Content uploaded by Engin Bayraktaroglu
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Engin Bayraktaroglu on Apr 30, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Ekonomi 04 (2020) 80–85
80
Ekonomi
journal homepage: https://dergipark.org.tr/ekonomi
Assessing the Short-term Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic on Foreign Visitor’s
Demand for Turkey: A Scenario Analysis
aFatih Günay, bEngin Bayraktaroğlu, cKahraman Özkul
a*Mersin University, Department of Tourism Management, Mersin – Turkey, b Anadolu University, Department of Tourism
Management, Eskişehir – Turkey, cMavi Deniz Publication, Rize - Turkey
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Coronavirus
COVID-19
Foreign visitor
Demand
Tourism
Turkey
ABSTRACT
Since it first started in China, COVID-19 outbreak has become the number one problem of the World. World
Health Organization accepted COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic on March 11, 2020. In light of the latest
information, it could be said that the world has never encountered such a pandemic in the last century.
Tourism is one of the most sensitive sectors to crises such as wars, terrorist attacks, natural disasters and
other kinds of unexpected phenomena. This study aims to forecast the short-term effects of COVID-19
pandemic on foreign visitors' demand for Turkey by using scenario analysis technique. According to the
results, a decline in foreign visitors’ arrivals in the range of 5% to 53% is estimated. It means a loss of tourism
revenues about $15.2 billion as the worst, and $1.5 billion as the best alternative scenario for 2020. It is
essential to develop recovery plans and to implement them urgently, to minimize the harms of the COVID-19
pandemic on Turkish tourism.
1. Introduction
Since it first started in China, the World has been under the effect of COVID-
19 outbreak. World Health Organization classified COVID-19 outbreak as a
pandemic on March 11, 2020. Because of COVID-19 and precautionary
measures taken to curb the spread, economic conditions have become
uncertain, specifically for the tourism industry.
In light of the latest information, it could be said that the world has never
encountered such a pandemic in the last century. In the modern era, tourism
activities and international mobility have reached a global scale. But in the third
month following the first reported case, many countries restricted international
mobility as a preventive measure against the virus. Some countries closed their
borders entirely and others restricted border crossings. On the other hand,
countries warned their citizens not to travel unless it is necessary. By taking
these measures and defensive actions to stop the spreading of the virus,
international mobility has almost stopped in the world and tourism activities
have been delayed.
Tourism is one of the most sensitive sectors to crises such as wars, terrorist
attacks, natural disasters and other kinds of unwanted phenomena. Normally,
tourism demand and forecasts could be done by some objective methods, but
coronavirus pandemic has changed all the circumstances and affected all the
conditions in the economic cycle.
At this point, forecasting tourist demand with subjective or hypothetical
methods could be seen as a solution. This study aims to forecast the short-term
effects of COVID-19 pandemic on foreign visitors' demand for Turkey by using
scenario analysis technique. For this purpose, the paper has designed in five
sections. After the introduction, a literature review was conducted on the
current state of international tourism, the past pandemics and the international
tourism demand for Turkey. In the methodology section, short-term effects of
COVID-19 pandemic on foreign visitors' demand for Turkey was analysed by
using scenario analysis technique and some suggestions were made in the
conclusion section. This study could be seen as an early prediction related to
the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on tourist mobility to Turkey. It has seen in
the results that, decision-makers still have time to recover the effects of the
pandemic in 2020.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Chronological Spread of COVID-19 and Preventive Measures
COVID-19, known also as the Coronavirus, appeared in December 2019,
according to the information provided by the World Health Organization
(WHO). On January 9, 2020, a 61-year-old person in China was found to have
similar symptoms with the SARS virus. On January 11, 2020, the first case was
confirmed and announced by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission (“China
reports first dead,” 2020). On January 20, 2020, the virus was detected on a US
citizen returning from his trip in Wuhan, and he was quarantined. This I s the
∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: fgunay@mersin.edu.tr (F. Günay).
Received: 06 April 2020; Received in revised from 22 April 2020; Accepted 23 April 2020
first reported case in the USA (Nedelman, 2020). On January 20, 2020, more
than 200 people were reported to have symptoms of the pandemic. Until that
date, 3 people had been infected, and the virus was also seen in Shanghai and
Shenzhen cities of China (“New China Virus,” 2020). The first case in South
Korea was also confirmed on 20th January (“New Virus Surging,” 2020).
On January 22, 2020, the first travel restriction came due to the coronavirus
by North Korea. It was stated by the North Korean administration that there was
a restriction for the tourists who wanted to travel the country entering via China
and that such a decision was made due to the epidemic that started in Wuhan
(“North Korea Bans Foreign Tourists,” 2020). On January 24, 2020, China
started to apply travel restrictions in 13 cities in which 35 million people lived,
to prevent the spread of the virus. Thus, another major travel restriction was
introduced by China after North Korea's restrictions on tourists entering the
country (“China Expands Virus Lockdown,” 2020). On the same day, 3 cases
were confirmed in France. These cases were the first ones confirmed in the
European Union (“Coronavirus Reaches Europe,” 2020).
