The Framework of Edu-tourism System

Towards the Definition of Edu-tourism, Edu-tourist and Edu-tourist Industry

By

1Bello Yekinni Ojo, 2Raja Nerina Raja Yusof, 3Yuhanis Binti

Ab Aziz and 3Khairil Wahidin Bin Awang1School of Graduate Studies

Universiti Putra Malaysia / Federal Polytechnic, Auchi. Nigeria

2Putra Business SchoolUniversiti Putra Malaysia

3Faculty of Economics and ManagementUniversiti Putra Malaysia (UPM)

Malaysia.

Abstract

This article discussed the framework for the general study of edu-tourism. The view of 3

schools of thought on the definition of the concept of edu-tourism: economic, technical

and holistic were discussed and analysed. The article argued that the multifaceted

nature of edu-tourism required a holistic definition. A system approach is used to

develop a new edu-tourism definition. Five elements were identified in the new edu-

tourism framework to include: edu-tourists, 2 geographical elements (i.e. Edu-tourist

generation region, and edu-tourist destination region), educational institutions,

transportation, and the industrial element. The process of edu-tourist industry is shown

to consist of several sectors with functional and spatial connections across the system.

Suggested applications of the edu-tourism framework were proposed in academic

research, education, business and government. The main theme is that edu-tourism’s

many facets are connected and that it is both possible and desirable to include an

explicit recognition of those connections in general studies of the subject of edu-

tourism.

Keywords: Edu-tourism, Edu-tourist, Edu-tourist Industry, Route,

Destination Regions.

Introduction

People have been participating in education-oriented tourism for

decades (Paul, 2010; CACA / European Commission, 2008; Ritchie,

Carr and Cooper, 2003; Smith and Jenner, 1997). The concept of

edu-tourism grew out of grand tour experience, the custom of the

English wealthy class, whereby people were sent outside their

original places of residence for the purpose of the study

(Ritchie, et. al, 2003). Changes in the marketplace, segmented

trend towards more flexibility, and allied to product

differentiation has led to the development of a number of special

interest tourism, including, edu-tourism (Poon, 1993). As such,

an amazing figure of about 2.7 million international edu-tourists

seek cross border education and learning experiences outside

their countries of origin in 2005, thus, a nearly 61% increase

since 1999 (UNESCO, 2012; UNESCO, 2010). In 2010, more than 4.1

million edu-tourists enrolled outside their country of

citizenship with the number forecasted to hit 7.2 million by the

year 2020 (OECD, 2012).

The consumption of international university services by the

international edu-tourists had become a global phenomenon capable

of contributing to the world economy (Naido, 2007; Verbik and

Lasanowski, 2007; DFID, 2000). It was estimated that the

expenditure of the international edu-tourists that seeks

university education services contributed over US$50 billion to

the global economy in 2012 (Bohm, et, al, 2012). The expenditure

of the international edu-tourists supported 313,000 jobs and

contributed US$24 billion to the United State economy in 2013

(NAFSA, 2013) as against US$22.7 billion in 2012 (ICEF Monitor,

2012a). The Canadian Government reported that international edu-

tourist’s expenditure on university education services

contributed more than CDN$8 billion to the Canadian economy in

2010 as against CDN$6.5 billion in 2008 (ICEF Monitor, 2012b).

It was also reported that international edu-tourists supported

about 86,570 jobs and generated CDN$455 million as tax revenue

for the Canadian government in 2010 (ICEF Monitor, 2012b).

Furthermore, export of edu-tourism services in the United Kingdom

are valued at €8.8 billion in 2012 of which approximately €7.6

billion is associated with expenditure of international edu-

tourists that consumed university educational services (ICEF

Monitor, 2012a). This specialised form of edu-tourist product

contributed approximately RM27 billion or 4 percent to the

Malaysia’s Gross National Income (GNI) in 2009 (Borneo Post,

2011). The government of Malaysia forecasted to earn about RM60

billion a year from this segment of edu-tourists by the year 2020

(Rehda Institute, 2014), consequently, creating additional jobs

of about 536,000 with the majority of them in the professional

and technical fields (Musa, 2010).

Despite the importance of edu-tourism to the global economy, and

more so in Malaysia, there is surprisingly limited understanding

of the concept (Paul, 2010), hence, limited research had reported

its definitions. The reason for this may be due to the novelty,

superficial fragmentation and multidisciplinary nature of the

concept of edu-tourism (DBIS, 2009; Times Higher Education,

2009). Bello (2008) argued that it is a good starting point to

always give a concise definition of tourism and hospitality

related concepts, hence, provide a good academic foundation and

promote theoretical base for development of the profession. As

such the main purpose of this article is to review previous

attempts to define the concept of edu-tourism, and subsequently

develop a new definitional framework which is applicable to

general studies of the subject.

This paper seeks to bridge the gap between the two edu-tourism

scholarship isolated camps: the business enterprise and economic

development camp (i.e. The camp that largely devoted to charting

growth and business profits of edu-tourism), and the impact and

externalities camp, whose work is to document the spillover

consequences of edu-tourism enterprises in host communities

(Okoli, 2001; Buck, 1978). Within these two edu-tourism

scholarship isolated camps, and among firms and governmental

organisations, three approaches to the definitions of edu-tourism

are identified; the technical, economic and holistic definition

approaches.

The Technical Approach to Definition of Edu-tourism

Early definitions of edu-tourism can be traced back to

definitions provided by the world renowned organisations such as

Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and

United Nation of World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) as shown in

Table 1.

