014 E-Journal PDF

8/12/2019 014 E-Journal PDF

1/15

GBSR e-Journal of Business, Economics and Social Sciences Research 2013 (e-ISSN:XXXX XXXX)WorldResearchConference.com 1

IMPACT OF TOURIST ARRIVAL IN ECONOMIC GROWTH: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCEFROM MALAYSIA

Dayang Hummida Abang Abdul Rahman a, A.M Dayang-Affizzah b, Salbiah Edman c

Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS)[email protected] a, [email protected], [email protected] c

ABSTRACT

This study uses secondary data from 1977 until 2011 to determine the relationship between tourist arrivals and economic growth in Malaysia. Apart from that, the other objective of this research is toinvestigate the contribution impact of tourism to economic growth. There are several methods of analysis were used to analyse the data which are Unit Root test (ADF & PP), Cointegration test (Johensenand Jeselius), normality test and Granger Causality test. The result shows that there is a positiverelationship between tourist arrivals and economic growth in Malaysia.

Keyword: Economic growth; causality; Tourist arrivals.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. INTRODUCTION

Tourism industry which already growing in ancient times found successful becomes generatingresources of high foreign exchange revenue. Furthermore, tourism is one of these important generatorsof income and employment creation. Tourism can be defined as process, activity, and result which arosefrom relationship and interacting among tourists, tourism suppliers, host governments, hostcommunities, and surrounding environments which involved in attracting and hosting of visitors (WorldTourism Organization [WTO], 2003) 1. In addition, tourism is a human activity, which encompasseshuman behaviour, resource utilization, and interaction with other people, economy and environments(Adrian Bull, 1995). Apart from that, people come from this country also could categorise as tourist.Visitors were divided into two, firstly tourist that means temporary visitors to a country at least 24hours, for the purposes of leisure or business and; secondly excursionists that means temporary visitorsstaying in a country less than 24 hours, for the same purposes, but excluding transit passengers (AdrianBull, 1995). At the same time, tourist have are various perspective in different countries. Mohammad,Elsadig & Abdur (2011) also mentions that Malaysia can become one of the leading tourist destinationscompeting with other popular destinations of the global economy. In addition, tourism sector successmany countries worldwide, including Malaysia, is often measured in dollars and cents or specifically bythe number of international tourist arrivals and the income they bring (Baharuddin, Ahmad, Jamil &Kong, 2000)

According to Khaled (2009), tourism term is a kind of universal remedy for some of the macroeconomicproblems, as an engine for social transformation and to produce a good image on the global platform

1 The World Tourism Organization is the United Nations agency responsible for the promotion of responsible,sustainable and universally accessible tourism. This organization also promotes tourism as a driver of economicgrowth, inclusive development and environmental sustainability and offers leadership and support to the sectorin advancing knowledge and tourism policies worldwide.


2/15


driver in an era give incentive that is too generous to industry. As we know, tourism represents one of the most dynamic economic sectors in the world (Edgardo, 2005; Imran, Muhammad & Fareed, 2010;Jamieson, 2000). However, tourism also can give the positive and negative impact to our economicgrowth. Tourism is also main source and the biggest contribution in economic Malaysia. Nowadays,tourism industries becoming increasingly vital namely are catalyst in Malaysian economic developmentand contribute much to income and countrys growth. Furthermore, it can become aspiring a foreigncentre for tourism. Malaysia is an interesting holiday destination offering something for everyone toenjoy their holiday. According to WTO (2005), Malaysia was ranked as the thirteen worlds top touristdestinations while within ASEAN region Malaysia was the leading country in receiving inbound touristsby controlling about 32.7 percent of total arrivals in 2004 (WTO, 2006). The countrys main gateway isthe Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA). Besides, it also offers low cost flight which is Air Asia inLow Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT). Other major international airports are Langkawi, Penang, Johor Bahru,Kota Kinabalu and Kuching (Malaysia, 2012). According to Syahida (2003), in the tourism industry, thetourism attractions are key factors in making a destination attractive and exciting. However, they are afew reasons for tourist to come the country. In generally, factors that attracting the tourists is culture,demography, political environment, and economic growth. Firstly, endowed with a diversity of culture,Malaysia offers a truly Asian experience. Malaysia is a melting and amalgamation of people from

various races (Tourism Malaysia; National and Marine Parks, 2010). Moreover, factor that attracting theeconomic growth in Malaysia is the size and value of a national economy is normally expressed as thetotal value of all goods and services produced by the economy during a specified time period, such asone year (Adrian Bull, 1995). This industry perceived as contributed on generating foreign exchangeearnings, employment and income. Norsiah Kadir (2008) found that the rising economic importance of the industry had been fuelled by the large and growing number of international tourists. However, thetourists that come to our country can give some effect and challenges face the Malaysia tourismindustry.

