1. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm
BIJ
18,1 An assessment of the
competitiveness of the Moroccan
tourism industry
6
Benchmarking implications
Mahmoud Yasin
Department of Management and Marketing, East Tennessee State University,
Johnson City, Tennessee, USA
Jafar Alavi
Department of Economics and Finance, East Tennessee State University,
Johnson City, Tennessee, USA
Sallem Koubida
Al-Akhawayn University, Ifrane, Morocco, and
Michael H. Small
Department of Management and Marketing, East Tennessee State University,
Johnson City, Tennessee, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine practices, realities and opportunities relevant to
Moroccan tourism. In the process, the competitiveness of this vital economic sector is assessed.
Based on this examination, relevant, benchmarking implications are identified and advanced to policy
makers.
Design/methodology/approach – The shift-share technique is utilized to analyze tourist arrivals,
from different regions of the world, to Morocco, Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt. The shift-share analysis
is utilized to understand the existing competitive position of Morocco in relation to her main competitors.
Findings – The results of the shift-share analysis revealed that Morocco has not performed as well
as the rest of the competitors in the benchmark group. This was attributed, in part, to focusing on
markets with less potential for growth.
Research limitations/implications – The shift-share technique utilized in this study is a diagnostic
tool. Thus, more research is needed to uncover the dynamic relationships relevant to the competitive
position of Moroccan tourism.
Practical implications – The findings of this study have clear benchmarking implications to
Moroccan policy makers, as they pursue a more comprehensive and systematic tourism strategy.
Originality/value – The applied research presented in this article is consistent with the increasing
significance of global tourism.
Keywords Morocco, Tourism management, Benchmarking, Competitive advantage
Paper type Research paper
Benchmarking: An International
Journal Introduction
Vol. 18 No. 1, 2011
pp. 6-22 In recent times, economic activities in terms of both contribution to the gross national
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1463-5771
product and employment have witnessed dramatic shift from manufacturing activities
DOI 10.1108/14635771111109797 to service activities. The growth of the service sector has been noted in different

2. economies across the globe. The tourism industry in many countries is a major The Moroccan
component of the service-driven economy. tourism
The growth in the global tourism market in the last few decades has been unmistakable.
In this context, tourism has become a major element of the global service economy. The industry
economic impact of global tourism activities is presenting concerned countries and
markets with new realities, challenges and opportunities. Therefore, tourists attracting
countries have to approach their markets, services and strategies more systematically. 7
In this context, Morocco is no exception. As Moroccan policy makers and tourism industry
leaders attempted to re-orient their tourism policies, they must have a full understanding of
their current strengths and weaknesses relative to their immediate competitors.
Despite her tourism potential, Morocco suffers from serious, yet, manageable
limitations. These limitations and shortcomings can be easily addressed by innovative
practices and targeted investments. The first step in this direction must focus on
understanding the current relevant forces which shape the Moroccan tourism industry.
In the process, this effort must be directed by comparing existing practices with other
competitive practices from other countries.
The objective of this study is to provide such understanding. Specifically, this study
utilizes the shift-share technique to shed some light on the existing competitive realities of
the Moroccan tourism sector. The results of the investigation have practical implications
to Moroccan policy makers, as they attempt to capitalize on the opportunities presented
by the growth of the global tourism market.
Background
Since the 1950s, when international travels began to be accessible to the general public,
the number of tourists has been increasing at an average rate of 7.1 percent per year.
In 2007, the number of international tourists reached 900 million. The industry’s revenues
have also been growing, reaching $733 billion in 2006 (World Tourism Organization
(WTO, 2010)). Despite recent, short-term slow down, this positive trend is expected to
continue in the near future. According to the WTO, the global tourism industry is
expected to grow at an annual rate of more than 6 percent till 2020.
Traditionally, Europe has had the lion share of tourist arrivals. For example, European
countries combined share of the global tourism market was 54.4 percent (WTO, 2010).
According to WTO (2010), in 2007, the top five countries in attracting tourism were France
(79.1 million tourist arrivals), Spain (58.5 million tourist arrivals), USA (51.1 million tourist
arrivals), China (49.6 million tourist arrivals) and Italy (41.1 million tourist arrivals). These
countries have succeeded in differentiating themselves as attractive destinations for
global tourists relative to other countries.
Although seaside and business travels continue to be the two major segments of the
global tourism market, there are some tourism niches that are growing at higher rates
due to a growing demand for the local genuine tourism experience. For instance, in 1996,
adventure-tourism accounted for about 15 percent of the total tourist arrivals to the USA.
The adventure-tourism segment of the global tourism market is growing at a annual rate
of 8 percent (Freire, 1998). However, in this context, adventure tourism is not alone; rural
and eco tourism are also growing at rates higher than the industry average (Fleischer
and Pizam, 1997; Clarke et al., 2001; Sharpley, 2001). Typically, rural tourists seek
adventures in agrarian areas with inexpensive accommodations (Oppermann, 1996).
Therefore, rural tourism is considered as an effective source of income and employment