With the spreading of COVID-19 virus, countries geographically close to China
took several preventive safety measures against the outbreak. These preventive
measures, which started with the screening of passengers from China at the
airports with thermal cameras, passed to the next stage with the flight
cancellations decisions made by several countries on January 25. Russia warned
its citizens not to travel to China and cancelled all flights from Wuhan to
Moscow. Tajikistan cancelled Somor Air's all flights from Tajikistan to China and
all flights of South Airlines from China to Tajikistan (“Airlines Suspend Flights,”
2020). On January 27, 2020, Turkey urged its citizens not to travel to China
unless necessary (Zorlu, 2020). In late January, many airlines decided to cancel
their flights to China (“Airlines Suspend Flights,” 2020). Germany reported its
first coronavirus case on January 27 (“Bayerische Behörden bestätigen,” 2020).
Turkish Airlines announced on January 30 that the number of flights to
Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai and Xian regions, from February 5 to February 29,
will be reduced (“Airlines Suspend China,” 2020) A day later, Turkish Airlines
announced that the flights to China were cancelled until 9 February 2020. Thus,
Turkey introduced first flight restrictions, in the context of preventive measures
against COVID-19 pandemic (Sahin, 2020).
While Spain reported the first case on January 31, 2020, it also announced that
the infected person was in the Canary Islands and was a tourist from Germany
(“Confirmado el coronavirus,” 2020). On the same day, coronavirus was
detected in two Chinese tourists in Milano, and this was the first reported case
in Italy (“Conte, primi due casi di coronavirus confermati,” 2020). On February
19, 2020, Iran reported 2 cases. On the same day, it announced that these 2 cases
were under treatment (“Iran Reports Two,” 2020). Turkey announced that
visitors from Iran would undergo the medical examination and those with
symptoms would not be accepted to the country, on February 21 (Alhas, 2020).
Two days later, Turkey announced temporary cancellation of border crossings
Günay et al. Journal of Ekonomi 04 (2020) 80–85
81
from Iran and Nakhichevan, as a result of the increase in the number of cases
in Iran (“Turkey, Pakistan Shut Iran Border,” 2020) on February.
25, 2020, Turkish Civil Aviation Authority suspended passenger flights to
and from Iran (Aydın, 2020). With the rapid increase in the number of cases
and deaths in Italy, Turkey decided to cancel flights to and from Italy on
February 29, 2020.
The first novel coronavirus case was diagnosed in Turkey on March 11,
2020, and it also announced that the first confirmed case was a Turkish citizen
who had travelled from Europe (“First coronavirus case,” 2020). Therefore,
Turkey took significant measures to prevent the spread of the virus. One of
the most important measures taken in this context is the cancellation of
international flights. On March 13, 2020, Turkey cancelled passenger flights
to and from Germany, France, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Austria,
Sweden and Netherlands (“Türkiye’nin uçuş yasağı,” 2020).
On March 28, 2020, all commercial passenger flights to or from Turkey was
cancelled by a presidential enactment (“Turkey cancels international flights,”
2020) The dates on which international flights were cancelled within the
scope of preventive measures taken against COVID-19 pandemic by Turkey
are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Cancelled International Flights by Turkey (“Türkiye’nin uçuş
yasağı,” 2020).
Date
Flight cancellations by Turkey (in both
directions)
February 3, 2020
China
February 23, 2020
Iran
February 29, 2020
Italy, South Korea, Iraq
March 13, 2020
Germany, France, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Belgium,
Austria, Sweden, Netherlands
March 16, 2020
England, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Ireland,
United Arab Emirates
March 21, 2020
Sri Lanka, Kuwait, Bangladesh, Mongolia, Turkish
Republic of North Cyprus, Ukraine, Kosovo,
Morocco, Lebanon, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan,
Oman, Slovenia, Moldova, Djibouti, Equatorial
Guinea, Canada, India, Hungary, Guatemala, Poland,
Kenya, Sudan, Chad, Philippines, Latvia, Taiwan,
Peru, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Niger, Tunisia, Algeria,
Ivory Coast, Finland, Angola, Czechia, Dominican,
Cameroon, Montenegro, Colombia, North
Macedonia, Mauritania, Nepal, Portugal, Panama
March 28, 2020
All commercial passenger flights
2.2. Outbreaks that Have Affected Tourist Demand in the Past Two
Decades
Diseases with their origins in Central Asia, Central America and Central
Africa have significantly damaged the image of several countries as a safe
tourist destination in the last two decades. One of these diseases is Severe
Acute Respiratory Syndrome (hereafter SARS) epidemic, which first infected
people in the Guangdong province of southern China in 2002 and received
worldwide attention in 2003. The other one is H5N1 Avian Influenza
(hereafter Avian Flu or Bird Flu) epidemic, which first infected people in Hong
Kong SAR, China in 1997 and received worldwide attention in 2004 (McAleer,
Huang, Huo, Chen & Chang, 2010). With its origin in Mexico, namely the H1N1
Swine Influenza (hereafter Swine Flu) epidemic, which received worldwide
attention in 2009 (Haque & Haque, 2018) and the Ebola Virus Disease
(hereafter Ebola) epidemic, which was first identified in the Democratic
Republic of Congo in 1976 but received worldwide attention in 2014 (Sifolo
& Sifolo, 2015) are some common examples.
