IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing for the random walk hypothesis in the case of visitor arrivals: evidence from Indian tourism


  • Mita Bhattacharya
  • Paresh Kumar Narayan


Testing for the random walk hypothesis, which asserts that a series is a non-stationary process or a unit root process, in the case of visitor arrivals has important implications for policy. If, for instance, visitor arrivals are characterized by a unit root, then it implies that shocks to visitor arrivals are permanent. However, if visitor arrivals are without a unit root, this implies that shocks to visitor arrivals are temporary. This study provides evidence on the random walk hypothesis for visitor arrivals to India using the recently developed Im et al. (2003) and Maddala and Wu (1999) panel unit root tests. Both tests allow one to reject the random walk hypothesis, implying that shocks to visitor arrivals to India from the 10 major source markets have a temporary effect on visitor arrivals.

Suggested Citation

  • Mita Bhattacharya & Paresh Kumar Narayan, 2005. "Testing for the random walk hypothesis in the case of visitor arrivals: evidence from Indian tourism," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(13), pages 1485-1490.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:37:y:2005:i:13:p:1485-1490
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840500109332

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Shiller, Robert J. & Perron, Pierre, 1985. "Testing the random walk hypothesis : Power versus frequency of observation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 381-386.
    2. Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-1072, June.
    3. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    4. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Hooi Hooi Lean & Russell Smyth, 2006. "Asian Financial Crisis, Avian Flu And Terrorist Threats: Are Shocks To Malaysian Tourist Arrivals Permanent Or Transitory?," Monash Economics Working Papers 11/06, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. Narayan, Paresh Kumar, 2008. "Examining the behaviour of visitor arrivals to Australia from 28 different countries," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 751-761, June.
    3. Kumar Narayan, Paresh & Narayan, Seema & Popp, Stephan, 2010. "Energy consumption at the state level: The unit root null hypothesis from Australia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(6), pages 1953-1962, June.
    4. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Liu, Ruipeng, 2011. "Are shocks to commodity prices persistent?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 409-416, January.
    5. Luis Alberiko Gil-AlaƱa, 2010. "Tourism in South Africa. Time series persistence and the nature of shocks. Are they transitory or permament?," NCID Working Papers 06/2011, Navarra Center for International Development, University of Navarra.
    6. Yashobanta Parida & Parul Bhardwaj & Joyita Roy Chowdhury, 2015. "Impact of Terrorism on Tourism in India," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(4), pages 2543-2557.
    7. Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2016. "Whether tourist arrivals in India convergent?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 252-255.
    8. Paresh Kumar Narayan, 2006. "Are Australia's tourism markets converging?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(10), pages 1153-1162.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:taf:applec:v:37:y:2005:i:13:p:1485-1490. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.