See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323320700

System Dynamics in Tourism Planning and Development

Article in Tourism Planning and Development · February 2018

DOI: 10.1080/21568316.2018.1436586

CITATIONS READS

64 4,371

3 authors:

Pooyan Sedarati Sérgio P. Santos

Universidade do Algarve Universidade do Algarve
7 PUBLICATIONS 75 CITATIONS 55 PUBLICATIONS 1,592 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pedro Pintassilgo
Universidade do Algarve
56 PUBLICATIONS 1,040 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Pooyan Sedarati on 19 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 This is a post-print (i.e. final draft post-refereeing) of a manuscript submitted to Journal of Tourism Planning
& Development.

To cite this article: Pooyan Sedarati, Sérgio Santos & Pedro Pintassilgo (2018) System Dynamics in Tourism
Planning and Development, Tourism Planning & Development,

To link to this article: : https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2018.1436586

System Dynamics in Tourism Planning and Development

Pooyan Sedarati, Faculty of Economics, University of Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
Email: [email protected]

Sérgio Santos, Faculty of Economics and Center for Advanced Studies in Management and Economics (CEFAGE), University
of Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
Email: [email protected]

Pedro Pintassilgo, Faculty of Economics and Center for Advanced Studies in Management and Economics (CEFAGE),
University of Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
Email: [email protected]

Abstract:
System Dynamics (SD) is a method that has the ability to capture the dynamic behavior of a
complex system over time. The tourism industry, due to the myriad of interactions among its
sectors, can be considered as a complex system. Therefore, SD has drawn the attention of
tourism researchers over the last two decades. The goal of this study is to assess the application
of the SD method in planning and development of the tourism industry. For this purpose, a
systematic literature review (SLR) was performed and a set of 27 papers was selected. The
analysis of the papers shows the applicability of the SD method to address a multitude of
different problems. Overall, however, it can be concluded that whilst the SD method has shown
considerable potential to provide tourism decision makers and regulators with tools for
strategic and operational policy development at many different levels of analysis, the number
of applications in this sector is still limited. Therefore, it is recommended that the use of SD
modelling in the tourism industry be extended in order to promote a holistic understanding of
the complex issues faced by this industry and to assist in the development of more effective
policies.

Keywords: System Dynamics, Tourism, Systematic Literature Review, Planning and

Development.
1. Introduction
Tourism has become one of the biggest industries in the world and can be deemed as an
economic sector (Baggio, 2013). It is an industry that is growing rapidly internationally and
regionally, and has a direct impact on economic, environmental and social aspects (Sinclair-
Maragh & Gursoy, 2016). Also, tourism has become a driving force in sustainable
development, encouraging many developing countries to promote tourism policies (UNWTO,
2013).

Tourism offers a multitude of activities spread across different sectors in order to meet tourists’
preferences. Goeldner and Ritchie (2003) proposed a model of the tourism industry
components which acknowledges that tourists use different services such as transportation,
food services, accommodation, travel trade, cultural activities, sports and recreation,
attractions, retail trade and other tourism services. Among these, the attractions sector plays a
fundamental role in tourism since every industry and service provider depends on it.

Changes in the tourism system depend on a variety of forces that have impacts on each other
(Boukas & Ziakas, 2014). Tourism is known for having various positive influences on
economic growth which can contribute to the creation of job opportunities, generate income
for local people and motivate them to increase their production (Brouder, 2012). The financial
flow resulting from tourism activities is fundamental to support investment on infrastructures,
fostering competitiveness, economic growth and development (Balaguer & Cantavella-Jordá,
2002).

The interdependence of the socioeconomic and the natural environment systems and their
impacts on sustainability should not, however, be neglected (Burger et al., 2012). Although
tourism is considered a major driving force in development, it can also generate negative
impacts. For example, it is well known that tourism plays a significant role in CO2 emissions
by using transportation, accommodation and other facilities which make tourism one of the
important contributors to climate change (Egilmez & Tatari, 2012; Law et al., 2012). The
presence of tourists in a destination leads to higher production of solid and liquid waste, which
can cause serious problems for destinations that lack a suitable infrastructure.

Many destinations thrived into mature touristic spots through an early introduction of a correct
and adaptive management plan along with suitable infrastructure. In order to maintain the high
quality of a destination it is necessary to observe and control the activities and elements of the

2
place. However, this can be a difficult task, as tourism destinations are complex systems, with
numerous interactions between the sectors operating within the destinations, and there are
multiple stakeholders, with varied and at times conflicting interests. The complexity of the
problems that emerge in tourism systems, due to the diversity of interests of the different
stakeholders and the dynamic and non-linear nature of the interactions between the different
components of the systems, has discouraged the use of linear thinking. Consequently, the
attention of researchers has drawn to a different interdisciplinary approach for managing
tourism destinations.

The adoption of a systems thinking and holistic approach to promote understanding of tourism
problems and tourism systems is justified on the grounds that the components of the tourism
industry interact with each other and offer the same final product which is an attraction and
experience for tourists (Sánchez, Callarisa, Rodríguez, & Moliner, 2006). A holistic, well-
managed and systematic plan is, therefore, necessary to develop and promote the destination
as a whole and to ensure its sustainability. The duty of sustainable tourism is not only
environmental protection, but also includes the livelihood, social and economic dimensions of
stakeholders in a touristic area (Angelevska-Najdeska & Rakicevik, 2012).

In order to capture and analyze the dynamic and complex nature of systems, multiple
approaches have been proposed over the last three decades. The System Dynamics (SD)
approach is one of the best known examples.

The purpose of this study is to explore the extent to which the SD approach has been
implemented in the planning and development of the tourism industry. In particular, we intend
to use systematic literature review to scrutinize what has been done in this field, and present
possible future areas of research.

2. What is System Dynamics?

System Dynamics (SD) is a computer-based approach to understand and analyze a system’s
behavior over time. The SD approach is capable of breaking a system into pieces and examining
each element of the system to find the impacts and outcome of changes on these elements at a
macro-level. System Dynamics has been applied in different contexts such as learning
organizations (Senge, 1997), transportation (Egilmez & Tatari, 2012), ecological modelling
(Semeniuk, Haider, Cooper, & Rothley, 2010) and other different fields of study. Maani &

3
Cavana (2000) explain, in their book, that SD can be applied to a variety of fields and purposes.
For instance, it can be used in designing a new system or restructuring and improving an
existing system. System Dynamics can also be used to predict the behavior of complex systems
and analyze how each element and segment of a system interact with other components.

The concept of SD comes from the idea of “industrial dynamics” which arose from the work
of Forrester (1961) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Originally was first used in
engineering and management. The SD approach is based on the concepts of internal interaction,
information feedback, and cause and effect.

It is an underlying premise of the SD method that the behavior of a system arises from its causal
structure. The ultimate goal in SD modelling is, therefore, to improve understanding regarding
the links between structure and behavior in order to seek endogenous explanations for the
problematic dynamics. It also intends, to design policies that can demonstrate the desired
changes in behavior.

System Dynamics is known as a powerful and practical method which has the ability to model
complex systems in order to study how they behave over a period of time. To understand the
problems and behavior of a system, it is necessary to look into the cause and effect among its
elements. It is well known that some effects are caused simultaneously by different elements.
By breaking down the whole system’s structure into smaller segments and increasing the
possibility of studying dynamic relationships among elements of the system, SD can be
considered as one of the best tools for a modeler to have a holistic approach in analyzing the
system as a whole.

According to Richardson & Pugh (1981) the use of SD should be focused on a system’s
problem, not the system itself. Dynamic problems have two main features which make them
complex and difficult to analyze. The first one is that dynamic problems contain quantities
which will change over time. The second one is that they include feedback structures.

Causal loop as well as stock and flow diagrams are the most important parts in SD modelling.
The ability to find out the relations of feedback processes, stock and flow diagrams, time delays
and nonlinearities in the system is considered as an art in SD modelling (Sterman, 2000). The
relations among elements of the system and all the causes and effects are shown in causal loop
diagrams. Causal loop diagrams are very helpful in structuring a mental model of the system
and forming the relations among elements. Coyle (2000) discusses the ability of causal loop
diagrams to show the interactions of a system and gain a better understanding of its dynamics.