Table 1: Technical Definitions of Edu –tourist

S/

n

Author(s) / Year Definition / Proposition

1. UNWTO (1963) An edu- tourist is described as a person(s)

visiting a place other than that in which he has

his usual place of residence, and staying at least

24 hours in the destination visited for the purpose

of education, leisure, among other reasons

2. OECD ( 1974) An edu- tourist is a person (s) who visits a place

other than that in which he habitually lives for a

period of at least 24 hours and not more than a

year for the purpose of education.

3. UNWTO (1968); OECD

(2008); Lew and

Mckercher (2004);

Bodger (1998).

An edu- tourist is defined as a person(s) whose

activity involves movement away from his / her

original place of residence with the purpose of

learning, among other reasons, and whose period of

stay at the destination is not less than 24 hours,

not permanent in nature, and unconnected to earning

purpose.

The definition of edu-tourist by OECD (1974) is in line with the

recommended definition proposed earlier by the UNWTO at Rome in

1963. In 1968, the UNWTO encouraged countries to use the edu-

tourist definition for compiling international edu-tourist

statistics (Wall, and Mathieson, 2006). However, as shown in

Table 1, the stated purpose of edu-tourists visit appears to be

broader which involves education, leisure, and other reasons

(UNWTO 1963), thus, complicating the identification of edu-

tourists. In later years, the OECD (1974) proposed edu-tourist as

a person(s) who visits a place other than that in which he

habitually lives for a period of at least 24 hours and not more

than a year for the purpose of education. This definition is

limited, perhaps because; university education programmes can be

more than a year, thus, complicating the period of stay of edu-

tourist at the destination. The index in the above definitions

revealed that existing definitions of edu-tourist flaws in

describing edu-tourists.

With a much focused purpose of the trip, the definition of edu-

tourist had received widespread acceptance among countries (PATA,

2010), although in practice, there are variations in its usage

among countries and regions. Despite the variation in the usage

of the technical definition of the concept of edu-tourists, three

elements are still common to all the definitions: distance

travelled, duration of stay and purpose of the journey (Huang,

2008; Okoli, 2001). The reason for the variation is partly due

to a pre-occupation of measuring the size and nature of edu-

tourist markets, and partly due to the difficulties of coming to

grips with the multiple facets of edu-tourism. Many definitions

of edu-tourism are framed by stating a particular definition of

edu- tourist and extending it by implication to edu- tourism

generally (Hansard, 1977-1978). Therefore, in attempting to

define edu-tourism, it is necessary to distinguish between the

concept and the technical definitions:

The concept of edu-tourism provides a notional and theoretical framework,

which identifies the essential characteristics, and distinguishes edu-tourism from

similar, often related, but different phenomenon. Technical definitions of edu-

tourism provide instruments for particular statistics, legislation, and industrial

purposes (Burkart and Medik, 1974 cited in Okoli, 2001).

In subsequent years, as the number of edu-tourist grew to over

4.1 million in 2010, research related to edu-tourism has also

increased. Notably, the views of the economic school of thought

on the definition of edu-tourism were also compiled.

The Economic Approach to Definition of Edu-tourism

Various definitions of edu-tourism that recognise the business

and economic dimensions of the concept of edu-tourism are

presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Economic Approach to Defining the Concept of Edu-tourism

S/

n

Author(s) / Year Definition / Proposition

1. UNWTO, (2006);

Anthony, et, al,

(2004)

Edu-tourism is defined as an internationally

impactful business with wide cross section

components of activities such as transportation,

accommodation, recreation, food and other related

services.

2. Naido (2007). It was defined as the provisions of edu-tourists’

resources and services to enhance the learning

experience of the edu-tourists while contributing

towards the socio-economic development of the host

communities

3. Anthony, et al.(2004);

Okoli, (2001).

The concept of edu-tourism can also be seen as the

science, art and business of attracting and

graciously catering to meet the holistic needs and

study expectations of the edu-tourists

4. Donald, et, al,(1988)

Edu-tourism is defined as an economic activity that

provides direct expenditures to the host region by

faculty, staff, students, visitors, and the

university and the indirect effect of these

expenditures on regional income when an appropriate

spending multiplier is applied.

The views of the economic school of thought on the definition of

edu-tourism as summaries in Table 2 shows that the economic

dimension of defining edu-tourism may not reflect the true and

detailed meaning of the concept of edu-tourism (Bhatiah, 2001;

Wahab 1975), hence, the approach can be criticised:

The economic definitions of the concept of edu-tourism failed to recognise the

“edu-tourist,” the human element and possibly the focal point of the subject.

Also, it does not recognise spatial or temporal elements, which are equally

important.

The anatomy of edu-tourism comprised of three elements: the Man,

the main actor in the act of edu-tourism; space, the physical

element to be covered; and time, the temporal element consumed by

the trip and stay (Bhatiah, 2001; Wahab, 1975). In view of this,

the gap between the technical and the economic approach in

defining edu-tourist shows a glaring difference. The technical

definition’s being too central to statistic collection while the

economic is being very much of business focus. Thus, the whole

spectrums of edu-tourism dimensions are not captured in

definition, giving rise to a more holistic approach in defining

edu-tourist and subsequently developing an edu-tourism framework.

The Holistic Approach to Definition of Edu-tourism

The holistic definition embraces the concept of edu-tourism as an

academic field of study based on definitions by a number of

researchers. In the first reference, edu-tourism is defined as:

The sum of the phenomena and relationships arising from the travel and stay of

non – residents at, a destination, provided the stay does not lead to permanent

residence and not connected to earning activity (Hunziker and Kraph (1942) in

Okoli, 2001, Pg. 44).

The unique features of this definition are its scope in

recognising that edu-tourism embraces the many facets centering

on the core principal, the edu-tourists. However, because this

definition does not frame in the terminology of academics, it

provides for both interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary

approaches to the study of edu-tourism. It promotes the need for

integration of theories and concepts from the affiliated fields,

such as sociology, economics, geography, ecology, and urban

studies (Jafari, 1977), including marketing, law, management and

psychology. There has been wide recognition of this definition,

even by various international organisations such as United Nation

World Tourism Organisation, (2008), International Monetary Fund,

(2002), Pacific Asia Travel Association, (2010) among others.