3. BIJ in areas where traditional agrarian industries have been on the decline (Carlsen et al.,
2001; Sharpley, 2001). The need for the economic revival of rural areas, combined with
18,1 the growing interest in rural tourism has increased the potential of tourism as a mean for
economic growth (Augustyn, 1998). In recent years, the growing importance of eco
tourism and the development of infrastructure at attractions, made it necessary to use
best practices to manage the impact of the increased number of visitors (Croy and Hogh,
8 2002; Walmsley, 2003).
Study setting
Tourism is an important sector of the Moroccan economy. According to WTO (2010), the
contribution of “travel and tourism” in the Moroccan economy in 2008 is expected to
reach $14 billion, which will count as 19 percent of their GDP. Furthermore, the growth in
tourism is expected to continue for the near future. WTO estimates that in 2018,
the revenue contribution of the tourism sector to the Moroccan economy will reach
$25 billion.
Traditionally, Morocco attracts tourists that are looking for seaside resorts or cultural
heritage. These two types of tourism are competing to get the largest share. For a while,
tourism in Morocco was dominated by seaside tourism until 1998 where cultural tourism
took over (Berriane, 2002; Bauer et al., 2006; Hazbun, 2003). Besides, these two types of
tourism, rural, desert and health care tourism are coming in force. Nusser (2005)
investigates potential rural tourism in the southern part of Morocco (desert) and develops
a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis for the region
ˆ
of Ouarzazate and Zagora and in the valley of Draa. The analysis shows that the
community is trying to use the cultural heritage and the positive effect of tourism to keep
families from moving to the cities and generate a secure income during drought years.
Other benefits of rural tourism is the development of rural infrastructure, set up nature
reserves, upgrading modest facilities like down-hill skiing in the Middle-Atlas by Ifrane
or the High-Atlas by Marrakech, training local environmentally friendly tourist guides
(Peyron, 2003; Chemonics International, 2006).
Realizing the importance of tourism to economic growth, in 2001 Morocco established
a strategy, “Vision 2010”, in which the country targeted to attract ten million tourists by
2010 (Water, 2002). Morocco has the potential to attract tourists from Europe as well as
the rest of the world. In addition to may historical attractions, Morocco has a vast
unspoiled coastlines and mountains, which can potentially attract “eco tourists” from all
over the world (Water, 2002; Caffyn and Jobbins, 2003; Khalil, 2004).
The following are the objectives of Vision 2010 (Moroccan Ministry of Tourism,
2009):
(1) Reach ten million tourist arrivals – 7 million of which are international visitors.
(2) Invest e8-9 billion in tourism-related industries.
(3) Create 160,000 new beds – 130,000 in sea tourist resorts and 30,000 beds in
cultural destinations of the country.
(4) Create 600,000 new jobs.
(5) Increasing the hard currency from tourism sales to $8 billion from $2 billion in
2000[1].
(6) Tourism contributing 20 percent to the GDP of the country – was 6.3 percent
of GDP in 2003 and 7.1 percent in 2005[2].

4. To reach these objectives, the government is developing a partnership between public and The Moroccan
private sector. Plan Azur is one of these partnerships. Under this plan, six new seaside tourism
resorts will be built. One of the resorts is on the Mediterranean Saidia beach and the other
five resorts on the Atlantic coastline: Port Lixus, Larache; Mogador, Essaouira; Mazagan, industry
El Jadida; Taghzout, Agadir and Playa Blanca, Guelmim. The first of these resorts will be
delivered by mid-2009. In addition, the government is speeding up the construction of a
network of highways at a rate of 160 kilometers per year from 40 kilometers per year in the 9
1990s[3], and signed a global air agreement in 2005, Open Sky, which grants a mutual
access to Moroccan and European sky by national air companies and will create 100 new
weekly frequencies per year. Finally, the government is simplifying and easing the
procedures to attract foreign direct investments – creation of regional tourism centers
and regional investment centers.
Table I shows tourist arrivals to Morocco by country of origin. After the arrivals of
Moroccan living abroad (MLA), French tourist arrivals comes first in the list by 43.76
percent[4] of total non-Moroccan arrivals, followed by Spanish and British tourists by
12.03 and 6.33 percent, respectively. Note that French[5] tourist arrivals in Tunisia
represent 18.42 percent of total non-resident visitors and for Egypt and Turkey it is of
4 and 3.32 percent, respectively.
In this study, we examine three countries that compete directly with Morocco for
tourists, namely Tunisia, Egypt and Turkey. All of these countries are equidistant from
Europe which is the largest emitter of tourist to the region. More specifically, Tunisia is
considered to be the major competitor to the Moroccan touristic products for two
reasons. First, Tunisia has similar seaside tourism infrastructure. Second, and in term of
the nationality of tourist arrivals, French are considered to be the first demanders of the
products offered by Morocco and Tunisia.
Furthermore, the World Economic Forum (WEF) in its reports identifies 14 pillars as
measures of the many business-related factors that influence competitiveness in the
sector of travel and tourism. Each of these pillars in itself is made up of a number of
variables. In this study, we recognize only the pillars and the variables that are
significantly different in the four countries under examination. The three pillars we are
interested in are the following: price competitiveness, prioritization of travel and tourism
and human/cultural resources.
First, Table II shows that airline ticket taxes and airport charges are very low in
Turkey and Egypt where they are ranked 21st and 32nd, respectively, out of 130
economies. In comparison, these taxes and charges are considerably higher for Morocco
(ranked 76th out of 130 economies) and very high in Tunisia (ranked 108th out of 130
economies). In addition, the cost of a five-star hotel rooms per night in Egypt and Tunisia
are among the lowest in the world (ranked 5th and 10th out of 130 economies,
respectively). In the case of Morocco, room charges are much higher (ranked 81st out of
130 economies) which is the highest of the four countries in this study. Overall, Morocco
appears to be less competitive than her main competitors in the price competitiveness
category. Perhaps, this translates into a competitive disadvantage for Morocco.
Second, the Moroccan Government prioritization and expenditure on tourism shows
no clear advantage over Tunisia and Egypt, where these countries are spending
considerably more than what Morocco spends on tourism as a percentage of total
government budget. For example, as shown in Table II, Tunisia is ranked seventh
(very high) worldwide in prioritizing travel and tourism and 17th in the amount