4
These diagrams help the modeler to easily convert qualitative dynamic models into quantitative
ones. Furthermore, causal loop diagrams are frequently used to study dynamic problems and
are aimed at giving an insight towards the problem rather than at its quantification. When the
objective is to analyze the system by developing quantitative simulation models, it is common
to precede the development of these models with stock and flow diagrams. In these diagrams
the stocks represent the state of the system, which changes by increases or decreases in the
flow rates. Also, stock and flow models provide a useful view over the status of the system’s
performance due to the implementation of different decisions and policies. After using causal
loop and/or stock and flow diagrams to represent the main components of the system, it is
common to use computer simulation in order to validate the nature of the relationships between
the different components of the system by representing the behavior of past data. Then the
outputs of this simulation are compared with the real behavior of the system to determine
whether the SD model is valid or not. Once a model has satisfied basic validity tests and has
been considered satisfactory for its purpose, it can be used for policy analysis (Forrester, 1961),
exploring what-if scenarios (Morecroft, 1988), optimizing key decisions (Coyle, 1985), and
investigating organizational redesign (Wolstenholme, 1999). In either case the model is aimed
at improving a problematic behavior.

Due to its characteristics the SD approach has been applied to many fields and industries and
with many different purposes. The tourism industry has been no exception as it has also been
targeted by this approach with the purpose of assisting the implementation of sustainable
tourism policies, identifying the strengths and the weaknesses of tourism systems, assisting the
management and planning of tourism destinations, managing the value chain in the hotel
industry, among many other purposes. The application of the SD model in the tourism industry
is discussed in detail in the subsequent sections. In particular, by carrying out our literature
review, we aim to assess the extent to which SD has been used in planning and development
of the tourism industry.

The following section discusses the methodology employed to identify the relevant papers and
is composed of two parts. The first part explains what a systematic literature review (SLR) is,
as well as the basic concepts, and the main advantages of this method. Then, the second part
describes each of the steps necessary to conduct a SLR.

5
3. Methodology
In order to scrutinize the application of the SD method in tourism, a systematic approach was
used to analyze and explore the literature regarding this subject. The Systematic Literature
Review (SLR) is a method to summarize a large amount of information and has proved valuable
to identify and evaluate the relevant studies regarding a specific subject. This method pays
close attention to a set of scientific methods in order to decrease systematic errors (Beelmann,
Petticrew, & Roberts, 2006).

The SLR method initially arose in the field of medical science and health care (Higgins &
Green, 2008) and has not yet been extensively applied to tourism research (Carter, Thok,
O’Rourke, & Pearce, 2015). One of the first definitions of this technique was proposed by
Sweet & Moynihan (2007) who describe it as a good tool for gathering and assessing the studies
on a specific topic, while minimizing the bias compared to non-systematic reviews. In
comparison with the traditional literature review methods, the SLR aims at specific research
objectives or questions. Similarly, to other methods, the SLR presents advantages and
disadvantages. One of its main disadvantages is that it is very time consuming while demands
considerable effort on the part of the researcher. One of its main advantages is that it provides
a replicable and a broader/structured perspective towards a problem. In what follows we
discuss the main steps taken to systematically review the relevant literature to our research.

3.1. Defining the Review Objective

In order to conduct a SLR, a review objective was defined: Assessment of the application of
the SD method to the tourism industry. For the successful achievement of this objective, all the
relevant publications had to be identified.

3.2. Searching for the Relevant Papers

In order to identify the relevant papers to address our review objective, a search was conducted
on the “Scopus”, “Web of Science” and “EBSCO” bibliographic databases. To this effect a set
of terms was defined and searched in the titles, abstracts and keywords of all the papers indexed
in these databases. The Boolean operators “OR” and “AND” were also used in our search to
ensure that only the relevant papers would be retrieved. The search string used was:

6
("System* Dynamic*" OR "System* Thinking" OR "System* Approach" OR "Causal loop*"
OR "Stock and Flow*" OR "Feedback Loop*" OR "Causal Mapping" OR "System*
Archetype*") AND (*Touris*)

For the purpose of this study, we focused on the papers published in peer reviewed journals
from 1961 to 2015. Our search was undertaken on the 11th of June 2015, therefore does not
include the papers published afterwards. Only “articles” were selected in the document type
tab in the bibliographic databases. In order to exclude the irrelevant papers from our analysis,
it was necessary to define the exclusion criteria. All the selected papers that met the criteria
below were excluded from further analysis.

Table 1. Exclusion Criteria in the SLR

CRITERIA
1 Non-peer review journals, books and book chapters, master and PhD theses
2 Other languages than English
3 Conference papers
4 Different subjects than the tourism industry and its related sectors
5 Papers referring to dynamic systems but not using the System Dynamics method
6 Review articles on related topics
7 Papers published in predatory publications (Beall, 2014)

3.3. Checking the Titles and Abstracts

By using the above search string, and restricting our analysis to “articles”, our search resulted
in the identification of 369 papers. After checking all the three databases for duplicates, 144
papers were excluded, and thus the number of papers found potentially relevant was reduced
to 225. Then, the titles and abstracts of these papers were read and all the papers that were not
related to the research objective (i.e. applying SD to tourism) were excluded from further
analysis.

3.4. Obtaining Full Texts and Data Extraction

Once the title and abstract of each paper were screened, the full version of the papers considered
potentially relevant was downloaded. After assessing and extracting the details of each paper,
while applying the exclusion criteria, a final sample of 27 papers was obtained for further

7
analysis. In order to summarize the information retrieved, and to compare different
publications, a table was elaborated (Table A1 in appendix) with the following sections:
authors, journal where the study was published, general objective of the paper, location of the
problem analyzed, stakeholders involved, type of modelling implemented (i.e. quantitative vs
qualitative), objective of using SD, and sector where the analysis took place. Figure 2 presents
a flowchart showing the process we have followed to obtain the final sample of papers.

Number of Potential Works

Identified by Using the Search
String (N=369)

144 Duplicate Papers Were

Excluded

Number of Papers Found

Potentially Relevant Based on
Their Abstracts and Titles N= 225

Excluded
1. Does not use application of SD= 163

Are they 2. Not Related to Tourism = 18

Relevant? 3. Not in English = 1
4. Predatory Publication = 6
5. Books, Thesis, and… = 6
6. Not Found = 4
27 Papers Selected for Further
Analysis

Figure 1. Flowchart of Paper Selection Process

3.5. Limitations of the Methodology

While the SLR offers many advantages and is a well-established methodology, it also has some
limitations. In particular, the search and selection criteria used can lead to some relevant papers
being excluded from the analysis. For example, although we covered the publications indexed
in some of the best known bibliographic databases, it is important to bear in mind that articles
not indexed in “Scopus”, “Web of Science” or “EBSCO” were excluded. Studies discussing

8
the application of SD in tourism that used a language other than English, were also missed from
our analysis. In the same way, articles that did not use the terms tourist or tourism in the title,
abstract or keywords or publications other than articles, such as books, book chapters,
conference proceedings and dissertations, were also not covered. In spite of this, the criteria
used and the bibliographic databases searched allow us to offer a robust assessment of the state
of the art in which regards the application of SD in the tourism industry.

4. Results
The data extraction table (Table A1 in appendix) of the SLR provided us with a useful overview
about the selected papers which enables us to analyze aspects such as publication trends,
geographical location and type of stakeholders involved in the modelling process. After
assessing the papers in detail, the results show that only 27 of the papers, published in
international journals and indexed in the bibliographic databases selected, use the SD method
in the field of tourism. Moreover, we found that only eight out of the selected papers were
published in tourism journals. Likewise, only one paper was published in the “System
Dynamics Review”, the most well-known journal in the area of System Dynamics. Kybernetes,
in the field of information and knowledge management, with three publications is the journal
with the largest number of papers in our sample. The remainder 15 papers were published in
three main scientific fields: environmental & ecological modelling, computer science and
operations research.

Regarding the modelling method, 37% of the selected papers used exclusively qualitative
modelling, 3.7% exclusively a quantitative approach, and 59.3% used both qualitative and
quantitative modelling. In what follows we present some results regarding the number of
publications by year, the geographic location of the tourism system analyzed, the distribution
of publications by sector and the stakeholders involved.

