NYS Tourism Impact Hudson Valley 2012

7/28/2019 NYS Tourism Impact Hudson Valley 2012

1/47

2012 Calendar Year

Hudson Valley Focus

TheEconomicImpactofTourisminNewYork


2/47

2

State Summary


3/47

3

Key themes in 2012

lThe recovery of New York States tourism economy continued toexpand in 2012, growing 6.2% after an 8.3% expansion in 2011.

l As a result, traveler spending reached a new high of $57.3 billion.Key industry data provide details of the historic expansion:

Room demand surged, growing 3.9% in 2012. And room ratesincreased 3.8% equating to a total hotel revenue increase of 7.3%according to Smith Travel Research.

Air passenger activity increased 4.5% for JFK and LGA combinedwhile airfares at these airports increased 2%.

A combination of modestly higher fuel prices and additional drivevisitors pushed spending at gasoline stations up 7.8%.

l Direct tourism employment grew 2.8% to reach a new high in 2012while associated personal income expanded 4.6%. By both of these

measures, tourism outpaced the general economy.


4/47

4

Headline results

lTravel & tourism remains a vital and growing component of the NewYork State economy.

l Spending by visitors to New York grew 6.2% in 2012 to $57.3 billion.l This spending generated $92 billion in total business sales including

indirect and induced impacts.

l More than 714,000 jobs were sustained by tourism activity last yearwith total income of $29 billion.

l 8.1% (1 in 12) of all New York state employment is sustained bytourism, either directly or indirectly.

l New York State tourism generated $7.2 billion in state and localtaxes in 2012, saving each NYS household an average of $891 in

taxes.


5/47

5

Traveler spending growth

lTraveler spending continuedto expand in 2012, growing

6.2% after an 8.3% rebound in

2011.

l As a result, the tourismeconomy reached anotherhigh in 2012, with $57.3 billion

in traveler spending.

l Traveler spending growth hasaveraged 5% per year since

2003 (compound annual

growth).


6/47

6

New York State tourism markets

l US domestic marketssupplied 70% ($40 bn) of

the New York States

traveler spending base in

2012.

l International marketsrepresented 30% ($17.3bn) of the spending base.


7/47

7

All sectors grew in 2012

l Travelers increased theirspending across all sectors in

2012.

l Spending increased the mostin the lodging sector as both

room demand and rates rose.

l Growth was also strong in therecreation sector as both

overnight and day visitor

demand increased.

l All sectors reached new highsin 2012.


8/47

8

Traveler spending distribution

l Traveler spending is diverse and well-distributed across multiple sectors of the economy.l The distribution of traveler spending remained stable in 2012 as all sectors of the travel economy

experienced solid growth.


9/47

9

Historic traveler spending by sector


10/47

10

Traveler spending by market


11/47

11

How traveler spending generates impact

Lastly, the induced impact isgenerated when employees

whose incomes are

generated either directly or

indirectly by tourism, spend

those incomes in the city

economy.

Travelers create direct economic value within a discreet group of sectors (e.g. recreation,transportation). This supports a relative proportion of jobs, wages, taxes, and GDP withineach sector.

Each directly affected sector also purchases goods and services as inputs (e.g. foodwholesalers, utilities) into production. These impacts are called indirect impacts.


12/47

12

Tourism sales

Business Day

l Including the indirect and induced impacts, traveler spendinggenerated $92billion in business sales in 2012 up 6.0%.


13/47

13

Traveler-generated sales

Business

* Direct sales include cost of goods sold for retail

** Air transport includes local airline and airport operations, including sales generated by inbound visitors,

plus outbound and transit passengers

*** FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate

Significant indirect benefits


14/47

14

Travel-generated employment

Business Day

l The tourism sector supported 8.1% of payroll employment (1-in-12 jobs) inNew York State last year.

l Travel-generated employment (2.8%) grew at more than twice the rate of thebroader NYS economy (1.3%)


15/47

15

Tourism employment

Business Day

l In 2007, the tourism sector supported 7.7% of payroll employmentand now stands at 8.1% of payroll employment as measured by the

US Bureau of Labor Statistics.