5. 10
BIJ
origin
18,1
Table I.
Tourist arrivals to
Morocco by country of
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Var. (%) 2007-2008
MLA 2,130,328 2,230,993 2,537,396 2,769,132 2,787,825 2,986,372 3,376,719 3,666,784 9
France 840,230 877,465 916,147 1,167,088 1,337,204 1,481,610 1,605,503 1,707,055 6
Spain 200,519 201,258 231,156 317,119 367,811 467,956 540,186 595,279 10
Germany 196,700 172,860 129,391 141,210 144,200 151,396 159,844 179,037 12
UK 135,642 146,511 134,009 150,354 193,552 265,536 338,304 274,762 219
Italy 123,628 112,518 100,001 112,807 120,955 140,923 160,047 163,315 2
Belgium 84,011 83,966 80,062 105,821 125,890 149,531 164,723 173,004 5
Others 668,932 627,689 633,109 713,182 765,940 915,009 1,062,291 1,119,403 5
T. arrivals 4,379,990 4,453,260 4,761,271 5,476,713 5,843,377 6,558,333 7,407,617 7,878,639 6
Source: Moroccan Ministry of Tourism (2009)

6. Price competitivenessa Government prioritiesb Human and cultural resources
Number of international fairs and
Ticket taxes and Avg. five star Travel and Travel and tourism Quality of the exhibitions held on average
Country airport charged room rate tourism priority expenditure educational systemc annuallyd
Egypt 32 5 31 20 119 54
Morocco 76 81 23 55 90 64
Tunisia 108 10 7 17 12 70
Turkey 21 48 58 118 70 31
Notes: aOut of 130 economies: 1 being the cheapest and 130 is the most expensive; bout of 130 economies: 1 high priority/expenditure and 130 low
priority/expenditure; cout of 130 economies: 1 best educational system and 130 worst educational system; dout of 130 economies: 1 high exposure through
international fairs and exhibitions and 130 low exposure
Source: WEF (2008)
industry
tourism
The Moroccan
Moroccan tourism facts
11
Table II.

7. BIJ the government allocates to travel and tourism. By comparison, Morocco’s travel and
18,1 tourism is ranked 23rd in the government priority and 55th in allocation of funds to the
travel and tourism sector.
Finally, with regard to human and cultural resources, as shown in Table II, the quality
of Tunisia’s educational system is ranked the highest (12th out of 130 economies) among
the four countries in this study. On the other hand, Turkey, Morocco and Egypt are
12 lagging behind in the quality of the educational system. They are ranked 70th, 90th and
119th, respectively. The quality of the educational system is relevant to the effectiveness
of the service sector in general, and to the tourism industry in particular. Such system
provides the tourism industry with human resources know-how needed to gain,
improve and sustain a competitive advantage in such a dynamic industry. Furthermore,
concerning the cultural resources as represented by the number of international fairs and
exhibitions held annually, Table II shows that Morocco is ranked 64th among the
130 economies. In relation to her direct competitors, Morocco’s ranking is the second
worse after Tunisia. In this group of four countries, Turkey is ranked the highest
(31st out of 130 economies) and Egypt is ranked second (54th out of 130 economies).
In this context, it appears that Morocco is not exerting sufficient efforts to promote its
cultural resources through well-organized international fairs and exhibitions. Thus, this
represents an area for potential improvements in the competitive position of her tourism
industry.
To sum up, price competitiveness is a major obstacle to the competitiveness and
development of travel and tourism in Morocco. The lack of attention to the travel and
tourism sector as evident by the low national priority given to this sector also may
impose a serious limitation on the competitive position of Moroccan tourism. In addition
to 3,500 kilometers of coastline on Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean, Morocco also
has a rich cultural resource which appears to be underutilized as evident by the lack of
international fairs and exhibitions. Overall, Moroccan tourism has a great economic
potential if the obstacles noted above are removed (Mabrouk et al., 2008).
The study
This study uses a shift-share technique, founded on Creamer’s (1943) “locational shifts”
in manufacturing, which is a tool that partitions the growth in an economic variable
(such as income, output, employment, etc.) in a particular area (i.e. state, region and city)
into various components (Mondal, 1992; Dinc and Haynes, 1999). Although the
traditional shift-share model is an accounting-based model, the probabilistic forms of
this technique have also been in use (Knudsen, 2000). This technique is usually applied
in economic studies, but it can be used in other settings. For example, a version of this
technique called the constant market share model has been used to analyze growth in
international trade (Ahmadi-Esfahani, 1995; Ongsritrakul and Hubbard, 1996). Despite
its limitations, the shift-share technique has been widely used in analyzing growth in
economic variables. A major benefit of the shift-share technique is its simplicity and the
fact that its use does not require primary data collection. On the other hand, its
limitations center around concerns such as temporal nature, theoretical content and
predictive capabilities of the technique (Houston, 1967; Stillwell, 1970; Hellman, 1976;
Richardson, 1978; Stevens and Moore, 1980; Knudsen, 2000).
The shift-share technique is a mathematical identity designed to decompose growth
into four components. This study uses the technique as a diagnostic tool. In this context,

