This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Crompton, J. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Economic Impact Studies: Instruments for Political Shenanigans?

Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Sciences at Texas A&M University

Most economic impact studies are commissioned to legitimize a political position rather than to search for economic truth. Often, this results in the use of mischievous procedures that produce large numbers that study sponsors seek to support a predetermined position. Examples are selected primarily from the reports of ostensibly expert consultants that illustrate 10 of these mischievous procedures: including local residents; inappropriate aggregation; inclusion of time-switchers and casuals; abuse of multipliers; ignoring costs borne by the local community; ignoring opportunity costs; ignoring displacement costs; expanding the project scope; exaggerating visitation numbers; and inclusion of consumer surplus. The political payoff of these shenanigans is discussed.

Key Words: economic impact studies • errors • procedures • abuse

Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 45, No. 1, 67-82 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0047287506288870


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. P. Sam and J. Scherer Stand Up and Be Counted: Numerical Storylines in a Stadium Debate International Review for the Sociology of Sport, March 1, 2008; 43(1): 53 - 70. [Abstract] [PDF]