Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD Global Development of Tourism through Analysis of Its Participation in Employment and GDP of Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union Received 4. 12. 2020 / Accepted 5. 2. 2021 Scientific article UDC 338.48:331.5:330.55 KEYWORDS: tourism, employment, gross domestic product, capital investment ABSTRACT - Tourism development is a global phe- nomenon. The growth of the number of employees in this industry, as well as its participation in the cre- ation of the gross domestic product of all countries is a reality. That is why its study is a necessity for accelerating the development of economic policies by further measures. This paper will be based on iden- tifying employment trends in the tourism industry, as well as its participation in the creation of the gross domestic product of Slovenia, Serbia and the rest of the European Union. A very important factor in the development of tourism and of the entire economy is capital investments, which will also be included in the analysis. For the sake of a complete considerati- on of all types of participation, we will also consider indirect participation, in addition to direct participa- tion, as it is more dominant than direct participation as regards employment and gross domestic product. Prejeto 4. 12. 2020 / Sprejeto 5. 2. 2021 Znanstveni prispevek UDK 338.48:331.5:330.55 KLJUČNE BESEDE: turizem, zaposlovanje, bruto domači proizvod, kapitalska naložba POVZETEK - Razvoj turizma je globalni pojav. Rast števila zaposlenih v tej panogi in njenega prispevka k ustvarjanju bruto domačega proizvoda vseh držav je dejstvo. Zaradi tega se moramo lotiti raziskovanja te panoge, da bi lahko pospešili razvoj gospodarskih po- litik s pomočjo nadaljnjih ukrepov. Članek bo temeljil na prepoznavanju trendov zaposlovanja znotraj turi- stične industrije in njenega prispevka k ustvarjanju bruto domačega proizvoda Slovenije, Srbije in pre- ostalih držav Evropske unije. Zelo pomemben dejav- nik v razvoju turizma in celotnega gospodarstva so kapitalske naložbe, ki bodo tudi vključene v analizo. Za celovito obravnavo skupnega deleža bomo poleg neposrednega deleža upoštevali tudi posredni delež, saj slednji bolj prispeva k zaposlovanju in bruto do- mačemu proizvodu kot pa neposredni delež. 1 Introduction We live in a world of a significant quantitative and qualitative growth of socially created needs. Their satisfaction is crucial for a quality socio-economic aspect of so- cial life. Traveling and learning about cultural and historical heritage are global phe- nomena which are of increasing importance, and fall under the tertiary sector (Marin- -Pantelescu & State, 2008). Satisfaction of tourists' needs, on the other hand, requires a tourist offer of adequate quality (Redžić, 2018). The global character of tourism has multiplier effects because foreign tourists with money earned in the countries where they are resident have multiple effects on the economy, because they represent an Global Development of Tourism ... 16 Revija za ekonomske in poslovne vede (1, 2021) influx of extra money (Antunac, 2002). So, it is a well-known fact that tourism, as an economic activity, has experienced significant growth in recent decades and especially in recent years. It is reflected in the increasing number of employees in this sector, but also in the increasing share of this activity in the GDP (Bošković, 2012). For this reason, the topic of this paper is the analysis of the above-mentioned tourism shares in Slovenia, Serbia and the rest of the European Union, as well as examining the links between the mentioned categories. If these links are proved, that will have significant positive consequences as we will be able to achieve the multiplier effects of the eco- nomic policies adopted. Globalization is a reality that we live in and the tendency is to harmonize all aspects of economic policies. It has been more successfully imple- mented in some areas and the positive effects are more noticeable, because the effects of the implemented measures are much more obvious and leave room for a direct reaction. Serbia's accession to the European Union will certainly open up the possibi- lity of using money from the funds intended for its members, which will increase the investments in tourism (Elizabeta & Dan-Marius, 2019). Moreover, aligning the fiscal policy with others is a precondition for the development of the economy, not only of tourism (Veselinović et al., 2019). The reason for the low