Despite the wide acceptance and good prospect of this approach,

Hunziker and Kraph definition of edu-tourism can be criticized on

the grounds that it is too vague as the phrase “sum phenomena and

relationships” does not indicate methodical applications or

extension. In view of this gap another definition of edu-tourism

was proposed to address the gap:

Edu-tourism is defined as the study of man while away from his usual place of

domicile, including the edu-tourist industry that responded to his needs and of

the impacts that both, has on the host socio-cultural, economic and physical

environments (OECD, 2012).

Though, this definition seems to be superficially attractive,

however, its limitation is inherent in the sub-definition of an

edu-tourist which is considered as too broad and its spatial

focus being too narrow. The definition ignores the element of

distance, duration and purpose, including, the concentration of

the definition on the host regions, thus, ignoring regions that

supply edu-tourist inflow (Hung, 2008).

Furthermore, the third holistic definition of edu-tourism

integrates various studies of design of edu-tourist regions;

hence, it presented a model to explain the definition of the

concept of edu-tourism, thus, claiming that:

“Edu-tourism environment are made up of 5 components; the people, who

participates in learning activities; the attraction, that offers activities for users

involvement; services and facilities that supported the activities; transportation,

that moves the people to and within the destination and the information, that

assisted the users to know, find and achieve his / her focus or aims of the trip

(Cooper, et, al, 2003; Dwyer, 2002; Mc Cabe, Poole, Weeks, and Leiper, 2000;

Bodger, 1998; and Oppermann, 1996)”.

The model approach suggested the possibility of stating a

definitional framework of edu-tourism in a more formal systems

theory setting, hence, an opportunity to identify things which

were previously overlooked or bypassed in previous definitions,

and in this sense, a methodological maxim (Gunn, 1972, in Bello

and Koya, 2008, pg. 78). However, the failure of the above

definition is attributed to non-recognition of the environmental

interactions of edu-tourism beyond the five elements of his

organisation; hence, in the parlance of system theory, edu-

tourism should be seen as an open system (Leiper, 1979, in Okoli,

2001 Pg.69), aside that the definition also omitted the

delineated edu-tourists.

The holistic approach in this paper adopts the work on defining

edu-tourism from the system perspective, as explained above.

Despite the weaknesses mentioned earlier, the system approach has

enabled each of its basic facets of edu-tourism to be identified.

This approach will also facilitate multidisciplinary studies of

particular aspects of edu-tourism and more importantly, would

give interdisciplinary studies of various facets and perspectives

of a common point of reference. In view of this, the components

of edu-tourism and its interaction are the focus of the following

discussion.

Elements of Edu-tourism

Having reviewed various definitions from technical, economic and

holistic approaches, the components of edu-tourism based on

previous literature may comprise of six elements; the edu-

tourist, the geographical elements, the educational institutions,

industrial element, transportation / carrier, and external

environment that enable all the elements interact.

Edu-tourists: The Human Element

In view of the technical definition of edu-tourism in our earlier

discussion, two components of edu- tourist activities: (i) the

dynamic component (i.e. The journey), and (ii) the static

component (i.e. The stay) (OECD, 2008; Hunziker and Kraph (1942)

in Okoli, 2001) were identified. Edu-tourists by virtues of the

above features are people in transition away from their usual

place of residence for at least one night (Rayner and Easthope,

2001) to accomplish an educational goal before returning home,

thus, fulfilling the dynamic component. However, the immigration

and visa policy of some countries such as Malaysia defined the

duration of stay of international edu-tourists in Malaysia as a

minimum of 1 year, subject to renewal up to a maximum of 5 years

(Malaysia Immigration Regulation Act, 1963; Borneo Trade, 2014).

This implied that the period of stay of edu-tourists in Malaysia

ranges between a minimum of 1 day to a maximum of 5 years, hence,

the distinction between a general tourist and an edu-tourist.

Another important distinguished feature of edu-tourists is that

their activity represents a discretionary use of time and

monetary resources (Jay and Eyes, 1993), hence, a touristic

element. The third concept that defined an edu-tourist is that

they are net consumers of economic resources within the

destination region (McGowan and Potter, 2008). This is manifested

by expenditure on various items which exceeds any incidental

remuneration gained by the edu-tourist (OECD, 2012) at the

destination. However, edu-tourists do not travel for the primary

purpose of earning remuneration from point’s en route (Borneo

Trade, 2014). These features differentiate them from any other

types of travellers. In view of the above argument, an edu-

tourist can be defined as:

A person(s) making a discretionary, temporary tour, which involves at least 1

overnight and at most 5 years stay away from the normal place of residence to

accomplish an educational goal before returning home and whose purpose of

travel is not connected to earning remuneration.

The indices from the circular pattern of edu-tourist behaviour

show that it is possible to isolate the geographical element that

is considered fundamental to edu-tourism system.

The Geographical Elements

Spatially edu-tourism involves three elements (Ritchie, et. al,

2003) which include: (i) edu-tourist generation regions; (ii)

transportation / transit routes; and (iii) edu-tourist

destination. The basic model of geographical elements as

presented in Figure 1 can be developed beyond a representation of

an edu-tourist flow patterns, hence, it can serve as an

analytical tool for describing the resources involved in an edu-

tourism process, in particular, the industrialised resources.

