review of related literature sample thesis pdf

Literature Review Example/Sample

Detailed Walkthrough + Free Literature Review Template

If you’re working on a dissertation or thesis and are looking for an example of a strong literature review chapter , you’ve come to the right place.

In this video, we walk you through an A-grade literature review from a dissertation that earned full distinction . We start off by discussing the five core sections of a literature review chapter by unpacking our free literature review template . This includes:

• The literature review opening/ introduction section
• The theoretical framework (or foundation of theory)
• The empirical research
• The research gap
• The closing section

We then progress to the sample literature review (from an A-grade Master’s-level dissertation) to show how these concepts are applied in the literature review chapter. You can access the free resources mentioned in this video below.

PS – If you’re working on a dissertation, be sure to also check out our collection of dissertation and thesis examples here .

FAQ: Literature Review Example

Literature review example: frequently asked questions, is the sample literature review real.

Yes. The literature review example is an extract from a Master’s-level dissertation for an MBA program. It has not been edited in any way.

Can I replicate this literature review for my dissertation?

As we discuss in the video, every literature review will be slightly different, depending on the university’s unique requirements, as well as the nature of the research itself. Therefore, you’ll need to tailor your literature review to suit your specific context.

You can learn more about the basics of writing a literature review here .

Where can I find more examples of literature reviews?

The best place to find more examples of literature review chapters would be within dissertation/thesis databases. These databases include dissertations, theses and research projects that have successfully passed the assessment criteria for the respective university, meaning that you have at least some sort of quality assurance. 

The Open Access Thesis Database (OATD) is a good starting point. 

How do I get the literature review template?

You can access our free literature review chapter template here .

Is the template really free?

Yes. There is no cost for the template and you are free to use it as you wish. 

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

What will it take for you to guide me in my Ph.D research work?

Thank you so much for all this information. I am unable to download the literature review template and the excel worksheet. When I click the button it takes me to the top of the page. I would really love to use this template, thank you again!

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates, and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models, and methods?
• Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

• Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Related Papers

Ana Liza Sigue

Motoky Hayakawa

Rene E Ofreneo

... Rene E. Ofreneo University of the Philippines School of Labor and Industrial Relations ... Erickson, Christopher L.; Kuruvilla, Sarosh ; Ofreneo, Rene E.; and Ortiz, Maria Asuncion , "Recent Developments in Employment Relations in the Philippines" (2001). ...

Lucita Lazo

This book begins by looking at the status of women in Filipino society and their place in the general socio-economic situation. It continues with sections on education and training in the Philippines and work and training. The next section reviews the constraints to women’s participation in training. In the summary the author gives a general overview of the situation of women and opportunities for work and training in the Philippines and offers some practical suggestions for the enhancement of women’s training and development.

EducationInvestor Global

Tony Mitchener

Rosalyn Eder

In this article, I examine the role of CHED and the Technical Panels (TPs) in the “production” of the globally competitive Filipina/o worker. For this paper, I draw on relevant literature on the topic and take nurse education, which is rooted in the colonial system established during the US-American occupation, as an example of how CHED and the TPs could be more linked to labor migration. I use the colonial difference - a space that offers critical insights and interpretation - to illustrate how coloniality remains hidden under the cloak of modernity. Link to the article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2016.1214913

Asia Pacific Journal of Management and Sustainable Development ISSN 2782-8557(Print)

Ryan O Tayco , Pio Supat

This study aims to determine the employability of the Negros Oriental State University graduates from 2016 to 2020. Employability is measured using different dimensions-from the graduates' side including the perspectives of the employers. A total of 1, 056 NORSU graduates and 68 employers locally and abroad answered the questionnaire through online and offline survey methods. Basic statistics were used and simple linear regression was also used to estimate the relationship between manifestations of respondents in NORSU VMGOs and the job performance as perceived by the employers. Most of the respondents in the study are presently employed and work locally. Many of them stay and accept the job because of the salaries and benefits they received, a career challenge, and related to the course they have taken in college. The study shows that the curriculum used and competencies learned by the NORSU graduates are relevant to their job. Competencies such as communication skills, human relations skills, critical thinking skills, and problem-solving skills are found to be useful by the respondents. It is found that the manifestation of the respondents is very high and homogenous. The same can be said with job performance as perceived by employers in terms of attitudes and values, skills and competencies, and knowledge. Furthermore, job performance and the manifestation of NORSU VMGOs have a significant relationship. That is, those respondents who have higher job performance in terms of attitude and values, skills and competencies, and knowledge have higher manifestations of NORSU VMGOs.

Annals of Tropical Research

Pedro Armenia

Ezekiel Succor

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

The Miseducation of the Filipino

Micabalo, Sheila Marie G.

Evan carlo deblois

Jesse Orlina

Bradernantz Geronag

Junie Leonard Herrera

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal

boscovolunteeraction.co.uk

James Trewby

Asia Proceedings of Social Sciences

Marlon Raquel

Kiran Budhrani , Lloyd Espiritu

Leonardo Lanzona

MaryNathanael Flores OSB

Philippine Journal of …

Nandy Aldaba

South African Journal of Higher Education

Kolawole Samuel Adeyemo

International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Technology

Glenn Velmonte

Rosini Grageda

Randel D Estacio

Reydenn Taccad

International Research in Education

Diane Mae Ulanday

Miseducation of Filipino

John Victor H . Dajac

Douglas Meade

Rebecca Gaddi

Jayvann Carlo Olaguer

Lorena Club

Trisha Bernadette Ecleo

Sara Villorente

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 02 September 2024

A qualitative dynamic analysis of the relationship between tourism and human development

• Pablo Juan Cárdenas-García   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1779-392X 1 ,
• Juan Gabriel Brida   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2319-5790 2 &
• Verónica Segarra   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0436-3303 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1125 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Development studies

This study analyzes the dynamic relationship between tourism and human development in a sample of 123 countries between 1995–2019 using a symbolic time series methodological analysis, with the number of international tourist arrivals per capita as the tourism measurement variable and the Human Development Index as the development measurement variable. The objective was to determine if a higher level of tourism specialization is related to a higher level of economic development. The definition of economic regime is used and the concept of the distance between the dynamic trajectories of the different countries analyzed is introduced to create a minimum spanning tree. In this way, groups of countries are identified that display similar behavior in terms of tourism specialization and levels of human development. The results suggest that countries with a high level of tourism specialization have a higher level of development as compared to those in which tourism has a lower specific weight. However, the largest group of countries identified is characterized by low levels of tourism specialization and economic development, which appears to translate into a poverty trap. Therefore, policies related to tourism activity expansion should be created since higher tourism levels have been linked to higher levels of human development. In the case of less developed countries, however, these projects should be financed by international organizations so that these countries can escape the poverty trap in which they are currently found.

Introduction

Traditionally, the Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDP per capita) is considered the go-to variable to determine a population’s economic development and is restricted exclusively to an economic measure (Todaro and Smith, 2020 ). Recently, however, studies on development have begun incorporating other noneconomic factors, such as education and health. These factors, together with the economic criteria, provide a baseline for measuring a population’s development in broader terms (World Bank, 1991 ; Lee, 2017 ). In the search for economic activities that enable economic growth and improve the level of economic development, many countries have been especially interested in tourist activity since it is an economic activity that has a strong potential for job creation, the generation of foreign currency, and revenue increase. In short, it may be able to boost economic growth in host regions (Brida et al., 2020 ). In some cases, the development of tourism has been found to contribute to reducing inequality (Chi, 2020 ; Nguyen et al. ( 2021 )) or reducing poverty (Garza-Rodriguez ( 2019 ); Folarin, Adeniyi ( 2019 )).

In fact, what is actually important in economic policies is not only the promotion of a country’s economic growth but also, the channeling of this economic growth into improved economic development in the territory (Croes, 2012 ). This latter concept is much broader and it serves to satisfy the needs and demands of the resident population, improving its quality of life (Ranis et al., 2000 ).

