Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul

Krishna Hamal Analysis and Forecasting

Paper presented at the Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia 11-14 February 1998

BTR Conference Paper 98.2

ISSN 1326-8309 ISBN 0 642 28504 7

Bureau of Tourism Research

GPO Box 1545 Canberra ACT 2601 AUSTRALIA Telephone: (02) 6213 7136; Facsimile: (02) 6213 6983 E-mail: hamalk@dist.gov.au

2

7 million in 1996. Data were obtained from the publications of the Australian Bureau of Statistics.8 per cent suggesting possible substitution between outbound and domestic holiday travel. Econometric models were used to estimate and analyse the demand parameters of outbound travel. assuming that the magnitude of substitution between a domestic destination and an overseas destination remains the same whether the overseas destination is a long-haul or short-haul destination. Australian outbound tourism Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page i . During the same period. The empirical results suggest a substitution between domestic and outbound holiday travel and that the magnitude and significance of the elasticity of substitution vary by travel distance to outbound destinations. accounting for 46 per cent of total short-term resident departures. A holiday traveller is more likely to substitute a short-haul rather than a long-haul overseas destination for a domestic destination. Indonesia. the relationship was observed on an aggregate level. the outbound travel sector has expanded more rapidly than the domestic travel sector. In reality. this may not be true. from 0. Keywords outbound travel. In this study. Relatively cheaper prices of outbound travel might have encouraged Australians to substitute overseas holiday destinations for domestic ones. Holiday travel dominates the outbound travel sector. Outbound travel is also observed to be influenced by population. In recent times. outbound travel model. The number of residents departing for holiday purposes increased by 5 per cent a year.Preface Outbound travel accounts for about 40 per cent of total international travel. real household disposable income and own price. which includes both short-term overseas arrivals and resident departures. This paper examines substitution by outbound travellers to long-haul and short-haul overseas holiday destinations. Previous studies by Hamal (1996 and 1997) observed that substitution occurs between outbound and domestic holiday travel. The models were estimated using annual historical data from 1974 to 1996. the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. whereas New Zealand.5 million in 1974 to 1. the USA and UK are chosen as long-haul destinations.1 million in 1991 to 2. Singapore and Fiji are selected as short-haul destinations. However.3 million in 1996. This is because prices of travel to short-haul overseas destinations are expected to be more competitive with domestic travel prices than would travel prices to long-haul overseas destinations. from 2. The number of short-term resident departures has increased by an average of 4 per cent a year since 1991. domestic holiday nights declined by 2.

.. Outbound travel .................... Introduction ............................................................................. 3......................... 4.... Data ......................................... 1......... APPENDIX A ........................................................... REFERENCES ......................................................... Model estimation and results .... Keywords ........................................................................................................... 6........... Demand elasticities of outbound travel ....................................................... Holiday outbound travel demand models .......................................... 7...................... 2...................................................... Conclusions .................. i i 1 3 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page ii ......................................................... 5....................................................Contents Preface .....................................................................................

time and health. Fiji and Singapore.7 per cent a year in the last ten years. • Australia is a vast country where domestic travel to some destinations is more costly than overseas travel to destinations surrounding Australia. • In recent decades. travel prices. visiting friends and relatives (VFR). Introduction People travel for several reasons such as holiday. Crompton and Ankomah 1993). especially for the development of marketing strategies. but holiday travel remains the dominant sector of the international travel market. Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 1 . the prices of substitute destinations are very important in analysing travel demand. largely due to the development of aircraft technology and the liberalisation of international air routes.1. and therefore more Australians can afford a holiday at overseas destinations. while the liberalisation of international air routes in several countries including Australia has resulted in competitive airfares on international routes. Therefore many Australians can afford to substitute overseas destinations for domestic destinations. Indonesia. a substitution between domestic and outbound holiday travel is likely to occur because: • Australia is a developed country with a high level of per capita real household disposable income. Although these two attributes jointly influence the final choice of a destination (Um and Crompton 1990 and 1992. employment and sports. business. the choice of a destination is determined not only by the price of a holiday in that destination but also by the prices of a holiday in substitute destinations. Situational constraints are those associated with factors such as income. the latter is empirically observed to be more important than the former (Um and Crompton 1992). In Australia. In other words. • Australians appear to have a liking for travel in general. Among several factors associated with situational constraints. holiday travel to a destination is influenced by two major attributes: the attractiveness of that destination and travellers’ ability to travel to that destination in terms of situational constraints (Woodside and Lysonski 1989. Hansen 1976. especially those surrounding Australia such as New Zealand.7 per cent a year since 1974 and by 1. Um and Crompton 1990 and 1992. Woodside and Lysonski 1989). The fuel efficiency and carrying capacity of airlines have improved with the development of aircraft technology. travel prices have been empirically observed to have a significant influence on travel demand (Hamal 1996 and 1997). This means that the price of overseas travel has relatively declined over the last ten years. Therefore. and overseas travel in particular. According to travel literature. the prices of outbound holiday travel in real terms has declined by 0. Holiday travellers are expected to compare the prices of taking holidays in different destinations and thereby to choose those destinations which maximise their holiday utility.

