|
on Tourism Economics |
| By: | Johan Fourie (Department of Economics, University of Stellenbosch); María Santana-Gallego (Department of Economics, La Laguna University, Spain) |
| Abstract: | While a mega-sport event is scheduled at least once every year somewhere in the world, these events are rare occurrences for the host cities and countries. The benefits of such events seem lucrative; the very fact that many countries bid to host these events suggests that the benefits – be they tangible or intangible – more often than not outweigh the costs. Using a standard gravity model of bilateral tourism flows between 200 countries from 1995 to 2006, this paper measures a very direct benefit of such mega-events: the increase in tourist arrivals to the host country. In general, results suggest that mega-events promote tourism but the gain varies depending on the type of mega-event, the participating countries, the host country’s level of development, and whether the event is held during the peak season or off season. |
| Keywords: | Sport mega-events, tourism, World Cup, Olympic Games, trade |
| JEL: | L83 F19 |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sza:wpaper:wpapers119&r=tur |
| By: | Tisdell, Clem |
| Abstract: | This article is primarily concerned with the economic consequences of World Heritage listing for the valuation of natural properties and the economic impacts of this listing. Australian data is used to throw light on this subject. Conceptual problems that arise in valuation are explored and several neglected limitations of the travel cost method for estimating the demand for visits to natural sites are mentioned. The importance of economic impact analysis in this context (especially its political ramifications) is given attention. The use of World Heritage listing for political purposes is discussed. It is argued that World Heritage listing favours the long-term conservation of natural properties. |
| Keywords: | Conservation of natural areas, economic impact analysis, economic valuation, tourism, travel cost method, World Heritage listing., Environmental Economics and Policy, L83, Q26, Q57, |
| Date: | 2010–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:uqseee:94306&r=tur |
| By: | Hsiao-I Kuo (Department of Senior Citizen Service Management, Chaoyang University of Technology); Chi-Chung Chen (Department of Applied Economics, National Chung Hsing University); Michael McAleer (Erasmus University Rotterdam, Tinbergen Institute, The Netherlands, and Institute of Economic Research, Kyoto University) |
| Abstract: | After a commercial whaling moratorium was enacted in 1986, whale watching became one of the fastest growing tourism industries worldwide. As whaling is regarded as an activity that is incompatible with whale watching, the possible resumption of commercial whaling has caused an urgent need to investigate the potential negative effects of whaling on the whale-watching industry. We examine the potential impacts of whaling on the global whale-watching tourism industry using an unbalanced panel data model. The empirical results indicate that the resumption of commercial whaling has the potential for a negative effect on the global whale-watching industry, especially for nations that are engaged in whaling. |
| Keywords: | Global whale watching, Commercial whaling, Delay-difference equation model, unbalanced panel data model. |
| Date: | 2010–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kyo:wpaper:728&r=tur |
| By: | Dennis Reinhardt (IUHEID, The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva) |
| Abstract: | This paper assesses whether the allocation puzzle - the tendency for capital to flow to countries with relatively low productivity growth - is observed for foreign direct investment (FDI) flows, which should be particularly sensitive to productivity prospects. We look both at aggregate FDI flows and, using a new data set, at FDI flows into the main economic sectors. We make three points. First, we do not find evidence of an allocation puzzle for aggregate FDI flows. Second, we refine the aggregate result and document substantial sectoral heterogeneity. An allocation puzzle is observed in the agriculture, construction, mining/petroleum/utilities and tourism sector. By contrast, we show that countries with faster productivity growth in manufacturing attract more investment in that sector. The link is even stronger for service sectors. Third, we document a role for financial openness: a country with fast productivity growth draws in more FDI into its service sectors only when it is financially open. We conclude with a discussion of some tentative explanations for the results. |
| Keywords: | Allocation Puzzle, Sectoral Level, Foreign Direct Investment |
| JEL: | F21 F41 O1 |
| Date: | 2010–08–17 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gii:giihei:heidwp14-2010&r=tur |
| By: | Abidoye, Babatunde; Herriges, Joseph A. |
| JEL: | C35 Q26 Q51 |
| Date: | 2010–10–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:isu:genres:32028&r=tur |
| By: | Paul Winters; Susana Sitja Rubio |
| Abstract: | The purpose of this guideline is to discuss the objectives and approaches of regional (subnational) development programs in order to provide guidance on issues related to evaluating the impact of these programs. Regional development programs are designed to improve the income-generating capacity of, and reduce poverty in, a focus region within a country. The primary and unique characteristics of these programs lie in promoting a broad range of productive activities in a predefined region. To do this, regional development programs often need to address the institutional structure under which decisions are made as well as how economic resources should flow from the center to the local level. As such, the programs involve both productive and institutional transformation. Evaluating the impact of regional development programs is complicated by the need to assess both the impact of productive investment as well as the institutional transformation. As with all impact evaluations, evaluating regional development programs is thus much more likely to be successful if planned along with the design of the program. This guideline provides a summary of the options for setting up evaluations of regional development programs, while carefully considering the need to go beyond evaluating the impact on beneficiaries alone |
| Keywords: | regional development, impact evaluation, development effectiveness,rural livelihoods, decentralization. |
| JEL: | C81 O12 O18 O22 R11 R58 |
| Date: | 2010–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:idb:spdwps:1004&r=tur |