Table 1: Total Number of Tourist Arrival and GDP in Malaysia (2007-2011)

Year Tourist Arrival GDP Constant Price

2007 20.9 million 506,341

2008 22.0 million 530,683

2009 23.6 million 522,001

2010 24.6 million 559,554

2011 24.7 million 590,353

Source: Department of Statistics Malaysia

Table 1 shows GDP and tourist arrival from 2007 to 2011. In year 2007, the number of tourist arrival is20.9 million and the total GDP in Malaysia is 506, 341. Whereas in year 2010, the number of touristarrival slightly increase to 22.0 million and GDP also rapid dramatic sharp to 530,683. After that in year2010, the total tourist arrivals only encounter rose dramatic a litter that of 24.6 million and the totalGDP is 559,554. Lastly, in year 2011 the total tourist arrival is 24.7 million and the total GDP is 590,353.


3/15


This prove that the higher tourist arrival, that will become dramatic sharp GDP and the largestcontributor to this country.

Tourism sector is the largest generated into economic growth in Malaysia. This is the main reason forthe government support and promotes tourism throughout the world. Furthermore, this sector can givea positive impact upon economic growth and development in Malaysia. According to Edgardo Sica(2005), today tourism represents one of the most dynamic economic sectors in the world and the studyaims to verify if tourism represents a determinant of growth in such countries. Different from otherperspective, tourism should generate employment and income, lead to a positive tourism balance of payments, stimulate the supplying sectors of tourism, and lead to a generally increased level of economic activity in the country and will give an impact on the frequently used quantitative measure of the economic development, gross domestic product (GDP) (Edgardo, 2005; Stanislay and Craig, 2006;Nanthakumar, 2007). In fact, tourism industry is largest contributed to our economic country. Anotherkey point, Syahida (2003) also agreed that tourism can create needed jobs for residence, generateneeded funds to improve the lives of local people and increase business for local merchants in smallcoastal town seeking economic security. In other word, tourism industry not only benefits to economicgrowth in our country, but it also benefited to the people of this country. Sara and Elias (2008) also

belief that there a significant relationship between economic growth and tourism. In addition nationaleconomy to benefit from tourism depends on the availability of investment to develop the necessaryinfrastructure, and capacity to supply the services that tourists require. Furthermore, when a countrybecomes more recognized, thus it facilitates to attract foreign travels (Business travels), which leads toan increase in the foreign reserve of the country. Therefore, indirectly it will increase our FDI.

On the contrary, Samina (2010) found that tourism led to a growth of household incomes andgovernment revenue directly and indirectly by means of multiplier effects, improving balance of payments and provoking tourism-promoted government policies. Indirectly, household will be activeparticipating contribution to development of the nation. In addition, it can improved policy environmentfor sustainable tourism development has major implication for macroeconomic goals and national social

development objectives, especially those related to poverty reduction (United Nations, 2007). They alsomention that at the same time, are new opportunities for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of tourisms contribution involving the government, the private sector and other stakeholders.

As noted in the previous section, tourism is one of the largest and fastest growing industries in theglobal economy and currently the third most important industry for Malaysia in term of foreignexchange earnings (MIER, 2008). Balaguer and Jorda (2002) explored the role of tourism for theeconomic growth of Spain using cointegration and causality testing. Adamos and Sofronis (2009) haveacknowledged that diminishing returns will eventually set in, putting a limit until level that the tourismsector can contribute on countries welfare. Tourism is not only one creator of GDP, but has animportant contribution to value added [Minciu, 2000, 25]. This industry can also have an impact

on natural resources in the various tourist destinations, on everyday life of these locations andalso on the individuals from those areas, whether rural or urban. Therefore, this study try to fillthis gap by investigate the between Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and tourist arrivals inMalaysia. The problem is to understand the difficult of effectiveness of virtual tour technologyfor the market of tourist places in our country in particularly with grows of tourism industry.Other than that, it is difficult to our country to attract the international tourist especially from