4.1. Publication by Year

Figure 3 shows the publishing frequency of the selected articles from 1994 to 2015. It indicates
that while the total number of publications is not very expressive, there is an upward trend in
the use of SD in tourism, over the past two decades.

9
 Figure 2. Publication by Year

4.2. Geographic Location of the Tourism Systems Analysed

Figure 4 shows the geographic location of the tourism systems analyzed by means of the SD
approach. China with five papers and Slovenia with three papers are the countries that have
received most attention, thus far. They are followed by Australia, Croatia, Taiwan and USA,
with two papers each. It should be noted that three papers, instead of analyzing a tourism
system in a specific location, focused on a general model. Two papers addressed multiple
countries (North Mediterranean countries; and Southern European Islands).

Figure 3. Geographic Location of the Tourism System Analysed

4.3. Distribution of Publications by Sector

When we analyze the distribution of the publications by sector, as shown in Figure 5, the
attractions sector, with 14 papers, is the tourism sector that has been most frequently studied

10
by means of the SD modelling approach. This sector is composed of various sub-sectors, such
as cultural, and natural attractions which offer a wide range of activities to tourists (Honggang,
2003; Liu & Chen, 2014; Xu & Dai, 2012). The accommodation sector was addressed in three
papers (Georgantzas, 2003; Law et al., 2012; Stipanovic & Rudan, 2014). Authors have also
addressed other sectors, for instance, Woodside (2009) focused on sustainable golf tourism in
the Adventure & Outdoor sector, Golob & Jere (2014) in the Event sector, and Li, Zhang, Xu,
& Jiang (2015) in the Transportation sector. In which regards the sectoral application of SD,
the studies selected show that there is also a significant number of multisector applications (7
papers).

Figure 4. Distribution of Publications by Sector

4.4. Stakeholders Involvement

Involving stakeholders in the modelling process plays an important role in gaining a better
understanding of a complex problem and in ensuring implementation of the solutions proposed.
Despite the importance of stakeholder involvement, our review indicates that only 11 papers
involved stakeholders in the modelling process. This involvement took place mainly during the
mental modelling phase. Stakeholders were involved in the studies directly and indirectly. The
direct involvement happened through workshops and collaboration in the modelling process.
In some studies, however, stakeholders were indirectly involved through questionnaires which
helped modelers to gain a better perspective of stakeholders’ opinions. The fact that the
majority of the studies (16 out of 27) does not explicitly acknowledge the involvement of key
stakeholders raises some concerns regarding the acceptability and, consequently, the likely
impact of these studies.

11
5. Discussion
The main objective of the selected publications is the use of SD to analyze and discuss tourism
and its related systems. However, due to the variety of the tourism industry’s sectors and sub-
sectors, the focus of the papers has varied from specific subjects to broader ones. As mentioned
above, tourism is a complex system which makes it hard to describe concisely. Therefore, the
model proposed by Goeldner & Ritchie (2003, p. 14) was used in our review to structure the
discussion regarding the implementation of SD in the tourism industry. This model shows the
processes, activities and outcomes of tourism by focusing on different components such as
natural resources, built environment and operating sectors of the tourism industry.

After analyzing the selected articles and considering the operating sectors of the tourism
industry in Goeldner & Ritchie’s (2003) model, the papers were organized into six different
categories, which are as follows: 1. Multisector, 2. Attractions, 3. Adventure & Outdoor
Recreation, 4. Transportation, 5. Accommodation, 6. Events. The following discussion reports
on what has been done regarding the application of SD in tourism with an emphasis on the
components of the tourism management model proposed by Goeldner & Ritchie (2003). This
discussion is structured to scrutinize different aspects of the SD application in tourism planning
and development. In this way we aim to understand how complex problems are defined in
tourism and what kind of dynamic characteristics have been identified to conceptualize the
tourism system.

5.1. Multisector Applications

Some authors use SD to explain the dynamic characteristics of destinations and present a more
holistic approach regarding their feedback structures. According to Lazanski & Kljajić (2006),
the tourism industry is composed of a large number of sectors with different economic, social
and environmental dimensions. Each of these sectors can be a complex system by itself and,
therefore, they should be managed simultaneously. In addition, Chen (2004) used SD to build
a decision support system for natural resources-based tourism to analyze different
environmental and investment scenarios. In his study, SD was used to create a generic model
for regions where environmental conservation is necessary due to tourism activities. The result
of three scenarios reveals the importance of exploring resource development policies for
regional tourism development. In order to successfully implement sustainable policies, Farsari
(2012) emphasizes the necessity of well-defined sustainable tourism policies. Therefore, in
order to develop a conceptual holistic model of a sustainable tourism policy, the author uses
12
SD to demonstrate the interrelations between policy issues. The conceptual model presented in
this study is a practical tool for helping policy planners to gain a holistic perspective regarding
sustainable tourism development. System Dynamics was also used for analyzing tourism
sustainability in Tibet (Zhang, Ji, & Zhang, 2015). Selected sustainability indicators were
found closely interrelated in the model. Thus, to maintain sustainability in the region, it was
found necessary to change the employment concept, and form a new approach towards
environmental protection. Schianetz et al. (2007), in turn, emphasize the role of stakeholders’
collaboration at an organizational level for achieving sustainable tourism development. After
reviewing six case studies, the authors describe the ability of SD modelling in promoting
stakeholders’ collaboration and encouraging a learning process. The learning tourism
destination framework presented in this study is a provisional concept, which was used to
review the case studies.

Lazanski & Kljajić (2006) draw a bigger picture of the tourism’s complex system by explaining
the complexity of interactions among elements of a system. The authors emphasize the benefits
of learning through decision-making processes, which contributes to the development of a
system. In this study, viewpoints of different methods about complex systems were discussed,
and afterwards a dynamic model of Slovene tourism was presented to indicate the potential of
SD in solving complex problems.

Peric & Djurkin (2014) use system thinking to provide a new perspective within destination
management and social responsibility. The authors also emphasize the importance of paying
attention to stakeholders’ interests for tourism development. In this study, a deeper look was
given to the community-based tourism with an organizational approach at the destination level.
According to the authors, the use of the system thinking approach in Croatia turned out to be a
successful tool for achieving economic and social sustainability. In a similar vein of research,
Ropret et al. (2014) used a systems approach to analyze the Slovenian tourism policy plan. In
their work, a qualitative approach was implemented to identify the strengths and weaknesses
of the current system. The study demonstrated the inability of the current policy plan in
achieving an optimal tourism development.

5.2. Attractions Sector

The attractions sector consists of multiple sub-sectors which vary from cultural attractions to
nature-based and recreational activities. This sector plays a vital role in the tourism industry by
offering different activities and experiences. Different elements are involved in the perception

13
of tourists regarding destination attractions. These differences show the importance of
destination management in order to promote attributes that correspond to everyone’s interests
(Kozak, 2002; Richards, 2002). Pull and push factors have impact on travelers’ choice, the
former concerns the destination attractions and the latter the socio-psychological needs of the
traveler (Klenosky, 2002). In the following sections, the attractions sector is divided into four
sub-categories according to the papers’ focus.

5.2.1. Cultural attractions

Three papers focused on cultural attractions and a consensus can be found among them that
sustainable cultural tourism can be reached in the long run. China was the geographic location
analyzed in the three papers. A generic model by Liu & Chen (2014) and a case study by
Honggang (2003) featured SD to assess cultural tourism development. The third article (Xu &
Dai, 2012) focuses on community development in heritage sites. It shows the interaction among
components of such system and tests different policies. Overall, SD proved to be an effective
and useful technique in capturing the complexities and nonlinearities of cultural tourism.
Moreover, the results showed the necessity of evaluating the vulnerability of cultural resources
and the ability to transform them into cultural attractions.

In managing cultural tourism, Liu & Chen (2014) assert on the necessity of using a holistic
approach rather than focusing on a specific objective in order to establish an effective and
inclusive management system. In this study, SD was used to investigate the conflicts among
different interest groups in cultural tourism. It was also used to find the components which lead
to dynamic changes in the system. From the outcome of the simulation, we can conclude that
there are four main aspects that can contribute to a sustainable development of cultural tourism:
value assessment of cultural heritage, investment protection, locals’ participation, and
implementation of a crowding ratio.