8. the model is not designed to identify cause-and-effect relationship, nor it is designed to The Moroccan
be used as a forecasting instrument. However, despite these criticisms, the shift-share tourism
technique remains a popular, inexpensive and simple tool to analyze performance and
composition of the economic variable. industry
This technique has been applied in the tourism industry (Sirakaya et al., 1995; Alavi
and Yasin, 2000; Sirakaya et al., 2002). The first study performed a typical shift-share
analysis, measuring the employment in the tourism industry in South Carolina for 13
different industries (such as air transportation, museums and art galleries and golf
courses) at the beginning and end of a specified period of analysis and then compared
them to a benchmark (in this case six South Atlantic States). The resulting growth
during the period was then decomposed into national growth, the industry mix and the
competitive effect. The second study studied the characteristics and dynamics of the
tourism market for four Middle Eastern countries. In the third study, Sirakaya et al.
(2002, p. 304) examine the employment in the tourism industry using shift-share
technique. They assert:
[. . .] the Shift-Share technique is an alternative to more rigorous econometric methods for
policy makers who need a quick and inexpensive analytical tool to evaluate the performance
and composition of their tourism industry.
The study at hand is an application of a version of the shift-share technique developed by
Esteban-Mrquillas (1972) and used by Alavi and Yasin (2000) to measure the growth in
tourists arrivals in the Middle East area (Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Syria). The purpose of
this study is to measure the growth in tourist arrivals to the Northern African area
(Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia) and Turkey from different regions of the world (Americas,
Europe, Eastern Asia-Pacific, Western Asia, Africa and others). These regions are
responsible for the bulk of tourist arrivals into the studied area. The countries in the
benchmark area (Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and Turkey) tend to be geographically close.
Also, they share similar tourism markets characteristics.
The equation for the tourism industry in country ( j), receiving tourists from region
(i) can be expressed as:
^
T 1 2 T 0 ¼ T 0 ðGAREA Þ þ T 0 ðGiAREA 2 GAREA Þ þ Tij ðGij 2 GiAREA Þ
ij ij ij ij
^
þ ðT 0 2 Tij ÞðGij 2 GiAREA Þ
ij
where:
T1 2 T0
ij ij
Gij ¼
T0
ij
T1 0
AREA 2 T AREA
GAREA ¼
T0
AREA
T1 0
iAREA 2 T iAREA
GiAREA ¼
T0
iAREA
0
^ T
Tij ¼ T 0 iAREA
j
T0AREA

9. BIJ The terms in the above equations are defined as:
18,1 T1
ij ¼ tourist arrivals to country (j) from region (i) at period 1 (i.e. the end of
the period).
T0
ij ¼ tourist arrivals to country (j) from region (i) at period 0 (i.e. the beginning of
the period).
14 GAREA ¼ overall, growth rate in total tourist arrivals from all regions to the area from
period 0 to 1.
T0
j ¼ total tourist arrivals from all regions to country (j) at period 0.
T0
iAREA ¼ total tourist arrivals from region (i) to area at period 0.
T1
iAREA ¼ total tourist arrivals from region (i) to area at period 1.
T0
AREA ¼ total tourist arrivals from all regions to area at period 0.
T1
AREA ¼ total tourist arrivals from all regions to area at period 1.
GiAREA ¼ growth rate in tourist arrivals from region (i) to the area from period
0 to 1.
Gij ¼ growth rate in tourist arrivals from region (i) to country (j) from
period 0 to 1.
^
Tij ^
¼ Tij represents what the tourist arrivals to country (j) from region (i)
would be if the structure and pattern of tourist arrivals from region (i)
were equal to the benchmark.
Under this formulation, the actual growth in tourist arrivals to country ( j) from region
(i) from period 0 to period 1 is decomposed into four components.
h i
Area-wide effect T 0 ðGAREA Þ
ij
This effect measures the change of tourist arrivals a country would expect, if it had
a growth rate equal to the benchmark. It represents the country’s share of tourism
relative to the benchmark. Comparing the area effect with the actual growth there are
three possibilities that must be examined:
(1) If its value is equal to the actual growth, then the country has kept its market
share of the tourism inflow to the area. In this case, the sum of the other effects
will equal zero.
(2) If, on the other hand, this effect is larger than the actual growth, then it means
that the country received fewer tourists than its expected share. In this case, the
examination of the other effects will be important to explain it.
(3) The last possible result is when the area effect is smaller than the actual
growth.
This means that the country is receiving more tourists than it was expected based on the
previous share. Again, the examination of the other three effects should provide some
insights as to why is the case.