In terms of the analysis of the relationship between tourism and economic growth, many studies have researched this connection. Most of them agree that a causal relationship exists between both variables, that tourism influences growth (Balaguer and Cantavella-Jordá, 2002 ; Brida et al., 2016 ), that the economic cycle influences the development of tourism (Antonakakis et al., ( 2015 ); Sokhanvar et al., 2018 ), and that there is a bidirectional relationship between tourism and economic growth (Bojanic and Lo, 2016 ; Hussain-Shahzad et al. ( 2017 )).

Given that a relationship between tourism and economic growth has been proven in the economies of host countries and national governments, despite a lack of sufficient empirical evidence, various international organizations have been promoting tourism activity as a tool to facilitate the population’s development in those host regions that attract tourist flows to their territory (OECD, 2010 ; UNCTAD - United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ( 2011 )). Such has been the case with the relationship between tourism and economic growth, with the suggestion that tourism is a tool for economic development (Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández, 2019 ).

Many studies have already analyzed the relationship between tourism and GDP per capita, finding long-term equilibrium relationships between the expansion of tourism and economic growth, whereby a higher level of tourists received means higher levels of economic growth (Akadiri et al., 2017 ). As previously mentioned, the economic development of a population, in a broad sense, and in addition to the economic variables, has to be linked to additional variables with a multidimensional content (Wahyuningsih et al., 2020 ). In this scenario, although some studies have measured development in a broader sense (Andergassen and Candela, 2013 ; Banerjee et al. 2018 ; Bojanic and Lo, 2016 ; Li et al., 2018 ), there is a clear lack of analysis of the relationship between tourism and economic development as a multidimensional variable.

In this regard, human development, and its measurement through the Human Development Index (HDI), is a multidimensional variable related to the living conditions of the resident population (income, education, and health), which has been used on many occasions (more than level of poverty or income inequality) to measure a country’s level of development (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015 ; Chattopadhyay et al., 2021 ; Croes et al., 2021 ). The link between tourism and human development arises from the economic growth generated by the expansion of tourist activity. This economic growth is used to develop policies that will improve the education and health levels of the host population (Alcalá-Ordóñez and Segarra, 2023 ).

This article analyzes the relationship between tourism and economic growth, measuring the economic growth of the countries in the broadest possible sense, with a link to the concept of human development (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015 ). As a novelty, a wide set of countries is used for this analysis. This overcomes the limitations of prior works that analyzed the relationship between tourism and human development using small country samples (Chattopadhyay et al., 2021 ).

Although distinct works have already analyzed the relationship between tourism and economic development, they tended to focus on the application of econometric tests to determine the type of causal relationship existing between these variables (Alcalá-Ordóñez and Segarra, 2023 ). This work takes a distinct approach, analyzing the qualitative dynamic behavior arising between tourism and human development. Different country groups are identified that have similar behavior within the group and, simultaneously, with differences as compared to the other groups. Thus it is possible to verify the relationship existing between tourism and human development in each of these country groups, to determine if a higher level of tourism specialization is linked to a higher level of human development.

This approach does not attempt to determine if a causal relationship exists by which tourism precedes the level of development. Rather, this approach of grouping countries aims to determine if, at similar levels of development, the country groups with a higher level of tourism specialization display higher levels of human development. This would suggest that tourism activity is an economic activity that promotes human development to a greater extent than other economic activities.

In this context, this study analyzes the dynamic relationship between tourism and economic development, considering development as a multidimensional variable. It uses a data panel consisting of 123 countries for the period between 1995–2019 and considers the diversity of countries in terms of tourism development and their economic development dynamics. To perform this dynamic analysis, the concept of economic regime is introduced (Brida, 2008 ; Cristelli et al., 2015 , Brida et al., 2020 ), and symbolic time series are used (Risso ( 2018 )).

This article contributes to the empirical literature examining the relationship between tourism and economic development. It analyzes the qualitative dynamic behavior of the countries without considering any particular model. Therefore, this analysis enables the identification of groups of countries with similar dynamics, for which economic models of the same type can be identified. The results of this study indicate that there are different groups of countries displaying similar dynamic behavior in terms of both tourism and development. These groups are characterized by their level of tourism specialization and economic development. Therefore, it is interesting to note the heterogeneity existing in the relationship between tourism and development, as well as the consequences that this situation has for both the empirical analysis and the political implications.

The rest of the document is organized as follows: the following section reviews the literature on the subject under study, section “Data” presents the data used, section “Methodology” details the methodology applied, section “Results” presents the results obtained, section “Discussion” includes a discussion of the paper, and, finally, section “Conclusions and policy implications” outlines the final conclusions and policy implications of the work.

Literature review

Economic growth versus economic development.

Traditionally, studies on development have focused on economic growth and have been based on the premise that the efficient allocation of resources maximizes growth and that the expansion of growth and consumption is a measure of population welfare (Easterly, 2002 ). However, the emergence of new studies at the end of the last century, beginning with the works by Sen ( 1990 , 1999 ), resulted in a change of focus for studies on development. They moved from an exclusive view of development linked to economic growth to the inclusion of new factors that connect it to the population’s living conditions (Croes et al., 2018 ).

Economic growth and development are distinct concepts that do not need to be linked. In other words, increased economic growth does not necessarily imply improved economic development (Croes et al., 2021 ). However, it is also true that economic growth, and the revenue generated, can be used to improve a population’s living conditions through better health care, infrastructures, and education (Banerjee et al., 2018 ; Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández, 2019 ).

In this regard, the first studies to analyze the relationship between tourist activity and the economies of host countries focused exclusively on the relationship between tourism and economic growth, using a traditional view of development that is linked to economic variables.

Tourism and economic growth

Numerous studies have analyzed the relationship between tourism and economic growth. Therefore, it is a highly relevant research area in the economic analysis of tourist activity, with three streams of perfectly defined results in which these works may be grouped (Alcalá-Ordóñez et al., 2023; Brida et al., 2016 ).

Firstly, different studies have determined that tourism development drives economic growth, identified under the tourism-led economic growth hypothesis. Both the first study to analyze this causal relationship (Balaguer and Cantavella-Jorda, 2002), as well as the later studies (Brida et al., 2016 ; Castro-Nuño et al., 2013 ; Lin et al., 2019 , Pérez-Rodríguez et al., 2021 ; Ridderstaat et al., 2016 ), have confirmed the existence of this relationship.

Secondly, other studies determined that the evolution of the economic cycle has an influence on the development of tourism, identified under the economic-driven tourism growth. These studies indicate that those economies with a greater level of investment, stability in the price level, or lower level of unemployment determine the development of tourism (Antonakakis et al. ( 2015 ); Rivera, 2017 ; Sokhanvar et al., 2018 ; Tang, Tan ( 2018 )).

Finally, a third wave of studies determined that the relationship between the development of tourism and economic growth has a bidirectional character. These studies note that the relationship between both variables is a causal bidirectional relationship (Antonakakis et al., 2019 ; Bojanic and Lo, 2016 ; Chingarande and Saayman, 2018 ; Hussain-Shahzad et al. ( 2017 ); Ridderstaat et al., 2013 ).

Human Development as a measure of development

Since the end of the last century, the scientific literature has shown that the concept of development cannot be linked exclusively to variables of economic content. Instead, development should be considered along with other non-economic factors that are related to the population’s living conditions. Therefore, it is a multidimensional concept (Alcalá-Ordóñez and Segarra, 2023 ).

When measuring development using a multidimensional perspective, this concept is often linked to human development (Cárdenas et al., 2015 ; Chattopadhyay et al., 2021 ). In this regard, the HDI is a multidimensional indicator that, in addition to considering variables of economic content, in this case per capita income, also incorporates other non-economic factors, specifically, life expectancy and educational level of the population (United Nations Development Program, 2022 ).