A substitution effect between outbound and domestic holiday travel in Australia has been empirically observed by Hamal (1996 and 1997). 1979 . Domestic holiday trips could not be compared to outbound trips after 1993 due to a break in series in domestic trips data in 1994-95. Figure 1: Domestic and outbound holiday travel. from 0.2 per cent a year to 1.1993 200 Outbound trips 180 160 140 120 100 80 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Trips (1979=100) Domestic trips * Excludes domestic trips data after 1993 due to a break in series in 1994-95. In fact. Figure 1 and Table 1 indicate that domestic holiday trips remained flat (zero growth) between 1979 and 1993 while the number of resident departures for holiday purposes during the same period increased by 4.3 million in 1996 (Table 2).5 million in 1974 to 1. the number of resident departures for holiday purposes increased by 5 per cent a year since 1974. Table 1: Domestic and outbound holiday trips (thousands) Year Domestic trips 1979 18998 1980 20060 1981 20303 1982 20001 1983 20450 1984 21034 1985 19371 1986 19248 1987 20959 1988 20531 1989 20169 1990 20336 1991 20206 1992 18207 1993 18817 1994 19433* Outbound trips 671 707 736 791 759 861 917 902 902 941 1119 1226 1151 1207 1160 1144 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 2 .2 million in 1993.

In reality.0 6.6 8.5 6.8 5.9 0. this may not be true.7 7.9 7.4 3.2 Average annual growth rate (%): 1979 . A holiday traveller is more likely to substitute a short-haul overseas destination for a domestic destination.3 5. because Table 2: Short-term resident departures by purpose of visit (thousands) Year Business Holiday VFR Other 1974 117 457 140 56 1975 117 557 176 62 1976 125 601 181 66 1977 133 584 188 66 1978 153 638 204 68 1979 168 671 246 91 1980 180 707 235 82 1981 189 736 226 65 1982 197 791 236 62 1983 196 759 237 62 1984 226 861 265 67 1985 238 917 288 69 1986 256 902 309 73 1987 289 902 333 99 1988 330 941 343 84 1989 386 1119 388 98 1990 404 1226 439 102 1991 396 1151 454 98 1992 442 1207 491 136 1993 476 1160 515 116 1994 531 1144 561 119 1995 612 1140 645 122 1996 657 1263 684 128 Average annual growth (%): 1974-1996 1974-1980 1981-1990 1991-1996 1974-1996 7.2 4.1993 0.6 8.1 Total 770 912 974 971 1062 1176 1204 1217 1287 1253 1419 1512 1540 1622 1698 1990 2170 2099 2276 2267 2354 2519 2732 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 3 .3 7.5 8.0 4.0 * Break in data series In Hamal (1996 and 1997).7 5.7 7.0 9.9 6.1995 1996 21506* 21939* 1140 1263 4.6 7. substitution between domestic and outbound travel in Australia was observed on an aggregate level assuming that the magnitude of substitution between a domestic destination and a overseas destination remains the same whether the overseas destination is a long-haul or short-haul.