16/47

16

Tourism employment

l As a labor intensivecollection of services,tourism-related sectors

represent significant

employment to New

York State.

l The more than 714,000jobs sustained by

traveler activity span

every sector of the

economy, either directly

or indirectly.Business Day

FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate


17/47

17

Tourism employment

l Tourism-generatedemployment has

contributed to the

economic recovery of

New York.

l After growing 2.8% in2012 (including

direct, indirect, and

induced impacts),

tourism employment

reached a new highof 714,222.

Business Day


18/47

18

Tourism employment ranking

Business Day

l Tourism is the 5th largest employer in New York State on the basis of directtourism employment.l The above table compares our estimates of tourism-generated employment

with total employment by sector.Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, State and Area Employment


19/47


20/47

20

Traveler-generated income

Business Day

FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate


21/47

21

Tourism tax generation

l Tourism generated $14.8billion in taxes in 2012,

growing 5.1%.

l Total state and local taxproceeds of $7.2 billion

saved the states

households an average of

$891 in tax burden.

Business Day


22/47

22

Tourism tax generation: State vs. Local

l Tourism generated $3.1billion in state taxes in

2012.

l Tourism generated $4.1billion in local taxes in

2012.

Business Day


23/47

23

Regional Summary


24/47

24

Traveler spending by region

l New York State isdivided into 11

economic regions.

l New York City is thelargest single tourismregion with 65% of

state visitor spend.

l New York City, LongIsland and Hudson

Valley together

comprise nearly 80%

of New York State

traveler spend.

Traveler Spending, 2012


25/47

25

Reliance on tourism

l Tourism is an integralpart of every regions

economy, generating

from 6% to 18% of

employment.

l Tourism is mostimportant to the

Adirondacks and

Catskills, generating

18% and 15% of totalemployment,

respectively.

Note: All regional and county tourism shares are calculated using QCEW (ES-202) employment and wage totals as produced by theNYS Dept. of Labor.

Tourism Share of Regional Employment 2012


26/47

26

Tourism growth

l Traveler spending roseacross every region of the

state last year.

l Long Island and theCatskills experienced

higher growth in 2012 than

2011.

l New York City experiencedthe largest rise in

spending.

l Greater Niagara, ThousandIslands, Central New York

and Long Island also each

experienced growth rates

of 5% or more.

Growth in Traveler Spending


27/47

27

Regional growth

Business Day

Traveler Spend

Year-Over-Year Comparison


28/47

28

Regional tourism summary

Business Day

Tourism Economic Impact

Combined Direct, Indirect, and Induced


29/47

29

Regional tourism impact distribution

Business Day

Tourism Economic Impact

Regional Shares


30/47

30

Business Day

Regional Detail for

Hudson Valley


31/47

31

Hudson Valley, county distribution

Business Day

l Tourism in the Hudson Valleyregion is a $3.1 billion industry,

supporting 51,337 jobs.

l Westchester Countyrepresents 53% of the regions

tourism sales with $1.7 billionin traveler spending.

l Traveler spending in the regionincreased 2.9% in 2012.

Traveler Spending in 2012


32/47

32

Hudson Valley, total tourism impact


33/47

33

Hudson Valley, traveler spending

l Travelers spent $3.1 billion inthe Hudson Valley region in

2012 across a diverse range of

sectors.

l Spending on food & beveragesand transportation servicescomprised 27% and 22% of

the total, respectively.

Tourism Spending


34/47

34

Hudson Valley, traveler spending


35/47

35

Regional growth


36/47

36

Hudson Valley, labor income

Business Day

l Tourism in the Hudson Valley region generated more than $1 billion in direct laborincome and $1.7 billion including indirect and induced impacts.

l Tourism is most significant in Westchester County, generating $945 million inlabor income.

Tourism-Generated Labor Income


37/47

37

Day

l 3.8% of all labor income in theHudson Valley region is

generated by tourism.

l Columbia County is the mostdependent upon tourism with

7.0% of all labor income

generated by visitors.

Tourism-Generated Labor Income

Share of Economy, 2012



38/47

38

Business Day



39/47

39

Hudson Valley, tourism employment

Day

l 6.4% of all employment in theHudson Valley region is

generated by tourism.

l Dutchess County is the mostdependent upon tourism with

7.7% of all employment

sustained by visitors.

