Jejak Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/jejak.v10i2.

11296

JEJAK
Journal of Economics and Policy
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/jejak

The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

Devanto Shasta Pratomo1

Economics and Business Faculty, Brawijaya University

Permalink/DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/jejak.v10i2.11296

Received: December 2016; Accepted: February 2017; Published: September 2017

Abstract
Indonesia is the largest archipelago country in the world, making one of popular tourist destinations in Southeast Asia region for both
international and domestic holidays. The main objective of the study is to examine a wide range characteristics, including demographic,
employment, and spatial characteristics for domestic travel in Indonesia.The method used in the study is descriptive analysis using the
2015 National Socio-Economic Survey (SUSENAS), which is used to explain some specific characteristics of domestic travelers in
Indonesia. Some regression analysis using binary probit is also added to examine the determinants of domestic travel demand in
Indonesia, measured by the probability to travel within the country. The result shows that, in general, domestic travelers in Indonesia
are dominated by people who are living in urban areas, people who are aged 25-40 years old, highly educated, working as paid
employees, and mostly originate from provinces in Java island.For specific purposes, people who are living in urban areas are more
likely travel for holidays. Males are more likely travel for business compared to females. People who do have a job are more likely travel
for business purposes, while people who are at school ages are the market for holiday travel.

Key words : travelers, SUSENAS, Indonesia, spatial, tourism.

How to Cite: Pratomo, D. (2017). The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia. JEJAK: Jurnal Ekonomi Dan
Kebijakan, 10(2), 317-329. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/jejak.v10i2.11296

 Corresponding author : p-ISSN 1979-715X

Address: Jl. MT. Haryono 165 Malang, Jawa Timur
65145 e-ISSN 2460-5123
E-mail: [email protected]
318 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

INTRODUCTION However, tourism development in

Indonesia is not only depended on foreign
Indonesia is the largest archipelago
visitors or international travelers, but supported
country in the world, comprising of more
also by local travelers or often referred as the
than 17,000 islands with abundant of culture
domestic tourists or domestic travelers. With a
and natural resources. Supported by the
population of over 230 million, based on the
popularity of Bali as one of the main tourist
Population Census 2010, domestic tourism
destination in the world, it also makes
market has become an attractive market to be
Indonesia in general as one of the popular
developed in Indonesia. In 2015, based on the
tourist destinations. Tourism is one sector of
National Socio-Economic Survey, almost 40
the Indonesia economy that contributed
million individuals are traveling within
greatly to the economic development of
Indonesia. In terms of revenue, the total
country (Santi et al, 2014). Based on the data
expenditure is also higher than revenue from
from Indonesian Central Statistical Board
foreign visitors, increasing significantly from
(BPS), tourism in Indonesia has grown
IDR 137 trillion (almost USD 10,000 million) in
moderately since the early 2000s. The number
2009 to more than IDR 180 trillion (USD 13,000
of foreign visitors visiting Indonesia increased
million) in 2015.
from 5 million in 2000 to over 9 million in
Bigano et al (2007) also noted that
2015. Tourism is also an important agent to
Indonesia is the sixth top tourist destinations for
increase economic earning, especially among
domestic holidays in the world (in terms of
developing countries (Nurbaeti et al, 2016).
number of visitors), after US, China, India,
The revenue from foreign visitors through its
Brazil, and United Kingdom. This is actually
tourist expenditure also increased from USD
supported by the population of Indonesia which
5,748 million in 2000 to more than USD 11,000
is the fourth most populous country in the world
million in 2015, supporting for approximately
after China, India, and the US with a total
4% of the total Gross Domestic Product of
population of more than 230 million in the 2010.
Indonesia. The study by Holik (2016) also
The dominant purpose for domestic travelers in
showed that the number of foreign visitors
Indonesia is for visiting friends and relatives,
positively affects the economic growth in
while the second dominant is for holiday (see
Indonesia.
figure 1).

