences and customer loyalty in theme parks management. Secondly, 
we describe the development of theme parks 
in Russia and abroad. Thirdly, we discuss major trends that affect the future development 
of theme parks. In the final section, conclusions and suggestions for future research are 
provided.
Parks as tourist attractions: the crucial role 
of customer experiences

There are a huge number of different 
parks all over the world. Actually, any public 
space with recreational or other purposes can 
get this name, like research park [20] or wind 
park [36]. In our case, only parks as tourist attractions are in the focus of study. These parks 
are also very different depending on their 
purpose and function. At the same time, we 
can definitely state that all such parks have 
the aim to attract tourists can be defined as 
an “institution of pleasure” [11].
Amusement parks have this purpose 
directly, which follows from their name [15; 
18]. As an example, Luna parks throughout 
their long history (the first amusement park 
with that name opened on Coney Island, New 
York, in 1903) directly performed their function to entertain visitors by immersing them 
“in the world of carefree childhood”. That 

is, nobody “loaded” visitors with practically 
nothing other than visiting attractions, cafes, 
and restaurants, according to this specific 
“genre of pleasure place”.2 This kind of simplified leisure is still attractive for a number 
of target audiences but the needs of contemporary tourists are usually much broader, so 
most amusement parks offer a different “organization of pleasure” than the sites of festival and leisure that had preceded it [11]. As a 
rule, each large amusement park is multifunctional, since “the constant desire for fun calls 
for a renewed and versatile portfolio of fun offer and for innovative forms of entertainment 
and recreation products” [27, p. 342]. 
Other types of parks may at first glance 
be far from this simple goal. However, no matter what park is a tourist destination, its target 
audience visits it for the sake of getting and 
emotions, though the experiences that bring 
pleasure may be significantly different. 
As an example, the major aim of national 
parks and nature reserves is protecting nature, so they pay great attention to the efficient management of natural resources. However, many of them have developed are now 
involved in the operation of tours [13; 21] and 
are intended to create a more developed infrastructure that ensures conditions for tourists to relax. Since this may cause damage of 
nature resources by tourists, all national parks 
and natural reserves are highly cautious and 
usually offer a minimum level of service to 
tourists [12; 13]. At the same time, this is very 
attractive for eco-tourists: they go on routes 
to be alone, to escape from everyday life, to 
get physical activity, to enjoy fresh air, to be 
in a group of like-minded people, as well as 
for many other personal reasons. Therefore, 
from the tourist attractiveness point of view 
we can define natural parks as specific experiential contexts providing extraordinary and 
memorable experiences of high value for visitors [8; 19].
A number of recent research confirm 
that experiential elements are crucial factors 
in creating and maintaining successful and 

2  In Russia, a specific type of amusement parks called Parks of culture and leisure is still widespread 
after the Soviet times. In some cases, there were 
successful attempts to activate the cultural component. However, these were mostly amusement 
parks for weekends.

profitable amusement parks. Therefore, the 
traditional park industry should focus intensely on consumers’ experiential processes [16]. 
It is noteworthy that in the past decades 
the tourism attractions with a thematic character turned into increasingly more popular [9].

Theme parks in Russia and abroad
In the history of parks as tourist attractions, a special place belongs to theme parks. 
They have become serious competitors for 
traditional amusement parks that were no 
longer able to satisfy the ever-growing needs 
of tourists. 
The global theme park industry has 
grown rapidly since the opening of Disneyland 
in Anaheim, California in 1955. Every year, the 
number of theme parks’ visitors all over the 
world was growing rapidly, ahead of the same 
indicator for world-famous cultural and historical sights. By the end of 2010, about 189.1 
million people had visited the top 25 theme 
parks worldwide [23].
There are various approaches to the 
Theme Park definition. One of the widely 
spread is that a theme park is a large leisure 
park with attractions, restaurants, hotels, and 
shops that provides its visitors with a wide 
range of entertainment, united by a common 
theme. Along with the amusement parks, this 
approach embraces oceanariums, zoos, dolphinariums, and other parks of all possible 
entertainments for children and adults. Another approach proposes to identify a number of specific features, distinguishing theme 
parks not only from other types of parks but 
also from all other leisure and entertainment 
facilities. 
In any case, the basic characteristics of 
thematic parks include their function, location, and potential [24]. Belias et al. define 
theme parks as “special tourist infrastructure 
facilities located on demarcated land areas, 
inside or outside residential areas and offering a variety of services to visitors around one 
or more thematic axes” [6, p.77]. 
We take the approach articulated by 
Aleksandrova and Sedinkina [1] as the most 
applicable. They consider theme parks as 
places for entertainment, recreation, learning, and games based on certain criteria and 
differentiating them from other parks and 
recreational areas by the following features:

