1. Introduction
Tourism is a new industry that developed rapidly after World War II. It is increasingly developing, and has become one of the largest industries in the world [
1]. Meanwhile, China’s tourism industry is developing at a high speed, and has become a brand new way of stimulating the country’s social and economic development. With rapid development, many consider that the tourism industry promotes economic growth, but damages the environment. However, whether in China or other countries, the relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment is very complicated. For example, the tourism industry can promote economic growth and the environmental quality, but also might restrain them simultaneously [
2]. Furthermore, the quality of the development of the tourism industry is closely related to cultural and environmental protection of tourist destinations [
3].
The development of regional tourism industries is interactive with the economy and the environment. They develop together and combine mutual benefit and reciprocity. If any element is ignored, there will be errors and biases when we study the relationship between regional tourism industries, the economy and the environment. An important question is whether the relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment mutually promote each other well. Therefore, the relationship between the two should be explored and tested deeply, which is the purpose of this study. The specific goal of this study is to integrate the tourism industry, the economy and the environment into a unified framework to analyze the relationship between the three by selecting their representative indices and using the Vector Auto Regression(VAR) coupling model and the econometric regression model.
In the present study, Qingyang City, Gansu Province is used as the case study area [
4]. The VAR coupling model was established to study the coupling relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment, and a quantitative analysis model was built to study the “curse effect” on the economy and the environment caused by the development of the tourism industry, as well as the mechanisms involved. Based on these analyses, relevant conclusions are drawn, with some countermeasures and suggestions proposed. Therefore, the present study compensates for some of the shortcomings of existing research, and thus has great theoretical and practical significance. This study could provide a reference for the further development of the regional tourism industry; offer a valuable reference for the design and development of any local government policy that aims to coordinate the relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment; and promote their development in a sustainable manner.
2. Literature Review
Studies on the relationship between the development of the tourism industry and the economy and environment often start from two basic aspects: the relationship between the tourism industry and the economy, and the relationship between the tourism industry and the environment.
A large number of studies have investigated the relationship between the tourism industry and the economy from different perspectives. For instance, theoretical analyses and simple statistical analyses, such as the input–output model and the theory of tourism multipliers, have commonly been used to study such a relationship in the early stages of research into the connection between tourism and the economy. For example, by using 109 countries as case studies, Du et al. [
5] found that the tourism industry played the most effective role in promoting long-term economic growth. Moreover, Mathieson [
6] developed the theory of tourism multipliers to quantify the impact of the tourism industry on the economy. Based on the index of per capita gross domestic product (GDP) and the total number of tourists, Rizal and Asokan [
7] discovered that the development of the tourism industry in Sikkim State of India could promote economic growth. More recently, relevant studies have mainly focused on testing the relationship between tourism and the economy by utilizing time series data or panel data, with the co-integration test and the Granger causality test representing some commonly used quantitative analysis methods. Balaguer and Cantavella-Jorda [
8] first applied co-integration theory to the study of the relationship between the tourism industry and the economy, finding a long-term equilibrium relationship between the development of the former and regional economic growth in Spain. The Granger causality test further revealed that the development of the Spanish tourism industry promoted the country’s overall economic growth in a unidirectional way. By using data from between 1980 and 2013 in Kenya, Akama [
9] found the local tourism industry could promote economic development. Overall, whether the studies are based on early qualitative theories and a simple statistical analysis, or on more recent sophisticated time series analysis, the main conclusions can be divided into three categories. The first category is that the development of the tourism industry promotes economic growth in a unidirectional way. Some supporting evidence is as follows. By using the input–output model, Khoshkhoo et al. [
10] demonstrated that the tourism industry could promote local economic development in Iran. Additionally, based on panel data collected from 19 island countries between 1990 and 2007, Seetanah [
11] found that the development of the tourism industry played a significant role in promoting economic growth. Furthermore, based on panel data collected from 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries between 1997 and 2012, Govdeli and Direkci [
12] came to a similar conclusion. The second category of main conclusions is that the development of the tourism industry and economic growth could mutually facilitate each other with a bidirectional causal relationship. For example, Ongan and Demiroz [
13] analyzed data collected between 1980 and 2004 in Turkey, and ascertained that there was a bidirectional causal relationship between the tourism industry and economic growth. Additionally, by using the Granger causality test, Roudi et al. [
14] reached a similar conclusion for small island developing states. Furthermore, Besel and Uygun [
15] also analyzed the relationship between economic growth and tourism development in Turkey by Fourier cointegration analysis and time varying causality analysis, and ascertained that there was a bidirectional causal relationship between them. The third category of main conclusions is that the development of the tourism industry does not promote economic growth in a unidirectional way. For instance, Arslanturk et al. [
16] used the Vector Error Correction Model(VECM) to analyze data collected between 1963 and 2006 in Turkey, with the results showing that there was no Granger causality between tourism earnings and GDP, indicating that the assumption of tourism-led growth (TLG) is not always valid for each case study. Additionally, Kokotovic [
17] analyzed the relationship between the tourism industry and economic growth in Croatia and the Czech Republic, and found that tourism would not promote economic growth in a unidirectional way. Moreover, based on data from between 1990 and 2015 of 10 top global tourism destinations, Shahbaz et al. [
18] reached a similar conclusion.
