The Influence of Heritage on the Revealed Comparative Advantage of Tourism—A Worldwide Analysis from 2011 to 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is a well-articulated article in which the series of methods and calculations performed are clearly demonstrated. the article has the merit of having made a large number of calculations on 117 countries of the world on the effects of some key factors of tourism exports analysed by two different indices. The results certainly need to be further articulated in future research, but they are definitely useful for understanding the trend of market demands the weaknesses of continental tourism systems and the virtuous ones. My advice for the future is that applying the methods and calculations of this study to more localised areas (small, coherent groups of nations) could be very helpful in understanding which direction tourism exports should take in the coming decades. Applying the method on smaller groups of nations and socio-economically similar groups with similar customs and law could be useful to better focus the results and increase the impact on society of the NRCA results.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

No such modification and correction required, please control the presence of typos.

Author Response

Comment 1) It is a well-articulated article in which the series of methods and calculations performed are clearly demonstrated. the article has the merit of having made a large number of calculations on 117 countries of the world on the effects of some key factors of tourism exports analysed by two different indices. The results certainly need to be further articulated in future research, but they are definitely useful for understanding the trend of market demands the weaknesses of continental tourism systems and the virtuous ones.

REply to Comment 1:Thank you very much for appreciating the merits of the manuscript. We are grateful for your time spent on evaluating our work

Comment 2) My advice for the future is that applying the methods and calculations of this study to more localised areas (small, coherent groups of nations) could be very helpful in understanding which direction tourism exports should take in the coming decades. Applying the method on smaller groups of nations and socio-economically similar groups with similar customs and law could be useful to better focus the results and increase the impact on society of the NRCA results.

Reply to Comment 2: Thank you for these suggestions. We will certainly incorporate your valuable suggestions in our future work, and we indicated this at the end of the paper, writing about future research directions, as:

The same methodology can be applied to more localised areas, small, socio-economically similar groups of nations, to identify which direction tourism exports should take in the coming decades.

The analysis could be done on a continent-driven basis instead of a region-driven approach, to see the impact of regional differences within continents and regional similarities across continents. The influence of variables, such as a safety index, digitalization index, access to online information could also be used for grouping the countries, as they may also have an impact on tourism performance.

Comment 3) Comments on the Quality of English Language: No such modification and correction required, please control the presence of typos.

Reply to Comment 3: Thank you very much – we have carefully checked the text and corrected the typos present in the text.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Reviewer's Comments

"The influence of heritage on the revealed comparative advantage of tourism – a worldwide analysis from 2011 to 2022" 

Punctuation and grammatical errors need to be fixed.

 Make sure that size of information on charts/tables allow for readability.  Use of black font for text is preferred over gray.

 Categories such as Europe&Eurasia should be expressed as Europe & Eurasia or Europe/Eurasia.  Corrections should be made throughout document and for other like categories.

 14 August 2024

Author Response

Comment 1) Punctuation and grammatical errors need to be fixed. Style and language corrections suggested in the attached file.

 Reply to Comment 1: Thank you very much for the extensive corrections. I have taken into account every item you indicated, and made the corrections according to your suggestions.

 

Comment 2) Make sure that size of information on charts/tables allow for readability.  Use of black font for text is preferred over gray.

 Reply to Comment 2: Thank you for this suggestion. I improved the charts and tables, changing fonts from gray to black. I hope the current versions are easier to read.

 

Comment 3) Categories such as Europe&Eurasia should be expressed as Europe & Eurasia or Europe/Eurasia.  Corrections should be made throughout document and for other like categories

Reply to Comment 3:Thank you for pointing this out, I have changed the categories using the „ & ” version, except in table headings where space is limited.

 Thank you for your careful evaluation of the manuscript. I am grateful for your time and valuable suggestions for improvement.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Very important research, with solid results. Some questions: Is a continent-driven analysis more relevant that a region-driven one? And other variables may be considered, like a safety index, or a digitalization index? Is availability of information online, for example, an influential factor? 

The article is well-written and academically rigorous, addressing a topic which I find important : the role of cultural heritage in the context of global data and its impact on tourism development, particularly in comparison to natural heritage sites. While I am not a statistics expert, I can only provide feedback on the sections of the article that pertain to the importance and protection of cultural heritage. For the statistical analysis and methodology per se, I recommend finding another reviewer who specializes in this field.

Overall, I recommend the article for publication, but I have included some suggestions and questions for the author, which I hope they will consider in their final version of the paper.  I can add here more suggestions, for instance to emphasizes the economic and educational role of cultural heritage globally and to eventually discuss strategies to mitigate the risks associated with tourism overflow at these sites.  Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please check punctuation and/or spelling on lines 7, 19, 366, 369. A re-read of the paper for checking minor errors would be beneficial.

Author Response

Comment 1) Very important research, with solid results.

Reply to Comment  1:Thank you very much for appreciating the manuscript, I am grateful for your valuable time and important comments and suggestions.

Comment 2) Some questions: Is a continent-driven analysis more relevant that a region-driven one? And other variables may be considered, like a safety index, or a digitalization index? Is availability of information online, for example, an influential factor? 

Reply to Comment  2:Thank you for raising these questions. The analysis could certainly be done on a continent-driven basis, although the currently used region-driven analysis may be more sensitive to regional differences within continents and regional similarities across continents. Other variables, such as a safety index, digitalization index, access to online information may be also reasonable to be used for grouping the countries, comparing the tourism performance of groups formed by these variables. However, the lack of data availability may limit this type of analysis for less developed countries. We have added this comment to the future research directions at the end of the paper as:

The same methodology can be applied to more localised areas, small, socio-economically similar groups of nations, to identify which direction tourism exports should take in the coming decades.  The analysis could be done on a continent-driven basis instead of a region-driven approach, to see the impact of regional differences within continents and regional similarities across continents. The influence of variables, such as a safety index, digitalization index, access to online information could also be used for grouping the countries, as they may also have an impact on tourism performance.

 

Comment 3) The article is well-written and academically rigorous, addressing a topic which I find important : the role of cultural heritage in the context of global data and its impact on tourism development, particularly in comparison to natural heritage sites. While I am not a statistics expert, I can only provide feedback on the sections of the article that pertain to the importance and protection of cultural heritage. For the statistical analysis and methodology per se, I recommend finding another reviewer who specializes in this field. Overall, I recommend the article for publication, but I have included some suggestions and questions for the author, which I hope they will consider in their final version of the paper. 

Reply to Comment  3:Thank you very much for your positive comments, and questions. As it is indicated in the response above, the answers to your former questions are incorporated in the text about future research directions.

Comment 4) I can add here more suggestions, for instance to emphasizes the economic and educational role of cultural heritage globally and to eventually discuss strategies to mitigate the risks associated with tourism overflow at these sites. 

Reply to Comment  4:Thank you for this suggestion. A brief paragraph is added in Conclusions about the raised issues:

Economic theory appreciates the economic importance of cultural heritage, as it provides positive externalities, enhancing employment and improving human and social capital, while following the principles of sustainability. Cultural heritage provides a unique perspective on history, tradition, and is an important component of the cultural capital. As such, it is invaluable in educating the younger generations, enhancing sense of identity and belonging, critical thinking and empathy towards diverse cultures. However, the phenomenon of overtourism poses a significant threat to heritage sites, therefore risk mitigation strategies should be developed to prevent the damages on heritage. Such strategies could start with the careful analysis of the carrying capacity of heritage sites, followed by limiting rules on the access times, traffic restrictions favouring on-foot access, tax regulations, and higher prices of access and accommodation in the neighbourhood. The idea of tourism demarketing may serve the protection of such sites, though at the expense of lower economic benefit.

Comment 5) Comments on the Quality of English Language: Please check punctuation and/or spelling on lines 7, 19, 366, 369. A re-read of the paper for checking minor errors would be beneficial.

Reply to Comment  5:Thank you very much for pointing this out. The text has been re-read and checked for typos and minor errors, including the punctuation and spelling errors you indicated.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Some specific comments can be found in the attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comment 1) The paper is well structured. All its parts are complete, supported by data and the various analyses performed are correctly explained. Conclusions and Future research are correctly set. Overall, the figures and tables are coherent with the data shared.

Reply to Comment 1: Thank you for your kind words, and appreciation of the merits of the manuscript.

 

Comment 2) Table 1 is not easy to read. I suggest a change in the spacing of the various lines to make the variables shown clearer. In the NRCA cell a word is missing, “tourism”.

Reply to Comment 2: Thank you for pointing this problem out. Table 1 has been improved, hopefully the current version is easier to read.

 

Comment 3) Appendix A takes up a lot of space in the article, without providing essential data. It could be placed among the attached supplementary files, while in the article it could be replaced with a summary image of the macro-regions analysed, with the countries considered highlighted.

Reply to Comment 3: Thank you very much for pointing this out. Appendix A was changed, a more concise version is presented in the current version. It was not possible to include an image with 177 countries presented visible, so instead, a more concise table was included here.

 

Comment 4) The bibliography is extensive and up to date with respect to the academic landscape. There are some minor issues related to the citing methodology that need to be made uniform, like at lines 425, 534.

Reply to Comment 4: Thank you very much raising this  point. The citing methodology errors are now corrected.

 

Comment 5) Specific comments: Some specific comments and typos are listed here: Lines 8-9: The phrase “The market…heritage” is redundant;    Lines 197, 274, 337, 366 there is an extra comma;  Line 268: repetition of “natural site”.

Reply to Comment 5: Thank you very much for pointing out these errors, They are now corrected.

 

Comment 6) Lines 379-381: what is the meaning of this sentence? What is meant by ‘re-positioned’ in reference to Cultural Heritage sites?

Reply to Comment 6: Thank you for pointing out the ambiguity. The sentence was re-worded, hopefully the meaning is now clearer, as: One such implication is that cultural heritage sites should be protected against overtourism in the most developed tourism regions…

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In my opinion, the study is a significant work. The methodology is novel and very thorough. That is why it is worth including more explanatory text for readers who are less familiar with statistical analyses. (E.g. a clearer presentation of the difference between RCA and NRCA) In my opinion, the main value of the article is not the obtained result, but the applied methodology. I therefore recommend a better and more detailed explanation of the results, as well as a presentation of what other investigations this methodology can bring new scientific results, i.e. where it is appropriate and justified to apply it.

Author Response

Comment 1) In my opinion, the study is a significant work. The methodology is novel and very thorough.

Reply to Comment 1:Thank you very much for your time and valuable comments, and your positive opinion about the manuscript.

 

Comment 2)That is why it is worth including more explanatory text for readers who are less familiar with statistical analyses. (E.g. a clearer presentation of the difference between RCA and NRCA)

Reply to Comment 2:Thank you for this suggestion. The clearer presentation of the methodology, with the comparison of RCA and NRCA, has been added to the methodology section, as:

The Revealed Comparative Advantage index (RCA) compares the share of a country's total exports of the analysed commodity in its total exports to the share of world exports of the same commodity in total world exports. An index value above 1 means, that the analysed commodity represents a higher share in the country's total exports, than in the world, and this indicates, that the country has an advantage in the commodity compared to the world average.

 The Normalised Revealed Comparative Advantage index (NRCA) calculates the difference between a country's actual exports share of world exports in the analysed commodity and the country"s total export share in total world exports. This difference is normalised by the share of the analyzed commodity in world exports. If the country's export share of the commodity is the same as its total export share, then the commodity is in a neutral position in the country, producing the same export share as the average commodities of the country. In this case NRCA equals zero, while positive values represent a sudcessful export commodity and negative values indicate an unsuccessful one disadvantaged in the world market.

The application of NRCA for trade analysis is justified by its ability to handle the weaknesses of RCA, as was explained in the Materials and Methods section. As it was stated in [27], NRCA has the unique ability to be additive with respect to both coun-tries and commodities, and it is consistent with regard to time. This feature makes NRCA values comparable between countries, commodities, and time periods.

 Comment 3) In my opinion, the main value of the article is not the obtained result, but the applied methodology. I therefore recommend a better and more detailed explanation of the results, as well as a presentation of what other investigations this methodology can bring new scientific results, i.e. where it is appropriate and justified to apply it.

Reply to Comment 3:Thank you for raising this issue. The explanation of the results has been expanded, and the the appropriateness and justification for the application of the methodology has been added to the Results section, as:

 Panel data analysis and linear mixed models are widely used in  social science, economics, business analytics, and in many other fields of science. The fixed effect and random effect estimations of these models reveal important features of the relationship between the dependent and the independent variables. Fixed effects account for variables or factors that remain constant across observations, in our case across countries.

Random effects are used to account for variability and differences between different entities, which can be countries, or time periods. In our model the random effects were estimated for the various years.

The model estimates show the incfluence of a unit change in the independent variables on the NRCA value, on average, and the random intercept values modify this estimated value by adding the relevant constant for each year. This means, using the results in Table 5, that the following equation can estimate NRCA for the Asia & Pacific region in 2017 (keeping only the significant estimates in the equation):

NRCA =         -0.001205 WHSC_no + 0.000003 KnownSpecies + 0.005909 WHSN_no + 0.009548TServInf + -0.003565 EnvTreaty + 0.040820 -0.0010744230

This type of modelling is particularly suitable in panel analyses, when we work with a large group of countries (or individuals, subjects) and have multiple-year observations for them. The fixed effects estimations in these models can estimate the impacts of time-invariant factors, and the random effect estimations account for variations in outcomes that cannot be explained by observed variables alone. Thus, the fixed effect of a variable can be considered as the average estimate of its impact, while the random effect add the individual variations to this. This type of modelling technique is very popular in cross-country economic comparisons of several years, and is also favoured in sociology and psychology, when repeated observations are taken about a large group of individuals.