tourism and inequality in european union

International Journal of Business and Management Studies,

CD-ROM. ISSN: 2158-1479 :: 03(03):481–492 (2014)

TOURISM AND INEQUALITY IN EUROPEAN UNION

Mijana Matoševi Radi

University of Split, Croatia

Tourism has a growing importance in the world economy and it has become especially

important in European countries. In the European Union according to the World Tourism

Organization in 2012 realized 38.7% of total international tourist arrivals and 34.2% of total

international tourism receipts, which allowed the European Union to become the most visited

tourist region in the world. But Europe is also the most important outbound market in the

world. In the same year, Europeans have made more than half of total international tourism

expenditure in the world. These data emphasize that the European Union compared with other

regions of the world has the greatest possibility of achieving a well-known positive effects of

tourism on economic growth and welfare. However, the structure of realized international

tourism receipts and expenditures shows a significant inequality in their distribution among

countries that may constitute potential threat to minimize the positive effects of tourism. This

paper aims to research the inequality of international tourism receipts and expenditure

distribution in the European Union. To analyze the differences in the distribution of

international tourism receipts and expenditure, was used a standard measure of economic

inequality - the Gini coefficient and Lorenz curve. The main results of this research

demonstrate that the inequality of international tourism receipts and expenditure distribution in

the European Union decreases. It suggests two conclusions. There are more and more

Member States (and its citizens) who have the opportunity to benefit from the development of

tourism by exploiting the positive effects of tourism on economic development. On the other

hand, a growing number of European Union citizens who realized discretionary income, use it

in tourism spending, and thus engaging in international tourist flows.

Keywords: Tourism, Inequality, Gini coefficient, Lorenz curve, European union.

Introduction

Tourism as an economic and social as well as cultural activity is one of the most important

activity of a contemporary society and economic growth on global scale and it has become

especially important in European countries (Vukovi , 2006, p. 37). The importance of tourism

for growth of economy was recognized for its contribution to the production, employment, its

influence on balance of payments. The ability of an economy to profit from tourism depends on

available investments aimed at the development of infrastructure required in order to create a

complex tourist product. Due to the fact that a tourist product consists of various goods and

services (accommodation, food, transportation facilities, cultural events etc.) tourism is

481

482 Tourism and Inequality in European Union

considerably related to various economic sectors, including hospitality, transport, retail sale and wholesale trade, agriculture, art, culture and many other sectors.

In the European Union according to the World Tourism Organization in 2012 realized 38.7% of total international tourist arrivals and 34.2% of total international tourism receipts, which allowed the European Union to become the most visited tourist region in the world. But Europe is also the most important outbound market in the world. In the same year, Europeans have made more than half of total international tourism expenditure in the world. It follows that tourism in the European Union is hiding a huge potential that can have a positive impact not only on economic growth and employment, but also to increase the standard of living and quality of life for residents of the European Union.

Moreover, it often emphasizes the role that tourism plays in reducing disparities in economic growth and stimulating more balanced regional growth. Analyzed on a sample from European countries, data shows that tourism, according to the present prevailing model for its development, generates net distribution of wealth from the north to the south and from richer to poorer states, thus contributing to the more balanced economic growth in European Union (Williams, Shaw, 1991.) From a regional perspective, and due to the fact that in a very short period of time and with a relatively reasonable level of investments tourism can generate rapid and almost instantaneous impact on regional economy, tourism can be proclaimed as an instrument of regional development as well as a reducer of regional economic disparity (Proença, Soukiazis, 2008, p. 792).

Unlike a number of current researches analyzing a role of tourism as a generator for economic growth on either regional or national level (Adamou, Clerides, 2010,: Cerina, 2012.; Figini, Vici, 2010.; Šimundi , 2012) and others, which emphasize the relation between a specialization in tourism and economic growth (Brau et al., 2003, Brau et al., 2006; Chang et al., 2010.) there are few researches that try to estimate weather tourism can be a relevant factor to reduce inequality in the European Union or unequal distribution of tourism increases inequality between residents of the European Union.

