Tourism destination competitiveness evaluation in Sichuan province using TOPSIS model based on information entropy weights

Tao Gu; Peiyu Ren; Maozhu Jin; Hua Wang

doi:10.3934/dcdss.2019051

Article Contents

2019, Volume 12, Issue 4&5: 771-782. Doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2019051 open access

This issue Previous Article A new approach for worst-case regret portfolio optimization problem Next Article On the design of full duplex wireless system with chaotic sequences

Tourism destination competitiveness evaluation in Sichuan province using TOPSIS model based on information entropy weights

Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610064, China

* Corresponding author: Maozhu Jin, E-mail: jinmaozhu@scu.edu.cn
* Corresponding author: Maozhu Jin, E-mail: jinmaozhu@scu.edu.cn

Received: June 2017

Revised: December 2017

Published online: August 2019

Abstract / Introduction Full Text(HTML) Figure(1) / Table(7) Related Papers Cited by

Abstract

This study applied the combined methods of Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and Information Entropy Weights to evaluate the tourism destination competitiveness (TDC) of 13 cities in Sichuan Province. In the empirical study, IEW was used to determine the subjective weights of four aspects and 26 evaluation indexes, which have the influence on TDC. In addition, applying the essential ideas of TOPSIS, chosen alternative should have the shortest geometric from the positive ideal solution (PIS) and the longest geometric distance from the negative ideal solution (NIS), to conduct a comprehensive evaluation and sort-based analysis. In the end, the essay arranged the TDC of 13 cities in Sichuan Province from high to low, then produced policy recommendations. The results represent that IEW & TOPSIS were an efficient and effective way to evaluate TDC.

Keywords:

Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 58F15, 58F17; Secondary: 53C35.

Citation:

FullText(HTML)

Figure 1. weight of indexes in TDC

Download: Full-size image PowerPoint slide

Table 1. Data of tourism resources in Sichuan Province

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 2. Data of tourism capacity in Sichuan Province

City	Number of travel agency (units)	Number of star-reated hotels (units)	Civilian-owned value added of tertiary industry (%)
Chengdu	462	128	109.4
Guangyuan	14	20	108.6
Luzhou	27	23	109.2
Leshan	75	33	109.9
Mianyang	61	30	110.0
Nanchong	49	26	110.6
Aba	34	19	110.5
Yibin	27	15	110.1
Dazhou	27	10	110.4
Ya'an	12	21	112.3
Ganzi	20	9	107.2
Suining	13	22	119.2
Zigong	21	8	109.4

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 3. Data of tourism industrial strength in Sichuan Province

City	Number of domestic tourist arrivals (10000 person times)	Domestic tourist income (100 million yuan)	Number of international tourist arrivals (10000 preson times)	International tourist income (UAD 10000)
Chengdu	18423.02	1616.95	197.8	85768.11
Guangyuan	2769.43	158.69	0.18	40.96
Luzhou	2539.51	2539.51	0.22	57.31
Leshan	3342.14	383.9	12.79	4656.25
Mianyang	2821.12	277.13	0.74	212.25
Nanchong	3076.5	253.28	0.25	71.07
Aba	2861.34	240.78	15.44	2852.81
Yibin	2822.24	256.02	0.17	63.21
Dazhou	1351.01	90.36	0.29	99.29
Ya'an	1658.91	108.6	0.37	102.92
Ganzi	792.66	79.03	6.25	1799.29
Suining	2432.79	201.09	0.72	148.95
Zigong	2106	200.38	0.16	52.5

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 4. Data of economic support ability

City	GDP per capita (yuan)	Total investment in fix asset (100 million yuan)	Passenger-kilometers of highways (10000 passenger-km)	Possession of civil motor vehicles (10000 units)	Total lengh of highways (km)
Chengdu	70019	6620.37	1231084	312.8	22789
Guangyuan	22117	561.74	183548	14.0	19520
Luzhou	29655	1181.03	641482	21.0	13516
Leshan	37125	863.91	247432	22.3	11658
Mianyang	33558	1080.37	336848	37.8	19887
Nanchong	22639	1244.54	466942	27.7	22446
Aba	27043	383.34	254599	10.4	13218
Yibin	32318	1130.26	330827	19.2	18301
Dazhou	24411	1176.20	241365	18.1	19510
Ya'an	30052	471.40	106689	11.8	6286
Ganzi	18096	465.72	142998	7.4	29584
Suining	24691	913.68	201427	13.3	8805
Zigong	39145	597.61	183364	13.8	6456

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 5. Data of eco-environment support ability in Sichuan Province

City	Air quality index	Rate of forest coverage (%)	Public green area per capita (sq.m)
Chengdu	8.95	38.4	13.5
Guangyuan	5.99	55.3	11.2
Luzhou	6.05	50	9.01
Leshan	7	55.47	9.03
Mianyang	6.79	52.4	9.63
Nanchong	6	39.8	11.6
Aba	2.98	24.95	5.5
Yibin	6.58	44.2	13.08
Dazhou	7.66	41.5	11.7
Ya'an	6.26	63.1	13.08
Ganzi	3.83	33.04	9
Suining	4.9	39.01	6.8
Zigong	7.69	33.7	11.3

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 6. Ranking of tourism resources in Sichuan province and the value of $ d^+ $, $ d^- $, $ c_i $