ranking of Serbian tourism is, inter alia, that Serbia is not a member of the European Union or of the European Monetary Union (Durkalić et al., 2019). When talking about tourism and its measures we are actually referring to the measures of economic policies that can directly or indirectly influence the development of this activity (Weaver & Lawton, 2014). The results in this area are reflected in the number of tourists and overnight stays, the number of employees, and the contribution to GDP creation (Unković & Zečević, 2009). Capital investment is also a very important factor in tourism development, that is, investments in infrastructure as a primary factor in tourism development. For this reason, the data on capital investments and their trends over the past decade, relating to Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union, will be included in the analysis. 2 Tourism participation in the gross domestic product Tourism development has a greater effect on the economic development of deve- loping countries than of developed countries (Ekanayake & Long, 2012). The general- ly accepted view of most experts is that tourism should not be viewed from the aspect of GDP creation but, in particular, from that of tourism spending, whose impact can be direct or indirect. The indirect impact refers to the development of those sectors of production that are considered suppliers to the tourism industry, while the direct impact is related to the overflow of income from the tourists' countries of residence. For this reason, special attention is directed to attracting this type of tourists (Nasir et al., 2017). The increase in their number may also result in a significant overflow of in- come from countries that have achieved a significant level of economic development to the developing countries. From all of the above, the direct participation of tourism in the creation of the GDP of Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union was considered (Graph 1), as well as the total share of tourism in its creation (Table 1). 17 Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD: Global Development of Tourism ... Graph 1: Direct participation of tourism in the European Union GDP Source: Authors, based on data from the WTTC. Graph 1 presents data for the period 2008-2019 for Slovenia, Serbia and the Eu- ropean Union, and refers to the direct participation of tourism in the creation of the GDP. Analyzing the data, it can be seen that the share of tourism in Serbia is lower than in Slovenia and the entire European Union. Until 2014, this share was well below 2%. Since 2014, there has been a growing trend compared to the period 2008-2014, and the share is constantly above 2%. The largest share was recorded in 2017 but has experienced a slight decline since; the reasons for this decline should be sought in the significant GDP growth in the last two years, which has not been accompanied by a proportional increase in the share of tourism. Even the projections and targets for 2028 do not reach, not only the present share, but also the share from the beginning of the observed period of both Slovenia and the rest of the European Union. This clearly indicates a significant lag in tourism development and raises a number of questions. Comparing Slovenia and the European Union, there is a great similarity. Growth in participation in Slovenia is accompanied by growth in Europe and vice versa. Again, 2014 is a watershed year as tourism participation was clearly greater in Europe than in Slovenia, unlike in the period before 2014, when it was at almost identical levels. The table below contains data on the direct, indirect and induced share of tourism, that is, of tourism participation in the creation of the GDP of Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union for the last three years. Data on the overall impact of tourism do not differ significantly from the direct participation discussed in the previous graph. Over the past three years, there has been an increase in direct, indirect and induced partici- pation of tourism in GDP creation in Slovenia and Serbia, as well as in the European Union. If only the induced participation is observed, the deviations are the smallest. Last year, it was even identical. The biggest direct impact is at the level of the Europe- an Union, while it is slightly lower in Slovenia and even smaller in Serbia. The largest share of indirect participation was in Slovenia, which was at a record high last year (above 7%). In Serbia and the