In the case of the Zhouzhuang region (Honggang, 2003), SD was used to find radical solutions
for improving cultural tourism development in the long run by analyzing the complexities and
feedbacks of a tourism destination. Improving operators’ performance, stakeholders’
participation, carrying capacity, and protecting the physical environment were the implemented
scenarios for tourism development. The results show that all the scenarios worked temporarily
and failed to find a radical solution in the long run.

In heritage sites, Xu & Dai (2012) used SD to gain a new perspective regarding the interrelation
between community development and tourism at heritage sites. They investigated the

14
implementation of four different scenarios, having concluded that controlling the use of
residential houses for tourism and using the generated income to restore the monuments leads
to a sustainable preservation and to a change in residents’ attitudes.

5.2.2. Natural Attractions

5.2.2.1. Concentration on Islands Tourism

Islands destinations, due to the numerous interactions among their components, can be
considered as complex systems and they have drawn researchers’ attention (van den Bergh &
Nijkamp, 1994). In order to reach sustainable development in such destinations, tourism is
being used to enhance the economies by improving the islands’ supply chain system
(Georgantzas, 2003; van den Bergh & Nijkamp, 1994; Xing & Dangerfield, 2010).

Three papers in our selected sample focused on the application of SD to the management of
islands destinations. In the case of the Sporades islands (van den Bergh & Nijkamp, 1994), the
study was conducted to explore conflicts between economic development and environmental
conservation and to model the dynamic interaction between land and marine environments.
The purpose of the study was to reach an environmentally sustainable development. Van den
Bergh and Nijkamp (1994) used two constraints for designing scenarios. The first constraint
was the high dependency of the Sporades islands’ economy on tourism. The second one was
the sensitive condition of environmental conservation of Monk seals which is influenced by
the economy and human activities. Afterwards, scenarios were formed based on social,
economic and environmental patterns. The outcome of this study showed the ability of SD to
provide insight over the long run. Moreover, the different scenarios indicate that tourism
growth would reduce unemployment and enhance the economy but in order to realize such an
outcome, it was necessary to implement some restrictive policies to reduce the negative impacts
on the environment.

Carlsen (1999) argues that tourism is an open system and constantly growing towards a more
complex state. The open system of tourism is responsive to social, economic and environmental
changes. In the work of Carlsen (1999), a soft system methodology (SSM) was used in order
to provide a systematic approach towards small island destinations with population of less than
one million. The results show the applicability of SSM for the management and planning of
island tourism destinations. This technique is particularly useful for small islands where the
interrelation among elements of the system can be captured in an easier way.

15
Following the dynamic modelling for tourism development in island destinations, carried out
by several authors, Xing & Dangerfield (2010) used SD to demonstrate the ability of this
technique in modelling the sustainability of mass tourism in island tourism economies. In this
study, instead of developing a forecasting model, the authors provide a model to test different
scenarios for policy planning and stakeholders’ engagement. The result of the tested scenarios
showed that imposing sustainable policies would be hard, therefore, it is necessary to make
stakeholders aware of the importance of these policies.

5.2.2.2. Concentration on landscapes and land use

Mao et al. (2014) explain the complexity and dynamics of land use and assert on the
contribution of tourism development to generate positive economic impacts, as well as the
negative impacts on the environment. The Lijiang River was used as a case study to explore
the environmental effects of tourism on land use and show the interrelations between land use
systems and tourism. The river provides tourism with many natural resources which make the
management of sustainable tourism development and environmental conservation necessary.
After running five scenarios, the results of simulation show that in order to reach sustainable
land use development, imposing a strict construction policy combined with a normal
environmental conservation is necessary. Morris et al. (2006) used, in turn, SD to identify the
factors of sustainable land use management in Herefordshire by using a local learning
approach. System Dynamics helped stakeholders to see Herefordshire as an endangered
cultural landscape. This contributed to a sense of local identity and encouraged local residents
to develop the destination in a sustainable manner.

5.2.2.3. Concentration on Coastal areas

Coastal regions are dealing with a multitude of activities and industries which causes a negative
impact on the ecological system of these areas. System Dynamics is being used for different
purposes such as integrated coastal zone management, social-ecological modelling, and
learning tourism destinations. “Tourism Future Simulator”, developed by Walker et al. (1998),
is one of the primary works on the application of SD to the management of coastal areas. This
simulator proved to be a powerful tool for capturing nonlinearities of the tourism industry.
Walker et al. (1998) used SD to manage tourism development in the Great Barrier Reef in a
sustainable manner and asserted on the necessity of understanding the forces which shape the
future of tourism in a holistic approach. According to these authors, tourism was considered as

16
a complex system with a multitude of activities which should be managed simultaneously. In
order to do so, a framework including all the factors that affect the tourism system was created.

According to Chang et al. (2008), coastal areas are considered complex regions which are in
interaction with multiple complex systems. Coastal zones are being used for tourism,
agriculture, fisheries, and industrial activities which increases the necessity of conserving these
areas. Coral reefs have an important role as ecosystems and also provide humans with different
opportunities for tourism activities. In the work of Chang et al. (2008), a decision support
system was used in order to provide stakeholders and policy planners with a tool to analyze
sustainable coral reef management. Seven scenarios were implemented and tested on the model
and the results showed that imposing an entrance fee to access the coastal zone would be the
best policy. The use of SD contributed to the enhancement of management efficiency and coral
reef sustainability.

In the process of investigating the interactions between humans and the environment,
Mavrommati et al. (2014) built a framework for the sustainability of lake systems. Four
scenarios with different environmental impacts on lake system were defined. The purpose of
using SD in this study was to build a framework for identifying the components which have
impacts on the socioeconomic and natural systems of St. Clair Lake. The proposed scenarios
in this study show that a holistic approach in the management of the lake’s system is necessary.

In developing a social-ecological system (SES) in the coastal area of Dutch Wadden Sea, a
group model building was used to understand the dynamic characteristics of the SES
(Vugteveen et al., 2015). Sustainable mussel fisheries and tourism development were the
analyzed scenarios. The result of the simulation showed a strong relation between three
variables: “Natural Value”, “Experience Value”, and “Number of Tourists”. The experience
from natural environment turned out to be the best motivation for tourism activities in the
region. Since group model building is an effective approach that facilitates SD modelling by
capturing the stakeholders’ views, it has also been used to systematically manage the
sustainability of wetland in Jiading, Taiwan (Chen, Chang, & Chen, 2014). System Dynamics
was used to analyse complexities of the wetland system by considering the impact of the yacht
industry on the Jiading wetland. The results of simulation showed that the development of a
system for wetland management was necessary. In addition, Schianetz et al. (2009) examined
the concept of learning tourism destination (LTD) in the Ningaloo Coast (Australia). In this
study, stakeholders had the opportunity to participate in decision making through a learning

17
process. System Dynamics modelling in this study proved to be a strong tool for creating a
shared vision and understanding of the tourism system.

5.3. Adventure and Outdoor Recreation Sector

The Adventure & Outdoor Recreation sector is characterized by complex mutual relationships
between the ecological systems and human factors. Tourism, natural resources, climate change,
local communities, and recreational activities are all interdependent (Chen, 2004; Schianetz et
al., 2009; Woodside, 2009). Only one article was found in this sector: Woodside (2009) applies
system thinking to golf tourism. The author uses causal mapping to demonstrate the
relationships among golf, tourism, and the environment as a motive for regional development.
Since criticism to the golf industry is growing rapidly, due to its environmental impacts, the
lack of an effective control and management system can be felt (Woodside, 2009). Due to the
existence of contradictions regarding golf, tourism, and the environment, the application of SD
can be helpful to gain a better perspective in order to reach an agreeable decision by all the
stakeholders. The results of simulation show that the government regulations can play an
important role in sustainable development of golf courses.