Therefore, it is very interesting to analyze the differences in the tourism contribution to the Member States' economies and using available data and the relevant methodologies attempt estimate whether tourism has the potential to reduce inequalities between the Member States of the European Union.

Economic impact of tourism in the European Union

It is important to investigate the economic impact in European Union Member States to determine whether tourism in general have sufficient power to activate its positive effects create economic growth and encourage the reduction of inequality in the Member States of the European Union.

WTTC (World Travel and Tourism Council) data for 2012 show that tourism in its “original” definition (traditional tourist services providers - hotels, restaurants and bars, travel agencies, car rentals and airline companies who provide goods and services directly to visitors) contributes with 3% to the gross domestic product of European Union (WTTC, 2013.). Direct contribution of tourism to the gross domestic product varies between the European Union Member States, within the range of 1.5% in Romania, 1.6% in Lithuania and Germany, to 13.9% of the gross domestic product in Malta. Due to extremely strong relations that tourism has with many economic sectors and a proven multiplier effect of tourism on economy, it is important to include not only a direct contribution of tourism to the gross domestic product but also date on

Mijana Matoševic Radic 483

an indirect and induced influence of tourism on gross domestic product. When related sectors are

taken into consideration, a total contribution of tourism to the gross domestic product in

European Union reaches 8.4 % in 2012 and it varies within the range of 4.2 % in Lithuania, 4.5

% in Germany to 26.4 % in Malta or even 27.8 % in Croatia (WTTC, 2013.a).

In terms of the contribution of tourism reducing unemployment data for 2012 in the

European Union show that in the activities which are directly related to tourism employed 8

million employees, or 3.6% of total employment (WTTC, 2013). If we consider the total

contribution of tourism to employment in the European Union, in 2012 year every ninth

employee of the European Union was directly or indirectly earning their income from tourism

and tourism-related activities, so that the total contribution of tourism to employment in the

European Union in 2012 was 9.1%. There are differences in the contribution of tourism to

employment among the Member States of European Union. The lowest proportion of the

population engaged in activities that are directly related to tourism in the European Union have

Lithuania (1.6%), Germany (only 1.8%), Poland (2.0%), and the largest number of employees in

activities that are directly relating to tourism can be found in Croatia (13.1%) and Malta (15.1%).

The total contribution of tourism to employment varies from 4.0% in Lithuania and 4.8% in

Germany to 27.2% in Malta and even 30.2% in Croatia (WTTC, 2013a).

These data emphasize that the European Union compared with other regions of the world

has the greatest possibility of achieving a well-known positive effects of tourism on economic

growth and welfare. However, the structure of realized international tourism receipts and

expenditures shows a significant inequality in their distribution among countries that may

constitute potential threat to minimize the positive effects of tourism.

Methodology

In economic research began to consider about inequality when it was noted that despite the

increase in living standards, wealth is not distributed equally trough the society and that the vast

majority is owned by the very few. For the measurement of inequality in the economy

traditionally applied two interrelated measures: Gini coefficient and Lorenz curve. Both originate

from the early years of the twentieth century: in 1905, Max Otto Lorenz published a paper in an

American statistical journal outlining the technique which was to bear his name. Corrado Gini’s

index of income inequality was published shortly afterwards in 1914. However, it was the work

on poverty and income inequality by Sir Tony Atkinson during the 1970s that led to the popular

dissemination and development of the original work of Lorenz and Gini (The Economics

Network, 2014).

The Gini coefficient is a statistical measure of the degree of inequality, which extreme

values are zero and one. But it is often presented in statistical publication as percentages

(between 0% and 100%). The Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where all

values are the same (for example, the same international tourism receipts in all countries). A Gini

coefficient of one (or 100%) expresses maximal inequality among values (for example total

international tourism receipts were realized only in one country).