The tourism industry is highly dependent on the environment, as the latter is its developmental basis. International research on the relationship between the tourism industry and the environment focuses on two major aspects, namely: the impact of the tourism industry on the environment, and the impact and consequence of environmental changes on the development of the tourism industry. Studies on the impact of the development of the tourism industry on the regional environment began in the 1930s, with a focus on the negative impact tourism activities had imposed on the ecological environment (e.g., Lutz [
19]). Wall and Wright [
20] first started to explore the mechanisms that might explain the impact of the tourism industry on the environment, and the work of authors such as Wall [
21] led to wide debates about this issue. In the 1990s, Wackernagel [
22] developed the ecological footprint evaluation method, which has been widely used to study the relationship between the tourism industry and the environment. In the 21st century, this field has been further expanded and deepened. Overall, there are two contrasting viewpoints. The first is that the development of the tourism industry imposes a negative impact on the environment. Most researchers reached similar conclusions. Stefanica [
23] found that transportation in the tourism industry had the most serious impact on the environment. Additionally, Rizal and Asokan [
24] discovered that the environmental impact of tourism is different for each region, and concluded that a detailed study on environmental impact assessment is needed for sustainable management and environmental protection. Furthermore, Stanciu et al. [
25], using the Romanian Black Sea Coast as a case study, found that the tourism industry had a significant negative impact on sustainable development. Moreover, Jafari [
26] studied the relationship between tourism and ecological protection and sustainable development in villages, and found that tourism had a positive impact on ecological protection and sustainable development in the early stage, but had a negative impact in the late stage. The second contrasting viewpoint is that the development of the tourism industry can have a positive impact, or negligible negative impact, on the environment, although the number of such studies is quite limited. A few studies supported this viewpoint. Gossling et al. [
27] believed that the development of the tourism industry was highly likely to lead to an increase in water consumption, but pointed out that it was not the main cause. Additionally, Smith [
28] felt that the development of the tourism industry had two contrasting impacts on the ecological environment; both negative and positive impacts could be found. Researchers are also beginning to test the impact of the ecological environment on the tourism industry. For example, Hein et al. [
29] conducted an empirical study in Spain, and discovered that the climate and weather could, to some extent, affect the development of tourism activities. Additionally, taking South-East Asian countries as examples, Brahmasrene and Lee [
30] discovered that the tourism industry could inhibit carbon emissions, and that ecotourism was effective. Furthermore, Chin et al. [
31] studied the impact of the environment on the development of tourism in Malaysia, and found that a quality ecological environment would promote the competitiveness of rural tourism destinations effectively.