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 1. Main Purpose for Domestic Travelers in Indonesia
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329

Compared to international travelers, based on their characteristics. The information

domestic travelers are much less sensitive to of domestic travelers profile are omportant in
crisis, including economic or political and policy-making process, development planning
other crisis, making it an excellent alternative and programs in a comprehensive Indonesian
for shock-absorber (Pierret, 2011). In the case tourism development.
of Indonesia, domestic tourism can also be The outline of the paper is as follows. After
considered as a mechanism to increase the introduction, the paper discuss the source of
sense of nationalism and social integration data and methodology used in this study. It is
among diverse cultural background of the then followed by results and discussion section,
population (Gunawan, 1996). consisting of descriptive analysis on
Based on the importance of the role of demographic, economic, and spatial
domestic tourism in supporting Indonesian characteristics. Next, the paper explains the
tourism, the study aims to analyze the simple regression results using probit analysis of
characteristics of domestic travelers in domestic travel demand in Indonesia. Finally,
Indonesia. The study on domestic traveler is the last section concludes the analysis.
relatively limited. A smaller number of studies
have analysed the domestic tourism in RESEARCH METHODS
Indonesia (and also Southeast Asian The main source of data set used in the
countries), compared to the several analysis of study was the National Socio-economic Survey
international tourism. Earlier study on (SUSENAS-KOR) in March 2015. SUSENAS is an
domestic tourism in Indonesia was initiated annual survey conducted by BPS examining the
by Gunawan (1996), while some others social and economic condition of households in
conducting studies in domestic tourism in Indonesia, consisting of more than 280,000
neighbouring countries, including Shuib households (with more than 1 million household
(2000) in Malaysia and Buy and Jolliffe (2011) member) as a sample.
in Vietnam. One of the advantages of using SUSENAS
Based on the basic theory on travel is the fact that there is a question about travel
demand, there are some important variables within a person’s home country. The detailed
influencing the probability of individuals for question available in the SUSENAS is as follow:
travel including income, price, population, “within 6 months prior the survey, did you have
and trend (Witt and Witt, 1992). Using the ever going for tourism or stay in commerical
data of domestic travelers, the study examines accomodation or travel for over or equal 100
the probability of travel by looking a wide kilometres, but not for school or for routine
range of characteristics of domestic travelers work?”. In other words, based on SUSENAS,
in Indonesia including demographic domestic travelers are defined as someone who
(measuring population characteristics), traveled in the territory of Indonesia, with the
employment (as a proxy of income or long journey within 6 months prior the survey
household welfare), and spatial and not a routine trip (not for school or work).
characteristics (whether the travelers SUSENAS divides several purposes of
originally come from). The quantitative domestic travel including vacation/leisure,
analysis using binary regression (probit) is recreation, sport, business, visiting relatives,
used to examine the domestic travel demand attending meetings, conferences, visiting for
320 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

health reasons and religious reasons. This Secondly, the probit is estimated for
question is also used by the Central Statistical examining the domestic travel for specific
Board as a reference for defining domestic purposes including whether domestic traveler
travelers in Indonesia. The limitation of doing travel for (1) holiday, (2) business, (3)
SUSENAS in terms of domestic travelers is the visiting relatives, and (4) other. In this estimate,
fact that it does not include the data of foreign the explanatory variables used follow the first
nationals who lived in Indonesia, and/or estimate. The individuals included in the
foreign nationals who do travel in Indonesia, estimate are the domestic travelers only,
as mentioned by Gunawan (1996). In other consisting of 135292 individuals.
words, SUSENAS only focuses on the
Indonesian nationality travelers who travel RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
within the country. Demographic Characteristic of Domestic
The method used in the study is mostly Travelers, Figure 2 presents the comparison
descriptive analysis explaining the across gender and across time among domestic
characteristics of demographic, economic, travelers in Indonesia. Based on SUSENAS 2015,
and spatial characteristics of domestic there is no significant difference in terms of
travelers. However, in addition, some proportion of travelers between male and female
regression analysis using binary probit are travelers. The condition is relatively stable
examined the in examining the domestic compared to SUSENAS 2011. However, the
travel demand measured by the probability to condition is very different when we look back to
travel within Indonesia. Firstly, the probit is the data on 1980s and 1990s (see Gunawan, 1996).
estimated to examine the probability of Using SUSENAS 1991, domestic travel are more
respondents or individuals for doing travel likely to be conducted by males rather than
domestically, where Y=1 for doing travel and females. Compared to the previous period,
Y=0 for not doing travel. The model is as therefore, more and more females are traveling
follow: in the recent period. This is probably related to
the improving of transportation or improving
Yi = α0 + α1 Xi + εi ……………………………….……………………. (1) travel safety for females that makes females more
likely to travel, particularly conducting domestic
Where Xi is a vector of some individual
travel.
characteristics employed as explanatory
Comparing place of residence, domestic
variables, including whether individuals
travelers are dominated by people who are living
living in urban areas, gender, age of
in urban areas. From all domestic travelers in
individuals (and age squared), whether
Indonesia, more than 65% of travelers are urban
individuals do have a job (working), whether
population, compared to 35% of travelers from
individuals at school ages (schooling),
rural areas (figure 3). Specifically, figure 3 also
whether individuals are doing housework,
shows that from the whole urban population,
whether individuals living in Java, and the
19% are doing travel within the country. This is
number of household member. The
relatively higher compared to only 10% of rural
individuals estimated consist of individuals
population doing domestic travel. In other
who are doing travel and not doing travel,
words, the tendency of urban population for
accounting of about 893284 individuals.
doing domestic travel is almost doubled than
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329