4/15


western country. Furthermore, is that our place and product in our country will satisfy thetourist desire. The visitor can also virtually browse through a souvenir or gift shop thats oninternet before deciding to buy anything they wish (Prasana, 2002). This study gives theopportunity for country to identify the real source for economic growth in this country.Different from other research, this study merely using two variables only; the fist was total

tourist arrival and secondly is GDP in Malaysia. In other words, this study would like toinvestigates the contribution of tourism in related to the Malaysian economic growth wherebyprovide the relevant recommendation of government policy to strengthen the economicperformance in Malaysia.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

A development in tourism industry is really emphasized therefore the interesting places in Malaysia canattract more tourists arrival to come to Malaysia. Alfartas (2009) investigated that to have adevelopment increasing in this sector a demand from the people must be created and that cannot behappen if they only have a tourists attractive place. Apart of that, government and private sector must

participation through a long term plan. In contrast, Sica (2005) said that they are other factorscontributed to the rapid development of tourism in the South-East regions, for example aretechnological improvements, new marketing promotional strategies and elimination of political barriers.Moreover, in order to, tourism sector become an alternative driving force to achieve economicdevelopment, the part of gains from tourism should be allocated for improving the living conditions of weak population.

According to the Salleh (n.d), explored the tourism development can be attracting foreign directinvestment (FDI) inflow that having significant impact in generating economy. In addition, according toKweka et al. (2003) also have the same opinion. They mention that in Tanzania, the contribution of tourism sector has attracted investment and policy initiatives to supports its development. The certaininvestment can give benefit both communities and reserves. Apart of that, they also mention that

tourism sector can generate indirect tax revenue. Tourism sector will also give in directly or indirectlycontribution to one country. Households indirectly will be earning income more by working in tourismsector or supporting industries. Indirectly, tourism industry will increase economic growth and furtherincrease this countrys name. In addition, according to Brida et al. (2008), investigated the tourismsector have relationship among elasticity of tourism expenditure ( TourExp), real exchange rate ( RER)andin long-run economic growth ( GDP). Policy implications will be accessible this by enhance performanceof the economic growth and increase their administrative management performance. In contrast, Maliket al. (2010) examined that there is long-run relationship between the number of tourists, GDP growthrate and current account deficit. It will increase Pakistan balance of payments accounts by cutting downcurrent account deficit and the GDP will be improves.

According to the Zortuk (2009), identify that tourism industry in Turkey have emerged as a great empire

with annual foreign exchange that high and job opportunities directly and indirect. In fact to, it is notonly increase foreign exchange income, yet it had spurred growth of the tourism industry and additionalit also triggered overall economic growth. As a matter of fact, Tohamy and Swinscoe (2000) having thesame opinion on the matter above. Moreover based on export revenue, tourism has become theworlds largest source of income and item that is important in balance of payment to most of thecountry. The direct effects of tourist expenditure on business are tax potential contribution that


5/15


estimates high from total of tax revenue. That research also indicated that direct impact foreign touristexpenditure about four times the one percent contribution from hotel and restaurant to GDP in nationalaccount.

Furthermore, Mazumder et al. (2011), think that tourism industry not only creates considerable highmultiplier effects but also stepped up the inter-sectoral linkages in the economy. Therefore, multiplier

effect that is direct, indirect, and induced is reason which helps in expand tourism contribution toeconomic. In additional, the capacity to generate ripple effect by tourism makes one important mediumof foreign currency injection which had been significant attention for developing countries economicdevelopment. The developing country has been gradually depending on income streams from tourismwhile traditional economic sector has been less potential in contributing to GDP country. In contrast,Evan et. al. (2008) has different perspective. They found that tourism industry is as one of the incomeearners that are attracts great interest from policy aspect for economic growth that continued in thiscountry.

3. METHODOLOGY

This section explains more about the method to be used in this research. The Methods and techniquesof this study will involve several aspects such as the conceptual framework, research design andhypotheses of the study. Furthermore, this study was focuses on the period of the studies data, thevariables that used, and how data is analyzed and what the data analysis carried out from these studies.In this section, the time series data always includes four standard procedures which are Unit root test(ADF, PP), Normality test, Co-integration test (Johansen and Jesulius, JJ 1990) and Granger Causality.

4. DATA

This study use the time series annual data from year 1977 until year 2011 which is was used the yearlydata. The data that used are GDP and total number of tourist arrival to Malaysia. The data had been

found from Department of Statistic Malaysia.