5.4. Transportation Sector

The transportation sector deals with a huge amount of interactions at the same time. Moreover,
as all industries and services depend on transportation, this sector plays a significant role in the
supply chain (Egilmez & Tatari, 2012). Many authors argue that accessibility and transport
infrastructure can have a strong influence on a destination’s attraction (Dickinson, Robbins, &
Fletcher, 2009; Kozak & Rimmington, 2000; Odoki, Kerali, & Santorini, 2001). As pointed
out by Crompton & Ankomah (1993), Crouch, (1994) and Prideaux (2000), tourist choice of a
destination is affected by the time and cost of the travel, showing the importance of transport
infrastructure in tourism destinations. Tourists are constantly using different means of
transportation and consequently they have direct and indirect impact on traffic, delays,
construction and maintenance. Meanwhile, climate change has drawn a serious attention to
CO2 emissions associated to tourism (Egilmez & Tatari, 2012; Guzman, de la Hoz, & Monzón,
2013; Trappey et al., 2012).

In our selected sample only the article by Li et al. (2015) featured SD to model and demonstrate
the complexities and interdependencies of transportation infrastructure on tourism
development. Their paper focuses on destinations which share the same tourism market and

18
explores how infrastructure can influence tourist choice. Competition and cooperation
scenarios were used to assess the role of the transportation infrastructure of Xidi and Hongcun
heritage sites in tourist’s choice behavior. The results of simulation show that both scenarios
can increase the attractiveness of the destinations. Furthermore, cooperation on investment can
increase the chance of merging two destinations into one.

5.5. Accommodation Sector

Sharpley (2000) discusses how accommodation contributes to economic gains within a

destination and plays an important role in creating a tourism experience. The accommodation
sector provides a multitude of choices for tourists with different preferences from five star
hotels to campsites, each of which, due to their scales and attributes, offers a particular range
of services (Benítez, Martín, & Román, 2007).

Three papers used the SD approach to address the accommodation sector. The first focuses on
the value chain management in the hotel industry in Cyprus (Georgantzas, 2003). The second
addresses the links between greenhouse gas emissions of the hotel industry and tourists’ choice
in Egypt (Law et al., 2012). The third explores innovation in the hospitality logistics in Croatia
(Stipanovic & Rudan, 2014). Georgantzas (2003) uses SD in order to investigate the hotel value
chain structure in Cyprus’ tourism and what would happen to Cyprus’ tourism in the future. He
suggests four scenarios for the hotel value chain in Cyprus. These scenarios aim to assess
changes in bed capacity, value chain parameters, tourism growth, and price seasonality. The
bed capacity and value chain scenarios indicate that the impact of the bullwhip effect on the
tourism market can be seen more on suppliers than hotels. The tourism growth scenario
suggests that building hotels in Cyprus is prone to market changes and any fluctuation can lead
to significant negative impacts. The last scenario, the one exploring price seasonality, indicated
that reducing seasonality can contribute to increasing hotels’ profit. The results showed that
Cyprus’ hotel value chain is unstable due to its specific structure. Building several scenarios
proved helpful for hotel managers to prepare themselves for any further changes.

Stipanovic & Rudan (2014) explain the influence of the providers of hospitality services and
their value system characteristics on the logistic process. In this study, they explore the ways
to innovate the logistic process in the hospitality industry. The importance of environmental,
social and economic aspects of responsible logistics was considered. Causal loop diagrams are
used to demonstrate the significance of a new strategic orientation in a dynamic environment.
The study shows the role of knowledge and information in sustainable development of the

19
companies in the hospitality industry. It also demonstrates the necessity of constant innovation
to cope with the dynamics of the tourism industry. In the process of reaching a green economy,
Law et al. (2012) used different environmental, social and economic scenarios to demonstrate
the impact of pollution on the opinion of tourists. These scenarios showed the ability of SD in
assessing the impacts of tourism indicators such as destination revenue, hotel occupancy level
and greenhouse gases emissions.

5.6. Event Sector

The event sector has been recognized as one of the important players in the development of
tourism destinations as it brings competitive advantages (Getz, 2008; Golob & Jere, 2014). The
only study we found in this sector is the one by Golob & Jere (2014), which focuses on
categorizing the event sector based on the quality of different factors in Slovenia. A qualitative
SD approach was used to explain the event tourism system in a more understandable and
rational way. The outcome of the modelling process showed the necessity of a holistic approach
in the management of operation and information systems. Simultaneously, it also showed that
changing the legislative system of events into a more standardized system is necessary.

6. Conclusions
In the previous sections, the application of SD in the tourism industry was explored. This
helped us to gain a better perspective about the use of this method in the tourism industry. The
SLR performed disclosed useful information about the concentration of publications on each
sector, and opened a new outlook about the possible applications of SD to tourism
development.

A set of 27 papers was selected and reviewed. All the assessed papers showed the relevance of
using the SD method in the tourism industry and its contribution to planning and development
of related sectors. This study aimed to identify the tourism complex problems in different
sectors. Furthermore, it investigated the ways in which a system was structured, and what kind
of behaviors it would generate as a result of different scenarios and policies.

Several other approaches exist to model the complex structure of industries such as geographic
information systems (GIS), and agent-based models (ABM). Nevertheless, the evidence and
results of this study show that the SD ability to integrate qualitative and quantitative

20
information can be an important advantage for capturing the complex interactions of the
different systems in the tourism industry.

The results of the SLR show that only 27 papers have applied the SD method to the tourism
industry, despite its wide use in other fields. This indicates that the application of this method
to tourism is still in an early development phase. As SD is a computer-based method, the
majority of the papers were published in journals in the domains of information & computer
science and environmental & ecological modelling. The number of publications in tourism
related journals is still limited. A considerable number of papers applied the SD method to case
studies. This shows that SD is a practical tool to address real world problems.

Regarding the location of the systems analyzed in the selected papers, our review shows that
many geographical locations are underrepresented; such as Africa, Middle East, and South
America. The review also shows that the majority of the selected papers stakeholders are not
strongly involved in the modelling process. This is significant limitation, as stakeholders’
knowledge is fundamental to designing a reliable model. Moreover, in a tourism destination,
using a group model building approach involving modelers and key stakeholders can be very
helpful for improving mutual understanding of a complex problem. Overall, the idea of
sustainable tourism development prevails in the selected papers, allowing us to conclude that
SD provides researchers with a powerful tool to look at complex problems in a holistic way.

System Dynamics helps to capture and understand the behaviors driving the processes in the
complex system of tourism. Recently, new publications applying SD to tourism have emerged.
Tegegne, Moyle, & Becken (2016) proposed a qualitative system dynamics approach in order
to gain a better understanding of the core components of the destination image of Ethiopia in
the Japanese market. The feedback structure illustrated a holistic view of the destination image
and facilitated the process of identifying the factors affecting the image of Ethiopia as a tourism
destination. The application of system dynamics cuts across a variety of fields in tourism
studies such as health tourism (Vetitnev, Kopyirin, & Kiseleva, 2016) in which system
dynamics is being used to forecast health demand in Krasnodar, Russia. System Dynamics
proved to be a useful method for decision making in health tourism due to the complexity of
this sector and the uncertainty it involves (Vetitnev et al., 2016).

Concurrently, system dynamics is being used as a method to assess and analyze the robustness
of long-term strategies in coastal urban tourism. Carlisle et al. (2016) used system dynamics to
illustrate the ability of this approach to represent a coastal urban system and help in its strategic

21
planning. Pizzitutti et al. (2017) applied system dynamics, in a participatory context, to the
management of tourism in the Galapagos Island, Ecuador. The models presented in the study
show the necessity of developing viable and realistic solutions for all direct and indirect threats
that affect Galapagos.

There are different applications of system dynamics that can help practitioners in managerial
decision making processes. System Dynamics can be used in destination management level,
strategic and policy planning, and project management. For instance:

a) Sustainable tourism policies and strategies can be illustrated by using system thinking
methods;

b) In heritage sites, SD can be used in stakeholder involvement using group model

building which helps to engage stakeholders and modelers to achieve a consensus over
the problems;

c) System Dynamics can help to understand the complex behavior of the hotel industry by
considering all the endogenous and exogenous factors involving its value chain This
helps the hotel managers in long-term planning and increases the accuracy of their cost
benefit analysis;

d) Data driven system dynamics models using “Big data” analysis can facilitate scenario
planning and decision support systems for policy makers.

