IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i21p5873-d279352.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pairwise Voting to Rank Touristic Destinations Based on Preference Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco E. Cabrera

    (Chair of Metrics and Management of Intangibles, Department of Languages and Computer Sciences, University of Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

  • Manuel Amaya

    (Department of Languages and Computer Sciences, University of Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

  • Gustavo Fabián Vaccaro Witt

    (Chair of Metrics and Management of Intangibles, Institute of Biomedical Research of Málaga (IBIMA), Department of Languages and Computer Sciences, University of Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

  • José Ignacio Peláez

    (Chair of Metrics and Management of Intangibles, Institute of Biomedical Research of Málaga (IBIMA), Department of Languages and Computer Sciences, University of Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

Abstract

This paper presents a novel approach for ranking tourist destinations based on the eigenvector method for pairwise voting (EMPV). The proposed approach relies solely on pairwise comparisons instead of direct-vote polling. The EMPV method was tested over a real-world case application to rank various tourist destinations in the Costa del Sol region, Spain, and its outcome was compared against a polling approach using a Likert-type scale. Results show that the EMPV and the Likert-based approach provided different rankings of preferred tourist destinations. Furthermore, both the EMPV and the Likert-based approaches shared the same preference patterns per ranking position, thus confirming that the reported predilection of the tourist is independent of the measurement approach. Finally, results show that the ranking produced by the EMPV methodology was highly related to the real number of visitors of the Costa del Sol tourist destinations, surpassing the Likert-based approach in both ordering and value similarities.

Suggested Citation

  • Francisco E. Cabrera & Manuel Amaya & Gustavo Fabián Vaccaro Witt & José Ignacio Peláez, 2019. "Pairwise Voting to Rank Touristic Destinations Based on Preference Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:5873-:d:279352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/5873/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/5873/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pan, Bing, 2015. "The power of search engine ranking for tourist destinations," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 79-87.
    2. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    3. Luis G. Vargas, 2016. "Voting with Intensity of Preferences," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 839-859, July.
    4. Wang, Ying & Jung, Kyung-Ae & Yeo, Gi-Tae & Chou, Chien-Chang, 2014. "Selecting a cruise port of call location using the fuzzy-AHP method: A case study in East Asia," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 262-270.
    5. Héctor Moreno-Mendoza & Agustín Santana-Talavera & Carmelo J. León, 2019. "Stakeholders of Cultural Heritage as Responsible Institutional Tourism Product Management Agents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-14, September.
    6. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Wade D. Cook & Moshe Kress, 1990. "A Data Envelopment Model for Aggregating Preference Rankings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(11), pages 1302-1310, November.
    8. Wang, Xia & Li, Xiang (Robert) & Zhen, Feng & Zhang, JinHe, 2016. "How smart is your tourist attraction?: Measuring tourist preferences of smart tourism attractions via a FCEM-AHP and IPA approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 309-320.
    9. Mendola, Daria & Volo, Serena, 2017. "Building composite indicators in tourism studies: Measurements and applications in tourism destination competitiveness," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 541-553.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Färe, Rolf & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2014. "Benefit-of-the-doubt aggregation and the diet problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 33-35.
    2. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    3. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    4. Li, Shunxi & Su, Bowen & St-Pierre, David L. & Sui, Pang-Chieh & Zhang, Guofang & Xiao, Jinsheng, 2017. "Decision-making of compressed natural gas station siting for public transportation: Integration of multi-objective optimization, fuzzy evaluating, and radar charting," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 11-17.
    5. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    6. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    7. Bahram Zikirya & Chunshan Zhou, 2023. "Spatial Distribution and Influencing Factors of High-Level Tourist Attractions in China: A Case Study of 9296 A-Level Tourist Attractions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-18, September.
    8. Muhammad Riaz & Wojciech Sałabun & Hafiz Muhammad Athar Farid & Nawazish Ali & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2020. "A Robust q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information Aggregation Using Einstein Operations with Application to Sustainable Energy Planning Decision Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-39, May.
    9. Salinas Fernández, José Antonio & Guaita Martínez, José Manuel & Martín Martín, José María, 2022. "An analysis of the competitiveness of the tourism industry in a context of economic recovery following the COVID19 pandemic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    10. Hugo Padrón-Ávila & Raúl Hernández-Martín, 2019. "Preventing Overtourism by Identifying the Determinants of Tourists’ Choice of Attractions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    12. Delia Popescu & Iulia Monica Oehler-Sincai & Daniel Bulin & Ion Alexandru Tanase, 2018. "Cee-16: A Cluster Analysis Based on Tourism Competitiveness and Correlations With Major Determinants," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(S12), pages 833-833, November.
    13. Assumpció Huertas & Antonio Moreno & Jordi Pascual, 2021. "Place Branding for Smart Cities and Smart Tourism Destinations: Do They Communicate Their Smartness?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Robert Huggins & Hiro Izushi, 2009. "Regional Benchmarking in a Global Context: Knowledge, Competitiveness, and Economic Development," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 23(4), pages 275-293, November.
    15. Lorena De Medina-Salas & Eduardo Castillo-González & Mario Rafael Giraldi-Díaz & Víctor Guzmán-González, 2017. "Analysis of Economical and Environmental Costs for the Selection of Municipal Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal Scenarios through Multicriteria Analysis (ELECTRE Method)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-8, October.
    16. Inessa Tyan & Mariemma I. Yagüe & Antonio Guevara-Plaza, 2020. "Blockchain Technology for Smart Tourism Destinations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-11, November.
    17. Naouel Yousfi-Halimi & Mohammed Said Radjef & Hachem Slimani, 2018. "Refinement of pure Pareto Nash equilibria in finite multicriteria games using preference relations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 607-628, August.
    18. Karagiannis, Roxani & Karagiannis, Giannis, 2018. "Intra- and inter-group composite indicators using the BoD model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 44-51.
    19. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    20. Liang Liang & Jie Wu & Wade D. Cook & Joe Zhu, 2008. "The DEA Game Cross-Efficiency Model and Its Nash Equilibrium," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1278-1288, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:5873-:d:279352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.