people from rural areas. It is possibly related whole urban population, 19% are doing travel
with the expansion of urban middle class within the country. This is relatively higher
population which is growing rapidly in urban compared to only 10% of rural population doing
areas and also supported by the good domestic travel. In other words, the tendency
infrastructure for travel which is relatively of urban population for doing domestic travel
better than in rural areas. This is relatively is almost doubled than people from rural areas.
similar to what is found in Vietnam, where the It is possibly related with the expansion of
emerging urban middle class being a driving urban middle class population which is
force for consumption, including the needs of growing rapidly in urban areas and also
domestic travel (Bui and Jolliffe, 2011). supported by the good infrastructure for travel
Comparing place of residence, domestic which is relatively better than in rural areas.
travelers are dominated by people who are This is relatively similar to what is found in
living in urban areas. From all domestic Vietnam, where the emerging urban middle
travelers in Indonesia, more than 65% of class being a driving force for consumption,
travelers are urban population, compared to including the needs of domestic travel (Bui and
35% of travelers from rural areas (figure 3). Jolliffe, 2011).
Specifically, figure 3 also shows that from the

Source: SUSENAS (1991,2011, 2015)

Figure 2.Proportion of Domestic Travelers by Gender (%), 1991-2015

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 3. Proportion of Domestic Travelers Among Urban and Rural Areas (%), 2015
322 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 4. Proportion of Domestic Travelers by Age Group (%), 2015

Comparing age group, domestic are potential domestic market in Indonesian

travelers in Indonesia are dominated by tourism.
people aged 25-40 years old (30%) (figure 4). Figure 5 presents the profile of domestic
This age group is also known as the working travelers by education attainment. The analysis
and childbearing periods. Although, they may is in figure 5 is focused on respondents aged 24
the most productive age group in years old and above assuming that travelers
employment, most of their motivation of completed their education. As presented, more
travel are for visiting relatives (48%) and than 30% of domestic travelers have senior high
vacation (33%), not for business purposes school education. Combined with tertiary
(6%). It is interesting to be noted that the high education, it is indicated that most of the
proportion of children or population aged 0- domestic travelers in Indonesia are highly
14 years who travel within the country (25%). educated, particularly if we compare with the
In general, the data suggests that those age average years of schooling Indonesia that is still
group under 40 and households with children around 9 years (Jones and Pratomo, 2016).

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 5. Proportion of Adult Domestic Travelers by Education Attainment
(and Age Group) (%), 20115
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329 323

In contrast, the proportion of domestic (see figure 7). The other dominant sector of
travelers with low education (primary school) activity of domestic travelers includes trade
also show a relatively high which is almost to (19%) and agriculture (15%). Spatial
30% of domestic travelers. Combining the Characteristic of Domestic Travelers, The
education characteristic and age group, figure domestic travelers in Indonesia are dominated
5 also indicates that domestic travelers with by travelers who originate from Java, particularly
primary school education is dominated by due to its high number of population.
travelers in older age group (50 years and Specifically, more than 60% of the total of
above) which more likely depended on the domestic travelers in Indonesia came from five
younger age groups. provinces in Java, with the largest number of
Although the highest proportion of travelers came from West Java, contributing
employment in Indonesia is working in 17.77% of the total domestic travelers in
agriculture sector, the highest proportion of Indonesia (figure 8). It is then followed by East
domestic travelers is working in services (21%) Java and Central Java.
Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 6.Type of Occupation of Domestic Travelers (%)