Graphically, the Gini coefficient is derived from the Lorenz curve as the area between the

Lorenz curve and the line of equality. For perfect equality, the Lorenz curve would be a straight

line (i.e., represents 45º equality line) and it becomes more curved as inequality rises. It should

be noted that the Lorenz curve is a graphical representation of inequality while the Gini

coefficient is a measure of this inequality (Bigovi , 2012, p. 106).


Measuring the degree of inequality of tourism flows is significant for two reasons. The greater inequality of distribution of tourism receipts, the smaller the chance that society as a whole achieve optimal impact that tourism can have on economic development. If the tourism receipts concentrated in a small number of tourism developed countries (which also may be at a higher level of economic development as a whole) will not realize the tourism potential to be a growth driver in less developed countries. On the other hand, the inequality of tourism expenditure can be an indicator of the difference in the standard of living of the population, because for the realization of tourism spending necessary to fulfill condition for the existence of discretionary income intended for the purchase of luxury goods, such as tourism.

In order to measure inequality degree and distribution of tourism flows in European Union using the data available from the World Bank Database for the period from 1995 to 2011. According to the available data, the measurement of tourism income inequality is based on data on International Tourism Receipts for Travel Items (in US$) available from WDI database, and measurement of tourism expenditure inequality is based on data on International Tourism Expenditures for Travel Items (in US$) available from WDI database too.

It would be good to the research include data on domestic tourism flows, which are not available for the selected time series. However, the fact that the domestic tourist flows represent only a redistribution of income within the country and do not generate the positive effects to the same degree as international tourist flows, justify this analysis.

Tourism and inequality in European Union

As already pointed out, Europe is the most important tourist destinations in the world but at the same time the most important emissive tourist market. The distribution of international tourism receipts and expenditures in the European Union Member States (which realized more than 2% of the total international tourism receipts in the Europe Union in 2011) are shown in Table 1.

In all selected countries, in the past fifteen years there has been a growth in international tourism receipts. The largest increase was in Croatia in which international tourism receipts grew at an average annual rate of 39.6%. This data should be interpreted with caution due to the fact that they are in the first observed year (1995) in Croatia for war destruction realized a very little international tourism receipts, and growth in relation to the low initial value is much higher than real growth. International tourism receipts grew at an average annual rate of more than 10% even in Sweden (almost 20% per annual), Greece (17,2%) and Belgium (10,4%).

Table 1 International tourism receipts and expenditures in EU Member States (bill. US$).

Country Name

International tourism

receipts

(ITR)

International tourism

expenditures (ITE)

Cover rate %

Growth rate

1995 - 2011

1995 2011 1995 2011 1995 2011 ITR ITE

Austria 13.435 19.778 10.887 10.548 1,23 1,88 3,15 -0,21

Belgium 4.548 11.661 8.115 22.301 0,56 0,52 10,43 11,65

Germany 18.036 38.865 60.260 86.167 0,30 0,45 7,70 2,87

Spain 25.368 60.108 4.539 17.275 5,59 3,48 9,13 18,71


France 27.587 54.879 16.358 44.233 1,69 1,24 6,60 11,36

United

Kingdom 20.487 35.105 24.926 51.105 0,82 0,69 4,76 7,00

Greece 4.135 14.801 1.323 3.159 3,13 4,69 17,20 9,25

Croatia 1.349 9.364 422 882 3,20 10,62 39,61 7,27

Italy 28.731 43.243 14.829 28.730 1,94 1,51 3,37 6,25

Netherlands 6.578 14.352 11.674 20.603 0,56 0,70 7,88 5,10

Poland 6.614 10.683 5.500 8.462 1,20 1,26 4,10 3,59

Portugal 4.831 11.376 2.099 4.143 2,30 2,75 9,03 6,49

Sweden 3.471 13.865 5.448 15.571 0,64 0,89 19,96 12,39

Total 165.170 338.080 166.380 313.179 0,99 1,08 6,98 5,88

Source: Author’s calculation based on the data obtained from The World Bank, World Bank

