Search results

This chapter provides an overview of the status of applied econometric research in hospitality and tourism management and outlines the econometric toolsets available for quantitative researchers using empirical data from the field. Basic econometric models, cross-sectional models, time-series models, and panel data models are reviewed first, followed by an evaluation of relevant applications. Next, econometric modeling topics that are germane to hospitality and tourism research are discussed, including endogeneity, multi-equation modeling, causal inference modeling, and spatial econometrics. Furthermore, major feasibility issues for applied researchers are examined based on the literature. Lastly, recommendations are offered to promote applied econometric research in hospitality and tourism management.

Within spatial econometrics a whole family of different spatial specifications has been developed, with associated estimators and tests. This lead to issues of model comparison and model choice, measuring the relative merits of alternative specifications and then using appropriate criteria to choose the “best” model or relative model probabilities. Bayesian theory provides a comprehensive and coherent framework for such model choice, including both nested and non-nested models within the choice set. The paper reviews the potential application of this Bayesian theory to spatial econometric models, examining the conditions and assumptions under which application is possible. Problems of prior distributions are outlined, and Bayes factors and marginal likelihoods are derived for a particular subset of spatial econometric specifications. These are then applied to two well-known spatial data-sets to illustrate the methods. Future possibilities, and comparisons with other approaches to both Bayesian and non-Bayesian model choice are discussed.

“It should also be noted that the objective of convergence and equal distribution, including across under-performing areas, can hinder efforts to generate growth. Contrariwise, the objective of competitiveness can exacerbate regional and social inequalities, by targeting efforts on zones of excellence where projects achieve greater returns (dynamic major cities, higher levels of general education, the most advanced projects, infrastructures with the heaviest traffic, and so on). If cohesion policy and the Lisbon Strategy come into conflict, it must be borne in mind that the former, for the moment, is founded on a rather more solid legal foundation than the latter” European Commission (2005, p. 9)Adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the Enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Objectives.

The objective of this chapter is to introduce the reader to Spatial Health Econometrics (SHE). In both micro and macro health economics there are phenomena that are characterised by a strong spatial dimension, from hospitals engaging in local competitions in the delivery of health care services, to the regional concentration of health risk factors and needs. SHE allows health economists to incorporate these spatial effects using simple econometric models that take into account these spillover effects. This improves our understanding of issues such as hospital quality, efficiency and productivity and the sustainability of health expenditure of regional and national health care systems, to mention a few.

For this discussion, assume there are n sample observations of the dependent variable y at unique locations. In spatial samples, often each observation is uniquely associated with a particular location or region, so that observations and regions are equivalent. Spatial dependence arises when an observation at one location, say y i is dependent on “neighboring” observations y j, y j∈ϒi. We use ϒi to denote the set of observations that are “neighboring” to observation i, where some metric is used to define the set of observations that are spatially connected to observation i. For general definitions of the sets ϒi,i=1,…,n, typically at least one observation exhibits simultaneous dependence, so that an observation y j, also depends on y i. That is, the set ϒj contains the observation y i, creating simultaneous dependence among observations. This situation constitutes a difference between time series analysis and spatial analysis. In time series, temporal dependence relations could be such that a “one-period-behind relation” exists, ruling out simultaneous dependence among observations. The time series one-observation-behind relation could arise if spatial observations were located along a line and the dependence of each observation were strictly on the observation located to the left. However, this is not in general true of spatial samples, requiring construction of estimation and inference methods that accommodate the more plausible case of simultaneous dependence among observations.

From a theoretical point of view, a spatial econometric model can contain both a spatially lagged dependent variable (spatial lag) and a spatially autocorrelated error term (spatial error). However, such models are rarely used in practice. This is because (assuming a lattice model approach is used for both the spatial lag and spatial error) the model is difficult to estimate¹ unless the weight matrices are different for the spatial lag and the spatial error.

Does the standard of living vary from region to region in Portugal and are spatial units in Portugal converging in income? We observe spatial error dependence between municipalities and estimate spatial econometric models to test convergence. For conditional convergence we conclude that primary sector employment, activity rate, and percentage of active population with higher education are important to distinguish the “steady state” of the regional economies, reflecting the labor market at regional level.

This paper tests the feasibility and empirical implications of a spatial econometric model with a full set of interaction effects and weight matrix defined as an equally weighted group interaction matrix applied to research productivity of individuals. We also elaborate two extensions of this model, namely with group fixed effects and with heteroskedasticity. In our setting, the model with a full set of interaction effects is overparameterised: only the SDM and SDEM specifications produce acceptable results. They imply comparable spillover effects, but by applying a Bayesian approach taken from LeSage (2014), we are able to show that the SDEM specification is more appropriate and thus that colleague interaction effects work through observed and unobserved exogenous characteristics common to researchers within a group.

Introduction: Despite its significance, the research on international migration with a specific focus on the European Union (EU) needs to be strengthened with comprehensive studies, for developing better immigration and integration policies. Considering the amplitude of migration flows in Europe and recent challenges brought by the Covid-19 pandemic crisis, the Brexit decision and humanitarian dimension of the migration phenomena (asylum seekers and refugees), the need for better immigration and integration policies within the host countries’ labor markets stands out as a major research direction, especially in case of immigrants looking for better working and living conditions. Aim: This chapter aims to design specific immigration clusters within the main EU-10 destination countries (including Spain, Italy, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, UK, Germany, Austria, and Sweden) (cluster analysis procedure); and to identify feasible ways and specific policies for immigrants’ labor market success (spatial analysis and macroeconometric models). Method: The methodological framework consists of two parts: (i) immigration clusters analysis, based on the interlinkages between several fundamental migration coordinates, namely, economic welfare at destination, employment opportunities for the foreign population, migrant integration policies and associated governmental efforts, educational background; and (ii) spatial analysis models, namely spatial lag–autoregressive and spatial error, and other three econometric procedures, respectively, the robust regression, Panel Corrected Standard Errors, and Arellano-Bond Dynamic Generalized Method of Moments. National data compiled for the 10 main EU receiving economies during 2000–2015, with a particular focus on Spain were used. Findings: The impact of the proposed research is reflected through a set of new specific tailored ways, policies and strategies that can be adopted and implemented by the policy-makers across Europe. Our empirical results show that, overall, EU-10 countries still fail to identify immigrants with high levels of education and skills acquired to enhance their potential for labor market integration. Policy-makers should always monitor the specific ways in which migration policies lead to concrete positive labor market outcomes for immigrants and that the tools used for implementing these policies are suitable in achieving predefined migration goals. Therefore, a particular focus should be on developing a new immigration system to select migrants for their skills and high level of human capital, by following the best practices examples of other receiving countries.