This study contributed to finding the literature on the application of SD to the tourism industry
but many issues remain to be analyzed by this technique. The majority of papers have focused
on the sectors that independently can be considered as a complex industry. Nonetheless, for
future work, it is important to bear in mind that SD has the potential to analyze tourism systems
either in particular or in general. The most important and necessary work is to concentrate more
on different types of tourism by applying a holistic approach to this industry. For instance,
some issues that could be analyzed include the long run impact of mass tourism on tourism
hotspots or the balancing role of particular tourism activities, as a complementary tool to
promote sustainable tourism development. More specifically, SD can be used for modelling
and strategic planning of natural resources in the tourism industry. Another possible application
is to model the interactions of tourism destinations with focuses such as tourist behavior and
satisfaction level, security issues and the impacts of tourists on a specific environment.

22
Many other issues remain, however, open to research. For example, in the development of
community-based tourism enterprises, a holistic organizational model for social responsibility
in tourism can be developed. In cultural studies, there is a need to increase the number of case
studies in order to expand the scope of the research about heritage systems. Concurrently,
alternative sustainable development approaches have to be found for risk management in
heritage sites. In social-ecological systems, further studies are necessary to improve model
quantification. In Islands systems, many interactions among population, environment and
tourism’s feedback loops are yet to be worked on. In ecosystem services, two challenges remain
ahead, first quantifying ecosystem services on human well-being, and second, developing a SD
model in order to apply the concept of sustainability at operational level. In order to further
scrutinize the hospitality innovation logistic process, it is also deemed necessary to quantify
the new strategic approaches for logistic process improvement. To conclude, SD provides a
strong tool for addressing complex problems in tourism, and for offering several opportunities
for researchers and practitioners alike.

References
Angelevska-Najdeska, K., & Rakicevik, G. (2012). Planning of sustainable tourism
development. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44, 210–220.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.022
Baggio, R. (2013). Oriental and occidental approaches to complex tourism systems. Tourism
Planning & Development, 10(2), 217–227. doi:10.1080/21568316.2013.783731
Balaguer, J., & Cantavella-Jordá, M. (2002). Tourism as a long-run economic growth factor:
The Spanish case. Applied Economics, 34(7), 877–884. doi:10.1080/00036840110058923
Beall, J. (2014). Criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers (2nd edition).
Scholarly Open Access [Blog in Internet], 1–55. Retrieved from
http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/11/30/criteriafor-determining-predatory-open-access-publishers-
2nd-edition/
Beelmann, A., Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social
sciences. A practical guide. European Psychologist. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.11.3.244
Benítez, J. M., Martín, J. C., & Román, C. (2007). Using fuzzy number for measuring quality
of service in the hotel industry. Tourism Management, 28(2), 544–555.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2006.04.018
Boukas, N., & Ziakas, V. (2014). A chaos theory perspective of destination crisis and
sustainable tourism development in islands: The case of Cyprus. Tourism Planning &
Development, 11(2), 191–209. doi:10.1080/21568316.2013.864995

23
Brouder, P. (2012). Creative outposts: Tourism’s place in rural innovation. Tourism Planning
& Development, 9(4), 383–396. doi:10.1080/21568316.2012.726254
Burger, J. R., Allen, C. D., Brown, J. H., Burnside, W. R., Davidson, A. D., Fristoe, T. S.,…
Zuo, W. (2012). The macroecology of sustainability. PLoS Biology, 10(6), e1001345.
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001345
Carlisle, S., Johansen, A., & Kunc, M. (2016). Strategic foresight for (coastal) urban tourism
market complexity: The case of Bournemouth. Tourism Management, 54, 81–95.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman. 2015.10.005
Carlsen, J. (1999). A systems approach to island tourism destination management. Systems
Research and Behavioral Science, 16(4), 321–327. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-
1743(199907/08)16:4321::AIDSRES255> 3.0.CO;2-5
Carter, R. W., Thok, S., O’Rourke, V., & Pearce, T. (2015). Sustainable tourism and its use
as a development strategy in Cambodia: A systematic literature review. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 23(5), 797–818. doi:10.1080/09669582.2014.978787
Chang, Y. C., Hong, F. W., & Lee, M. T. (2008). A system dynamic based DSS for
sustainable coral reef management in Kenting coastal zone, Taiwan. Ecological Modelling,
211(1–2), 153–168. doi:10. 1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.09.001
Chen, H., Chang, Y.-C., & Chen, K.-C. (2014). Integrated wetland management: An analysis
with group model building based on system dynamics model. Journal of Environmental
Management, 146, 309–319. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.038
Chen, K. C. (2004). Decision support system for tourism development: System dynamics
approach. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45(1), 104–112.
Coyle, R. G. (1985). The use of optimization methods for policy design in a system dynamics
model. System Dynamics Review, 1(1), 81–91. doi:10.1002/sdr.4260010107
Coyle, R. G. (2000). Qualitative and quantitative modelling in system dynamics: Some
research questions. System Dynamics Review, 16(3), 225–244. doi:10.1002/1099-
1727(200023)16:3225::AIDSDR195> 3.0.CO;2-D
Crompton, J. L., & Ankomah, P. K. (1993). Choice set propositions in destination decisions.
Annals of Tourism Research, 20(3), 461–476. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(93)90003-L
Crouch, G. I. (1994). Demand elasticities for short-haul versus long-haul tourism. Journal of
Travel Research, 33(2), 2–7. doi:10.1177/004728759403300201
Dickinson, J. E., Robbins, D., & Fletcher, J. (2009). Representation of transport. Annals of
Tourism Research, 36(1), 103–123. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.10.005
Egilmez, G., & Tatari, O. (2012). A dynamic modeling approach to highway sustainability:
Strategies to reduce overall impact. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
46(7), 1086–1096. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2012.04.011
Farsari, I. (2012). The development of a conceptual model to support sustainable tourism
policy in north Mediterranean destinations. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management,
21(7), 710– 738. doi:10.1080/19368623.2012.624298
Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

24
Georgantzas, N. C. (2003). Tourism dynamics: Cyprus’ hotel value chain and profitability.
System Dynamics Review, 19(3), 175–212. doi:10.1002/sdr.275
Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution, and research. Tourism Management,
29(3), 403–428. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2007.07.017
Goeldner, C. R., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2003). Tourism: Principles, practices, philosophies. New
York: Wiley.
Golob, A., & Jere, J. (2014). Standardization and classification of events in tourism based on
a systems approach. Singidunum Journal of Applied Sciences, 11(1), 67–73.
doi:org/10.5937/sjas11-5741
Guzman, L. A., de la Hoz, D., & Monzón, A. (2013). Optimal and long-term dynamic
transport policy design: Seeking maximum social welfare through a pricing scheme.
International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 8(4), 297–316.
doi:10.1080/15568318.2012.696772
Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of
interventions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. doi:org/10.1002/9780470712184.
Honggang, X. (2003). Managing side effects of cultural tourism development - The case of
Zhouzhuang. Systems Analysis Modelling Simulation, 43(2), 175–188.
doi:10.1080/02329290290008202
Klenosky, D. B. (2002). The “pull” of tourism destinations: A means-end investigation.
Journal of Travel Research, 40(4), 396–403. doi:10.1177/004728750204000405
Kozak, M. (2002). Comparative analysis of tourist motivations by nationality and
destinations. Tourism Management, 23(3), 221–232. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00090-5
Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an off-
season holiday destination. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 260–269.
doi:10.1177/004728750003800308
Law, A., De Lacy, T., McGrath, G. M., Whitelaw, P. A., Lipman, G., & Buckley, G. (2012).
Towards a green economy decision support system for tourism destinations. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 20(6), 823–843. doi:10.1080/09669582.2012.687740
Lazanski, T., & Kljajić, M. (2006). Systems approach to complex systems modelling with
special regards to tourism. Kybernetes, 35(7/8), 1048–1058.
doi:10.1108/03684920610684779
Li, J., Zhang, W., Xu, H., & Jiang, J. (2015). Dynamic competition and cooperation of road
infrastructure investment of multiple tourism destinations: A case study of Xidi and Hongcun
World Cultural Heritage. Discrete Dynamics in Nature & Society, 2015, 1–10.
doi:10.1155/2015/962028
Liu, G., & Chen, J. S. (2014). A dynamic model for managing cultural tourism. Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 20(5), 500–514. doi:10.1080/10941665.2014.904805
Maani, K. E., & Cavana, R. Y. (2000). Systems thinking and modelling: Understanding
change and complexity. Albany, New Zealand: Pearson Education.