Figure 1: The Geographical Elements of Edu-tourism

(Ritchie, et. al, 2003)

Moreover, it can facilitate a delineation of areas of tourismic

impact as expressed below:

Every edu-tourist is generated from a region otherwise known as edu-tourist

generation or sending regions (Huang, 2008; Sharpley, 2003). The mobility of

edu-tourists from their respective places of domicile to the attraction sites is

executed through transportation via transit routes (Leonard and Morley, 2007).

Finally, there is edu-tourist destination region that hosts the attractions and as

well expect to host the edu-tourists on arrival (Huang, 2008).

The explicit explanations of the roles and consequences of each

element in an edu-tourism system as described, including, the

resources that were required in the conventional edu-tourism

system that could facilitate delineation of areas of edu-

tourismic impacts as described above is thus, presented as

follows:

The Edu-tourist Generation Regions: This described the permanent places

of domicile of edu-tourists, including, those intrinsic and

extrinsic push factors that motivated edu-tourists’ temporal

outflow (McMahon, 1992; Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002; Soutar and

Turner, 2002). Edu-tourism begins in this region and likely end

there (Becker and Kolster, 2012). By application, edu-tourist

generation region is the location of the basic market for the

edu-tourist industry and the source of potential edu-tourism

demand. In edu-tourist generating region, the necessary

behavioural and environmental factors can be explained when edu-

tourists prepare for the trips. Major marketing functions and

targets are being conducted in this region. In addition, the

region also bears some economic, social and cultural consequences

when a significant number of her members participate in the edu-

tourism trip.

The Edu-tourist Destination Regions: This explains the location which

attracted and hosts the edu-tourists temporarily while at the

destination (Becker and Kolster, 2012) and in particular those

features that contributed to the attraction. The attraction in

this case may be regarded as the anticipations by the edu-

tourists of some qualitative characteristics which are lacking in

the generating region that edu-tourists wish to experience

personally (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002; Soutar and Turner, 2002;

McMahon, 1992). By application, edu-tourist destination is the

location of many parts of edu-tourism business, hence; it hosts

the educational institutions, transportation/ carriers and other

edu-tourist businesses as explain below.

Educational Institutions: Educational institution has become a

tourist product branded for attracting international edu-tourist

globally (Naido, 2007). Usually located in the destination

regions, and branded with internationalisation orientation,

hence, implies that international and intercultural dimension are

integrated into teaching, research and service functions of the

learning institutions for effective attraction effects (Knight,

1994). Educational institutions at the destination are expected

to have diversity of international programs (Ayoubi and Masoud,

2007; Mestenhauser and Ellingboe, 1998; Harari,1992; Klasek,

1992), enrolled reasonable population of international students

(Lipsett, 2009; McGowan and Potter, 2008); engage the services of

international academic staffs (Van der Wende, 2009), and maintain

strong international strategic alliances with other foreign

institutions (Hanson and Meyerson, 1995; Harari,1992; Pickert and

Turlington, l992) to be attracted to potential international edu-

tourists.

The role of globalisation in the packaging of education

institutional services for tourismic purpose cannot be

overemphasized, hence, integration of information and

communications technology (ICT) (Chirkova, 2011; Allwood, 2002),

the use of the English language as medium for scientific

communication (OECD, 2007), and establishment of foreign

university campuses (Altbach, et, al, 2009) have the capacity to

make an educational institution attractive to the consumers of

university services. The index in this information shows that

internationalisation and globalisation are two major keys in the

packaging of educational institutions for tourismic purposes. In

view of this, education institutions are an essential element in

an edu-tourism system that motivates participation in the edu-

tourism activity. This implies that an education institution

formed the basis for edu-tourist activity, thus, it is not an

understatement to say that “no educational institution, no edu-

tourism”.

Transportation/Carriers: provides the transportation services

from the edu-tourists generation regions to the destination and

vice versa (Telfer, 2002; Webb, 1993). The transportation /

carriers provide direct flight from the edu-tourist generation

region to the destination region, thus, provides a link between

the two regions. Other component of the transportation component

in an edu-tourism system include the local airlines, railways,

taxis, buses and shipping lines that provide inter and intra city

transportation services to the edu-tourists on arrival at the

destination (Telfer, 2002). In view of this, transportation is

an essential component of an edu-tourism system that made

participation in the edu-tourism activity possible.

Industrial Element: The industrial element consists of

organizations and facilities (i.e. Marketing, hospitality / stay,

and regulation) established to provide specific needs of the edu-

tourists (Okoli, 2001), hence the following:

The Marketing Category: provides the communication links between the

edu-tourists, the destination and other elements within the

system (Iyanga, 1999). It is usually located in the generation

regions, and at various destinations in the form of travel

agencies, edu-tourist agents, promotion offices of the edu-

tourist institutions and so on (Okoli, 2001; Roppolo, 1996).

The Hospitality Component of the edu-tourist industry provides the

required complimentary role in the edu-tourism system by

providing the accommodation services, including, food and drinks

(Okoli, 2001) on arrival of the edu-tourist at the destination.

Firms that were categorised under the hospitality component of

the edu-tourist industry includes: the Hotels, Motels, Inns,

Hostels, Guest houses and Eateries (Petruzzellis and Romanazzi,

2010). They are usually located at the destination (Telfer,

2002).

General Tourist Attraction Component of the industry includes those

tourist facilities at the destination which the edu-tourist wants

to experience (Okoli, 2001) during the holiday or leisure. These

facilities may be totally different from what the edu-tourist use

to have at the home country or the attractions may not be

available at all (Okoli, 2001). It is often the marketers or

tour guards that provide clues to the potential edu-tourists on

the availability of these tourist attractions and requirements

for accessing them (WTTC, 2010).