SARS epidemic mainly affected the countries in Asia, namely China, Hong
Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan. SARS epidemic is estimated to have cost these
four countries over the US $20 billion in lost GDP, and a reduction of more
than 70% across the rest of Asia, even in the countries were no case was
detected (Mckercher & Chon, 2004). Industry data suggested that
international tourism to China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Vietnam declined by
58 per cent in the first quarter of 2003 (Henderson, 2003). Pine and
McKercher stated that after SARS epidemic, Singapore’s tourism gross
domestic product (GDP) decreased 43% and the number of lost tourism-
related jobs was 17.500; Hong Kong’s tourism GDP decreased 41% and lost
tourism-related jobs was 27.000; China’s tourism GDP decreased 25% and
lost tourism-related jobs was 2.8 million, and Vietnam’s tourism GDP
decreased 15% and lost tourism-related jobs was 62.000. Kuo et al., (2008)
reported that damage levels in Taiwan and China were less noticeable than
those in Hong Kong and Singapore, which signifies that the government’s
reaction and strategies in dealing with this serious disease may result in different
levels of damage. For example, Au et al., (2005) asserted that the impact of SARS on
Hong Kong’s tourism industry is said to be more damaging than the 9-11 episode
or the 1997 Asian Financial crisis. In Singapore, visitor arrivals fell dramatically for
April 2003 to June 2003 quarter, reaching rare figures, which were over 70% lower
than the previous year in May (Henderson and Ng, 2004). Also, Canada is another
SARS-infected country with 251 cases and 41 deceases. In Canada, during April
2004 to June 2004 quarter, international visitors declined by 14%, spending by
international visitors declined by 13%, the international travel deficit grew to over
$1.1 billion and the tourism employment decreased by 2.4% (Wall, 2006).
Avian Flu infections suddenly spread in eight Asian countries, namely China,
Japan, South Korea, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Indonesia, between the
end of 2003 and the beginning of 2004 (Kuo, Chang, Huang, Chen and McAleer,
2009). Brahmbhatt (2005) estimated that the Avian Flu outbreak led to a 5%
decline in international tourist demand and decreased the GDP of Vietnam by 0.4%
in 2004. In contrary, Kuo et al. (2008) stated that the number of affected cases had
a significant impact on the tourist demand for SARS-infected countries, but not for
Avian Flu-infected countries because SARS was able to spread between humans.
However, the H5N1 Avian Flu virus is currently only transmitted from birds to
humans and so its ability to spread among humans is still weak and the number of
cases is small compared to SARS.
Swine flu was first recorded in Mexico in March 2009 and then spread into
coterminous regions in American Continent and then to regions further afield,
especially to Central and East Europe, Middle East and South-east Asia (Page, Song
and Wu, 2012). Haque and Haque (2018) reported that Brunei lost nearly 15% of
tourist demand from June 2009 to May 2010 (post swine flu) period. Page et al.
(2012) estimated that the swine flu pandemic had a significantly negative effect on
the United Kingdom tourism demand in all 14 source markets, especially mainland
China, Spain, South Korea, and Russia, in the second quarter of 2009.
The Ebola outbreak of 2014 which started from Guinea in December 2013, spread
to other West African countries, namely Sierra Leone and Liberia. Novelli, Burgess,
Jones and Ritchie (2018) stated that whole continent of Africa’s tourist arrivals
reduced by 2% in 2014, and a further 5% in October 2015, after the Ebola outbreak.
Mizrachi and Fuchs (2016) mentioned about a 20% to 70% decline in bookings in
2014 as a result of the Ebola outbreak in Kenya.
2.3. Foreign Visitor Arrivals to Turkey
Tourism is one of the most important sectors for the Turkish economy. It is widely
accepted that tourism is an important instrument, which increases foreign
exchange incomes, decreases unemployment rates and triggers overall economic
growth (Isik 2012; Isik, 2010). When examining tourism demand, the number of
foreign visitors is one of the important variables. When the number of foreign
visitors to Turkey is analysed, except 2006, 2012, 2015, 2016, it stands out a general
upward trend. Considering these years, it is possible to identify significant crises
affecting the numbers.
In 2006, foreign visitor arrivals declined about 1,3 million compared to the
previous year, after a 3,5 million increase. In 2005 and 2006, a series of terrorist
attacks were organized by Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK - PYD/YPG) in Istanbul
and the tourism destinations in the southern shore of Turkey, namely Kusadasi,
Cesme, Marmaris and Antalya. In these attacks, terrorists targeted the tourists
directly. Also, in 2006, Andrea Santoro, the pastor of the Santa Maria Catholic
Church in Trabzon, was killed in a Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETO) linked
armed attack. These terror attacks were accepted as the main determinants of a
1,3 million decline in foreign arrivals to Turkey in 2006.
In 2012, foreign visitor arrivals increased only about 300 thousand. In 2011,
there was a 2,8 million increase compared to 2010. The main reason for this slight
increase is the conflict which started in the border of Turkey and Syria, namely the
Syrian Civil War.
