COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DYNAMICS OF INBOUND AND DOMESTIC TOURIST FLOWS IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES IN 2020–2021

I. Ivanov
{"title":"COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DYNAMICS OF INBOUND AND DOMESTIC TOURIST FLOWS IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES IN 2020–2021","authors":"I. Ivanov","doi":"10.17072/2079-7877-2022-3-153-168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global transformation of tourist flows that occurred in 2020–2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic requires a more detailed study through the prism of the geography of tourism. The main indicator of the tourist flow dynamics used in this study is tourist arrivals according to hotel statistics. The indicator ‘tourist flow recovery index’ (TFRI) is proposed, calculated on the basis of monthly data on inbound and domestic tourist flows for 2019–2021. The calculation results are presented for all major European countries in the form of a table with a color scale. This method allows one to assess the degree of the tourist flow recovery, to carry out periodization, and also to compare different European countries with each other. There have been distinguished 6 stages of reduction and restoration of tourist flow: the beginning of the pandemic, the first general lockdown, the first restoration of the tourist flow, the second lockdown, the second restoration of the tourist flow, and the Omicron wave. After the first general lockdown, in the face of fairly strict restrictions on entry and exit from the country, the inbound tourist flow recovered weakly and for a short time. The volume of domestic tourist flow in many countries during the recovery periods corresponded to or even exceeded the level of 2019. The second lockdown, announced in most European countries, led to a second collapse in the inbound tourist flow, but the domestic tourist flow remained, albeit to a lesser extent. The second recovery took place against the backdrop of mass vaccinations and the spread of the Delta strain, which delayed the easing of restrictions. The Omicron wave did not lead to a new mass lockdown, but reduced the pace of the tourist flow recovery. The recovery of the inbound tourist flow went faster in the microstates, in Turkey, Albania and Kosovo, of the domestic tourist flow – in the small countries of Europe with a high share of tourism in their GDP. An analysis of the relationship between the TFRI and the stringency index (SI) made it possible to identify groups of countries where restrictions did not have a direct impact on the reduction in tourist flow. Possible reasons for their deviation from the general trend are described.","PeriodicalId":345845,"journal":{"name":"Географический вестник = Geographical bulletin","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Географический вестник = Geographical bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17072/2079-7877-2022-3-153-168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The global transformation of tourist flows that occurred in 2020–2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic requires a more detailed study through the prism of the geography of tourism. The main indicator of the tourist flow dynamics used in this study is tourist arrivals according to hotel statistics. The indicator ‘tourist flow recovery index’ (TFRI) is proposed, calculated on the basis of monthly data on inbound and domestic tourist flows for 2019–2021. The calculation results are presented for all major European countries in the form of a table with a color scale. This method allows one to assess the degree of the tourist flow recovery, to carry out periodization, and also to compare different European countries with each other. There have been distinguished 6 stages of reduction and restoration of tourist flow: the beginning of the pandemic, the first general lockdown, the first restoration of the tourist flow, the second lockdown, the second restoration of the tourist flow, and the Omicron wave. After the first general lockdown, in the face of fairly strict restrictions on entry and exit from the country, the inbound tourist flow recovered weakly and for a short time. The volume of domestic tourist flow in many countries during the recovery periods corresponded to or even exceeded the level of 2019. The second lockdown, announced in most European countries, led to a second collapse in the inbound tourist flow, but the domestic tourist flow remained, albeit to a lesser extent. The second recovery took place against the backdrop of mass vaccinations and the spread of the Delta strain, which delayed the easing of restrictions. The Omicron wave did not lead to a new mass lockdown, but reduced the pace of the tourist flow recovery. The recovery of the inbound tourist flow went faster in the microstates, in Turkey, Albania and Kosovo, of the domestic tourist flow – in the small countries of Europe with a high share of tourism in their GDP. An analysis of the relationship between the TFRI and the stringency index (SI) made it possible to identify groups of countries where restrictions did not have a direct impact on the reduction in tourist flow. Possible reasons for their deviation from the general trend are described.
2020-2021年欧洲国家入境和国内旅游流量动态对比分析
2020-2021年因COVID-19大流行而发生的全球旅游流量变化,需要通过旅游地理学的棱镜进行更详细的研究。本研究使用的旅游流量动态的主要指标是根据酒店统计的游客人数。提出了“旅游流量恢复指数”(TFRI)指标,以2019-2021年入境和国内旅游流量月度数据为基础计算。计算结果以一个带有色标的表格的形式呈现给所有欧洲主要国家。这种方法允许人们评估旅游流量恢复的程度,进行分期,也可以相互比较不同的欧洲国家。游客流量减少和恢复分为6个阶段:大流行开始、第一次全面封锁、第一次恢复游客流量、第二次封锁、第二次恢复游客流量、奥米克隆波。第一次全面封锁后,面对较为严格的出入境限制,入境游客流量恢复乏力,恢复时间较短。在恢复期,许多国家的国内旅游流量相当于甚至超过了2019年的水平。大多数欧洲国家宣布的第二次封锁导致入境游客流量第二次崩溃,但国内游客流量仍然存在,尽管程度有所下降。第二次复苏是在大规模接种疫苗和三角洲病毒传播的背景下发生的,这推迟了放松限制。欧米克隆波并没有导致新的大规模封锁,但降低了游客流量恢复的速度。入境旅游流量的恢复在国内旅游流量的小国,如土耳其、阿尔巴尼亚和科索沃,在旅游业在其国内生产总值中所占比例很高的欧洲小国,速度更快。对TFRI和严格程度指数之间的关系进行分析后,可以确定一些限制措施对减少旅游流量没有直接影响的国家。描述了它们偏离总体趋势的可能原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信