The Regulatory Component which is usually the government, inter-

governmental bodies and vocational educational institutions or

its agents provide mechanisms to aid the smooth operations of the

industry (WTTC, 2010). In view of this, the industrial component

provided the complimentary roles required for sustainable edu-

tourist activities with the government performing the regulatory

functions by ensuring that conducive business environment is

provided. Therefore, those environmental factors that influence

edu-tourist business activities are explained as follows.

External Environment: Edu-tourist industry like every other

businesses cannot operate in a vacuum, rather it act and react to

what happens in its environment (Okoli, 2001). The environment

of edu-tourism business comprised of:

The Economic Factor: - This explains issues that are associated with

the economy of both the edu-tourist host and the edu-tourist

sending country (Chen, 2007), that influence the trends and

behaviour of edu-tourist businesses and edu-tourist

respectively). Economic factors of the host country are not

limited to, but, include affordability of the host country living

expenses by the edu-tourists (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002), future

opportunity to stay and work in the host country (Chen, 2007;

Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002), the economic link between the host

and the sending country (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002; Mc Mahon,

1992). Economic factors that relates to the edu-tourist home

countries also have significant influence on edu-tourist decision

to seek edu-tourist services outside their origin countries,

hence, the quest of the home country to catch up with global

economic development (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002), enhanced

economic wealth per capital income of the sending country

(Agarwal and Winkler, 1985), the drive for development of human

capital resources of the sending country (Mc Mahon, 1992; Agarwal

and Winkler, 1985). In view of this, sustainable edu-tourist

business anchored on the ability of edu-tourist industries to be

on the lookout for these economic factors and as well adjust to

them where necessary.

Technological Factor: The definition of technological forces comprises

of both the hard and soft technology that influence edu-tourist

business activities, including edu-tourist behaviour (Lee, 2008).

Technology in the context of edu-tourism focuses on the

application of computers and microelectronics to the management

of edu-tourist resources and services (Anthony, et, al, 2004),

edu-tourist destination organization and supply logistics

(Ritchie, et, al, 2003), control internet expansion and

computerized enrollment systems (Anthony, et, al, 2004) among

other factors affect edu-tourism industry effectiveness and the

behaviour of edu-tourist choice process. It is pertinent

technology changes rapidly influence the ability of the edu-

tourist industry performance (Anthony, et. al, 2004). For example

edu-tourism marketing practices have been adjusted to changes in

online information and enrollment development.

Social / Cultural Factor: Theoretically, the development of

international sensitivity and global understanding strengthens

edu-tourist perspectives to include a general recognition of

human conditions within a social-ecological framework (Carlson,

et al, 1990). The desire of edu-tourist to expand communication

(Rhodes, 2010), seeking cross-cultural experience (Van Hoof and

Verbeeten, 2005; Carlson, et al, 1990), and opportunities to make

international connections (Mazzarol and Soutar, 2002) were

identified as social / cultural factors that inform edu-tourist

decision on the choice of a destination. Peer group and

influence of relation also play important role in determining the

direction of flow of the international edu-tourists (Mazzarol,

Kemp and Savery, 1997).

Items such as parental influence or suggestion (Baharun, 2006),

the influence of friends / peer group (Licata and Maxham, 1998),

alumnus suggestions (Chen, 2007), agent and teachers /

professor’s recommendation (Chen, 2007; Mazzarol, Kemp and

Savery, 1997) and the behaviour of edu-tourist business employees

do have a positive influence on edu- tourist’s choice of a

destination. The index in this information reveals that edu-

tourist industry must give special attention to those social

factors capable of influencing the attitude of the edu-tourists

towards edu-tourist destinations or industries as well as the

behaviour of edu-tourist employees.

Physical / Environmental Factor: This play a significant role in edu-

tourist's choice process of a destination, thus, capable of

affecting the activities of the edu-tourist businesses (Alvord,

Long, and Udall, 2008). The weather and the influences of the

climate are frequently emerging as an important criterion for

choosing an edu-tourist destination (Alvord, Long, and Udall,

2008). The perceptions of the edu-tourist on environmental safety

and security, the proximity of the host country to the edu-

tourist sending country, and, the degree of racial discrimination

at the destination among other items measure the environmental

factor that influences the choice of edu-tourist destination

(Kleckley, 2008). These factors cannot be controlled by the edu-

tourist stakeholders, but, they can adjust to it in the course of

their business activities.

Political Factor: This explains the political / legal system that

creates the rules and frameworks within which edu-tourism

business operates (Mc Mahon, 1992). Government policies support

and encourage edu-tourist business activities and define how edu-

tourist business will be conducted (Alugbo, 2002). Changes in

political forces appear on a regular legislative basis at local,

regional or national level and pose a serious challenge on the

activities of edu-tourist industry (Okoli, 2001). In this case,

issues relating to foreign trade agreements between the host and

the sending countries (Lee, 2008), the security policy (Mazzarol

and Soutar, 2002); monetary and fiscal policy (Chen, 2007), and

immigration and foreign policy of the host country (Becker and

Kolster, 2012) had positive or negative influence on the

activities of the edu-tourist industry and the behaviour of the

edu-tourists.

Others political factors that influence the choice behaviour of

edu-tourist while selecting an edu-tourist destination is the

political link between the host and the sending country (Mc

Mahon, 1992) among other. In view of the above analysis, it has

been established that edu-tourist system operates within the

broader environments of economic, technology, socio-cultural,

physical/ environmental and political factors with which it

interacts and adjusts its activities, hence the proposed

framework for edu-tourism study in Malaysia.

The Proposed Framework for Edu-Tourism Study in Malaysia

In view of the analysis of various elements and components in

edu-tourism system discussed earlier, it is now possible to

propose a technical definition of edu-tourism used in this study.