In 2015, a slight decline was observed in foreign visitor arrivals to Turkey, about
250 thousand, compared to the previous year. In this year the Islamic State of Iraq
and the Levant (ISIS) organized a series of attacks in Diyarbakir, Sanliurfa and
Ankara. Also, Turkey shot a Russian fighter aircraft down which committed a
border violation while flying over Syria in 2015. This is a major crisis affecting
Russian visitors’ arrivals. But in 2016 a major decline of 10,9 million in foreign
visitor arrivals to Turkey was observed. In 2016, ISIS targeted directly the touristic
places and governmental structures in different cities. In Istanbul, Sultanahmet
Square, Istiklal Street, Ataturk Airport and Besiktas Stadium were targeted by ISIS
with bombing attacks. Also, Kızılay Square in Ankara was targeted by another
terrorist group, namely PKK - PYD/YPG, in 2016. There are other terrorist attacks
committed by ISIS and PKK - PYD/YPG in some other cities, namely Diyarbakir,
Mardin, Gaziantep, Adana and Kayseri, which are also touristic cities of Turkey. But
the massive effect happened after the coup attempt organized by the FETO/Parallel
State Structure in July 2016. This was the biggest political crisis in Turkey in the last
35 years and had effects tourist arrivals dramatically.
Günay et al. Journal of Ekonomi 04 (2020) 80–85
82
Table 2: Number of Foreign Visitors to Turkey (2000-2019)
Years
Numbers
Year
Months
Numbers
2000
10,428,153
2019
2001
11,618,969
2002
13,256,028
2003
14,029,558
January
1,539,496
2004
17,516,908
February
1,670,238
2005
21,124,886
March
2,232,358
2006
19,819,833
April
3,293,176
2007
23,340,911
May
4,022,254
2008
26,336,677
June
5,318,984
2009
27,077,114
July
6,617,380
2010
28,632,204
August
6,307,508
2011
31,456,076
September
5,426,818
2012
31,782,832
October
4,291,574
2013
34,910,098
November
2,190,622
2014
36,837,900
December
2,147,878
2015
36,244,632
Total
45,058,286
2016
25,352,213
2017
32,410,034
2018
39,488,401
Source: Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2020a
After political stability, foreign arrivals to Turkey reached over 32,4 million
in 2017, 39,4 million in 2018 and 45 million in 2019. On the other hand, in
2019, the average spending of a foreign visitor was $642 and total revenue
from foreign visitors were $28.7 billion (Ministry of Culture and Tourism of
Turkey, 2020b).
3. Methodology
There are several methods to forecast tourism demand and income. Some
approaches, which use statistical and econometric methods (Isik et al., 2019;
Isik et al., 2018) to forecast, are quantitative and objective. The others are
subjective, grouped as qualitative techniques (Uysal & Crompton, 1985).
Quantitative approaches try to predict what will happen in the future by
calculating the past trends and the relationship between variables affecting
demand (Calantone, Benedetto & Bojanic, 1987). Such approaches need
historical data to forecast future tourism demand and the conditions should
be stable during the estimated future or ceteris paribus. This assumption
should be met depending on accurate forecasting and the validity of the
results. Time series regression, gravity models, neural networks models and
other econometric models can be listed as quantitative methods (Uysal &
Crompton, 1985; Kulendran & Witt, 2003: Song & Turner, 2006; Kaplan &
Aktas, 2015).
Quantitative methods are not useful when the future is unclear or there is
no similar experience. Any historyless event cannot be predicted by
quantitative method (Schnaars, 1987). In such cases, subjective methods,
called as qualitative or judgmental, can be used to forecast the future due to
the advantage of not requiring historical data (Frechtling, 2001). Those
methods, classified as a qualitative approach, are appropriate where
historical data are insufficient or inappropriate to forecast future (Uysal &
Crompton, 1985: 7). The Delphi Model, Traditional survey methods,
Judgement-Aided Model (JAM), Scenario Analysis (or Subjective probability
assessment) are some of those qualitative methods to forecast (Uysal &
Crompton, 1985; Calantone et al., 1987; Frechtling, 2001).
Scenario analysis is one of the techniques used in the economy, finance or
other fields to predict the future. In accounting, finance and economy, it is
important to estimate the future for any investment decision such as capital
investments or portfolio selection. This technique is also used for risk
management in finance (Altay, 2014; Hassani, 2016). In accounting, it is also
used for budgeting process to forecast costs and revenues (De Kluvyer, 1980).
The technique is mostly studied in economy-based papers. Based on the
information mentioned above, this study aims to make projections to see the
effect of COVID-19 on the number of foreign visitors to Turkey in 2020 within
the scope of alternative scenarios. Within this context, we generated two
hypothetical scenarios in which the change rate of the tourism demand is
constant for each month or decline will recover with an equal proportion
from the dropped rate until December. Each scenario has a set of alternatives
covering border closure and every alternative was calculated for three-basis
decline rate. The study covers only the monthly estimates of Turkey's 2020
international demand to put forth the yearly drop under alternative scenarios
compared to 2019. The tourism statistics were obtained from the February 2020
bulletin of the relevant Ministry. Tourism is currently one of the most affected
sectors from COVID-19 pandemic and UNWTO has revised its 2020 forecast for
international arrivals and receipts, and it also emphasizes that any predictions are
likely to be further revised (UNWTOb, 2020).
