ANALISIS PENGARUH PERMINTAAN PARIWISATA TERHADAP PDRB

PROVINSI JAWA TIMUR

PROPOSAL SKRIPSI
DIAJUKAN UNTUK MEMENUHI TUGAS UJIAN AKHIR SEMESTER
PADA MATA KULIAH METODOLOGI PENELTIIAN

Oleh:

BACKTIAR PUTRA PRATAMA

NIM: 041711133019

PROGRAM STUDI S1 EKONOMI PEMBANGUNAN

FAKULTAS EKONOMI DAN BISNIS

UNIVERSITAS AIRLANGGA
SURABAYA
2020
 BAB 1

PENDAHULUAN

1.1 Latar Belakang

Dalam kehidupan modern saat ini pariwisata tidak lagi hanya dinikmati oleh
orang-orang tertentu, namun pariwisata saat ini menjadi salah satu pilihan bagi
kehidupan manusia. Pariwisata telah berkembang dan menjadi salah satu sektor
yang berkontribusi pada perekonomian. Ditandai dengan perkembangan jumlah
wisatawan dan kontribusi sektor pariwisata terhadap PDB. Berdasarkan laporan
Kementrian Pariwisata (Kemenpar), jumlah wisatawan mancanegara ke Indonesia
pada tahun 2018 mencapai 15,784,233 juta jiwa dan pada tahun 2019 mencapai
16,137,565 juta jiwa.

Perkembangan pariwisata yang semakin pesat ini ditandai dengan daya

saing pariwisata negara Indonesia di dunia berdasarkan Travel and Tourism
Competitiveness Index yang dibuat oleh World Economic Forum per 2 tahun sekali,
pada tahun 2015 peringkat daya saing Indonesia berada di peringkat 50 dunia pada
tahun berikutnya yaitu tahun 2017 peringkat daya saing Indonesia berada di
peringkat 42 dan pada tahun 2019 daya saing Indonesia berada di peringkat 40. Hal
ini menunjukkan bahwa sektor pariwisata Indonesia sangat berkembang. Selain itu
dapat dilihat melalui pendapatan pariwisata Indonesia. Dalam rangking
pembentukan devisa, rangking sektor pariwisata pada tahun 2013-2015 menempati
rangking ke-4 dengan kontribusi sebesar 10,054,15 juta dollar, tahun 2014 dengan
perolehan 11,166,13 juta dollar, dan pada tahun 2015 sebesar 12,225,89 juta dollar
(Kemenpar, 2015).

Perkembangan pariwisata yang sangat pesat berpengaruh terhadap beberapa

aspek seperti ekonomi, lingkungan, sosial, dan budaya. Selain hal tersebut
pariwisata adalah salah satu sektor penting dalam perekonomian. Sektor ini adalah
sektor yang dapat meningkatkan pertumbuhan ekonomi nasional sudah signifikan
pekerjaan yang dihasilkan. Sehingga sektor pariwisata memiliki potensi untuk
menjadi titik atau salah satu penggerak ekonomi utama, karena masyarakat
setempat memiliki kaitan erat dengan lingkungan sekitar di lokasi wisata
(Abuomoud et al, 2019). Pariwisata internasional telah diakui sebagai saluran untuk
pengentasan kemiskinan dan pembangunan infrastruktur, kontribusinya terhadap
pertumbuhan ekonomi, pendapatan valuta asing, dan lapangan kerja (Wamboye et
al .,2020). Banyak penelitian telah mengeksplorasi dan menunjukkan bahwa
pengembangan sektor pariwisata telah membantu banyak negara mencapai
pertumbuhan ekonomi yang lebih tinggi. Parwisata adalah penghasil devisa terbesar
kedua dan berkontribusi terhadap neraca perdagangan dan kinerja Gross Domestic
Product (Hanafiah et al, 2010).

Pariwisata Indonesia yang telah dikenal di dunia dan memiliki daya saing
di pariwisata Internasional dapat menjadi salah satu sektor yang dapat memberikan
sumbangan pendapatan yang signifikan terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi jika
dikelola dan dikembangkan dengan baik. Pertumbuhan ekonomi adalah proses
kenaikan output perkapita diproduksi dengan Produk Domestik Regional Bruto
(PDRB) perkapita (Boediono, 1985). Terdapat beberapa faktor yang mempengaruhi
pertumbuhan ekonomi antara lain : tenaga kerja, tingkat teknologi, sumber daya
alam, dan kondisi sosial budaya.

Pengembangan Pariwisata dapat memberikan beberapa manfaat seperti

antara lain : peningkatan lapangan kerja, peningkatan penerimaan devisa negara,
serta Peningkatan pada Produk Domesik Regional Bruto (PDRB). Indonesia sendiri
memiliki 34 provinsi yang masing-masing provinsi memiliki PDRB yang berbeda.

Tabel 1.1

PDRB Harga Konstan 34 Provinsi di Indoensia Tahun 2018

PDRB Atas Dasar Harga Konstan

Provinsi
No (Dalam Ribuan)
1 ACEH 126.824
2 SUMATERA UTARA 512.765
3 SUMATERA BARAT 163.995
4 RIAU 482.087
5 JAMBI 142.995
6 SUMATERA SELATAN 298.569
7 BENGKULU 44.171
 PDRB Atas Dasar Harga Konstan
No Provinsi (Dalam Ribuan)
8 LAMPUNG 232.214
9 KEP. BANGKA BELITUNG 52.212
10 KEP. RIAU 173.689
11 DKI JAKARTA 1.736.195
12 JAWA BARAT 1.419.689
13 JAWA TENGAH 941.283
14 DI YOGYAKARTA 98.026
15 JAWA TIMUR 1.563.756
16 BANTEN 433.884
17 BALI 154.150
18 NUSA TENGGARA BARAT 90.323
19 NUSA TENGGARA TIMUR 65.941
20 KALIMANTAN BARAT 130.584
21 KALIMANTAN TENGAH 94.595
22 KALIMANTAN SELATAN 128.106
23 KALIMANTAN TIMUR 464.823
24 KALIMANTAN UTARA 57.825
25 SULAWESI UTARA 84.258
26 SULAWESI TENGAH 103.617
27 SULAWESI SELATAN 309.243
28 SULAWESI TENGGARA 88.328
29 GORONTALO 26.722
30 SULAWESI BARAT 31.176
31 MALUKU 29.465
32 MALUKU UTARA 25.050
33 PAPUA BARAT 60.453
34 PAPUA 159.728
Sumber: Badan Pusat Statistik (2019)

Berdasarkan Tabel 1.1 dapat dilihat bahwa PDRB atas dasar harga konstan
tertinggi di Indonesia diduduki oleh DKI Jakarta dengan jumlah 1.736.195 miliar.
Kemudian diikuti oleh Jawa Timur dengan jumlah 1.563.759 miliar rupiah, serta
Jawa Barat dengan jumlah 1.419.689 miliar rupiah. Jawa Timur sebagai provinsi
terbesar di pulau Jawa PDRB nya menempati peringkat ke 2 secara nasional. PDRB
Jawa Timur meningkat setiap tahunnya pada periode 2015-2019 mengalami
peningkatan mencapai 1.650.143 miliar rupiah pada tahun 2019.

Provinsi Jawa Timur memiliki 38 Kabupaten/Kota dimana di tiap deaerah

memiliki daya tarik wisata masing-masing, berdasarkan data Dinas Komunikasi
dan Informatika Provinsi Jawa Timur tahun 2018, 5 tempat wisata yang memiliki
daya tarik wisata tertinggi di provinsi Jawa Timur yang pertama adalah Kawah Ijen
di Banywuangi dan Bondowoso dengan presentase 33%, lalu di tempat kedua
adalah Bromo di Probolinggo, Pasuruan, Lumajang, Malang dengan presentase
11,89%, Posisi ketiga adalah House Of Sampoerna di Surabaya dengan presntase
11,80%, Peringkat ke 4 yaitu Kampung Buring di Kota Malang, dan peringkat ke 5
yaitu Wisata Agro Strawberry di Probolinggo dengan presentase 5,64%.

Perkembangan wisata mancanegara di Provinsi Jawa Timur dapat dilihat

dari jumlah kunjungan wistawan mancangeara ke Provinsi Jawa Timur tahun 2018
sebesar 320.529 kunjungan yang naik sebesar 29,68 persen dibandingkan dengan
tahun sebelumnya yang mencapai 247.166 kunjungan. Kunjungan wisatawan
mancanegara ke Provinsi Jawa Timur yang terbesar berasal dari kawasan ASEAN.
Peningkatan jumlah pengunjung wisata pada suatu daerah juga diiringi dengan
peningkatan sarana dan prasarana. Sarana disini memberikan kemudahan bagi
wisatawan untuk memenuhi kebutuhannya. Bentuk jasa pariwisata yang menjadi
konsumsi utama wisatawan adalah hotel dan restoran dimana pengeluaran
wisatawan juga untuk kebutuhan penginapan dan makanan. Berkembangnya
pariwisata suatu daerah maka akan banyak juga

Dengan menggunakan variable Produk Domestik Regional Bruto, jumlah

pengunjung wisata, jumlah restoran, dan kamar hotel serta beradasarkan latar
belakang maka peneliti menguraikan permasalahan tersebut dengan judul “Analisis
Pengaruh Pariwisata Terhadap PDRB Sektor Pariwisata Jawa Timur”.

1.2 Kesenjangan Penelitian

1. Penelitian ini menggunakan Provinsi Jawa Timur sebagai subjek penelitian,
dimana penelitian dengan topik menggunakan Jawa Timur sebagai subjek
penelitian masih minim
2. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode GMM, dimana penelitian dengan topik
serupa sebagian besar menggunakan metode Panel Cointegration Test,
Fixed Effect Model, Vector Autoregressive dan Random Effect Model.
1.3 Tujuan Penelitian

Sesuai dengan yang telah diuraikan pada latar belakang, maka tujuan dari
penelitian ini adalah menguji pengaruh variabel jumlah pengunjung wisata, jumlah
restoran, dan jumlah kamar hotel terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi sektor pariwisata
di Jawa Timur.

1.4 Sistematika Penelitian

Sistematika penulisan penelitian ini terdiri dari lima tahapan yang saling
berkaitan untuk mencapai tujuan penelitian, yaitu :

BAB 1 : PENDAHULUAN

Dalam bab ini berisi latar belakang, rumusan masalah, tujuan penelitian, dan
sistematika penulisan dalam penelitian.

BAB 2 : TINJAUAN PUSTAKA

Dalam bab ini berisi landasan teori dari permasalahan yang dibahas,
penelitian-penelitian terdahulu, dan kerangka berfikir teoritis.