As such, edu-tourism involves discretionary travel and temporary

stay of a person(s) away from their usual place of residence for

a minimum of 1 night and a maximum of 5 years for the purpose of

education (depending on the country or region) provided the

primary purpose of the trip is unconnected to earning

remuneration. The components of the edu-tourism system should

therefore comprise of: edu-tourists, geographical elements (i.e.

The edu-tourist generation and destination region),

transportation / carrier element, the education institutions, and

industrial element.

These five elements are arranged in a spatial and functional

connection, hence, having the features of an open system with the

organisation of the five elements operating within the broader

environments (i.e. Political, physical, cultural, social,

economic, and technology) with which it interacts. The framework

of edu-tourism can be expresses pictorially, thus, Figure 1

expressed the geographical elements of edu-tourist generation and

destination regions linked with transportation, without other

elements in edu-tourism system. However, Figure 2 presented the

combination of the geographical elements, edu-tourist element,

the educational institution component, and the industrial

component, including, the broader environments, to illustrate the

total edu-tourism framework.

Figure 2: Proposed Elements of Edu-tourism System

Figure 2 symbolises arrangement of the multiple elements and

facets of edu-tourism: geographic, behavioral, educational

institutions, industrial, and transportation. The geographical

elements explains the edu-tourist generation region that supply

the edu-tourists, and the edu-tourist destination region that

demanded for or received the edu-tourist, thus, expressing the

supply and demand feature of edu-tourism activity. The behavioral

element explains that edu-tourists are required to leave the

generation region as a result of personal and or environmental

Transportation / Carrier

Cultural

conomy

Political

Economy

Physical

Technology

Social conomy

Edu-tourist Generati

on Region

DepartingEdu-touristsArriving Edu-tourists

IndustrialElement

Edu-touristDestinati

onRegions

Edu-touristsArrival

EducationalInstitutions

IndustrialElement

factors, hence, get pushed to travel to and stay in a destination

region that are endowed with quality educational resources and

other edu-tourist industry, thus, the pull factors. The edu-

tourist chooses a means of transportation to link up with the

destination with expectation of returning home after

accomplishing the purpose of the trip (i.e. Education), though,

within the stipulated time of 1-5 years.

The industrial element is represented within the two geographical

elements. Also symbolic is the representation of a part of the

edu-tourist element outside the industrial element, signifying

the partially industrialised characteristic of the process.

Conclusion, Managerial and Practical Implications

The system approach to edu-tourism scholarship is found desirable

in our dynamic global economy. It is useful for several areas and

at many levels of analysis. In an academic research, it can

serve as a reference point for general and specific studies. Its

structure and the emphasis on connections existing among and

within the various elements of the system can be used in research

for business and impact studies. In vocational education, the

framework provides a methodological basis for designing curricula

for programs of study. In the business world, the framework has

the potential applications in several areas of edu-tourist

industry management, notably within large multi-sector firms

operating in several locations. It might be particularly useful

for marketing planning and as a tool for identifying spatial and

functional links. Furthermore, analysis of system theory could

be useful for the analysis of the characteristics of enterprises

as the system would appear to have strategic importance for

furthering our understanding of industrial problems.

The framework seems particularly relevant as a guide for planning

and assessing governmental policies in the area of edu-tourism.

Government can use the framework to recognise the relationships

of its geographical constituency in the edu-tourism system,

hence, the relative importance of the constituency such as

tourist generation regions, transit route, and destination; how

the various edu-tourist flows vary as to degree of

industrialisation; the benefit, cost and defects in the system;

stemming from industrialised or non industrialised components.

The value of this article provides edu-tourism definitional

framework that could provide governments with a value-free

approach to edu-tourism policy. Also, the fact that the

framework is not structured from the perspective of one element,

the system approach could serve as an analytical basis for

creative policy formation in widely different situations.

References

ACA / European Commission. (2008). Transnational Education in the European Context – Provision, Approaches and Policies. Brussels: EuropeanCommission.

Agarwal, U. and Winkler, D. R. (1985). Foreign Demand for United States Higher Education: A Study of Developing Countries in the Eastern Hemisphere. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 33, (3), 623-44.

Allwood, J. (2002). Bodily Communication Dimensions of Expressionand Content. Multimodality in Language and Speech Systems, 7-26.

Altbach, G., Philip, L. R., and Laura, E. R. (2009). Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution, A Report Prepared for the UNESCO 2009 World Conference on Higher Education. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from UNESCO: www.unesdoc.unesco.org/image

Alugbo, C.C. (2002). Common Concerns of Managers: Theory and Practice. Owerri: Achugo Publications.

Anthony, B., Marcelo, F., Andrew, H., Sarah, J., Neil, K., David,P., Kelvin, V. C.;. (2004). Vission 2020; Forcasting International

Student Mpbility; A UK Perspective. England: British Council Department.

Ayoubi, R, Masoud, H. (2007 ). The Strategy of Internationalization in Universities. International Journal of Educational Management, 21, (4), 339–349.

Becker, R. and Kolster, R. (2012). International Student Recruitment: Policies and Developments in Selected Countries. Netherland: Organisation for International Cooperation in Higher Education.

Bello, Y. O. (2008). Food and Beverages Service Management in the Nigeria Hospitality Industry . Ondo: Grace Excellent Publishers.

Bhatiah, A. J. (2001 ). International Tourism Management. Uk: Starting PVT Ltd.

Bodger, D. (1998). Leisure, Learning and Travel. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 69, 28-32.

Bohm, C., Doris, G., Meares, S. and Pearce, L. (2012). Global Student Mobility 2025: Forecasts of the Global Demands for International Higher Education (GDIHE) in Australia. Retrieved November 17, 2013, from www.idp.com/marketingandresearch.

Borneo Post. (2011). Malaysia’s Education Sector Well Poised for Further Growth. Retrieved April 21, 2013, from www.theborneopost.com/2011/04/21/malaysia%E2%80%99s-education-sector-well-poised-for-further-growth.

