|
2007 Annual International CHRIE Conference & Exposition
28
However, not every study supports the hypothesis that tourism expansion can lead to economic growth. Oh
(2005) reported no long-run link between tourism and economic growth in South Korea. In addition, he found a one-
way causality running from economic growth to tourism development in South Korea. Because of mixed findings on
a causal relationship between the two factors, Kim et al. (2006) and Oh (2005) recommended more vigorous
research on this issue for the purpose of generalization. The first goal of this study aims to make a contribution in
this aspect. The second goal seeks to contribute to the tourism development literature by examining the causality
between tourism and exchange rate as well as between tourism and export growth because there are also very few
empirical studies analyzing those two issues. Consequently, we investigate the casual relationship among tourism
development, exchange rate, exports and economic growth using data from four Asian tourist destinations, namely
China, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. Results from the examination of South Korea and Taiwan can offer a
comparative investigation on the empirical relationship between tourism expansion and economic growth found in
Oh (2005) and Kim et al. (2006).
Further, another two popular Asian tourist destination, Singapore and particularly China, provide us two
unique cases to conduct research on the interactions among tourism development, exchange rate, exports and
economic growth. China National Tourism Administration (2002) reported that the number of international tourists
traveling to China reached 31.24 million and the tourism receipts were 16.23 billion in US dollars (US$), which
ranked number five and seven, respectively, in the world in 2000. Avelini Holjevac (2003) predicted that Europe
would have the lowest tourist growth rate, whereas East Asia and the Pacific would have the largest tourist growth
rate according to the forecasts by World Tourism Organization (1997). Pizam (1999) believed that, by the year
2050, China would be one of four major tourist destinations. On the other hand, China has also become one of the
fastest growing economies in the world since its economic reform and opening up to the outside world in 1979 (Liu,
Burridge, & Sinclair, 2002). Understanding the causal links among tourism development, exchange rate, exports and
economic growth can provide important knowledge regarding development strategies for China and many other
countries that may want to promote tourism as part of their national economic development plan. Several issues
along with the interactions between tourism development and economic growth are scrutinized in this study. First,
when testing the tourism-led economic growth, Balaguer and Cantavella-Jorda (2002), Oh (2005) and Kim et al.
(2006) used a bivariate analysis of Granger causality test, which ignored the potential impact of the exchange rates
on the dynamic links between tourism expansion and economic growth. As Dritsakis (2004) stated, it has been
considered that studies based on bivariate analysis may suffer from specification error. Copeland (1991) argued that
exchange rates play a crucial role in the contribution of tourism expansion to economic growth in a small open
economy. Moreover, the exchange rate is universally used as one of determinants of tourism demand and forecasting
studies in the tourism literature. Dritsakis (2004) also found that foreign exchange rate had an impact on economic
growth of Greece and its international tourism earnings. In this study, we carry all empirical examination with the
inclusion of the exchange rate factor based on a multivariate analysis of the Granger causality.
Second, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan have been commonly known for their export-oriented
economy (Feenstra, Yang, & Hamilton, 1999; Ghartey, 1993; Wu & Eng, 1991). Nonetheless, Oh (2005) and Kim et
al. (2006) did not consider the critical role of exports in both countries either when they studied the causality
between tourism expansion and economic development. Shan and Wilson (2001) contended that there should exist a
causal link between trade and travel theoretically, and the causality could run in either or both directions. Without a
doubt, tourism development in the host country can attract tourist arrivals and foreign tourists traveling to a host
country can promote the image of the country for its goods and services all over the world, which in turn generates
trade opportunities. On the other hand, trade between countries can also create subsequent travels to the destination
country after the first visit. Greater trade consequently expands awareness of each country and hence tourism
demand. Shan and Wilson (2001) further showed that there existed a two-way causality between exports and tourism
growth. We hence also incorporate the factor of exports, in additional to exchange rate, into the investigation.
Third, quarterly data predominated in previous research concerning tourism-led growth. In this study, we
follow Shan and Wilson (2001) and Nakaota (2005) to use the monthly industrial production (IP) to approximate
economic growth. Note that economists usually use quarterly data on gross domestic product to (GDP) measure the
quarterly value of the economy, while they use IP to measure monthly output of the economy (Shapiro, 1988). The
advantage of using IP is that IP
data are usually available on a monthly basis, which in turn can offer a more
sufficient sample of observations. Especially, the vector autoregression (VAR) model requires large sample size to
generate enough degrees of freedom for estimation. Moreover, by using the monthly data of tourist arrivals (TA) and
IP, we can offer a comparative investigation of the causality between tourism and economic development in Korea
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
