Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2017 Home Previous Next

Following a thorough methodology review completed in 2015, the T&T Competitiveness Index (TTCI) has adopted the most complete and modern set of indicators globally available to measure tourism competitiveness.

However, measurements are constantly improving. As a consequence, the approach to calculating some of the indicators used in the TTCI has changed, resulting in some fluctuations in the figures. These changes do not modify the concepts or the overall methodology used to compute the T&T Competitiveness Index, yet they introduce some variability that does not accrue to actual country performance.

While insuring comparability, full transparency on the methodology is central to the soundness of the TTCI research framework. In order to communicate simply and effectively these measurement updates, the following table summarizes the changes introduced into the computation of the few modified indicators.

Indicator

Summary of the change

Country Brand Strategy

This indicator continues to evaluate the accuracy of the strategy of the National Tourism Organization (NTO) using a formula that compares the most popular brandtags (as measured by the proprietary Digital Demand D2 tool) for a specific country to the brandtags most heavily promoted by that country’s NTO. However, the updated methodology to compute this indicator no longer includes the “macro-economic” correlation variable. This correlation had assigned an economical value to each brandtag based on its digital appeal. In the new methodology this is now converted into a “digital” correlation. In addition, we have expanded our reach in terms of data gathering to include more brandtags and languages in the analysis. These changes on this particular indicator will impact each Country’s CBS Rating score equally.

Water stress

Based on annual water withdrawal data, this indicator now estimates projected future country-level water stress for 2020 under a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario. Previously, it was simply a normalized (0–5) ratio of total annual water withdrawals to total available annual renewable supply.

Forest cover change 

This indicator continues to measure the percentage change in forest cover since the year 2000, using satellite data. However, Yale/CIESIN researchers have added more precision by considering areas with cover tree of at least 30%. In the previous iteration, the indicator considered areas with at least 50% of forest cover.

Transport efficiency

The question underlying this indicator has become more detailed and precise. In the 2015 edition the question was: “In your country, to what extent does your national ground transport network (e.g. buses, trains, trucks, taxis, etc.) offer efficient transportation?” However, the 2017 edition averages the score across the two components of the following Executive Opinion Survey question: “In your country, how efficient (e.g. frequency, punctuality, speed, price) are the following transport services? a. Ground transportation (buses, subways, taxis) (1 = Extremely inefficient – among the worst in the world; 7 = Extremely efficient – among the best in the world) b. Train services (1 = Extremely inefficient – among the worst in the world; 7 = Extremely efficient – among the best in the world).”

Environmental treaty ratifications

The list of treaties has been expanded from 27 to 32 to include: The 2015 Paris Agreement; the 1998 Aarhus Convention; the 2003 Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers; the 1992 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes; and the 1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses.

Quality of tourism infrastructure

The question underlying this indicator has become more direct and specific. In the 2015 edition of the index the question was: “When senior executives visit your country for the first time for business purposes, how likely are you to recommend extending their trip for leisure purposes? (1 = very unlikely; 7 = very likely)”. For the 2017 edition the question was changed to: “In your country, how do you assess the quality of tourism infrastructure (e.g. hotels, resorts, entertainment facilities) (1 = Very poor – among the worst in the world; 7 = Excellent – among the best in the world)?”

Automated teller machines

This indicator continues to measure the availability of Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) in a country. However, the scope now includes all ATMs rather than ATMs accepting Visa cards. The denominator has also changed from total population to adult population.

Attractiveness of natural assets

The question underlying this indicator has become more direct and specific. The 2015 edition of the question was: “How would you assess the quality of the natural environment in your country? (1 = extremely poor; 7 = among the world’s most pristine?” For the 2017 edition, the question was changed to: “To what extent do international tourists visit your country mainly for its natural assets (e.g. parks, beaches, mountains, wildlife, etc.) (1 = Not at all; 7 = To a great extent)?”

Back to Top