nep-tur New Economics Papers
on Tourism Economics
Issue of 2018‒01‒22
two papers chosen by
Laura Vici
Università di Bologna

  1. Air transport connectivity development in tourist regions By Dimitriou , Dimitrios J.; Sartzetaki, Maria F.
  2. Evaluating Crime as a Negative Externality of Hosting Mega-Events: Econometric Analysis of the 2012 London Summer Olympics By Nicholas Le

  1. By: Dimitriou , Dimitrios J.; Sartzetaki, Maria F.
    Abstract: Air connectivity is a key driver for growth, especially for the attractive tourist destinations. Even though the benefits of the air transport are essential, limited research is published regarding the linkage of air connectivity and other business sectors (such as tourism), t he spillover effects on regional economy and the overall contribution of air connectivity to socioeconomic development. Especially for Mediterranean countries air transport for leisure purposes is the most important enabler to achieving economic growth and development. Air transport facilitates integration into the economy and provides vital connectivity on a national, regional, and international scale between countries, promoting tourism growth, and create employment opportunities in tourist destinations. The assessment concept and methodology are given, providing an essential tool for planners, economists, analysts and researchers. The application results are essential for comparisons with other destinations and provide key messages regarding the relations hip of air connectivity and air transport connectivity development in remote tourist destinations especially in Mediterranean region.
    Date: 2018
  2. By: Nicholas Le (West Virginia University, Department of Economics)
    Abstract: Analysis of the benefits and the drawbacks of hosting large-scale sporting events like the Olympics or World Cup frequently ignore the effects of crime due to its relatively small economic impact in comparison to employment and consumption effects. Literature has frequently tied sporting events and tourism to crime, in addition to observing proximity effects on crime during sporting events. This research seeks to confirm both by implementing a difference-in-difference regression that can show whether crime increased during the Olympics, in particular in London boroughs which hosted venues for the Games. Ultimately, the research concludes that crime in London as a whole does increase although it is unable to find statistically significant evidence that crime increased in host boroughs at a magnitude larger than the general increase in crime in the city. Likely reasons we have been unsuccessful in pinpointing the location effects include data limitations (daily data would be superior to monthly data due to the dates during which the event was hosted) and the relatively small geographical size of each host borough, as well as their proximity to one another.
    Keywords: sporting events, economics, crime, olympics
    Date: 2018–01

This nep-tur issue is ©2018 by Laura Vici. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.