Hypothetical Scenarios: Two scenario sets are presented with relevant
alternatives. The first scenario expects a decrease in demand or at the same level
compared to the same month of the previous year. In the second scenario, for
every month after the opening of the borders, demand will recover from the drop
evenly. The second scenario is that decline will be at the same proportion for each
month after the borders are opened. This hypothetical scenario implies that
demand will drop with a hypothetical percentage for the first month after the
borders are opened, and then it will recover evenly.
Scenario A. Decline in demand is at the same level for each month:
A.1. Borders will be closed for one month
A.2. Borders will be closed for one and a half months (45 days)
A.3. Borders will be closed for two months
A.4. Borders will be closed for three months
A.5. Borders will be closed for four months
Scenario B. Decline in demand will recover with equal proportion month by
month:
B.1. Borders will be closed for one month
B.2. Borders will be closed for one and a half months (45 days)
B.3. Borders will be closed for two months
B.4. Borders will be closed for three months
B.5. Borders will be closed for four months
The UNWTO has announced the expectations claiming that international tourist
arrivals will be down 20% to 30% for 2020 when compared to 2019 because of
travel restrictions (UNWTO, 2020). On the other hand, tourism professionals are
hopeful for the after-COVID-19 outbreak (Horuz, 2020). Based on those
expectations of stakeholders, we have estimated our projections for Turkey’s
international tourist arrivals in the context of foreign visitors with different
decline rate. Monthly international tourist numbers were calculated by using
Formula (1) as shown below.
Number of Foreign Visitorstm=Number of Foreign Visitorstm-1x (1∓r) (3.1)
tm is the calculated month, and tm-1 is the same month of the previous year. r
is the change rate. This calculation has been done for each forecasted month. Then
the number of yearly arriving foreigners has been calculated as the sum of
monthly data for 2020. Lastly, forecasted yearly data for 2020 was proportioned
to 2019 as shown in formula (2) to put forth the rate of change percentage.
Estimated Rate of Change (%) for Foreign Visitorst=Number of Foreign Visitorst
Number of Foreign Visitorst-1 -1 (2)
4. Findings
According to the analyses, the estimated number of foreign visitors and the
annual decrease for alternative scenarios have been shown in Table 3 to 7. Table
3 shows the one-month border closure alternative for two scenarios under
different decline rates.
Table 3: Estimated number of foreign visitors and annual change rate (what if
borders are closed for a month)
Günay et al. Journal of Ekonomi 04 (2020) 80–85
83
As shown in Table 3, if the number of foreign visitors has dropped 30% as
constant for each month of the rest of year, estimated annual change rate will
be -31% compared to 2019 due to the one-month border closure. On the other
hand, if the demand would be recovered with equal proportion month by
month from the basis rate, the rate of change will be -19%. If the monthly rate
of demand comes true as 80% compared to the previous year, as a constant
decrease, the demand will decline by 22% due to the one-month border
closure. In the event of recover from the basis rate, demand will decline by
14%. As can be seen in Table 3, the number of tourists will drop 5% even if
demand remains the same.
The estimated number of foreign visitors and annual change rates are
shown in Table 4 if border closure lasts one and a half months (until the 30th
of April) for two scenarios.
Table 4: The estimated number of foreign visitors and annual change rate
(what if borders are closed for one and a half months)
If the number of foreign visitors has been as 70% at the same level for each
month of the rest of year (Scenario A), the estimated rate of change is -33%
compared to 2019 due to the three-month border closure, but if Scenario B
comes true, the change of demand will be -23% (Table 4). If the number of
foreign visitors declines by 20% compared to the previous year at the same
level for each month, the demand will decline by 25% due to the three-month
border closure. If Scenario B comes true, demand will decline by 18%. As seen
in Table 4, the number of tourists will decline by 37%, even if the demand
remains the same.
The forecasted number of foreign visitors and estimated annual change
rates depending on two scenarios have shown in Table 5.
Table 3: Estimated number of foreign visitors and annual change rate (what if
borders closed for two months)
As shown in Table 5, if the number of foreign visitors comes true by 70% as
constant for the previous same months of the year, the rate of change will be
-36% compared to 2019 due to the two-month border closure. But, if the
demand would be recovered by an equal proportion from the basis rate, the
change will be -26%. If the rate of demand has been as 80% compared to the
previous year, as constant for the same months of 2019, the demand will
decline by 29 % due to the two-month border closure. In the event of Scenario
B, demand will decline by 22%. As can be seen in Table 4, the number of
tourists will drop 13% even if the demand remains the same.
Estimated number of foreign visitors and annual change rates are shown in
Table 6 for two scenarios if border closure lasts three months.
Table 6: Estimated number of foreign visitors and the rate of percentage change
(what if borders closed for three months)
As shown in Table 6, if the number of foreign visitors is 70% at the same level for
each month of the rest of year, the estimated rate of change is -44% compared to
2019 due to the three-month border closure, but if Scenario B comes true, the
change of demand will be -35%. If the rate of demand is 80% compared to the
previous year, at the same level for each month, the demand will drop 37% due to
the three-month border closure. If Scenario B comes true, demand will drop 32%.
As can be seen in Table 6, the number of tourists will drop 22% even if the demand
remains the same.