The HDI offers some major advantages as a measure of development over other indicators, providing a more complete vision of society’s progress and focusing not only on economic factors but also on factors related to the population’s living conditions. This makes it possible to identify inequalities that need to be addressed to promote more equitable and sustainable development (Sharma et al., 2020 ; Tan et al., 2019 ). Moreover, since it was created by the United Nations Development Program for a large group of countries, it permits homogenous comparison-making between a broad base of countries at a global level (Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández, 2019 ).

Tourism and human development

The expansion of tourism activity can influence the level of human development (Croes et al., 2021 ). The common link between these two variables is the economic impact generated by the expansion of tourist activity since this is a linked process, whereby a higher level of tourists results in an increase in income generated and thus, a higher level of economic growth (Brida et al., 2016 ). Countries can take advantage of this higher level of economic growth to develop specific policies aimed at improving the living conditions of the host population, thereby improving human development (Eluwole et al., 2022 ).

This link between tourism and human development has also been highlighted by the United Nations Tourism in its Millennium Development Goals of 2000, which declared that factors such as health and education are very important in economic development. It was suggested that tourism may improve human development given that it has an influence on these non-economic factors (UN Tourism, 2006 ).

The triple component of the HDI, the most frequently used indicator to measure economic development, has been considered in most of the studies analyzing the relationship between tourism and economic development (Alcalá-Ordóñez and Segarra, 2023 ).

Distinct studies have attempted to determine whether tourism is a tool for economic growth in host countries, although most of the studies have exclusively used economic content to measure the concept of development (Wahyuningsih et al., 2020 ). Therefore, there is a major lack of empirical studies that consider whether tourism influences development and that do so while considering development to be a multidimensional variable encompassing other factors (beyond those associated with the economy).

Some of these studies have outlined that the expansion of tourism has led to an increase in the level of development for host countries. This suggests that tourism has a positive unidirectional relationship with the living conditions of the population (Meyer and Meyer, 2016 ). Fahimi et al. ( 2018 ), examining microstates, found evidence supporting the idea that the expansion of tourism leads to an improvement in human capital. Other studies have also noted that this causal relationship between tourism and development exists, but only in developed countries (Banerjee et al., 2018 ; Bojanic and Lo, 2016 ). Some studies have suggested that only the least developed countries have benefited from the tourism industry in terms of increased economic development ratios (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015 ).

However, although it has been indicated that tourism influences economic growth, some authors have noted that tourism does not have an influence on the development of host countries (Rivera, 2017 ), or simply, that the expansion of this activity does not have any effect on human development (Croes et al., 2021 ).

As an intermediate position between these two schools of thought, some works have suggested that tourism has a positive influence on the development of the resident population, but this causal relationship is only found when certain factors exist in the host countries, such as infrastructure, environment, technology, and human capital (Andergassen and Candela, 2013 ; Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández, 2019 ; Li et al., 2018 ).

Along these same lines, in a study using panel data from 133 countries, Chattopadhyay et al. ( 2021 ) determined that, although no global relationship exists between tourism and human development for all countries, the specific characteristics of each country (level of growth, degree of urbanization, or commercial openness) are determinants for tourism to improve human development levels.

Finally, other studies in the scientific literature have looked to determine whether the relationship between tourism and development is a bidirectional causal relationship, with papers affirming the existence of this relationship between tourism and development (Pulido-Fernández and Cárdenas-García, 2021 ).

Therefore, when examining the few studies that have analyzed the relationship between tourism and development, it may be concluded that contradictory and biased results exist. This may be due to the characteristics of the samples chosen, the variables used, and the methodology employed. Currently, there is no defined school of thought in the scientific literature with regard to the ability of tourism to improve living conditions for the resident population. This contrasts with the conclusions drawn regarding the relationship between tourism and economic growth.

This gap in the scientific literature provides an opportunity for new empirical studies that can analyze the relationship between tourism and development.

In this study, data from different sources of information were used with the objective of analyzing the relationship between tourism and economic development, in accordance with the methodology proposed in the following section. The data used in the present study are available for a total of 123 countries, covering all geographical areas worldwide. The specific data for these countries are as follows, including a web link to the availability of the data to provide greater transparency:

Tourist activity. The number of international tourists received was used as a variable for measuring tourist activity. For those countries for which this data was unavailable, the number of international visitors received was used, based on annual information provided by the United Nations Tourism between 1995 and the present (UN Tourism, 2022 ).

Data on international tourists received at a country level are available at https://www.unwto.org/tourism-data/global-and-regional-tourism-performance

Economic development. The HDI, developed by the United Nations Development Program and available annually from 1990 to the present day, was used as a variable for measuring economic development (United Nations Development Program, 2022 ).

Data from the HDI for each country are available at https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI

Total population. The de facto population was used as a measurement variable and counts all residents regardless of their legal status or citizenship. This information was provided by the World Bank and is available from 1960 to the present day, on an annual basis (World Bank, 2022 ).

Data on the population of the distinct countries are available and accessible at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/sp.pop.totl .

Based on the data indicated above, the initial variables are transformed, specifically, in the case of tourism, through the use of the relativized per capita variable. A descriptive summary of the variables used in the analysis is presented in Table 1 . Finally, two variables have been used to analyze the relationship between tourism and economic development:

International tourists per inhabitant received in the country (number of international tourists / total population of the country), as a measure of tourism specialization. The unit of this variable is established at a relative value, by dividing the number of tourists by the population.

HDI of the country, as a measure of economic development. The unit of this variable is established at a relative value for each country, which, in all cases, is between 0 (lowest level of human development) and 1 (highest level of human development).

Regarding the tourist sector, the measurement of tourism is a subject that has generated great interest, and, on many occasions, the selection of different indicators leads to different results (Song and Wu, 2021 ). As a result, the results of the empirical analysis may be affected by the indicators used to represent the tourist demand (Fonseca and Sanchez-Rivero, 2020 ), with there being important differences between studies with respect to the tourism indicator. According to Rosselló-Nadal, He ( 2020 ), tourist arrivals or tourism expenditure are frequently used to measure tourist demand; however, when looking at the literature, differences in the results are found depending on the indicator considered. Indeed, in their study, which looked at 191 countries between 1998–2016, the authors found evidence that estimates may differ depending on the indicator used for the tourism demand of a destination (international tourist arrivals, or international tourist expenditure in this case). Other studies use indicators that do not measure the degree of tourist activity of a destination, as is the case for the number of tourist arrivals, the expenses, or the revenues. Instead, they consider an indicator that measures the degree of specialization that an economy has in tourism, for example, international tourist arrivals in per capita terms or expenditure or income as a percentage of GDP or exports. This work uses the number of international tourist arrivals, in relation to the population, and thus obtains the degree of tourism specialization of a destination (such as Dritsakis, 2012 ; Tang and Abosedra, 2016 ).

With regard to the measurement of economic development, the arrival of the HDI has resulted in a notable improvement in terms of GDP per capita, which is traditionally used to measure the progress of a country linked only to economic aspects (Lind, 2019 ). In fact, the HDI includes other noneconomic factors as it measures three key dimensions of development: a long and healthy life, being well-informed, and having a decent standard of living. This is why this index was created from the geometric mean of the normalized indices for each of the three dimensions indicated: (i) health: life expectancy at birth; (ii) education: years of schooling for adults and expected years of schooling for children; and (iii) standard of living: Gross National Income per capita (United Nations Development Program, 2022 ). Therefore, since the emergence of this index, there have been increasingly more studies that have incorporated HDI as a measurement of economic development. This variable has been shown to represent development better than other variables that are based exclusively on economic factors (Anand and Sen, 2000 ; Jalil and Kamaruddin, 2018 ; Ngoo and Tey, 2019 ; Ogwang and Abdou, 2003 ; Sajith and Malathi, 2020 ).