BAB 3 : METODE PENELITIAN

Dalam bab ini berisi pendekatan penelitian, identifikasi variabel, definisi

operasional, jenis dan sumber data, proses pengumpulan data, dan teknik analisis

BAB 4 : PEMBAHASAN

Dalam bab ini berisi gambaran umum penelitian, deskripsi hasil uji empiris,
analisis model, serta pembahasan hasil penelitian

BAB 5 : KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN

Dalam bab ini berisi seluruh penjelasan yang ditarik dari hasil penelitian
dalam bentuk simpulan, dan disertai saran-saran yang diperlukan.
 BAB 2

TINJAUAN PUSTAKA

2.1 Landasan Teori

2.1.1 Konesp Ekonomi Pariwisata

World Tourism Organization (WTO) dan International Union of Office
Travel Organization (IUOTO) mendefinisikan wisatawan sebagai setiap
pengunjung yang tinggal paling sedikit 24 jam, akan tetapi tidak lebih dari 6 (enam)
bulan di tempat yang dikunjunginya dengan maksud kunjungan antara lain: (1)
berlibur, rekreasi, dan olahraga, (2) bisnis, mengunjungi teman dan keluarga, misi,
menghadiri pertemuan, konferensi, kunjungan dengan alasan kesehatan, belajar,
atau kegiatan keagamaan. Adapun Badan Pusat Statistik mendefinisikan pelancong
sebagai setiap pengunjung yang tingal kurang dari 24 jam di tempat yang
dikunjunginya. Pariwisata berdasarkan pengertian World Tourism and Travel
Council (WTCC) adalah merupakan seluruh kegiatan orang yang melakukan
perjalanan ke dan tinggal di suatu tempat di luar lingkungan kesehariannya dalam
jangka waktu tidak lebih dari setahun untuk bersantai, bisnis dan lainnya.
Kunjungan pariwisata dapat terjadi karena berbagai alasan: liburan,
perjalanan bisnis, kunjungan ke teman dan kerabat (VFR), konferensi, ziarah, dan
sebagainya. Sebagian besar studi empiris tentang permintaan pariwisata memeriksa
total perjalanan wisata (termasuk semua tujuan yang disebutkan di atas) atau hanya
perjalanan liburan (Witt dan Witt, 1995). Dalam Undang-Undang Republik
Indonesia Nomor 10 tahun 2009 dinyatakan : “Wisata adalah kegiatan perjalanan
yang dilakukan oleh seseorang atau sekelompok orang dengan mengunjungi tempat
tertentu untuk tujuan rekreasi, pengembangan pribadi, atau mempelajari keunikan
daya tarik wisata yang dikunjungi dalam jangka waktu sementara”.
Perkembangan pariwisata akan memberikan keuntungan bagi masyarakat di
daerah tersebut. Perkembangan pariwisata akan menghidupkan pasar lokal dan
merangsang tumbuhnya perekonomian. Yoeti (2008) menyatakan bahwa pariwisata
merupakan katalisator pembangunan suatu daerah sekaligus mempercepat proses
pembangunan itu sendiri. Peran pariwisata dalam perekonomian antara lain sebagai
berikut :

1. Mempercepat dan memperluas kesempatan berusaha.

2. Memperbesar kesempatan kerja bagi masyarakat.
3. Mempercepat proses pemerataan pendapatan.
4. Meningkatkan penerimaan daerah melalui pajak maupun penerimaan daerah
melalui retribusi.
5. Mendorong pertumbuhan dan pembangunan daerah.

Menurut Yoeti (2008) faktor-faktor yang mendorong pertumbuhan pariwisata di

abad ke-21 ini adalah :
1. Three Revolution
Kemajuan teknologi transportasi, telekomunikasi, dan tourism menyebabkan
segalanya menjadi mudah bagi orang-orang untuk melakukan perjalanan wisata
yang juga mendorong orang-orang untuk melakukan kegiatan wisata.
2. Hybrid
Diperkirakan pada waktunya nanti orang-orang akan melakukan perjalanan dengan
pola baru. Suatu perjalanan bisnis akan digabung dengan kegiatan wisata sehingga
suatu perjalanan bisnis akan menjadi lebih lama.
3. Leisure Time
Kecenderungan di dunia ini semakin banyaknya waktu libur yang tersedia sehingga
kesempatan untuk melakukan untuk melakukan kunjungan wisata semakin besar.
2.1.2 Teori Pertumbuhan Ekonomi
Pertumbuhan ekonomi menjadi salah satu indikator keberhasilan
pembangunan suatu daerah. Mankiw (2016) menyatakan bahwa pertumbuhan
ekonomi menunjukan sejauh mana aktivitas perekonomian akan menghasilkan
tambahan pendapatan masayrakat pada sauatu periode tertentu. Karena pada
dasarnya aktivitas ekonomi merupakan suatu proses penggunaan faktor-faktor
produksi untuk menghasilkan output, maka pada gilirannya akan menhasilkan suatu
aliran balas jasa terhadap faktor produksi yang dimiliki masyarakat. Pertumbuhan
ekonomi adalah suatu proses perubahan menuju arah yang lebih baik.
 Menurut Solow , menjelaskan bagaimana tingkat tabungan, investasi,
pertumbuhan populasi, dan kemajuan teknologi mempengaruhi tingkat output
dalam perekonomian dan pertumbuhannya sepanjang waktu (Mankiw, 2016).
Dalam pertumbuhan ekonomi indikator penting untuk mengetahui kondisi
perekonomian suatu daerah adalah Produk Domestik Regional Bruto (PDRB).
PDRB digunakan untuk mengetahui performa suatu perekonomian Mankiw (2016).
Hubungan antara modal dan output dapat ditulis dalam persamaan fungsi berikut :
𝑦 = 𝑓(𝑘)………………………………………………………………..(2.1)
Output per pekerja (y) adalah fungsi dari stock modal per pekerja (k). Hal
ini sesuai dengan fungsi produksi. Sedangkan fungsi investasi dapat ditulis dengan
persamaan sebagai berikut :
𝑖 = 𝑠 𝑓 (𝑘)………………………………………………………………(2.2)
Persamaan diatas menunjukkan bahwa tingkat investasi per pekerja adalah
fungsi stok modal per pekerja. Stok modal ini dipengaruhi oleh besar kecilnya
investasi dan depresiasi . Investasi akan menambah modal sedangkan depresiasi
akan mengurangi modal. Pertumbuhan juga dipengaruhi oleh pertumbuhan
populasi. Semakin meningkatnya populasi maka jumlah tenaga kerja akan
meningkat, dan kemudian akan mengurangi stok modal per pekerja. Tingkat
pertumbuhan populasi dan tingkat depresiasi secara bersama-sama dapat ditulis
dengan persamaan sebagai berikut :
∆𝑘 = 𝑠𝑓(𝑘) − (𝛿 + 𝑛)𝑘………………………………………………(2.3)
Dalam teori Solow kemajuan teknologi diasumsikan sebagai variabel
eksogen, sehingga model ini terkadang juga disebut sebagai model pertumbuhan
ekonomi eksogen.Dengan asumsi fungsi produksi dengan skala hasil konstan, maka
persamaannya sebagai berikut :
𝑌 = 𝐹(𝐾, 𝐿 𝑥 𝐸)………………………………………………………(2.4)
L x E digunakan untuk mengukur jumlah pekerja efektif. L mengukur
jumlah pekerja dan E efisiensi masin-masing pekerja. Fungsi produksi ini
menyatakan bahwa output Y tergantung pada stok modal K dan jumlah pekerja
efektif (L x E). Kondisi ini terjadi ketika perubahan persediaan modal sama dengan
nol. Maka pengaruh kemajuan teknologi terhadap jumlah modal dapat dituliskan
pada persamaan berikut :
∆𝑘 = 𝑠𝑓(𝑘) − (𝛿 + 𝑛 + 𝑔)𝑘…………………………………………….(2,5)
Teori pertumbuhan Solow menjelaskan bahwa terdapat beberapa hal yang
mampu memacu pertumbuhan ekonomi. Salah satunya dengan meningkatkan
investasi yang sesuai dengan kondisi daerah baik secara fisik maupun non fisik.
Disamping hal tersebut peningkatan tabungan menyebabkan akumulasi modal akan
meningkat pula, sehingga akan mempercepat pertumbuhan ekonomi. Kemajuan
teknologi juga akan memberikan peningkatan pendapatan per tenaga kerja.
Angka PDRB sangat penting untuk ditampilkan, karena dapat digunakan sebagai
analisa perencanaan pembangunan dan sebagai barometer untuk mengukur hasil
pembangunan yang telah dilaksanakan. Todaro (2002) PDRB adalah nilai total atas
seluiruh output akhir yang dihasilkan oleh perekonomian di tingkat daerah baik
yang dihasilkan oleh penduduk asli daerah tersebut maupun penduduk daerah lain
yang bermukim di daerah tersebut. Secara umum Produk Domestik Regional Bruto
(PDRB) didefinisikan sebagai nilai barang dan jasa yang diproduksi di suatu
wilayah dalam periode waktu tertentu.
Mengacu pada teori pertumbuhan Solow penelitian ini mengasumsikan
PDRB sebagai output dari model perekonomian. Penelitian ini mengasumsikan
jumlah pengunjung wisata sebagai pertumbuhan populasi dimana semakin
bertmbahnya jumlah pengunjung wisata akan meningkatkan output yang
dihasilkan. Kemudian jumlah kamar hotel, jumlah restoran, dan jumlah daya Tarik
wisata diasumsikan sebagai tingkat tabungan dan investai. Maka ketika jumlah
kamar hotel, jumlah restoran, dan jumlah daya tarik wisata meningkat maka akan
meningkatkan jumlah output yang dihasilkan pula.
2.2 Penelitian Terdahulu
Penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Brida dan Risso (2009), mengenai
pariwisata dan perhotelan dengan studi kasus faktor yang mempengaruhi
permintaan pariwisata Jerman terhadap Italia menggunakan data panel 1987- 2007
yang dianalisis dengan metode GMM. Penelitian ini menggunakan variabel lama
menginap, jumlah kedatangan wisatawan internasional, harga relatif, harga minyak
dunia, GDP per kapita negara asal. Hasil penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa variabel
lama menginap, kedatangan wisatawan internasional dan GDP per kapita
berpengaruh positif pada permintaan pariwisata Jerman terhadap Italia, sedangkan
variabel harga relatif dan harga minyak dunia berpengaruh negatif terhadap
permintaan pariwisata Jerman terhadap Italia.
Hanafiah et al (2010) melakukan penelitian mengenai pengembangan sektor
pariwisata terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi di Malaysia melalui variabel
perdangangan bilateral, populasi, pendapatan, harga pariwisata dan jarak geografis
antara Malaysia dan negara-negara Asia penentu utama pariwisata pada tahun
1997-2008. Banyak penelitian telah mengeksplorasi dan menunjukkan bahwa
pengembangan sektor pariwisata telah membantu banyak negara mencapai
pertumbuhan ekonomi yang lebih tinggi. Parwisata adalah penghasil devisa terbesar
kedua dan berkontribusi terhadap neraca perdagangan dan kinerja Gross Domestic
Product Dengan menggunakan gravity model. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa
secara signifikan permintaan pariwisata berkolerasi dengan perdagangan.
Chang & Mcaleer (2012) melakukan penelitian mengenai spesialisasi
pariwisata terhadap pembangunan ekonomi di di 159 negara selama periode 1989-
2008 menggunakan data jumlah kunjungan wistawan, nilai tukar dan pendapatan.
Dengan menggunakan Panel threshold model hasil penelitiannya menunjukkan
Jumlah kunjungan wistawan dan pendapatan berkorelasi positif terhadap
pertumbuhan ekonomi dan nilai tukar berkorelasi negatif terhadap pertumbuhan
ekonomi.
Habibi (2017) , yang meneliti faktor penentu inbond ke Malaysia dengan
menggunakan data panel periode tahun 2000-2012. Variabel yang digunakan dalam
penelitian ini adalah Jumlah kedatangan wisatawan, PDB per kapita, tourist price
Index, harga subtitusi, travel cost, dan jumlah kamar hotel. Hasilnya pendapatan,
kamar hotel dan stabilitas politik memiliki dampak positif pada permintaan
pariwisata untuk Malaysia. Penelitian ini juga menunjukkan bahwa estimasi
koefisien harga wisata pengganti dalam model adalah negatif.
 BAB 3
METODE PENELITIAN
3.1 Kerangka Berfikir
Pariwisata di Indonesia khususnya Provinsi Jawa Timur memiliki daya tarik
dimasing-masing 38 kabutpaten/kota. Langkah awal dalam penelitian ini adalah
menentukan variabel yang mempengaruhi pariwisata dimana menjadi lingkup dari
kajian. Variabel yang dipilih adalah jumlah pengunjung wisatawan, jumlah
restoran, dan jumlah kamar hotel. Hal ini didasarkan pada beberapa jurnal acuan
dan ketersediaan data yang ada. Langkah kedua adalah menentukan objek kajian
kedua sebagai variabel yang dipengaruhi oleh objek pada langkah awal, Variabel
yang digunakan adalah Produk Domestik Regional Bruto (PDRB) atas dasar harga
konstan Provinsi Jawa Timur. Langkah ketiga adalah melihat pengaruh dari objek
pertama sebagaimana objek pertama didukung oleh ketiga variabel dependen
terhadap objek kedua sebagai variabel independen. Setelah semua proses dilalui,
peneliti akan memberikan kesimpulan dari hasil penelitian.