5. UNIT ROOT TEST

Unit root test is test to defined stationary or non-stationary in the result. The unit roots test is a moreformal test, which is required to check the stationary properties of the variables. Stationary is refers tothe state where the underlying stochastic process that generates a data series is invariant with respectto time. It is important for estimation because with apply least squares regression on non-stationaryvariables can give misleading parameter estimates of the relationship between variables. Meanwhile,with checking for stationary, it will be explain what kind of processes we need to estimate for ourmodels. If the characteristics of the stochastic process change over the time, we can say that the process

is the non-stationary. Non-stationary time series data is necessarily contain the permanent components.The mean and variance of a non-stationary time series depend on time, which can cause a series has nolong- run mean. The ADF test is one-sided because the alternative hypothesis is that < 0 (or p).

Phillip and Perron (1988) propose an alternative (nonparametric) method of controlling for serialcorrelation when testing for a unit root. The PP method estimates the non-Augmented DF test equation,and modifies the t-ratio of coefficient so that serial correlation does not affect the asymptotic


6/15


distribution of the test statistic. The PP test is differing for the ADF in the treatment of serial correlation.The information based method does not apply to the PP test. The lag selection is not that important inPP test if compare with ADF test.

6. COINTEGRATION TEST

Cointegration test is the test to find this result is long run relationship or short run relationship amongthe endogenous and exogenous variable. Advantages of Johansen and Jeselius, JJ is the Johansenmultivariate procedure poses several advantages over the residual-based Engle-Granger two-stepapproach in testing for a long-run relationship among economic variable. Phillips (1991) hasdocumented the desiberility of this technique in term of symmetry, un-biasedness and efficiency.Furthermore, it is well known that the Johansen procedure does not suffer from normalization problemand is robust to departures from normality Cheung and Lai, (1993), Gonzalo (1994). To reject the nullhypothesis, the trace statistic and maximum eigenvalue statistic must greater than critical value. Whenthe two or more variables in a system are found to be co-integrated, it said to have a long runrelationship. But if does not co-integrated they are short run relationships .

7. NORMALITY TEST

Normality tests are used to determine whether a data set is well-modeled by a normal distribution ornot, to compute likely an underlying random variable is to be normally distributed. The distribution of sum of a large number of independent and identically distributed random variables tends to a normaldistribution as the number of such variables increases indefinitely. If the number of variables is not verylarge or they are not strictly independent, their sum may still be normally distributed. The normaldistribution is a comparatively simple distribution involving only two parameters (mean and variance).

8. Granger Causality Test

Granger Causality Tests based on Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) is deployed when cointegrationis detected. The purpose is to avoid problem of misspecification (Granger, 1988). The existence of acointegrated relationship in the long run indicates that the residuals from the cointegration equationcan be used as ECT as below.

LnGDPt =0 i + 3,i LnTA t-i + 1ECT t-1 + 1t (1)

LnTAt = 0 + 2,i LnGDP t-i + 2ECT t-1 + 2t (2)


7/15


9. EMPIRICAL RESULT AND DISCUSSION

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the data that have been used in this study was gained from year2001 until 2010 for both dependent and independent variable. This chapter will be presented theempirical result using the statistical analysis of Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP)Unit Root Test, Co-integration Test, Normality Test and Granger Causality Test. The result will bepresented in the table form followed by the explanation for each tests. The empirical result will bepresented in table from and followed by the analysis of the empirical result.

Table 2: Result for Unit Root test

ADF test

Variable Level 1 st difference

intercept Trend &intercept

intercept Trend &intercept

LGDP 2.372(1) -0.923(0) -6.834(0)*** -8.083(0)***

LTOURIST -3.446(14) 2.629(0) -2.261(0) -3.244(0)*

Notes: Asterisks (*), (**), (***) indicate the rejection of the null hypothesis of non-stationary at 10%, 5% and 1%and ( ) denote the lag length.

Table 2 represents the result of ADF unit root test in probability value ( p-value). Null hypothesis can onlybe rejected if p-value is smaller than 0.1. In the levels intercept, ADF test results provide evidence thatonly Tourist arrival and GDP not significant in that case the first different are proceed. At the firstdifferences, GDP are stationary at 1 percent significant and Tourist arrival only have one significant atfirst differences, trend and intercept at the level of 10 percent during the period of the annually from1977 2011. Furthermore, the null hypothesis is rejected at the first difference because the variable of GDP and Tourist arrival was found to be stationary at the first different and statistical significant.