Tourism-Generated Employment

Share of Economy, 2012


40/47

40

Hudson Valley, tourism employment

Day

Tourism-Generated Employment, 2012


41/47

41

Hudson Valley, tourism taxes

Business Day

l Tourism in the Hudson Valleyregion generated $380 million

in state and local taxes in

2012.

l Sales, property, and hotel bedtaxes contributed to $206

million in local taxes.

l Westchester County produced53% of the regions tourism tax

base in 2012.

Tourism-Generated Taxes, 2012


42/47

42

Hudson Valley, tourism taxes

Business Day

l Were it not for tourism-generated state and local taxes, the average household inthe region would have to pay an additional $516 to maintain the same level of

government revenue.


43/47

43

Household surveys from the US Travel Association and Longwoods International have providedkey inputs in establishing traveler spending figures. Industry data on lodging, airports, Amtrak, andattractions contribute to year-over-year growth analysis.

Employment definitions. The basis of our data and modeling is the Regional Economic InformationSystem (REIS), Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. This is different

than the NYS Department of Labor data source (ES202/QCEW). The main definitional difference

is that sole-proprietors, which do not require unemployment insurance and are not counted in the

ES202 data. BEA data shows (for example) state accommodations employment at 89,124,

compared with QCEW at 82,190. For total employment (across all sectors), the difference is 20%.

International methodology. Our approach (through Travel Industry Association calculations) isbased the estimates on direct survey responses to the Department of Commerce in-flight survey

and Statistics Canada data constrained to BEA international balance of payments data. The NY

data are consistent with TIAs state-by-state distribution which ensures against overestimation.

All employment and income results are constrained to known industry measurements for keytourism sectors.

Methods and data sources


44/47

44

Local taxes are a build-up of individual categories (sales, occupancy, property). The model isnot equipped to deal with individual exemptions such as Indian gaming.

Second home expenditures are based on the stock of seasonal second home inventory.Annual average expenditures for housing are pro-rated to the season length to account for

various levels of expenditures not accounted in visitor surveys.

Lodging sector. Our models use survey information and constrains this to the value of thehotel sector in each county. This can vary from certain bed tax estimates of total revenue for

several reasons. One is that the bed tax may only be based on room revenue while total sales

for the industry may include other revenue sources (room service, phone, etc.). Another is

that certain smaller establishments may not fully report or be required to report their revenue.



45/47

45

l Tourism Economics utilized the IMPLAN input-output model for New York State totrack the flow of sales through the economy to the generation of GDP, employment,

wages, and taxes.

l The impacts are measured on three levels: Direct impact: The immediate benefit to persons and companies directly

providing goods or services to travelers.

Indirect impact: The secondary benefit to suppliers of goods and services to thedirectly-involved companies. For example, a food wholesaler providing goods to

a restaurant. The model is careful to exclude imports from the impact

calculations.

Induced impact: The tertiary benefit to the local economy as incomes in the priortwo levels of impact are spent on goods and services. For example, a restaurant

employee spends his wages at a grocery store, generating addition economic

output.



46/47

46

About Tourism Economics

Tourism Economics, headquartered in Philadelphia, is an Oxford Economics companydedicated to providing high value, robust, and relevant analyses of the tourism sectorthat reflects the dynamics of local and global economies. By combining quantitativemethods with industry knowledge, Tourism Economics designs custom marketstrategies, project feasibility analysis, tourism forecasting models, tourism policyanalysis, and economic impact studies.

Our staff have worked with over 100 destinations to quantify the economic value oftourism, forecast demand, guide strategy, or evaluate tourism policies.

Oxford Economics is one of the worlds leading providers of economic analysis,forecasts and consulting advice. Founded in 1981 as a joint venture with OxfordUniversitys business college, Oxford Economics is founded on a reputation for highquality, quantitative analysis and evidence-based advice. For this, it draws on its ownstaff of 40 highly-experienced professional economists; a dedicated data analysisteam; global modeling tools; close links with Oxford University, and a range of partnerinstitutions in Europe, the US and in the United Nations Project Link.

For more information: [email protected].


47/47

47

For more information:

+1.610.995.9600, [email protected]

Documents

NYS Tourism Impact Hudson Valley 2012