Jumlah
Kamar Hotel

Jumlah Sektor Pertumbuhan

Pengunjung Pariwisata Ekonomi

Wisatawan

Jumlah
Restoran
3.2 Rancangan Model

Penelitian ini menggunakan model data panel dinamis yang mengacu pada
beberapa jurnal seperti A Dynamic Panel Data Study of the German Demand for
Tourism in South Tyrol yang ditulis oleh Brida dan Risso (2009), jurnal Bilateral
Trade and Tourism Demand yang diteliti oleh Hanafiah et al (2010) dan Current
Issues in Tourism yang ditulis Habibi (2017). Berdasarkan acuan jurnal tersebut
maka penelitian ini melakukan modifikasi model dengan data yang dimiliki. Maka
model dalam penelitian ini adalah sebagai berikut :
𝑙𝑛𝑃𝐷𝑅𝐵𝑖𝑡 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1 𝑙𝑛𝐽𝑢𝑚𝑙𝑎ℎ𝑃𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑗𝑢𝑛𝑔𝑊𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑡 + 𝛽2 𝐽𝑢𝑚𝑙𝑎ℎ𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑡
+ 𝛽3 𝑙𝑛𝐽𝑢𝑚𝑙𝑎ℎ𝐾𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑡 + 𝜀𝑖𝑡
Keterangan :
lnPDRB : Logaritma natural dari variabel Produk Domestik
Regional Bruto sektor pariwisata
lnJumlahPengunjungWisata : Logartima natural dari variabel jumlah pengunjung
wisata
JumlahRestoran : Variabel Jumlah Restoran
lnJumlahKamar : Logartima natural dari variabel jumlah kamar
𝛽1 𝛽2 𝛽3 : Koefisien/Intersep regresi
𝛽0 : Konstansta
𝜀 : Error
3.2.1 Definisi Variabel

Definisi variabel digunakan untuk menjelaskan masing-masing variabel

yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini.

a) Produk Domestik Regional Bruto

PDRB adalah nilai total seluruh output akhir yang dihasilkan oleh daerah
baik penduduk di dalam daerah tersebut maupun penduduk di luar daerah tersebut.
Dalam artian umum PDRB didefinisikan sebagai nilai barang dan jasa yang
diproduksi di suatu wilayah dalam periode waktu tertentu. Variabel PDRB dalam
penelitian ini adalah PDRB atas dasar harga konstan pada 38 Kabupaten/Kota di
Provinsi Jawa Timur periode 2014-2018.

b) Jumlah Pengunjung Wisatawan

Wisatawan adalah setiap orang yang melakukan perjalanan ke suatu tempat

yang berada di luar tempat tinggalnya, kurang dari satu tahun yang didorong oleh
tujuan (bisnis, berlibur, atau tujuan pribadi lainnya), selain untuk bekerja dengan
penduduk negara yang dikunjungi. Variabel jumlah pengunjung wisatawan yang
digunakan dalam penelitian adalah Jumlah pengunjung wisatawan Kabupaten/Kota
di Provinsi Jawa Timur Periode 2014-2018.

c) Jumlah Restoran

Restoran/rumah makan merupakan suatu usaha yang menyediakan

makanan serta minuman beserta pelengkap lainnya dengan perlengkapan dan
peralatan makan untuk proses pembuatan hingga penyajian kepada konsumen di
tempat yang tetap dengan tujuan memperoleh keuntungan. Variabel jumlah restoran
yang digunakan dalam penelitian adalah jumlah restoran di 38 Kabupaten/Kota di
Proivnsi Jawa Timur periode 2014-2018.

d) Jumlah Kamar Hotel

Hotel merupakan suatu usaha yang menyediakan layanan penginapan bagi

wisatawan. Layanan yang diberikan adalah fasilitas kamar beserta perlengkapan
dan peralatan di dalamnya. Variabel jumlah kamar yang digunakan dalam
penelitian ini adalah jumlah kamar yang tersedia pada hotel berbintang maupun non
berbintang serta penginapan lainnya restoran di 38 Kabupaten/Kota di Proivnsi
Jawa Timur periode 2014-2018.

3.2.2 Hipotesis

Hipotesis dalam penelitian ini variabel jumlah pengunjung wisata, jumlah

restoran, jumlah kamar hotel berpengaruh signifikan pada pertumbuhan ekonomi
pada sektor pariwisata provinsi Jawa Timur.
3.3 Ruang Lingkup Studi/Penelitian
Ruang lingkup dalam penelitian ini adalah mengetahui pengaruh dari sektor
pariwisata terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi melalui 3 variabel yaitu jumlah
pengunjung wisatawan, jumlah restoran, jumlah kamar hotel.

3.4 Jenis dan Sumber Data

Jenis data yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini merupakan data sekunder,
berupa data panel periode 2014 – 2018. Sumber data yang digunakan dalam
penelitian ini diambil dari data yang dipublikasikan oleh Badan Pusat Statistik,
Dians Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata serta Kementrian Pariwisata.

3.4.1 Metode Pengumpulan Data

Metode pengumpulan data yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah
penggunaan metode dokumentasi. Metode dokumentasi yaitu mencari data
mengenai hal-hal atau variabel yang berupa catatan, buku, dan sebagainya. Dalam
penelitian ini penulis mengumpulkan data dari badan pusat statistik (BPS), Dinas
Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata, Kementrian Pariwisata.

3.5. Teknik Analisis

Teknik analisis dalam penelitian ini menggunakan metode Generalized
Method of Moments (GMM) yang digunakan untuk mengurangi masalah
endogenitas dan untuk memperoleh perkiraan pengaruh antara pariwisata dan
pertumbuhan ekonomi sektor pariwisata Jawa Timur. Dalam uji GMM pertama
dilakukan uji spesifikasi GMM untuk mengetahui valid atau tidaknya model yang
digunakan. Kemudian adalah uji korelasi Arellano-Bond untuk mengetahui ada
atau tidaknya autokorelasi dalam model. Selanjutnya dliakukan uji parsial (t-test)
untuk melihat tingkat signifikansi dari variabel independen secara individu dalam
mempengaruhi variabel dependen. Kemudian dilakukan uji simultan Prob > F
untuk menentukan signifikansi variabel independen secara bersama dalam
mempengaruhi variabel dependen.
3.5.1 Data Model Dinamis
Penggunaan data panel memiliki manfaat untuk analisis penyesuaian
dinamis (dynamic adjustment). Hubungan dinamis tersebut dapat diketahui melalui
lag variabel dependen pada persamaan regresi. Analisis pada model persamaan
regresi tidak hanya dipengaruhi oleh periode saat ini namun juga dipengaruhi oleh
periode sebelumnya pada variabel independen atau disebut dengan distributed lag
model. Menurut Baltagi, Bratberg, & Holmås (2005) model data panel dinamis
adalah sebagai berikut :
1
𝑦𝑖𝑡 = 𝛿𝑖 ,𝑡 −1 + 𝑥𝑖𝑡 𝛽 + 𝜇𝑖𝑡 ; = 1, … 𝑁 ; 𝑡 = 1,2, … 𝑇……………………………..(3.1)
1
Dimana 𝛿 merupakan skalar dan 𝑥𝑖𝑡 merupakan matriks berukuran 1 x K
dan 𝛽 merupakan matriks berukuran K x 1. Asumsinya adalah 𝜇𝑖𝑡 mengikuti model
one way error component sebagai berikut :
𝜇𝑖𝑡 = 𝜇𝑖 + 𝑉𝑖𝑡 …………………………………………………………………..(3.2)
Dimana 𝜇𝑖𝑡 adalah efek individu yang diasumsikan 𝜇𝑖 ~ 𝑁(0, 𝜎2/𝜇) dan 𝑉𝑖𝑡
/𝜇
adalah error term yang diasumsikan 𝑉𝑖𝑡 ~ 𝑁(0, 22 ) dimana 𝜇𝑖 dan 𝑉𝑖𝑡 saling
bebas satu sama lain.
Adanya lag dari variabel dependen sebagai regressor dalam regresi pada
model data panel akan mengakibatan endogenity. Meskipun error term tidak
memiliki korelasi, namun jika terdapat lag variabel dependen pada model regresi
Pooled Least Square (PLS), Fixed Effects (FE), dan Random Effects (RE) maka
akan dapat menghasilkan estimator yang tidak konsisten dan juga bias (Baltagi et.al
2005). Permasalaha tidak konsisten dan juga bias tersebut dapat diatasi
menggunakan pendekatan GMM. Terdapat dua prosedur estimasi GMM yaitu :

a) First-Difference GMM (FD-GMM)