from 0. Outbound travel In Australia. Table 2: Short-term resident departures 1974-1996 1400 Holiday 1200 1000 Thousands 800 VFR 600 400 200 0 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 Business Other According to a periodical analysis of the growth rates of outbound travel. The number of short-term resident departures has increased by an average of 6. from 7.8 million in 1974 to 2.1 per cent a year since 1974. In recent times. This paper examines the substitution behaviour of Australian travellers with respect to longhaul and short-haul overseas holiday destinations.the prices of short-haul overseas travel are expected to be directly more competitive with the prices of domestic travel than would be the prices of long-haul overseas travel. outbound travel accounts for about 40 per cent of total international travel which includes both short-term overseas arrivals and resident departures. Unlike Hamal (1996 and 1997).8 per cent a year during 1974-1980 to 5.7 million in 1996 (Table 2 and Figure 2). In this study. Singapore and Fiji are selected as short-haul destinations.7 million short-term Australian resident departures.9 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 4 . the USA and UK are chosen as long-haul destinations. whereas New Zealand. 4. the outbound travel sector has expanded more rapidly than the domestic travel sector. the rate of increase in the number of short-term resident departures for holiday purposes has continuously declined over the period. this study uses outbound travel demand models to test the substitution between domestic holiday travel and overseas holiday travel to short-haul and long-haul destinations. Indonesia. In 1996. 2.2 million overseas visitors arrived in Australia compared to 2. The number of business and VFR departures grew more strongly than the number of holiday and other departures.

Holiday outbound travel demand models Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 5 . About 69 per cent of the 1995-96 expenditure was incurred on airfares for overseas travel. The contribution was estimated to be $3. The outbound travel market makes a significant contribution to the economy. suggesting that the Australian outbound holiday travel market compared to business and VFR markets is maturing. and the share of VFR outbound market increased from 18 per cent in 1974 to 25 per cent in 1996. the share of this market has declined over the last 23 years.3 and 7. from 59 per cent in 1974 to 56 per cent in 1990 and 46 per cent in 1996.8 billion in 1993-94 and $2. The outbound travel sector is dominated by the holiday travel market which accounts for 46 per cent of the total short-term resident departures (Figure 3).7 per cent during 1991-1996 (Table 2). However. The decline is caused by a strong growth in business and VFR outbound travel markets. As a result. The change in market shares suggests that the composition of the outbound travel sector is changing over time. 1996 Other 5% VFR 25% Business 24% Holiday 46% 3.9 billion in 1995-96 (Skene 1996. The number of short-term resident departures for business and VFR increased respectively by 8. transport and retail industries in Australia and overseas destinations.7 per cent a year between 1974 and 1996. This will have implications for accommodation. O’Dea 1997). the share of business travel market in the total outbound travel sector increased from 15 per cent in 1974 to 24 per cent in 1996. Such a continuous decline has not occurred in the number of short-term resident departures for business and VFR purposes. Figure 3: Short-term resident departures by purpose of visit.per cent a year during 1981-1990 and to 0.

which is expected to influence outbound travel demand positively. and the estimated parameters can be directly interpreted as elasticities. (1) (2) (3) (4) LHit = α i 0 + α i1 LYt + α i2 LPt + α i3 LQit + α i4 LEX it LHit = α i0 + α i1 LYt + α i2 LPt + α i3 LQit LH it = α i0 + α i1 LYt + α i2 LRPit + α i3 LEXit LH it = α i0 + α i1 LYt + α i2 LREXit where LHit is the log of per capita short-term resident departures for holiday purpose to the ith destination. The domestic and overseas prices of travel and accommodation represent respectively the cross-price and own-price of holiday travel and accommodation. The coefficient of crossprice variable measures the substitution between domestic and outbound holiday travel. LYt is the log of per capita real household disposable income in thousands. LRPit is the log of relative prices of travel and accommodation (Pt/Qit) in the ith country. there are several factors associated with situational constraints that may have a significant influence on outbound holiday travel. because the purchasing power of outbound visitors varies with a variation Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 6 . The double log linear function is chosen because it is easy to estimate. Skene 1993. The econometric models presented in equations (1) to (4) are single equation models which are specified in a simple double log linear functional form. However. whereas the coefficient of own-price variable measure a change in the number of outbound holiday travellers due to a change in the prices of overseas travel and accommodation. This procedure is followed to avoid the consequences of a collinearity between population and income. The estimated coefficients of own-price and cross-price variables are expected to have respectively a negative and a positive sign. and LREXit is the log of the exchange rate weighted by the prices of domestic and overseas travel and accommodation.g. LEXit is the log of the annual average exchange rate in the ith country’s currency per Australian dollar. All of the four models were initially estimated to choose the best one. In addition. the domestic and overseas prices of travel and accommodation. the double logarithmic linear function has been widely used in empirical studies of tourism demand (e. 1996/97 and 1997). and exchange rates. real income. Population. the major variables included in the econometric models of outbound travel in this study are population. Hamal 1996. Kulendran 1995. LPt is the log of the price index of domestic holiday travel and accommodation deflated by CPI. Witt and Witt 1992. Exchange rate is another important economic factor which is likely to have influence on outbound travel. Loeb 1982.As mentioned earlier. LQit is the log of the price index of holiday travel and accommodation in the ith destination country proxied by that country’s CPI. is included in the models by presenting dependent and independent variables on a per capita basis. provides superior fit.

