No abstract

No abstract

This paper explores how tourists from 165 regions of EU-27 countries cut back their tourism expenditure during the global economic crisis in 2009. This study disentangles the cutback tourism expenditure in two mutually related decisions: First, it takes into account whether the tourist has had to cut back on tourism expenditure due to the crisis and second, how they decided to cut back according to six alternatives: "fewer holidays", "reduced length of stay", "cheaper means of transport", "cheaper accommodation", "travel closer to home" or "change the period of travel". The econometric model able to deal with such simultaneous decisions is an adaptation of the Heckman model in generalized structural equations modeling. This methodology permits to control by sample selection bias and correlations between equations. This paper highlights the existence of patterns in the cut back alternatives depending on the socioeconomic characteristics of the household and the climate conditions in origin.

This article analyses the role of income in the decision of participating in the tourism demand within 1 year. The tourists who are participating can travel to domestic destinations only, abroad destinations only or to both of them. Such a substitution pattern is modelled using a bivariate probit model. The analysis is carried out to the regional level using a survey conducted in 15 European (EU-15) countries. In addition to the traditional socioeconomic variables, the analysis adds new variables to the outbound tourism demand modelling, such as the attributes of the place of residence. The results show that tourism demand is income elastic. However, there are marked differences in the income elasticities of the probabilities of travelling domestically or abroad. Above certain income threshold, the substitution pattern between destinations takes part. The probability of travelling domestically only remains constant, whereas the probability of travelling abroad keeps growing. Additionally, the article proves that income elasticities vary significantly and nonlinearly with income.

No abstract