rest of the European Union it is around 4%. Slovenia 18 Revija za ekonomske in poslovne vede (1, 2021) has the largest total share of tourism in GDP creation; for the last three years it was above 12%, which indicates the exceptional importance of tourism, unlike in Serbia, where it was about 8% in the previous period. Table 1: Total share of tourism in the GDP of Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union 2017 2018 2019 Slovenia Direct 3.23 3.48 3.56 Indirect 6.80 6.87 7.13 Induced 2.12 2.16 2.18 In total 12.05 12.51 12.87 Serbia Direct 2.41 2.35 2.39 Indirect 3.63 3.81 4.02 Induced 1.84 1.97 2.14 In total 7.8 8 8.4 European Union Direct 3.58 3.63 3.86 Indirect 4.22 4.37 4.54 Induced 2.05 2.08 2.18 In total 9.85 10.08 10.58 Source: Authors, based on data from the WTTC. 3 Tourism employment participation in total employment Taking into account the growing trend of tourism as an economic activity, it is qu- ite reasonable that the number of employees has increased significantly over the past decade (Aynalem et al., 2016). However, when we talk about tourism employment, we should mention direct employment but also the indirect employment which has been explained in the previous section when we discussed GDP. Monitoring direct tourism employment exclusively gives the wrong conclusion about tourism development beca- use it does not include employment in those activities that record employment growth due to tourism development (Mustafa, 2019). For this reason, this paper analyzes the direct participation of tourism employment in total employment (Graph 2), as well as the total participation (Table 1). What is noticeable is the similar participation and almost identical trend as in the case of the tourism share in the GDP. After 2013, the share of direct employment in the European Union is constantly higher than in Slovenia and much higher than in Serbia. However, if we look at the first and last year of the observed period, we see the highest percentage growth in Serbia, then in Slovenia, and finally in the European Union. We will analyze the link between all these categories, as well as their statistical significance. In addition to direct employment, other forms of employment that are directly or indirectly related to tourism should be taken into account. The following table gives an insight into this. 19 Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD: Global Development of Tourism ... Table 2: Total share of tourism employment in Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union 2017 2018 2019 Slovenia Direct 3.65 3.82 4.05 Indirect 6.45 6.48 6.55 Induced 2.05 2.08 2.14 In total 12.15 12.38 12.74 Serbia Direct 1.91 1.82 2.08 Indirect 2.19 2.38 2.45 Induced 1.12 1.63 1.92 In total 5.22 5.83 6.45 European Union Direct 3.81 3.87 4.11 Indirect 4.19 4.33 4.41 Induced 1.62 1.73 1.95 In total 9.62 9.93 10.47 Source: Authors, based on data from WTTC. The observed three-year period gives similar trends as in the case of the debate on the share of tourism in the GDP of Slovenia, Serbia and European Union. The constant growth of all types of employment is noticeable in all three cases. Indirect employment is of particular importance because it absorbs the largest number of wor- kers directly or indirectly connected with the tourism industry. This is especially pro- nounced in Slovenia, where it has amounted to around 6.5% over the past three years. The growth is quite similar in all except for the induced employment in Serbia, which recorded a significant percentage growth in 2018, by as much as 0.51%; however, this growth was also pronounced in the previous year, i.e., by almost 0.3%. As stated in the introductory part of the paper, the basic condition for the develo- pment of not only tourism, but of the entire economy, is conditioned by capital inve- stment. Directly or indirectly, capital investments have a significant impact on tourism development and sustainable development (Miljevic & Mihajlovic, 2019). The reason for this claim lies in the fact that infrastructure and its development is crucial, and a prerequisite for tourism development (Simić et al., 2019). Therefore, capital inve- stments, i.e., their participation in the total investment activities, were also considered. The data are shown in the following table. Table 3: Participation of capital investments in the total investments in Slovenia, Serbia and the European Union Slovenia Serbia European Union 2008 6.47 3.02 4.31 2009 6.52 3.14 4.64 2010 8.10 2.95 4.73 2011 9.16 3.57 