Стр. 7–17
Marina Y. SHERESHEVA, Elena R. SHARKO

Современные проблемы сервиса и туризма
№ 2/2020  Том 14

11

Table 1 – Top-10 best world theme parks3

Park Name
Theme 
Location

Parameters

Total 
area, 
ha

Annual 
No. of visitors, mln

Tickets 
price

Foundation 
date

1. Magic Kingdom Park. Walt 
Disney World Park
(disneyworld.disney.go.com)

Walt Disney cartoon characters
Florida, 
USA
34
Over 20,0
104-139 $
1971

2. Europa-Park
(europapark.de)
Heroes of European fairy tales
Rust, 
Germany
90
Over 4,5
32-55 €
1975

3. Le Puy du Fou
(puydufou.com)
Historical event
Les 
Epesses, 
France
55
Over 2,0
62-116 €
1977

4. PortAventura Park
(portaventuraworld.com)

Mediterrània, Far 
West, México, China and Polynesia, 
Sesame Street, 
Ferrari Land

Salou, 
Spain
117
Over 3,5
60-109 €
1995

5. Hangzhou Songcheng Park
(ongcn.com/SongScenic_en/
About)

Culture of the 
Song dynasty
Hangzhou, 
China
250
Over 10,0
80-180 
yuan
–

6. Paultons Park – Home of 
Peppa Pig World
(paultonspark.co.uk)

Peppa Pig cartoon 
characters
Romsey, 
England
57
Over 8,0
90-120 $
2018

7. Legoland Billund
(legoland.dk)
 «LEGO»
Billund, 
Denmark
14
Over 15,0
300-600 
DKK
1968

8. Playmobil Fun Park
(playmobil-funpark.de)
«PLAYMOBIL»
Zirndorf, 
Germany
90
Over 9,0
10-80 €
1991

9. Sochi Park
(sochipark.ru)
Heroes of Russian 
folk tales
Sochi, 
Russia
20,5
Over 3,0
1300-2000 
rubles
2014

10. Universal Studio Park (Universal Studio
(usj.co.jp)

Hollywood, Harry 
Potter, Marvel 
comics, Minions, 
Jurassic Park

Osaka, 
Japan
54
Over 11,0
4700-6800 
yen
2001

- a thematic identity;
- two or more thematic zones;
- a sufficient number of attractions to visit;
- great potential for attracting families;
- commercial basis;
- high-quality services;
- organized in a confined space and 
with controlled access;
- centralized management of production and consumption processes.
In the Table 2, there is a list of Top-10 
best world theme parks. It is noteworthy that 
all ten parks have all the specific features 
listed above, including Sochi Park taking the 
ninth place among Top-10. 
Still, there is a gap in theme parks 
development as compared to many other 
countries. The main cause is that in the postSoviet period, most parks in Russia were out 

of the focus of local and federal authorities 
and received almost no funding.  That was a 
need to survive, not the time to think about 
bright thematic coloring. 3

Nowadays, there is a growing number 
of parks functioning as tourist attractions in 
Russia. Since there is no overall statistics, Table 1 presents the results of our assessment, 
based on available open sources4.     