Tujuan penggunaan FD-GMM pada persamaan panel dinamis adalah
dengan menghilangkan efek individu. Instrumen yang tepat digunakan pada
persamaan First Difference adalah variabel lag dari level. Estimasi yang konsisten
α dimana N→∞ dengan T relative kecil. dengan T relatif kecil. Dengan
menggunakan transformasi First Difference pada pendekatan variabel instrumen
untuk menghilangkan pengaruh individu (𝜇𝑖 ) dengan persamaan sebagai berikut :
𝑌𝑖𝑡 − 𝑦𝑖 ,𝑡 −1 = 𝛼(𝑦𝑖 ,𝑡 −1 − 𝑦𝑖 ,𝑡 −2 ) + (𝑉𝑖𝑡 − 𝑉𝑖 ,𝑡 −1 ); 𝑡 = 2, … , 𝑇………. ...…..(3.3)
Estimasi First Diffrence memiliki keterbatasan, yaitu ketika terjadi korelasi
antar lag dari First Difference sehingga instrumen yang digunakan menjadi lemah.
Kelemahan First Difference GMM dapat dapat diketahui dengan cara
membandingkan koefisisen dari pengubah lag yang diperoleh dari pendekatan
Pooled Least Square (PLS), Fixed Effect (FE), dan First Difference GMM (FD-
GMM). Jika menggunakan Pooled Least Square (PLS) maka nilai penduga
koefisien akan bias ke atas. Jika menggunakan Fixed Effect (FE) maka nilai
penduga koefisien akan bias ke bawah. Maka nilai koefisien yang konsisten akan
diperoleh apabila nilainya berada diantara Pooled Least Square (PLS) dan Fixed
Effect (FE) (Firdaus 2011).

b) System GMM (SYS-GMM)

Inti dari metode System GMM (SYS-GMM) adalah pengestimasian sistem
persamaan baik pada first difference maupun level. Instrumen yang digunakan pada
level adalah lag first difference. Asumsi tambahan pada System GMM (SYS-GMM)
adalah 𝐸 (𝜇𝑖 , ∆𝑦𝑖2 ) = 0 untuk i=1,…..N. Adapun matriks instrumen bagi System
GMM (SYS-GMM) adalah sebagai berikut :
…………………………………………………....(3.4)

Himpunan kondisi momen ditulisan sebagai berikut :

[𝑍𝑖∗1 , 𝜇1 ] = 0………………………………………………………………..(3.5)
𝑈 ∗ = (∆𝑉𝑖3 , … , ∆𝑌𝑖𝑡 , … 𝑈𝑖3 , … 𝑈𝑖𝑡 )………………………………………….(3.6)
Maka System GMM memiliki kombinasi instrumen berupa level pada persamaan
first difference pada persamaan level.
3.5.2 Uji Spesifikasi GMM
Valid atau tidaknya suatu instrumen atau biasa disebut validitas instrumen
yang digunakan dalam suatu model sangatlah penting. Untuk mengetahui valid atau
tidaknya suatu instrumen dapat diketahui melalui Sargan/Hansen test untuk over-
identifying restrictions. Pada uji ini terdapat nilai probabilitas chi-square, dimana
jika nilai probabilitasnya di bawah tingkat signifikan yang ditentukan yaitu 1%, 5%,
dan 10% maka hipotesis nol (H0) ditolak atu model dikatakan tidak valid. Namun
jika nilai probabilitasnya di atas tingkat signifikan yang ditentukan yaitu 1%, 5%,
dan 10% maka hipotesis nol (H0) diterima atu model dikatakan valid. Kemudian
adalah uji autokorelasi atau disebut juga uji korelasi Arellano-Bond. Uji auto
korelasi digunakan untuk mengetahui hubungan antar tahun pada model. Uji
autokorelasi menggunakan statistik Arellano-Bond digunakan untuk mengetahui
konsistensi dari hasil estimasi yang dihasilkan dalam model GMM. Pada uji
autokorelasi Arellano-Bond ini terdapat probabilitas z. Apabila nilai probabilitas z
berada dibawah tingkat signifikansi 1%, 5%, dan 10% maka hipotesis nol (H0)
ditolak, yang berarti menunjukan adanya autokorelasi dalam model sehingga model
dinyatakan tidak valid. Namun jika nilai probabilitas z berada diatas tingkat
signifikansi 1%, 5%, dan 10% maka hipotesis nol (H0) diterima sehingga
menunjukan tidak adanya autokorelasi yang berarti model dinyatakan valid.

3.5.3 Uji Statistik

A) Uji Parsial
Uji parsial menggunakan uji t (t-test) adalah uji yang dilakukan terhadap koefisien
dari variabel independen secara parsial. Tujuan dari uji parsial ini adalah untuk
melihat tingkat signifikansi dari variabel independen secara individu dalam
mempengaruhi variabel dependen. Uji ini dilakukan dengan cara membandingkan
nilai t hitung pada hasil estimasi dengan t tabel. Apabila t hitung ≥ t tabel maka H0
ditolak dah H1 diterima, artinya terdapat hubungan antara variabel dependen dan
variabel independen. Selain itu pengujian juga dapat menggunakan niali p-value uji
t. Apabila nilai p-value dibawah tingkat signifikansi 1%, 5%, dan 10% maka
terdapat hubungan antara variabel dependen dan variabel independent Gujarati
(2012). Hipotesis yang digunakan pada uji parsial ini adalah sebagai berikut :
𝐻0 ∶ 𝛽1 = 0 (variabel independen tidak berpengaruh
terhadap variabel dependen)
𝐻0 ∶ 𝛽1 = 0 (variabel independen berpengaruh
terhadap variabel dependen)
B) Uji Simultan
Uji simultan atau Prob > F bertujuan untuk menentukan signifikansi variabel
independen secara bersama dalam mempengaruhi variabel dependen. Apabila nilai
Prob > F berada di bawah tingkat signifikansi yang ditentukan yaitu 1%, 5%, dan
10% maka H0 ditolak dan H1 diterima , yang artinya bahwa secara bersama-sama
variabel independen berpengaruh pada variabel dependen Gujarati (2012).
Hipotesis yang digunakan dalam uji simultan dapat dinyatakan sebagai berikut:
𝐻0 ∶ 𝛽1 = 𝛽2 = 𝛽3 = 0 (varibel independen secara bersama-sama
tidak berpengaruh terhadap variabel
dependen)
𝐻1 : 𝛽 ≠ 0 (variabel independen secara bersama-sama
berpengaruh terhadap variabel dependen)
 BAB 4
KETERBATASAN STUDI

4.1 Teori/Konsep
Dalam penelitian ini terdapat keterbatasan dalam teori dan konsep yaitu
penelitian ini hanya menjelaskan konsep mengenai pengertian dari pariwisata dan
pertumbuhan ekonomi.Secara teori tidak dijelaskan mengenai pengaruh sektor
pariwisata secara langsung namun secara empiris terdapat pengaruh besar, sektor
pariwisata terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi.

4.2 Model
Metode GMM yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini hanya melihat
hubungan searah antara pariwisata dan PDRB sektor pariwisata. Namun pada
dasarnya apabila ketersediaan data terpenuhi maka dapat digunakan metode Panel
Granger Causality untuk melihat hubungan dua arah antara pariwisata dan PDRB
sektor pariwisata.

4.3 Data
Dalam penelitian ini hanya menggunakan variabel Produk Domestik
Regional Bruto, jumlah pengunjung wisatawan, jumlah kamar hotel, jumlah
restoran. Namun pada dasarnya terdapat banyak variabel yang dapat digunakan
sebagai indikator untuk mengetahui hubungan dan pengaruh antara pariwisata dan
PDRB sektor pariwisata meliputi investasi, penerimaan pariwisata, pengeluaran
pariwisata, dan travel cost.

4.4 Alat Analisis

Dalam penelitian ini hanya menganalisis hasil regresi dengan menggunakan
GMM Moment-System dan uji parsial serta uji simultan. Namun pada dasarnya
terdapat analisis lainnya yang dapat menangkap pengaruh sektor pariwisata
terhadap pertumbuhan ekonomi dengan data panel.
 DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Abumound, I., Ibrahim, A., & Hijawi, L. (2019). Estimating the Economic Impact

of Tourism in the North Jordan through the I-O Approach. European

Research Studies Journal, 22(1), 254-266.

Baltagi, B. H., Bratberg, E., & Holmås, T. H. (2005). A panel data study of
physicians’ labor supply: The case of Norway. Health Economics, 14(10),
1035 1045. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.991
Brida, J. G., & Risso, W. A. (2009). A Dynamic Panel Data Study of the German
Demand for Tourism in South Tyrol. Tourism and Hospitality Research,
9(4), 305–313. https://doi.org/10.1057/thr.2009.15
Chang, C. L., & Mcaleer, M. (2012). Aggregation, heterogeneous autoregression
and volatility of daily international tourist arrivals and exchange rates.
Japanese Economic Review, 63(3), 397–419.
Firdaus, M. (2011). Aplikasi Ekonometrika untuk Data Panel dan Time Series.
Bogor : IPB Press
Gujarati, D.N., & Porter, D.C. (2009). Basic Econometrics (5𝑡ℎ 𝐸𝑑). New York :
McGraw-Hill Irwin
Habibi, F. (2017). The determinants of inbound tourism to Malaysia: a panel data
analysis. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(9), 909–930.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2016.1145630
Hanafiah, M.H.M., Harun, M.F.M., & Jamaluddin, M.R. (2010). Bilateral Trade

and Tourism Demand. World Applied Sciences Journal, 10, 110-114.

Mankiw,N.G. 2016. Macroeconomics (9th Ed). New York : Worth Publishers

Todaro, M. P. (2002). Ekonomi Dalam Pandangan Modern. Jakarta: Bina Aksara.

Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2009. Retrieved from

https://jdih.kemenkeu.go.id/fullText/2009/10TAHUN2009UU.HTM.
Witt, S.F & Witt, C.A. (1995). Forecasting tourism demand: A review of empirical

research. International Journal of Forecasting, (11), 447-475.

Yoeti Oka A. (2008). Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Pariwisata. Jakarta: PT
Pradnya Paramita.
Original Article

A dynamic panel data study of the German

demand for tourism in South Tyrol
Received (in revised form): 11th June 2009

Juan Gabriel Brida

is Assistant Professor at the School of Economics and Management – Free University of Bolzano. His research
interests and expertise are in the areas of tourism economics and economic growth. He has a PhD in Economics
from University of Siena.

Wiston Adrián Risso

has a PhD in Economics from University of Siena. He is currently Researcher at the School of Economics and
Management – Free University of Bolzano and at the Department of Economics of the University of Siena.