4.76 20 Revija za ekonomske in poslovne vede (1, 2021) 2012 9.93 3.23 4.47 2013 9.79 3.96 4.39 2014 9.68 4.19 4.33 2015 9.55 4.02 4.45 2016 9.42 4.04 5.04 2017 9.33 4.06 4.91 2018 9.61 4.08 5.10 2019 10.02 4.25 5.32 Source: Authors, based on data from WTTC. Without going into a detailed year-by-year interpretation, one can notice a more or less constant increase in the share of capital investments. The biggest jump was recorded in 2010 in Slovenia, as it rose by 1.58%. If we look at the first and last year of the observed period, we can see that this growth was the highest in Slovenia by 3.55%, then in Serbia by 1.23%, while the smallest growth was recorded in the Euro- pean Union by 1.01%, which means that Slovenia and Serbia are above the European average in the observed period. The next step is to establish a link between all of the above categories; the results can be seen in the tables below. Share of tourism employment Share of tourism in GDP Share of tourism employment Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 1 .356 .011 Share of tourism in GDP Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .356 .011 1 Source: Authors› representation based on SPSS. The link between the share of tourism employment and the share of tourism in the GDP was determined using Pearson›s correlation coefficient, since all assumpti- ons about normality, linearity and homogeneity of variance were met and tested with preliminary analyses. The mean positive correlation, r = 0.356, was calculated and the obtained result is statistically significant given that the value of the mentioned coeffi- cient is p = 0.011. Share of capital investments Share of tourism in GDP Share of capital investments Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 1 .654 .000** Share of tourism in GDP Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .654 .000** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) Source: Authors’ representation based on SPSS. 21 Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD: Global Development of Tourism ... The link between capital investment and the share of tourism in the GDP was de- termined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, since all assumptions about normali- ty, linearity and homogeneity of variance were met and tested with preliminary analy- ses. A strong positive correlation was calculated, r = 0.654, and the obtained result is statistically significant given that the value of the mentioned coefficient is p < 0.0005. Share of capital investments Share of tourism employment Share of capital investments Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) 1 .124 .000** Share of tourism employment Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .124 .000** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) Source: Authors’ representation based on SPSS. The link between the share of capital investments and the share of tourism employment was determined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient because all assu- mptions about normality, linearity and homogeneity variance were met and tested with preliminary analyses. A weak positive correlation was calculated, r = 0.124, and the obtained result is statistically significant given that the value of the mentioned coeffi- cient is p < 0.0005. 4 Conclusion Tourism as a factor of global development is an area of particular interest for many economic experts. Its complexity is reflected in the inability to accurately de- fine contributions to economic development. It is difficult to delimit its effect, except in the case of a direct influence. However, we can debate about it with considerable statistical certainty. There is a global trend in the development of this economic acti- vity, which is reflected in the constant growth of the number of employees but also in the participation in the creation of GDP, both direct and indirect, which is defined in the paper itself. This paper discusses the shares of employees, and not the absolute number of employees; the share of GDP, and not its nominal amount. The reason for considering these categories is that this way we could indirectly compare tourism to other activities and their contributions. The increase in the participation of all the exa- mined categories confirms the hypothesis about the constant development of tourism. A positive relationship was found among all the examined categories. In all cases, the correlation is statistically significant and ranges from weak to moderate to extremely strong. The