25
Mao, X., Meng, J., & Wang, Q. (2014). Modeling the effects of tourism and land regulation
on land-use change in tourist regions: A case study of the Lijiang River Basin in Guilin,
China. Land Use Policy, 41, 368–377. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.06.018
Mavrommati, G., Baustian, M. M., & Dreelin, E. A. (2014). Coupling socioeconomic and
lake systems for sustainability: A conceptual analysis using Lake St. Clair region as a case
study. Ambio, 43(3), 275– 287. doi:10.1007/s13280-013-0432-4
Morecroft, J. D. W. (1988). System dynamics and microworlds for policymakers. European
Journal of Operational Research, 35(3), 301–320.
Morris, D., Oreszczyn, S., Blackmore, C., Ison, R., & Martin, S. (2006). A systemic approach
to scoping of factors influencing more sustainable land use in Herefordshire. Local
Environment, 11(6), 683–699. doi:10.1080/13549830600853759
Odoki, J. B., Kerali, H. R., & Santorini, F. (2001). An integrated model for quantifying
accessibility benefits in developing countries. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, 35(7), 601– 623. doi:10.1016/S0965-8564(00)00010-0
Peric, M., & Djurkin, J. (2014). Systems thinking and alternative business model for
responsible tourist destination. Kybernetes, 43(3/4), 480–496. doi:10.1108/K-07-2013-0132
Pizzitutti, F., Walsh, S. J., Rindfuss, R. R., Gunter, R., Quiroga, D., Tippett, R., & Mena, C.
F. (2017). Scenario planning for tourism management: A participatory and system dynamics
model applied to the Galapagos Islands of Ecuador. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(8),
1117–1137. doi:10.1080/09669582.2016.1257011
Prideaux, B. (2000). The role of the transport system in destination development. Tourism
Management, 21(1), 53–63. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(99)00079-5
Richards, G. (2002). Tourism attraction systems. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 1048–
1064. doi:10. 1016/S0160-7383(02)00026-9
Richardson, G. P., & Pugh III A. I. (1981). Introduction to system dynamics modeling with
dynamo. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.
Ropret, M., Jakulin, T. J., & Likar, B. (2014). The systems approach to the improvement of
innovation in Slovenian tourism. Kybernetes, 43(3–4), 427–444. doi:10.1108/K-07-2013-
0154
Sánchez, J., Callarisa, L., Rodríguez, R. M., & Moliner, M. A. (2006). Perceived value of the
purchase of a tourism product. Tourism Management, 27(3), 394–409.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2004.11.007
Schianetz, K., Jones, T., Kavanagh, L., Walker, P. A., Lockington, D., & Wood, D. (2009).
The practicalities of a learning tourism destination: A case study of the Ningaloo Coast.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(6), 567–581. doi:10.1002/jtr.729
Schianetz, K., Kavanagh, L., & Lockington, D. (2007). The learning tourism destination: The
potential of a learning organisation approach for improving the sustainability of tourism
destinations. Tourism Management, 28(6), 1485–1496. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2007.01.012
Semeniuk, C. a. D., Haider, W., Cooper, A., & Rothley, K. D. (2010). A linked model of
animal ecology and human behavior for the management of wildlife tourism. Ecological
Modelling, 221(22), 2699–2713. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.07.018

26
Senge, P. M. (1997). The fifth discipline. Measuring Business Excellence, 1(3), 46–51.
doi:10.1108/ eb025496
Sharpley, R. (2000). The influence of the accommodation sector on tourism development:
Lessons from Cyprus. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(3), 275–293.
doi:10.1016/S0278-4319(00)00021-9
Sinclair-Maragh, G., & Gursoy, D. (2016). A conceptual model of residents’ support for
tourism development in developing countries. Tourism Planning & Development, 13(1), 1–
22. doi:10.1080/21568316.2015.1047531
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics systems thinking and modeling for a complex
world (1st ed.).Irwin: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Stipanović, C., & Rudan, E. (2014). The new strategic orientation in innovating hospitality
logistics system. Tourism & Hospitality Management, 20(2), 195–206.
Sweet, M., & Moynihan, R. (2007). Improving population health : The uses of systematic
reviews. Science. New York, NY: The Milbank Memorial Fund.
Tegegne, W. A., Moyle, B. D., & Becken, S. (2016). A qualitative system dynamics approach
to understanding destination image. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management.
doi:10.1016/j.jdmm. 2016.09.001
Trappey, A. J. C., Trappey, C., Hsiao, C. T., Ou, J. J. R., Li, S. J., & Chen, K. W. P. (2012).
An evaluation model for Low carbon island policy: The case of Taiwan’s green
transportation policy. Energy Policy, 45, 510–515. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.02.063
van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., & Nijkamp, P. (1994). An integrated dynamic model for
economic development and natural environment: An application to the Greek Sporades
Islands. Annals of Operations Research, 54(1), 143–174. doi:10.1007/BF02031732
Vetitnev, A., Kopyirin, A., & Kiseleva, A. (2016). System dynamics modelling and
forecasting health tourism demand: The case of Russian resorts. Current Issues in Tourism,
19(7), 618–623. doi:10.1080/13683500.2015.1076382
Vugteveen, P., Rouwette, E., Stouten, H., van Katwijk, M. M., & Hanssen, L. (2015).
Developing socialecological system indicators using group model building. Ocean & Coastal
Management, 109, 29–39. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.02.011
Walker, P. A., Greiner, R., McDonald, D., & Lyne, V. (1998). The tourism futures simulator:
A systems thinking approach. Environmental Modelling & Software, 14(1), 59–67.
doi:10.1016/S1364-8152 (98)00033-4
Wolstenholme, E. F. (1999). Qualitative vs quantitative modelling: The evolving balance.
Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(4), 422–428.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600700
Woodside, A. G. (2009). Applying systems thinking to sustainable golf tourism. Journal of
Travel Research, 48(2), 205–215. doi:10.1177/0047287509332335
World Tourism Organization. (2013). Sustainable tourism for development guidebook (1st
ed.). Madrid:Author.

27
Xing, Y., & Dangerfield, B. (2010). Modelling the sustainability of mass tourism in island
tourist economies. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62(9), 1742–1752.
doi:10.1057/jors.2010.77
Xu, H., & Dai, S. (2012). A system dynamics approach to explore sustainable policies for
Xidi, the World Heritage Village. Current Issues in Tourism, 15(5), 441–459.
doi:10.1080/13683500.2011.610499
Zhang, J., Ji, M., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Tourism sustainability in Tibet—forward planning
using a systems approach. Ecological Indicators, 56, 218–228.
doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.04.006

28
 APPENDIX
Table A1 – Summary of the studies that have used System Dynamics in Tourism

Stakeholders’ Qualitative/
Authors Journal General Objective of the Paper Location Purpose of using System Dynamics Sector
Involvement Quantitative

Showing the necessity of having

Systems Showing how soft system management
a systems approach to the
Carlsen, Research and Information not can be helpful to better understand the Attractions
management of economic and General Model Qualitative
1999 Behavioural provided social, environmental and economic Sector
environmental resources in
Science factors of islands tourism
islands tourism destinations

Exploring an integrated approach

Chang,
Ecological for sustainable coral reef Information not Solving the complex problems of coastal Attractions
Hong, & Taiwan Both
Modelling management in order to deal provided zone management Sector
Lee, 2008
with coastal zone management

Journal of Studying the natural resources based

Using a decision support system
Computer Information not tourism system, and using causal
Chen, 2004 to assess different environmental USA Both Multisector
Information provided feedback loops to show the system
and investment scenarios
Systems structure

Evaluating sustainable wetland

1. Teachers;
Chen, management with focus on the Modelling the dynamics of the wetland
Environmental 2. Representatives Attractions
Chang, & environmental and Taiwan Both environment and the impacts caused by
Management of local residents; Sector
Chen, 2014 socioeconomic impacts of the the yacht industry
3. Conservationists
yacht industry