8/15


Table 3: Result for Unit Root test

PP test

Variable Level 1 st difference

Intercept Trend & intercept Intercept Trend & intercept

LGDP 2.824(5) -0.421(3)** -6.781(3)*** -8.787(3)**

LTOURIST 5.489(3)*** 2.629(0) -2.161(3) -3.087(3)**

Notes: Asterisks (*), (**), (***) indicate the rejection of the null hypothesis of non-stationary at 10% 5% and 1%and ( ) denote the lag length.

Table 3 represents the result of PP unit root test in probability value ( p-value). At the level intercept GDPsignificance. In other words, all the probability is less than 0.01. In contrast, in first differences, only GDPare stationary at 1 percent significance. Tourist arrival only significant at level intercept, at 1 percentsignificance. Moreover, the null hypothesis is rejected at the first difference because the variable of GDPwas found to be stationary at the first different and statistical significant. The ADF and PP test showsthat, most the variables are stationary and the test can be proceed to cointegration test

10. COINTEGRATION TEST

The purpose of cointegration test is to test the existence of long run relationship among the endogenousand exogenous variable, namely the GDP of Malaysia and Tourist who come to Malaysia. It is also knownas multivariate analysis. To reject the null hypothesis, the trace statistic and maximum eigenvaluestatistic must greater than critical value .

Table 4: Co-Integration Test

Null Alternative k=2 r=5

Trace -Max

Test statistic 95% (C.V) Test statistic 95% (C.V)

r = 0 r = 1 14.76445** 14.07 19.72945** 15.41

r


9/15


Table 4 indicate that the trace test and maximum eigenvalue exist at single and double cointegrationvector and the variables are moving towards equilibrium. The table shows that both Max and Tracetests suggest that there is a cointegrating relationship because they are significant. The trace test showsthat the rejecting of the null hypothesis of r=0 which is 14.76445 is greater than critical value. The nullhypothesis of r 1 is also rejected due to the greater than critical value. The maximum eigenvalue testindicates that the rejection of the null hypothesis is only occurs at r=0 of maximum eigenvalue test of 19.72945 and r 1, maximum eigenvalue test of 4.965006 is greater than critical value. Based on theresult, it can be interpreted that cointegrating test has are relationship between the GDP and touristarrival.

11. NORMALITY TEST

Normality tests are used to determine whether a data set is well-modeled by a normal distribution ornot, to compute likely an underlying random variable is to be normally distributed.

Figure 1: Normality Test

The figure 1 indicates that most observations are highly concentrated on the left side of the distribution.Furthermore, based on figure above, the distribution found more to negative side. This proved to itsskewness and kurtosis is -0.379907 and 3.171002. To summarize, the Jarque-Bera test return 0.884566,which reject the null hypothesis of normality because p-value is less than 0.0001.

0

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

-15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 10000

Series ResidualsSample 1977 2011Observations 35

Mean 1.35E-12Median -476.0103Maximum 9592.812Minimum -13874.48Std. Dev. 4978.152Skewness -0.379907Kurtosis 3.171002

Jarque-Bera 0.884566Probability 0.642568


10/15


11/15


13. CONCLUSION

As a conclusion, this research is carried out to investigate the impact of tourism will effect economicgrowth in Malaysia. Apart from that, this study also has others objectives which aim to identify thecontribution impact of tourism in related to economic growth and to provide recommendation andpolicy for government in related to tourism growth. Besides, the results for ADF test suggest that GDPare stationary at the first difference with one percent of significant level while tourist arrival arestationary at the first difference with ten percent of significant level. Corollary, null hypothesis rejectedat the first different because the variable was found to be stationary. Moreover, PP test suggest thatonly GDP are stationary at the first difference with one percent of significant level. In addition, thecointegration test has been run by using Johansen and Juselius test (1990) and it shows that both traceand maximum eigenvalue test statistics rejected the null hypothesis at five percent significant levelwhich implies that there is cointegration between GDP and tourist arrival.

In the vector error correction model, the result suggest the there is no causality between the GDP andtourist arrival in the short run because the result shows that bigger than 5 percent level of significant.This mean the tourist arrival cannot be explained properly by the economic condition. However, thegranger causality test has explained there is long run relationship between the two variables. Theseresults show that there is unidirectional between economic growth and tourist arrival in the long run.The result of analysis which made in chapter four found tourists arrival have a positive relationship withGDP Malaysia. This can be proved when all tests have been made to show that the existence of positiverelationship between dependent variable namely economic growth and independent variables aretourists arrival. In other words, an increase in tourist arrivals also led to increase in GDP Malaysia.

From the results that are obtained, it was found that the objective have been achieve where found thattourism has a positive impact on economic growth in Malaysia. In other words, the increase in touristarrivals will cause an increase in economic growth in Malaysia generally. Diversity of tourism productsthat introduced like ecotourism, health tourism, film tourism, tourism homestay, edutourism andtourism aqua is also one of the increase of tourists factor to Malaysia. Apart from that, a high grossnational income, lower inflation, population rates that high and short haul destinations influencingtourists to visit Malaysia.

In addition, the tourism industry is very sensitive to international recession crisis non- economic likewar, natural disasters such as haze and plague. The global economic recession has greatly slowed alsorelated to tourist development in this region. Besides that, the World Tourism Organization estimateshas estimated that tourism accounts will reach up to 10% of global gross domestic product, making itthe worlds largest industry. Besides that, tourism also contributes to the reduction of poverty and thatfor many of the least developed countries, and in many rural areas, tourism is one of the viablestrategies that also contributed to the development of the country. In 2020, Malaysia targets 36 billiontourist will arrive, and bringing up to RM168 billion in the revenue for the country. As a conclusion, theanalysis shows, then, that a long-run stable relationship between economic growth and tourismexpansion exists. The strong impact of tourist activity, according to the magnitude of the estimatedparameter would reveal the existence of important long-run multiplier effects.

In developing a master plan countries may wish to consider incorporating the recommendationspresented below as well as those contained in Commission resolution on Implementation of the Plan of Action for Sustainable Tourism Development in Asia and the Pacific. Malaysia as a truly Asia, is a countrythat has an attractiveness of its own. Moreover, by looking at the rise in the tourism sector, it is


12/15


opportunity to further boost the tourism industry in Malaysia by diversifying tourism activity that moreinnovative. Government should consider increasing their efforts to assess the economic impact of tourism from boiling. The formulation of national tourism development policy must be done will as nothindered by lack of data on the scope and extent of the economic contribution of tourism and itsimpact. Promotional activities should be directed towards to raise awareness and encourage visitors tovisit tourist attractions in Malaysia. Concentration should be given to improvements to attractions andpresent markets and developing tourist infrastructure. Government also should consider establishing inorder to create inter-ministerial committees that include representatives from the tourism industry inorder to coordinate and monitor that implementation of the plan. In addition, the government mustmake improvements in procedures for the issuance of visas, border formalities and customs regulationto ease international travel.

In other words, to attract tourists arrival, a strategy involves consumer marketing and commercial needto be developed to promote the tourists on tourism product offering unique and different than othercountries. Although, has a strong tourism product, it is possible can be the main motivate a tourist totravel our country. Thus, to attract the international market to come to Malaysia, tour package can beproposed together with other tourism package. For example, the welfare tour package and tourismhomestay were consolidated, that can attract more tourists attention. It is likely to be a added valuefor product tourist from other countries and with the image enhancement it will contribute to extensionof tourist visit to one country. In order to increase the demand on the international market, the uniquedestinations may need to be explored with include and introduce natural products that are invaluablenational treasures such as rafflesia flower that can only found in Sarawak. Environmental and socio-cultural should be considered and integrated into national policies and plans for tourism development.Collaborative approach between the public sector, private sector and stakeholders can internalize someof the external travel cost thereby preserving the cultural heritage and protect our environment.Government and private sector must work together to ensure efficiency in realizing Vision 2020 toachieve developed nation and thus introduced the name at the international level. Besides that,countries should consider a undertaking surveys to assess the needs and demands of the workforce tothe level skills and training of current and future training requirements in the tourism sector, anddevelop a national tourism training plan. Bilateral, multi-lateral and sub-regional cooperation in tourismdevelopment should be further strengthened. All the above recommendations are intended to improveand add value to the existence to being tourist attractions. However, it may be increased in accordancewith the needs and demands of tourists which is in line with current trends, tastes and quality of lifeimprovement.

14. Acknowledgements

Financial support from Universiti Malaysia Sarawak through SGS-03(S100)/868/2012(13) is gratefullyacknowledged. All remaining flaws are the responsibilities of the authors.


13/15


References

Adamos, A., & Clerides, S. (2009). Tourism, Development and Growth: International Evidence andLessons for Cyprus. Cyprus Economic Policy Review, 3-22.

Alan, C. (1999). TOURISM DEVELOPMENT AND NATURAL CAPITAL. Annals of Tourism Research, 98-109.

Anna, D. (2008). Direct and indirect impact of the tourism industry on drylands: the example of SouthernTunisia. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal , 661-669.

Badaruddin, M., Ahmad, P. M., & Jamil, J. (n.d). ISLAND TOURISM IN MALAYSIA: THE NOT SO GOODNEWS. School of Housing, Building & Planning, 1-8.

C. Michael, H. (2011). Emerald Article: Health and medical tourism: a kill or cure for global. Departent of Management , 4-15.

Camelia, S., Cristi, F., & Marius, S. (2009). TOURISM AND ITS IMPACT UPON THE ROMANIAN ECONOMY:AN INPUT-OUTPUT APPROACH.Stiine Economice, 1-22.

CHIA-LIN, C., MICHAEL, M., & DAN, S. (2009). MODELLING INTERNATIONAL TOURIST TOURIST AN

APPLICATION TO TAIWAN.Department of Applied Economics National Chung Hsing University , 1-24.

Chor, F. T. (2010). An exploration of dynamic relationship between tourist arrivals, inflation,unemployment and crime rates in Malaysia. International Journal of Social Economics, 50-69.

Edgardo, S. (2005). TOURISM AS DETERMINANT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH: THE CASE OF SOUTH-EASTASIAN COUNTRIES.Faculty of Economics, 1-43.

Filipe, S., Alketa, P., & Gustavo, S. (2007). An analysis of the dynamics of the tourism industry in Brazil:challenges and recommendations. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management , 507-512.

Isabel, C.-J. (n.d). Tourism and economic growth at regional level: the cases of Spain and Italy.

Departament dEconometria, Estadstica i Economia Espanyola , 1-32.Jauhari, V. (2009). Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes Emerald Article: Hospitality, tourism and

economic growth in India. 7-11.

JOSAPHAT, K., OLIVER, M., & ADAM, B. (2003). THE ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF TOURISM IN TANZANIA. Journal of International Development , 335351.

Jovo, A. (2008). Tourism entrepreneurship and regional development: example from New Zealand.International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research , 282-308.

Juan, G., Edgar, J. S., & W. Adrian, R. (2008). Tourisms Impact on Long-Run Mexican Economic Growth.Economics Bulletin, 1-8.

Juliana, L., Mohd, S. M., Mohd, S. Y., & Nur, A. M. (2011). THE ALTERATION OF SARAWAK ETHNICNATIVES FOOD: ITS IMPACT TO SARAWAK STATE TOURISM.INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ONBUSINESS AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 1-15.

KHALED, O. A. (2009). ANALYSIS OF TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN LIBYA.Studies College of Business, 1-92.


14/15


15/15


SARA, P., & SOUKIAZIS, E. (2008). Tourism as an economic growth factor: a case study for SouthernEuropean countries. Tourism Economics, 791806.

Sarmidi, T., & Salleh, N. H. (2010). Dynamic inter-relationship between trade, economic growth andtourism in Malaysia. Pusat Pengajian Ekonomi, Fakulti Ekonomi dan Perniagaan, 1-13.

Shahnawaz, M., Imran, S. C., & Muhammad, R. S. (2010). Tourism, Economic Growth and CurrentAccount Deficit in Pakistan: Evidence from Co-integration and Causal Analysis. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 1-11.

Sharon, C., Janie, L.-T., Grace, P. I., & Izyanti, A. R. (2010). An Identification of the Effects of thePromotion of Tourism Transportation on the Socio-Cultural Environment: The Case of Malaysia.European Journal of Social Sciences, 1-11.

Siti, A. L., Suhaimi, A. R., Khairil, A., & Yaakob, C. M. (2011). A Study on Islamic Tourism: A MalaysianExperience. International Conference on Humanities, Historical and Social Sciences, 1-6.

W. Glen, C. (2011). Film tourism: sustained economic contributions to destinations. WorldwideHospitality and Tourism Themes, 159-164.

Documents

014 E-Journal PDF