Open Data, World Development Indicators

International tourism expenditures grew in all countries (except in Austria where the

international tourism expenditures in the observed period decreased by approximately 3.15%). In

the observed period, the largest increase in international tourism expenditures realized in Spain

(grew at an average annual rate of 18,7%) and Sweden (12,4%) and lowest in Germany (only

2,9% per annual) and Poland (3,6%). It should be also emphasized that Germany is traditionally

one of the most important emissive tourism markets in the world and because of the relatively

high international tourism expenditure on the beginning of the observed period could not expect

a significant increase over the last fifteen years.

If we analyze the relationship between international tourism receipts and expenditures

(cover rate) it can be seen which countries realized foreign currency inflow from tourism that can

generate positive effects on economic growth, and which countries were faced a foreign

exchange outflow from the economy as a result of significant international tourism expenditures.

The highest cover rate in the 2011 was realized in Croatia where international tourism receipts

were up to 10 times greater than international tourism expenditures.

A significant foreign currency inflow was achieved in Spain (though was the difference

between receipts and expenditures decreased in 2011 compared to 1995, still international

tourism receipt for more than three and a half times outgrow the expenditures) as well as Greece

and Portugal. The foreign exchange outflow due to tourist flows realized Germany, United

Kingdom, Belgium and the Netherlands in which the actual international tourism expenditures

which are significantly higher than international tourism receipts.

Table 2 shows the ranks of the ten European Union Member State which achieved the

highest international tourism receipts in the 1995 and 2011. From the data presented in the table

it can be seen that the first six countries are in leadership positions in both years, but their

relative position within the group is changed. While Italy which in 1995 achieved the highest

international tourism receipts in 2011 to a leading position replaces Spain, France in both years,

holding stable second place. Among the top ten countries according to the international tourism

receipts in 1995 are Poland and Portugal, which in 2011 worsened their relative position and they

are not among the top ten most successful countries. Their positions in the 2011 occupy Greece


and Sweden. It is interesting to note that the international tourism receipts of the country which in 1995 achieved the highest receipts (Italy), was seven times higher than the income of the country, which according to the realized receipts takes the tenth place (Belgium), while the same ratio reduced fifteen years later to five times.

Table 2 Top ten EU Member States for International tourism receipts (bill. US$).

Rank Country 1995 Rank Country 2011

1 Italy 28.731 1 Spain 60.108

2 France 27.587 2 France 54.879

3 Spain 25.368 3 Italy 43.243

4 United Kingdom 20.487 4 Germany 38.865

5 Germany 18.036 5 United Kingdom 35.105

6 Austria 13.435 6 Austria 19.778

7 Poland 6.614 7 Greece 14.801

8 Netherlands 6.578 8 Netherlands 14.352

9 Portugal 4.831 9 Sweden 13.865

10 Belgium 4.548 10 Belgium 11.661

Source: Author’s calculation based on the data obtained from The World Bank, World Bank Open Data, World Development Indicators

Data presented in Table 3 demonstrate the ranks of ten European Union Member States

which are in the two observed years (1995 and 2011) achieved the greatest international tourism expenditures. The data indicate that the order of the first four countries is the same in both years, namely Germany, United Kingdom, France and Italy are the most important outbound tourism markets. The significant tourism markets in both observed years are the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Sweden, which are found in both years among the top ten countries that generate the greatest international tourism expenditures, but their relative position was changed.

Table 3 Top ten EU Member States for International tourism expenditures (bill. US$).

Rank Country 1995 Rank Country 2011

1 Germany 60.260 1 Germany 86.167

2 United Kingdom 24.926 2 United Kingdom 51.105

3 France 16.358 3 France 44.233

4 Italy 14.829 4 Italy 28.730

5 Netherlands 11.674 5 Belgium 22.301

6 Austria 10.887 6 Netherlands 20.603


7 Belgium 8.115 7 Spain 17.275

8 Poland 5.500 8 Sweden 15.571

9 Sweden 5.448 9 Austria 10.548

10 Spain 4.539 10 Denmark 9.840


Open Data,World Development Indicators

The analysis of the data shown in Table 1-3 provides a clear framework of the most

important European Union Member States in terms of international tourism receipts and

expenditures. The analysis also illustrates the evolution of the growth rate and the cover rate

(interrelation of international tourism receipts and expenditures) during the analyzed period as

well as changes in the relative position of the ten most important countries according to realized

international tourism receipts and expenditures. However, although some data suggest that there

is a significant difference in the distribution of international tourism receipts and expenditures, to

be able to analyze the inequality of distribution of international tourism receipts and expenditures

it is necessary to include in the analysis all of the countries (and the ones that generated the

lowest international tourism receipts and expenditures).

Analisys results of tourism potential for reducing inequality in European Union

With the aim of analyzing the inequality of distribution international tourism receipts and

expenditures among the European Union Member States were calculated Gini coefficient of

tourism revenues and expenditures separately. Their values are given in Table 4.

Table 4 Gini coefficients: international tourism receipts and expenditure in European Union.

Year

Gini coefficient of the

international tourism receipts

(%)

Gini coefficient of the

international tourism expenditure

(%)

1995 62,70 71,20

1996 61,93 69,76

1997 61,83 69,85

1998 61,28 69,78

1999 61,80 70,08

2000 61,80 70,45

2001 60,83 69,97

2002 60,69 69,60

2003 60,38 69,75

2004 60,31 68,96


2005 59,40 68,53

2006 59,18 67,60

2007 58,32 66,81

2008 57,37 65,25

2009 57,50 65,25

2010 57,27 65,54

2011 57,34 65,68


Open Data,World Development Indicators

According to the value of the Gini coefficient of the international tourism receipts can be

concluded that there is a remarkable inequality of international tourism receipt’s distribution

among European Union Member States (coefficient in all observed years is higher than 50%).

But there is the fact which still encouraging. The inequality in the analyzed period decreases

(from 62 to 57%), although in some years may notice a slight increase in inequality measured by

the Gini coefficient. It suggests that the distribution of international tourism receipts in the

European Union still becomes more equal and it creates conditions that a number of countries

generate revenues from international tourism, which can result in positive effects on their

economies. When revenues from international tourism are beginning to generate the countries

which were not previously involved in international tourist flows (which also may have a lower

level of economic development such as Bulgaria and Romania) tourism itself begins to take on

the role of a generator more balanced economic development.

The similar trend shows the Gini coefficient of the international tourism expenditure. Its

value amounted 71% in 1995 and it is reduced during the fifteen years (although with the

exception of some years) to a value of 66 %. Reduction in the value of the Gini coefficient of the

international tourism expenditure indicates that the inequality of international tourism

expenditure’s distribution decreased over time, which means that more tourists from the

European Union Member States included in international tourism flows in a way that more and

more countries are becoming important emissive tourism markets.

Although the Gini coefficient can generally point to a change in the level of inequality,

unfortunately it cannot say anything about the characteristics of inequality. To be able to analyze

the structure of inequality international tourism receipt and expenditure designed the Lorenz

curves, which illustrate on the Chart 1 and 2 the concentration of international tourism receipts

and expenditures in the European Union Member States.


Chart 1 Concentration of international tourism receipts in the European Union Member States.



If we take a look into the curves shown in Chart 1, we can see that the steeper slope (i.e. the

strongest concentration of international tourism receipts) has a curve which relating to 1995.