10. h i
Region-mix effect T 0 ðGiAREA 2 GAREA Þ
ij The Moroccan
This effect measures the difference between the growth rate of tourism from region (i) to tourism
the area and the overall growth rate from all regions to the area. If the growth rate industry
of tourism from region (i) is greater than the overall growth rate then the effect is
positive. Otherwise, it is negative. If this component is positive then it means that the
benchmark economy is focussed on attracting tourists with higher than average growth
rate. On the other hand, a negative component means focus of efforts on regions with 15
lower than average growth rate.
h i
^
Competitive effect Tij ðGij 2 GiAREA Þ
This effect measures the difference between the growth rate of tourism from region (i) to
country (j) and the growth rate from region (i) to the area. If this effect is positive then it
means that the country is attracting more tourists from region (i) than the benchmark.
On other words, the competitive effect becomes positive when the country is increasing its
tourists inflow from a certain region faster than its competitors, otherwise it will be negative.
If a country can attract tourists at higher pace than its benchmark economy it indicates a
competitive advantage of that country. If not, the country has a competitive disadvantage.
h i
^
Allocation effect ðT 0 2 Tij ÞðGij 2 GiAREA Þ
ij
This component, also known as interaction effect, measures the growth in tourists
arrivals that is attributed to the interaction of the region-mix effect and the competitive
effect. This element is unique to the Esteban-Mrquillas (1972) model. It indicates if a
country is specialized in attracting tourists from regions in which it has a competitive
advantage. The magnitude of this effect indicates how well the country is doing in
attracting tourists from regions according to its competitive advantage. Therefore, as
indicated by Alavi and Yasin (2000), a country may have a “competitive advantage” or
“disadvantage” and may be “specialized” or “not specialized” in attracting tourists from
region (i). These four possibilities are synthesized in Figure 1.
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
(+) (–)
Advantage Disadvantage
(Gij – GiAREA) > 0 (Gij – GiAREA) < 0
(–) (T 0 – T ) < 0
ˆ (T 0 – T ) < 0
ˆ
SPECIALIZATION
ij ij ij ij
Not specialized
A,N D,N
(–) (+)
(Gij – GiAREA) > 0 (Gij – GiAREA) < 0
0 ˆ 0 ˆ
(+) (T – T ) > 0
ij ij (T – T ) > 0
ij ij
Specialized A,S D,S Figure 1.
(+) (–) An illustration of possible
allocation effects

11. BIJ Results and discussion
18,1 This study analyzed the growth in tourist arrivals to four destinations (Egypt, Morocco,
Tunisia and Turkey) between 2002 and 2005, from five major regions of the globe
(Americas, Europe, Eastern Asia-Pacific, Western Asia and Africa). The data used for
this analysis are obtained from the Statistical Yearbook 2005 which was published
by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical Division. The choice of
16 the four countries studied was based on these countries geographic proximity, and
similarity in attractions. While this choice is relative and therefore debatable, the utility
of the methodology utilized is promising. This methodology is useful to policy makers as
they assess the relative standing of their countries and drive meaningful practical
benchmarking implications. The regions studied include Americas, Europe, Eastern
Asia and Oceania, Western Asia and Africa. The focus on these five major regions is
justified due to the importance of these regions in the global tourism market of more than
96 percent of total tourist arrivals globally. The time period under study (2002 and 2005)
is dictated by the availability of the most recent data needed to perform the shift-share
analysis.
Table III reports the number of tourist arrivals into the studied area. The numbers in
Table III indicate that Egypt and Turkey received the highest number of tourists where
Tunisia was a close third, and Morocco was last. Based on the numbers in Table III,
Europe is largest contributor of tourist arrivals to the studied countries (i.e. area) in this
study. This can be attributed to the close proximity of Europe to the area, and the relative
strength of the European economy. The relative lack of tourist arrivals to the area from
the America is noted. This can be attributed to the unwillingness of US citizens to travel
to these areas after 9/11. The Western-Asia region, which consists, mainly, of the Middle
Eastern Arab countries is a significant contributor of tourist arrivals to this area.
Table III also shows the number of tourist arrivals to the three North African
countries and Turkey for the time frame under study. Based on this table, Egypt and
Turkey are clearly the most important tourist destinations. These two countries
combined attracted around 28 million tourists during 2005. In addition, Egypt and
Americas Europe Eastern Asia and Oceania Western Asia Africa Total
Morocco
2002 119,229 1,868,540 44,242 85,996 91,698 2,209,705
2005 140,194 2,607,239 51,745 91,029 143,855 3,034,062
Turkey
2002 253,804 11,359,447 280,607 303,860 130,758 12,328,476
2005 390,884 17,663,077 421,643 625,686 154,489 19,255,779
Tunisia
2002 21,920 2,918,526 7,167 1,310,607 786,053 5,044,273
2005 35,202 3,869,035 13,710 1,440,387 993,378 6,351,712
Egypt
2002 171,458 3,583,791 213,771 1,012,613 161,497 5,143,130
2005 297,675 6,047,194 411,048 1,511,285 263,847 8,531,049
Total
Table III. 2002 566,411 19,730,304 545,787 2,713,076 1,170,006 24,725,584
Tourists arrivals 2005 863,955 30,186,545 898,146 3,668,387 1,555,569 37,172,602
by region of origin
(2002 and 2005) Source: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical Division (2007)

12. Turkey representing more than 75 percent of tourist arrivals to the countries under The Moroccan
study. It is also to be noted that based on the analysis in Table III approximately tourism
80 percent of tourist arrivals to the four countries studied were from Europe. This is not
surprising as the European continent is responsible for more than 50 percent of the industry
worldwide tourism demand. These four countries studied offer Europeans many
tourism options while being physically accessible due to geographical proximity. Thus,
these four countries are very attractive tourism destinations to the Europeans. 17
The illustration of shift-share analysis shown in Figure 2 indicates that the number of
tourist arrivals from Europe to Morocco has increased (i.e. actual growth) by 738,699
during 2002-2005 period. Using the shift-share technique, this growth was decomposed
into the following four components. The area-wide effect accounted for 940,623 tourist
arrivals. This effect represents the expected Moroccan market share if its growth rate
had been the same as the overall benchmark growth rate. The actual growth compared
to the area-wide effect shows that Morocco had a growth rate which is lower than the
average rate of growth for the area. Thus, Morocco received fewer tourists than it would
have expected. This difference of 201,924 is explainable by the other three components.
The positive value of the region-mix effect of 49,703 indicates that the growth rate in
tourist arrivals from Europe to the area is larger than that of the overall growth rate to
the area (i.e. or 0.5300 . 0.5034). This implies that European tourists are gaining weight
in the overall tourism contribution to the area. Therefore, this analysis clearly indicates
that Morocco concentrated on attracting tourists from a region, which had faster than
average growth rate in relation to the benchmark area.
The competitive effect of 2 237,514 indicates Morocco’s growth rate in terms
of attracting tourists from Europe is smaller than the average for the benchmark area
(i.e. Gij , GiAREA or 0.3953 , 0.5300). As a result, European tourists travelled to
Morocco at a lower rate relative to other countries in the benchmark (area). This implies
that Morocco has a competitive disadvantage in attracting European tourists in relation
to its benchmark. Finally, the negative allocation effect of 2 14,178 tourist arrivals
indicates that although Morocco had a competitive disadvantage in attracting tourist
^
from Europe (i.e. Gij , GiAREA ), it was strongly specialized in this region (i.e. T 0 . Tij or
ij
1,868,540 . 1,763,281).
Morocco Benchmark economy
Year Europe Total Europe Total
2002 1,868,540 2,209,705 19,730,304 24,725,584
2005 2,607,239 3,034,062 30,186,545 37,172,602
Component Formula Calculation
Actual growth Ti1 – Ti0
j j 2,607,239 – 1,868,540 = 738,699
Area-wide effect Ti0 (GAREA)
j 1,868,540 (0.5034) = 940,623*
Region-mix effect (Ti0 (GiAREA – GAREA)
j 1,868,540 (0.5300 – 0.5034) = 49,703*
Competitive effect ˆ
Tij (Gij – GiAREA) 1,763,281 (0.3953 – 0.5300) = –237,514*
Allocation effect ˆ
(Ti0 – Tij) (Gij – GiAREA) (1,868,540 – 1,763,281) (0.3953 -0.5300) = –14,178
j
Figure 2.
T1 0
AREA – T AREA 37,172,602 – 24,725,584 Ti1 – Ti0
j j 2,607,239 – 1,868,540 Illustration of shift-share
GAREA = = = 0.5034 Gij = = = 0.3953
T0
AREA 24,725,584 Ti0
j 1,868,540 analysis for tourist
arrivals from Europe to
T1 0
– T iAREA 30,186,545 – 19,730,304 T0 19,730,304
GiAREA =
iAREA
= = 0.5300 Tij = T 0
ˆ j
iAREA
= 2,209,705 = 1,763,281 Morocco (2002-2005)
T0iAREA 19,730,304 T0
AREA
24,725,584

13. BIJ Table IV shows the overall results of the shift-share analysis for the four countries
18,1 studied. This table shows that Morocco’s “actual growth” was smaller than the “area-wide
effect” for all regions except Africa. Thus, Morocco’s growth in tourism was less than
“their share” of growth for the other North African countries. This gives rise to the
negative “competitive advantage”, or disadvantage in attracting tourists from all areas
except Africa. In contrast, this table shows the strong position of Egypt in North African
18 tourism market. The positive “competitive effect” gives rise to the competitive advantage
in attracting tourism from all regions. However, Egypt is not “specialized” in attracting
tourists from the regions where she enjoys competitive advantage, except for “Africa.”
The results of the shift-share analysis have practical benchmarking implications to
the benchmark area as a whole and the countries within the benchmark area.
Conclusions and implications
Based on the results of this study and the realities of today’s global tourism marketplace,
the following conclusions and implications are put forth.
First, despite its potential, the area which makes up the four countries of interest to
this study is lagging behind in terms of attracting tourists. In 2002, this area attracted
about 24.7 million tourists from the regions under study. While this total reached about
37 million in 2005, the area as whole still lagged behind single major tourism destination,
such as Italy, France, or Spain. In this context, this area stands to benefit from
Actual Area-wide Region-mix Competitive Allocation
To From growth effect effect effect effect Code
Morocco Americas 20,965 60,021 2,612 217,690 223,977 D,S
Europe 738,699 940,635 49,613 2237,379 214,170 D,S
E. Asia/Oceania 7,503 22,272 6,291 223,218 2,158 D,N
West Asia 5,033 43,291 213,011 271,185 45,937 D,N
Africa 52,157 46,161 215,943 25,017 23,078 A,N
Total 824,357 1,112,380 29,563 2324,456 6,870 D,N
Turkey Americas 137,080 127,767 5,560 4,176 271,008 A,S
Europe 6,303,630 5,718,419 301,616 245,606 21,291,870 A,S
E. Asia/Oceania 141,036 141,259 39,900 238,912 2110,353 D,S
West Asia 321,826 152,965 245,972 956,427 218,025 A,N
Africa 23,731 65,824 222,735 286,370 6,267 D,N
Total 6,927,303 6,206,234 278,370 1,080,927 21,484,989 A,N
Tunisia Americas 13,282 11,035 480 9,315 10,030 A,S
Europe 950,509 1,469,205 77,493 2822,254 2155,523 D,S
E. Asia/Oceania 6,543 3,608 1,019 29,767 19,806 A,S
West Asia 129,780 659,768 2198,285 2140,085 2313,593 D,S
Africa 207,325 395,704 2136,669 215,702 163,048 D,N
Total 1,307,439 2,539,319 2255,962 2938,958 2276,232 D,S
Egypt Americas 126,217 86,313 3,756 24,839 242,230 A,N
Europe 2,463,403 1,804,103 95,157 646,042 2245,084 A,N
E. Asia/Oceania 197,277 107,614 30,396 31,475 278,539 A,N
West Asia 498,672 509,756 2153,201 79,204 2226,106 A,N
Table IV. Africa 102,350 81,299 228,079 74,038 13,622 A,S
Shift-share results of Total 3,387,919 2,589,085 251,970 855,598 2578,337 A,N
tourist arrivals analysis
(2002-2005) Source: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical Division (2007)

14. benchmarking their tourism strategies and practices of the leading tourists destinations The Moroccan
such as those mentioned above. tourism
Second, a significant portion of the total tourist arrivals into this area is accounted for
by tourists arriving from Europe. In other words, this area is very much dependent on industry
Europe as the source of tourist arrivals. The geographical proximity of this area to
Europe perhaps tends to explain this natural dependency. Furthermore, countries in this
area have strong ties to European countries due to the historical and commercial ties. For 19
example, French language is widely spoken in Morocco, Tunisia and to lesser extent in
Egypt. In addition, the difference in standard of living and the relative strength of the
Euro make the countries of this area very affordable destination to Europeans.
Third, this area appears to be attracting a large number of tourists from developing
countries. Since economic power of these tourists is limited, they are not significantly
contributing to tourism revenues of the countries in this study.
Fourth, this area is not drawing its fair share of tourists from the rich North American
countries. This perhaps is attributed to the reluctance of tourists from North American
countries to visit the countries in this area after the events of 9/11. Therefore,
the countries in this study are in need of integrated and systematic marketing efforts
aimed at attracting tourists from this rich region. These marketing efforts should
address the safety concerns of tourists from this region. In addition, they should promote
the multi-faceted aspects of tourism with emphasis on innovative services such as
ecotourism. The above conclusion has implications to policy makers of the countries in
this area. In this context, a coordinated strategy is needed at the tourism ministry level of
these countries (the benchmark area) to redefine tourism products, images and markets.
In this context, internal, competitive and external benchmarking are useful.
Fifth, with regard to Moroccan tourism specifically, Morocco should benefit from
benchmarking the practices of the leading countries in this study, namely Turkey, and
the leading country in the North Africa, namely Egypt. Such competitive benchmarking
should help Morocco transfer Turkey’s and Egyptian’s best practices and in the process
narrow the gap between Morocco and the major competitors in the area.
Sixth, Morocco appears to have no competitive advantage in any of the regions, with the
exception of Africa. Thus, Moroccan policy makers and tourism industry leaders are called
upon to re-orient the patterns of specialization and competitive advantage which currently
taking hold on the Moroccan tourism market. In this context, redefining the tourism image
of the country through emphasizing new products such as religious, eco and rural tourism
may prove useful. Thus, external benchmarking efforts to learn best practices may prove
very helpful. These efforts should focus on countries like Spain, France and Italy.
Seventh, the public and private sectors of the Moroccan tourism industry must work
together to modernize the tourism infrastructure, strategy and practices. In this context,
it is recommended that the focus should be on increasing the total tourist volume as
well as increasing revenues per tourist. To facilitate achieving this objective, some short-
and long-term tactics and strategies should be deployed. As such, investments directed
at improving the content and quality of the Moroccan educational system are
recommended. Also, a cooperative effort between the private sector and the public sector
is needed in order to systematically promote the tourism and cultural image of Morocco
through hosting well-orchestrated international fairs and exhibitions. Furthermore,
a careful examination of the costs/expenses related to tourism industry should
be undertaken to eliminate waste and non-value-added procedures, activities and

15. BIJ expenditures. Such analysis should aim at improving the price competitiveness of the
18,1 different aspects of Moroccan tourism. Finally, the Moroccan Government must
reexamine its commitment and national priority in relation to the tourism industry.
Overall, the shift-share analysis presented in this research is designed to provide
area wide and country-specific policy makers with a realistic, understanding of the
competitiveness of their respective tourism markets, product and potential. This
20 understanding is instrumental toward developing a comprehensive and systematic
tourism strategy. This strategy should be viewed in the context of the role and potential of
tourism, as an economic growth opportunity. Despite recent efforts, as articulated by the
“Vision 2010”, past Moroccan tourism policies have not yielded a competitive advantage
in promising segments of the tourism global market. The Moroccan competitive
advantage in Africa is not sufficient, as the African market is relatively weak in terms of
purchasing power. Thus, its economic growth potential on the Moroccan economy is
limited. Therefore, Morocco needs to systematically target more promising tourism
markets and develop more innovative tourism-related services in order to capitalize on
the growing global tourism market.
Notes
1. Source: Morocco Tourism Reform, Middle East Business Intelligence, June 2001.
2. Source: “Compte satellite du tourisme”, Haut-Commissariat au Plan, report 2005.
3. Source: Ministry of Transport, available at: www.mtpnet.gov.ma
4. Based on statistics of the year 2005.
5. We focus mainly on the position of French tourists in the four destinations under
investigations because they make a sizable proportion of international arrivals to the
country under study.
References
Ahmadi-Esfahani, F.Z. (1995), “Wheat market shares in the presence of Japanese import quotas”,
Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 315-23.
Alavi, J. and Yasin, M.M. (2000), “A systematic approach to tourism policy”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 48, pp. 147-56.
Augustyn, M. (1998), “National strategies for rural tourism development and sustainability:
the Polish experience”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 191-209.
Bauer, S., Escher, A. and Knieper, S. (2006), “Essaouira, ‘the wind city’ as a ‘cultural product’”,
Erdkundle, Vol. 60, pp. 25-39.
´
Berriane, M. (2002), “Les Nouvelles Tendances du Developpement du Tourisme au Maroc”,
´ ´ ` ´
Conference donnee dans le cadre du 13eme Festival International du Geographie de St Die, ´
´
Saint-Die-des-Vosges.
Caffyn, A. and Jobbins, G. (2003), “Governance capacity and stakeholder interactions in the
development and management of coastal tourism: examples from Morocco and Tunisia”,
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 11 Nos 2/3, pp. 224-45.
Carlsen, J., Getz, D. and Ali-knight, J. (2001), “The environmental attitudes and practices of family
businesses in the rural tourism and hospitality sectors”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 281-97.
Chemonics International (2006), “Promoting rural tourism”, United State Agency for
International Development, Chemonics International, Washington, DC.

