How your country rated in the WEF tourism report

The World Economic Forum’s Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2013 assesses 140 economies worldwide based on the extent to which they are putting in place the factors and policies to make it attractive to develop the travel and tourism sector.

Here is a sample of how countries in the Asia Pacific region fared:

Singapore: With its famously well-functioning public institutions, it is perhaps not surprising that Singapore ranks 1st out of all economies for its policy environment, with rules and regulations that are extremely conducive to the development of its T&T industries. And it is among the safest economies of all assessed with regard to safety and security.

One area of concern is its lack of price competitiveness, which has eroded, as seen in increasing hotel prices and taxation.

Japan: Japan’s extremely customer oriented culture (1st) is an important strength for the T&T industry. On the other hand, the country continues to be an expensive destination, ranking 130th in the price competitiveness pillar.

Hong Kong SAR: Its transport infrastructure is among the most developed in the world.~However, Hong Kong trails other advanced economies in the region for its lack of emphasis on environmental sustainability, where it ranks a low 118th.

Malaysia: The country benefits from excellent price competitiveness (ranked 5th), with comparatively low fuel prices, low ticket taxes and airport charges, competitive hotel prices, and a favorable tax regime.

However, health and hygiene indicators trail those of many other countries in the region with, in particular, a low physician density and few hospital beds available.

Thailand: A very friendly attitude of the population toward tourists (ranked 13th). This is buttressed by the government’s strong prioritisation of the sector, with good destination marketing campaigns (11th) and relative price competitiveness (25th).

Given the importance of the natural environment for the country’s tourism, environmental sustainability should be a greater priority (ranked 99th on this indicator).

China: China’s policy environment is not highly conducive to the T&T sector’s development (ranked 86th).

Furthermore, there are increasing concerns related to the sustainable development of the sector (109th).

China’s tourism infrastructure remains underdeveloped (ranked 101th), with few international-quality standard hotel rooms available and few ATMs, and the country receives a poor assessment for its general affinity for Travel & Tourism, where it ranks 129th.

Indonesia: The country is ranked 9th overall on price competitiveness in the T&T industry because of its competitive hotel prices (ranked 21st), low ticket taxes and airport charges, and favorable fuel prices.

In addition, it is ranked 19th for its national prioritisation of Travel & Tourism.

However, Indonesia is not ensuring the environmentally sustainable development of the tourism sector (ranked 125th), an area of particular concern given the sector’s dependence on the quality of the natural environment.

Vietnam: Vietnam must further develop its transport infrastructure, especially its ground transport (98th) and tourism infrastructure (112th), while ensuring that the sector is developed in an environmentally sustainable way (128th).

Higher prioritiation of the sector (now ranked a low 110th) could help to unlock the investment required for building the necessary infrastructure.

The Philippines: The most improved country in the Asia Pacific region, ranking 16th regionally and 82nd overall, up 12 places since the last edition.

Among the country’s comparative strengths, prioritisation of the Travel & Tourism industry (this indicator ranks 15th, as government spending on the sector as a percentage of GDP is now 1st in the world, and tourism marketing and branding campaigns are seen to be increasingly effective).

Safety and security concerns (ranked 103rd); inadequate health and hygiene (94th); and underdeveloped ground transport ~are all holding back the potential of the economy’s T&T competitiveness.