The time scale considered in this study covers the period between 1995–2019, in order to perform the broadest possible time analysis. On the one hand, there is an initial time restriction in terms of the data, given that the first data available on international tourist arrivals, provided by the United Nations Tourism, refer to the 1995 fiscal year. On the other hand, the data for the 2019 fiscal year are the latest in the time series analyzed. Therefore, the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis, which may have had a different impact at the country level, as well as the level of recovery in international tourist arrivals, do not affect the results of this work.

Methodology

In this work, an analysis is carried out involving the dynamics of two variables: tourism specialization and the HDI. Each of the countries considered in the analysis is represented by a two-dimensional time series of coordinates of these two variables.

In order to compare these dynamics and thereby find homogenous country groups sharing similar dynamics, it was first necessary to introduce a metric permitting this comparison. A fundamental issue in this analysis is that the units of measurement used for each variable are different and the relationship between them is unknown since tourism is measured in the number of tourists per inhabitant while the HDI is an index that varies between 0 and 1. Therefore, the frequently used Euclidean metrics are not valid for this analysis. For this reason, in this study, the problem was analyzed within the framework of complex systems by introducing the concept of “regimes”.

In economic literature, the term “regime” is used to characterize a type of behavior exhibited by one economy, which can be qualitatively distinguished from the “regime” that characterizes another economy. In this way, one regime is distinguished and differentiated from another, so that the economy as a whole may be considered a system of multiple regimes. Intuitively, an “economic regime” may be considered a set of rules governing the economy as a system and determining certain qualitative behaviors (Boehm and Punzo, 2001 ).

Regime changes, on the other hand, are associated with qualitative changes in the dynamics of an economy. Identifying and characterizing these regimes is a complex issue. For example, when working with mathematical models, a commonly used criterion is through Markov partitions (see Adler, 1998 ). Another widely used criterion when working with data is the division of the state space using various statistical indicators, such as the mean, median, etc. (see Brida and Punzo, 2003 ).

Firstly, a distance between countries was calculated to compare their trajectories; secondly, a symbolic time series analysis was used and the concept of “regime” was incorporated; as a result, the original two-dimensional series was transformed into a one-dimensional symbolic series. Then, a metric allowing for the comparison of the dynamic trajectories of the different countries was introduced; finally, a cluster analysis was performed to group the countries based on their dynamics.

The symbolic time series analysis methodology, still quite undeveloped in the field of economics, has been used in some previous works, such as that by Brida et al. ( 2020 ) that analyzes the relationship between tourism and economic growth. All analyses have been performed using RStudio software.

Time series symbolization

To identify the qualitatively relevant characteristics, the concepts of regime and regime dynamics were introduced (Brida, 2008 ; Brida et al., 2020 ). Each regime had its own economic performance model that made it qualitatively different from the rest. The partitioning of the space of tourism states and the development was established by means of annual averages of international arrivals per capita (x) and the HDI (y). The space was divided into four regions, which were determined by the annual averages of tourism and economic development, \({\bar{x}}_{t}\) and \({\bar{y}}_{t}\) respectively, with \(t=1,\ldots ,25\) . Using this partitioning of the states space into regimes, two types of dynamics are distinguished: one within each of the regimes and one of change between regimes. While the dynamic observed in each regime determines a performance model that differs from the models that act in the others, the dynamics of change from one region to another indicate where an economy is at each temporal moment. This dynamic describes performance in terms of tourism specialization and economic development in a qualitative way.

A change of regime of course signals some qualitative transformation. To explore these qualitative changes for every country, let us substitute a bi-dimensional time series \(\left\{\left({x}_{1},{y}_{1}\right),\,\left({x}_{2},{y}_{2}\right),\,\ldots ,\,\left({x}_{{\rm{T}}},{y}_{{\rm{T}}}\right)\right\}\) , by a sequence of symbols: \(s=\left\{{s}_{1},{s}_{2},\ldots ,{s}_{T}\right\}\) , such that \({s}_{t}=j\) if and only if \(\left({x}_{t},{y}_{t}\right)\) belongs to a selected state space region, \(\,{R}_{j}\) . It is defined four regions in the following way:

Regime 1: countries with above-average HDI and tourism specialization. In this regime, the most developed economies specializing in tourism are expected to be found. The majority of European countries are expected to be found in this regime; countries in other regions with a high level of tourism specialization could also be included.

Regime 2: countries with high HDI and low tourism specialization. In this regime, the most developed economies, but in which tourism activity has a less important weight in their economic base, are expected to be found. Some large countries such as the US and Germany are expected to be found in this regime. Other countries may also be found here even if they do not present similar levels of development as European countries, for example, they have higher levels in relative terms (above the sample average).

Regime 3: countries with low HDI and low tourism specialization. In this regime, economies with a lower level of development and where tourism activity is not relevant to their economic activity, are expected to be found. Countries such as China, other Asian countries, countries on the African continent, and countries in South America are expected to be included in this regime.

Regime 4: countries with low HDI and high tourism specialization. Countries with a lower level of development and a high level of tourism specialization, such as Caribbean countries and some island countries, are expected to be found in this regime.

Once the one-dimensional symbolic series is obtained, a metric is introduced that allows comparing the dynamics of the countries, and which in turn allows for obtaining homogeneous groups. Given the symbolic sequences \({\left\{{s}_{{it}}\right\}}_{t=1}^{t=T}\) and \({\{{s}_{{jt}}\}}_{t=1}^{t=T}\) the distance between two countries, i and j is given by.

Intuitively, the distance between two countries measures the number of years of regime non-coincidence during the period. If the distance between two countries is zero, the countries have been in the same regime for the entire period. On the contrary, if the distance between two countries is T, the countries have not coincided for any time during the analyzed period. If the distance between two countries is α, it means that they have not coincided for α years during the period. In other words, they have coincided for T-α years.

Using the defined distance, the hierarchical tree was created using the nearest neighbor cluster analysis method (Mantegna, 1999 ; Mantegna and Stanley, 2000 ). Using the algorithm by Kruskal ( 1956 ), the minimum spanning tree (MST) was created. This tree was created progressively, joining all the countries from the sample using a minimum distance. According to this algorithm, in the first step, the two countries whose series had the shortest distances were connected. In the second step, the countries with the second shortest distance were connected. This pattern continued until all countries were connected in one tree.

Symbolic time series analysis

Figure 1 shows the point cloud corresponding to 2019, with the respective averages of each variable. Each point represents a country in this year with its coordinates (Tourism, HDI). As is expected, the points are distributed in the four regions, showing that qualitatively the countries perform differently. A clustering in the second and third quadrants can be observed, indicating a clustering in the sections with a low level of tourism specialization, and, in turn, there are not many countries in the fourth quadrant. In other words, few countries have been considered to have a high level of tourism specialization but low levels of development, in the last year (Belize, Fiji, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, the Maldives, and Samoa).

Cloud of points of the 123 countries for the year 2019.

Table 2 shows the percentage of time spent by each of the 123 countries analyzed in each of the previously defined regimes, showing that the large majority of the countries (80 countries) remained in the same regime for the entire period or, at least, for three-quarters of the period analyzed in the same regime (16 countries). In this regard, using the symbolization of the series, 4 clear groups were identified, made up of countries that remained in the same regime for the entire period:

Group 1: made up of countries that are in regime 1 for the entire period (high level of tourism specialization and high level of development): Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Switzerland, Cyprus, Spain, France, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and Singapore.

Group 2: made up of countries that are in regime 2 for the entire period (low level of tourism specialization and high level of development): Germany, Argentina, Australia, Chile, South Korea, Costa Rica, Cuba, the United States, Russia, Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Mexico, Panama, United Kingdom, Romania, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine.