16. Clarke, J., Denman, R., Hickman, G. and Slovak, J. (2001), “Rural tourism in Roznava Okres: The Moroccan
a Slovak case study”, Tourism Management, Vol. 22, pp. 193-202.
Creamer, D. (1943), Shifts of Manufacturing Industries, in Industrial Location and National
tourism
Resources, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. industry
Croy, W.G. and Hogh, L. (2002), “Endangered visitors: a phenomenological study of eco-resort
development”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 254-71.
Dinc, M. and Haynes, K.E. (1999), “Regional efficiency in the manufacturing sector: integrated 21
shift-share and data envelopment analysis”, Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 183-99.
Esteban-Mrquillas, J.M. (1972), “Reinterpretation of shift-share analysis”, Regional and Urban
Economics, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 249-55.
Fleischer, A. and Pizam, A. (1997), “Rural tourism in Israel”, Tourism Management, Vol. 18 No. 6,
pp. 367-72.
¸˜
Freire, A. (1998), Internacionalizacao – Desafios para Portugal, Editorial Verbo, Lisboa.
Hazbun, W. (2003), “A new agenda for tourism development in the Arab world”, paper presented
at the Conference League of Arab States, Cairo, March.
Hellman, D.A. (1976), “Shift-share models as predictive tools”, Growth and Change, Vol. 7, pp. 3-8.
Houston, D.B. (1967), “The shift and share analysis of regional growth: a critique”, Southern
Economic Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 577-81.
Khalil, A. (2004), “Environmental services, externalities and agriculture: the case of mountain
tourism in Morocco”, Electronic Journal of Agriculture and Development Economics, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 63-86.
Knudsen, D.C. (2000), “Shift-share analysis: further examination of models for the description
of economic change”, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 34, pp. 177-98.
Mabrouk, F., McDonald, M., Mocan, S. and Summa, T. (2008), The Tunisian Tourism Cluster,
Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
Mondal, W.I. (1992), “An evaluation of industrial recruitment initiatives and employment growth
in Arkansas”, Southwest Journal of Business & Economics, Vol. 9 No. 2, p. 27.
Moroccan Ministry of Tourism (2009), available at: www.tourisme.gov.ma/english/
5-Tourisme-chiffres/ArriveeTouristes.htm (accessed May 2009).
Nusser, B. (2005), Rural Tourism in Morocco: The Community Based Project in the
South-Moroccan Village of Timidarte, available at: www.fh-eberswalde.de/_obj/
F48552FB-E651-4B23-A80A-023F8C936FE6/outline/Rural ^ _Tourism_Morocco.pdf
Ongsritrakul, S. and Hubbard, L. (1996), “The export market for Thai frozen shrimps in the
European Union”, British Food Journal, Vol. 98 No. 8, pp. 24-8.
Oppermann, M. (1996), “Rural tourism in Southern Germany”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 86-102.
Peyron, M. (2003), “Promotion and protection: eco-tourism in the Moroccan Middle-Atlas”, paper
presented at the Second International Workshop on Cultural Impact on Technology
Development in European and Islamic Countries, Ifrane.
Richardson, H.W. (1978), “The state of regional economics: a survey article”, International
Regional Science Review, Vol. 3, pp. 1-48.
Sharpley, R. (2001), “Rural tourism and the challenge of tourism diversification: the case of
Cyprus”, Tourism Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 233-44.
Sirakaya, E., Choi, H. and Var, T. (2002), “Shift-share analysis in tourism: examination of tourism
employment change in a region”, Tourism Economics, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 303-24.

17. BIJ Sirakaya, E., Uysal, M. and Toepper, L. (1995), “Measuring tourism performance: using
a shift-share analysis: the case of South Carolina”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 34 No. 2,
18,1 pp. 55-61.
Stevens, B.H. and Moore, C.L. (1980), “A critical review of the shift-share as a forecasting
technique”, Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 20, pp. 419-37.
Stillwell, F.J.B. (1970), “Further thoughts on the shift and share approach”, Regional Studies,
22 Vol. 4, pp. 451-8.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical Division (2007), Statistical
Yearbook 2005, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical
Division, New York, NY.
Walmsley, D.J. (2003), “Rural tourism: a case of lifestyle-led opportunities”, Australian
Geographer, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 61-72.
Water, A.T. (2002), “Morocco’s grand plan”, African Business, Vol. 281, pp. 58-61.
WEF (2008), The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report, World Economic Forum, Geneva.
WTO (2010), Yearbook of Tourism Statistics, Data 2004-2008, World Tourism Organization,
Madrid, 2010 edition.
Corresponding author
Jafar Alavi can be contacted at: drjalavi@mail.ETSU.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints