Submission Type

Presentation

Session Title

Session 1-2-D: International Case Studies – Tourism and Policy

Location

Caesars Palace, Las Vegas, Nevada

Start Date

28-5-2019 11:00 AM

End Date

28-5-2019 12:25 PM

Disciplines

Growth and Development

Abstract

In The Theory of Economic Development, Joseph Schumpeter ([1934] 1983, Chapter II) explicates how the dynamic role of innovative mindset and ability of entrepreneurs, through introducing new methods of production and new economic commodities, leads up to the expansion of the boundary for economic/industrial development.

By following Schumpeter’s approach, we explore the development boundary of casino tourism. Through a post facto analysis of the hard evidences derived across the world (e.g., Las Vegas, Macao and Singapore) since the 1980s, the dimensions of innovation to the development boundary of casino tourism are scrutinized and explicated. Besides, we uncovered that the expanding capacity and changing institutions of casino tourism generates positive feedbacks which further stimulates the progressive changes in the innovative process.

Nevertheless, different from the industrial world being examined by Schumpeter, casino tourism supplies leisure and related hospitality services by incorporating a unique component of casino gaming. In practice, innovations in casino gaming may promote gambling behavior by various communities which is not necessarily a socially desired consequence. This actually generates a new form of negative externality that may as well set a limit to the industry’s development boundary at both the regional and global levels.

Keywords

casino tourism; development boundary; externality; innovation; Schumpeterian

Author Bio

Ricardo C.S. Siu is an Associate Professor of Business Economics at the University of Macau. His researches are mainly following the institutional economics approach. In the studies of casino gaming, he focuses around investigating the interactions between institutional changes (including changes in public policies and social interests) and evolution of the gaming industry in Macao and other Asian jurisdictions. He has a number of publications in academic journals, professional magazines and books.

Joey P. U. Sou is a lecturer at the Institute for Tourism Studies – Tourism College, and a Ph.D. student in the Faculty of Business Administration at the University of Macau. Her primary research interest is in development economics, mainly focus on the empirical study of the Greater China. In addition, by integrating the economic concepts and quantitative skills to tourism, Joey develops her research field in industrial economics and tourism policy.

Funding Sources

None.

Competing Interests

None.

Share

COinS
 
May 28th, 11:00 AM May 28th, 12:25 PM

A Schumpeterian approach to examine the development boundary of casino tourism

Caesars Palace, Las Vegas, Nevada

In The Theory of Economic Development, Joseph Schumpeter ([1934] 1983, Chapter II) explicates how the dynamic role of innovative mindset and ability of entrepreneurs, through introducing new methods of production and new economic commodities, leads up to the expansion of the boundary for economic/industrial development.

By following Schumpeter’s approach, we explore the development boundary of casino tourism. Through a post facto analysis of the hard evidences derived across the world (e.g., Las Vegas, Macao and Singapore) since the 1980s, the dimensions of innovation to the development boundary of casino tourism are scrutinized and explicated. Besides, we uncovered that the expanding capacity and changing institutions of casino tourism generates positive feedbacks which further stimulates the progressive changes in the innovative process.

Nevertheless, different from the industrial world being examined by Schumpeter, casino tourism supplies leisure and related hospitality services by incorporating a unique component of casino gaming. In practice, innovations in casino gaming may promote gambling behavior by various communities which is not necessarily a socially desired consequence. This actually generates a new form of negative externality that may as well set a limit to the industry’s development boundary at both the regional and global levels.