Citation

Farness DH. Transp. Res. Rec. 1974; 490: 1-9.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1974, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences USA, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Tthis paper explores the impact of tourism on a regional economy. It is both conceptual and empirical insofar as quantitative measures are available for the Oregon economy. Its intent is to illuminate public policy decisions and give direction to research appropriate to their implementation. inasmuch as the objective of regional policy is to promote the welfare of the residents of the region, careful consideration is given to distinquishing between resident and nonresident effects--a distinction not generally made in tourist impact studies. Also, contrary to most studies, the costs associated with tourism are given explicit consideration. And, in addition to the gross effects, attention is directed to redistribution effects among residents of a region. The fiscal effect appears to be adverse in Oregon; this is, the costs incurred by the state to provide facilities and services (parks, highways) used directly by tourists are greater than the taxes collected directly from them (user fees, state gasoline tax). Financial capital is sufficiently mobile that it is affected little by growth or nongrowth of the tourist industry. Labor, on the other hand, is not so mobile, and there appears to be a small labor benefit. Despite the fact that the jobs pay little, are seasonal, and offer limited opportunities for upward mobility, they do match the needs of a part of the labor force. Owners of natural resources have the most to gain from tourism, but their gains are partially offset by losses to resident consumers who pay higher prices for products of fixed-quantity natural resources. The local fiscal effect is unknown. The low capital-labor ratio in tourist industry activities and the low wages of the industry tend to result in low property tax revenue generated per worker in the industry. Whether this results in an adverse fiscal effect on local government depends on the characteristics of its labor force. Because of the difficulties in assigning weights to the various effects and in handling redistribution effects, it is difficult to arrive at a consensus.