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 7. Sector of Activity of Domestic Travelers
324 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

Some provinces outside Java that who contribute more than 17% of the total
contributed to the high number of total domestic travelers in Indonesia was only 15% of
domestic travelers in Indonesia are among the total population of West Java (figure 9). In
other North Sumatra, South Sulawesi, other words, only 15% of population of West
Lampung and Bali. Although the distribution of Java traveled within the country. In contrast,
domestic travelers in Indonesia is dominated some provinces have relatively higher
by travelers from Java, the proportion of proportion (more than 25%) of travelers
domestic travelers compared to its province compared to their population, including
population is relatively small. For example, the Bangka Belitung, Yogyakarta, Jakarta, and Bali.
number of domestic travelers from West Java

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 8. Distribution of Domestic Travelers Based on Province of
Origin (%), 2015

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 9. Proportion of Domestic Travelers Compared to Total Its Province
Population (%), 2015
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329

Source: SUSENAS (2015)

Figure 10.Distribution of Domestic Travelers Based on Province of Destination (%),
2015

Where domestic travelers go? Unlike travelers easily to travel between province
foreign visitors who made Bali as a major compared to other provinces.
tourist destination, most of the destination of Jakarta and Yogyakarta received most of
domestic travelers is the provinces in Java the domestic traveler-inbound particularly from
(figure 10). This is possible as the most other province. This is supported by the position
travelers living in Java travel within the of Jakarta as the central of government and
province or within the islands (and do not economy while Yogyakarta as a province that is
travel to other provinces or islands). popular for cultural tourism destination.
Table 1 specifically shows that most of Specifically, 92% travelers inbound to Jakarta
the domestic travelers in Indonesia travel come from other provinces, while 82% of
within their province of residence. Therefore, travelers inbound to Yogyakarta also come from
although several domestic travelers are area outside the province (between province
coming from West Java, East Java and Central traveler. Regression Analysis, this section
Java, most of them only make their journey in presents the regression analysis using probit
their own province. Some exceptions are (binary dependent variable regression)
domestic travelers from Jakarta, Banten, and examining demand for domestic travel in
Yogyakarta (all in Java), whereas more than Indonesia. The dependent variable is whether
60% of them travels to other provinces respondents travel or not within the country six
(between provinces). More than 90% of months prior to the survey. Following SUSENAS,
domestic travelers from Jakarta even travel to respondents are restricted to the household
other provinces, particularly to their member aged 10 years old above who answering
neighbouring provinces i.e. West Java and SUSENAS questionaires. Similar to the previous
Banten. However, it has to be noted that estimate, probit regression is estimated focusing
Jakarta, Banten, and Yogyakarta are three on respondents who are conducting a domestic
provinces with a relatively small area travel. The independent variables tend to follow
compared to other provinces, enabling the the previous estimate in table 2.
326 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

Table 1.Proportion of Domestic Travelers-Outbound and Travelers-Inbound Based on

Province

Travelers-Outbound Travelers-Inbound
Within Between Within
Province Province Province Province Between Province
Aceh 71.42 28.58 78.89 21.11
North Sumatra 82.45 17.55 73.15 26.85
West Sumatra 68.86 31.14 60.48 39.52
Riau 45.82 54.18 59.96 40.04
Jambi 61.00 39.00 68.34 31.66
South Sumatera 61.32 38.68 67.91 32.09
Bengkulu 62.88 37.12 67.33 32.67
Lampung 63.44 36.56 69.56 30.44
Bangka-Belitung 85.35 14.65 87.75 12.25
Riau Islands 55.42 44.58 65.11 34.89
Jakarta 7.70 92.30 7.45 92.55
West Java 61.15 38.85 62.26 37.74
Central Java 51.61 48.39 54.89 45.11
Yogyakarta 34.14 65.86 17.38 82.62
East Java 80.23 19.77 77.69 22.31
Banten 32.25 67.75 52.30 47.70
Bali 77.93 22.07 54.18 45.82
NTB 85.47 14.53 86.00 14.00
NTT 90.38 9.62 91.42 8.58
West Kalimantan 86.63 13.37 87.95 12.05
Central Kalimantan 58.70 41.30 74.93 25.07
South Kalimantan 77.08 22.92 76.68 23.32
East Kalimantan 47.83 52.17 65.08 34.92
North Kalimantan 42.44 57.56 55.57 44.43
North Sulawesi 72.66 27.34 66.93 33.07
Central Sulawesi 69.79 30.21 80.09 19.91
South Sulawesi 83.00 17.00 74.09 25.91
Southeast Sulawesi 74.77 25.23 85.46 14.54
Gorontalo 68.57 31.43 75.86 24.14
West Sulawesi 45.49 54.51 62.20 37.80
Maluku 82.55 17.45 83.62 16.38
North Maluku 73.02 26.98 81.30 18.70
West Papua 61.40 38.60 79.45 20.55
Papua 64.52 35.48 75.77 24.23
Source: SUSENAS (2015)
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329

