سنجش جایگاه کشورهای اسلامی از نظر شاخص های رقابت‌پذیری جهانی سفر و گردشگری با استفاده تکنیک ماباک (MABAC)

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی برنامه ریزی منطقه ای

مجید اکبری ¹ (پژوهشگر دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.)
وحید بوستان احمدی ² (کارشناسی ارشد مهندسی عمران- مهندسی آب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد لارستان، ایران.)
معصومه انصاری ³ (دانشجو دکتری)
وحید سهرابی ⁴ (کارشناسی ارشد مهندسی عمران- مهندسی آب دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد لارستان، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1398/10/11 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/06/12 تاریخ انتشار : 1401/02/01

کلید واژه: گردشگری, رقابت‌پذیری, کشورهای اسلامی, رقابت‌پذیری سفر و گردشگری, تکنیک ماباک,

چکیده مقاله :

ا
ارزیابی و درک مفهوم رقابتیگردشگریجهانی یک کشور پیش‌نیاز کلیدی برای سیاست­گذاران و چالشی قابل‌توجه برای محققان در فرآیند تصمیم‌گیری است. شاخص رقابت‌پذیری سفر و گردشگری (TTCI)مجموعه‌ای از عوامل و سیاست‌ها را اندازه‌گیری می‌کند که توسعه پایدار بخش سفر و گردشگری را ممکن می‌سازد، و این به نوبه خود به توسعه و رقابت‌پذیری یک کشور کمک می‌کند. در این بین کشورهای اسلامی به دلیل برخورداری از موقعیت­های متنوع جغرافیایی، پراکندگی و توزیع جمعیتی در اقصی نقاط جهان و قاره­ها و تنوع و گستردگی شرایط اقلیمی، و همچنین غنای فرهنگی از جایگاه و ظرفیت بالقوه بالایی در گردشگری داخلی و بین­المللی برخوردارند. در این امتداد این مقاله با هدف سنجش و تعیین جایگاه کشورهای اسلامی از منظر شاخص­های 14 گانه رقابت­پذیری سفر و گردشگری طی دوره زمانی 2015 تا 2019 با استفاده از مدل ماباک و با تاکید بر کشور ایران انجام گرفته است. نوع تحقیق کاربردی و روش آن توصیفی- تحلیلی است. برای تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات از مدل­های کمی آنتروپی شانون و از جدیدترین تکنیک تصمیم­گیری چند معیاره ماباک (MABAC) استفاده گردید. نتایج این پژوهش برای کشورهای مورد مطالعه در سال­ 2015 نشان داد کشورهای امارات متحده عربی، مالزی و ترکیه به ترتیب با میزان امتیاز ماباک (416/0)، (373/0) و  (333/0) در رتبه اول تا سوم، در سال 2017 مجدد این سه کشور به ترتیب با میزان امتیاز ماباک (417/0)، (389/0) و (342/0) در رتبه اول تا سوم، و برای سال 2019 کشورهای مالزی، امارات متحده عربی و ترکیه به ترتیب با میزان امتیاز ماباک (398/0)، (375/0) و  (374/0) رتبه­های اول تا سوم را به خود اختصاص داده بودند. کشور ایران نیز طی سال­های 2015-2017-2019 به ترتیب با میزان امتیاز ماباک (132/0)، (140/0) و  (078/0) در جایگاه پانزدهم، یازدهم و دوازدهم قرار گرفته بود. اصلی­ترین مانع بر سر راه صنعت گردشگری در اکثر کشورهای اسلامی مساله امنیت و بسته بودن کشورها بوده که از رسیدن به رشد بالاتر جلوگیری کرده است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

          Assessing and understanding the competitive concept of global tourism in a country is a key prerequisite for policymakers and a significant challenge for researchers in the decision-making process. The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index (TTCI) measures a set of factors and policies that enable the sustainable development of the travel and tourism sector, which in turn contributes to a country's development and competitiveness. In the meantime, Islamic countries due to their diverse geographical locations, dispersion and distribution of population in all parts of the world and continents, and the diversity and breadth of climatic conditions, as well as cultural richness of high status and potential in domestic and international tourism. Internationally enjoy. In this regard, this article has been done with the aim of measuring and determining the position of Islamic countries in terms of 14 indicators of travel and tourism competitiveness during the period 2015 to 2019 using the Mabak model and emphasizing Iran. The type of applied research and its method is descriptive-analytical. Shannon quantitative entropy models and the latest MABAC multi-criteria decision making technique (MABAC) were used to analyze the data. The results of this study for the countries studied in 2015 showed that the countries of the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia and Turkey ranked first to third with Mabak (0.416), (0.373) and (0.333) points, respectively. In 2017, the three countries again ranked first to third with the points of Mabak (0.417), (0.389) and (0.342), respectively, and for 2019, Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey, respectively. With Mobak score (0.398), (0.375) and (0.374), they were in the first to third ranks. Iran was also in the 15th, 11th and 12th place during the years 2015-2017-2019 with the amount of Mabak (0.132), (0.140) and (0.078) points, respectively. The main obstacle to the tourism industry in most Islamic countries is the security and closure of countries, which has prevented higher growth.
Extended Abstract
Introduction:
         in recent years, competition has an impact on sustainable development of industry, travel and tourism and is one of the most important concerns of business and activity in today's dynamic and competitive environment. The concept of global competition has become very popular in the analysis of tourism performance in the national economies. The assessment and understanding of the competitive concept of global tourism is a key prerequisite for policymakers and a significant challenge to scholars in the decision - making process. during the last few decades, significant development has been made in the tourism industry, particularly international tourism. tourism is one of the most important industries around the world and plays a pivotal role in the development and competition of many regions. However, tourism not only creates economic benefits, but also brings socio - cultural achievements that have contributed to greater competitiveness .the competitiveness of tourism can lead to the growth of competitive power, maintaining and increasing market share, resulting in the growth of this sector and consequently national welfare.
Methodology:
       according to the objectives of the research and the components of the study, the type of research is applied and its method is descriptive - analytic. the geographic territory of the study is 36 islamic countries based on existing data for 2015 - 2019. the data collection tool for investigating the indices of travel and tourism competitiveness is in the form of three sub - selected indices (A - B - C)and 14 sub - criteria. to analyze the data from quantitative models, including shannon entropy model, and multi - criteria decision making method (MABAK)has been used. the proposed method is a multi - criteria decision - making technique which is used to rank the options in multi - criteria decision - making models. in this method, the aim of weighting is sometimes to weighting the research factors and sometimes the ranking of the research methods.
Findings:
        After analyzing the data collected for the countries under study for 2015, the UAE, Malaysia and Turkey showed the highest (0.416), (0.373) and (0.333) points, respectively. Ranked first to third, in 2017 the UAE, Malaysia and Turkey again ranked first with MABAC (0.417), (0.389) and (0.342) respectively, and for the year 2019 Malaysia, UAE and Turkey ranked first to third with scores of MABAC (0.398), (0.375) and (0.374) respectively. Also, in terms of travel and tourism competitiveness statistics for 2019, Islamic countries rank third in the world in terms of improving competitiveness compared to the previous period. Iran also ranked 15th, 11th and 12th in the 2015-2017-2019, respectively, with MABAC (0.132), (0/140) and (0.078) points respectively. It is not a good place for its capacity and potential.
Conclusion:
         Travel and tourism industry has been growing at a faster pace than the global economy, and this sector has proven to be one of the main drivers of economic growth in the past decades. the aim of the index of travel and tourism is to provide a comprehensive strategic tool to measure and control factors and policies that are considered for the development of travel and tourism in different countries. a total of 14 main indices investigated in the report, iran as well as the majority of islamic countries in terms of index of competitiveness, and in addition to the worst performance of iran in indices of 14, is related to the business environment with the rank of 121. international openness, readiness of information and communication technology (ICT), the importance of travel and tourism and sustainable environment are other indices of undesirable performance in the field of travel and tourism competitiveness. in the end, what is clear is the growth and development of the country tourism industry in need of balanced development in all aspects of competitiveness, and the governments and policy makers need to take their steps to achieve sustainable growth in all dimensions.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. 1.       Abreu-Novais, M., Ruhanen, L., & Arcodia, C. (2018). Destination competitiveness: Aphenomenographic study. Tourism Management, 64, pp: 324–334.


2. 2.       Akbari, M., Jafari Mehrabadi, M., Taleshi Anbouhi, M., Sobhani, N. (2016). Measuring the Relative Efficiency of the Cities of East Azarbaijan Province in Tourism Infrastructures Part by Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), Journal Geography and Development, Vol, 14, No, 45, pp: 197-220.


3. 3.       Ali Akbari, E., Akbari, M., Ansari, M., Buostan Ahmadi, V. (2019): Measurement and analysis of competitiveness indicators in West Asian countries with emphasis on Iran, Regional Planning, Vol, 9, No. 33, pp: 1-14.


4. 4.       Allahdadi, F. (2011). Factors Contribute to Underdevelopment ofTourism Industry in Iran.Journal of American Science, Vol. 7(12).


5. 5.       Bagheri, M., Shojaei, P., & Kiani, Mehrdad (2016). Presenting a Structural Interpretive Model of Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Indicators (Case Study: Fars Province), Tourism Planning and Development, Fifth Vol, No. 18, pp. 137-157.


6. 6.        Balan, D., Balaure, V. Veghes, C. (2009): Travel and Tourism Competitiveness of theworld's top Tourism Destination: An exploratory assessment.


7. 7.       Boroumand, B., Kazemi, A., & Ranjbarian, B. (2015). Development of Indigenous Model for Measuring Tourism Competitiveness of Iranian Tourism Destinations, Quarterly Journal of Modern Marketing Research, Vol, 8, No. 2, , pp: 122-105 .


8. 8.       Cole, S., Razak. V. (2009). Tourism as future.Futures, Vol. 41, No.(6), pp:335-345.


9. 9.       Crouch, G. (2007). Measuring tourism competitiveness: research, theory and theWEF index. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Vol. 2, Issue (3), pp: 146-154.


10. 10.    Crouch, G. I. (2011). Destination competitiveness: An analysis of determinant attributes.Journal of Travel Research, 50(1), pp:27–45.


11. 11.    Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., & Dwyer, W. (2010). Tourism Economies and Policy. Bristol: Channel View Publications.


12. 12.    Ebrahimi, M., Yavari Gohar, F., & Hassan Kashi, M. (2019). "Prioritization of Iran's Competitiveness Factors in Halal Tourism", Quarterly Journal of Tourism Planning and Development, Vol 8, No. 28, pp. 113- 137.


13. 13.    Ekin, Y., Akbulut. O. (2015). Tourism destination competitiveness: The case of Dalyan–Turkey. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, Vol. 3, pp: 60-66.


14. 14.    Fernándezj, D. b. (2017). Reinterpreting the World Economic Forum's global tourism competitiveness index. Tourism Management Perspectives (20), pp:131–140


15. 15.    Hassani, A., & Rahimzadeh, M. (2019). Futurism of the tourism industry in Tehran, Urban Tourism Quarterly, Vol, 6, No. 1, pp. 135-148.


16. 16.    Henderson, A., Avis, B., Hong Kan, T. )2018). Testing discontinuous innovations in the tourism industry: The case of scenic airship services. Tourism Management, Vol, 66,  pp:167-179


17. 17.    Hieu, V. M., Rasovska, I, (2017): Craft villages and tourism development, a case study in Phu Quocisland of Vietnam. Management, Vol, 21 No 1, pp: 223-236.


18. 18.    Islami, S. (2014). Measurement of the social welfare index over the past four decades in urban areas of the country. Economic Journal, Nos, 5 ,6 August and September 2014,pp: 25-28.


19. 19.    Jani, S. (2011). Factors Affecting Competitiveness in Iran and Southwest Asian Countries, Quarterly Journal of Economic Research and Policy, Vol, 19, No. 58, pp: 159-190.


20. 20.    Krstić, B., Radivojević, V., Stanišić, T. (2017). Tourism industry and national competitiveness:a sub-sAHARan AFRICA countriesperspective. Ecohomnka,  Vol, 63, january-march 2017, № 1, pp: 1-17


21. 21.    Lee, C., King, B. (2009). A determination of destination competitiveness for Taiwan's hot springs tourism sector using the Delphi technique. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 15,pp:  243-257.


22. 22.     Maghsoudi, M., & Arab, M. (2016). Study of tourism policy in Islamic countries, with emphasis on Iran, Turkey and Malaysia, Journal World Policy Quarterly, Vol, 5, No. 1, pp: 117-207.


23. 23.    Marais, M., Plessis, E., Saayman, M. (2017). A review on criticalsuccess factors in tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol, 13, pp: 1-12.


24. 24.    Mazanec, J. A., Wöber, K., & Zins, A. H. (2007). Tourism destination competitiveness:From definition to explanation? Journal of Travel Research, 46, pp:86–95.


25. 25.    Pitelis,C. N. (2011). the competitive Advantage and Catching-up of National: A New framework and  the role of  FDI . Clusters and public policy, In P, Nijkamp, & I Siedschlag, Innovation Growth and competitiveness: Dynamic Regions in the knowledge- Based world Economy, pp: 281-303.


26. 26.    Salinas Fernández, J. A., Serdeira Azevedo, P., Martín Martín, J. M., & Rodríguez Martín, J. A. (2020). Determinants of tourism destination competitiveness in the countries most visited by international tourists: Proposal of a synthetic index. Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol, 33, pp:1-13.


27. 27.    Schwab, k., Martin, C., Samans, R., Moavenzadeh, J., Drzeniek, M. (2015). The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report. world Economic Fourm.


28. 28.    Schwab,k, Martin,c, Samans, R., Moavenzadeh,j, Drzeniek, M. (2019). The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report. world Economic Fourm.


29. 29.    Yeoman, I. (2012). 2050 – Tomorrow’s tourism. Bristol: Channel View Publications.


30. 30.    Zarouki, S., & Oliaei Nasab, M. (2017). Study of Factors Affecting Tourism Growth with Emphasis on Applied Destination Competitiveness from Dynamic Panel Data Estimator and GMM-Sys Estimator", Quarterly Journal of Tourism Planning and Development, Vol, 6, No. 23, pp: 77-104.