Demonstrating the relationships

Hospitality North Building a framework of sustainable
between several policy issues by Information not
Farsari, 2012 Marketing & Mediterranean Qualitative tourism focused on political dimensions Multisector
using a conceptual model of provided
Management countries to help policy makers
sustainable tourism

Modelling a dynamic structure to

System forecast the future of Cyprus'
Georgantzas, Information not Modelling the stock and flow structure Accommodation
Dynamics tourism by assessing the hotel Cyprus Quantitative
2003 provided of Cyprus' hotel value chain Sector
Review value chain system, tourism
growth and tourism seasonality

29
 Table A1 – Continued

Stakeholders’ Qualitative/
Authors Journal General Objective of the Paper Location Purpose of using System Dynamics Sector
Involvement Quantitative

Demonstrating how the quality

Golob & Information not Explaining the event tourism system in a
Singidunum of organizations can play an Slovenia Qualitative Event Sector
Jere, 2014 provided more understandable and rational way
important role in event tourism

Systems Analyzing time delays, nonlinearities

Assessing the impacts of cultural
Honggang, Analysis Information not and feedbacks to explore the Attractions
tourism developments on a China Both
2003 Modelling provided development of effective policies for Sector (Cultural)
cultural heritage destination
Simulation cultural tourism

Characterizing the complexity of

Journal of Showing how decision support systems
Law et al., tourism destination development Information not Accommodation
Sustainable Egypt Both can help tourism destinations to
2012 for green economy planning in provided Sector
Tourism transform into a green economy
tourism

Exploring the complex systems’ Using causal loop diagrams to explain

Lazanski & Information not
Kybernetes approach to study Slovenian Slovenia Both the Slovenian tourism market and Multisector
Kljajić, 2006 provided
tourism system discuss different categories of problems

1. Management;
Analyzing the impact of committees of Xidi
Discrete
Li, Zhang, transportation infrastructure on and Hongcun; Modelling road infrastructure
Dynamics in Transportation
Xu, & Jiang, tourism development in China 2. Travel agencies; Both investments to serve multiple tourism
Nature and Sector
2015 destinations that share the same 3. Local business destinations
Society
market owners; 4. Local
residents; 5.Tourists
Asia Pacific
Integrating management of 1. Residents;
Liu & Chen, Journal of Identifying critical factors related to the Attractions
cultural tourism into a system China 2. Tourists; Both
2014 Tourism evolution of the cultural tourism system Sector (Cultural)
with multiple objectives 3. Businesses
Research

30
 Table A1 – Continued

Stakeholders’ Qualitative/
Authors Journal General Objective of the Paper Location Purpose of using System Dynamics Sector
Involvement Quantitative
Assessing the impact of tourism
Mao, Meng, Exploring the relationships between the
Land Use on the environment considering Information not Attractions
& Wang, China Both socioeconomic system and the land use
Policy different land use management provided Sector
2014 system under different scenarios
policies
1.Individuals with
various expertise
(e.g., ecology,
community planning,
Improving policy making for
engineering,
Mavrommati managing ecosystem services
economics, public Using causal loop diagrams to show the
, Baustian, & through a framework that Attractions
Ambio USA health); Qualitative complexity and the various feedback
Dreelin, identifies the interrelationship Sector
2. Various loops on water use and recreation
2014 between natural and human
organizations (e.g.,
systems
public utilities,
universities, county,
state and federal
agencies)
Morris,
Proposing a systemic approach
Oreszczyn,
Local to model and identify the main Information not Showing an alternative approach for Attractions
Blackmore, UK Qualitative
Environment problems associated with provided studying the land use system Sector (Land use)
Ison, &
sustainable land use
Martin, 2006

1. Local Government;
Proposing an alternative
Peric & 2. Private Sector; Understanding, simplifying and
community based tourism
Djurkin, Kybernetes Croatia 3. NGOs; Qualitative clarifying the complexities of the Multisector
enterprise structure grounded on
2014 4. Community tourism industry
social responsibility
residents

Analyzing whether and how

Ropret, Developing a qualitative model to
Slovenian policy development Information not
Jakulin, & Kybernetes Slovenia Qualitative identify the strengths and weaknesses of Multisector
plans can be improved provided
Likar, 2014 the current state of the system
systematically and systemically

31
 Table A1 – Continued

Stakeholders’ Qualitative/
Authors Journal General Objective of the Paper Location Purpose of using System Dynamics Sector
Involvement Quantitative
1. Local and state
authorities;
2. Research Showing that systems thinking can be a
International
Using the system thinking institutions; capable tool to promote the concept of
Schianetz et Journal of Attractions
approach to model the learning Australia 3. Tourism operator; Qualitative learning tourism destination
al., 2009 Tourism Sector
tourism destination concept 4. Accommodation
Research
owner; 5. NGOs
with an interest in the
region
1. Tourism
Discussing case studies which Organizations;
Schianetz, use SD modelling in order to 2. Regional Planners;
Assessing sustainability and showing
Kavanagh, & Tourism demonstrate the effectiveness of General 3. National
Qualitative how it can be improved through the Multisector
Lockington, Management this technique to assess Model Government;
learning tourism destination concept
2007 sustainability and encourage 4. International
learning processes Organizations;
5. Scientists
Investigating ways to innovate
Tourism and logistic processes in the Using causal loop diagrams to model
Stipanovic & Information not Accommodation
Hospitality hospitality industry in order to Croatia Qualitative new strategic approaches on logistic
Rudan, 2014 provided Sector
Management transform resources into processes in the hospitality industry
competitive advantages

van den Exploring the conflict between Understanding the relationships,

Annals of
Bergh & environmental conservation and Information not causality, and feedback mechanisms Attractions
Operations Greece Both
Nijkamp, rapid tourism growth by using a provided between the economic system and the Sector
Research
1994 dynamic model environmental system

1. Participants of the
Vugteveen,
tourism workshop;
Rouwette, Using an integrative system
Ocean & 2. Consultancies; Understanding socio-ecological
Stouten, van approach in order to understand Attractions
Coastal Netherlands 3.Regional Both problems in integrated coastal
Katwijk, & and solve social-ecological Sector
Management Government; management
Hanssen, coastal problems
4.NGOs; 5.Tourist
2015
organizations

32
 Table A1 – Continued

Stakeholders’ Qualitative/
Authors Journal General Objective of the Paper Location Purpose of using System Dynamics Sector
Involvement Quantitative

1. Representatives of
the accommodation
sector; 2.
Walker, Proposing a framework to Representatives of
Greiner, Environmental simultaneously evaluate social, the restaurant, food Creating a tourism future simulator
Attractions
McDonald, Modelling & economic and environmental Australia outlets, and retail Both system in order to explore the impacts of
Sector
& Lyne, Software factors which affect the tourism sectors; different scenarios
1998 activity 3. Land-based and
marine tour
operators;
4. Planning agencies

Assessing how golf tourism can

Journal of contribute to economic welfare Adventure &
Woodside, General Information not Showing the possibility of achieving
Travel of a region while avoiding its Both Outdoor
2009 Model provided sustainable golf tourism
Research social and environmental Recreation Sector
destruction

Journal of the Demonstrating the ability of SD

Xing & Southern Promoting sustainable tourism
Operational to analyze the sustainability of Information not Attractions
Dangerfield, European Both development by evaluating the impacts
Research mass tourism in island provided Sector
2010 Islands of mass tourism in island destinations
Society destinations

Assessing sustainable policies by

1.Tourists; 2.Local Understanding the complexities and
Xu & Dai, Current Issues modelling tourism and Attractions
China Community; 3.Local Both interrelationships of the community in a
2012 in Tourism community development in Sector (Cultural)
Government heritage site
heritage sites

Using a dynamic method to

1. Researchers;
evaluate tourism sustainability in Tibet
Zhang, Ji, & Ecological 2. Tourism operators; Providing a systematic approach to
Tibet and find the indicators that Autonomous Both Multisector
Zhang, 2015 Indicators 3. Policymakers; evaluate tourism sustainability in Tibet
contribute to sustainable Region
4. Residents
development in the region

33

View publication stats