Chinese scholars began to study the relationship between the tourism industry and the economy relatively late, and their findings can be categorized as follows. Firstly, the tourism industry can promote the economy in a unidirectional way. For example, Zhang et al. [
32] analyzed the relationship between tourism and economic growth in 11 cities in Shanxi Province, and found that tourism had a clear pulling effect on the economy. Secondly, the tourism industry and the economy can facilitate and promote each other in a bidirectional way. For example, based on data between 2000 and 2016, Chen and Gao [
33] found that there was a long-term stable and coordinated relationship between the tourism industry and the economy in Guangxi Province, by using VAR and the Granger causality test model; however, the role of tourism in promoting economic growth was not as significant as the contribution of economic growth to the development of the tourism industry. Additionally, Sui and Liu [
34] analyzed the relationship between the development of tourism and macroeconomic growth in China using a non-linear Markov switching causality (MSC) model, and found that there was bidirectional causality between the two. Moreover, Yang [
35] found that there was a long-term and stable relationship between economic growth and the tourism industry based on data from Guilin from the past 10 years. The third category of findings are those that suggest the development of the tourism industry will not promote economic development. For example, based on data from between 2000 and 2015 for 11 cities in Zhejiang, Xu et al. [
36] found that when tourism dependence reached a certain level, the negative externality of tourism became obvious, which was unfavorable to economic growth.
In the 1980s, Chinese scholars began to study the relationship between the development of the tourism industry and environmental quality. Specifically, they studied the impact of the development of the tourism industry on the ecological environment, as well as the impact of the ecological environment on the development of the tourism industry. For the former, consistent conclusions were drawn, which were similar to the findings of international experts, that the development of the tourism industry would damage the ecological environment. For instance, Fan and Yang [
37] confirmed that the unreasonable use of tourism resources would cause serious damage to the local ecological environment. In contrast, studies on the impact of the environment on the tourism industry are quite limited. Some scholars have applied either the ecological footprint or environmental capacity method in this area. For example, Liu and Wang [
38] used the ecological footprint theory and the ecological capacity theory to analyze the ecological capacity of tourism in the Nanji wetlands.
The relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment in different countries and regions has become a widely discussed issue in the field of tourism research in recent years. Both international and domestic studies have expounded the relationship between the tourism industry and the economy, and the relationship between the tourism industry and the environment, from different perspectives. To date, research has made some important breakthroughs; however, problems and deficiencies still exist. Firstly, from the perspective of sustainable development, studies that establish a unified framework to systematically study the relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment are still very limited. Secondly, studies that test the interactive relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment, as well as the potential mechanisms involved, are lacking and inconclusive. Therefore, this study aims to address these shortcomings.
5. Conclusions
By utilizing a quantitative analysis method and relevant models, the present study uses Qingyang City, Gansu Province, as a case study, and tests the relationship between the development of the tourism industry, the economy and the environment in that region. The main conclusions are as follows:
A mutually promoting relationship does not exist between the development of the tourism industry and economic growth; instead, a unidirectional relationship is found between the two elements. Specifically, economic growth significantly increases the development of the tourism industry, although the latter fails to effectively promote the former as it has imposed a negative influence on economic growth. Similarly, a mutually promoting relationship does not exist between the development of the tourism industry and environmental quality; instead, a unidirectional relationship is found between the two elements. Specifically, the development of the tourism industry significantly increases environmental pollution by accelerating the emissions of environmental pollutants. However, as expected, the spread of environmental pollution has not significantly promoted the development of the tourism industry.
This study found that, in our study area, the development of the tourism industry fails to effectively stimulate and increase economic growth, and additionally that the curse effect on economic growth imposed by the development of the tourism industry does exist. The development of the tourism industry not only imposes a direct negative influence on economic growth, but also adversely affects it in an indirect way through its influence over some transmission factors such as price levels, technology innovation, human capital and openness levels. Furthermore, the development of the tourism industry fails to effectively improve environmental quality; instead, it promotes the emissions of environmental pollutants and exacerbates environmental pollution. Therefore, the curse effect on the environment imposed by the development of the tourism industry does exist. The development of the tourism industry not only imposes a direct negative influence on the environment, but also adversely affects it in an indirect way through its influence over some transmission factors such as environmental policy, human capital, technology innovation, and level of marketability.
During the process of regional development, the relationship between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment needs to be correctly addressed. By optimizing the industrial structure, improving the economic benefits of the tourism industry, stressing the importance of building a brand, expanding the tourism market, strengthening tourism education, encouraging personnel training, promoting technology innovation, forming intelligence support systems for tourism development, taking effective measures to promote environmental protection, and changing the manner of development in the tourism industry, it should be possible to realize the coordination of and sustainable development between the tourism industry, the economy and the environment.