correlation between investment activities, employment and GDP perta- ining to tourism enables even faster development through the suitable measures of adopted economic policies. On the other hand, the current global situation and the COVID-19 pandemic pose a danger. The tertiary sector is most vulnerable to fluctua- tions and crises of this type. The ensuing economic crisis is evident, and it will have 22 Revija za ekonomske in poslovne vede (1, 2021) far-reaching and long-lasting consequences in tourism. That is why this development trend will undoubtedly stop and it is up to the experts in this field to come up with a package of measures for the recovery of tourism and for mitigating the negative con- sequences that will be felt in many spheres. The challenge is great and the sooner an adequate assessment is made, the faster the solution will be found. Knowledge and time will provide the answers to all questions. Dr. Drago Cvijanović, dr. Nemanja Pantić Globalni razvoj turizma skozi analizo njegovega deleža v zaposlovanju in BDP-ju Slovenije, Srbije ter Evropske unije Turizem je v središču razvojnih politik vseh razvitih gospodarstev. V tem sektorju je opazna rast zaposlovanja, prav tako pa tudi povečanje njegovega deleža v bruto do- mačem proizvodu. Zato se moramo lotiti podrobnega in sistematičnega raziskovanja te teme. Ukrepi gospodarske politike bi morali spodbujati še hitrejši razvoj turizma. Celotna družba doživlja vedno hitrejše spremembe na globalni ravni. Te se odražajo v rasti družbenih potreb. Kakovost življenja posameznika in posledično celotne družbe je odvisna od zadovoljitve teh potreb. Potreba po potovanju sega daleč v preteklost, vendar je šele v zadnjih desetletjih postala masovna. To je privedlo do povečanja turi- stične ponudbe, da bi turistom omogočili večjo izbiro. Privabljanje turistov je postalo pomemben cilj iz več razlogov. Poleg pomena spoznavanja kulturne in naravne dediš- čine je zelo pomemben tudi gospodarski vidik. Namreč, tuji turisti prinašajo denar, ki so ga zaslužili v svoji državi, kar ima številne učinke in zelo pozitiven vpliv na celotno gospodarstvo. Ob priznavanju pomena domačih turistov se moramo vseeno zavedati, da tuji turisti s svojim denarjem večkratno prispevajo k razvoju gospodarstva. Splošno znano je, da se je turizem kot gospodarska dejavnost močno razvil v zadnjih desetle- tjih, še posebej pa v zadnjih letih. To se odraža v naraščajočem številu zaposlenih v tem sektorju in v naraščajočem deležu te dejavnosti v BDP-ju. Zaradi tega je tema tega prispevka analiza omenje- nih deležev turizma v Sloveniji, Srbiji in Evropski uniji ter raziskovanje povezav med omenjenimi kategorijami. Dokazovanje teh povezav bo imelo pomembne pozitivne po- sledice, saj bomo lahko dosegli multiplikacijske učinke sprejetih ukrepov gospodarske politike. Globalizacija je realnost v kateri živimo in zato si prizadevamo uskladiti vse vrste gospodarskih politik. Na nekaterih področjih je bila globalizacija uspešneje izvedena in njeni pozitivni učinki so opaznejši, saj se hitreje zazna vpliv izvedenih ukrepov, kar omogoča takojšen odziv. Kadar govorimo o turizmu in njegovih ukre- pih, pravzaprav govorimo o ukrepih gospodarske politike, ki lahko neposredno ali posredno vplivajo na razvoj te dejavnosti. Rezultati na tem področju so vidni v šte- vilu turistov in nočitev, številu zaposlenih in prispevku k BDP-ju. Kapitalske naložbe so še en zelo pomemben dejavnik v razvoju turizma, tj. naložbe v infrastrukturo kot primarni dejavnik turističnega razvoja. Zaradi tega bo analiza vsebovala podatke o 23 Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD: Global Development of Tourism ... kapitalskih naložbah in njihovem trendu v zadnjem desetletju na primeru Slovenije, Srbije in Evropske unije. Na podlagi analize podatkov o neposrednem deležu v bruto domačem proizvodu smo ugotovili, da je delež turistične dejavnosti v Srbiji bistveno nižji kot v Sloveniji in celotni Evropski uniji. Do leta 2014 je bil ta delež precej nižji od 2 %. Od leta 2014 dalje opažamo naraščajoč trend v primerjavi z obdobjem 2008-2014, pri čemer je delež stalno višji od 2 %. Največji delež je bil zabeležen leta 2017, nato pa je turizem doživel rahel zaton, toda razloge za ta zaton moramo iskati v znatni rasti BDP-ja v zadnjih dveh letih, ki je ni spremljala sorazmerna rast deleža turizma. Projekcije in cilji za leto 2028 ne dosegajo niti trenutnih deležev, kaj šele deležev iz začetka obrav- navanega obdobja v Sloveniji in preostali Evropi. To nakazuje precejšnji zaostanek