Also on the chart can be observed that half of the countries that generate lower international

tourism receipts together realized only 10% of total international tourism receipts of European

Union Member States in both years. On the other hand, 15% of Member States that generate the

most international tourism receipts generated almost 40% of the total international tourism

receipts of all European Union Member States. These are the two parts of Lorenz curves shown

in Figure 1, which have almost the same slope in both years, suggesting that the structure of

inequality of receipt’s distribution between countries which achieve the highest but also the

lowest international tourism receipts in last 15 years has not changed. The difference in the slope

of the curve occurs on a part of the curves relating to the countries which generate receipts

higher than half the countries with the lowest international tourism receipts, but do not belong to

the 15% of the countries with the highest international tourism receipts. It can be seen from the

data shown in Tables 1 and 2. As we noted in Table 2, the six countries which generate the

highest international tourism receipts retained its leading position in both years and at the end of

the period generate twice the size receipts compared to the receipts which realized at the

beginning of the observed period. However, countries such as Portugal, Sweden, Greece and

Belgium, which does not belong to the 15% of the leading countries in the observed period,

generate generate three times higher receipts compared to the receipts which realized at the

beginning of the observed period (as can be observed from the data shown in Table 1).


Chart 2 shows the concentration of international tourist expenditure in the European Union

Member States. The smaller difference between the Lorenz curve relating to the year 2011 and

the Line of equality in compared to Lorenz curve that shows the year 1995, indicating that the

concentration of international tourism expenditure decreased in the last 15 years. The lower part

of the Lorenz curve, presented on the Chart 2, indicates that 60% of countries whose residents

realize the lowest international tourism expenditure, being paid only 10% of total international

tourism expenditure of all European Union Member States. On the other hand 20% of the

countries with the highest international tourism expenditure achieve almost 70% of total

international tourism expenditures of all European Union Member States. It should be

emphasized that from the differences in the slopes of the curves can be perceived that the

difference in the slopes of the curves is smaller in the case of concentrations international

tourism expenditure, then in the case of international tourism receipts (Chart 1). It is also evident

that the reduction of inequality international tourism expenditure between European Union

Member States contributes to a larger number of countries than is the case with international

tourist receipts.

Chart 2 Concentration of international tourism expenditures in the European Union Member States.



From the above data it can be concluded that there is an inequality in the distribution of

international tourism receipts and expenditures between European Union Member States.

Analyzing the period 1995-2011 however it is evident that inequality is reduced. Analyzing the

period 1995-2011, however it is evident that inequality decreases, what leads to the fact that

within the European Union has revealed important new tourism destinations which are in the last

15 years has significantly increased international tourism receipts. On the other hand, reduces the


inequality of distribution international tourism expenditure is encouraging because it illustrates

the situation that in the European Union there are more and more residents of different countries

who have discretionary income that can be directed into consumption of luxury goods, such as

tourism.

Conclusion

For their contributions (direct and total) to the gross domestic product and employment tourism

has a growing importance in the world economy and it has become especially important in

European Union Member States. In the European Union according to the World Tourism

Organization in 2012 realized 38.7% of total international tourist arrivals and 34.2% of total

international tourism receipts, which allowed the European Union to become the most visited

tourist region in the world. But Europe is also the most important outbound tourism market in the

world. In the same year, Europeans have made more than half of total international tourism

expenditure in the world.

Analyzing the data on the international tourism receipts and expenditures of the European

Union Member States may be noted very interesting findings. The same six countries (Spain,

France, Italy, Germany, United Kingdom and Austria) have the leadership positions (according

to the international tourism receipts) at the beginning and the end of observed period, but their

relative position within the group is changed. In terms of international tourism expenditure need

to emphasize that the order of the first four countries (Germany, United Kingdom, France and

Italy) is the same at the beginning and the end of observed period. The significant tourism

markets in both observed years are also the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Sweden, but their

relative position among top ten was changed.

However, a more comprehensive framework for analyzing the distribution of international

tourism receipts and expenditures in European Union provide measures of inequality of

distribution’s international tourism receipts and expenditures. According to the value of the Gini

coefficient of the international tourism receipts and international tourism expenditures separately

can be noted that there is a remarkable inequality of international tourism receipts and

expenditure’s distribution among European Union Member States, but the inequality of

international tourism receipt’s and expenditure’s distribution decreased over time.

When investigating the inequality structure of international tourism receipt’s and

expenditure’s distribution leads to results which show that there is a strong concentration of

receipts and expenditure in small number of countries. On the other hand, there are a large share

of countries (over 50%) who achieved an extremely small proportion of total international

tourism receipts and expenditures. The largest contribution to reducing distribution inequality of

international tourism receipts have countries (such as Portugal, Sweden, Greece and Belgium)

which generate receipts higher than half the countries with the lowest international tourism

receipts, but do not belong to the 15% of the countries with the highest international tourism

receipts. Also should be noted that the difference in the concentration is smaller in the case of

international tourism expenditure, then in the case of international tourism receipts. It is also

evident that the reduction of inequality international tourism expenditure between European

Union Member States contributes to a larger number of countries than is the case with

international tourist receipts.

From the above it follows that there are more and more European Union Member States

(and its citizens) who have the opportunity to benefit from the development of tourism by

exploiting the positive effects of tourism on economic development. On the other hand, a


growing number residents of different countries in European Union who realized discretionary income, directed into consumption of luxury goods, such as tourism, and thus engaging in international tourist flows.

References

1. Adamou, A., Clerides, S. (2010), Prospects and limits of tourism-led growth: The international evidence, The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis, WP 41 – 09.

2. Bigovi , M. (2012), The Strength and Dynamics of Seasonal Concentration in Montenegrin Tourism, Turizam/Institute for Tourism Zagreb, Volume 16, Issue 3, p. 102-112.

3. Brau, R., Lanza, A., Pigliaru, F. (2003), How Fast are the Tourism Countries Growing? The cross-country evidence, Fondacione Eni Enrico Mattei, Nota di lavoro 85.2003, September 2003.

4. Brau, R., Lanza, A., Pigliaru, F. (2006), How fast are small tourist countries growing? The 1980 – 2003 evidence, CRENOS, Centro Ricerche Economiche Nord Sod, Working Papers 2006/14.

5. Cerina, F. (2012), Endogenous growth and sustainable tourism, CRENoS, Centre for north south economic research, Working papers 2012/34.

6. Chang, C. L., Khamkaew, T., Mc Aleer, M. (2010), IV Estimation of a Panel Threshold Model of Tourism Specialization and Economic Development, CIRJE Discussion Paper F – 732, April 2010.

7. Figini, P., Vici, L. (2010), Tourism and Growth in a cross-section of Countries, RCEA, The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis, WP 01 – 09.

8. Proença, S., Soukiazis, E. (2008), Tourism as an economic growth factor: a case study for Southern European countries, Tourism Economics, 14 (4), p. 791 – 806.

9. The Economics Network, Learning materials, Measuring inequality: Using the Lorenz Curve and Gini Coefficient, available at:

10. www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/archive/.../measuring_inequality.doc

11. Šimundi , B (2012), Ima li turizam potencijal generator rasta? U knjizi Crnjak-Karanovi , B. et al. (ed.): Identitet jadranskog prostora Hrvatske: retrospekt i prospekt, Sveu ilište u Splitu, Ekonomski fakultet, Split, p. 181 – 195.

12. Vukovi , I. (2006), Suvremeni trendovi u razvoju turizma u Europskoj uniji i implikacije na Hrvatsku, Tourism and Hospitality Management, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 35 – 55.

13. Williams, A. M., Shaw, G. (1991), Tourism and Economic Development, Western European Experiences, 2nd edition, Belhaven Press, A division of Printer Publishers, London.

14. World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) (2013), Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2012, Regional Report, European union, available at: http://www.wttc.org/site_media/uploads/downloads/european_union2012.pdf

15. World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) (2013a), The Authority on World Travel & Tourism, Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2012, Country Reports, Different Issue, available at: http://www.wttc.org/research/economic-impact-research/country-reports/

tourism and inequality in european union

Documents