Experts suggest that the success of attracting foreign tourists should be evaluated from the perspective of 'service exports' rather than just the number of visitors. To enhance economic growth and value creation, it is essential to not only increase the number of tourists but also to extend their stay and spending.
In a report titled 'Growth Effects and Policy Directions of the Tourism Industry from a Service Export Perspective' released on August 5, the Bank of Korea estimated that the contribution of tourism exports to the country's gross domestic product (GDP) has averaged 0.04 percentage points annually since 2000. This figure increased to an average of 0.15 percentage points during the recovery period from 2022 to 2025, following the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Bank emphasized that the tourism industry should be viewed as service exports, where foreign visitors consume goods and services domestically. Even with the same number of tourists, the tourism export value varies based on the average length of stay and per capita spending. Additionally, the impact on the domestic economy differs depending on the spending structure and the value-added capacity of the industry.
According to the report, approximately 60% of the growth contribution from tourism exports comes directly from related industries such as accommodation, food, and transportation, while the remaining 40% is generated from upstream industries supplying intermediate goods and services.
The Bank of Korea also analyzed the effects of expanding tourism exports by benchmarking Japan. It estimated that for South Korea's tourism exports to reach the level of Japan's GDP, an increase of $55.6 billion (25.4%) from last year would be necessary. In this scenario, the domestic value-added impact would be about $4.4 billion (approximately 6.3 trillion won), equivalent to 0.235% of last year's nominal GDP.
Relying solely on increasing the number of tourists is seen as a heavy policy burden. To meet targets, South Korea would need to increase the number of visitors by 4.81 million, raise per capita daily spending by $45.2, or extend the average length of stay from 6.5 days to 8.2 days. However, the Bank noted that by increasing the number of visitors, spending, and length of stay simultaneously, the policy burden could be reduced while achieving the same outcomes.
Jeong Seon-young, head of the Bank's Asia-Pacific Economic Team, stated, "Even if we maintain the average length of stay at the current level of 6.5 days, increasing the number of visitors by 2.26 million and raising daily spending by $21.3 would allow us to reach Japan's level smoothly."
She added, "If tourism policies focus not just on increasing visitor numbers but also on extending stay durations or increasing per capita spending, we can achieve policy effects more quickly."
The need for qualitative advancement in tourism was also highlighted. By increasing the share of high-value services such as healthcare and improving the value-added rates in accommodation, aviation, and restaurant sectors, the domestic value-added impact could rise from 6.3 trillion won to 6.7 trillion won. This effect is equivalent to an additional 1.7% increase in tourism exports.
The Bank of Korea concluded that the goals and performance management criteria of tourism policies should expand from focusing solely on visitor numbers to include tourism export values and domestic value creation effects. It emphasized that when visitors' stays and spending increase, and that spending translates into domestic production and value-added, the economic benefits of tourism can be fully realized.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.