The mobility network of European tourists: a longitudinal study and a comparison with geo-located Twitter data

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to provide a network study of the structural and dynamical characteristics of tourism flows in Europe from 1995 to 2012. Design/methodology/approach Travels in Europe were studied by following the network science research paradigm and by focusing on the whole network of intra-European tourism destinations. Network analysis was used to map and reveal the pattern of connections between states as shaped by bilateral tourism flows. Data were provided by the United Nations World Tourism Organization, and the data were integrated with tourism data available from national statistical offices of the individual countries, when necessary. Findings For 2012, results obtained from the UNWTO record-based network were compared to geo-located Twitter data as a proxy of human mobility patterns. The present analysis provides evidence of a shift towards an increased homogeneity in the travelling preferences of European tourists, an acquired attitude of visitors to travel shorter distances and a tendency of mobility patterns to merge. Finally, the comparison between UNWTO and Twitter data shows a different spatial distribution of visitors. These results provide a useful insight for policymakers involved in tourism planning. Originality/value The contribution of this study is threefold. First, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the only study that focuses on the bilateral tourism flows between all countries falling, geographically or politically, under the definition of Europe. Second, evidence is provided of a shift towards a greater homogeneity in the travelling preferences of European tourists. Lastly, for the first time, this study provides a comparison between topological structure and bilateral mobility patterns of tourism flows, based on two different data-recording methods.

A complex network analysis of global tourism flows

“…Here, we refer to capturing and processing the information that visitors profusely and voluntarily post online. This includes, for example, geo-located Twitter messages (e.g., Hawelka et al, 2014;Provenzano, Hawelka, & Baggio, 2018), specialized blogs (e.g., Chung, Chung, & Nam, 2017), or geo-tagged photos (e.g., Junker, Akbar, & Cuquet, 2017). This category also includes analysing destination electronic word of mouth (e.g., Luo & Zhong, 2015;Williams, Inversini, Ferdinand, & Buhalis, 2017) as well as navigation paths in online trip planning (Li, Yang, & Pan, 2015).…”

Comparing International Movements of Tourists: Official Census versus Social Media

“…Provenzano et al [6] analyzed tourism within Europe using both WTO data and geolocalized Twitter data, concluding that there is a large overlap between the two data sets, even though social network data is more complete. Zhou et al [11] studied the international trade network by building a graph with edges only between a country and its largest economic partner and tries to justify the validity of this model using a triad census.…”

“…Our work differs from similar efforts because the focus is on the extensive comparison between official data obtained in traditional ways, such as those studied by Provenzano et al [6], with mobility extracted using social media data. Although there are other comparisons between different data sources for this context, they focus on specific cases, not providing a clear indication of the extent to which social media data reflects characteristics obtained with official data regarding the international flow of tourists.…”

Qualitative online research in tourism – a systematic review of the literature

“…Tourism scholars have not neglected the possibility of using online research methods. Indeed, previous studies have acknowledged and promoted the use of the internet and social media to research virtual and non-virtual communities (Hanna, 2012; Lohmann and Schmücker, 2009; Mkono and Markwell, 2014; Mkono et al , 2015; Munar and Jacobsen, 2014; Muskat et al , 2013; Provenzano et al , 2018; Tavakoli, 2016; Tavakoli and Mura, 2018). However, a comprehensive search in all journals listed in Scopus as well as tourism and hospitality journals listed in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) journal quality list shows that at the current time, a systematic analysis of tourism studies using online methods is absent in the literature.…”