whose coefficient is expected to have a positive sign. the prices of travel and accommodation in Australia and overseas. Hence the exchange rate. population. 4. Although the outbound holiday travel to the UK and USA and their respective exchange rates have widely fluctuated in the short-run. consumer price indices and exchange rates were obtained from publications of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). The number of short-term resident departures to the UK and USA for holiday purposes has increased over the last 23 years despite the depreciation of the Australian dollar against the UK pound and US dollar. the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund . Data on short-run resident departures. the prices were proxied by the consumer price indices of those countries. The exclusion of the exchange rate in model (2) is based on historical data on exchange rate and outbound travel to major destinations. is included in the above models. Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 7 . real household disposable income. they have remained respectively up-ward and down-ward trended over a long period of time. Data Outbound travel models were estimated using annual historical data from 1974 to 1996. Since a long time series of data on the prices of travel and accommodation is not readily available for overseas countries. from 1974 to 1996 (Figures 4 and 5). and the exchange rate is weighted by the relative prices of travel and accommodation to form a proxy for the real effective exchange rate variable. prices and exchange rate variables on an individual basis.in exchange rate. Model (1) is a relatively full model in the sense that it includes income. The exchange rate is excluded in model (2). the domestic and overseas prices of travel and accommodation are combined together to form a single relative price variable in model (3). One possible reason for such an inverse relationship between outbound holiday travel and the exchange rate could be that the influence of the exchange rate is immediately passed over to the prices of holiday travel and accommodation as observed in recent months in some Asian countries which were hit hard by the recent financial crisis. whereas the other three models either exclude the exchange rate variable or specify these variables in different forms to increase the degree of freedom in their estimation process.

60 0.50 0.20 0 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 0.80 100 0.60 Exchange rate (Pound/A$) Figure 5: Outbound holiday travel to USA and US exchange rate 250 Outobund hoilday travel Resident departures (thousands) 200 US exchange rate 1.20 1.Figure 4: Outbound holiday travel to the United Kingdom and the UK exchange rate 160 150 Resident departures (thousands) 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 0.40 0.65 0.00 150 50 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 8 .45 0.00 0.60 1.40 Exchange rate (US$/A$) 1.40 Exchange rate 0.55 Outbound holiday travel 0.70 0.

Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 9 .