Borneo Trade. (2014). Immigration: Sabah Investment Incentive and Policies. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from www.sabah.com.my/bomeotrade.

Buck, R. C. (1978). Towards a Synthesis in Tourism Theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 5, (1), 24-38.

Burkart, A. J., and Medlik, S. (1974). In Okoli, C. I. C. (2011) Tourism Development and Management in Nigeria. Enugu: Jee Communication.

Carlson, J., B. Burn, J. Ussem and Yachimowicz, D. (1990). Study Abroad: The Experience of American undergraduates in Western Europe and the United States. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.

Chen, C. H. (2007). Understanding Taiwanese Students' Decision-making Factors Regarding Australian International Higher Education. International Journal of Educational Management, 20, (2), 91-100.

Chirkova, A. (2011). Pepsi Across Culture: Analysis and Cross-cultural Comparison of Pepsi Websites. (Master Dissertation). Sweden: University of Gothenburg.

Cooper, H., Jeffrey, C. V., Charlton, K., and Melson, A. (2003). The Effects of Modified School Calendars on Students Acheivement and School and Community Attitudes. Review of educational research, 73, (1), 1-52.

Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (DBIS). (2009). Higher Ambitions: The Future of Universities in a Knowledge Economy; Cited in Paul, W. (2010) Educatinal Tourism: Understanding the Concept, Recognising the Value. Retrieved Feburary 11, 2012, from www.insights.org.uk.

Department of International Development (DFID). (2000). Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalization Work for the Poor: A White Paper on International Development. London: DFID. Retrieved January 11, 2013,from http://193.129.225.248/fullpapaehome.htm.

Donald, S. E., Stanford, L. L., and John, B. M. (1988). Measuringthe Economic Impact of Institution of Higher Education. Research in Higher Education, 28, (1), 17-34.

Dwyer, L. (2002). Economic Contribution of Convention Tourism: Conceptual and Empirical Issues in K. Weber and K. Chon (Eds.), Convention Tourism: International Research and Industry Perspectives. New York: Haworth Hospitality Press.

Gunn, C. A. (1972). In Bello, Y. O and Koya, E, (2008) Accommodation Service Management: Principle and Practice in the Hospitality Industry. Akure: AlabiEyo and Co LTD.

Hansard (Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia). (1977-78).House of Representatives Select Committee on Tourism Official Report. Canberra: Commonwealth Government Printer.

Hanson, K., and Meyerson, J. (1995). International Challenges to AmericanColleges and Universities: Looking ahead. US.: American Council on Education and the Oryx Press, Phoenix, AZ.

Harari, M. (1992). Internationalization of the Curriculum. In C. B. Klasek (Ed.), Bridges to the Future: Strategies for Internationalizing Higher Education. Washington: Washington State University’s Centre for International Development.

Huang, R. (2008). Mapping Educational Tourists Experience in the UK: Understanding International Students. Third World Quarterly,1003-1020.

Hung Chih, Y. (2008). An Examination of the Effects of Participation in a College Study Abroad Program: Unpublished Thesis in Leisure Studies. Pennsylvania State University: Pennsylvania .

Huzikers, Z. and Karaph, I. (1942). in Okoli, C. I. C. (2011) Tourism Development and Management in Nigeria. Enugu: Jee Communication pg. 34.

ICEF Monitor . (2012a). Opendoor 2012 Report; International Students Enrollment Increases by Nearly 6%. Retrieved March 11, 2014, from www.monitor.icef.com

ICEF Monitor. (2012b). International Students Generate CDN$6.5 billion for Canadian. Retrieved March 11, 2014, from www.monitor.icef.com.

International Monetary Fund. (2002). Balance of Payments Statistics Yearbook. New York: IMF.

Iyanga, J. I. (2009 ). Marketing for the Developing World. Owerri: GlobalPress .

Jafari, J. (1977). Editor's Page. Annals of Tourism Research, 5, (Sp. No.), 6-11.

Jay, M., Eyes, D., and Berkely, C. . (1993 ). International Students in the UK Higher Education. California: University of California Press.

Klasek, C. B. (1992). Bridges to the Future: Strategies for Internationalizing Higher Education . Carbondale: IL: Association of International Education Administrators.

Kleckley, J. (2008 ). Economy: NC and its Regions. A Workshop on Climate, Weather and Tourism. East Carolina University, November 14-15.

Knight, J. (1994). Internationalization: Elements and Checkpoints. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Bureau for International Education.

Lee, J. (2008). Beyond Borders: International Student Pathways tothe United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12, (3), 308-327.

Leipe, N., Mc Cabe, V., Poole, B., and Weeks, P. (2000). Business and Management of Conventions. Brisbane: John Wiley and Sons.

Leiper, N. (1979). In Okoli, C.I. C (2001) Tourism and Travel Management in Nigeria . Enugu: Jee Communication.

Leonard, D., and Morley, L. (2007). Experiences of International Students in UK Higher Education: A Review of Unpublished Research2003. Retrieved March 16, 2013, from www.ukcosa.org.uk/about/pubsresearch

Lew, A. A., and Mckercher, B. (2004). Flows and the Spatial Distribution ofTourists, Williams Edition. UK: Lew, C. M. Hall.

Licata, J. W., and Maxham, J. G. (1998). Student Expectations of the University Experience: Levels and Antecedents for Pre-Entry Freshmen . Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 9, (1), 69-91.

Lipsett, A. (2009). Overseas Students now 20% of the United Kingdom Graduates; Education Guardian. Retrieved November 10, 2012, from www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jan/29/overseas-syudents-british-degrees.