If border closure lasts four months for two scenarios, estimated number of
foreign visitors and annual change rates are shown in Table 7
Table 7: Estimated number of foreign visitors and the rate of percentage change
(what if borders are closed for four months)
As shown in Table 7, if the number of foreign visitors is 70% at the same level
for each month of the rest of year, the estimated rate of change is -53% compared
to 2019 due to the three-month border closure, but if Scenario B comes true, the
change of demand will be -46%. If the rate of demand is 80% compared to the
previous year, at the same level for each month, the demand will drop 48% due to
the three-month border closure. If Scenario B comes true, demand will drop 43%.
The number of tourists will drop 37%, even if the demand remains the same as
seen in Table 7.
5. Conclusion
Tourism is one of the most sensitive sectors to crises. Coronavirus pandemic is
one of the biggest health crises that the world faced in the modern era. According
to the UNWTO, global economic crises affected world international tourism
arrivals -4% in 2009, another health event, SARS in 2003 affected world
international tourism arrivals -0,4% (UNWTO, 2020). The number of foreign
visitor of Turkey declined 30% (can be seen in Table 2) in 2016 due to the 15 July
coup attempt by the FETO/PSS.
After the first case was seen in China, Turkey started to take precautions to
struggle with the COVID-19. Depending on the developments, preventive
measures against pandemic extended from day by day. According to recent
information, it aimed to estimate the indirect effects of COVID-19 on the number
of foreign visitors to Turkey under alternative hypothetical scenarios. The findings
of the study show that if border closure lasts one month, demand will decline by
5%, for 45 days closure decline will be 9%, there will be 13% decline on demand
for 2-month closure, 24% decline for 3-months and, 37% for 4- months, compared
Günay et al. Journal of Ekonomi 04 (2020) 80–85
84
to 2019 if there is no demand decline, which is the optimistic scenario. As our
estimation of hypothetical Scenario A., in which a decline in demand is at the
same level for each month, results show that the demand of foreign visitor
could decline between 14% to 53% due to the border closure. If Scenario B will
be realized, in which the decline in demand will recover with equal proportion
month by month, demand will decline between 10% to 46% under different
alternatives due to border closure and decline rate scenarios. This can be
regarded as the most influential phenomenon as a health crisis for Turkish
tourism in the late 20th and early 21st century. These effects will be recovered
within the years, but we should not forget that being healthy is the most
important thing for human beings.
According to the estimation results of alternative scenarios, the decline in
demand is expected to be in the range of 5% to 53%. This means, if the worst
scenario comes true, it will be one of the worst tourism crises that Turkey has
experienced. This result shows that COVID-19 will be more effective than other
health outbreaks such as SARS (Wall, 2006; McAleer et al., 2010), Avian Flu
(Brahmbhatt, 2005), Swine flu (Haque and Haque, 2018) observed in last two
decades. Under the assumption that the spending of a foreign visitor remains
the same as in 2019 at $642, Turkish foreign visitor receipts will decrease to
$13.7 billion (52.8%) as the worst, and $27.4 billion (5.3%) as the best
alternative scenario for 2020. It means a loss of tourism revenues to $15.2
billion as the worst, and to $1.5 billion as the best alternative scenario for 2020.
Recent news about COVID-19 shows that the future of the pandemic is still
unclear. On the other hand, we also carry optimistic views. To minimize the
harm of the COVID-19 pandemic to Turkish tourism, it is necessary to develop
recovery plans and implement them urgently.
The study has some important limitations, and the findings should be
handled under these limitations. The study was conducted by using alternative
probabilistic scenarios to forecast the number of foreign visitors to Turkey. In
this respect, the findings of the study should be considered under hypothetical
scenarios. On the other hand, providing information and shedding light on
stakeholders for planning and future decisions makes the study important. It is
suggested to estimate and determine the potential and probable effects of
COVID-19 on tourism receipt and economic growth for future studies
depending on tourism.
References
Airlines suspend China flights because of coronavirus (2020, January 31),
Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-
health-airlines-factbox/airlines-suspend-china-flights-because-of-
coronavirus-outbreak-idUSKBN1ZU131
Airlines suspend flights due to coronavirus outbreak (2020, February 26),
Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-
health-airlines-factbox/factbox-airlines-suspend-flights-due-to-
coronavirus-outbreak-idUSKCN20K0GZ.
Alhas, A.M. (2020, February 21). Turkey: All arrivals from Iran checked for
coronavirus, Anadolu Ajansı. Retrieved from
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/health/turkey-all-arrivals-from-iran-checked-
for-coronavirus/1740920
Altay, E. (2014). Bankacılıkta Risk. İstanbul: Derin Yayınları.
Au, A.K.M., Ramasamy, B. and Yeung, M.C.H. (2005) The effects of SARS on the
Hong Kong tourism industry: An empirical evaluation. Asia Pacific Journal
of Tourism Research, 10 (1): 85-95. DOI: 10.1080/1094166042000330236.
Aydın, H.K. (2020, February 26). Turkish passenger flights with Iran
suspended, Anadolu Ajansı. Retrieved from
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkey/turkish-passenger-flights-with-iran-
suspended/1745983.