ABSTRACT Germany is traditionally the most important source of tourism for

South Tyrol. The purpose of this study is to investigate the determinants of the
German demand for tourism in this Italian region. We introduce a dynamic panel
data model for modelling short and long-term responses. We use annual data from
1987 to 2007 of the per capita GDP of Germany (measuring income), the number of
German tourists in each of the 116 tourism destinations of South Tyrol (measuring
the volume of tourism), the relative prices between Italy and Germany (measuring
tourism price) and price of crude oil (as a proxy of travel costs). The main results
of this study are: (1) the demand for tourism in the previous period has a positive
and relevant effect on actual demand, reflecting loyalty of the German tourists;
(2) the cost of travel and the relative prices have a negative and significant impact
on tourism demand.
Tourism and Hospitality Research (2009) 9, 305–313. doi:10.1057/thr.2009.15; published online 13 July 2009

Keywords: dynamic data panel model; tourism demand; South Tyrol

INTRODUCTION attractions are the mountains, in particular the

The province of South Tyrol (or Bolzano-
Bozen) is an autonomous province located at
the northernmost point in Italy. The province
has an area of 7400 km2 and a total population
of 487 673 (2006), less than 1 per cent of the
total population of Italy. The main tourist
Correspondence: Juan Gabriel Brida
School of Economics and Management, Free University
of Bolzano, Via Sernesi 1, Bolzano 39100, Italy
E-mail: JuanGabriel.Brida@unibz.it
Dolomites and all the activities related with
this landscape. Tourism is an important sector
of the South Tyrolean’s economy with more
than 10 000 tourist establishments and 27 146 242
overnight stays in 2007 derived from 5 239 775
arrivals (7.5 per cent of the total arrivals in
Italy). South Tyrol is the first province in Italy
in number of overnight stays (2008) and this
reveals that the region is one of the most
important destinations in Italy. The average

© 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313
www.palgrave-journals.com/thr/
 Brida and Risso

Table 1: Means of transport used by the German tourists 2002–2007

Means of transport 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Car 50.80 49.20 46.70 45.20 46.50 47.10

Plane 31.50 32.30 35.80 36.80 37.20 36.40
Coach 10.30 10.30 9.50 10.00 9.40 9.30
Train 5.80 6.10 5.90 6.10 5.00 4.90
Source: Reyseanalyse. All trips = 100 per cent.

total number of beds in the hospitality structures Table 2: Origin of the tourist in the South Tyrol in
is 21, revealing a small-scale business structure. the last two years (in percentage)
The occupancy rate of beds increased from
Country 2005/06 2006/07
25 per cent in 1970 to 40 per cent in 2007.
The output of the tourism industry in South Germany 47.80 46.90
Tyrol increased from less than 5 per cent of Italy 36.90 37.00
the region’s GDP in 1970 to 12 per cent in Austria 2.60 2.70
2007. As a consequence, the South Tyrolean Switzerland 3.60 3.70
economy is strongly dependent on tourism. Benelux 3.20 3.50
Income from tourism industry has exhibited Other countries 5.80 6.20
constant growth during the last 40 years. The Source: ASTAT, 2008.
increase in overnight stays in the same period
was from 11 million to more than 27 million.
In the last 15 years, the rate of growth of 47.1 per cent of total trips. The second place
the number of overnight stays was around is taken by the airplane, increasing the share in
1 per cent but in the last 30 years there was a the period 2002–2007.
decrease in the average number of overnight Table 2 shows the percentage of German
stays from 9 to 5 days. This can be explained tourists in South Tyrol in the last two touristic
by an almost linear increase of tourist arrivals years. It represents 47.8 and 46.9 per cent
to the region from less than 500 000 in 1970 (2005/06 and 2006/07 respectively) of the total
to more than 5 million in 2007. In average per tourists, and 75.87 and 74.44 per cent of the
year, around 30 000 persons are employed in total international tourists measured as over-
the tourism sector, accounting for more than nights stays.
12 per cent of total employments in South Table 3 shows that, most of the German
Tyrol, where women are 58 per cent of the tourists arrive from Bayern. Germans from
total employees in the sector. Bayern are the main tourists in the Dolomites,
Most of the tourists arriving in South Tyrol Aurina and the other regions, both in winter
comes from Germany. During the last years, and summer seasons. The second place is taken
German tourists represented around 50 per by Nordrhein-Westfalen.
cent of the total tourists and more than 74 per In this study, a dynamic demand model
cent of the total international tourists measured proposed by Arellano and Bond of the German
as overnights stays. Tourism from Germany has demand for tourism in South Tyrol is intro-
been constantly increasing in the last 20 years. duced. The model is used to identify the main
Muñoz (2007) asserted that like most European determinants of the demand and their relative
holidaymakers, Germans prefer to use their contribution to the volume of German in
own cars for travelling. Table 1 shows that in tourism to South Tyrol. Using a dynamic
2007, the percentage share of travels by car was model, we study the impacts of the demand

306 © 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313
 Dynamic panel data study of the German demand for tourism

Table 3: German tourists of 2004/05 according to destination, season and German region

German region Dolomites and Aurina Other regions Winter Summer

Baden-Wurttemberg 15.30 15.80 8.30 19.70

Bayern 31.30 29.20 35.80 26.70
Berlin 3.40 2.40 2.50 2.90
Brandenburg 0.60 0.90 0.70 0.90
Bremen 0.00 0.60 0.30 0.50
Hamburg 0.80 1.00 0.70 1.00
Hessen 12.10 8.20 12.40 7.90
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 1.40 0.60 0.70 0.90
Niedersachsen 5.60 6.40 6.10 6.20
Nordrhein-Westfalen 19.10 22.60 19.70 22.40
Rheinland-Pfalz 4.10 3.00 3.20 3.40
Saarland 1.30 1.80 2.70 1.10
Sachsen 1.20 2.50 2.40 1.90
Sachsen-Anhalt 1.00 0.80 0.70 1.00
Schleswig-Holstein 0.70 1.10 1.00 1.00
Thuringen 2.00 3.00 2.80 2.60
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Tourism in South-Tyrol: Year 2005/06 (ASTAT).

for tourism in the previous period on actual
demand. We show that the past consumption
behaviour has a positive and relevant effect on
current demand, reflecting loyalty of the
German tourists. The results of this paper may
give valuable help for South Tyrolean policy-
makers in the decision-making process.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows.
The next section provides a brief literature
review and discussion of the methodologies
used by previous studies. The subsequent
section describes the data and the econometric
methods used for estimation. The penultimate
section presents the empirical results and their
interpretation. Some concluding remarks are
including in the final section.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Tourism demand has been studied from
different points of view, using both quantita-
tive and qualitative methods. As pointed in the
very recent review (Song and Li, 2008), the
majority of the published studies used quanti-
tative methods, in particular time-series and
econometric models. This study employs a
panel data model to estimate short-run and
long-run elasticities for tourists visiting the
province of South Tyrol. Panel data analysis
has rarely been used in previous empirical
research. Panel data permit the use of a
complete database in order to explain the influ-
ence of several variables in decisions made by
tourists. The possibility of using a large number
of observations provides more degrees of
freedom in the estimation process. This
approach also reduces the problem of multicol-
linearity and provides more degrees of freedom
in the model estimation. Panel data also allow
a better representation of adjustment dynamics.
Dynamic panel methodologies, based on both
cross-section and time series data, have the
advantage that they take account of all the
information relating to the data set under
consideration. In spite of its advantages, the
panel data approach has rarely been applied to
tourism demand analysis. Song and Li (2008)
in their recent review of the published studies
on tourism demand modelling and forecasting
show only four exceptions in the post-2000
literature. (1) Ledesma-Rodrýguez et al (2001)

© 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313 307
 Brida and Risso
used the panel data method to estimate short-
run and long-run elasticities for tourists visiting
the island of Tenerife. (2) The paper by Naude
and Saayman (2005) uses both cross-section
data and panel data for the period 1996–2000
to identify the determinants of tourism arrivals
in 43 African countries, taking into account
tourists’ country of origin. (3) Roget and
Gonzalez (2006) employ panel data models to
examine the demand for rural tourism in
Galicia (Spain). Finally, Sakai et al (2000) used
the panel data approach to analyse the effects
of demographic change on Japanese people’s
travel propensity. We extended the review of
Song and Li to the last two years finding six
more papers modelling tourism demand by
using panel data models. For instance, the
paper by Kuo et al (2008) investigate the
impacts of infectious diseases including Avian
Flu and severe acute respiratory syndrome
(hereafter SARS) on international tourist
arrivals in Asian countries using panel data
procedures. Eilat and Einav (2004) used a
generalisation of the multinomial logit model
and panel data set to estimate the demand of
international tourism. Eugenio-Martin et al
(2008) introduce a cross-sectional time series
model which deals with autocorrelation and
heteroskedasticity in the error term that is
applied to a worldwide panel data set of desti-
nation countries for tourists from Australia,
France, Germany, Japan, Spain, the United
Kingdom and the United States to examine
whether economic development of a particular
destination is relevant for tourism demand.
Khadaroo and Seetanah (2007) use panel data
to investigate the importance of transport on
the demand for tourism of Mauritius, showing
that international tourists are particularly sensi-
tive to the island’s transport infrastructure.
Maloney and Montes Rojas (2005) use dynamic
panel data analysis of tourist flows from eight
origin countries to 15 Caribbean destinations.
In the paper by Garín-Muñoz (2007), the
dynamic model GMM-IFF proposed by
Arellano and Bond is applied to a panel data
set consisting of inbound German tourism in
308 © 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research
each of the 17 Spanish destinations for the
period 1991–2003 to examine German demand
for tourism in Spain. This paper is very close
to our study, both for the methodology and
the results. It also coincides. As for South Tyrol,
most of the international tourism arriving in
Spain comes from Germany. Garín-Muñoz
(2006) is similar to the previous paper. In this
case the application of the GMM-DIFF
dynamic model uses the panel structure of the
data set for the 15 most important countries of
origin of tourists over the period 1992–2002
and other models are also shown for compar-
ison. The results of the study suggest that
tourism demand to Canary Islands must be
considered as a luxury good and is highly
dependent on the evolution of relative prices
and cost of travel between origin and destina-
tion country. Finally, also the study by Garín-
Muñoz and Montero-Martín (2007) uses a
dynamic model estimated with a panel data set
to identify and measure the impact of the main
determinants of the inbound international
tourism flows in the Balearic Islands.
Less attention has also been paid to the
dynamics of tourism demand systems. Most of
the models are static regressions, not permitting
to consider time as a fundamental variable of
the process. We specify dynamic econometric
models for modelling short-term impacts as
well as long-term dynamics. The observed
significance of the lagged dependent variable
in such models indicates that time is likely to
be a necessary variable of the model specifica-
tions. (Fujii and Mak, 1981; Garin-Muñoz,
2006) Although the importance of including
explicit dynamic adjustments in demand anal-
ysis has generally been recognised, specific
research in tourism demand using dynamic
systems is not abundant, and only a few authors
have addressed these issues in empirical studies.
Some papers have tried to find alternative
tourism demand specifications including
previous consumption in the model (Witt and
Martin, 1987; Ledesma-Rodrýguez et al, 2001;
Garin-Muñoz, 2006). These models permit to
handle the dynamic structure of preferences.
Vol. 9, 4, 305–313