The order of integration in a data series can be tested using two types of unit root tests: the Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) unit root test (Dickey and Fuller 1979) and the Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root test (Phillips and Perron 1988). any hypothesis test based on these statistics would be meaningless.5. Rather. Stationary series are also known as integrated series. According to the regression results. these models are a reasonably good fit with an adjusted R2 value ranging from 0. However. This means that the error term will be highly correlated. Among the two demand models. United States of America Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 10 . then the basic assumption falls apart and the estimated model will have the 'spurious regression problem' (Granger and Newbold 1974). model (2) is chosen over model (1) because the exchange rate variable in model (1) has an unexpected sign. they become inefficient (Gujarati 1988. p. a cointegration and error correction mechanism can not be used to derive the long-run and short-run parameters of outbound travel demand. the PP unit root test was used to test the stationarity of model variables in this study.62. the series is called integrated of order one. Therefore. United Kingdom The UK models could not explain all the variation in outbound holiday travel to UK. these models were not adopted to analyse outbound travel demand. The 'spurious regression problem' can be overcome by using cointegration and error correction mechanisms recently developed by Engle and Granger (1987).60 to 0. Model estimation and results One of the basic assumptions of a regression model is that all of its model variables are stationary implying that the means. The unit root test results indicate that the model variables are integrated of different orders. F and R2 values can be seriously overstated. variances and covariances of the individual model variables are independent of the time period. models (3) and (4) were less useful than models (1) and (2) in terms of their predictive power and the signs of their estimated regression coefficients. Although the estimated ordinary least square regression coefficients remain unbiased. In such a situation. If a series becomes stationary after taking its first difference. Model (2) suggests that outbound holiday travel to UK is positively influenced by income and the cross-price of travel and accommodation and negatively by the own-price of travel and accommodation (Table A1 in Appendix). 363). The standard errors are incorrect and the estimated t. The estimated coefficients of all model variables are highly significant. If one or more variables are nonstationary. This is because the test does not create a serious problem of losing degrees of freedom while adding more lag terms to correct an autocorrelation problem in the regression model. The estimated regression statistics of the remaining models are presented by destination in tables B1 to B6 in Appendix B and discussed briefly below. the models (1) to (4) were estimated as simple double log linear regression models on the assumption that the estimated demand parameters remain unbiased. Among these. As a result.

New Zealand Like the UK models.62 in model (2) (Table A5 in Appendix).99 (Table A4 in Appendix).94 (Table A2 in Appendix). However. Short-term resident departures to New Zealand for holiday purposes are observed to be positively influenced by income. As Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 11 . Indonesia Both demand models of outbound travel to Indonesia have a high explanatory power with an adjusted R2 value of 0. exchange rate and the price of travel and accommodation in Australia. According to model (1). the model is chosen over model (2). simply because the latter includes the exchange rate variable with an expected sign. suggesting that there are some other factors influencing outbound travel demand to New Zealand.84 (Table A3 in Appendix). Singapore Among the two demand models of outbound holiday travel to Singapore.Both models of outbound holiday travel to USA show a very good fit with an adjusted R2 value of 0. model (1) is rejected in favour of model (2) because its exchange rate variable has an unexpected sign. However. model (1) is chosen over model (2). outbound travel demand to Indonesia is positively affected by income and the domestic price of travel and accommodation and negatively by the price of travel and accommodation in Indonesia. Fiji The demand models of outbound holiday travel to Fiji are a reasonably good fit with an adjusted R2 value ranging from 0.83 to 0. model (2) is rejected in favour of model (1). In model (1). With the exception of the own-price variable. the estimated income and price elasticities are observed to be highly significant and have the expected signs. the New Zealand outbound travel models do not have a high predictive power. Despite a relatively higher R2 value. The adjusted R2 value is observed to be 0. exchange rate and the crossprice of travel and accommodation but negatively by the own-price of travel and accommodation. However. In other words. Since model (1) has an expected sign for its exchange rate variable. the influence is observed to be statistically significant only in the case of income and cross-price variables and not in the case of exchange rate and ownprice variables.50 in model (1) and 0. model (1) is chosen over model (2) because the exchange rate variable has an expected sign for its estimated coefficient. because model (1) has a relatively higher explanatory power and an expected sign for the coefficient of its exchange rate variable (Table A6 in Appendix). outbound holiday travel to USA is influenced positively by income. whereas they are negatively influenced by the price of travel and accommodation in New Zealand. all variables in model (2) have highly significant coefficients with expected signs. though the coefficient is statistically insignificant.

the outbound travel to Singapore is positively influenced by income.84. The income elasticity of outbound travel to New Zealand is insignificant.63 to 0. which range from 0. are positive and significant for all destinations except New Zealand and Singapore. income is not a driving Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 12 . 6. The estimated income elasticities. That is. Demand elasticities of outbound travel The estimated demand elasticities of outbound travel are summarised in Table 3.expected. On average. whereas it is negative and insignificant in the case of outbound travel to Singapore. and negatively influenced by the price of travel and accommodation in Singapore. the number of resident departures is largely driven by the domestic prices of travel and accommodation followed by the price of overseas travel and accommodation and real per capita income. exchange rate and the price of travel and accommodation in Australia.

