The volatility of tourism demand and real effective exchange rates: a disaggregated analysis

Abstract

Purpose One of the main factors that can impact the cost of holidays to a particular destination is the exchange rate; exchange rate fluctuations impact the overall price of the holiday and should be expected to effect tourism demand. This paper aims to scrutinize the volatility of the real effective exchange rate between the source market relative to the holiday destination and tourism demand volatility, where the influence of disaggregated data is noted. Design/methodology/approach The study uses multivariate conditional volatility regressions to simulate the time-varying conditional variances of international visitor demand and exchange rates for the relatively mature Caribbean tourist destination of Barbados. Data on the country’s main source markets, the UK, the USA and Canada is used, where the decision to disaggregate the analysis by market allows the authors to contribute to policymaking, particularly the future of tourism marketing. Findings The volatility models used in the paper suggests that shocks to total arrivals, as well as the USA and UK markets tend to die out relatively quickly. Asymmetric effects were observed for total arrivals, mainly due to the combination of the different source markets and potential evidence of Butler’s (1980) concept of a tourist area’s cycle of growth. The results also highlight the significance of using disaggregated tourism demand models to simulate volatility, as aggregated models do not adequately capture source market specific shocks, due to the potential model misspecification. Exchange rate volatility is postulated to have resulted in the greater utilization of packaged tours in some markets, while the effects of the market’s online presence moderates the impact of exchange rate volatility on tourist arrivals. Markets should also explore the potential of attracting higher numbers of older tourist, as this group may have higher disposable incomes, thereby mitigating the influence of exchange rate volatility. Research limitations/implications Some of the explanatory variables were not available on a high enough frequency and proxies had to be used. However, the approach used was consistent with other papers in the literature. Practical implications The results from the paper suggest that the effects of exchange rate volatility in key source markets were offset by non-price factors in some markets and the existence of the exchange rate peg in others. In particular, the online presence of the destination was one of those non-price factors highlighted as being important. Originality/value In most theoretical models of tourism demand, disaggregation is not normally considered a significant aspect of the model. This paper contributes to the literature by investigating the impact real effective exchange rate volatility has on tourism demand at a disaggregated source country level. The approach highlights the importance of modeling tourism demand at a disaggregated level and provides important perspective from a mature small island destination.

Moderation analysis of exchange rate, tourism and economic growth in Asia

“…The effects of exchange rate on tourism development can differ across the country, territory and within the tourism jurisdiction [38]. The real and nominal appreciation of the currency leads to a negative impact on the tourism development in the country [40]. Exchange rate has PLOS ONE asymmetric impact on tourism on tourism development in developing countries such as, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal in the short run [41].…”

Effects of Multiple Financial News Shocks on Tourism Demand Volatility Modelling and Forecasting

“…Even when there is no leverage effect, volatility asymmetry indicates that negative news's impact does not outweigh the impact of positive news. A reasonably mature tourism destination's worldwide visitor demand and currency rates were simulated using multivariate conditional volatility regressions by (Alleyne et al 2020). The total arrivals showed asymmetric impacts.…”