According to Garin-Muñoz (2006), there are
two main reasons for including previous
consumption as an explanatory variable of the
model: first, there is less uncertainty associated
with a previous country where you travel than
an unvisited country; second, people with
knowledge about the visited destination talk
about their holidays reducing the uncertainty
for potential visitors. If people are satisfied with
the destination there is a larger probability of
coming back and tell other people about their
experiences. Hence, the coefficient of the
lagged dependent variable may be interpreted
as a measure of habit formation and inde-
pendent preferences. In the present study we
consider past consumption as an explanatory
variable and some traditional demand variables.
It means we consider income of the German
tourist and price-type factors. From a theoretical
point of view, the demand for tourism is a
function of the quantity of German tourism
demanded in the past, the relative cost of living
between the Italy region and Germany, the price
of travel and the income of the tourists.
ECONOMETRIC METHODOLOGY
AND DATA SET
The objective of this paper is to introduce a
model to investigate the German demand for
tourism in South Tyrol. We have in mind two
main properties that our model must verify: it
must be a dynamic model and employ a panel
data set. The model utilised in this study is the
dynamic data panel model proposed by
Arellano and Bond (1991) and we apply it to
a panel data set collected from 116 different
tourism destinations of South Tyrol. The avail-
able data consist of 2436 observations: the
annual overnights stays of international tourists
in 116 different tourism destinations of South
Tyrol (that coincides with 116 communes of
the province) from 1987 to 2007. Using a
panel allows us to use annual data and avoids
the problems of seasonality. The availability of
panel data will allow us to measure the effects
of variables with little changes within cities and
more variability across cities. This represents a
© 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584
Dynamic panel data study of the German demand for tourism
major advantage when compared with the
utilisation of time series. Tourism demand is a
function of several variables that are to be
selected, together with the particular form of
the function. Once the variables and the func-
tional form of the demand are selected, we
have to choose the estimation procedure to
determine the parameters of the model.
Variables
In this paper, the tourism demand is measured
in terms of the number of overnights stays of
international visitors in hotels and apartments
in each one of the 116 destinations of South
Tyrol. We use this variable to represent
German tourism demand. This is motivated by
the fact that more than 60 per cent of the total
number of international tourists corresponds to
Germans. This is true for all the period covered
in this study. The function of several variables
defining the tourism demand gives causal
relationships between the tourism demand
(dependent) variable and its influencing factors
(explanatory or independent variables). The
literature suggests several possible independent
variables to model tourism demand. The most
commonly used are income, relative prices,
exchange rates and transportation costs but
variables of time trend, marketing expenditure
and special events are also included (Song and
Li, 2008). The use of these variables, however,
depends on the availability of data and its quan-
titative measurement, the non-existence of
collinearity between explanatory factors and
the form of the model. This paper chose
income, relative prices and transportation costs
as explanatory or independent variables to
investigate how adequately these variables can
explain the German demand for tourism in
South Tyrol.
Data
Data for our study were selected based on data
availability, reliability of data sources, ability to
represent and theoretical considerations. The
data utilised in this study are annual time series
data for the period 1987–2007. Data for the
Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313 309
 Brida and Risso
number of overnights stays of international
visitors in hotels and apartments in each one
of the 116 destinations of South Tyrol are
taken from the Provincial Statistics Institute
(ASTAT) of Bolzano. Income is represented
by the German per capita GDP at constant
price of 2000 and the relative prices were esti-
mated using the ratio between the consumer
index price of Italy and Germany. Both series
were obtained from the International Mone-
tary Fund (IMF). Several studies sustain that
German tourists prefer to travel to the North
of Italy by car and this is the motivation to
proxy transportation costs by the average of
Dated Brent, West Texas Intermediate and the
Dubai Fateh price of crude oil. This time series
was also obtained from the IMF.
Model specification
The tourism demand function is expressed in
the form:
Qi ,t = f (Qi ,t -1 , PTt , PCOt ,GDPt )
where Qi,t is the number of overnight stays
destination i during the year t; PTt is the rela-
tive cost of living of German tourist in Italy;
PCOt is the price of crude oil and GDPt is
the real per capita gross domestic product
in Germany. Equation (1) is a theoretical rela-
tionship among the variables under considera-
tion. In practice, we need to specify the
functional form of the model. In the present
study the tourism demand model has adopted
the double-logarithmic form. Then the model
to be estimated would be equation (2);
however, the economic time series generally
present unit roots and then the model to
be estimated is in differences as shown in
equation (3):
ln Qi ,t = a + b1lnQi ,t -1 + b 2 lnPTt + b3 lnPCOt
+ b4 lnGDPt + lt + mi + e i ,t
In equation (2),
i,t = t + i + i,t is the fixed
effects decomposition of the error term, in
310 © 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584
which t and i are the time and destination-
specific effects, respectively. The error
component i,t is assumed to be serially uncor-
related with zero mean and independently
distributed across destinations, but heteroske-
dasticity across time and destinations is allowed
for. Moreover, i,t is assumed to be uncor-
related with the initial condition ln Qi,t, for
t = 2, 3, …, T, and with the individual effects i
with for any t.
When a model for panel data includes lag
dependent explanatory variables, the simple
estimation procedures are asymptotically valid
only when there is a large number of observa-
tions in the time dimension (T); in our case
T = 21 is not enough. The current available
response to this problem (Holtz-Eakin, 1988;
Arellano and Bond, 1991; Hsiao, 2003) is to
first difference the model and use lags of the
dependent variable as instruments for the lagged
dependent variable. In the present study we
used the generalised method of moments
(GMM-DIFF) framework proposed by Arellano
(1)
and Bond (1991). As the model is in differ-
ences, the problems stemming from possible
non-stationarity are avoided and this method
will generate consistent and efficient estimates
of the parameters of interest and standard
errors. The dynamic model to be estimated
will therefore be

lnQi ,t = b1
lnQi ,t −1 + b 2
lnPTt + b3
lnPCOt
+ b4
lnGDPt +
e i ,t (3)
where i = 1, …, 116; t = 1987, …, 2007; and all
the variables are in first differences.
Because of the double-logarithmic form of
the model, the parameters may be interpreted
as elasticities. The parameter 1 indicates to
what degree current tourism purchase is deter-
mined by the value of previous consumption.
As it is a dynamic model, the estimated coef-
ficients are the short-run elasticities. Long-run
(2) elasticities can be obtained by dividing each of
the coefficients by (1 − 1).
As Garín-Muñoz and Montero-Martín
(2007) assert, one of the advantages of using a
Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313
 Dynamic panel data study of the German demand for tourism

dynamic model is that both short-run and as in the linear model the coefficients are
long-run elasticities may be obtained. A further significant and the signs are the expected.
advantage relates to the fact that, by differ- The coefficients are the short-run demand
encing data, we avoid the problem of non- elasticities; to obtain the long-run elasticities
stationarity and this method will give us we divide each of the estimated coefficients by
confidence in the reported coefficient and (1 − 1). The long-run elasticity values are
standard errors. income elasticity = 1.92, cost of living = − 4.36
and price travel elasticity = − 0.19.
EMPIRICAL RESULTS FOR Notice the significance of the coefficient of
SOUTH TYROL the lagged dependent variable. This significance
This section presents the estimation of equation could be explained by the habit of persistence
(3) using the GMM-DIFF estimator of Arel- and/or the word-of-mouth effects.
lano and Bond and the linear regression to The estimated coefficient for the income vari-
compare. We have used STATA v.9.0 econo- able has the expected sign. The long-run income
metric software to estimate the model. The elasticity (1.92) means that tourism in South
hypothesis of no second-order autocorrelation Tyrol is a luxury for the German tourist.
in the errors is tested as the methodology The short-run ( − 1.05) and long-run
assumes. We conducted a test of autocorrela- ( − 4.36) price elasticities indicate that the
tion and the Sargan test of over-identifying tourism in the region is elastic, being sensitive
restrictions as derived by Arellano and Bond to a variation of prices. This may be the reflec-
(1991). Failure to reject the null hypothesis in tion of numerous alternatives in the region
both tests gives support to the model. (Austria, Switzerland and Southern Germany).
The empirical results in Table 4 show that Consequently, care must be taken by the
the model performs satisfactorily. Note that industry to maintain or improve price compet-
itiveness. In contrast to the cost of living, the
Table 4: Estimation results for the linear and dynamic
short-run ( − 0.04) and long-run ( − 0.19) cost
model (1987–2007) of travel elasticities suggest that tourism is
inelastic to variations in the cost of travel.
Variable GMM-DIFF estimator of
Arellano Bond CONCLUSIONS
ln Qi,t − 1 0.7588
This article expands significantly upon previous
− 34.74 studies of Croes and Vanegas (2005), Garín-
ln GDPt 0.4639 Muñoz (2006, 2007) and Garín-Muñoz and
− 2.19 Montero-Martín (2007). Their contribution to
ln PTt − 1.0529 the literature is the application of a dynamic
( − 4.83) econometric modelling of international tourism
ln PCOt − 0.0458 demand to estimate a dynamic panel data model
( − 3.54) for the German demand of tourism in South-
Tyrol. The dynamic methodologies used in
Autocorrelation 2 0.14, P=0.886 this study are based on both cross-section and
Sargan (df) 115.88, P=0.357
time series data, having the advantage of taking
Wald test 28300000
into account all the information relating to the
No. observations 2204 data set under consideration. The model used
Dependent variable: Logarithm of the number of overnights in this paper provides short- and long-run elas-
stays (ln Qi,t ). t-statistics in parenthesis. The estimates are ticities. The study shows that the long-run
obtained by using the instruments ln Qi,t lagged up to seven income elasticity of 1.92 indicates that tourism
periods. in South Tyrol is a luxury and the short-run