v razvoju turizma in odpira številna vprašanja. Pri primerjavi Slovenije in Evropske unije lahko opazimo podobnost. Rast deleža turizma v Sloveniji spremlja rast v Evropi in obratno. Zopet izstopa leto 2014 kot prelomno leto, saj je bil delež turizma v Evropi opazno višji kot v Sloveniji, za razliko od obdobja pred letom 2014, ko sta bila na skoraj identični ravni. Analiza podatkov o neposrednem, posrednem in induciranem deležu turizma, tj. deležu turizma v BDP-ju Slovenije, Srbije in Evrope v zadnjih treh letih, je pokazala, da se podatki o splošnem vplivu turizma ne razlikujejo bistveno od njegovega neposre- dnega deleža. V zadnjih treh letih je prišlo do povečanja neposrednega, posrednega in induciranega deleža turizma v ustvarjanju BDP-ja v Sloveniji, Srbiji in Evropi. Če si pogledamo samo inducirani delež, vidimo najmanjša odstopanja oz. je delež podoben pri vseh državah. Lansko leto je bil celo identičen. Največji neposredni vpliv je pri- soten na ravni Evrope, medtem ko je malce nižji v Sloveniji in občutno nižji v Srbiji. V Sloveniji je opazen največji neposredni delež, saj je lansko leto dosegel rekordnih dobrih 7 %. V Srbiji in preostali Evropi ta delež znaša okoli 4 %. Največji skupni pri- spevek turizma k ustvarjanju BDP-ja je opazen v Sloveniji. V zadnjih treh letih se je dvignil nad 12 %, kar nakazuje izjemen pomen turizma v nasprotju s Srbijo, kjer je v preteklem obdobju znašal okoli 8 %. Glede na naraščajoč trend turizma kot gospodarske dejavnosti, je povsem razum- ljivo, da se je število zaposlenih v zadnjem desetletju občutno povečalo. Vendar, ka- dar govorimo o zaposlitvi v turizmu, moramo poleg neposredne zaposlitve omeniti še posredno. Spremljanje zgolj neposredne zaposlitve v turizmu privede do napačnega zaključka o razvoju turizma, saj ne upošteva zaposlitve v dejavnostih, ki beležijo po- večano zaposlovanje zaradi razvoja turizma. Opazen je podoben delež in skoraj identičen trend kot v primeru deleža turizma v BDP-ju. Po letu 2013 je delež neposredne zaposlitve v Evropi konstantno višji od deleža v Sloveniji in predvsem v Srbiji. Toda, če pogledamo prvo in zadnje leto obrav- navanega obdobja, vidimo najvišjo odstotno rast v Srbiji, nato v Sloveniji in nazadnje v Evropi. Poleg neposrednega deleža smo upoštevali tudi skupni delež zaposlitve v turiz- mu v Sloveniji, Srbiji in Evropski uniji. Obravnavano triletno obdobje kaže podobne trende kot v primeru obravnave deleža turizma v BDP-ju Slovenije, Srbije in Evrope 24 Revija za ekonomske in poslovne vede (1, 2021) kot celote. V vseh treh primerih gre za konstantno rast vseh vrst zaposlitve. Neposre- dna zaposlitev je še posebej pomembna, saj vključuje največje število delavcev, ki so neposredno ali posredno povezani s turistično industrijo. To je še posebej izrazito v Sloveniji, kjer v zadnjih treh letih znaša okoli 6,5 %. Rast je precej podobna v vseh na- vedenih državah razen v primeru inducirane zaposlitve v Srbiji, ki je beležila 0,51-od- stotno rast v letu 2018, ta rast pa je bila izrazita tudi eno leto prej, tj. skoraj 0,3 %. Osnovni pogoj za razvoj ne le turizma, temveč celotnega gospodarstva so kapital- ske naložbe. Kapitalske naložbe imajo velik neposredni ali posredni vpliv na razvoj turizma in trajnostni razvoj. Največja rast je bila zabeležena leta 2010 v Sloveniji, saj se je povečala za 1,58 %. Če si ogledamo prvo in zadnje leto obravnavanega obdobja, vidimo, da je ta rast največja v Sloveniji (3,55 %), ki ji sledi Srbija (1,23 %), najnižja rast pa je prisotna v Evropi (1,01 %), kar pomeni, da sta v tem obdobju tako Slovenija kot Srbija nad evropskim povprečjem. Po teoretičnem pregledu smo opravili statistično analizo, da bi ugotovili razmerje med deležem zaposlovanja v turizmu in deležem turizma v BDP-ju z uporabo Pear- sonovega korelacijskega koeficienta, saj smo vse hipoteze glede normalnosti, linear- nosti in homogenosti spremenljivke potrdili in preverili s pomočjo predhodnih analiz. Izračunali smo pozitivno srednjo povezanost, r = 0,356, pridobljeni rezultat pa je statistično pomemben, saj je vrednost omenjenega koeficienta p = 0,011. Razmerje med kapitalskimi naložbami in deležem turizma v BDP-ju smo dolo- čili z uporabo Pearsonovega korelacijskega koeficienta, saj smo vse hipoteze glede normalnosti, linearnosti in homogenosti spremenljivke potrdili in preverili s pomočjo predhodnih analiz. Izračunali smo visoko pozitivno povezanost, r = 0,654, pridobljeni rezultat pa je statistično pomemben, saj je vrednost omenjenega koeficienta p<0,0005. Razmerje med deležem kapitalskih naložb in deležem zaposlovanja v turizmu smo določili z uporabo Pearsonovega korelacijskega koeficienta, saj smo vse hipoteze glede normalnosti, linearnosti in homogenosti spremenljivke potrdili in preverili s pomočjo predhodnih analiz. Izračunali smo nizko pozitivno povezanost, r = 0,124, pridobljeni rezultat pa je statistično pomemben, saj je vrednost omenjenega koefici- enta p<0,0005. Nevarnost predstavlja trenutna globalna situacija in pandemija bolezni CO- VID-19, ki jo povzroča virus SARS-CoV-2. Terciarni sektor je najbolj občutljiv na takšna nihanja in krize. Posledična gospodarska kriza je očitna, pri čemer bo turizem utrpel daljnosežne in dolgoročne posledice. Zato se bo ta razvojni trend nedvomno končal, strokovnjaki na tem področju pa bodo morali sprejeti sveženj ukrepov za okre- vanje turizma in blažitev negativnih posledic, ki jih bo čutiti na številnih področjih. Gre za velik izziv in prej kot bomo opravili ustrezno evalvacijo, hitreje bomo našli rešitev. Znanje in čas bosta priskrbela odgovore na vsa naša vprašanja. The paper is part of the research conducted under the project III-46006 “Susta- inable agriculture and rural development in terms of the Republic of Serbia strategic goals realization within the Danube region”, financed by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia. 25 Drago Cvijanović, PhD, Nemanja Pantić, PhD: Global Development of Tourism ... LITERATURE 1. Antunac, I. (2002). Mit o deviznoj potrošnji inozemnih turista. Ekonomski pregled, 53, No. 3–4, pp. 28–25. 2. Aynalem, S., Kassegn, B. and Tesefay, S. (2016). Employment Opportunities and Challenges in Tourism and Hospitality Sectors. Journal of Tourism & Hospitality, 5, No. 1, pp. 256–264. 3. Bošković, T. (2012). Turizam kao faktor privrednog razvoja. Škola biznisa-Naučnostručni časopis, 3, No. 4, pp. 23–28. 4. Durkalić, D., Furtula, S. and Borisavljević, K. (2019). Ranking tourism market performance in EMU countries: results of PROMETHEE – GAIA approach. Hotel and Tourism Management, 7, No. 2, pp. 67–76. 5. Ekanayake, E. M. and Long, A. E. (2012). Tourism development and economic growth in developing countries. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 6, No. 1., pp. 51–63. 6. Elizabeta, R. and Dan - Marius, V . (2019). The competitiveness of tourism in Romania after EU accession: Regional analysis. Economics of agriculture, 66, No. 4, pp. 1023–1038. 7. Marin - Pantelescu, A. and State, O. (2008). The consequences of globalization upon “safe” tourism. Academica Tusistica, 1, No. 2, pp. 8–14. 8. Miljević, I. and Mihajlović, M. (2019). Primena metoda ocene investicionih projekata u javnom sektoru. Oditor-časopis za menadžmet, finansije i pravo, 5, No. 1, pp. 19–31. 9. Mustafa, A. (2019). A Study of Impact of Tourism Direct Employment Trends on Tourism Arrivals: An Empirical Analysis of Sri Lankan Contex. Journal of Politics and Law, 12, No. 3, pp. 62–68. 10. Nasir, S., Sadiku, L. and Sadiku, M. (2017). The Impact of Tourism on Economic Growth in the Western Balkan Countries: An Empirical Analysis. International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences, Applied Research, 10, No. 2, pp. 19–25. 11. Redžić, D. (2018). Significance of quality in the tourism industry: Research study on the perception of stakeholders in tourism. Hotel and Tourism Management, 6, No. 2, pp. 11–20. 12. Simić, N., Kosumi, T. and Jialiang, Y . (2019). Regulatorni instrumenti održivog razvoja. Održivi razvoj, 1, No. 1, pp. 17–28. 13. Stefanović, V . and Azemović, N. (2019). Tourism of the future contrary to the future of tourism. The Fourth International Scientific Conference – Tourism in function of development of the Republic of Serbia, Vrnjačka Banja, pp. 222–239. 14. Unković, S. and Zečević, B. (2009). Ekonomika turizma. Beograd: Centar za izdavačku delatnost Ekonomskog fakulteta. 15. Veselinović, P., Dimitrijević, M. and Kostić, M. (2019). Significance of fiscal policy for economic development and agriculture. Economics of agriculture, 66, No. 2, pp. 357–373. 16. Weaver, D. and Lawton, L. (2014). Tourism Management. John Wiley & Sons: Sidney. 17. World travel & Tourism Council. Retrived on 3/1/2020 from the Internet: https://www.wttc.org/. Drago Cvijanović, PhD, University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Hotel Management and Tourism in Vrnjačka Banja. E-mail: drago.cvijanovic@kg.ac.rs Nemanja Panić, PhD, University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Hotel Management and Tourism in Vrnjačka Banja. E-mail: nemanja.pantic@kg.ac.rs