Group 3: made up of countries that are in regime 3 for the entire period (low level of tourism specialization and low level of development): Azerbaijan, Benin, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Central African Republic, China, Congo, Algeria, Egypt, Gambia, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Haiti, Indonesia, India, Cambodia, Laos, Lesotho, Morocco, Mali, Myanmar, Mongolia, Malawi, Namibia, Niger, Nicaragua, Nepal, Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Sudan, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, Togo, Tuvalu, Tanzania, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

Finally, Group 4, made up of Belize and the Maldives, which are in regime 4 for the entire period (high level of tourism specialization and low level of development):

It is worth noting that according to the results obtained, regime changes can be difficult to observe. This could be a result of the fact that a regime change implies a structural change in the economy and in such a period as the one analyzed in this study (25 years), the observation of a structural change may be circumstantial in nature. In other words, the timing of structural changes seems to be slower than the tick of the chosen clock; in this case, an annual tick.

Within the group of countries that always remain in regime 1, two groups of countries can be identified. One of the groups is that in which tourism is an essential sector for the economy (like in the case of the Bahamas or Barbados, which have tourism contribution rates to GDP of above 25%), and in which tourism seems to have an influence in the high level of development. The other group is that in which, while tourism is not necessarily an essential sector for the economy, due to the existence of other economic activities, it is an important sector for development (such as Spain or Portugal, with tourism contribution rates to GDP of above 10%).

Within the group of countries that always remain in regime 2, there are fundamentally countries in which tourism has a marginal weight in relation to the level of population (like in the case of Germany, the US, and Japan), due to the lack of or little exploitation of the country’s tourism resources, which would result in development seeming to be related to other economic activities.

Within the group of countries that always remain in regime 3, there is a large group consisting of 41 countries (a third of the sample) that seem to be in a poverty trap, due to the low level of development and low level of tourism specialization. This is in such a way that the low level of development hinders the expansion of tourism activity, and, in turn, this lack of tourism development makes it difficult to increase the levels of development.

Finally, within the group of countries that always remain in regime 4, there are only two countries found, which are characterized by a high level of tourism specialization but have not transformed this into an improvement in development, possibly due to the existence of certain factors that hinder this relationship.

Therefore, the first issue to note is the little mobility that countries have in terms of their classification between the different regimes, given that 80 countries (two-thirds of the sample) remained in the same regime during the 25 years analyzed, which seems to show that the variables are somewhat stable, and thus justifies the fact that no major changes were observed during the period analyzed. This behavior reveals that the homogeneity in the tourism and development dynamic is the rule and not the exception.

In fact, only 27 countries, out of the 123 countries analyzed, are in a different regime for at least a quarter of the period: Albania, Armenia, Bulgaria, Brazil, Botswana, Canada, Colombia, Slovakia, Eswatini, Finland, Fiji, Hungary, Jamaica, Jordan, Lithuania, Latvia, Moldova, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Saint Lucia, Sweden, Thailand, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, and Samoa.

In this regard, Fig. 2 shows the time evolution of the symbolic series for some selected countries. As can be noted, there are some countries, like Brazil, that always have a low level of tourism specialization and alternate between periods of high and low economic development, with it seeming as though there is consolidation as being a low HDI country in recent years (until 2002, Brazil had an above average level of development but, after it was hit by a crisis, the country moved to the low development regime. Then, in 2013, it managed to return to the high HDI regime, albeit temporarily as in 2016, in the midst of a political and economic crisis, it returned to the low development regime, where it currently remains). This is similar to what happened in Fiji, insofar as it was almost always specialized in tourism and alternated HDI, consolidating itself in Regime 4 of the low HDI. As such, it seems as though certain countries define their behavior according to the degree of tourism specialization; in this case, not particularly specialized countries.

Top panel: Brazil (left) and Fiji (right). Bottom panel: Latvia (left) and Eswatini (right).

However, the behavior of Latvia or Eswatini seems to be determined by HDI and not by tourism specialization. As to be expected, Latvia remained always in regimes 1 and 2 with a high HDI while Eswatini remained in regimes 3 and 4 with a low HDI. In both cases, they alternated periods of high and low specialization in tourism.

Grouping homogeneous countries

In the case analyzed, there are many countries with zero distance. These are the countries that have the same symbolic representation, that is, the regimes dynamics are coincidental given that these countries always remain in the same regime. Therefore, there are three groups that start to form with countries that have zero distance (countries that are always placed in regimes 1, 2, and 3), and a small group, formed by Belize and the Maldives, which are the only countries that remained in regime 4 for the entire period analyzed. According to this algorithm, 6 groups were obtained, while some countries were not included in any of the groups as they were considered to be “outliers”.

Specifically, there was a graph with 123 nodes corresponding to each country and 122 links; however, given that there were several countries with the same dynamic (the distance between these countries is zero), each of these groups is represented in a single node; that is, the countries that always remained in regime 1 were considered together as one single node, with the same happening for the remaining three groups of countries with identical dynamics (groups 2, 3, and 4). Therefore, in this case, there is a node representing 18 countries from group A and another node (both pink) that represents multiple countries; the Czech Republic, Estonia, Croatia, Mauritius, and Slovenia, which all share the same dynamic (they always remain in regime 1, except in 1995). There is a node representing 19 countries from group B (light blue), another node representing 41 countries from group C (green), and a final node representing Belize and Maldives in group D. In this way, 80 countries are represented in four nodes. To complete the tree, 38 other nodes, each corresponding to a country, were established. Using Kruskal’s algorithm ( 1956 ), the MST is built, in which all nodes are connected in a single tree from the minimum distances. In this way, a tree is created having links that connect the nodes to represent the minimum distances between them (a longer arrow indicates a longer distance).

Figure 3 shows the MST. It is worth noting the central position that these multiple nodes have within the groups, that is, nodes that represent a group of countries with the same dynamics. The structure of the MST seems to be almost linear; moreover, while group C (green) is the most numerous, it is also the most compact of the large groups.

(Nodes: Pink group A/Light blue group B/Green group C/Yellow group D/Orange group E/Blue group F/Red Outliers. Distances according to arrow color: black 1/red 2/light blue 3/green 4/blue 5/orange 6/pink 7/gray 8/violet 9).

Figure 4 shows the geographic distribution of the different groups. There are 6 groups (3 large and 3 small), while some countries are not included in any of these groups, as they are considered to be “outliers”:

Group A: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Bahamas, Barbados, Switzerland, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hong Kong, Croatia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, Mauritius, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, Portugal, Qatar, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Uruguay. This group is made up of countries that predominantly remained in regime 1, that is, in general, these are countries with a high tourism specialization and high economic development.

Group B: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Germany, Ecuador, United Kingdom, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Kuwait, Sri Lanka, Mexico, North Macedonia, Panama, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, United States. This group is made up of countries that predominantly remained in regime 2, that is, in general, these are countries with a low tourism specialization and high economic development.

Group C: Azerbaijan, Benin, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Central African Republic, China, Congo, Dominican Republic, Algeria, Egypt, Gambia, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Haiti, Indonesia, India, Cambodia, Laos, Lesotho, Mali, Morocco, Myanmar, Mongolia, Malawi, Namibia, Niger, Nicaragua, Nepal, Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Sudan, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, Togo, Tuvalu, Tanzania, Uganda, Vietnam, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. This group is made up of countries that remained the majority of the time in regime 3, that is, in general, these are countries with a low tourism specialization and low economic development. With the exception of the Dominican Republic and South Africa (96% and 92%, respectively), all countries remained in regime 3 for the entire period.

Group D: Belize and the Maldives. This group is made up of the two countries that always remained in regime 4, that is, in general, these are countries with a high tourism specialization and low economic development.

Group E: Armenia, Moldova, Thailand, and Turkey. This group has the particular characteristic of having low tourism specialization throughout the period but alternating between a high level of development (regime 2) and a low level of development (regime 3).

Group F: Botswana, Jamaica, and Tunisia. This group is made up of countries that fundamentally remained in regime 4, that is, these are countries with a high tourism specialization and low economic development, however, unlike group D, they moved during the period analyzed through other regimes.

Outliers: Canada, Fiji, Saint Lucia, Sweden, Eswatini, and Samoa. These countries presented different dynamics and were not integrated into any of the previously-defined groups.

(Note: Pink: group A/Light blue: group B/Green: group C/Yellow: group D/Orange: group E/Blue: group F/Red: Outliers).

As can be seen, group A, which consists of countries with a high tourism specialization and high economic development, is basically made up of European countries, some Asian countries, and Uruguay (the only country in the Americas to be part of this group).

The countries in group B, that is, those countries with a good level of economic development, but a low specialization in the sector, are more geographically dispersed. This group consists of some European countries (in particular, Eastern European countries), a large part of Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the US, Australia, and some Asian countries.

Group C, that is, those countries with a low tourism specialization and low economic development, consists of the vast majority of African countries, as well as a significant number of Asian countries, in addition to Bolivia and Paraguay in Latin America, as well as some countries in Central America.

The countries in Group D, that is, those countries that had a high tourism specialization but a low level of economic development throughout the period analyzed, as well as those in Group F, which were also in this regime for most of the period, do not have a uniform geographic pattern, since they are located on different continents.

Finally, the countries in Group E, that is, those countries with a low tourism specialization and alternating levels of economic development, are also geographically dispersed between Europe and Asia.

As can be seen in Table 3 both Group A and Group B are made up of countries with a high level of development; however, the countries in Group A, which also have a high level of tourism specialization, on average, have a significantly higher level of development than the countries in Group B, where the level of tourism specialization is low. These results appear to show that in terms of those countries specialized in tourism (Group A), the link with development is higher than for those countries that have achieved high levels of development due to the development of other economic activities.

Similar results can be found when comparing the data from Group C (countries with a low level of tourism specialization and low level of economic development) with the data from Groups D and F (countries with a high level of tourism specialization and low level of economic development). This is because, despite the level of development being low in all the countries, in the Group D and F countries, the level of development is significantly higher than in Group C countries. This appears to show that for those countries specialized in tourism (Groups D and F), the link with development is greater than for those countries that rely on other sectors as the basis of their economy.

Tourism’s relevance lies not only in its contribution to economic growth but also in the fact that the improved economic growth generated by the expansion of tourism activity may translate into improved living conditions for the host population. Due to this chained process, many countries have opted for this economic activity with the aim of improving income, education, and health. In short, they hope to increase their levels of human development.

Although distinct works have analyzed the relationship between tourism and human development by applying causality tests to determine the type of relationship between these variables, this study adopts a different approach. It analyzes the qualitative dynamic behavior between tourism and human development, to identify clusters of countries that display similar behavior with regard to this relationship.

Firstly, it is necessary to note the little movement there is of the countries between the different regimes, which indicates great stability, given that 80 countries (two-thirds of the sample) remained in the same regime throughout the entire period analyzed (1995–2019). These results regarding the stability of the countries in the different regimes differ significantly from the results obtained in other studies that have used the same technique for the analysis of the dynamic relationship between variables (Brida et al., 2020 ). This is because even when there is a movement of the countries between regimes, this happens, at most, between two or three regimes (Jordan and Samoa are the only exceptions, passing through all four regimes).

Furthermore, the results appear to show that groups of countries with a higher level of tourism specialization have higher levels of human development. Therefore, tourism is configured as an effective tool to improve development levels, as previously stated in works such as that of Cárdenas-García et al. ( 2015 ) conducting a joint analysis with data from 144 countries or Bojanic and Lo ( 2016 ), whose global analysis referred to a sample of 187 countries.

Specifically, these results are found both in the group of countries with the highest level of development, (countries of Group A versus the countries of Group B), as previously revealed in works such as that of Meyer and Meyer ( 2016 ) analyzing South Africa and that of Tan et al. ( 2019 ) analyzing Malaysia. These results were also found in the case of countries with a lower level of development (countries of Group D and F as compared to the countries of Group C), as previously suggested by works, such as that of Sharma et al. ( 2020 ) examining India or Croes ( 2012 ) analyzing Nicaragua.

However, despite these majority results, countries have been identified that, despite having an important tourism specialization (Belize, Botswana, Jamaica, Maldives, and Tunisia), had a low level of human development. This has not allowed for the high level of tourism specialization to become a tool to improve the living conditions of the population in these countries.

This exception may be due to the link between tourism and human development, which, in addition to being affected by the level of tourism specialization, also depends on the destination’s characteristics. These characteristics include the provision of infrastructure, the level of education, and the existing investment climate in the receiving countries, as previously suggested by Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández ( 2019 ), or by the level of economic growth, the development of the urbanization process, or the degree of commercial openness of the receiving countries, as identified by Chattopadhyay et al. ( 2021 ).

Conclusions and policy implications

Distinct international organizations have shown that what is really important is not the contribution of tourism to economic growth, but rather, that this economic growth generated by the expansion of tourism activity permits the improvement of living conditions of the host population (EC, 2018 ; IADB - Inter-American Development Bank ( 2020 ); UNCTAD - United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ( 2020 )).

Given the importance of economic development for the host countries, empirical studies that analyze the relationship between tourism and economic development have begun to emerge. These works mainly link the multidimensional concept of development with human development, measured by the HDI. Here, the link between tourism and human development is produced through the economic growth generated by the expansion of tourism activity. This economic growth is used to develop policies to improve the host population’s education and health levels.

However, few such studies exist, and the scientific literature does not reveal a defined trend with regard to this relationship. Furthermore, most of these existing works rely on causality analyses to determine whether there is a relationship between tourism and human development. They do not analyze whether having a higher degree of tourism specialization, for groups of countries with similar levels of development, implies a higher level of human development, which would suggest that tourism promotes development to a greater extent than other economic activities.

Due to the methodology used, this empirical work cannot determine the type of relationship existing between tourism and development, that is, whether there is a unidirectional or bidirectional relationship between both variables. However, it does allow us to determine if countries with a higher level of tourism specialization have a higher level of development than those specializing in other productive activities.

This study aimed to contribute to the empirical discussion about the relationship between tourism and development through the use of a non-parametric and non-linear approach; specifically, the qualitative dynamic behavior of these two variables was compared using the definition of economic regime and clustering tools based on the concept of hierarchical and MST (Mantegna, 1999 ; Kruskal, 1956 ).

The results seem to indicate that tourism is an economic activity that can promote human development more than other economic activities. Indeed, at similar levels of human development, both in the case of countries with a high level of development (countries in Group A versus countries in Group B) and in the case of countries with a low level of development (countries in Groups D-F versus countries in Group C), the country groups with a higher level of tourism specialization have higher human development values than those countries specialized in other productive activities.

Therefore, public administrations should develop specific actions to increase the level of tourism specialization since tourism is a strategic tool that improves human development levels, as compared to other economic activities. It is necessary to invest in the improvement and expansion of tourism infrastructure, including the improvement of transportation systems in host destinations, increasing and improving the supply of accommodations and basic tourism-related services. Moreover, an attractive offer should be provided, both in terms of resources and attraction factors. This includes complementary services to attract a greater number of tourist flows, while developing destination promotion campaigns and, therefore, ensuring greater tourism specialization.

It should also be noted that, of the identified country groups, the most numerous one is that which includes countries from Group C, which is made up of 43 countries (approximately a third of the sample). This cluster is characterized by low tourism specialization and a low level of economic development, which seems to translate into a poverty trap, given that the low level of development prevents the expansion of the tourism activity, and, in turn, this lack of tourism development makes it difficult to increase the levels of development.

Policies should be developed that consider the lack of financial resources of these countries to carry out investment projects. International organizations and institutions linked to development, such as the United Nations Development Program, Inter-American Development Bank, or World Bank, should finance specific projects so that these countries may receive investments related to the improvement and expansion of tourism infrastructure, so as to improve human development through this activity. Suitable regulatory frameworks should be established in these countries, to encourage public-private collaboration for the development of tourism projects. In this way, private investments could make up for the lack of public financing in these destinations.

The analysis performed in this work has also identified groups of countries that, despite their high degree of tourism specialization, do not have high levels of human development (Belize, Botswana, Jamaica, Maldives, and Tunisia). This highlights the importance of identifying factors or characteristics that provide the destination with ideal initial conditions to permit the economic impacts generated by the expansion of tourism to be channeled into an improvement in human development. In addition to being conditioned by the host country’s level of tourism specialization, the link between tourism and human development also depends on infrastructure provision, education level, investment climate, urbanization level, and the degree of commercial openness. Although this current of scientific literature has not been widely studied, it has been addressed by some works analyzing the relationship between tourism and human development (Cárdenas-García and Pulido-Fernández, 2019 ; Chattopadhyay et al., 2021 ).

Policies established by public administrations should consider a dual objective: on the one hand, investing in the improvement and expansion of the tourism infrastructure and, on the other hand, increasing and improving the factors found to be determinant in configuring tourism as a tool for human development. Given that there are entities investing in projects linked to tourism aimed at improving the living conditions of the resident population, the failure to act on the determinant factors of this relationship could result in inefficient policies in terms of the allocation of resources linked to improved development.

Finally, this study has certain limitations, including the variables used to measure tourism specialization and economic development. With regard to tourism, it has been shown that changing the indicator used leads to differences in the results obtained. In terms of economic development, while other factors such as poverty level, quality of life, or income inequality are related to development, human development, and its measurement through HDI, is the most frequently used indicator to measure it. Moreover, the short period analyzed (1995–2019) is another limitation. There is a restriction in the initial period used since it is the first year in which data were available on development and this may determine the small variability between countries among the different regimes. Another limitation lies in the fact that it does not analyze the characteristics of the destination as a determinant in the relationship between tourism and human development, in accordance with the new current of the scientific literature. In terms of methodology, the choice of the measure used for the symbolization of the series can affect the results. For example, the mean may be influenced by outliers in the data, and this can be relevant for certain variables, such as tourism, which displays a high degree of variation. It would be interesting to perform the same exercise using other measures for the symbolization of the series, such as the truncated mean, the median, or some type of threshold.

Future lines of research may highlight the fact that this study consists of an analysis at the country level, although it is clear that the impacts of tourism are produced in the territory at the regional and local levels. As a result, it may be interesting to replicate this work at the regional level using different countries as an analysis, depending on the availability of such data.

Moreover, as a continuation of this study, in addition to the degree of tourism specialization, it may be interesting to analyze the type of tourism received by each of the groups of countries that have been identified. In other words, to examine whether the characteristics of the type of tourism received (accommodations, motivations, or level of expenditure) in each cluster also determine the relationship between tourism and human development. Furthermore, it may be interesting to introduce the influence of other factors on the relationship between tourism and development into the analysis of this relationship, as discussed previously in the limitations.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Adler R (1998) Symbolic dynamics and Markov partitions. Bull Am Math Soc 35(1):1–56

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Alcalá-Ordóñez A, Segarra V (2023) Tourism and economic development: a literature review to highlight main empirical findings. Tour Econ. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166231219638

Akadiri SS, Akadiri AC, Alola UV (2017) Is there growth impact of tourism? Evidence from selected small island states. Curr Issues Tour 22(12):1480–1498. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1381947

Article   Google Scholar  

Anand S, Sen A (2000) The income component of the human development index. J Hum Dev 1(1):83–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880050008782

Andergassen R, Candela G (2013) Less developed countries, tourism investments and local economic development. Rev Dev Econ 17(1):16–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12012

Antonakakis N, Dragouni M, Filis G (2015) How strong is the linkage between tourism and economic growth in Europe? Econ Model 44:142–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2014.10.018

Antonakakis N, Dragouni M, Eeckels B, Filis G (2019) The tourism and economic growth enigma: examining an ambiguous relationship through multiple prisms. J Travel Res 58(1):3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517744671

Balaguer J, Cantavella-Jordá M (2002) Tourism as a long-run economic growth factor: the Spanish case. Appl Econ 34:877–884. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840110058923

Banerjee O, Cicowiez M, Morris EJ, Moreda A (2018) Boosting tourism’s contribution to growth and development: analysis of the evidence. Rev Dev Econ 22(3):1296–1320. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12385

Boehm B, Punzo LF (2001) Investment-productivity fluctuations and structural change. in Punzo, L.F. (ed), Cycles, growth and structural change, Routledge, London

Bojanic DC, Lo M (2016) A comparison of the moderating effect of tourism reliance on the economic development for islands and other countries. Tour Manag 53:207–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.10.006

Brida JG, Punzo LF (2003) Symbolic time series analysis and dynamic regimes. Struct Change Econ Dyn 14(2):159–183

Brida JG (2008) The dynamic regime concept in Economics. Int J Econ Res 5(1):55–76

ADS   Google Scholar  

Brida JG, Cortes-Jimenez I, Pulina M (2016) Has the tourism-led growth hypothesis been validated? A literature review. Curr Issues Tour 19(5):394–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.868414

Brida JG, Matesanz-Gómez M, Segarra V (2020) On the empirical relationship between tourism and economic growth. Tour Manag 81:104131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104131

Cárdenas-García PJ, Pulido-Fernández JI (2019) Tourism as an economic development tool. Key factors. Curr Issues Tour 22(17):2082–2108. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1420042

Cárdenas-García PJ, Sánchez-Rivero M, Pulido-Fernández JI (2015) Does tourism growth influence economic development? J Travel Res 54(2):206–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513514297

Castro-Nuño M, Molina-Toucedo JA, Pablo-Romero MP (2013) Tourism and GDP: a meta-analysis of panel data studies. J Travel Res 52(6):745–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513478500

Chattopadhyay M, Kumar A, Ali S, Mitra SK (2021) Human development and tourism growth’s relationship across countries: a panel threshold analysis. J Sustain Tour 30(6):1384–1402. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1949017

Chi J (2020) Revisiting the tourism-inequality nexus: evidence from a panel of developed and developing economies. Curr Issues Tour 24(6):755–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1743243

Chingarande A, Saayman A (2018) Critical success factors for tourism‐led growth. Int J Tour Res 20(6):800–818. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2233

Cristelli M, Tacchella A, Pietronero L (2015) The heterogeneous dynamics of economic complexity. PloS One 10(2):e0117174. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117174

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Croes R (2012) Assessing tourism development from Sen’s capability approach. J Travel Res 51(5):542–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287511431323

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Croes R, Ridderstaat J, Van Niekerk M (2018) Connecting quality of life, tourism specialization, and economic growth in small island destinations: The case of Malta. Tour Manag 65:212–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.10.010

Croes R, Ridderstaat J, Bak M, Zientara P (2021) Tourism specialization, economic growth, human development and transition economies: the case of Poland. Tour Manag 82:104181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104181

Dritsakis N (2012) Tourism development and economic growth in seven Mediterranean countries: a panel data approach. Tour Econ 18(4):801–816. https://doi.org/10.5367/te.2012.0140

Easterly W (2002) The elusive quest for growth: Economists’ adventures and misadventures in the tropics. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

Google Scholar  

EC - European Commission (2018) Tourism and Transport: Key to Development. Luxembourg: European Commission

Eluwole KK, Bekun FV, Lasisi TT (2022) Fresh insights into tourism-led economic growth nexus: a systematic literature network analysis approach. Asia Pac J Tour Res 27(4):374–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2022.2075775

Fahimi A, Akadiri SS, Seraj M, Akadiri AC (2018) Testing the role of tourism and human capital development in economic growth. A panel causality study of micro states. Tour Manag Perspect 28:62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.08.004

Folarin O, Adeniyi O (2019) Does tourism reduce poverty in sub-Saharan African Countries? J Travel Res 59(1):140–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518821736

Fonseca N, Sánchez Rivero M (2020) Granger causality between tourism and income: a meta-regression analysis. J Travel Res 59(4):642–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287519851189

Garza-Rodriguez J (2019) Tourism and poverty reduction in Mexico: an ARDL cointegration approach. Sustainability 11:845. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030845

Hussain-Shahzad SJ, Shahbaz M, Ferrer R, Kumar RR (2017) Tourism-led growth hypothesis in the top ten tourist destinations: new evidence using the quantile-on-quantile approach. Tour Manag 60:223–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.12.006

IADB - Inter-American Development Bank (2020) Tourism Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map for Development of the Caribbean Region. IADB, Washington DC

Jalil SA, Kamaruddin MN (2018) Examining the relationship between human development index and socio-economic variables: a panel data analysis. J Int Bus Econ Entrep 3(2):37–44. https://doi.org/10.24191/jibe.v3i2.14431

Kruskal JB (1956) On the shortest spanning tree of a graph and the traveling salesman problem. Proc Am Math Soc 7:48–50

Lee YS (2017) General theory of law and development. Cornell Int Law Rev 50(3):432–435

CAS   Google Scholar  

Li KX, Jin M, Shi W (2018) Tourism as an important impetus to promoting economic growth: a critical review. Tour Manag Perspect 26:135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.10.002

Lin VS, Yang Y, Li G (2019) Where can tourism-led growth and economy-driven tourism growth occur? J Travel Res 58(5):760–773. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518773919

Lind N (2019) A development of the human development index. Soc Indic Res 146:409–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02133-90

Mantegna RN (1999) Hierarchical structure in financial markets. Eur Phys J B 11:193–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100510050929

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Mantegna RN, Stanley HE (2000) An introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and complexity in finance. Cambridge University Press, UK

Meyer DF, Meyer N (2016) The relationship between the tourism sector and local economic development (Led): the case of the Vaal Triangle region, South Africa. J Environ Manag Tour 3(15):466–472

Ngoo YT, Tey NP (2019) Human development index as a predictor of life satisfaction. J Popul Soc Stud 27(1):70–86. https://doi.org/10.25133/JPSSV27N1.005

Nguyen C, Schinckus C, Su T, Chong F (2021) The influence of tourism on income inequality. J Travel Res 60(7):1426–1444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287520954538

OECD - Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2010) Tourism Trends & Policies 2010. OECD, Paris

Ogwang T, Abdou A (2003) The choice of principal variables for computing some measures of human well-being. Soc Indic Res 64(1):139–152. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024788123572

Pérez-Rodríguez J, Rachinger H, Santana-Gallego M (2021) Testing the validity of the tourism-led growth hypothesis under long-range dependence. Curr Issues Tour 24(6):768–793. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1744537

Pulido-Fernández JI, Cárdenas-García PJ (2021) Analyzing the bidirectional relationship between tourism growth and economic development. J Travel Res 60(3):583–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287520922316

Ranis G, Stewart F, Ramirez A (2000) Economic growth and human development. World Dev 28(2):197–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00131-X

Ridderstaat J, Croes R, Nijkamp P (2013) Tourism and long-run economic growth in Aruba. Int J Tour Res 16(5):472–487. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.1941

Ridderstaat J, Croes R, Nijkamp P (2016) The tourism development–quality of life nexus in a small island destination. J Travel Res 55(1):79–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287514532372

Risso WA (2018) Tourism and economic growth: a worldwide study. Tour Anal 23(1):123–135. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354218X15143857349828

Rivera MA (2017) The synergies between human development, economic growth, and tourism within a developing country: an empirical model for Ecuador. J Destination Mark Manag 6:221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.04.002

Rosselló-Nadal J, He J (2020) Tourist arrivals versus tourist expenditures in modelling tourism demand. Tour Econ 26(8):1311–1326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816619867810

Sajith GG, Malathi K (2020) Applicability of human development index for measuring economic well-being: a study on GDP and HDI indicators from Indian context. Indian Econ J 68(4):554–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019466221998620

Sen A (1990) Development as capability expansion. In Griffin K, Knight J (Eds.), Human development and the international development strategy for the 1990s (pp. 41–58). London, UK: McMillan

Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Anchor Books, New York, NY

Sharma M, Mohapatra G, Giri AK (2020) Beyond growth: does tourism promote human development in India? Evidence from time series analysis. J Asian Financ Econ Bus 7(12):693–702. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no12.693

Sokhanvar A, Çiftçioğlu S, Javid E (2018) Another look at tourism- economic development nexus. Tour Manag Perspect 26:97–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.03.002

Song H, Wu DC (2021) A critique of tourism-led economic growth studies. J Travel Res 61(4):719–729. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728752110185

Tang C, Abosedra S (2016) Does tourism expansion effectively spur economic growth in Morocco and Tunisia? Evidence from time series and panel data. J Policy Res Tour Leis Events 8(2):127–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2015.1113980

Tang CF, Tan EC (2018) Tourism-led growth hypothesis: a new global evidence. Cornell Hosp Q 59(3):304–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965517735743

Tan YT, Gan PT, Hussin MYM, Ramli N (2019) The relationship between human development, tourism and economic growth: Evidence from Malaysia. Res World Econ 10(5):96–103. https://doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v10n5p96

Todaro MP, Smith SC (2020) Economic Development. 13th Edition. Addison Wesley, Boston

UNCTAD - United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2011) Fourth United Nations Conference on Least Developed Countries. UNCTAD, Istanbul

UNCTAD - United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2020) Economic Development in Africa Report 2020: Tackling Illicit Financial Flows for Sustainable Development in Africa. UNCTAD, Geneva

Book   Google Scholar  

United Nations Development Programme (2022) Human Development Reports 2021/2022. United Nations Development Programme, New York

UN Tourism (2006) UNWTO’s declaration on tourism and the millennium goals: Harnessing tourism for the millennium development goals. United Nations Tourism, Madrid

UN Tourism (2022) Tourism Data Dashboard. United Nations Tourism, Madrid

Wahyuningsih D, Yunaningsih A, Priadana MS, Wijaya A, Darma DC, Amalia S (2020) The dynamics of economic growth and development inequality in Borneo Island, Indonesia. J Appl Econ Sci ume XV(67):135–143. https://doi.org/10.14505/jaes.v15.1(67).12 . Spring 1

World Bank (1991) World Development Report 1991: The Challenge of Development. Washington, D.C: World Bank

World Bank (2022) World Bank Open Data. Washington, D.C.: World Bank

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Economics, University of Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas s/n, Jaén, Spain

Pablo Juan Cárdenas-García

GIDE, Faculty of Economics, University of the Republic, Gonzalo Ramírez 1926, Montevideo, Uruguay

Juan Gabriel Brida & Verónica Segarra

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

PJCG: conceptualization, funding acquisition, investigation, project administration, validation, resources, original draft writing, final version writing. JGB: conceptualization, investigation, formal analysis, methodology, validation, visualization. VS: conceptualization, investigation, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, resources, software, validation, original draft writing, final version writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Juan Cárdenas-García .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Cárdenas-García, P.J., Brida, J.G. & Segarra, V. A qualitative dynamic analysis of the relationship between tourism and human development. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1125 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03663-5

Download citation

Received : 11 March 2024

Accepted : 21 August 2024

Published : 02 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03663-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies