Europe PMC
Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Europe PMC requires Javascript to function effectively.

Either your web browser doesn't support Javascript or it is currently turned off. In the latter case, please turn on Javascript support in your web browser and reload this page.

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Abstract 


This paper analyses, for the first time, potential convergence patterns of hotel revenues across provinces in China. Through the club clustering methodology, the analysis uses a unique dataset of all hotels across all Chinese provinces. The findings document that these hotel revenues follow a diverging pattern on a national level, while a converging pattern is identified across certain provinces, thus forming specific clubs. When the analysis is extended to identify potential drivers for such diverging or converging behavior, the new results illustrate the role of productivity trends, management strategies and tax policies as those factors that drive such patterns. The results could be of substantial value, primarily for tourism policymakers to further improve the current framework of the Chinese hotel industry to introduce practices and policies that will allow the industry to catch up with the global market.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11293-022-09745-6.

Free full text 


Logo of phenaturepgLink to Publisher's site
Atl Econ J. 2022; 50(1-2): 37–51.
Published online 2022 Jun 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-022-09745-6
PMCID: PMC9185133
PMID: 35702272

Hotel Revenue Convergence: Evidence Across Star Hotels in Chinese Provinces

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

Abstract

This paper analyses, for the first time, potential convergence patterns of hotel revenues across provinces in China. Through the club clustering methodology, the analysis uses a unique dataset of all hotels across all Chinese provinces. The findings document that these hotel revenues follow a diverging pattern on a national level, while a converging pattern is identified across certain provinces, thus forming specific clubs. When the analysis is extended to identify potential drivers for such diverging or converging behavior, the new results illustrate the role of productivity trends, management strategies and tax policies as those factors that drive such patterns. The results could be of substantial value, primarily for tourism policymakers to further improve the current framework of the Chinese hotel industry to introduce practices and policies that will allow the industry to catch up with the global market.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11293-022-09745-6.

Keywords: Hotel revenues, Convergence, Club clustering, Chinese provinces

Introduction

Firms’ revenues and profitability usually reflect investors’ expectations regarding potential growth patterns for these firms. Hence, to value such trends, researchers and practitioners must forecast them. This empirical paper explores how hotel revenues evolve and converge over time in the case of the Chinese star hotels across all the country’s provinces. This study touches on a main strand in the literature, the hypothesis of diminishing returns, according to which capital investment flows in the industry lead revenues and profit rates towards their average for the entire sector. Hence, sectors move towards an equilibrium, although the degree of dispersion may not be zero, provided that within a dynamic context, shocks keep hitting firms causing them to diverge.

There are usually macro or micro shocks, which may be industry- or firm-specific and have a substantial impact on revenues, such as research and innovation activities (Görzig & Gornig, 2013), heterogeneity in managerial capacity (Bloom et al., 2012), or industry- and firm-specific taxes (Dosi et al., 2015). Such shocks generate divergence away from a uniform equilibrium. The paper directly explores potential convergence within the Chinese hotel industry. The previous literature has mainly focused on the manufacturing (Nell & Thirlwall, 2017, 2018) and banking (Carbo & Fernandez, 2007; Weill, 2007, 2008) industries, with studies in the hotel industry being comparatively absent.

Moreover, the analysis is associated with the tourism market segmentation literature focusing on micro-level customer segmentation studies, based on individuals’ social demographic and behavioral features (Ernst & Dolnicar, 2018). The analysis is also related to macro-level segmentation studies that analyzed country-level segmentation patterns (Bijmolt et al., 2004), based on macro-level indicators, such as socio-economic, political, cultural, and geographic variables (Hassan & Craft, 2005).

The paper is also associated with the literature of market convergence (Polo Pena et al., 2013). According to this literature, there exist three major conceptual approaches for market segmentation: natural, reproducible, and constructive segmentation (Ernst & Dolnicar, 2018). In general, analysis of the tourism market appears to be an emerging topic in the tourism economics literature (Kourtzidis et al., 2018; Valadkhani & O'Mahony, 2018; Xie et al., 2018).

Over the last 15 years, China has extensively expanded the hotel industry through higher investments and stronger management skills (Gu et al., 2012). The country’s membership in the World Trade Organization, as well as the organization of certain mega events, such as the Beijing Olympics in 2008, the Shanghai World Expo in 2010, and the 16th Asian Games in Guangzhou in 2010, gave a substantial boost to the country’s hotel industry (Li et al., 2011). Along with the substantial increase in national income levels and the mobility of Chinese domestic tourists across Chinese provinces, multinational hotel group interests in investing in China have been substantially stimulated. Furthermore, the literature clearly indicates that China has great tourism potential, especially with respect to the hotel industry (Gross et al., 2013). Currently, star hotels number over 30,000 across all Chinese provinces and offer many services to stimulate domestic and international tourism mobility. After the previously mentioned mega events ended, current international and domestic investors substantially expanded hotel investments to all provinces across the country.

The empirical analysis is important primarily because potential convergence for revenues to their steady state will offer information content for certain stakeholders, such as investors in the hotel industry, hotel managers, workers, tourism local policymakers, and those agencies monitoring competition and tourism market integration. Any convergence patterns clearly illustrate that variation in hotel revenues across provinces can be attributed to certain factors and policies, apart from those such as geographical positioning and economic drivers, and potentially those associated with productivity, tax policies, and management strategies. Prior research provides no studies of convergence in revenue patterns in the Chinese hotel industry.

This paper extends the literature on convergence of corporate revenues and profits using the Phillips and Sul (2007) approach to examine the convergence behavior of hotel revenues across 31 Chinese provinces. Drawing upon the early works on positioning theory by Christaller (1955) and bid rent theory by Alonso (1960) with respect to the role of common factors in hotel revenues and profits, the Phillips and Sul (2007) method demonstrated that a time-varying multiple common factor structure can be embedded within a time-varying single common factor structure. Specific to hotel revenues, the Phillips and Sul (2007) approach captures the evolution of provincial hotel revenues in relation to their common component and an idiosyncratic component, both of which are time varying.

Although the literature offers alternative methods to test for convergence, such as the beta- and sigma-convergence and unit root methodologies, the analysis in this paper stays with the Phillips and Sul (2007) club modelling approach which offers several advantages. First, the beta-convergence methodological approach was negatively criticized by Pesaran (2006) who provided econometric evidence that these convergence methods refer to a homogeneous type of convergence, in the sense that convergence occurs only within an economy, area or region and not in a cross pattern. In contrast, the Phillips and Sul (2007) approach allows for different time paths, as well as individual heterogeneity, unlike the traditional convergence approaches that assume homogeneous characteristics. Moreover, according to Azariadis and Drazen (1990) and Hobijn and Frances (2000), if the variables under consideration converge, but the available data come from a time period of transitional dynamics, the unit-root tests may not catch the convergence pattern.

Second, this approach allows for the endogenous determination of convergence clubs. Third, unlike conventional unit root and cointegration tests, the Phillips and Sul (2007) approach does not impose any assumption concerning trend stationarity or stochastic non-stationarity, since this method is robust to heterogeneity and the stationarity properties of the variable in question.

In addition to exploring overall panel convergence, the analysis implements the convergence clustering algorithm to identify the presence of convergence clubs within the 31 provincial hotel revenues. Next, the analysis investigates the extent to which certain economic drivers can explain convergence clubs. The only published study similar to the current paper is the paper by Lin et al. (2019) who adopted the panel club convergence approach to analyzing global tourism market segmentation. More specifically, they empirically explored the convergence process of Turkish global tourism source markets over the period of 2001–2015, covering 81 markets. Their findings documented the presence of convergence clubs or segments, highlighting the importance of Asian source markets, and identified important implications for tourism organizations seeking to develop global marketing strategies.

The results of the current study reveal the absence of overall panel convergence across the revenues of 31 provincial star hotels. Instead, they show seven distinct convergence clubs. Similar to the hotel revenue evidence, the convergence findings document evidence for the number of stars characterizing each hotel, hotel size proxied by the number of rooms, revenues coming from room services (but not from restaurant services), the taxes they pay, and the room occupancy rate. In contrast, a different pattern was identified with the mechanism of labor productivity.

Methodology

Given that the goal of the paper is to explore the presence of different regional hotel revenue clubs converging to the steady state, the empirical analysis makes use of the Phillips and Sul (2007, 2009) club convergence procedure. Unlike other convergence tests which rely on unit root and cointegration tests, this particular method offers certain advantages versus other convergence methodological approaches, such as that no specific assumptions regarding the stationarity of the variables or the presence of common factors are required. Given the heterogeneity of the time series in the panel, the method identifies clubs (i.e., groups of regional hotels), each potentially converging towards a common club trend. The full panel is formed by N = 31 × 23,416 (Chinese provinces) and T = 9. The method uses a time-varying common factor, cpit, where:

cpit=δitμt.
1

cpit denotes the logarithm of hotel revenues of region i at time t and μit is a common hotel revenue factor (i.e., common trend component in the panel). δit describes a time-varying idiosyncratic component that captures both time and individual specific effects, implying the distance between cpit and the common factor, while μt, determines the common stochastic trend in the panel. To test the null hypothesis of convergence, Phillips and Sul (2007) propose the following semiparametric form for the loading coefficient δit, where:

δit=δi+σiξitL(t)t-α.
2

δi is fixed, ξit ~ iid(0,1) across hotel revenues of provinces i = 1, 2, …, N and which is weakly dependent over time t. σi illustrates an idiosyncratic scale parameter. L(t) displays a slowly-varying function of time, with L(t)  ∞ and t  ∞. This representation ensures that δit converges to δi. The null hypothesis of convergence can be written as: H0: δi = δ and αi  0, against the alternative hypothesis: H1: {δi = δ across all i and αi < 0}, or {δi  δ for some i and αi  0, or αi < 0}. Phillips and Sul (2007) employ the following quadratic distance measure, Ht, where

Ht=N-1((hit-1)2
3

and hit indicates the transition coefficient, defined as:

hit=(cpit)/(N-1cpit)=δit/(N-1δit).
4

Hotel revenue convergence occurs when hit  1 for all i as t  ∞. Following Phillips and Sul (2007), L(t) = logt in Eq. (2). The null hypothesis H0 above can be tested by estimating the following logt regression:

log(H1/Ht)-2log(logt)=a+γlogt+εt
5

for t = rT, rT+1, …, T, where r > 0 and r is the initiating sample fraction which usually influences the results from regression (5). Monte Carlo experiments from Phillips and Sul (2007) indicate that r [set membership] [0.2, 0.3] achieves satisfactory performance. For γ = 2a, the null hypothesis was tested through a one-sided test of γ  0, against γ < 0. The estimates of γ are based on heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent standard errors.

To identify convergence clubs in a panel of countries, Phillips and Sul (2007) developed a data-driven algorithm, which has the following five steps. Step 1 is ordering; arranging the panel members according to the last observation. Step 2 is core group formation; identification of a core club of provinces by sequential log(t) regressions, based on the k highest members (Step 1) with 2  k  N. The size of the group is determined by seeking the maximum convergence t-statistic, tk, with tk > 1.65. Step 3 is data sieving for club membership; addition of provinces to the core group (Step 2), one at a time, if the t-statistic associated with each new province is greater than zero. Step 4 is recursion and stopping formation; formation of a second convergence club by application of log(t) regression to the group of provinces not selected in Step 3, if they converge. If not, steps 1 to 3 are repeated to detect sub-convergence clusters. If no core group is found in step 2, these provinces display divergent behavior. Step 5 is club merger; merger of the clubs fulfilling the convergence, according to log(t) regression, of all pairs of subsequent clubs and across formed clubs until no further mergers meet the criteria.

Data

The empirical analysis of the paper makes use of all private star hotel revenue data in 31 Chinese provinces (23,416 hotels): Beijing (1,248), Tianjin (296), Hebei (514), Shaanxi (1,111), Inner Mongolia (305), Liaoning (482), Jilin (210), Heilongjiang (197), Shanghai (1,017), Jiangsu (1,208), Zhejiang (1,651), Anhui (680), Fujian (1,152), Jiangxi (684), Shandong (1,089), Henan (1,432), Hubei (919), Hunan (1,017), Guangdong (2,815), Guangxi (751), Hainan (327), Chongqing (494), Sichuan (1,344), Guizhou (776), Yunnan (717), Tibet (79), Gansu (388), Qinghai (113), Ningxia (69), and Xinjiang (331) obtained from the Statista (2020) database, with the number in parentheses indicating the number of hotel per province.

Hotel revenues are annual, spanning the period 2010 to 2018 and were considered only if they remained active over the period under study. Moreover, given that the Chinese provinces varied dramatically in terms of size, the revenue variable was standardized to make suitable comparisons. At the end of the empirical analysis, hotel revenues were also expressed in natural logarithms. Table Table11 reports summary statistics. Before the club convergence empirical analysis, the trend component of the star hotel revenues was obtained via the Hodrick and Prescott (1997) filter. Given that the analysis employs annual data, a smoothing parameter of 100 was used.

Table 1

Summary Statistics of Hotel Revenues Across Chinese Provinces:Time Period: 2010 to 2018

ProvincesMeanSDMinMaxMedian25%75%
Beijing0.590.680.340.730.540.490.64
Tianjin0.370.330.250.580.330.280.43
Hebei0.410.520.290.600.390.320.50
Shaanxi0.340.460.220.480.310.250.39
Inner Mongolia0.320.390.240.430.280.270.38
Liaoning0.400.350.320.510.370.350.45
Jilin0.350.510.240.480.330.280.40
Heilongjiang0.310.280.220.460.290.250.39
Shanghai0.540.630.390.700.530.440.62
Jiangsu0.570.680.420.740.540.480.63
Zhejiang0.580.520.460.700.560.490.64
Anhui0.400.470.300.580.360.330.46
Fujian0.550.510.460.720.500.490.61
Jiangxi0.400.520.320.560.380.350.48
Shandong0.490.400.350.640.450.380.55
Henan0.460.380.330.600.420.360.51
Hubei0.480.420.390.630.450.420.55
Hunan0.520.570.420.730.480.440.62
Guangdong0.620.430.510.810.570.540.69
Guangxi0.450.390.340.640.420.360.52
Hainan0.440.350.320.580.400.350.50
Chongqing0.410.420.310.530.370.350.47
Sichuan0.530.670.430.690.510.460.60
Guizhou0.420.360.310.550.390.340.48
Yunnan0.410.440.280.520.400.350.47
Tibet0.220.310.120.390.190.150.30
Shaanxi0.440.340.350.560.410.380.49
Gansu0.370.300.260.540.350.280.47
Qinghai0.210.170.140.390.180.160.29
Ningxia0.200.150.120.360.170140.30
Xinjiang0.390.180.290.590.380.320.51

Figures are in natural logs, while values are in millions of US dollars. 25% and 75% show the lower quartile, or first quartile (Q1), i.e., the value under which 25% of data are found, and the upper quartile, or third quartile (Q3), i.e., the value under which 75% of data found, respectively. Data source: Statista (2020). SD standard deviation

Empirical Analysis

Baseline Results

After normalizing the trend variables through a standardized z-score procedure, Table Table22 presents the convergence results for r = 0.3. Phillips and Sul (2007) suggested that r = 0.3 (with r as previously defined) is an efficient choice to provide valid results in terms of both size and power. The first row reports overall convergence, i.e., convergence across all 31 Chinese provinces. The coefficient estimate is γ=-0.184, with a t-statistic, tγ^=-47.456, and statistically significant at 1%, indicating rejection of the null hypothesis of overall convergence. Next, the analysis continues to determine whether club clusters can be identified. The new results highlight the presence of seven distinct clubs plus non-converging provinces. More specifically, Club 1 includes the provinces of Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning, with γ=-1.502 and tγ^=-0.459, indicating failure to reject the null hypothesis of convergence.

Table 2

Club Convergence of Hotel Revenues Across Chinese Provinces: 2010 to 2018

ClubNo. of provincesγtγ^speed of convergence:
=|γ^/2
Full Sample31–0.184***–47.456
Club 13–1.502–0.4590.751
Club 24–1.609–0.4480.805
Club 33–1.385–0.4770.693
Club 44–1.539–0.4600.770
Club 56–1.625–0.4890.813
Club 62–1.346–0.4660.673
Club 76–1.417–0.4480.709
Non-converging club3
Fisher exact test for independence: [0.00]

Provinces: Anhui(5), Beijing(2), Chongqing(4), Fujian(7), Gansu(3), Guangdong(7), Guangxi(6), Guizhou(5), Hainan(7), Hebei(2), Heilongjiang(1), Henan(5), Hubei(5), Hunan(5), Inner Mongolia(N), Jiangsu(7), Jiangxi(5), Jilin(1), Liaoning(1), Ningxia(3), Qinghai(3), Shaanxi(4), Shandong(2), Shanghai(7), Shanxi(4), Sichuan(4), Tianjin(2), Tibet(N), Xinjiang(N), Yunnan(6), Zhejiang(7), with the number in parenthesis indicating the club the province belongs, while N in the parenthesis indicates that the province is in the non-converging club. The method includes fixed effects. The critical value t0.05=-1.65156 across all cases. Data source: Statista (2020)

***p  0.01

Club 2 encompasses the provinces of Beijing, Hebei, Tianjin, and Shandong, with γ=-1.609 and tγ^=-0.448. Club 3 includes the provinces of Gansu, Ningxia, and Qinghai, with γ=-1.385 and tγ^=-0.477. Club 4 includes the provinces of Chongqing, Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Sichuan, with γ=-1.539 and tγ^=-0.460. Next, Club 5 includes the provinces of Anhui, Guizhou, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi, with γ=-1.625 and tγ^=-0.489. Club 6 has the provinces of Guangxi and Yunnan, with γ=-1.346 and tγ^=-0.466, while Club 7 includes the provinces of Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, with γ=-1.417 and tγ^=-0.448. Finally, the non-converging club rests with the provinces of Inner Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang. Moreover, the information shown on the table provides an examination of the speed of convergence, which highlights that Club 5 (0.813) has the fastest speed of convergence, followed by Club 2 (0.805). These two clubs show the strongest convergence toward hotel industry’s revenues, potentially implying that the hotels in these provinces respond relatively fast to highly intensive competitive conditions (Pervan et al., 2019).

Theoretical Explanations of the Divergence Results

According to the hypothesis of diminishing returns, capital investment flows rely on dynamic firms in the industry to bring revenues and profit rates towards the average for the entire sector. Thus, convergence in hotel revenues was expected. However, the results signify the absence of such convergence patterns. A potential explanation is found in the argument that although the Chinese hotel industry has experienced significant reforms and attracted substantial private investments, differences still persist across hotels that are in provinces that have attracted foreign hotels, intensifying the competition between the two groups and among provinces where the presence of foreign competition is probably minimal. This results in heterogeneity in terms of performance and in relevance to certain criteria, such as ownership, hotel size, star rating and profits (Li et al., 2006).

Moreover, heterogeneity could be also attributed to the experience the hotels have on the basis of pricing and marketing. Given that the majority of the hotels under consideration are state-dependent firms, their low-price policy leads to low profits, and thus, to the widening performance gap across them (Hsu et al., 2004; Yu & Gu, 2005). Furthermore, convergence cannot occur because the heterogeneity across the hotel industry is intensified by the presence of poor employee service quality (i.e., poor English language ability, poor communication skills) (Kim et al., 2006; Lu & Zhu, 2006).

Finally, another potential explanation for the lack of full convergence comes from the perspective of human resources management, such as difficulties in recruiting the best talents in this sectoral competitive environment (Heffernan et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2015). Then next analysis makes use of specific determinants from the hotel revenue literature to identify potential factors that substantially contributed to the lack of full convergence.

Club-merging Tests

Phillips and Sul (2007, 2009) also point out the presence of overestimated findings with respect to the true number of clubs. Therefore, club-merging tests were conducted to determine whether merging adjacent clubs fall into larger clubs. Table Table33 clearly documents that by rejecting the null hypothesis of merging, these tests provide no supporting evidence relevant to the merger of the respective convergence clubs.

Table 3

Merging Club Tests for Hotel Revenues: 2010 to 2018

Clubsγ^tγ^
Club 1 + Club 2–0.0686.69***
Club 2 + Club 3–0.072–7.14***
Club 3 + Club 4–0.059–6.58***
Club 4 + Club 5–0.073–7.69***
Club 5 + Club 6–0.060–6.82***
Club 6 + Club 7–0.075–7.86***

The critical value t0.05 t0.05=-1.65156. Data source: Statista (2020)

***p  0.01

Mechanisms of Revenues Convergence

This section attempts to explain the above convergence patterns identified by making use of certain mechanisms or drivers associated with the types of products and services provided by the Chinese hotel industry. The analysis follows the resource-based theoretical approach recommended by Jovanovic (1982) and Wernerfelt (1984). According to this approach, certain fundamental drivers of performance and success (e.g., profitability, revenues) of a certain firm rely on internal and external resources, as well as on unique capabilities, i.e., the size of the firm, quality of the employees, number of rooms, innovative methods of management, labor productivity, and general human resources (Ben Aissa & Goaied, 2016; Tan, 2017). The role of drivers in hotel revenues is similar to the operational and financial efficiency appoach, where certain factors seem to drive hotel revenues, such as occupancy rate, operational efficiency based on the type of offered services, and productivity (Chiu & Huang, 2011; Chen & Lin, 2012; Skuflic & Mlinaric, 2015).

Based on this discussion, the literature underlines the importance of a number of drivers that dictate the course of hotel revenues, such as the number of stars characterizing each hotel (Danziger et al., 2006; Tarí et al., 2010), the size of the hotel proxied by the number of rooms (Assaf & Cvelbar, 2010; Claver-Cortés et al., 2007, 2010), whether revenues come from rooms or restaurant services (Bertsimas & Shioda, 2003; Kimes, 2005; Kimes & Thompson, 2004), the taxes they pay (Durbarry & Sinclair, 2008; Gooroochum & Sinclair, 2005), labor productivity (Barros, 2005; Sigala, 2004), and the room occupancy rate, which provides the operational dimension of hotel revenues (Alleyne et al., 2006). Data on these individual variables or mechanisms were also obtained from Statista (2020).

Homogeneity Tests

Given that the Phillips and Sul convergence method is based on the presence of heterogeneity across the variables under consideration, the presence of heterogeneity through the Pesaran and Yamagata (2008) test was investigated. To explore the presence of heterogeneity before any application of the club clustering method across the potential drivers of hotel revenues, this part follows a two-step strategy. First a simple panel regression of hotel revenues was run against the control variables previously discussed. Next, the residuals from this regression, denoted as eit, were used in the second stage to estimate the dynamics of the revenues process within the 31-province group,

eit=ai+λei,t-1+σivit
6

where, within each hotel revenue group, λ was assumed to be homogeneous across the different hotel revenues. The goal is to test the validity of the hypothesis that λ = λi for all i in the group. The findings are reported in Table Table4.4. The p-values are 0.00, thus, rejecting the null hypothesis of slope homogeneity. In other words, the results clearly document that there is significant heterogeneity across the hotel revenues variables under study.

Table 4

Pesaran and Yamagata Homogeneity Test-Eq. (6): 2010 to 2018

Statistic:28.96
Normal approximation p-value:[0.00]
Bias-corrected bootstrap p-value:[0.00]
λ coefficient:0.527

Data source: Statista (2020)

Online Supplemental Appendix Tables 1 through 7 report the convergence results associated with these potential mechanisms. The findings document patterns similar to those reported in Table Table33 with respect to the mechanisms of the number of stars characterizing each hotel, the size of the hotel proxied by the number of rooms, revenues coming from room services (but not from restaurant services), the taxes they pay, and the room occupancy rate which provides the operational dimension of hotel revenues. A different pattern was identified with the mechanism of labor productivity.

Independence Tests

Moreover, the tables provide important information on whether the explored drivers play any role for their convergence into their clubs. This is accomplished through the Fisher’s exact test for independence (Fisher, 1934). Across all tables, the results clearly provide evidence that in all drivers the Fisher exact test for independence is rejected at the 1% significance level, implying that these drivers play a role in the convergence of hotel revenues into the clubs.

Drivers’ Contribution to Convergence: Evidence From Ordered Logit Analysis

To provide further solid evidence about the appropriateness of the drivers used to explain the convergence clubs in hotel revenues, next the clubs were considered as an ordinal variable. More specifically, hotel revenues, the dependent variable, represents the club to which the province belongs. It is possible to order and rank the clubs determined by the Phillips and Sul methodology. To this end, an ordered logit model was used (Fullerton & Xu, 2016) to evaluate the significance of the drivers determining the clubs as previously:

yi*=Xib+vi
7

where the dependent variable is an ordinal value from 1 to 7 in relevance to the convergence clubs, Xi proxies the set of drivers used previously, and i = 1, 2, …, 31 provinces. The vector b describes the regression coefficients. Table Table55 reports the estimated coefficients of the ordered logit model. The findings illustrate that the drivers of the number of stars, number of rooms, revenues from room and restaurant services, room occupancy rate, and labor productivity exert a positive effect on hotel revenues. In contrast, taxes have a negative impact on hotel revenues. The positive estimated coefficients indicate that a one-unit increase in these coefficients increases the likelihood of joining Club 1, moving from Clubs 2, …, 7, or Club 2 moving from Clubs 3, …, 7 and so on, with probabilities 0.436, 0.478, 0.413, 0.375, 0.401, and 0.568, respectively.

Table 5

Order Logit Estimates Across Hotel Revenue Determinants, Eq. (7): 2010 to 2018

VariablesCoefficientp-values
Number of stars0.436***0.00
Number of rooms0.478***0.00
Revenues from rooms0.413***0.01
Revenues from restaurants0.375**0.02
Room occupancy rate0.401***0.00
Hotel revenues taxes–0.352**0.03
Labor productivity0.568***0.01
Pseudo R2 = 0.73

Fixed effects are included. Data source: Statista (2020)

**p  0.05; ***p  0.01

In terms of taxes, the estimated coefficient highlights that a one-unit increase in taxes decreases the likelihood of joining Club 1, moving from Clubs 2, …, 7, or Club 2 moving from Clubs 3, …, 7 and so on, with probability -0.352. The findings are expected to provide certain challenges for both national and local Chinese policymakers in terms of tourism policies and strategies. For instance, local policies concerning the coordination of urban development and transportation construction are expected to provide a boost to the hotel industry through converging patterns of income across provinces characterized by strong income inequality.

In addition, national tax policies may also provide substantial assistance to the hotel industry across the country to narrow the gap in terms of net profits and in a sense decrease potential competitive disadvantages hotels experience in certain provinces. The lack of any convergence pattern in terms of labor productivity probably denotes deficiency issues in relation to the efficient management of human resources (Pine & Qi, 2004). This lack of convergence could also potentially indicate the inability of the hotel industry in certain provinces to find skilled human resources (Zhou et al., 2001).

Conclusion

For the first time in the relevant literature, this paper explored potential convergence patterns for hotel revenues across all 31 Chinese provinces through the club-clustering methodological approach and a unique hotel data set from 23,416 hotels. The empirical results highlighted that the Chinese hotel industry was not integrated in terms of revenues, but certain clubs were determined, mainly based on geographical proximity criteria. Furthermore, the analysis identified particular drivers of hotel revenues that could potentially explain divergent patterns, such as tourism management strategies, types of hotels and tax policies.

The results could have substantial policy implications and promote recommendations for certain stakeholders, such as hotel investors, tourists, regulators, local policymakers and mainly national tourism policymakers. Policy actions relevant to tourism strategies and policies appear to be needed to form national strategies and policies that will eventually increase the intensity of competition, measured by a higher speed of convergence towards long-run average revenues. Nevertheless, there is always the danger that the presence of unexpected shocks occurring in a national industry, such as during the recent pandemic crisis, might induce policy makers to adopt certain policy measures to deal with these crisis events by prioritizing other national (or local) goals, such as export activity and other trade issues, over competition, and thus introduce new barriers by insulating certain parts of the industry from competition.

In addition, the Covid-19 pandemic is expected to lead to a significant decline in hotel revenues, because of the contraction in demand caused by an economic downturn and lockdowns. Based on the analysis in this work, certain policies can help the hotel industry rebound, such as lower taxes and improvement of hotel management policies, which will lead to lower operational costs. Nevertheless, the impact of the pandemic, as well as the economic downturn on an individual province depends on the characteristics of the hotel industry in that province. Certain provinces (or even hotels within the same province) are expected to be more vulnerable to such conditions than others, depending on whether the drivers identified in the empirical analysis section follow or converge with respect to their mean value.

Given that consumer demands and expectations from the hotel industry change rapidly, they can increasingly highlight the need for hotels to develop strategies that are sufficient to be automatically adapted. Regional and national policymakers should explicitly consider strategies that promote the drivers typically responsible for hotel revenues divergence to converge. Designing such tourism strategies is extremely important for provinces whose economic growth is highly dependent upon resources from the tourism sector.

Finally, the results could be further validated either by expanding the set of determinants of profitability convergence or exploring the validity of the findings with datasets for different, mostly tourist, countries. Given that the findings are based entirely on a single methodological approach, robust alternative methodological approaches are needed to confirm the reported results.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Footnotes

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • Alleyne P, Doherty L, Greenidge D. Approaches to HRM in the Barbados hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2006;18(1):94–109. 10.1108/09596110610646655. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Alonso W. A theory of the urban land market. Papers in Regional Science. 1960;6(1):149–157. 10.1111/j.1435-5597.1960.tb01710.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Assaf A, Cvelbar LK. The performance of the Slovenian hotel industry: Evaluation post-privatisation. International Journal of Tourism Research. 2010;12(2):462–471. 10.1002/jtr.765. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Azariadis C, Drazen A. Threshold externalities in economic development. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1990;105(3):501–526. 10.2307/2937797. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barros CP. Measuring efficiency in the hotel sector. Annals of Tourism Research. 2005;32(3):456–477. 10.1016/j.annals.2004.07.011. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ben Aissa S, Goaied M. Determinants of Tunisian hotel profitability: The role of managerial efficiency. Tourism Management. 2016;52(3):478–487. 10.1016/j.tourman.2015.07.015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bertsimas D, Shioda R. Restaurant revenue management. Operations Research. 2003;51(3):472–486. 10.1287/opre.51.3.472.14956. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bijmolt THA, Paas LJ, Vermunt JK. Country and consumer segmentation: Multi-level latent class analysis of financial product ownership. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2004;21(4):323–340. 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2004.06.002. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bloom N, Sadun R, Van Reenen J. Does management really work? Harvard Business Review. 2012;90(1):76–82. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
  • Carbo S, Fernandez F. The determinants of bank margins in European banking. Journal of Banking and Finance. 2007;31(17):2043–2063. 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2006.06.017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen CM, Lin YC. Does better service induce higher profitability? Evidence from Taiwanese hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 2012;31(12):1330–1332. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.03.010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chiu YH, Huang CW. Evaluating the optimal occupancy rate, operational efficiency, and profitability efficiency of Taiwan’s international tourist hotels. The Service Industries Journal. 2011;31(14):2145–2162. 10.1080/02642069.2010.503889. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Christaller W. Contributions to a geography of the tourist trade. Erdkunde. 1955;9(1):1–19. [Google Scholar]
  • Claver-Cortés E, Molina-Azorìn JF, Pereira J. The impact of strategic behaviours on hotel performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2007;19(1):6–20. 10.1108/09596110710724125. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Claver-Cortés E, Molina-Azorin JF, Pereira-Moliner J. Strategic groups in the hospitality industry: Intergroup and intragroup performance differences in Alicante Spain. Tourism Management. 2010;27(12):1101–1116. [Google Scholar]
  • Danziger S, Israeli A, Bekerman M. The relative role of strategic assets in determining customer perceptions of hotel room price. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 2006;25(1):129–145. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.12.005. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dosi G, Grazzi M, Moschella D. Technology and costs in international competitiveness: From countries and sectors to firms. Research Policy. 2015;44(20):1795–1814. 10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Durbarry R, Sinclair MT. Tourism taxes: implications for tourism demand in the UK. Review of Development Economics. 2008;12(1):21–36. 10.1111/j.1467-9361.2008.00432.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ernst D, Dolnicar S. How to avoid random market segmentation solutions. Journal of Travel Research. 2018;57(1):69–82. 10.1177/0047287516684978. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fisher, R. A. (1934). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh, Scotland: Oliver and Boyd.
  • Fullerton, A. S., & Xu, J. (2016). Ordered Regression Models Parallel, Partial, and Non-Parallel Alternatives (1st ed.). New York, NY: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Gooroochum N, Sinclair M. Economics of tourism taxation: Evidence from Mauritius. Annals of Tourism Research. 2005;32(2):478–798. 10.1016/j.annals.2004.10.003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Görzig B, Gornig M. Intangibles, can they explain the dispersion in return rates?. The Review of Income and Wealth. 2013;59(4):648–664. 10.1111/j.1475-4991.2012.00525.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gross MJ, Gao H, Huang SS. China hotel research: A systematic review of the English language academic literature. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2013;6(1):68–78. 10.1016/j.tmp.2012.11.004. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gu H, Ryan C, Yu L. The changing structure of the Chinese hotel industry: 1980–2012. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2012;4(1):56–63. 10.1016/j.tmp.2012.02.001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hassan SS, Craft SH. Linking global market segmentation decisions with strategic positioning options. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2005;22(2):81–89. 10.1108/07363760510589244. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Heffernan, T., Feng, W., Angell, R., & Fang, Y. (2010). The identification of marketing focused employability attributes for graduates in China. Retrieved from: https://www.anzmac2010.org/proceedings/pdf/anzmac10Final00209.pdf
  • Hobijn B, Frances PH. Asymptotically perfect and relative convergence of productivity. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 2000;15(1):59–81. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(200001/02)15:1<59::AID-JAE544>3.0.CO;2-1. [CrossRef] [3.0.CO;2-1&" target="pmc_ext" ref="reftype=other&article-id=8037393&issue-id=368144&journal-id=3816&FROM=Article%7CCitationRef&TO=Content%20Provider%7CLink%7CGoogle%20Scholar">Google Scholar]
  • Hodrick RJ, Prescott EC. Postwar U.S. business cycles: an empirical investigation. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. 1997;29(1):1–6. 10.2307/2953682. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hsu K, Zhu Z, Agrusa J. Turning click-through visitors into customers: A study of Chinese hotel websites. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing. 2004;11(1):81–91. 10.1300/J150v11n04_06. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jovanovic B. Selection and the evolution of industry. Econometrica. 1982;50(4):649–670. 10.2307/1912606. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kim WG, Ma X, Kim DJ. Determinants of Chinese hotel customers’ e-satisfaction and purchase intentions. Tourism Management. 2006;27(4):890–900. 10.1016/j.tourman.2005.05.010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kimes SE. Restaurant revenue management: Could it work? Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management. 2005;4(1):95–97. 10.1057/palgrave.rpm.5170132. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kimes SE, Thompson GM. Restaurant revenue management at Chevys: Determining the best table mix. Decision Sciences. 2004;35(2):371–392. 10.1111/j.0011-7315.2004.02531.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kourtzidis SA, Tzeremes P, Tzeremes NG, Heryán T. Integration of tourism markets in Australia: An international visitor arrivals’ convergence assessment. Tourism Economics. 2018;24(7):901–907. 10.1177/1354816618776184. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Li S, Blake A, Cooper C. Modelling the economic impact of international tourism on the Chinese economy: A CGE analysis of the Beijing 2008 Olympics. Tourism Economics. 2011;17(2):279–303. 10.5367/te.2011.0025. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Li L, Tse EC-Y, Gu BY. The relationship between strategic planning and entrepreneurial business orientation. Chinese Economy. 2006;39(1):70–82. 10.2753/CES1097-1475390605. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lin Z, You K, Lau CK, Demir E. Segmenting global tourism markets: A panel club convergence approach. Annals of Tourism Research. 2019;75(1):165–185. 10.1016/j.annals.2019.01.007. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lu Z, Zhu F. Post-purchase evaluation of China’s star-rated hotel service quality: A content analysis of guest reviews on third party hotel booking websites. China Tourism Research. 2006;2(1):93–103. [Google Scholar]
  • Nell KS, Thirlwall AP. Why does the productivity of investment vary across countries? PSL Quarterly Review. 2017;70(2):213–245. [Google Scholar]
  • Nell KS, Thirlwall AP. Explaining differences in the productivity of investment across countries in the context of ‘new growth theory’ International Review of Applied Economics. 2018;32(2):163–194. 10.1080/02692171.2017.1333089. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pervan M, Pervan I, Ćurak M. Determinants of firm profitability in the Croatian manufacturing industry: Evidence from dynamic panel analysis. Economic Research. 2019;32(6):968–981. [Google Scholar]
  • Pesaran HM. A pair-wise approach to testing for output and growth convergence. Journal of Econometrics. 2006;138(3):312–355. [Google Scholar]
  • Pesaran HM, Yamagata T. Testing homogeneity in Panels. Journal of Econometrics. 2008;142(1):50–93. 10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Phillips PCB, Sul D. Transition modeling and econometric convergence tests. Econometrica. 2007;75(13):1771–1855. 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2007.00811.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Phillips PCB, Sul D. Economic transition and growth. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 2009;24(14):1153–1185. 10.1002/jae.1080. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pine R, Qi P. Barriers to hotel chain development in China. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2004;16(1):37–44. 10.1108/09596110410516543. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Polo Pena ΑΙ, Frias Jamilena DM, Rodríguez Molina MA. Market orientation as a strategy for the rural tourism sector: Its effect on tourist behavior and the performance of enterprises. Journal of Travel Research. 2013;52(2):225–239. 10.1177/0047287512459108. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sigala M. Using data envelopment analysis for measuring and benchmarking productivity in the hotel sector. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing. 2004;16(1):39–60. 10.1300/J073v16n02_04. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Skuflic L, Mlinaric D. Microeconomic determinants of profitability for Croatian hotel industry. Ekonomskipregled: MjesecnikHrvatskogdrustvaekonomista Zagreb. 2015;66(3):477–494. [Google Scholar]
  • Statista. (2020). The Statistics for Market Data. Statista,com
  • Tan Y. Hotel-specific, industry-specific and macroeconomic determinants of profitability in London hotel industry: Structure-conduct-performance or efficient-structure hypothesis?. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2017 10.2139/ssrn.2943487. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tarí JJ, Claver-Cortés E, Pereira-Moliner J, Molina-Azorín JF. Levels of quality and environmental management in the hotel industry: Their joint influence on firm performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 2010;29(3):500–510. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.10.029. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Valadkhani A, O'Mahony B. Identifying structural changes and regime switching in growing and declining inbound tourism markets in Australia. Current Issues in Tourism. 2018;21(3):277–300. 10.1080/13683500.2015.1072504. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Weill, L. (2008). Convergence in banking efficiency across EU countries. Working Paper, LARGE, No. 7. 10.2139/ssrn.1222501
  • Weill L. Is there a lasting gap in bank efficiency between Western and Eastern European countries? Comparative Economic Studies. 2007;49(1):101–127. 10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100183. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 1984;5(2):171–180. 10.1002/smj.4250050207. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Xie H, Tiwari AK, Chang T. Investigating stationarity in tourist arrivals to India using panel KPSS with sharp drifts and smooth breaks. Applied Economics. 2018;50(46):4985–4998. 10.1080/00036846.2018.1466988. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yang H, Cheung C, Fang CC. An empirical study of hospitality employability skills: Perceptions of entry-level hotel staff in China. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education. 2015;27(2):161–170. 10.1080/10963758.2015.1089510. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yu L, Gu H. Hotel reform in China: A SWOT analysis. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 2005;46(1):153–169. 10.1177/0010880404273892. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhou L, Murray I, Zhang B. People’s perception of foreign hotel chains in China’s market: An empirical study of the effects of country-of-origin and corporate identity. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing. 2001;11(1):43–67. [Google Scholar]

Data 


Data behind the article

This data has been text mined from the article, or deposited into data resources.

Similar Articles 


To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.