Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
tourism specific investment and tourism sustainable investment consid-
eration factors) the resultant factors of investment considerations were
used as predictors (7 independent variables) in four regression models. In
these, the overall investment condition of each of the four countries was
used as the dependent variable (Table 5). An examination of the results
of the four models revealed that overall the models were significant at
a probability level of 0.05 and better, and the adjusted R
2
values ranged
from 0.335 for Turkmenistan to 0.458 for Uzbekistan. The adjusted R
2
values were 0.448 and 0.456 for Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, respec-
tively. These significant R
2
values indicate that a significant portion of
the variance in evaluating the overall investment conditions of the CAS
countries could be explained as a function of the included investment
consideration factors.
With significance (as measured by p-value) and importance (as mea-
sured by standardized b coefficients) the study indicated that attractive
investment cost options as one of the predictors of overall evaluation of
investment conditions for the CAS countries for sustainable tourism
investment, is significant at the probability level of 0.07 and better. This
variable had a positive sign and was significant for the four countries
included in the study. The standardized b coefficients were 0.544 for
Uzbekistan, 0.443 for Kyrgyzstan, 0.442 for Kazakhstan, and 0.240
for Turkmenistan. With the exception of the model for Kazakhstan,
the factor of workforce conditions, as one of the independent variables
of the overall evaluation of investment conditions, exerts positive sig-
nificant influence on explaining the overall evaluation of investment
conditions for each of the four CAS countries. The standardized beta
coefficient for this variable was 0.575 for Kyrgyzstan, followed by
0.573 for Turkmenistan, and 0.354 for Uzbekistan. The study also in-
dicated that the significance and relative importance of variables showed
variation from one country to country. The significant variables for the
model of Kyrgyzstan were workforce with a beta coefficient of 0.575 (p
- 0.00), followed by attractive investment cost with a beta coefficient of
0.443 (p - 0.00), and areas of tourism support facilities with a negative
b-value of -.375 (p - 0.01). On the other hand, the significant variables
for the model of Kazakhstan were general investment conditions with
a b coefficient of 0.642 (p - 0.00), followed by attractive investment cost
with a b coefficient of 0.442 (p -.00). However, the variables of attractive
investment cost with a b coefficient of 0.544 and workforce conditions
Search WWH ::
Custom Search