The Influence of International Tourism Receipts on Economic Development: Evidence from China’s 31 Major Regions

Abstract

This study applies a bootstrap panel Granger causality test to examine the causal relationship between international tourism receipts and economic growth in China’s 31 major regions for the period from 1995 to 2015, accounting for both dependency and heterogeneity across regions. The empirical results of this study support evidence for the growth hypothesis in the regions, such as Anhui, Henan, Jiangxi, Jilin, Fujian, Jiangsu, Shandong, Tianjin, Chognqing, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Tibet, and Yunnan. A reverse relationship supports evidence on the conservation hypothesis for the regions, such as Hubei and Hunan. A reciprocal causal relationship was found in Hebei and Shannxi, while the result of a neutrality hypothesis supported 14 of these 31 major regions (i.e., Heilongjiang, Shanxi, Beijing, Guangdong, Hainan, Liaoning, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Gansu, Guangxi, Guizhou, Ningxia, Sichuan, and Xinjiang). The empirical findings of this work provide important policy implications for China’s 31 major regions.

Tourism and economic growth in Asia: A bootstrap multivariate panel Granger causality

“…In addition, it is recognized as having a positive effect on long‐run economic growth through different channels. It has long been recognized that tourism can have an impact on economic activities (e.g., Arslanturk, Balcilar, & Ozdemir, ; Aslan, ; Balaguer & Cantavella‐Jorda, ; Dwyer, Forsyth, & Spurr, ; Fawaz & Rahnama, ; Khan, Phang, & Toh, ; Kim, Chen, & Jang, ; Lean & Tang, ; Lee & Kwon, ; Nunkoo, ; Obadiah, Odhiambo, & Njuguna, ; Pavlic, Svilokos, & Tolic, ; Schubert, Brida, & Risso, ; Tang & Tan, ; Wu & Wu, , b).…”

Is tourism‐led growth hypothesis still valid?

“…However, the causality became bidirectional from 2000 onwards. Wu and Wu (2017) Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) and found support for tourism-induced growth. Dogru and Bulut (2018) also employed the Dumitrescu and Hurlin test to find the causal relationship between tourism development and economic growth in seven European countries.…”

“…However, the causality became bidirectional from 2000 onwards. Wu and Wu () used bootstrap panel Granger causality test to study TLG between tourism receipts and economic progress in China's 31 major regions and found empirical evidence for the TLGH in several regions but found a reverse relationship for few regions, such as Hubei and Hunan. The bidirectional relationship was observed for Hebei and Shaanxi.…”

Determinants and Implications of the Tourism Multiplier Effect in EU Economies. Towards a Core-Periphery PatternS

“…While several methods of calculating the tourism multiplier effects exist (Vanhove, 2011), since our research was not centred on the multiplier effect calculation, but rather its explanation, we used the multiplier effect as the rapport between the total and direct contribution of tourism to GDP respectively job creation according to World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) reports. As regards the investigation method, the literature suggests two different approaches: the first one, preferred by a significant part of the literature, is the panel data / time series approach, which offers the advantage of observing a time lag between the independent variables and the emergence of the multiplier effect of tourism (Garin-Mun, 2006;Falk, 2010;Seetanah, 2011;Wu and Wu, 2017;Liu and Song, 2018). Instead, this type of analysis is dependent on the availability of data over a significant period of time in order to allow the identification of time lag.…”