Bayerische Behörden bestätigen ersten Fall in Deutschland (2020, January
27), Der Spiegel. Retrieved from
https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/medizin/corona-virus-erster-fall-
in-deutschland-bestaetigt-a-19843b8d-8694-451f-baf7-0189d3356f99
Calantone, R. J., Di Benedetto, C. A. and Bojanic, D. (1987). A Comprehensive
Review of the Tourism Forecasting Literature, Journal of Travel Research,
26(2). 28-39.
China Expands Virus Lockdown, Encircling 35 Million (2020, January 23), New
York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/23/world/asia/china-coronavirus-
outbreak.html
China reports first death from mysterious outbreak in Wuhan (2020, January
11), Aljazeera. Retrieved from
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/china-reports-death-
mysterious-outbreak-wuhan-200111023325546.html
Confirmado el coronavirus en un turista alemán en La Gomera (2020, January
31), Noticias. Retrieved from
https://www.antena3.com/noticias/sociedad/confirmado-caso-
coronavirus-gomera_202001315e34a9380cf2cfb788f47b07.html
Conte, primi due casi di coronavirus confermati in Italia. Il 2 febbraio
l'evacuazione degli italiani da Wuhan (2020, January 31), Agenzia Ansa.
Retrieved from
https://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/cronaca/2020/01/30/coronavirus-
conferenza-stampa-conte-sigillata-stanza-turisti-cinesi_f3155eb8-ddfd-
405a-abf3-84ba870c666e.html
Coronavirus reaches Europe as France confirms 3 cases (2020, January 24),
Deutsche Welle. Retrieved from https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-
reaches-europe-as-france-confirms-3-cases/a-52145333
de Kluvyer, C. A. (1980). Bottom-Up Sales Forecasting Through Scenario
Analysis, Industrial Marketing Management, (9): 167-170.
First coronavirus case diagnosed in Turkey (2020, March 10), TRT World.
Retrieved from https://www.trtworld.com/turkey/first-coronavirus-case-
diagnosed-in-turkey-34449
Frechtling, D. C. (2001). Forecasting tourism demand: methods and strategies. UK:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Haque, T.H. and Haque, M.O. (2018). The swine flu and its impacts on tourism in
Brunei. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 36, pp. 92-101,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.12.003.
Hassani, B. K. (2016). Scenario Analysis in Risk Management. Switzerland:
Springer Int. Publishing.
Henderson, J. C. (2004). Managing a health-related crisis: SARS in Singapore.
Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10 (1): 67–77.
https://doi.org/10.1177/135676670301000107.
Henderson, J.C. and Ng, A. (2004). Responding to Crisis: Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Hotels in Singapore. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 6: 411–419
Horuz, M. E. (2020, April 01). Turizmciler Kovid-19 salgını sonrası dönemden
umutlu, Anadolu Ajansı, retrieved from
https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/ekonomi/turizmciler-kovid-19-salgini-sonrasi-
donemden-umutlu-/1787487 on 1.04.2020.
Iran reports two suspected fatal cases at Qom hospital (2020, February 16), BBC
News. Retrieved From https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-
51563039
Isaac Mizrachi and Galia Fuchs, 2016 Should we cancel? An examination of risk
handling in travel social media before visiting ebola-free destinations,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Volume 28, 2016, Pages
59-65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.01.009.
Işık, C., Sirakaya-Turk, E. and Ongan, S. (2019). Testing the efficacy of the
economic policy uncertainty index on tourism demand in USMCA: Theory
and evidence. Tourism Economics, 1354816619888346.
Isik, C., Dogru, T. and Turk, E. S. (2018). A nexus of linear and non-linear
relationships between tourism demand, renewable energy consumption,
and economic growth: Theory and evidence. International Journal of
Tourism Research, 20(1): 38-49.
Isik, C. (2012). The USA’s international travel demand and economic growth in
Turkey: A causality analysis:(1990–2008). Tourismos: An International
Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 7(1): 235-252.
Isik, C. (2010). Türkiye'de Yabancı Ziyaretçi Harcaması ve Turizm Gelirleri
İlişkisi: Bir Eş-bütünleşme Analizi (1970-2008). Sosyoekonomi, 13(13).
Kaplan, F. and Aktas, A.R. (2016). The Turkey Tourism Demand: A Gravity Model,
The Empirical Economics Letters, 15 (3): 265-272.
Kulendra, N. and Witt, S.F. (2003). Leading Indicator Tourism Forecasts. Tourism
Management, 24: 503-510.
Kuo, H-I., Chen, C-C., Tseng, W-C., Ju, L-F., Huang, B-W. (2008). Assessing impacts
of SARS and Avian Flu on international tourism demand to Asia. Tourism
Management, 29 (5): 917-928.
McAleer, M., Huang, B-W., Kuo, H-I., Chen, C-C., Chang, C-L. (2010). An
econometric analysis of SARS and Avian Flu on international tourist arrivals
to Asia. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25 (1): 100-106.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.07.015.
Günay et al. Journal of Ekonomi 03 (2020) 80–85
85
Mckercher, B. and Chon, K. (2004). The over-reaction to SARS and the collapse
of Asiantourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (3): 716-719.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkey (2020a). Monthly Bulletins.
Retrieved from https://www.ktb.gov.tr/EN-256541/2020.html.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkey (2020b). Tourism Receipts and
Expenditures-Average Expenditures (2003-2019). Retrieved from
https://www.ktb.gov.tr/EN-249307/tourism-receipts-and-
expenditures.html.