		$ d^+ $	$ d^- $	$ C_i $	Rank
1	Chengdu	0.550814	0.669486	0.548624	2
2	Guangyuan	0.621754	0.422017	0.404320	5
3	Luzhou	0.850805	0.331103	0.280143	9
4	Leshan	0.663612	0.437401	0.397272	7
5	Mianyang	0.591847	0.578172	0.494156	3
6	Nanchong	0.769232	0.520604	0.403620	6
7	Aba	0.477572	0.697994	0.593752	1
8	Yibin	0.834214	0.293777	0.260443	10
9	Dazhou	0.861676	0.297350	0.256552	11
10	Ya'an	0.834464	0.350878	0.296014	8
11	Ganzhi	0.720549	0.517163	0.417838	4
12	Suining	0.911916	0.154774	0.145097	13
13	Zigong	0.898165	0.251098	0.218486	12

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 7. The ranking of $ d^+ $, $ d^- $, $ c_i\sum $ and $ c_i $ of Sichuan province

											d⁺	d^-	C_i	Rank
Chengdu	0.54862	2	0.67592	1	0.82103	1	0.87753	1	0.68903	2	0.06354	0.96347	0.93813	1
Guangyuan	0.40432	5	0.08201	12	0.05213	8	0.23084	8	0.66767	3	0.74736	0.43434	0.36755	6
Luzhou	0.28014	9	0.11224	10	0.39159	2	0.26133	5	0.53443	10	0.66540	0.40101	0.37604	3
Leshan	0.39727	7	0.18843	4	0.10089	3	0.18735	9	0.62099	6	0.71011	0.42463	0.37421	4
Mianyang	0.49416	3	0.17271	5	0.06571	6	0.29001	4	0.61834	7	0.67970	0.49456	0.42117	2
Nanchong	0.40362	6	0.17270	6	0.06767	5	0.31423	3	0.55298	9	0.69664	0.41520	0.37344	5
Aba	0.59375	1	0.14770	7	0.07580	4	0.15504	11	0.00000	13	0.80958	0.46607	0.36536	7
Yibin	0.26044	10	0.12460	9	0.06293	7	0.26075	6	0.66484	4	0.77253	0.37281	0.32550	9
Dazhou	0.25655	11	0.13029	8	0.01438	13	0.24862	7	0.64432	5	0.79596	0.360216616	0.31156	10
Ya'an	0.29601	8	0.20576	3	0.02281	11	0.08964	12	0.77753	1	0.79706	0.435391142	0.35327	8
Ganzhi	0.41784	4	0.01219	13	0.01869	12	0.33984	2	0.28915	11	0.79262	0.341512783	0.301121399	11
Suining	0.14510	13	0.38640	2	0.04866	9	0.08901	13	0.28881	12	0.85787	0.283852311	0.248617312	13
Zigong	0.21849	12	0.09030	11	0.04191	10	0.15590	10	0.55993	8	0.84206131	0.296212909	0.260229832	12

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Related Papers

Cited by

References

	J. M. Amigó and Á. Giménez , Applications of the min-max symbols of multimodal maps, Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences, 1 (2016) , 87-98.
	F. Balibrea , On problems of Topological Dynamics in non-autonomous discrete systems, Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences, 1 (2016) , 391-404.
	D. Buhalis , Marketing the competitive destination of the future, Tourism Management, 21 (2000) , 97-116.
	R. Couch, Destination competitiveness: ExploringFoundations for a long term research program, Proceedings of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada 1994. Annual Conference 1994.
	A. M. d'Hauteserre , Lessons in managed destination competitiveness: The case of foxwoods casino resort, Tourism Management, 21 (2000) , 23-32.
	L. Dwyer , T. H. P. Forsyth and P. Rao , The price competitiveness of travel and tourism: A comparison of 19 destinations, Tourism Management, 21 (2000) , 9-22.
	M. J. Enright and J. Newton, Determinants ofTourism destination competitiveness in asia pacific: Comprehensiveness and universality, Journal of TravelResearch, 2005.
	N. Gooroochurn and G. Sugiyarto , Competitiveness indicators in the travel and tourism industry, Tourism Economics, 11 (2005) , 25-46.
	N. Gooroochurn and G. Sugiyarto , Competitiveness indicators in the travel and tourism industry, Tourism Economics, 11 (2005) , 25-46.
	S. S. Hassan , Determinants of market competitiveness in an environmentally sustainable tourism industry, Journal of Travel Research, 38 (2000) , 239-245.
	C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Method and Application, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1981.
	S. S. Kim , Y. Z. Guo and J. Agrusa , Preference and positioning analyses of overseas destinations by mainland chinese outbound pleasure tourists, Journal of Travel Research, 44 (2005) , 212-220.
	M. Kozak and M. Rimmington , Measuring tourist destination competitiveness: Conceptual considerations and empirical findings, Hospitality Management, 18 (1999) , 273-283.
	M. Kozak and M. Rimmington , Measuring tourist destination competitiveness: Conceptual considerations and empirical findings, Hospitality Management, 18 (1999) , 273-283.
	C. E. Shannon , A mathematical theory of communication, Bell System Technical Journal, 27 (1948) , 379-423,623-656. doi: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x.
	D. Larry and K. Chulwon, Destination Competitiveness: Determinants and Indicators, Current Issues in Tourism, 2003.
	K.-L. Wang and C.-S. Wu, A Study of Competitiveness of International Tourism in the South East Asian Region, Eleventh Annual East Asian Seminar on Economics: Trade in Services, June 22-24, 2000, Seoul, Korea.
	Y. Yoon, Development of a Structural Model for Tourism Destination Competitiveness from Stakeholders Perspectives, 2002.