Tourism performance evaluation of mediterranean countries by using multi-criteria decision-making method

Abstract

Tourism revenues are one of the most important sources of income in Mediterranean countries. Thereby Mediterranean countries are rivals to each other and therefore identifying relative tourism performance provides significant information both for government agencies and managers in the tourism industry in these countries. Since performance is a multidimensional phenomenon, performance evaluation is required to consider several factors. In this context, a solution can be provided with multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods. Given the multidimensional structure of the tourism performance, the current study aims to analyze relative performances of 14 Mediterranean countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Malta, Morocco, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey) via TOPSIS (The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) method. Within the scope of the analyses, the years 2018 and 2019 were covered as a basis. In the analysis, number of arrivals, tourism expenditure in the country (US$), accommodation, number of departures, tourism expenditure in other countries (US$), number of establishments, the average length of stay, net occupancy rate are used as criteria and countries relative rankings are obtained. According to the results, there have been changes in the rankings of the countries in these years. Spain, Greece, Egypt, and Italy took their places in the top five in both years, while France was in the 5th place in 2018, dropping three places in 2019 to take its place in the 8th place. Moreover, Turkey failed to find a place in the top five in 2018 but ranked 4th in 2019. It is essential to investigate the macroeconomic reasons for this progress made by Turkey. Furthermore, it is determined no large gaps between the relative proximities values (C*) of the countries. Merely, for the years 2018 and 2019 a significant difference was identified between the C* values of Spain (1st place) and Israel (14th place) (respectively 0.61, 0.38; 0.62, 0.39). Finally, some limitations of the study are mentioned. In addition, recommendations are made to decision makers based on the findings.