173 (Adj-R2 = 0.20 to 2.006 1. In other words.870* -0.196 (Adj-R2 = 0.821* 1.83) Model-2 Indonesia 0. The major driving factors are the price of travel and accommodation in Australia and those countries. As expected.147 (Adj-R2 = 0.828* (Adj-R2 = 0.99) Model-1 New Zealand Model-1 Singapore UES 1.993 0.94) Short-haul Model-1 Fiji 0.350* -0.348* -2.64) 0.23.417* (Adj-R2 = 0.157** -1.794* 2. the estimated own-price elasticities which measure a change in the number of resident departures to an overseas destination with respect to a change in price of travel and accommodation in that destination have a negative sign suggesting that outbound holiday travel demand is negatively affected by the overseas prices of travel and accommodation.840* 2.2339* 0.50) UNE denotes an unexpected sign.62) Model-1 USA 0.108 (Adj-R2 = 0. The absolute value of cross-price elasticity ranges from 0. The estimated cross-price elasticities which measure a change in the number of resident departures to a overseas destination with respect to a change in the domestic prices of travel and accommodation show that outbound holiday travel is positively and significantly influenced by the domestic prices of travel and accommodation.628* 1.Table 3: Estimated demand elasticities by destination Income cross price own price Exchange Destination Long-haul rate Preferred model Model-2 UK 0. This suggest a substitution between domestic and outbound holiday travel. factor for Australian outbound visitors to New Zealand and Singapore.127* -1. outbound Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 13 .755** -0.349 1.043* 0.

This means that the magnitude and significance level of cross price elasticity could be different if some more variables were added in these models to increase their explanatory power.0 New Zealand Fiji Indonesia Elasticity Singapore USA UK 0. New Zealand and Singapore) have not fully explained the variation in outbound travel demand.80 are considered in this study to compare the estimated cross price elasticities. One of the reasons for such mixed evidence could be that some models (UK. In other words. In other words. the less likely it is to be a substitute for a domestic holiday destination. the comparison of elastiicities between models with different explanatory power may not be a reasonable way to test the above hypothesis.12 Significance level related to travel distance to outbound destinations. the level of significance of the cross price elasticity is relatively higher in the UK model than in the New Zealand model. New Zealand and Singapore.50 to 0. then there is evidence of an inverse relationship between travellers’ substitution behaviour and travel distance to outbound destinations. yet it has a relatively larger cross-price elasticity.16 0.64 (Table 3).5 2. However. Considering Sydney as a reference point to measure the distance between Australia and overseas destinations. The comparison is shown in Figure 5 which clearly indicates that the further away an overseas holiday destination is. models with an adjusted R2 value of more than 0.0 Elasticity 1.travellers do include the domestic prices of travel and accommodation in their final choices of outbound destinations. the UK is much further away than Indonesia. Australian outbound travellers are very sensitive to domestic prices of travel and accommodation while Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 14 Significance level .04 0 0. Fiji and Indonesia are considered in the analysis of outbound travel demand.08 1.5 0. if only USA. Table 3 and Figure 4 do not present clear cut evidence that the magnitude and significance of the coefficient associated with travellers’ substitution behaviour is inversely Figure 4: Cross-price elasticity and its significance level by destination 2. Also. Therefore. The adjusted R2 value is relatively low in these models ranging from 0.0 0.5 0. On the other hand.