Table 2. Probit Estimate for Domestic Travel of them are more likely doing domestic travel.
Demand The significant coefficient of working also
Coef. P value supports the tourism demand theory
Urban 0.361 0.000 suggesting that income is one of the main
Males 0.070 0.000 determinants of individuals for travel (see Witt
Age 0.035 0.000 and Witt, 1992) However, interestingly, the
Age Sq -0.000 0.000 coefficients of respondents who are schooling
Working 0.090 0.000 are higher compared to the other activities,
Schooling 0.213 0.000 indicating that househo lds with member who
House work 0.146 0.000 are at school ages are potential market for
Java 0.081 0.000 domestic travel. Comparing region, people who
No. HH member -0.046 0.000 are living in Java are more likely doing travel
Constant -1.848 0.000 than people who are living outside Java. Finally,
Number of obs 893284 the number of household member is negatively
LR chi2(9) 25068.26 influencing the domestic travel, suggesting that
Prob > chi2 0 respondents with less household members are
Pseudo R2 0.033 more likely for doing domestic travel. Table 3
Notes: (Y=1: Travel, Y=0: Not Travel) examines the probability of domestic travelers
As presented in table 2, people who are for doing specific purposes of travel, including
living in urban areas are more likely to travel holiday, business, visiting friends and relatives,
compared to people living in rural areas. This is and others. Other purposes include such as
consistent with figure 2 explaining the joining seminar, for health and education
domination of the domestic travelers from activities, religious activities, or sport activities.
urban areas, possibly due to the better As presented in table 3, people who are
infrastructures and the emerge of urban living in urban areas are more likely traveling
middle-class population. Males are more likely for holiday purposes, but it is less likely
to travel compared to females, indicated by a traveling for business, visiting relatives, and
significant and positive coefficient. other purposes compared to people living in
However, the coefficient is relatively very rural areas. Males are more likely doing
small, suggesting no much difference between domestic travel for business and other
males and females behaviour in terms of purposes, but are less likely doing domestic
domestic travel. There is a non-linear travel for holiday and visiting friends and
relationship of ages, suggestin that the relatives comparers to females. Comparing
probability of travel increases as age increases, ages, an increase in ages decreases the
but it will decrease at a certain age. The other probability of doing holiday and visiting friends
important variables that influences the demand and relatives, but it will increase after a certain
for domestic travel is the main activity of age, suggesting a potential non-linear
respondents. All of the main activities of relationship. On the opposite, an increase in
respondents, including working, schooling, and ages increases the probability of travel for
houseworking, have a positive and significant business and other purposes.
effect on the domestic travel sugesting that all
Tabel 3. Probit Estimate for Specific Purposes of Travel
328 Devanto Shasta Pratomo, The Analysis of Domestic Travelers in Indonesia

Holiday Business Visiting Relatives Other

Coef. P value Coef. P value Coef. P value Coef. P value
Urban 0.317 0.000 -0.043 0.000 -0.039 0.000 -0.281 0.000
Males -0.084 0.000 0.445 0.000 -0.055 0.000 0.032 0.002
Age -0.011 0.000 0.053 0.000 -0.005 0.001 0.014 0.000
Age Sq 0.000 0.000 -0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001
Working 0.001 0.907 0.436 0.000 -0.103 0.000 0.018 0.100
Schooling 0.128 0.000 -0.424 0.000 -0.169 0.000 0.142 0.000
Housework -0.039 0.000 -0.134 0.000 0.072 0.000 0.032 0.001
Java 0.351 0.000 -0.159 0.000 -0.187 0.000 -0.097 0.000
No. HH member 0.041 0.000 0.021 0.000 -0.055 0.000 0.027 0.000
Constant -0.627 0.000 -3.056 0.000 0.381 0.000 -1.349 0.000
Number of obs 135292 135292 135292 135292
LR chi2(9) 11086.35 6227.51 3646.88 2353.75
Prob > chi2 0 0 0 0
Pseudo R2 0.0708 0.1075 0.0194 0.019