3 Source: developed by the authors based on mamainthecity.ru/Travels/Abroad/25-luchshikh-parkov-razvlecheniy-i-attraktsionov-evropy-po-versii-tripadvisor 
and 
34travel.me/post/
nazvany-25-luchshikh-tematicheskikh-parkov-v-mire
4  State report “On the State and Environmental 
Protection of the Russian Federation in 2016”. 
Moscow: Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia, 
2017.S. 220, 223.760 s; Decree of the Government 
of the Russian Federation of November 18, 2019 
No. 1465 “On the Creation of the Zigalga National 

Park” ”; Decree of the Government of the Russian 
Federation of November 28, 2019 No. 1527 “On 
the transformation of the state natural reserve“ Pillars ”into the national park“ Krasnoyarsk Pillars “”; 
Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 07.12.2019 No. 1607 “On the creation of the 
national park “Koygorodsky“”; Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 
10, 2019 No. 1632 “On the transformation of the 
Gydansky State Nature Reserve into the Gydansky 
National Park”; Decree of the Government of the 
Russian Federation of December 20, 2019 No. 1735 
“On the Creation of the Tokinsko-Stanovoy National 

Park” ”; Decree of the Government of the Russian 
Federation of December 24, 2019 No. 1807 “On 
the creation of the national park “Kytalyk””; Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation 
of December 25, 2019 No. 1839 “On the creation of 
the Samursky National Park”; Parks of culture and 
rest. Statistical Information. 2019. URL: opendata.
mkrf.ru/opendata/7705851331-stat_parks
5  Source: developed by the authors based
6  By the mid-1970s, there were more than 1,180 
parks of culture and leisure with an extensive infrastructure in the USSR.

Table 2 – The number of different park types  
in Russia as of 01/01/20205

Park Type
Number of 
parks

Approximate expenses for annual 
maintenance, 
mln. Rub.

Amusement parks, 
water parks, lunа 
parks

2243
6.5

Parks for sports / 
fitness
148
120.0

Thematic parks
32
8.3

Parks for culture 
and leisure
317
250.0

Ethnographic 
Museum Parks
75
12.0

Zoos
36
42.0

Exhibition parks
35
18.0

Botanical gardens/
parks
46
270.0

Arboretums
27
350.0

National / natural 
parks
62
6000.0

Safari parks
5
240.0

Forest parks
24
3.5

Water parks
1
7.3

Figure 1 shows that there is a direct proportion between the cost of creating a tourism product in a certain park type and the 
number of such parks, though one should 
also take into account some other factors. As 
an example, the rest of the historic network 
of parks for culture and leisure that were 
numerous in the Soviet time6 still serves as 
a cause of such parks’ relative abundance in 
contemporary Russia. 
Assessments of the market size and 
consumer preferences for amusement parks 
in Russia are as follows: the market size 

amounted to 8.68 billion rubles in 2016, 
and the main factor of the consumer choice 
was the proximity of park location [14]. That 
means that this market is at the early stage, 
and Russian consumers are not yet too 
sophisticated and demanding to amusement 
parks’ services. Proximity of a theme park can 
be an important factor of consumer loyalty, 
especially for urban parks, but is not the only 
factor if there is enough places for choice [7]. 
Widyahantari and Rudiarto also underline 
that proximity distance is not only the main 
reason for visiting a park but also influenced 
by attractiveness and the suitability of 
the theme with the local community’s 
characteristics [35].
So far, only Sochi Park and Zaryadye Park 
in Moscow are able to compete successfully 
at the international level. It will take some 
time to develop a sufficient number of worldclass theme parks in Russia. At the same time, 
the pause in the theme parks functioning 
due to the COVID-19 pandemic is not only 
a danger of bankruptcy but also a chance to 
study best management practices in order to 
find better starting points for post-pandemic 
competition in the market. 
As a rule, each large theme park is 
multifunctional, but with a pronounced 
artistic and figurative orientation. A number 
of studies conducted in different countries 
confirm that physical setting, interaction 
with staff, as well as interaction with other 
customers, have a significant impact on 
theme park visitors’ delight and satisfaction, 
and finally on park visitors’ loyalty [2]. Highly 
important are emotional factors and the 
need to share experiences with friends and/
or family [3; 33]. Kao et al. indicate that 
immersion, surprise, participation, and fun 
are four important experiential qualities 

Стр. 7–17
Marina Y. SHERESHEVA, Elena R. SHARKO