Nedelman, M. (2020, February 1). New report on first US case of novel
coronavirus details mild symptoms followed by pneumonia, CNN.
Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/31/health/
washington-coronavirus-study-nejm/index.html.
New China virus: Cases triple as infection spreads to Beijing and Shanghai
(2020, January 20), BBC News. Retrieved from
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51171035.
New virus surging in Asia rattles scientists (2020, January 20), Nature.
Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00129-
x?utm_source=fbk_nnc&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=naturene
North Korea bans foreign tourists over China virus: Tour agency (2020,
January 22), Aljazeera. Retrieved from
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/north-korea-bans-foreign-
tourists-china-virus-tour-agency-200122042416138.html.
Novelli, M., Burgess, L.G., Jones, A. and Ritchie, N.W. (2018). ‘No Ebola…still
doomed’ – The Ebola-induced tourism crisis. Annals of Tourism Research,
70, pp. 76-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2018.03.006.
Page, S., Song, H., & Wu, D. C. (2012). Assessing the Impacts of the Global
Economic Crisis and Swine Flu on Inbound Tourism Demand in the
United Kingdom. Journal of Travel Research, 51(2): 142–153.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287511400754.
Pine, R. and McKercher, B. (2004). The impact of SARS on Hong Kong’s tourism
industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
16 (2), pp. 139-143. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110410520034.
Sahin, T. (2020, February 3), Turkish Airlines extends flight suspension to
China, Anadolu Agency. Retrieved from
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/economy/turkish-airlines-extends-flight-
suspension-to-china/1722904.
Schnaars, S. P. (1987). How to Develop and Use Scenarios. Long Range
Planning, 20(1): 105-114.
Sifolo, N. and Sifolo, P.P.S. (2014). The tourism inconvenience of the Ebola
epidemic: lessons for the South African tourism sector. African Journal of
Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 4 (1): 1-11.
Song, H. and Turner, L. (2006). Tourism Demand Forecasting, in International
Handbook on the Economics of Tourism (Eds. L. Dwyer and P. Forsyth). UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Turkey cancels international flights amid virus outbreak (2020, March 27),
TRT World. Retrieved from https://www.trtworld.com/turkey/turkey-
cancels-international-flights-amid-virus-outbreak-34918
Turkey, Pakistan shut Iran border; Afghanistan bans travel over virus fears
(2020, February 23), TRT World. Retrieved from
https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/turkey-pakistan-shut-iran-
border-afghanistan-bans-travel-over-virus-fears-34039
Türkiye’nin uçuş yasağı getirdiği ülkelerin tam listesi (2020, March 20),
Turizm Günlüğü. Retrieved from
https://www.turizmgunlugu.com/2020/03/20/turkiyenin-ucus-yasagi-
getirdigi-ulkelerin-tam-listesi/
UNWTO (2020, Mar 27). International Tourist Arrivals Could Fall by 20-30%
in 2020. Retrieved from https://webunwto.s3.eu-west-
1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2020-03/24-03Coronavirus_0.pdf.
UNWTO (2020b, April 01). Tourism and COVID-19. Retrieved from
https://www.unwto.org/tourism-covid-19.
Uysal, M. and Crompton, J. L. (1985). An Overview of Approaches Used to
Forecast Tourism Demand, Journal of Travel Research, 23(4). 7-15.
Wall, G. (2006). Recovering from SARS: The case of Toronto Tourism. In
Tourism, Security and Safety: From Theory to Practice (Eds. Mansfeld, Y.
and Pizam, A.) 143-152. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Yıldızalp Özmen, M. and İnal, A. (2020). Kültür ve Turizm Bakanı Ersoy:
Öngörümüz turizm sezonu mayıs sonuna ertelenecek, Anadolu Ajansı.
Retrieved from https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/politika/
Zorlu, F. (2020, January 27). Turkey urges citizens not to travel Hubei,
China, Anadolu Agency. Retrieved from
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkey/turkey-urges-citizens-not-to-
travel-hubei-china/1715718.
Fatih Günay, received Ph.D. degree in Tourism
Management from Mersin University Graduate School
of Social Sciences, Turkey in 2019. He is currently
working as research assistant at Mersin University
Faculty of Tourism. His research interest includes
finance, financial management, tourism, accounting,
tourism economy, tourism demand, and recreation.
ORCID: 0000-0003-0892-514X
Engin Bayraktaroğlu, received Ph.D. degree in
Tourism Management from Anadolu University
Graduate School of Social Sciences, Turkey in 2019. He
is currently working as assistant professor at Anadolu
University Faculty of Tourism. He is the associate
editor of Anadolu University’s Journal of Tourism,
Leisure and Hospitality. His research interest includes
destination value, destination development, tourist
mobility, philosophy of tourism.
ORCID: 0000-0002-9956-2593
Kahraman Özkul, received his Bachelor's Degree in
Hospitality Management from Kocatepe University
School of Tourism and Hotel Management. He is
currently working as editor at Mavi Deniz Publications.
In addition to working in various social responsibility
projects, he also serves as the chairman of an
educational CSO, namely 'Eğitim İçin Varız.' His
research interest includes hospitality management
and tourism education.
ORCID: 0000-0002-2124-9636