© 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313 311
 Brida and Risso
( − 1.05) and long-run ( − 4.36) price elasticities
indicate that the tourism in the region is very
sensitive to variation of prices. The latter may
reflect the numerous alternatives in the region.
In particular, Austria, Switzerland and Southern
Germany offer similar and substitute products.
South Tyrol should give importance to main-
tain or improve price competitiveness. Promo-
tion of other kinds of tourism in alternative to
mountain tourism to diversify the supply would
also be very advisable. From the other hand,
the elasticities of the cost of travel are negative
and smaller than one in absolute value, both
in the short-run and long-run ( − 0.04
and − 0.19, respectively). Then the cost of
travel has a negative impact on the German
demand for tourism in South Tyrol. Given that
the majority of the German tourists travel by
car, the South Tyrolean authorities can improve
the results of the industry by giving incentives
to travel by low cost airlines to the airport of
Bolzano or by subsidising part of the costs of
travelling by car. The elasticities estimated
in this study are in line with the results of
previous studies (see Dritsakis, 2004; Croes and
Vanegas, 2005; Garín-Muñoz, 2006, 2007 and
Garín-Muñoz and Montero-Martín, 2007).
This study should be of significant assistance
to clarify the application and benefits of model-
ling in analysing tourism demand in small
regions. Consequently, the study should help
in developing economic policies for the
promotion of tourism. The tools used in this
paper can be applied to estimate the German
demand of tourism in other regions of Italy.
The results of these studies could be used to
compare with South Tyrol. The research can
also be generalised by including the prices of
alternative destinations as a new variable of the
model to test if there are substitute markets.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Our research was supported by the Compe-
tence centre in Tourism Management and
Tourism Economics (TOMTE) of the Free
University of Bolzano, project: ‘Tourism,
growth, development and sustainability. The
312 © 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584 Tourism and Hospitality Research
case of the South Tyrolean region’. We thank
the helpful comments of anonymous referees.
A preliminary version of this paper was
presented at the conference ‘Advances in
Tourism Economics’ (ATE2009), Research
Centre in Tourism, Innovation and Services
(CITIS) of Universidade Lusiada de Lisboa,
23–24 April 2009.
REFERENCES
Arellano, M. and Bond, S. (1991) Some tests of spec-
ification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence
and an application to employment equations.
Review of Economic Studies 58: 277–297.
ASTAT. (2007) Tourism in South Tyrol: Year
2005/06. Bolzano, Italy: ASTAT.
ASTAT. (2008) Tourism in South Tyrol: Year
2006/07. Bolzano, Italy: ASTAT.
Croes, R.R. and Vanegas, M. (2005) An econometric
study of tourist arrivals in Aruba and its implica-
tions. Tourism Management 26(2): 879–890.
Dritsakis, N. (2004) Cointegration analysis of
German and British tourism demand for
Greece. Tourism Management 25: 111–119.
Eilat, Y. and Einav, L. (2004) Determinants of
international tourism: A three dimensional
panel data analysis. Applied Economics 36(12):
1315–1327.
Eugenio-Martin, J.L., Martín-Morales, N. and
Sinclair, M.T. (2008) The role of economic
development in tourism demand. Tourism
Economics 14(4): 673–690.
Fujii, E. and Mak, J. (1981) Forecasting tourism
demand: Some methodological issues. Annals
of Regional Science 15(2): 359–380.
Garín-Muñoz, T. (2006) Inbound international
tourism to Canary Islands: A dynamic panel data
model. Tourism Management 27(2): 281–291.
Garín-Muñoz, T. (2007) German demand for
tourism in Spain. Tourism Management 28(1):
12–22.
Garín-Muñoz, T. and Montero-Martín, L. (2007)
Tourism in the Balearic Islands: A dynamic
model for international demand using panel
data. Tourism Management 28(2): 1224–1235.
Holtz-Eakin, D. (1988) Testing for individual
effects in autoregressive models. Journal of
Econometrics 39: 297–308.
Hsiao, C. (2003) Analysis of Panel Data, 2nd edn.,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vol. 9, 4, 305–313

Khadaroo, J. and Seetanah, B. (2007) Transport
infrastructure and tourism development.
Annals of Tourism Research 34(4): 1021–1032.
Kuo, H.I., Chen, C.C., Tseng, W.C., Ju, L.F. and
Huang, B.W. (2008) Assessing impacts of
SARS and Avian Flu on international tourism
demand to Asia. Tourism Management 29(5):
917–928.
Ledesma-Rodriguez, F.J., Navarro-Ibanez, M. and
ez-Rodrýguez, J.V. (2001) Panel data and
tourism: A case study of Tenerife. Tourism
Economics 7: 75–88.
Maloney, W.F. and Montes Rojas, G.V. (2005)
How elastic are sea, sand and sun? Dynamic
panel estimates of the demand for tourism.
Applied Economics Letters 12(5): 277–280.
© 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1467-3584
Dynamic panel data study of the German demand for tourism
Naude, W.A. and Saayman, A. (2005) Determinants
of tourist arrivals in Africa: A panel data regres-
sion analysis. Tourism Economics 11: 365–391.
Roget, F.M. and Gonzalez, X.A.R. (2006) Rural
tourism demand in Galicia, Spain. Tourism
Economics 12: 21–31.
Sakai, M., Brown, J. and Mak, J. (2000) Population
aging and Japanese international travel in the
21st century. Journal of Travel Research 38:
212–220.
Song, H. and Li, G. (2008) Tourism demand
modeling and forecasting – A review of recent
research. Tourism Management 29(2): 203–220.
Witt, S. and Martin, C. (1987) Econometric models
for forecasting international tourism demand.
Journal of Travel Research 25(3): 23–30.
Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 9, 4, 305–313 313
World Applied Sciences Journal 10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality): 110-114, 2010
ISSN 1818-4952
© IDOSI Publications, 2010

Bilateral Trade and Tourism Demand

Mohd Hafiz Mohd Hanafiah, Mohd Fauzi Mohd Harun and Mohd Raziff Jamaluddin

Universiti Teknologi Mara, Malaysia

Abstract: Tourism industry can be claimed as one of the important sectors in the modern Malaysian economic
development. It has been identified as second largest foreign exchange earning sector and had strengthen up
the performance of Malaysia Gross Domestic Product and trade balance. Numbers of studies have been done
in order to attempt the theory that there is a link between trade and tourism and most of them showed that it
is positively correlated. This paper specifies tourism demand models in Malaysia and estimates demand
equations using tourist inflow data for the period 1997-2008. Researchers identified that bilateral trade,
population, income, tourism price and geographical distance between Malaysia and the Asian countries are
the main determinants of tourism. It clearly shows that tourism demands relates significantly with the trades.
With more proactive action taken by the policymaker in understanding the dynamic of this industry, Malaysia
will able to increase the quality of tourism industry in order to be the main center for tourism Asia region and
the world beyond 21st century.

Key words: Tourism % Trade % Economy % Demand

INTRODUCTION Empirical Studies: International tourism also has

As an evolving sector, tourism has been defined as
the sum of those industrial and commercial activities
which produce goods and services and mainly consumed
by foreign visitors or domestic tourists.” Tourism
industry can be claimed as an important sector for the
Malaysia economy. It has been identified as the second
largest foreign exchange earning sector and helped to
strengthen the Malaysian economy in terms of
international trade. World Tourism Organization
classified tourism industry as comparable rather than
export activities [1]. Tourism demand can be forecasted
by using variables such as income, tourism price,
transportation costs, trade of goods and services [2, 3].
International trade was the most important role in
generating national income. In fact, tourism is a significant
source of export revenues for any country in the world.
It is important that the government policymaker
comprehend the factors affecting foreign tourism
demand. There are only a small number of studies
has been done in order to identify the relationship
between trade and tourism. Furthermore, poor quality of
research has been a continual problem in tourism studies
and most of the studies merely focus on tourist flows and
receipts.
become a major foreign exchange earner for many
low-income countries and small islands and it is a
principal export for 83% of developing countries [4].
Many countries attempt to develop tourism sector
and increase the number of coming visitors because of
several reasons: international tourists bring foreign
currency to a host country; tourism sector is much more
merciful toward environment than many industries
producing goods; growth in tourism industry accelerates
other, related industries (retail, entertainment,
transportation).
Since the September 11 event, Malaysia has become
an oasis for tourists from the Middle East as it is able to
provide a safe haven for Muslim tourists as an alternative
to their traditional escapade to London (and Western
Europe) during their hot and humid summer months.
The problem called Islamophobia gave Malaysia a
comparative advantage as the fear and/or hatred of
Islam, Muslims or Islamic culture had encouraged the
Middle East tourist to opted Malaysia rather than
Europe as their travel destination [4].
The literature on tourism demand focuses on the
determinants, as in cost of transport, price, income in
tourism generating countries and population. During the
past decade, numerous econometric models have been

Corresponding Author: Mohd Hafiz Mohd Hanafiah, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Malaysia.
Tel: +603 5543 5699, Fax: +603 5543 5698, E-mail: hafizhanafiah@salam.uitm.edu.my.
110
 World Appl. Sci. J., 10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality): 110-114, 2010
developed and estimated in tourism literature to identify
the relationship between tourist arrivals in a particular
country and the factors that influence arrivals. In
international tourism demand modeling, most of the
previous studies have used the demand function
approach to identify the quantitative [5]. Some studies
have used the gravity model approach. However, the
gravity model approach lacks a firm theoretical foundation
and the final form of the model closely resembles the
demand function [6].
The gravity-type models are applied in physics and
have achieved increasing recognition in the analysis of
economic phenomena related to the flow of goods and/or
services [8]. This type of model has yet to be applied,
with a proper theoretical base to tourism demand.
Although some studies may claim to have estimated a
variant of the gravity model, omitted variables from the
model and incorrect estimation technique bias the results’.
There are sets of potential determinants that can
influence the decision to travel classified into the
following categories: socioeconomic factors, such as,
income level, relative prices between the origin and the
destination places, demography, urbanization and length
of the leisure time; technical factors related to easier
communications and transport facilities; psychological
and cultural factors reflecting personal preferences and
the style of life of the potential travelers; and random
factors related to unexpected events, like political
instability, weather conditions, natural disasters, epidemic
diseases, etc [7].
Furthermore, the above variables are correlated with
immigration and most of the immigrants prefer home-
country products [6]. For that reason, this phenomenon
can reduce the trading transaction costs. In particular,
tourism can be thought as a form of temporary
international migration. It clearly shows that inbound
tourist could promote the tourism of their host country
with their family and friends [9]. Not only that,
international trade theory is simply international
localization theory. Therefore, most of the economists
linked tourism through an input-output matrix [6].
From the literature, it indicates that the demand for
travel export is equal to:
TA: f (GDP, RP, TRADE, POP, DIS)
Where
TA = The number of tourist arrivals;
GDP = The income in tourist generation countries;
RP = The relative price;
111
TRADE = The bilateral trade;
POP = The total population in tourist generation
countries;
DIS = The geographical distance.
Empirical literature reviews on tourism demand
recommend that tourist demand is measured as in tourist
arrivals and departures, with tourist arrivals as the
dependent variable. On the other hand, empirical models
of tourism demand use consumer’s income, the price of
services, exchange rate and distance as explanatory
variables [2, 5, 10, 11].
Most of the empirical studies used an autoregressive
model in demand estimation to evaluate the determinants
of international tourism demand. The econometric model
was formulated to evaluate the international tourism
demand by residents of Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and
Venezuela to Aruba [12].
Additionally, from a research on Caribbean tourism
demand, the empirical results identified income as the
most significant variable in explaining tourism demand
[7]. Referring to other researchers who concluded that
forecasting Portugal tourism demand is important in
order to analyze the country’s economy position and the
econometric methodology showed that co-integration
is non-existent in Portuguese tourism demand [12]. The
authors concluded that communication for transportation
infrastructures, destination risk, bilateral trade and
geographical distance are the main determinants of
tourism.
Econometric Model: A common model used in tourism
demand studies is a single equation model with demand
explained by the income of tourists in their countries of
origin, the cost of tourism in the destination and
alternative destinations and the substitute price variable.
As to explanatory variables, the definitions of income
used are usually personal disposable income or gross
domestic product of the country of origin. In this study,
income is measured by industrial output value, due to
difficulties in obtaining figures for monthly GNP and
population, or for per capita income and even disposable
income for the originating countries. Therefore, the
researchers employed real income, cost of living,
exchange rate, arrival from origin country, inflation rate
and dummy variable (economic crisis) as the independent
variables.
The dependent variable used is the number of
arrivals at destination (i) from origin (j) in a given year
(TA). Data set from The World Development Indicators
 World Appl. Sci. J., 10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality): 110-114, 2010
and World Statistical Yearbook and The Tourism
Compendium and Yearbook of Tourism Statistics have
been used for the explanatory variables and dependent
variable respectively.
The researchers converted the GDP per capita in
tourist countries into logarithm modes in order to find out
whether tourism demand will be influenced by income in
the country of origin of the tourists or not. B Based on the
empirical literature, the researchers expected for a positive
sign. Income in the origin country is the most frequently
used explanatory variable. Most researchers have relied
on national income and GDP as measures for income in
the origin. This paper considers that income is highly
significant as a determinant of demand. Other than that,
this paper is also to find out whether a trade partner is an
important vehicle to expand tourism or not.
A study on the determinants of inbound tourism in
Laos found a positive sign when they used this proxy
[13].
Log TRADE = Xt + Mt
GDPm + GDPi
Where
Xt = The annual exports of Malaysia to the
country of origin of each tourist at time t;
origin at time t;
Mt = The annual import of Malaysia from each
tourist’s country of origin at time;
GDPi = The Gross Domestic Product per capita in
tourist countries;
This research has been conducted in order to
discover whether population changes will affect the
number of immigration from a particular country or not
and according to the literature on forecasting tourism
demand, we expected a positive sign. The result shows
that the level of tourism depends not only on the
population of the origin country, but also on the
immigrants from the destination country. Therefore,
population of the origin country is also part of
explanatory variable [7].
Nevertheless, most studies do not consider this
variable because population tends to be highly
correlated with income and at the same time will lead
towards multicollinearity and autocorrelation problems.
The researchers then manipulate Macroeconomic
variables (tourism price) and distance (transportation
cost) to analyze their influence on the cost of tourist
service such as:
112
log(RPim) = log [CPIm / CPIi ]
Where CPIm is the consumer price index in
Malaysia and CPIi is the consumer price index of origin
country. The ratio will give the relative price of tourism
and influences the decision for the tourist to decide
whether to travel to Malaysia or not. Meanwhile,
logarithm between the geographical distance and the
partner country were compute in order to find out whether
the cost of transports will moderate the tourist arrivals or
not. A negative sign is expected for both variables [10,
11].
Model Specification: This paper also emphasizes on
international trade either it can brings positive impact on
Malaysia tourism demand or not. From the recent
literature review, it shows that tourism demand was a
dynamic phenomenon. Therefore, this study uses a panel
data set between Malaysia and the Asian countries
(China, Japan, Thailand, Indonesia and United Arab
Emirates) for the period of 1997-2008. The proposed panel
data applies Newton’s gravitational law and the gravity
models are based on the gravity law of spatial interaction.
The gravity models utilized the gravitational force
concept as an analogy in order to explain the volume of
trade, capital flows and migration of people among the
countries in the world. These models have been accepted
in tourism studies [14]. Several researchers modified the
Tinbergen Gravity Model for the purpose of estimating
tourism demand. A slight adjustment has been made by
converting the variables in order to suit the tourism
related variables [10, 15].
Nearly 80 of 100 empirical studies on tourism
demand or arrivals used single equation of linear and/or
log linear equation [2]. As a result, estimated coefficients
can be interpreted as elasticities. Therefore, the variables
such as log(GDPm), log(RPim), log(TRADEim), log(DIS im)
and log(POPim) are treated as endogenous variables in
this study. The log-linear model based on the modified
Gravity Model is as follows:
log(TAim) = á + $1 log(GDPm) + $2 log(RPim) + $3
log(TRADEim) + $4 log(DISim) + $5 log(POPim)
+ ui
Where
á = Constant
TAim = The number of tourist arrivals in Malaysia
GDPim = The gross domestic product
RPim = The relative price
 World Appl. Sci. J., 10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality): 110-114, 2010
TRADEim = The bilateral trade
POPim = The population
DISim = The distance
ui = The error
Findings: From the analysis, it is found that the
explanatory power is quite high (Adjusted R2=0.738).
All the explanatory variables are significant (LogGDP,
LogTRADE, LogDIS and LogPOP at 95%) confidence
interval, with the exception of LogRP. Gross Domestic
Product is statically significant, with an expected
positive sign.
The variables LogTRADE and LogRP are statistically
significant with positive relationship with tourism
demand. This outcome really shows that trade partners
and relative price are crucial vehicle in order to inflate
tourism demand. The coefficient of LogDIS (Distance)
is negative, as expected. This result proves the
justification of gravitational model and explains that high
traveling cost really reduce the tourism demand. Finally,
the variable population (LogPOP) finds a positive sign.
A series of t-test have been applied in each
independent variable against the dependent variable.
From the above gravity model equation, the variables
log(GDPm), log(RPim), log(TRADEim), log(DISim) and
log(POPim) share the same significant level of 95 %.
Taken as a whole, all independent variables are
significant towards explaining the dependent variables
and it shows that there are significant relationships
between these variables. In other words, there are
significant positive relationships between tourism
demands with income, trade and population. On the other
hand, there are significant negative relationship between
tourism demand and distance and also tourism price.
F-test has been used in order to verify the
relationships between the independent variables
(price, income, distance, population and economic crisis)
as a group and the dependent variable (tourism demand)
[10]. As indicated in Figure 1, the F-value (18.0327) is
more critical than the F-distribution value. Therefore,
one can reject the null hypothesis and concludes with
95% confidence interval that the independent variables
as a whole explained a significant changes in tourism
demand. In a simple word, income, distance, population,
tourism price and bilateral trade as a group have given
significant effect either positive or negative towards
tourism demand.
White’s test was applied to eliminate
heteroskedasticity problem by treating the data as
degrees of freedom equal to the number of slope
coefficient excluding the constant in the regression [11].
113
Table 1: The Impact of Trade on Malaysian Tourism Demand
Variables Coefficient
LogGDP 0.582**
LogRP -0.626**
LogTRADE 0.118**
LogDIS -0.572**
LogPOP 0.620**
Adj. R2 0.738
N 84
Durbin Watson 0.674692
nR2 = P2 61.992
** - Statistically significant at 5% confidence intervals
The critical value is then opted from Chi-square table
and since the nR2 value of 61.992 is lower than the 5%
critical value, therefore we can accept that no
heteroskedasticity problem exists.
Next, the variance inflation factor (VIF) has been
conducted in order to find out any Multicollinearity
problem with the variables. To test whether the variables
have Multicollinearity problem, the variance inflation
factor (VIF) had been conducted. If the VIF result is
less than 4, it indicates that there is no serious
Multicollinearity problems occurred. If the VIF result is
more than 4, it indicates that the research model has
serious Multicollinearity problems and the models need
to be re-checked.
By entering VIFPF scalar formula, we will get:
VIF = 1 / (1 - 0.6579)
VIF = 2.93 < 4
As the VIF value is less than 4 (rule of thumb),
there is supporting evidence that TAim is in absence of
Multicollinearity.
CONCLUSION
This paper investigates the relationship between
bilateral trade and tourism demand in Malaysia. Any
analysis of international tourism demand and the
sensitivity of economic parameters in particular must be
viewed with caution. There may be some unknown bias
in the derived demand parameters due to the use of a
small sample and that was the reason why the researchers
used a modified gravity model. Thus, in order to
understand the dynamic nature of tourism, the researcher
constructed a log linear econometric model and the
research findings confirmed the above assumption.
 World Appl. Sci. J., 10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality): 110-114, 2010
The logged tourism demand showed an expected positive
sign while other explanatory variables such as
geographical distance and tourism price are statistically
significant. Moreover, the results were aligned with key
economic theories. These results prove that an augment
technique is needed in order to understand more about
the demand for tourism determinants. Furthermore, this
study generated new information on the affects and
sensitivity of economic parameters and also their
influence over demand for international tourism. As the
quality of data for international travel and tourism
increases and more data become available, the
methodology and the database developed in this study
can be extended to obtain more vigorous parameter
estimates. Basically, recommendations for further study
were only intended in order to give guidelines for
improvement on this research paper and for better
understanding on the discussed topic.
As a conclusion, this report meets its objectives by
conducting an exploratory research and identifying
key economic indicators that have significant effects
towards tourism industry development and performance
measures for future applications. Further, this research
forms an understanding of the multitude of economic
factors and issues that affect the nation’s
competitiveness and the effective operation of the
government’s strategies in the global tourism arena.
Additionally, to the investors and businessmen exploring
good potential investment opportunities in Malaysia,
this report offers a glimpse into various significant
tourism related economics that local companies can take
advantage on current and future world economic
condition. Lastly, this paper has amply satisfied it aims
and at the same time, a similar study should be done using
a bigger sample, more variables and current data in order
to strengthen this study.
REFERENCES
1. World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), 2006.
Malaysia: Travel and Tourism Climbing to New
Heights. World Travel and Tourism Council. London.
2. Lim, C., 1977. Review of International Tourism
Demand Models. Annals of Tourism Res.,
24(4): 835-849.
114
3. Kulendran, N. and K. Wilson, 2000. Is there a
relationship between international trade and
international travel? Applied Economics.
4 World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), 2006.
Malaysia: Travel and Tourism Climbing to New
Heights. World Travel and Tourism Council. London.
5. Turner, L.W. and S.F. Witt, 2001. Factors influencing
demand for international tourism: Tourism demand
analysis using structural equation modelling.
Tourism Economics, 7(1): 21-38.
6. Witt, S. and C. Witt, 1995. Forecasting Tourism
Demand: A Review of Empirical Research.
International J. Forecasting, 11(3): 447-475.
7. Carey, K., 1991. Estimation of Caribbean Tourism
Demand: Issuers and Methodology. Atlantic
Economic J., 19(3): 32-40.
8. Wang, S. Yu., 2008. The impact of crisis events and
macroeconomic activity on Taiwan’s international
inbound tourism demand. Tourism Management,
pp: 1-8.
9. Dwyer, L., I. Burnley, P. Murphyand and P. Forsyth,
1992. Tourism - Immigration Interrelations. Report
Prepared for Bureau of Immigration Research.
10. Hanafiah, M.H. and M.F. Harun, 2010. Application of
Gravity Model in Estimating Tourism Demand in
Malaysia. Proceedings of 2010 International
Conference on Business, Economics and Tourism
Management, Singapore, 12(2): 121-129.
11. Hanafiah, M.H. et al., 2008. Estimating Tourism
Demand in Malaysia. Proceedings of 7th Asia Pacific
Forum for Graduate Students’ Research Tourism,
Malaysia, 1(3): 141-146.
12. Daniel, A. and F. Ramos, 2002. Modelling Inbound
International Tourism Demand Portugal. International
J. Tourism Res., 4(1): 193-209.
13. Phakdisoth, L. and D. Kim, 2007. The Determinants
of Inbound Tourism in Laos. ASEAN Economic
Bulletin, 24(2): 225- 237.
14. Tinbergen, J., 1962. Shaping the World Economy.
New York: Twentieth Century Fund.
15. Rodrigue, J.P., 2004. The geography of transport
systems. London: Routledge.