ARTICLE IN PRESS

Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355

www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

The length of stay in the demand for tourism

Joaqun Alegre, Llorenc- Pou
Department of Applied Economics (University of the Balearic Islands) & Associate IMEDEA Unit (CSIC-UIB),
Edifici Jovellanos-Campus UIB, Crta. Valldemossa Km. 7.5, 07122 Palma de Mallorca, Illes Balears, Spain
Received 31 December 2004; accepted 15 June 2005

Abstract

One of the main characteristics of current tourism is the reduction in the length of stay at a destination. Nevertheless, this variable
has received little attention in literature. This paper examines the microeconomic determinants of the length of stay at one of the
Mediterraneans leading sun-and-sand destinations. The estimation of a conditional demand function model highlights the
explanatory power of the tourists sociodemographic prole and of holiday characteristics, as well as the sensitivity of the length of
stay to price changes.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Length of stay; Demand for tourism; Conditional demand

1. Introduction Balearics for European tourism, the conclusions drawn

When tourists plan a holiday, a number of decisions
must be made about different components of the trip,
e.g. the choice of destination, type of accommodation,
means of transport etc. Although decisions about
different aspects of the trip can be considered sequen-
tially, their main characteristic is their interdependence
(Dellaert, Ettema, & Lindh, 1998). One of the most
important holiday characteristics to be decided is the
length of stay. Nonetheless, this variable has received
little attention in literature, particularly if we bear in
mind its effect on the income generated in tourist
destinations.1 In this paper, an analysis is made of the
evolution and determinants of the length of stay in one
of the Mediterraneans leading sun-and-sand destina-
tions, the Balearic Islands. Given the signicance of the
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 971 171319; fax: +34 971 172389.
E-mail addresses: joaquin.alegre@uib.es (J. Alegre),
llorens.pou@uib.es (L. Pou).
1
See Spotts and Mahoney (1991), Taylor, Fletcher, and Clabaugh
(1993), Nogawa, Yamaguchi, and Hagi (1996), Seaton and Palmer
(1997), van Limburg (1997), Mules (1998), Agarwal and Yochum
(1999), and Cannon and Ford (2002), among others.
in this paper could be extended to other destinations.
A holidays length, like the actual decision to take a
trip or a particular choice of destination, can be
explained by two types of variables: rstly, variables
associated with the personal and family characteristics
of the tourist and, secondly, economic variables, such as
his or her level of income or the price of the holiday,
which can both be construed as constraints.
Examples of personal and family characteristics
that might determine the length of stay include the
tourists age, family status, number of children, level of
education and profession. Some of these variables might
have a direct inuence on the length of stay. For
instance, a couples desire to make their holidays
coincide might limit the length of the trip. On the other
hand, the existence of children with regulated holidays
might lead to a longer holiday period. In contrast,
variables like age or the level of education might be
indirect determinants, since they inuence consumers
preferences and help to dene his or her values and
motivations. In general terms, the effect that this last
group of variables has on the length of stay is an
empirical matter.

0261-5177/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.06.012
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1344 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
Economic variables, i.e. income and the price of the
holiday, should also inuence the length of stay.
According to economic theory, a rise in income with
xed relative prices should lead to an increase in the
demand for tourist services. A rise in holiday price with
xed income should lead to a fall in demand.
Models used to analyse recreational trips have
explored the role that time plays in the demand for
and benets of recreational trips (Berman & Kim, 1999;
Bockstael, Strand, & Hanemann, 1987; Larson, 1993;
Larson & Shaikh, 2001; McConell, 1992; Shaw &
Feather, 1999). Their end purpose was to include the
opportunity cost of time in the demand for recreation.
However, they did not take into consideration the
singularity of tourist services.
This study regards the length of stay as yet another
characteristic of the holiday product. From a theoretical
point of view, it takes the approach of discrete choice or
random utility models proposed by McFadden (1974)
and Manski (1977). In these models, which facilitate a
simple empirical and operational approximation of
consumer behaviour, it is assumed that individuals
obtain benets from a compound good, dened by a set
of measurable characteristics. In terms of recreational or
tourism demand, it can be assumed that consumers
compare the utility of several alternative choices,
selecting the one that maximizes their utility. The
different options might affect consumers nal choice
of destination or type of holiday. Discrete choice models
have been applied to studies of holiday destination
selection (Eymann & Ronning, 1997; Haab & Hicks,
1997; Huybers, 2003a, b; Huybers & Bennett, 2000,
2003; Morey, Rowe, & Watson, 1993; Papatheodorou,
2003; Shaw & Ozog, 1999).2
Dubin and McFadden (1984) and Hanemann (1984)
propose consumer choice models that combine choices
of discrete and continuous variables. Dubin and
McFadden (1984) apply the model to the household
demand for energy, with domestic appliances being
selected according to both their characteristics and the
amount and type of energy consumption. Households
must weigh up the benets that each appliance offers
against expectations of future use and future energy
prices. The demand for length of stay at a destination
can be regarded in a similar way. In particular,
consumers weigh up the benets of different holiday
alternatives, also assessing the cost of each one and the
length of stay they can afford, taking into account their
nancial and time constraints. To assess the demand for
length of stay, our model assumes that tourists decide
the optimum length of stay, conditioned on the
remaining holiday characteristics they have selected
(the destination, type of accommodation etc.).
2
See Crouch and Louviere (2000) for a general overview of choice
models in tourism, hospitality and leisure.
The model has been estimated with data for the
Balearic Islands, one of the Mediterraneans leading
sun-and-sand destinations. The islands offer a total of
413,519 beds, 72% of which are in hotels, representing
22% of all Spains hotel beds and 3.36% of the
European Unions (European Commission, 2002; INE,
2003). Tourist arrivals rose from just over 2.2 million
tourists in 1970 to 10 million in the year 2003. Within
the Spanish State, the Balearic Islands are one of the top
destinations for German and British tourists, account-
ing, respectively, for 35.1% and 41.3% of all tourists to
the islands in 2002 (Conselleria de Turisme, 2003). In
order to gain a better insight into the behaviour patterns
of tourists to the Balearics, the Regional Government of
the Balearic Islands conducts a Tourist Expenditure
Survey (henceforth the TES) in collaboration with the
University of the Balearic Islands. Surveyed at the
airport, the TES compiles data on tourist expenditure,
together with the tourists sociodemographic character-
istics and holiday options, including the length of stay.
The data used in this paper covers the high seasons from
1993 to 2003, with an original sample of 56,915 tourists.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In
Section 2, a review is made of previous literature
concerning analyses of the length of stay in tourist
destinations. In continuation, descriptive evidence from
the Balearic Islands is presented, showing the consider-
able reduction in length that has occurred over the last
few years. In Section 3, the economic model is presented.
Section 4 describes the variables included in the
empirical model, together with certain econometric
issues. Section 5 outlines the main results and discusses
their implications. The concluding remarks are pre-
sented in Section 6.
2. Literature review and empirical evidence
2.1. Literature review
Literature on the demand for tourism abounds.
Detailed reviews of such studies can be found in Crouch
(1994), Witt and Witt (1995), Lim (1997), Crouch and
Louviere (2000), and Song and Witt (2000). The variable
used in studies to dene the tourism demand is not
unique. In his review of international tourism demand
models, Lim (1997) classies the dependent variable
into the following categories: tourist arrivals and/or
departures (43.6% of the studies), tourist expenditure
and/or receipts (41.9%), travel exports and/or imports
(6%), and the length of stay and nights spent in
tourist accommodations (8.5%). Recent articles on the
tourism demand have incorporated new modelling
and estimation strategies. One approach extends
econometric techniques for analysing time series (e.g.
error correction models, cointegration analysis or
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355 1345

autoregressive vectors), using the number of tourist of the party are not statistically different from zero.
arrivals as the reference variable (see, for example, These authors also obtained a price elasticity of
0.27
Dritsakis, 2004; Kulendran & Witt, 2001; Song & Witt, for the length of stay, that is, an inelastic demand.
2005). A second approach focuses on applying the Bell and Leeworthy (1990) test a travel cost method to
microeconomics of consumer expenditure theory model the annual consumer demand for Florida beach
(Deaton & Muellbauer, 1980a, b). Assuming that a days by individual tourists travelling signicant dis-
representative consumer (tourist) exists, the latters tances to get there. Their results show the expected signs
preferences are analysed using aggregate time series for the on-site cost per day and for income, with price
models (see, for example, Divisekera, 2003; Durbarry & and income elasticities of
0.15 and 0.37, respectively.
Sinclair, 2003; Han, Durbarry, & Sinclair, 2005; Li, Finally, Fleischer and Pizam (2002) analyse a cross-
Song, & Witt, 2004). These approaches to analysing the section sample of Israeli senior citizens to identify
demand for tourism have failed to pay attention to the factors that affect their decision to take vacations for
tourists length of stay. Neither have they taken into different lengths of time. From their Tobit model
consideration the implications that the evolution of this estimates, the authors conclude that age, health status
variable might have on their analyses. and income have a positive effect on the length of stay.
Many of the above-mentioned studies of tourism
demand are characterized by the use of aggregate time 2.2. Descriptive evidence in the Balearic Islands
series data. For the empirical estimation of consumer
models, when available, microeconomic data drawn The length of time that tourists spend on holiday in
from surveys are more appropriate (Deaton, 1998). the Balearic Islands is becoming drastically shorter.
With microeconomic information, tourists sociodemo- According to the TES, between 1989 and 2003 there was
graphic characteristics can be included among the a reduction in the average length of stay of just over 3
determinants of the demand and heterogeneous con- days (from 13.14 to 9.89 days), representing an absolute
sumer behaviour can be incorporated (Heckman, 2001). reduction of almost 25% and an average cumulative
The few articles available in the literature on the decrease of 2% per year. As Table 1 shows, this
length of stay in holiday destinations are mainly evolution is common to the main group of nationalities.
descriptive. They analyse how different tourist proles This situation is occurring in most European holiday
or types of trip result in differences in the length of stay destinations. The phenomenon is also common to the
(Oppermann, 1995, 1997; Seaton & Palmer, 1997; Sung, main issuing countries (Tourism Intelligence Interna-
Morrison, Hong, & OLeary, 2001). In general terms, tional, 2000a, b). To highlight the importance of these
these papers show different lengths of stay depending on trends, Fig. 1 shows the average number of days stay by
nationality, age, labour status, the repeat visitation rate British tourists abroad and the same gures for tourists
and stage in the family life cycle. Oppermann (1995) also to the United Kingdom between 1982 and 2002. In both
suggests that the average length of stay might be cases, there is a considerable reduction in the average
inuenced by the family life cycle through tourists length of stay.
choice of holiday destination. In relation to the latter, In the case of the Balearic Islands, the effect of this
Gronau (1970) states that the physical distance between trend is accentuated because the sun-and-sand holiday
tourists place of origin and their holiday destination
(i.e. the ight time in his study) might have a positive Table 1
inuence on the average length of stay).3 Average number of days stay in the Balearic Islands during the high
Some studies have analysed the determinants of season by nationality
the length of stay, using econometric models. Mak, Year German British Spaniards Others Total
Moncur, and Yonamine (1977) and Mak and Nishimura
(1979) test two explanatory models of the length of stay 1989 14.28 13.16 11.29 12.39 13.14
1990 14.47 12.14 9.89 12.05 12.63
with cross-sectional data from a survey on US visitors to
1991 13.53 12.28 11.24 11.55 12.39
Hawaii in 1974. Among the variables used by these 1992 14.06 12.24 10.99 11.48 12.47
authors, a positive causal relation is obtained for 1993 13.60 12.18 10.46 11.99 12.42
income, visits to Hawaii for pleasure, repeat visitation, 1994 13.77 12.04 10.11 12.06 12.43
and young and aged visitors. Meanwhile, a negative 1995 13.04 11.90 10.99 11.35 12.01
1996 12.71 11.38 10.50 10.85 11.68
coefcient is obtained for visitors on pre-paid package
1997 12.30 11.36 9.39 10.61 11.27
tours or organized group tours, married visitors, middle- 1998 12.03 11.23 8.95 10.45 11.04
aged visitors and per capita daily expenditure. In 1999 12.36 11.06 9.44 10.72 11.21
contrast, variables referring to education and the size 2000 11.32 10.69 9.11 10.07 10.66
2001 11.65 10.85 7.89 10.26 10.75
3
2002 10.57 10.77 8.64 9.96 10.24
Bernham and Kim (1999) and Bell and Leeworthy (1990) also nd a 2003 10.22 10.03 7.73 10.05 9.89
positive correlation between more travel time and on-site time.

1346 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
overseas residents
13
12
11
Nights
10
9
8 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
7
1982 1986 1990 1994
1984 1988 1992
Fig. 1. Average length of stay during visits to and from the UK
(Source: Travel Trends 2002).
product tends to be marketed in weekly packages.
In 1989, 16.1% of all tourists spent 7 days in the
Balearics, while 65.5% spent 2 weeks. In 2003, the
corresponding percentages were 47.6% and 52.3% (see
Fig. 2). Therefore, the length of stay is dropping without
the availability of alternative intermediate lengths of
stay, which only worsens the impact.
Fig. 3 shows the percentage of tourists that stay for up
to a week in the Balearics, from 1 to 2 weeks, and for
more than 2 weeks. In 1989, 17.1% of tourists spent up
to 1 week in the Balearics (6.93 days on average), 74.6%
spent between 1 and 2 weeks (13.65 days on average)
and 8.3% spent over 2 weeks (21.23 days on average). In
2003 the corresponding percentages were 47.6% (6.53
days), 46.5% (12.22 days) and 5.8% (18.77 days).
Different factors might contribute towards this
reduction, including sociodemographic ones (the ageing
population, families where both spouses work outside
the home etc.) and changes in tourist habits, such as a
ARTICLE IN PRESS
14 days 7days
UK residents
100
80
60
Percentage
40
20
0
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Fig. 2. Percentage of tourists with stays of exactly 7 and 14 days in the
Balearic Islands.
1998 2002 preference for more than one holiday per year or an
1996 2000 increased number of short breaks.
Other hypotheses might also explain this decrease. In
the case of Majorca, for example, Morgan (1991) posed
the hypothesis of a change in category, where
consumers might decide to opt for a high-quality
product, compensating for its greater expense by
reducing their consumption of other products. If we
apply this argument to the length of stay, consumers
might decide to choose a better quality destination or
type of holiday if they can compensate for its higher cost
by reducing their length of stay.
The descriptive evidence at our disposal does indeed
indicate that holidays become shorter in length as the
price per day rises. Using data from the TES, Fig. 4
relates these two variables over three different years:
1989, 1996 and 2003. The daily price of the holiday paid
by the tourist4 is shown according to intervals based on
the deciles of the samples distribution of spending. On a
scale of 110, the lowest value corresponds to the 10%
cheapest prices that were paid, whilst the highest value
corresponds to the 10% the more expensive prices. For
4
The price per tourist per day is dened as the daily cost of the
holiday, excluding the transport cost.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355 1347

year
Length of stay

Up to 1 week 1 to 2 weeks 1989 1996 2003

15
Over 2 weeks

80
14

13

60
12

Average days
11
Percentage

40 10

20 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

daily price by deciles

Fig. 4. Average number of days stay by daily spending deciles.

0
stay there, ttour, so that t ttrans ttour . J represents
19
19 9
19 0
19 1
19 2
19 3
19 4
19 5
19 6
19 7
19 8
20
20 0
20 1
20 2

alternative holidays. The utility function also includes a

8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
99
0
0
0
03

vector of taste shifters, Z, with characteristics of the

Fig. 3. Tourist distribution by lengths of stay in the Balearics.
each price level, the vertical axis shows the average
length of stay. From Fig. 4 it can rst be concluded that
the higher the price per day, the lower the length of stay.
Secondly, this effect seems to have increased over the
course of time. In 1989 there was a 1.68-day difference in
the average length of stay between those tourists who
paid the lowest and the highest prices. In 1996, this
difference rose to 1.97 and in 2003 to 2.73.
3. Economic model
This paper adopts a discrete choice/continuous model
(Dubin & McFadden, 1984; Hanemann, 1984). In this
model, the consumer maximizes a utility function that
includes q, the vector of consumer goods (excluding
tourist services); z, the vector of characteristics that
dene the holiday (the destination, type of accommoda-
tion, category of accommodation etc.); and t, the length
of the holiday. This last factor can be separated into the
travel time to the destination, ttrans, and the length of
consumer that might inuence his or her preferences,
and a random term, e, for non-observable characteristics
of the trip (McFadden, 1981). The consumer determines
the values of q, z and t that maximize his or her utility:
max uq; z; ttrans ; ttour ; Z; e (1)
q;z;ttrans ;ttour
subject to income restrictions, Y, and time con-
straints, T:
p0 q ptrans ptour ttour pY ,
ttrans ttour pT,
q; z; ttrans ; ttour ; p; ptrans ; ptour X0,
where p is the vector of prices of q, and ptrans and ptour
are the travel price and holiday price per day at the
destination, respectively. The latter is determined by the
characteristics of the holiday.
From (1) the consumer chooses the level of consump-
tion of non-tourism goods, the characteristics of the
holiday trip and its length. Let us suppose the consumer
opts for a particular holiday j, thus xing the
characteristics of the trip, zj, and the necessary travel
time tj-trans. This does not determine the length of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1348 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
stay but it does involve the selection of a certain
holiday price per day, which will be a function of
selected characteristics, pj-tour  ptour zj . Following
Pollak (1969, 1971), the conditional demand function
for the length of stay at destination j can be expressed
as shown:
tj-tour ttour p; pj-tour ; zj ; Y
pj-trans ; T
tj-trans ; Z; ej .
(2)
Expression (2) conditions the length of stay on the
selected holiday characteristics. What makes this condi-
tional demand function appealing is the fact that the
demand function for length of stay can be estimated,
taking pre-assigned values for the choice of destination
and the set of holiday characteristics (accommodation,
type of board etc.). Note, however, that these character-
istics are not dropped from the demand function, but
included as conditioning arguments. In our model,
therefore, a certain choice of holiday partly determines
its length. By including the characteristics of the holiday
in the demand function, the length of stay is explicitly
considered not to be independent of these characteristics.
We assume weak separability between the tourist trip
and consumer goods other than tourism, q. Weak
separability implies that income and the prices of goods
outside the tourist trip only affect the demand function
through their effect on total expenditure on the trip.
Under this hypothesis, the conditional demand function
for length of stay can be written as
tj-tour ttour pj-tour ; zj ; Y
pq
pj-trans ; T
tj -trans ; Z; ej . the disturbance term was normally distributed was
(3)
Thus, in our theoretical specication, the length of
stay is a function of the holiday characteristics, the daily
price of the holiday (dependent upon its selected
characteristics), the total expenditure available for the
holiday, the maximum time available, the characteristics
of the consumer and a non-observable random effect.
4. Econometric approach
As mentioned above, the data used in the estimation
of the model are drawn from the Tourist Expenditure
Survey conducted in the Balearic Islands during the high
seasons from 1993 to 2003.5 Given the heterogeneity of
the data due to the existence of different nationalities in
the sample, the estimated econometric model is only
based on the sample of British and German tourists
(who account for 70% of the interviewees). Tourists
staying in friends or relatives homes or in their own
5
Although previous waves of the TES were available from 1989, part
of the information used was only included in the questionnaires from
1993 onwards. Thus, the estimated sample was restricted to the period
19932003.
houses were excluded. Tourists with missing informa-
tion for any of the variables were also discarded. The
nal sample consisted of 24,896 interviews.
The survey requests information about the tourists
sociodemographic characteristics, and enquires about
their motivations in choosing the Balearics and about
different characteristics of the holiday. Nevertheless,
specic characteristics or comparisons that nally led
them to choose a particular product and destination are
not known. The information about the holiday product
is therefore limited to their nal choice, with no data on
possible alternatives the tourist may have considered
during the decision process.
Given the almost continuous characteristics of the
models dependent variable, different methods of
specifying and estimating the causal relation were
considered. These alternative specications imply dif-
ferent assumptions about the characteristics of the
dependent variable. If it is considered to be a continuous
variable, a multiple linear regression model can be
estimated, under the assumption that its stochastic
component has a normal distribution. If the dependent
variable is considered to be Poisson distributed, a count
data model can be estimated. However, neither of these
alternatives takes into account the strong bimodal
nature of the dependent variable. Although this
characteristic might be explained by the independent
variables, when a multiple regression model was
estimated the results showed that the error term
maintained a bimodal form. Thus, the assumption that
rejected. Given this fact, it was considered appropriate
to transform the length of stay variable into a discrete
one, taking weekly periods as references. Consequently,
a discrete logit model was estimated, where the
dependent variable was dened as a dichotomous
variable. The dependent variable takes a value of 0 if
the tourist stayed at the destination for 7 days or less,
and 1 if he or she spent over 7 days there.6
Besides the length of stay, the TES provided the
following data for each tourist: (1) Age: under 30 years,
3045, 4560, over 60 years. (2) Profession: salaried
workers and manual labourers; civil servants; profes-
sionals, head technicians, company directors, managers
and middle managers (for the sake of brevity henceforth
referred to as Level A); pensioners, students, and other
professions. (3) Size of the party. (4) Nationality:
German and British. (5) Type of accommodation:
guesthouses and 1 or 2star hotels, 3star hotels, 4 or
5star hotels, apartments and villas. (6) Type of board,
distinguishing between room only, bed and breakfast,
half-board and full-board. (7) Number of trips made
6
Note that although the estimated model is a logit one, its
specication is not derived from the hypotheses of the random utility
model.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
over the last 12 months (including this one). (8) Number
of previous visits to the Balearic Islands: rst visit,
second visit, third visit, fourth or more. (9) Whether the
tourist came on a package holiday or not. (10) The
reasons why he or she chose the Balearics for a holiday.
In the specication of the model, a distinction is made
between the following possible reasons: price, climate,
beaches, quality of the hotels and quality of the
surrounding area. (11) The tourist expenditure of the
party (including what they paid in their country of
origin and transport). (12) The holidays daily price per
person. The variables for the size of the party, total
expenditure and daily price per person were specied as
continuous variables, whilst the remaining ones were
included as dummies, taking one of the categories as the
reference.
In order to interpret the estimation results, it is worth
noting that in logit estimations the probability of an
event i is determined by the function
0 50% for over a week.
eb x 1
Pi 0 0 . (4)
1 eb x 1 e
b x
One of the main characteristics of this probability
function is the fact that changes in its value are
dependent, in a non-linear way, on explanatory vari-
ables. Coefcient bj determines the value of the odds
ratio, where the latter is dened as the ratio of the
probability of an event divided by the probability of the
opposite event:
Pi 0
eb x . (5)
1
Pi
For explanatory variable j, term ebj is the factor by
which the odds increase when variable j goes up by one
unit. The term log odds is used to refer to coefcient bj .
If bj is positive, factor ebj will be higher than a unit,
implying an increase in the odds ratio. If bj is negative,
the factor will be lower than a unit, implying a decrease
in the odds ratio.
Besides the odds ratio, the mean marginal effects were
also calculated and, in the case of the continuous
variables, their elasticity (see Table 2). The marginal
effect of a variable is dened as the variation in
probability caused by a one unit increase in this variable
while the other variables remain stable (Ben-Akiva &
Lerman, 1989). The marginal effect of variable xj can be
expressed as follows:
qPi
bj Pi1
Pi, (6)
qxj
while, in the case of the elasticities, it can be expressed as
shown below:
qPi=Pi
1
Pibj xj . (7)
qxj =xj
1349
Note from (6) and (7) that in both the marginal effects
and the elasticities, the effect on probability of a
variation in variable j is dependent on coefcient bj
and the probability value itself. For a given value of
coefcient bj , the function of the marginal effect is
highest when probability Pi is equal to 0.5. In contrast,
the marginal effect is lowest when Pi takes either very
low or very high values. This is due to the implicit non-
linearity of the logit model. This specication implies
that for an event with either a very high or very low
probability, a change in the variables that determine
that event would have a much lower impact than for an
event with not such an extreme probability. In our
sample, if 90% of the tourists had chosen to stay for
over 7 days, the marginal effects of the deterministic
variables would be lower than they would for a smaller
percentage of tourists. Holding the value of coefcient bj
constant, the highest marginal effect would occur when
50% of the tourists had stayed for up to a week and
5. Results and discussion
Table 2 contains the results of the estimates.7 Note
that because a discrete choice model was used, its
estimates show the inuence the explanatory variables
have on the probability of a stay of more than one week
in the Balearics. This section is organized so that we rst
comment briey the main statistical results. Later on a
discussion of their implications is presented.
Age: The descriptive analysis of the data shows that
the youngest age group (under 30s) is the one that
presents the lowest percentage of stays of more than 1
week, whilst the over 60s group shows the greatest
percentage. However, in the estimation of the model, the
dummy variables for the age intervals display a global
statistical signicance of 0.043. The lack of signicance
of the age variable might be explained by the inclusion
of other variables in the model that are closely
correlated with age (particularly labour status). Despite
its low signicance, the odds ratio between the different
age intervals and the reference category (the over 60s) is
always less than 1. That is, the over 60s show a higher
probability of longer stays than the other age groups.
The mean marginal effects (which measure the percen-
tage change in probability in relation to the reference
category) are all negative. Tourists under the age of 60
are about 2% less likely to stay for over a week than the
oldest age group.
Labour status: Belonging to the most highly qualied
professional category (Level A) involves a lower
odds ratio than all the other professional categories.
7
For reasons of space, the coefcients for the yearly variables have
not been included in Table 2.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1350 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355

Table 2
Results of the binomial logit model (19932000)

B Sig. Exp(B) Marginal effect %a

Age Under 30
0.127 0.380 0.881
1.53

3045
0.263 0.066 0.768
1.86
4560
0.203 0.145 0.816
1.67
Over 60
Labour status Salaried and manual workers 0.369 0.000 1.447 3.57
Civil servants 0.263 0.011 1.301 2.28
Pensioners 0.778 0.000 2.177 6.65
Students 0.643 0.000 1.902 8.33
Other professions 0.511 0.000 1.667 5.62
Level A
Nationality German 0.774 0.000 2.169 5.28
British
Accommodation Guesthouses and 1 or 2star hotels
0.381 0.000 0.683
4.49
3Star hotels
0.253 0.001 0.776
2.37
4 or 5Star hotels
0.272 0.037 0.762
2.39
Apartment or villa
Type of board Room only
0.586 0.000 0.556
4.84
Bed and breakfast
0.750 0.000 0.472
8.24
Half board
0.641 0.000 0.527
6.03
Full board
Number of trips One including this trip 0.272 0.000 1.313 2.53
Two
0.045 0.524 0.956
0.39
Three
0.124 0.109 0.883
1.20
Four
0.206 0.038 0.814
2.04
Over four
Package holiday Yes
0.059 0.440 0.942
0.50
No
Repeat visitation rate First visit
0.341 0.000 0.711
3.5
Second visit
0.220 0.000 0.803
2.13
Third visit
0.112 0.094 0.894
1.00
Fourth visit or more
Price as travel motive Yes
0.248 0.000 0.780
2.57
No
Climate as travel motive Yes
0.006 0.907 0.994 0.01
No
Beaches as travel motive Yes 0.114 0.011 1.121 1.14
No
Quality of hotel AS travel motive Yes 0.125 0.016 1.133 1.02
No
Quality of surroundings as travel motive Yes 0.032 0.509 1.032 0.33
No
Size of party
2.966 0.000 0.051
2.10*
Daily price of holiday
0.130 0.000 0.878
1.79*
Total holiday expenditure 0.007 0.000 1.007 2.39*
Constant 5.391 0.000 219.49

The dependent variable has been dened as 0 if the stay is up to 1 week long and 1 if it is over 1 week long.
a
The marginal effects were calculated in relation to the reference category. When the variable was specied as a continuous one (size of party, daily
price of holiday, and total holiday expenditure), the elasticities were estimated (values marked with an asterisk).

Compared with Level A, students show the highest
marginal effect (8.33%), followed by pensioners (6.65%),
other professions (5.62%), salaried workers and manual
labourers (3.57%), and civil servants (2.28%).
Nationality: German tourists present an odds ratio
compared to British tourists (the reference group) of
over two, with a marginal effect of 5.28%.
Type of accommodation: Staying in guesthouses or
hotels reduces the odds in comparison with apartment
and villa accommodation. The lowest category of hotel
registers the strongest marginal effect, with a
4.49%
reduction in probability, and a drop of almost
2.4% in
the case of 3, 4, and 5star hotels.
Type of board: Compared with full-board accommo-
dation, the odds ratio for all the other categories is
below one, with negative mean marginal effects ranging
from 4.84% (room only) to 8.24% (bed and break-
fast).
Number of trips: In the descriptive analysis of the
sample, tourists who had only made one trip in the last
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355 1351

12 months (including this one) were more likely to stay -0.5

for over a week than those who had made more than
four trips (the reference group). In comparison with this
last group, the estimated marginal effect for tourists
who had only made one trip involves a 2.53% increase -1.0
in the probability of a longer stay. Tourists who had
made between two and four trips did not show a
statistically different effect from the reference group.
Package holiday: Choosing a package holiday leads to -1.5
a lower odds ratio than other holiday systems, with a

Price elasticity
marginal effect of 0.50%.
Repeat visitation rate: The reference category was the
group of tourists on their fourth visit or more to the -2.0
Balearics. This was the group with the highest percen-
tage of stays of over a week in the sample. This evidence
was conrmed by the econometric estimation, which
shows that the lower the repeat visitation rate the lower -2.5
the odds ratio. The mean marginal effect for rst-time
visitors, compared with the group with the highest
repeat visitation rate, shows a reduction in probability
of 3.50%, with a value of 2.13% and 1.00% for those -3.0
on their second and third visit, respectively.
19

19

19

19

19

19

19

20

20

20

20
93

94

95

96

97

98

99

00

01

02

Travel motives: Concerning the dummy variables for
travel motives, neither the climate nor the quality of the
surrounding area has any differential effect on prob-
ability, whilst the beaches and the quality of the hotel
were both found to have a signicant (albeit low) effect,
with a marginal effect of around 1%. In contrast, price
as a travel motive achieves an odds ratio of 0.76, with a
marginal effect of 2.57%.
Size of the party: The estimated mean elasticity
presents a value of 2.10. Thus, as the size of the party
increases, the probability of a stay of over a week falls.
Daily price of the stay: The estimation of the model
shows that the price factor has a signicant effect on
probability, with a mean elasticity of 1.79. Although
this value must be interpreted in probability terms, it
suggests that, holding the holiday characteristics xed,
an increase in the price of the holiday is likely to be
offset by a shorter length of stay. Fig. 5 shows the
evolution of the average estimated price elasticity for the
period 19932003. Although the price elasticity is
initially below the unit, price sensitivity increases along
the period, reaching values of over 3 at the end of the
period. The importance of this effect can be highlighted
using a simple numerical example, based on the mean
values from the year 2003 sample. If an increase in price
of 1h per person per day is assumed (involving an
increase of 2.22% in the average price of the holiday),
the probability of a stay of over a week goes down by
5.84%. This would entail a drop in the percentage of
tourists staying for over a week from 57% to 53.6%,
with a considerable impact on the occupancy rates of
holiday accommodation centres.
Tourist expenditure: The estimated tourism expendi-
ture elasticity for the probability of a stay of over 1 week
03
Fig. 5. Mean estimated price elasticities, 19932003.
is in some way symmetrical to the price effect, with a
mean value of 2.3 for the whole period. As for the price
elasticity, the estimated tourism expenditure elasticity
shows an increase over time for nearly all the years,
rising from a value of 1.2 in 1993 to 3.01 in 2003. As
commented in Section 4, the logit model allows for the
presence of non-linear effects in the marginal effects (or
in the elasticities). For a given value of coefcient bj , the
highest marginal effect occurs when, a priori, it is
equally likely that a tourist will stay for up to a week or
over 2 weeks. In the case of the Balearics, the historical
evolution shows a trend towards the equal probability of
both events, as demonstrated by Fig. 3. The evolution of
the expenditure elasticity on the probability of a stay of
over 1 week is therefore attributable to greater tourist
sensitivity to variations in this variable.
From the estimation results several general implica-
tions can be derived. The microeconometric analysis
shows that the probability of a stay of over 1 week varies
according to the tourists characteristics. Although the
database shows a common move towards shorter length
stays, the importance of this effect varies from one
tourists segment to another. It is worth stressing the
importance of this heterogeneity, because it might offer
some clues as to how to manage the impact of this trend
in certain tourist destinations, at least in the short- or
mid-term.
It is worth noting that the composition of the demand
is not xed over time. In the case of Mediterranean sun-
and-sand destinations there has been a growth in the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1352 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
importance of the older tourist segment, the number of
couples who holiday together, mid-to-high range
accommodation, the number of yearly trips European
tourists take, or the percentage of tourists who
revisit destinations on subsequent holidays. All these
changes suggest that the reduction in the length of
stay is not a single trend, but instead the outcome of a
complex process of evolution. Should they continue,
some of these latent trends (such as more frequent yearly
trips by European tourists) may increase the reduction
in the average length of stay, with subsequent repercus-
sions for tourist destinations. In contrast, some chan-
ging tourist characteristics might help to counteract
the drop in the length of stay. This might be the case,
for instance, with the ageing tourist population or the
presence of tourists with a certain degree of destination
loyalty, who repeat visits to a certain place. Offering a
better-quality tourist product could also help to halt
this trend.
According to the TES, quality (i.e. quality construed
as the quality of the hotel and its surroundings) plays a
particularly important role in their choice of the
Balearics as a destination. Upgrading the quality of
tourist products might therefore be another way
to counteract the drop in the length of stay. Related
to quality, the group of tourists with the highest
expenditure is also the group most likely to choose a
longer stay.
From the results obtained in this study, it can be
inferred that it would be benecial for the Balearic
Islands to promote tourist segments that are loyal to the
destination, motivated by the quality of its beaches and
hotels. Thus, tourist policies aimed at fostering destina-
tion loyalty would encourage a longer average length of
stay, in addition to other benets. The tourist segment
that travels the least, making just one yearly trip, might
also help arrest the trend.
Special consideration must be given to the effect that
price has on the length of stay. It should be taken into
account that a priori price changes will not necessarily
just bring about a reduction in the length of stay. An
increase in price might mean that an alternative set of
holiday characteristics are chosen, even the destination
itself. In this sense, the estimated price elasticity
presented here underestimates the total effect prices
have on the tourism demand, merely estimating the
effect on the length of stay assuming that the remaining
holiday characteristics are not modied, including the
choice of destination.
6. Conclusions
The length of time a tourist decides to stay at a
holiday destination is a basic characteristic of the
holiday. It has important repercussions for tourist
destinations, since it affects their occupancy rates and
nal income. The discussion in this study is based on
evidence of a strong trend towards shorter holiday
stays. Microdata from one of the Mediterraneans
leading sun-and-sand destinations have highlighted the
role that a tourists sociodemographic characteristics
might play, in addition to purely economic factors, in
determining a chosen length of holiday. Because it is
partly a consequence of new consumer characteristics
and behaviour patterns, this trend cannot easily be
reversed. Nonetheless, the analysis has shown that some
tourist segments are less sensitive to this trend. Although
a decision to promote these tourist segments cannot
be taken purely on the basis of trends in tourist lengths
of stay, the results of the study point towards the
need to incorporate this variable in the design of tourism
policies.
An important feature of the length of stay is its
bimodal distribution. Nowadays most holidays in
European sun-and-sand destinations, whether they
are package holidays or not, are booked for periods of
1 or 2 weeks. Nevertheless, increasing numbers of
holidays are being offered for more exible time
periods. The effect a more exible length of stay
might have on sun-and-sand destinations is unknown.
It would almost certainly lead to a frequency reduction
in 1- or 2-week holidays options. This greater exibility
could be detrimental to holiday destinations by gen-
erating a rise in 4- or 5-day stays. This uncertainty once
again highlights how important it is to analyse the
tourism demand from the perspective of tourist length
of stay.
The effect that prices might exert on a tourist
destinations capacity to compete has received certain
attention in the literature (Dwyer, Forsyth, & Rao,
2000). In econometric prediction models, price elasti-
cities have been estimated using aggregate time series
data (see Song & Witt, 2000). In these models, the
tourism demand has been dened in different ways,
based on variables such as the number of tourists, the
total number of nights stay or even the countrys
income from tourism. The main drawback to this kind
of study is that aggregate data hinder the detection of
the microeconomic determinants of the demand.
In this study, the analysis of microdata has empha-
sized the inuence of tourists sociodemographic char-
acteristics on the length of stay. Further, the analysis has
shown the sensitivity of the length of stay to price
changes. Thus, increases in the price of a holiday might
not necessarily put tourists off a trip, but induce them to
shorten their length of stay. As a consequence, when
price elasticities are estimated using demand models
based on tourist numbers, the nal effect of price
variations on the demand are underestimated, since
the importance a reduction in the length of stay might
have is ignored.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
6.1. The implications for destination marketing
For a destination, one of the most relevant character-
istics of a trip is the length of stay, rstly because of its
importance in determining revenue from tourism.
Income from tourism might well be falling in many
destinations despite the increase in visitor arrivals, due
to a reduction in the length of stay. In this sense,
commercial strategies and those directed at attracting
tourists should focus on encouraging a longer length of
stay. Secondly, the length of stay is important because
its shortening affects not only earnings. While a
destination might continue to receive growing numbers
of tourists, the occupancy rates of hotels and tourist
accommodation centres could well level out or fall. In
order to maintain the same occupancy gures, destina-
tions are forced to attract higher numbers of visitors.
This is likely to imply greater pressure on the tourist
area as a whole (in terms of infrastructure, the
environment etc.) and on the management of tourist
accommodation. One possible undesired knock-on
effect of a shorter length of stay might be a more
seasonal demand, because with shorter stays, a greater
number of tourists can visit the destination during peak
weeks of the high season.
Given the trend towards shorter stays, tourist
destinations are faced with various possibilities. They
can try to maintain their income levels, attracting
greater numbers of tourists, or they can accept the
reduction in income and maintain the same number of
visitors. In a framework of high competition, difculty
in attracting higher tourist numbers and the costs and
negative externalities that this can entail might make the
second scenario more likely. A third alternative is to
design tourism policies aimed at promoting a longer
length of stay. This could be achieved through
commercial price policies or marketing campaigns
aimed at attracting tourist segments whose longer length
of stay guarantees higher earnings. The results obtained
in this study show that there are segments of demand
which are less sensitive to this downward trend in the
length of stay and that these policies are therefore
feasible.
6.2. Future research
The information used in our analysis was compiled in
one single destination. To generalize some of the
conclusions that were reached, data must be analysed
for other tourist destinations. Nonetheless, we believe
that it could be more fruitful to gather information from
the countries of origin, particularly data associated with
the role that the length of stay plays in the planning of a
trip. From the authors viewpoint, there are two issues
of special interest. The rst is the role that time
constraints play in the frequency of holiday trips and
1353
choice of destination. The second is the possible
existence of substitution effects among the character-
istics of the trip. Our model assumes that a length of stay
is chosen conditional on the remaining characteristics
of the trip. Nevertheless, a priori, the effect of price
variations on the stay might not just imply a reduction
in its length, but a different choice of holiday
characteristics altogether.
The logit model used in this analysis is justied by the
strong bimodal nature of the distribution of the length
of stay, which makes the use of other statistic models
(linear regression or count data models) inappropriate.
To estimate the model, the length of stay variable was
converted into a discrete one. The obtained results were
robust to different segmentation alternatives. From a
statistical point of view, however, using techniques that
take into account the existence of multiple modes in the
endogenous variable might help to reduce the arbitrari-
ness of partition.
Models of tourism consumption systems (Woodside
& King, 2001) suggest that the whole components of a
holiday plan are interdependent, due to differing travel
styles (Becken & Gnoth, 2004; Woodside & Dubelaar,
2002). However, apart from the exceptions cited in our
review of literature, insufcient attention has been given
to the length of stay in decision models. Analyses of
decision-making processes and descriptions of tourism
typologies and travel styles should give emphasis to this
variable.
Acknowledgement
Financial support from SEC2002-01512 project is
gratefully acknowledged.
References
Agarwal, V. B., & Yochum, G. R. (1999). Tourist spending and the
race of visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 38(2), 173176.
Becken, S., & Gnoth, J. (2004). Tourist consumption systems among
overseas visitors: Reporting on American, German, and Australian
visitors to New Zealand. Tourism Management, 25, 375385.
Bell, F. W., & Leeworthy, V. R. (1990). Recreational demand by
tourists for Saltwater Beach Days. Journal of Environmental and
Management, 18(3), 189205.
Ben-Akiva, M., & Lerman, S. R. (1989). Discrete choice analysis.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Berman, M. D., & Kim, H-J. (1999). Endogenous on-site time in the
recreation demand model. Land Economics, 75(4), 603619.
Bockstael, N. E., Strand, I. E., & Hanemann, W. M. (1987). Time and
the recreation demand model. American Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 55(2), 246249.
Cannon, T. F., & Ford, J. (2002). Relationship of demographic and
trip characteristics to visitor spending: An analysis of sports travel
visitors across time. Tourism Economics, 8(3), 263271.
Conselleria de Turisme. (2003). El turisme a les Illes Balears. Dades
Informatives, any 2002. Palma.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1354 J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355
Crouch, G. I. (1994). A meta-analysis of tourism demand. Annals of
Tourism Research, 22(1), 103118.
Crouch, G. I., & Louviere, J. J. (2000). A review of choice modelling
research in tourism, hospitality, and leisure. Tourism Analysis, 5,
97104.
Deaton, A. (1998). The analysis of household surveys. A microecono-
metric approach to development policy. Washington, DC: World
Bank, The John Hopkins University Press.
Deaton, A. S., & Muellbauer, J. (1980a). An almost ideal demand
system. American Economic Review, 70(3), 312326.
Deaton, A. S., & Muellbauer, J. (1980b). Economics and consumer
behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dellaert, B., Ettema, D. F., & Lindh, C. (1998). Multi-faceted tourist
travel decisions: A constraint-based conceptual framework to
describe tourists sequential choices of travel components. Tourism
Management, 19(4), 313320.
Divisekera, S. (2003). A model of demand for international tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1), 3149.
Dritsakis, N. (2004). Cointegration analysis of German and British
tourism demand for Greece. Tourism Management, 25, 111119.
Dubin, J. A., & McFadden, D. L. (1984). An econometric analysis of
residential electric appliance holdings and consumption. Econome-
trica, 52(2), 345362.
Durbarry, R., & Sinclair, M. T. (2003). Market shares analysis. The
case of French tourism demand. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4),
927941.
Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., & Rao, P. (2000). The price competitiveness of
travel and tourism: A comparison of 19 destinations. Tourism
Management, 21, 922.
European Commission. (2002). Tourism statisticsYearbook. Data
1990, 1995, 1997 2000. Luxembourg: Eurostat.
Eymann, A., & Ronning, G. (1997). Microeconometric models of
tourists destination choice. Regional Science and Urban Economics,
27, 735761.
Fleischer, A., & Pizam, A. (2002). Tourism constraints among Israeli
Seniors. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 106123.
Gronau, R. (1970). The effect of travelling time on the demand for
passenger transportation. The Journal of Political Economy, 78(3),
377394.
Haab, T. C., & Hicks, R. L. (1997). Accounting for choice set
endogeneity in random utility models of recreation demand.
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 34, 127147.
Han, Z., Durbarry, R., & Sinclair, M. T. (2005). Modelling US tourism
demand for European destinations. Tourism Management, forth-
coming. Available online at www.sciencedirect.com.
Hanemann, W. M. (1984). Discrete/continuous models of consumer
demand. Econometrica, 52(3), 541561.
Heckman, J. J. (2001). Micro data, heterogeneity, and the evaluation
of public policy: Nobel lecture. Journal of Political Economy,
109(4), 673748.
Huybers, T. (2003a). Domestic tourism destination choicesA choice
modelling analysis. International Journal of Tourism Research, 5,
445459.
Huybers, T. (2003b). Modelling short-break holiday destination
choices. Tourism Economics, 9(4), 389405.
Huybers, T., & Bennett, J. (2000). Impact of the environment on
holiday destination choices of prospective UK tourists: Implica-
tions for Tropical North Queensland. Tourism Economics, 6(1),
2146.
Huybers, T., & Bennett, J. (2003). Environmental management and the
competitiveness of nature-based tourism destinations. Environmen-
tal and Resource Economics, 24, 213233.
INE-National Institute for Statistics. (2003). Cifras INE. Boletn
Informativo del INE, mayo.
Kulendran, N., & Witt, S. F. (2001). Cointegration versus least squares
regression. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(2), 291311.
Larson, D. M. (1993). Joint recreation choices and implied values of
time. Land Economics, 69(3), 270286.
Larson, D. M., & Shaikh, S. L. (2001). Empirical specication
requirements for two-constraint models of recreation choice.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83(2), 428440.
Li, G., Song, H., & Witt, S. F. (2004). Modelling tourism demand:
A dynamic linear AIDS approach. Journal of Travel Research,
43(November), 141150.
Lim, C. (1997). An econometric classication and review of interna-
tional tourism demand models. Tourism Economics, 3, 6981.
Mak, J., Moncur, J., & Yonamine, D. (1977). Determinants of visitor
expenditures and visitor lenght of stay: A cross-section analysis of
US visitors to Hawaii. Journal of Travel Research, 15, 58.
Mak, J., & Nishimura, E. (1979). The economics of a hotel room tax.
Journal of Travel Research, 17, 26.
Manski, C. (1977). The structure of random utility models. Theory and
Decision, 8, 229254.
McConell, K. E. (1992). On-site time in the demand for recreation.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74(November),
918925.
McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice
behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp.
105142). New York: Academic Press.
McFadden, D. (1981). Econometric models of probabilistic choice. In
C. Manski, & D. McFadden (Eds.), Structural analysis of discrete
data (pp. 198272). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Morey, E. R., Rowe, R. D., & Watson, M. (1993). A repeated nested
logit model of Atlantic salmon shing. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics, 75(August), 578592.
Morgan, M. (1991). Dressing up to survive. Marketing Majorca anew.
Tourism Management, 12(1), 1520.
Mules, T. (1998). Decomposition of Australian tourist expenditure.
Tourism Management, 19(3), 267271.
Nogawa, H., Yamaguchi, Y., & Hagi, Y. (1996). An empirical research
study on Japanese sport tourism in Sport-for-All events: Case
studies of a single-night event and a multiple night event. Journal of
Travel Research, 35(2), 4654.
Oppermann, M. (1995). Travel life cycle. Annals of Tourism Research,
22(3), 535552.
Oppermann, M. (1997). First-time and repeat visitors to New Zealand.
Tourism Management, 18, 177181.
Papatheodorou, A. (2003). Modelling tourism development:
A synthetic approach. Tourism Economics, 9(4), 407430.
Pollak, R. A. (1969). Conditional demand functions and consumption
theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 83(1), 6078.
Pollak, R. A. (1971). Conditional demand functions and the
implications of separable utility. Southern Economic Journal, 37,
423433.
Seaton, A. V., & Palmer, C. (1997). Understanding VFR tourism
behaviour: The rst ve years of the United Kingdom tourism
survey. Tourism Management, 1(6), 345355.
Shaw, W. D., & Feather, P. (1999). Possibilities for including the
opportunity cost of time in recreation demand systems. Land
Economics, 75(4), 592602.
Shaw, W. D., & Ozog, M. T. (1999). Modeling overnight recreation
trip choice: Application of a repeated nested multinomial
logit model. Environmental and Resource Economics, 13,
397414.
Song, H., & Witt, S. F. (2000). Tourism demand modelling and
forecasting: Modern econometric approaches. Oxford: Pergamon.
Song, H., & Witt, S. F. (2005). Forecasting international tourist ows
to Macau. Tourism Management, forthcoming. Available online at
www.sciencedirect.com
Spotts, D. M., & Mahoney, E. M. (1991). Segmenting visitors to a
destination region based on the volume of their expenditures.
Journal of Travel Research, 29(4), 2431.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Alegre, L. Pou / Tourism Management 27 (2006) 13431355 1355

Sung, H. H., Morrison, A. M., Hong, G.-S., & OLeary, J. T. (2001).
The effects of household and trip characteristics on trip types:
A consumer behavioural approach for segmenting the US domestic
leisure travel market. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
25(1), 4668.
Taylor, D. T., Fletcher, R. R., & Clabaugh, T. (1993). A comparison
of characteristics, regional expenditures, and economic impact of
visitors to historical sites with other recreational visitors. Journal of
Travel Research, 32(1), 3035.
Tourism Intelligence International. (2000a). How Germans Will Travel
2005, Bielefeld.
Tourism Intelligence International. (2000b). How British Will Travel
2005, Bielefeld.
Van Limburg, B. (1997). Overnight tourism in Amsterdam
19821993A forecasting approach. Tourism Management,
18(7), 465468 (Research Note).
Witt, S. F., & Witt, C. A. (1995). Forecasting tourism demand:
A review of empirical research. International Journal of Forecasting,
11, 447475.
Woodside, A. G., & Dubelaar, C. (2002). A general theory of
tourism consumption systems: A conceptual framework and
an empirical exploration. Journal of Travel Research, 41,
120132.
Woodside, A. G., & King, R. (2001). An updated model of travel and
tourism purchaseconsumption systems. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 10(1), 326.