In this study. Income was not observed as a significant factor in the case of outbound travel to New Zealand and Singapore.0 Fiji Elasticity Indonesia Significance level USA 0. Conclusions The available information suggests a substitution between outbound and domestic holiday travel in Australia.0 0. but not so much while choosing long-haul destinations such as USA. the substitution behaviour of outbound holiday travellers has been analysed with an emphasis on long-haul versus short-haul destinations.16 0 a long-haul or short-haul destination.5 0. The substitution behaviour of domestic holiday makers has been statistically tested in previous studies but on an aggregate level.08 1.12 . 7. During 1979 to 1993. the domestic holiday trips remained flat while the number of resident departures for holiday purposes increased by 4.2 per cent a year.5 2.0 Elasticity 1.selecting a short-haul overseas holiday destination such as Fiji and Indonesia. The estimated own-price elasticities were found to have expected signs suggesting that the outbound holiday travel demand is negatively influenced by the price of travel and accommodation in overseas destinations.04 0. The substitution behaviour of outbound holiday travellers is likely to change by travel distance between domestic and outbound destinations.5 0. without due attention to whether an outbound destination is Figure 5: Cross price elasticity and its significance level by destination 2. The number of resident departures is observed to be largely driven by the domestic prices of travel and accommodation followed by the prices of overseas travel and accommodation and real per capita income. In other Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 15 Significance level 0. The estimated cross-price elasticities which measure the substitution between domestic and outbound holiday travel demand show that outbound holiday travel is positively and significantly influenced by the domestic price of travel and accommodation.

This could have resulted from defects in the estimated models of outbound holiday travel to the UK. If the results from these models are excluded from the analysis of outbound travel demand. These models have not fully explained the variation in outbound travel demand. there is no clear cut evidence suggesting that the magnitude and significance of a coefficient associated with travellers’ substitution behaviour is inversely related to travel distance to outbound destinations. then there exists clear cut evidence on the inverse relationship between the magnitude and significance of substitution and travel distance to outbound destinations. outbound travellers do substitute overseas destinations for domestic ones.words. In summary. New Zealand and Singapore. However. but less sensitive while choosing longhaul destinations. Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 16 . Australian outbound travellers are very sensitive to the domestic price of travel and accommodation while selecting a short-haul overseas holiday destination.

Bureau of Tourism Research. Estimating Tourism’s Economic Contribution. F. Demand and Forecasts: Short-Term Visitors to Australia from New Zealand. Hamal. Bureau of Tourism Research. Singapore.L.K. Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression.. and P. October. Journal of Travel Research 27: 8-14. (1976). Annals of Tourism Research 20: 461-476.B. Hamal. J. (1997). Modeling and Forecasting Demand in Tourism. Hansen. S. 1/95.. Crompton (1992). International Travel to the United States: An Economic Evaluation.C. (1993).W.J. A.F. A General Model to Traveller Destination Choice. 1(2). Annals of Tourism Research 9: 7-20. 2. Um. Skene. and P. (1996). September. Econometrica 55: 251-276. Attitude Determinants in Tourism Destination Choice. Canberra. S. Skene. Pacific Tourism Review. Kulendran. Annals of Tourism Research 17: 432-448. Research Paper No. Journal of Econometrics 2: 111-120. Gujarati. 86. O’Dea. (1995).. Newbold (1974). D.L. a working paper presented at the Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference. Biometrica 75: 335-346. and P. Granger (1987). and C.. Witt (1992). Witt. Australia. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research.. Granger. 6-9 February. Time Series Properties. Ankomah (1993). and J.. Crompton (1990). and S. Canberra.References Crompton. Second ed. Tourism’s Direct Economic Contribution. Dickey. J. Working paper no. Woodside. Estimation and Findings. Lysonski (1989).F. Psychological Theories of Consumer Choice. (1996). Choice Set Propositions in Destination Decisions. Cointegration and Error Correction: Representation. P.L.. 23-33. Research Paper No. R. Journal of Consumer Research 3: 117-142. Fuller (1979). Canberra: Bureau of Industry Economics. K. Journal of Travel Research 30: 18-25. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74: 427-431. Daniel (1987).J. Spurious Regressions in Econometrics. Coffs Harbour. J. (1988).A. K. Hamal. 35-46. 1995-96. (1982). and C. Substitutability Between Domestic and Outbound Travel in Australia. The Roles of Preceived Inhibitors and Facilitators in Pleasure Travel Destination Decisions. Modeling Domestic Holiday Tourism Demand in Australia: Problems and Solutions. 3. N.. Distribution of the Estimates for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root.. Damodar N. Um. Loeb.A. London: Academic Press Limited. Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 17 . Krishna (1996/97).G. Engle.. Melbourne: Victoria University. Basic Econometrics. S. 1(1). and J. McGraw-Hill. Perron (1988). Phillips. P. Working paper no. ‘Substitutability Between Domestic and Outbound Travel in Australia’. C. Modelling International Quarterly Tourism Flows to Australia Using the Demand Function Approach.W. and W.