The probability of travel for business (1992), income and population are the main
will also decrease after a certain age (see the determinants of travel. Some population
age square variable) Looking at the main characteristics used in this study also support the
activity of respondents, there is no significant demand theory, including male travelers, middle
difference for people who are doing holiday age travelers, and travelers who are living in
between people who are working and people urban areas.
who are not working. People who are working
are more likely travel for business and less CONCLUSION
likely travel for visiting friends or relatives. In The objective of the paper is to analyze the
contrast, people who are schooling are more domestic travelers in Indonesia based on some
likely doing holiday and less likely visiting characteristics, including demographic,
friends and relatives and less likely travel for employment, and spatial sharacteristics. Using
business. Respondents who are living in Java descriptive and some regression analysis of
are more likely travel for holiday than SUSENAS data, the analysis shows that those
respondents came from outside Java. characteristics are significant in explaining
However, they are less likely doing travel for domestic travelers in Indonesia. The result
other purposes. Finally, the higher number of shows that, in general, domestic travelers in
the household member, the more likely for Indonesia are dominated by people who are
doing holiday, travel for business, and other living in urban areas, people who are aged 25-40
purposes, with the highest coefficient is found years old, highly educated, working as paid
for holiday purpose. employees, and mostly originate from provinces
In general, the result supports the basic in Java island. The information of domestic
demand theory for travel, indicated by a travelers in Indonesia is important for policy-
significant coefficient of working as a proxy of making process, development planning and
income. As mentioned by Witt and Witt programs in a comprehensive Indonesian
JEJAK Journal of Economics and Policy Vol 10 (2) (2017): 317-329

tourism development. Some additional

Jones, G. W., and Pratomo, D. (2016). Education in
characteristics that need to be considered in
Indonesia: Trends, Differentials, and Implications
the future studies include household income, for Development. In C. Z. Guilmoto and G. W. Jones
and price for travel variables. (Eds.), Contemporary Demographic
Transformations in China, India and Indonesia,
REFERENCES Switzerland: Springer.
Badan Pusat Statistik. (1991). Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nurbaeti.,Damanik, J.,Baiquni, M., and Nopirin. (2016). The
Nasional (Susenas). Jakarta: Badan Pusat Competitive of Tourism Destination in Jakarta.
Statistik. Indonesia. IOSR Journal of Business and
. (2011). Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional (Susenas). Management Volume 18 Issue 7 Ver. III : 25-31
Jakarta: Badan Pusat Statistik. Pierret, F. (2011). Some points on domestic tourism.
. (2015). Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional (Susenas). Rencontre internationale s ur le développement du
Jakarta: Badan Pusat Statistik. tourisme domestique. Working Paper. UNWTO
Bigano, A., Hamilton, J. M., Lau, M., Tol, R. S., and Zhou, Santi, F., Oktarina, R.B.H.D, and Kustiari R. (2014). Analysis
Y. (2007). A global database of domestic and Determinants of Investment, Demand and Supply
international tourist numbers at national and Indonesia Tourism. IOSR Journal of Economics and
subnational level. International Journal of Finance Volume 4 Issue 3 : 16-27
Tourism Research, 9(3): 147-174. Shuib, A. (2000). Demand for Hotel Accomodation in Kuala
Bui, H. T., and Jolliffe, L. (2011). Vietnamese domestic Lumpur among Domesti Tourists, Working Paper,
tourism: an investigation of travel motivations. Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Working Paper. Leibniz Institute. Witt, S.F., and Witt, C.A. (1992). Modeling and Forecasting
Gunawan, M. P. (1996). Domestic tourism in Indonesia. Demand in Tourism, Academic Press, London.
Tourism Recreation Research, 21(1): 65-69.
Holik, A. (2016). Relationship of Economic Growth with
Tourism Sector, JEJAK Journal of Economics and
Policy, 9(1): 16-33.