Mazzarol, T., and Soutar, G. (2002). Push-Pull Factors Influencing International Student Destination Choice . International Journal of Educational Management, 16, (2), 183-195.

Mazzarol, T., Kemp, S., and Savery, L. (1997). International Students who Choose not to Study in Australia: An Examination of Taiwan and Indonesia. Canberra. : Australian International Education Foundation.

McGowan, S and Potter, L. (2008). Implications of the Chinese Learner for the Internationalisation of the Curriculum: An Australian Perspective. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19, 181-198.

McMahon, M. (1992). Higher Education in a World Market: A Historical looks at the Global Context of International Study. Journal of Higher Education, 24, 465-482.

Mestenhauser, J., and Ellingboe, B. (1998). Reforming the Higher Education Curriculum. Internationalising the Campus. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Musa, S. (2010). Edu-tourism Push for Sabah. Retrieved March 23, 2014,from Borneo Post Online: http://www.theborneopost.com/2010/03/26/edu-tourism-push-for-sabah-cm

NAFSA. (2013). Explore International Education; The International Students Economic Value Too. Retrieved March 21, 2014, from www.nafsa.org/explore_education/impact/Data_and_statistics.

Naido, V. (2007). Research on the Flow of International students to UK Universities: Determinants and Implications. Journal of Research in International Education, 6, (3), 287-307.

Okoli, C. I. (2011). Tourism Development and Management in Nigeria. Enugu: Jee Communication.

Oppermann, M. (1996). Convention Destination Images: Analysis of Association Meeting Planners’ Perceptions. Tourism Management, 17, (3), 75–182.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007 ). Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. Retrieved September 11, 2013, from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/55/39313286.pdf.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2012). Education at a Glance; UNESCO, 2009, Trends in Global Higher Education: . Tracking an Academic Revolution, Education Target Reports from each Government - New Zealand, Canada, China, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan.

Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Developement. (1974). Tourism Policy and International Tourism in Member Countries. Paris: OECD.

Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development. (2008). Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD.

Pacific Asia Travel Association. (2010, ). Notes and Definitions. Retrieved Febuary 22, 2014, from www.papa.org/note-definitions

Paul, W. (2010). Educational Tourism: Understanding the Concept, Recognising the Value. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from www.insights.org.uk

Petruzzellis, L. and Romanazzi, S. (2010). Educational Value: HowStudents Choose University: Evidence from an Italian University . International Journal of Educational Management, 24, (2),139-158.

Pickert, S.and Turlington, B. (1992). Internationalizing the Undergraduate Influence of National Culture Curriculum. In AHandbook for Campus Leaders. (pp. 23-34). Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.

Poon, A. (1993 ). Tourism, Technology and Competitive Strategies. UK: CABI.

Rayner, L., and Easthope, G. (2001). Postmodern Consumption and Alternative Medications. Journal of Sociology, 37, (2), 157-178.

Rehda Institute. (2014). Economic Transformation Programme. RetrievedJanuary 9, 2014, from www.rehdainstitute.com/research-a-researchs.

Rhodes, G. (2010). Opportunities and Challenges in the Internationalization and Globalization of Higher Education in United States: Implications for U.S.-India Student’s Mobility. Retrieved November 11, 2012 , from http://www.ugc.ac.in/new.

Ritchie, B., Carr, N. and Cooper, C. (2003). Managing Educational Tourism. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.

Roppolo, S. (1996 ). The Impact on Tourism as we Educate for a Global Society, Tourism and Culture: Towards the 21st Century. Proceeding . Newcastle: Northumbria University.

Sharpley, R. (2003). Rural Tourism and the Challenges of Tourism Diversification: The Case of Cyprus. Tourism management, 23, (2), 233-244.

Smith, C., and Jenner, P. (1997). Educational Tourism. Travel and Tourism Intelligence, 3, 60-75.

Soutar, N. and Tuner, P. J. (2002). Student’s Preferences for University: A Conjoint Analysis. International Journal of EducationalManagement, 16, (1), 40-45.

Telfer, D. J. (2002 ). Tourism Development Concept and Issues. Channel View publication.

Times Higher Education. (2009 ). Power of Cultural Appeal, James Pitman, Study Group, UK . Retrieved January 29, 2013, from www.timeshighereducation.co.uk

United Nation World Tourism Organisation. (1968). Cited in UNWTO (2008) International Recommendations For Tourism Statistics . New York: UN.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). (2010 ). Global Education Digest 2010: Comparing Education Statistics across the World . Montreal, Canada: UNESCO.

UNWTO. (1963). Cited in Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), (1974) Tourism policy and International Tourism in Member Countries. Paris: OECD.

Van der Wende, M. (2009 ). Internationalization of Higher Education in the OECD Countries: Challenges and Opportunities for the Coming Decade . Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 274–289. .

Verbik, L. and Lasanowski, V. (2007). International Student Mobility: Patterns and Trends. United Kingdom: Observatory Borderless Higher Education.

Wahab, S. (1975). Tourism Management. London: Tourism InternationalPress.

Wall, G., and Mathiesom, A. (2006). Tourism: Change, Impacts and Opportunities . New York : Pearson Prentice Hall.

Webb, M. S. (1993 ). Variables Influencing Graduate Business Students College Selection . College and University, 68,( 1), 38 – 46.

World Tourism and Travel Council. (2010 ). Customer Satisfaction; Annual Report. Retrieved August 17, 2013, from www.wttc.org

World Tourism Organisation (WTO). (2006). Tourism Highlights (2nd Ed.). Retrieved December 12, 2012, from www.unwto.org/facts/menu

World Tourism Organization. (2013, November 10). UNWTO World Tourism Barometer . Retrieved Feburary 16, 2014, from Madrid: UNWTO: http://www.unwto.org/facts/eng/barometer.htm.