85 Table A2: Regression statistics of holiday models: United States Estimated Significance level Variable coefficient T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU 0.07 0.62 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.173 0.020 -1.13 INTERCEPT -2.859 6.498 -1.462 -2.01 0.628 1.949 0.840 2.145 1.166 -2.762 -3.029 0.623 0.04 LEX_UK -0.794 5.05 0.732 0.03 LQ_UK -2.233 -3.741 -1.399 0.575 LP_AU 2.755 1.904 -1.10 0.685 2.54 LEX_ US 0.07 LP_AU 1.603 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_ FJ INTERCEPT 0.01 0.62 DW = 1.16 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.638 1.471 2.20 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 18 .465 0.12 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_ US INTERCEPT 0.26 Other statistics N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.60 DW = 1.06 0.049 2.Appendix Table A1: Regression statistics of holiday models: United Kingdom Estimated Significance level Variable coefficient T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU 1.73 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.16 LQ_US -0.21 Table A3: Regression statistics of holiday models: Fiji Estimated Variable coefficient T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU 0.67 INTERCEPT -3.01 0.16 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.332 6.440 0.73 0.702 0.01 0.546 0.348 3.62 0.044 LEX_ FJ 0.02 LP_AU 2.94 DW = 2.558 -1.340 -5.83 DW = 2.55 0.399 -1.12 Other statistics N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.516 -0.01 0.19 0.01 0.199 2.580 0.108 0.530 LQ_FJ -2.345 INTERCEPT 0.632 0.151 0.828 -1.127 -1.776 2.616 0.352 -0.014 1.84 DW = 2.367 0.272 0.10 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_UK INTERCEPT 0.993 -0.5000 Significance level Other statistics 0.94 DW = 2.

09 0. Singapore Estimated Significance level coefficient Variable T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU -0.08 LEX_ NZ 0.Table A4: Regression statistics of holiday models.08 Other statistics N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.876 1.01 0.821 1.830 -4.04 0.48 0.004 LEX_ ID -0.62 DW = 2.01 0.316 0.14 Table A6: Regression statistics of holiday models.753 0.933 -0.41 LP_AU 1.666 LP_AU 1.459 -0.358 0.927 5. Indonesia Estimated coefficient Variable T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU 0.196 -7.595 -10.035 0.11 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_ NZ INTERCEPT 0.74 0.46 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_ SN INTERCEPT 0.704 0.03 INTERCEPT -3.297 4.590 MODEL (2) LY_AU LP_AU LQ_ ID INTERCEPT 0.178 1.882 INTERCEPT -6.05 LQ_SN -0.99 DW = 2.177 -0.01 0.64 DW = 1.65 INTERCEPT 1.846 1.689 0.815 LQ_ID -0.362 1.817 -2.56 0.870 -0.350 2.130 0.329 0.00 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.148 0.468 0.61 DW = 2.97 LP_AU 1.001 -0.270 0.147 0.12 LQ_NZ -1.76 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.636 0.721 -0.433 -0.043 -1.66 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.99 0. New Zealand Estimated Significance level coefficient Variable T-ratio MODEL (1) LY_AU 0.723 3.70 0.874 0.758 3.285 -0.99 DW = 2.671 1.39 0.391 0.01 0.338 0.03 N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.79 LEX_ SN 1.096 0.349 -0.824 0.01 0.39 0.417 2.313 -0.50 DW = 1.837 0.11 Table A5: Regression statistics of holiday models.75 Other statistics N= 23 Adj-R2 = 0.006 0.157 1.260 Significance level Other statistics 0.04 Australian Outbound Holiday Travel Demand: Long-haul Versus Short-haul Page 19 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful