WTTC Business Travel 2011

1
Business Travel:
A Catalyst for Economic Performance
2
CHAIRMAN:
Geofrey J W Kent
Founder & Executive Chairman
Abercrombie & Kent

VICE CHAIRMEN:
Jean-Claude Baumgarten
Vice Chairman
World Travel & Tourism Council
Edouard Ettedgui
Group Chief Executive
Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group
Michael Frenzel
Chairman of the Executive Board
TUI AG
Mark Harms
Chairman & CEO
Global Leisure Partners
Stephen P Holmes
Chairman & CEO
Wyndham Worldwide
Manfredi Lefebvre DOvidio
Chairman
Silversea Cruises
Brett Tollman
President & Chief Executive
The Travel Corporation

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:
Marilyn Carlson Nelson
Chairman
Carlson
Gary Chapman
President, Group Services
& Dnata
Emirates Group
Jef Clarke
President & CEO
Travelport
Andrew Cosslett
CEO
InterContinental Hotels
Group PLC
Qiang Duan
Chairman
Beijing Tourism Group
Sebastin Escarrer
Vice Chairman
Sol Meli
Manuel Fernando Esprito Santo
Chairman
Rioforte Investments SA
Denis Hennequin
Chairman & CEO
Accor
Pansy Ho
Managing Director
Shun Tak Holdings Limited
James Hogan
CEO
Etihad Airways
Hubert Joly
President, CEO & Director
Carlson
Richard R Kelley
Chairman
Outrigger Enterprises Group
Tom Klein
President
Sabre Holdings
Gerald Lawless
Executive Chairman
Jumeirah Group
Jabu Mabuza
CEO
Tsogo Sun Group
J W Marriott, Jr
Chairman & CEO
Marriott International, Inc
Christopher J Nassetta
President & CEO
Hilton Worldwide
Charles Petruccelli
President Global Travel Services
American Express Company
Christopher Rodrigues CBE
Chairman
VisitBritain
Jefrey C Rutledge
Chairman & CEO
Travel Guard Worldwide, Inc
Arne M Sorenson
President & COO
Marriott International, Inc
Jyotsna Suri
Chairperson & Managing Director
Bharat Hotels Ltd

GLOBAL MEMBERS:
Talal Al Bahar
Chairman & Managing Director
IFA Hotels & Resorts
Mohammed Al Habbai
CEO
Dubailand
Ted J Balestreri
Chairman & CEO
Cannery Row Company
Simn P Barcel
CEO
Barcel Corporatin Empresarial
Raymond Bickson
Managing Director & CEO
Taj Hotels, Resorts and Palaces
Giorgio Boscolo
CEO
Boscolo Group
Rattawadee Bualert
President
lebua Hotels & Resorts Co, Ltd
Mariano Prez Claver
Chairman
NH Hoteles
Chris J Cahill
COO
Fairmont Rafes Hotels
International
Alexandre Chemla
President
Altour
Chen Feng
Chairman of the Board
HNA Group
Chen Rong
CEO
China International Travel Service,
Limited Head Ofce (CITS )
Jim Compton
Executive Vice President &
Chief Revenue Ofcer
United Airlines
Dong Zhiyi
Chairman
Beijing Capital International
Airport Co, Ltd
Pier Luigi Foschi
Chairman & CEO
Costa Cruises
Arthur de Haast
Global Chief Executive Ofcer
Jones Lang LaSalle Hotels
Andy Harrison
Chief Executive
Whitbread Plc
Raimund Hosch
President & CEO
Messe Berlin GmbH
Stephen P Joyce
President & CEO
Choice Hotels International
Miltos Kambourides
Managing Partner
Dolphin Capital Investors
Dara Khosrowshahi
President & CEO
Expedia Inc
Sir Nigel Knowles
Co-CEO
DLA Piper
RK Krishna Kumar
Vice Chairman
Taj Hotels, Resorts & Palaces
Hans Lerch
Vice Chairman & CEO
Hotelplan Group
Liu Yi
President
Beijing Tourism Group
Luis Maroto
President & CEO
Amadeus IT Group SA
Richard Mortimore
Managing Director
Reed Travel Exhibitions
Jim Murren
CEO
MGM Resorts International
Jerry Noonan
Co-leader, Global Hospitality
& Leisure Practice
Spencer Stuart
Deepak Ohri
Chief Executive Ofcer
lebua Hotels & Resorts Co, Ltd
Frits D van Paasschen
President & CEO
Starwood Hotels & Resorts
Worldwide, Inc
Andy Payne
CEO
Wilderness Safaris
Jean Gabriel Prs
President & CEO
Mvenpick Hotels & Resorts
Fernando Pinto
CEO
TAP Portugal
Alexander Pleshakov
CEO
Transaero Airlines
David Radclife
Chief Executive
Hogg Robinson Group
Marty Salfen
General Manager
Global Travel &
Transportation Industry
IBM
Per Setterberg
President & CEO
Global Blue
Jasminder Singh
Chairman & CEO
Radisson Edwardian Hotels
Jef Smisek
President & CEO
United Airlines
Khalid A bin Sulayem
Director General
Department of Tourism and
Commerce Marketing
Hiromi Tagawa
President & CEO
JTB Corp
Yassin K Talhouni
CEO
Zara Investment Holding Co Ltd
Jaume Tpies
President
Relais & Chteaux
Robin Tauck
President
R Tauck & Partners
Jose Antonio Tazn
Chairman of the Board
Amadeus IT Group SA
Jonathan M Tisch
Chairman & CEO
Loews Hotels
Matthew D Upchurch
CEO
Virtuoso Ltd
Philip C Wolf
President & CEO
PhoCusWright, Inc
Xu Jiwei
Chairman
Huangshan Tourism Group
Vladimir Yakushev
Managing Partner
S-Group Capital Management
Tim Zagat
Co-Founder, Co-Chair & CEO
Zagat Survey LLC
Guanghui Zhang
President & CEO
Beijing Capital International
Airport Co, Ltd

HONORARY MEMBERS:
Andr Jordan
Chairman
Andr Jordan Group
Jon Linen
Adviser to the Chairman
Lord Marshall of Knightsbridge
Chairman
Nomura International plc
Sir Frank Moore, AO
Chairman
FT Moore P/L
Frank Olson
Retired Chairman of the Board
The Hertz Corporation
Grard Plisson
Co-President Founder
Accor
Carl Ruderman
Chairman
Universal Media
Tommaso Zanzotto
President
Toscana Ville & Castelli Srl

CHAIRMAN EMERITUS:
James D Robinson III
General Partner
RRE Ventures
WTTC Chairman (1990-1994)

MMEDIATE PAST
CHAIRMAN:
Vincent A Wolfngton
Chairman
Global Alliance Advisors LLC

FORMER CHAIRMEN:
Sir Ian Prosser
Retired Chairman
InterContinental Hotels
Group PLC
Harvey Golub
Retired Chairman & CEO
Robert H Burns
Chairman
The Robert Burns Hotel Group

PRESIDENT & CEO:
David Scowsill

15 April 2011
Contents

Executive Summary................................................................................... 1
Detailed Findings ....................................................................................... 9
1 Global business travel trends ....................................................... 11
2 The ROI of Business Travel The
Business Perspective.............................................................................. 16
2.1 Generating New sales............................................................................ 17
2.2 Keeping Customers................................................................................ 18
2.3 Developing Partnerships ........................................................................ 19
2.4 Spurring Innovation................................................................................ 20
3 The ROI of Business Travel
Econometric Analysis ............................................................................. 21
3.1 World Trade Benefits.............................................................................. 21
3.2 Broader Productivity Effects ................................................................... 28
3.3 Scenario Analysis................................................................................... 31
Methodology............................................................................................. 33

Executive Summary
WTTC would like to thank the following sponsors:
1
GLOBAL BUSINESS TRAVEL IS UNDER SCRUTINY. EVEN AS THE WORLD
ECONOMY RECOVERS, COMPANIES REMAIN CAUTIOUS ABOUT RESTORING
TRAVEL BUDGETS. MEANWHILE, VIRTUAL MEETING TECHNOLOGY OFFERS
A READY ALTERNATIVE TO IN-PERSON MEETINGS. AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONCERNS HAVE BEGUN TO INFLUENCE BOTH CORPORATE AND
GOVERNMENT POLICIES REGARDING TRAVEL.
These trends raise a fundamental question with signifcant implications: What role, if any, does business travel play
in driving corporate performance and in the development of the global economy?
Published to coincide with the 11th Global Travel & Tourism Summit in Las Vegas, this study was commissioned by the World Travel
& Tourism Council (WTTC) to seek answers to this question.
Two separate research channels were used to inform the study. The frst was a survey of global business travellers and executives in the
United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Brazil and China. The second channel was an econometric analysis covering 190 countries
which tested for the existence of any causal relationships between business travel and national economic performance.
The results of these analyses are compelling, showing a clear relationship between business travel and corporate performance, as well as
economic growth. Business travel not only helps the bottom line; it also grows economies, raises incomes, and creates jobs.
Business travel improves global corporate productivity, yielding
a return on investment of 10:1. In other words, one unit of new
business travel spending produces incremental industry sales of
ten units.
Business travel is integral to international trade. Approximately
one third of the growth in global trade over the past decade has
been driven by international business travel.
Growth in business travel from 2000 to 2007 facilitated the
creation of over 40 million jobs through related increases in trade
and productivity. This represented almost 20% of the growth in
global employment over the same period.
If business travel were cut by 25% over two consecutive years,
global GDP would be 5% lower than would otherwise be the
case after a fve-year period. This would mean 30 million fewer
jobs than forecast under baseline assumptions for the same period
an average loss of 1% of global employment.
Global business travellers estimate that roughly 50% of their
prospective customers are converted to new customers with an
in-person meeting compared with 31% without such a meeting.
On average, business travellers believe that 38% of their customers
would switch to a competitor and their companies would lose
37% of annual sales without in-person meetings.
The majority of respondents attend trade shows in order to network
with prospective (66%) and current (61%) customers. These trade
shows are estimated to generate 15% of annual revenue.
A signifcant majority of international travellers feel it is very
or extremely important to travel to international subsidiaries
to expand business in international markets (70%) and to invest
internationally (65%).
Four out of fve global executives (nine out of ten in China)
agree or strongly agree that face-to-face business meetings
are essential to their organisations success and that business travel
improves a frms chance of increasing sales.
On average, executives say that 29% of their companys new
sales depend on business travel, with China and Brazil reporting
above-average returns.
Three quarters of executives believe that business travel is
extremely or very important in increasing profts (74%),
increasing sales (75%), developing supplier partnerships (70%),
and in spurring innovation (70%).
INTRODUCTION
KEY FINDINGS
B U S I N E S S T R AV E L A C A T A L Y S T F O R E C O N O M I C P E F R F O R M A N C E
2
TO UNDERSTAND THE ROLE THAT BUSINESS TRAVEL PLAYS AT THE
COMPANY LEVEL ITS RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI) 500 GLOBAL
BUSINESS TRAVELLERS AND EXECUTIVES WERE SURVEYED IN THE USA, UK,
GERMANY, BRAZIL AND CHINA (100 IN EACH COUNTRY). OUT OF THESE
SURVEYS, FOUR AREAS OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACT EMERGED.
The ROI of Business Travel
The Business Perspective
B U S I N E S S T R AV E L
New sales
Travel and sales are inextricably linked. On
average, executives report that 29% of their
companys new sales depend on business travel.
And business travellers estimate that 50% of
prospects become customers when an in-person
meeting takes place versus only 31% without
one. The most signifcant beneft was noted by
Chinese business travellers, who indicated a 24
percentage point jump in conversion with an in-
person meeting.
Keeping customers
Cutting back on business travel poses signifcant
business risks. Over one-third of respondents
(36%) project that between 25% and 49% of their
current customers would switch to a competitor
without in-person meetings. And, on average,
business travellers estimate that 38% of their
customers would switch to a competitor without
in-person meetings. These responses were
remarkably stable across the diferent countries
surveyed.
49%
% of prospects turning
into sales WITH in-person
meeting
% of prospects turning
into sales WITHOUT
in-person meeting
30%
57%
33%
50%
27%
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

=

3
1
%
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

=

5
0
%
45%
30%
49%
32%
Sales conversion rates with and without an in-person meeting
36% Brazil
Brazil
Brazil
41% China
China
China
37% Germany
Germany
Germany
35% UK
UK
UK
39% USA
USA
USA
Average response by country
Share of customers that would switch to a
competitor without an in-person meeting
3
A C A T A L Y S T F O R E C O N O M I C P E F R F O R M A N C E
Partnerships
Co-operative relationships are integral to company performance.
Global business travellers understand that travel is essential to
building these relationships. For example, nearly three quarters
(72%) of global business travellers fnd external conferences and
conventions have a signifcant or high impact on developing

partnerships. And well over half of all respondents indicated
that meeting with partners is very or extremely important
to expanding into new markets, investing in new markets, and
managing their companys supply chain.
Innovation and
human capital
Global business travellers also
afrmed a strong relationship
between travel and innovation
and productivity. Over two
thirds of executive travellers
(70%) believe that business
travel is extremely or very
important to innovation and to
added productivity/efciency.
The survey shows how travel infuences corporate and economic performance on multiple fronts. Results from all fve
countries illustrate clear benefts in terms of new sales, customer retention, innovation, partnership opportunities and
overall operating effciencies.
4%
4%
10%
7%
10%
9%
16%
8%
20%
23%
31%
25%
39%
66%
59%
64%
43%
35%
28%
33%
27%
29%
15%
26%
Importance of meeting with suppliers and other partners
Expanding into new customer markets
Investing in new markets
Managing supply chain more effciently
Employing additional staff
Slightly important Not at all important Moderately important Very important Extremely important
74%
74%
70%
70%
70%
63%
61%
55%
47%
Increased profts
Investing in local markets
Increased sales
Increased international sales
Developing partnerships with suppliers
Investing in foreign markets
General innovation
Ability to hire additional employees
Added productivity / effciency
Business travel is very important or extremely important to
4
IN ORDER TO QUANTIFY ANY CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS WHICH COULD EXIST
BETWEEN BUSINESS TRAVEL AND TRADE, PRODUCTIVITY AND OVERALL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, A PARALLEL ECONOMETRIC ANALYSIS WAS
UNDERTAKEN.
The ROI of Business Travel
The Econometric Results
Trade efects
The trade efects of business travel identifed by respondents to
the survey are also borne out by the econometric analysis, which
reveals a clear link between international business travel growth
and growth in world trade. Countries with a larger outbound
business travel market tend to enjoy higher exports, while faster
growth in business travel is also linked to more rapid trade growth.
The modelling shows that higher business travel intensity (business
travel spending relative to GDP) drives higher trade intensity
(imports and exports relative to GDP). As well as identifying a
clear correlation, the analysis shows that a causal relationship exists
between a higher level of business travel intensity and higher trade
intensity. By considering both travel and trade spending relative to
GDP, it was possible to remove the impact of similar trend growth
caused by broader economic trends and, by doing so, eliminate
spurious relationships. The end result provides the percentage of
trade growth which is attributable to business travel activity.
The econometric models suggest that business travel is responsible
for about a third of the growth in world exports over the past
decade. These benefts have been shared by both developed and
developing economies. The implication, supported by the surveys,
is that business travel is particularly integral to the relationships,
investments, supply chains and logistics which are necessary for
international trade to occur. For example, a signifcant majority
of international travellers feel it is extremely important to travel
to international subsidiaries to expand business in international
markets (70%) and to invest internationally (65%).

30%
25%
20%
15%
Intensity is calculated
as relative to GDP
Business travel intensity (lhs)
Trade intensity (rhs)
Source: Oxford Economics
0.30%
0.25%
0.20%
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
Business Travel and World Trade Intensity
4%
8%
5%
7%
10%
3%
19%
27%
28%
33%
66%
65%
55%
29%
35%
37%
26%
30%
Importance of Travel to International Subsidiaries
Slightly important Not at all important Moderately important
Very important Extremely important
Business travel is responsible for about a third of the growth in world exports over the past decade.
5
When comparing the level of trade with the level of business travel spending across countries, it becomes clear that outbound travel is
most powerful in its efect on exports, while inbound travel primarily infuences imports, as shown in the charts below.
This relationship is also apparent when considering the importance of business travel and trade relative to GDP. The econometric
modelling identifes a strong relationship between business travel intensity (relative to GDP) and trade intensity over time. The charts
below show that changes in outbound travel are drivers of exports in both the UK and Brazil with a high degree of confdence.
These relationships are not exclusively in one direction (trade also drives business travel) so the analysis is careful to identify and isolate
the causal efect of business travel on trade.
The implications of these trade efects are signifcant. Trade
not only generates income for companies, but also advances
economic development by lowering prices, creating economies
of scale, allowing countries to focus on areas of comparative
advantage, spurring innovation and creating competition.
Business travel, as a catalyst of global trade, plays a signifcant
role in driving faster GDP growth, improving standards of living,
and creating jobs.
Exports (US$bn)
France
China
Germany
USA
Singapore O
u
t
b
o
u
n
d

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

t
r
a
v
e
l

(
U
S
$
b
n
)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
World Outbound Business Travel vs Exports
UK
Singapore
Imports (US$bn)
Japan
Germany
I
n
b
o
u
n
d

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

t
r
a
v
e
l

(
U
S
$
b
n
)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
World Inbound Business Travel vs Imports
Business Travel
Increased Trade
Lower
prices
Economies
of scale
Comparative
advantage
Faster GDP Growth
Rising Incomes
Job Creation
Macro Stability
Tech transfer
& innovation
Increased
competition
0.00%
0.005%
0.01%
0.015%
0.02%
0.025%
0.03%
0.035%
16%
12%
14%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1995 1999 2003 2007
Brazil: Exports & Outbound Travel Intensity
0.04%
% GDP % GDP
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1995 1999 2003 2007
UK: Exports & Outbound Travel Intensity % GDP % GDP
Exports relative to GDP (lhs)
Outbound business travel relative to GDP (rhs)
Exports relative to GDP (lhs)
Outbound business travel relative to GDP (rhs)
6
Broader productivity efects
The efects of business travel on corporate and economic performance go beyond the facilitation
of international trade. The survey results indicate that business travel also has an impact on overall
productivity and, therefore, on business performance and proftability. And these impacts are evident
with regards to both domestic company performance and international trade. Again, we fnd that
causality runs in both directions: while business performance does infuence travel budgets in the short
term, there is a longer-term impact of business travel on overall business performance.
By running extensive causality tests and through the combination of time series and cross-sectional
panel econometrics across more than 20 countries, it was possible to identify the specifc efects of
business travel on productivity
1
and, by extension, on sales and profts. This approach ensures that
both the direct and indirect benefts of business travel are captured on the basis of historical industry
data. Through this analysis, the broader indirect benefts of higher sales conversions, human capital
developments, and partnership benefts are quantifable.
The modelling was then extended to cover each world region on a country-by-country basis by
applying industry-specifc results for representative countries to the broader region. The industry
composition and the business travel intensity (domestic and international) for each country determine
ROI estimates for this broader set. A range of values is estimated, as well as the average for each region
according to volatility in cross-country calculation, also factoring in any country-specifc uncertainty.
On a worldwide basis, the analysis shows that, on average, business travel yields a return on investment
of 10:1 that is, one unit of incremental business travel spending produces incremental industry sales
of ten units.
1
The measure used, Total Factor Productivity, accounts for the efects of technology and other capital and provides a purer
benchmark of changes in industry-by-industry productivity over time.
18
16
10
4
14
8
2
12
6
0
Americas
Range Average
Europe Asia
Pacifc
Middle
East
Africa World
ROI of Business Travel
Incremental sales per dollar invested
On average, business
travel yields a return
on investment of 10:1.
7
Based on these results, a scenario was then run through the Oxford Economics macroeconomic model to see the efects on GDP and
employment. The model assumes a consecutive two-year reduction in business travel spending of 25%, relative to current business travel
activity not dissimilar to what many companies experienced during the recent global recession. The relationship between business travel
and total factor productivity for each country was used as an input to the global macroeconomic model. The scenario includes the
assumption that business travel activity falls by 25% in the frst year and then remains at that lower level for a second year before returning
to the baseline level of spending. However, it takes several years for the impacts to fully feed through into lower productivity and be felt in
the wider economy.
For the world as a whole, if business travel were cut by 25% over two years, global GDP would be 5% lower than would otherwise be the
case after a fve year period. In addition, employment would be 1% lower in each year based on this scenario a loss of 30 million jobs
relative to the baseline forecast.
Scenario Analysis: What happens if business travel is cut by 25% over two years?
Diferences across regions are partly determined by the
industry composition of countries within each region.
Historic relationships between business travel and
industry-by-industry productivity are also important,
refecting relative spending on business travel across
countries, and underlying productivity changes over
time. For example, a higher estimated ROI has been
determined for the USA than for the EU, consistent
with overall higher productivity response in the USA
over the past 20 years but also refective of diferent
industry compositions.
Typically, one sees a stronger response to business travel in emerging markets that are receptive to growth in key productivity sectors.
However, the Asia Pacifc region as a whole has a relatively low estimated ROI. This is infuenced by a low estimated ROI for Japan, which
carries a large weight in the calculations as a key regional source market for business travel.
Business Travel Spend and ROI by Region

Total Business Business Travel International Average Range of

Travel Spending Intensity outbound share Estimated ROI possible ROI
(US$ bn) (% GDP) of travel spend * values

Americas 302 1.6% 10% 11.9 +/-4.1
North America 275 1.7% 8% 11.5 +/-4
Other America 27 0.9% 26% 13.3 +/-4.2
Europe 290 1.5% 31% 7.9 +/-3.6
EU 243 1.5% 31% 6.9 +/-3.3
Other Europe 47 1.4% 27% 12.8 +/-5.7
Asia Pacifc 226 1.7% 17% 9.4 +/-2.9
Middle East 18 1.2% 58% 10.1 +/-3.7
Africa 21 1.5% 27% 9.7 +/-3.3

World 856 1.5% 20% 9.9 +/-3.6
* Return on investment to gross sales of additional spending in business travel
-6%
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
Americas Europe Asia
Pacifc
Middle
East
Africa World
GDP loss if 25% drop in Business Travel
% difference from baseline
-3.0%
-2.5%
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
Pacifc
Middle
East
Africa World
Jobs loss if 25% drop in Business Travel
If business travel were cut by 25% over two years, global GDP would be 5% lower than would otherwise be the case
after a fve-year period. In addition, employment would be 1% lower in each year based on this scenario a loss of
30 million jobs relative to the baseline forecast.
8
Though not sufcient to tip the world back into a recession,
the global economy would grow at a slower rate than if business
travel continued at normal levels. After fve years, growth would
begin to return to the baseline growth pattern, but the level of
GDP and employment would remain lower than under baseline
assumptions.
Implications
The results of this analysis have implications for both business
leaders and policy-makers.
For business leaders, the evidence shows a strong connection
between spending on business travel and corporate performance.
Representative surveys across fve diverse countries illustrate
a consistent view that travel yields benefts in terms of sales,
customer retention, partnerships, innovation and human capital.
These perspectives are substantiated by statistical and econometric
analyses which indicate an average business travel return on
investment to sales of 10:1.
As with any cost, there are likely savings to be realised through
more careful allocations of business travel. However, the evidence
points to substantial risks associated with cutbacks in this particular
area. And companies that continue to invest in travel seem to
experience returns that more than warrant the investment.
Equally, the clear efects of business travel on overall economic
performance should inform policy decisions related to corporate
travel. Given the dividends of productivity, jobs, exports and taxes
generated by business travel, policies should be designed to foster
this catalyst of the global economy.
4.5%
3.5%
4.0%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
World GDP Growth
% growth
Baseline
1.8%
1.4%
1.6%
1.2%
1.0%
0.8%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
World Employment Growth
% growth
Baseline
Alternative scenario: no business travel
Alternative scenario: no business travel
Detailed Findings
9
This page left intentionally blank
A CATALYST FOR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
11
1 Global Business Travel Trends
1.1 Business travel and the business cycle
Business travel is a substantial force in the global economy. World Travel &
Tourism Council research conducted by Oxford Economics estimates business
travel direct spending to have reached US$856 billion in 2010, comprising nearly
a quarter of global Travel & Tourism demand.
Over the last 10 years, growth in worldwide business travel has been more
subdued than growth in leisure travel. This is largely due to a significant fall in
business travel during the recent global recession as companies sought cost-
cutting measures. According to a February 2009 survey of 400 US corporate
executives (source: U.S. Travel Association):
A 51% majority reported that their organization decreased the amount of
business travel.
Those who have made cuts have reduced their budgets by an average 35%.
And 34% slashed their budgets by more than half.
This snapshot of US corporate behaviour is consistent with Oxford Economics
tracking of global business travel, which fell by 15% over the course of 2008 and
2009, before rising again in 2010.

These trends are not in themselves surprising as businesses typically cut back
on travel during a downturn in the same way as on capital investments. In both
the 2001/2002 recession and the recession which began in 2008, business
travel fell in tandem with corporate profits, following the same pattern as
investment.

70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Global Travel Spendi ng
2000=100, inflation adjusted
Source : Oxford Economics
Leisure Travel
Business Travel
BUSINESS TRAVEL A CATALYST FOR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
BUSINESS TRAVEL
12

With the global economy now in recovery, business travel is growing again.
However, to this point, business travel has not rebounded to the degree that
might have been expected given the surge in company profits and robust
investment growth. Travel budgets appear to be restrained, even in recovery, as
improvements in communications technology offer an alternative to some travel
and business confidence has yet to fully recover around the world.
A recent survey of global business air travellers (Ascend Corporate Travel
Survey, 2011) shows that roughly half of respondents expect air travel budgets
to rise over the course of the next year and that fewer companies are planning to
cut back on business travel. This is a definite sign of economic recovery
impacting on business travel, but the survey suggests a third of companies are
still planning to reduce the number of staff travelling, including a reduction in
travel to conferences and exhibitions.

Despite this apparent tension at this point in
the business cycle, corporate executives
around the world maintain that business travel
plays an essential in business performance
according to Oxford Economics survey
undertaken for this report. Over half of
executive travellers believe spending more on
business travel would have a positive impact
on both gross revenue and overall profitability.
Only 10% expect an increase in travel budgets
to negatively affect profitability.

-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Busi ness Travel, Investment & Profits
% growth, real spending
Business Travel
Company
Profits
Investment
Impact of an Increase in Business Travel
50%
10%
41%
55%
10%
34%
Positive
Negative
No impact
either way
Gross revenue
Overall profitability
13
1.2 Business Travel by Region
The relative importance of business travel varies significantly across world
regions. Unsurprisingly, the bulk of business travel demand is generated by the
developed world. OECD countries are responsible for over 70% of all business
travel spending including domestic and outbound travel.

There is clearly greater scope for growth in business travel in developing
markets as part of economic development and catch-up with the developed
world. It may well be the case that these emerging markets are able to accrue
greater incremental benefits of business travel as part of this catch-up.
International outbound business travel spending represents only 20% of total
corporate travel expenditures although our research indicates that international
travel generates greater benefits than domestic travel. Given the cultural,
language and time differences that can exist between countries it follows that
face-to-face meetings are integral to developing international business. As this
research will show ,international business travel is a key driver of world trade.
The ratio of domestic to international outbound business travel varies by country,
partly related to size and the scope for long distance internal travel. For
example, international outbound travel is less important for North America than
the EU due to the presence of the large internal US market. In these cases,
many of the identified returns to business travel will still be achieved but on a
domestic basis.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
N
o
r
t
h
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
O
t
h
e
r
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
E
U

O
t
h
e
r
E
u
r
o
p
e
N
.
E
.

A
s
i
a
S
.
E
.

A
s
i
a
S
.

A
s
i
a
O
c
e
a
n
i
a
M
i
d
d
l
e
E
a
s
t
A
f
r
i
c
a
Outbound
Domestic
Business Travel Spendi ng by Region
US$ bn
BUSINESS TRAVEL
14
In general, emerging markets generate less international business travel than
they receive. In direct trade terms, this implies a trade surplus in the flow of
business travel spending. The analysis undertaken as part of this research will
identify a strong causal relationship between international business travel and
world trade. Through the benefits of globalisation, business travel produces
substantial gains for both emerging and developed economies.

1.3 Business Travel by Industry
Differences in the industrial make-up of an economy partly define cross-country
differences in business travel spending. Using input-output (I-O) tables we
identified business travel purchases by sector across OECD countries. Among
the countries for which I-O tables are available, there is considerable agreement
regarding the relative importance of business travel to different sectors. A large
proportion of the difference in business travel spending across countries can be
explained by the relative importance of different sectors.
The professional services and manufacturing sectors generate the largest
volume of business travel spending for the countries analysed. However this is
influenced by the large scale of these sectors. A better measure of the sectoral
importance of business travel is to consider business travel spending relative to
total revenue for each industry, which we call business travel intensity.
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
North
America
Other
America
EU Other
Europe
N.E.
Asia
S.E.
Asia
S. Asia Oceania Middle
East
Africa
Inbound
Outbound
Net
International Business Travel Spendi ng
US$ bn
15
Manufacturing and professional services tend
to have relatively high business travel
intensity. Business travel relative to total
revenue is greatest for the communications &
information sector. The financial services
sector is also important on this basis. An
economy with a greater proportion of these
industries tends to reflect higher overall
business travel demand as well as the
potential to receive greater economic benefits
of business travel. More detailed analysis of
manufacturing has identified that production
of more advanced investment goods involves
higher associated business travel.

Business travel encompasses a diverse set of activities. Based on our survey in
five countries, nearly one-quarter of business travellers travel most frequently in
order to work on-site at a customers location while 20% travel most often for
internal meetings or training. Trade shows and conferences were noted as the
most frequent type of trip for 24% of respondents.

Most Frequent Type of Trip Taken, Share of Respondents

0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0%
Communications
Other Services
Professional
Finance
Retail
Manufacturing
Transportation
Wholesale
Utilities
Hotels
Ed & Health
Mining
Construction
Agriculture
OECD: Business travel intensity
Business travel spending as a share of industry revenue
BUSINESS TRAVEL
16
11%
7%
15%
29%
10%
11%
4%
2%
2%
9%
Assistant
Analyst
Supervisor
Manager
Consultant
Director
Vice President
Senior VP
Executive VP
Chief Officer
2 The ROI of Business TravelThe
Business Perspective
To understand the role that business travel plays at the company level its
return on investment (ROI) 500 global business travellers and executives were
surveyed in the USA, UK, Germany, Brazil and China (100 in each country).
Respondents needed to be employed and have travelled at least once in the
past year for business. A quota of at least 25% of respondents was established
for senior executives (Directors, Vice Presidents, and Chief Officers).
Respondents by Job Title

The respondents represented the full
industry spectrum of the global economy
with 16% in the manufacturing sector,
11% in Professional and Business
Services, and 8% in both the Retail
Trade and Information industries.
The survey was also representative of
various company sizes with one-third of
respondents from small companies (1-
100 employees), 35% in medium-sized
companies (101-1000 employees), and
32% in large companies (over 1000
employees).
The 15-minute survey was conducted
online in the local language of each
market.
Respondents by Industry
17
Out of these surveys, four categories of significant impact emerged: generating
new sales, keeping customers, developing partnerships and spurring innovation.
At a summary level, executive respondents believe that business travel is
extremely or very important to increasing profits (74%), increasing sales
(75%), developing supplier partnerships (70%) and general innovation (70%).
Importance of Business Travel by Area of Benefit
2.1 Generating New Sales
Travel and sales are inextricably linked. Business travellers estimate that 50% of
prospects become customers when an in-person meeting takes place versus
only 31% without onea spread of 19 points. The most significant benefit was
noted by Chinese business travellers, who indicated a 24 percentage point jump
in conversion with an in-person meeting.
Sales Conversion Rates With and Without an In-Person Meeting

21%
22%
21%
21%
19%
24%
24%
25%
28%
31%
30%
35%
33%
36%
30%
28%
24%
26%
43%
40%
40%
37%
33%
33%
32%
31%
21%
Increased profits
Increased sales
General innovation
Added productivity / efficiency
Not at all important Slightly important Moderately important Very important Extremely important
49%
30%
57%
33%
50%
27%
45%
30%
49%
32%
% of prospects turning into
sales WITH in-person
meeting
% of prospects turning into
sales WITHOUT in-person
meeting
Brazil China Germany UK USA
Average =50%
Average =31%
BUSINESS TRAVEL
18
On average, executives report that
29% of their companys new sales
depend on business travel.
Interestingly, the China and Brazil
respondents report the largest
proportion of sales which are
dependent on business travel at
38% and 32%, respectively,
supporting the view that benefits
from business travel may be greater
for emerging markets.

Trade shows and exhibitions represent an
important source of sales for participating
companies. Attendees estimate these
events to generate an average of 15% of
the companys annual revenue. Business
travellers in the USA report the highest
impact (20%) of trade shows on sales.

2.2 Keeping Customers
Business travel is integral to maintaining a loyal client base. When executives
were asked about the impact of business travel on various areas of company
performance, customer retention scored higher than any other area.
Share of Executi ves Stating Business Travel Has a High Impact On

Share of Sales Dependent on Business Travel
67%
66%
63%
60%
54%
49%
Customer retention
Conversion rate for
prospective customers
Developing sales
opportunities
Employee morale
Employee performance
Employee compensation
32%
38%
24%
28%
21%
Brazil
China
Germany
UK
USA
Share of Sales Dependent on Trade Shows
16%
16%
10%
15%
20%
Brazil
China
Germany
UK
USA
19
Furthermore, cutting back on business travel is
seen to pose significant business risks. Over
one third of respondents (36%) estimate that
between 25% and 49% of their current
customers would switch to a competitor
without in-person meetings. And, on average,
business travellers estimate that 38% of their
customers would switch to a competitor
without in-person meetings. These responses
were remarkably stable across the different
countries surveyed.

2.3 Developing Partnerships
Co-operative relationships are integral to company performance. Global
business travellers understand that travel is essential to building these
relationships. For example, nearly three quarters (72%) of global business
travellers find external conferences and conventions have a significant or
high impact on developing partnerships. And well over half of all respondents
indicated that meeting with partners is very or extremely important to
expanding into new markets, investing in new markets, and managing their
companys supply chain.
Importance of meeting with suppliers and other partners

Share of Customers That Would Defect
Without an In-Person Meeting
36%
41%
37%
35%
39%
Brazil
China
Germany
UK
USA
4%
7%
4%
10%
10%
8%
9%
16%
20%
25%
23%
31%
39%
33%
35%
28%
27%
26%
29%
15%
Expand into new customer
markets
Invest in new markets
Manage supply chain more
efficiently
Employ additional staff
Not at al l i mportant Sl i ghtl y i mportant Moderatel y i mportant Very i mportant Extremel y i mportant
66%
59%
64%
43%
BUSINESS TRAVEL
20
Among those business
travellers participating in trade
shows and exhibitions, 64%
feel they have a significant or
high impact on building
partnerships, professional
development, generating new
insights, and career
development.

2.4 Spurring Innovation
Global business travellers also affirmed a strong relationship between travel and
innovation and productivity. Over two thirds of executive travellers (70%) believe
that business travel is extremely or very important to innovation and to
added productivity/efficiency.
Business Travel is very important or extremely important to
In addition 72% of participating respondents stated that conferences and
conventions have a significant or high impact on generating new insights in my
industry and 68% say the same regarding my professional development.
74%
70%
70%
70%
63%
61%
55%
47%
74%
Increased profits
Increased sales
General innovation
Added productivity / efficiency
64%
63%
62%
56%
Building partnerships
within my industry
My professional
development
Generating new
industry insights
My career
development
Trade Shows Have a High Impact On
21
3 The ROI of Business Travel
Econometric Analysis
Surveys in all five countries illustrate benefits of business travel in terms of new
sales, customer retention, innovation, partnership opportunities, and overall
operating efficiencies. To confirm these findings and attempt to quantify them,
Oxford Economics conducted a comprehensive set of econometric analysis to
identify any causal relationships which exist between business travel and trade,
productivity, and overall economic performance. First we look at the relationship
between business travel and trade and then examine the overall impacts of
business travel on corporate and economic performance.
3.1 World Trade Benefits
Key Results
Business travel is integral to international trade. Extensive econometric
modelling indicates that approximately one third of the growth in
international trade over the past decade can be attributed to business
travel.
One additional dollar invested in international business travel would, on
average, generate 17 dollars in trade.
A 10% increase in international business travel would increase world
trade on average by 3%, which is consistent with the analysis of
corporate return on investment presented later in this report.
Statistical analysis across 190 countries indicates both correlation and causation
between business travel and international trade.
Countries with a larger outbound business travel market tend to enjoy higher
exports, while faster growth in business travel is also linked to more rapid trade
growth. And econometric modelling shows that higher business travel intensity
(business travel spending relative to GDP) drives higher trade intensity (imports
and exports relative to GDP).
BUSINESS TRAVEL
22
This correlation is made clear when the level of trade is compared to the level of
business travel spending across countries; the largest exporters tend to be those
with a high degree of outbound business travel while the level of imports and
inbound business travel are also highly correlated.
While cross-country analysis of this sort
demonstrates the clear correlation between the
two indicators the causality cannot be determined.
Time series analysis is required to determine
causality.
Movements in business travel and world trade are
also correlated over time. Importantly, they follow
a similar cycle rather than just a common trend.
The analysis compares business travel intensity
(relative to GDP) and trade intensity over time,
rather than actual travel/trade levels This allows
easier comparison across different countries and
also over time by removing broader economic
trend factors. Specifically, econometric modelling
identifies a clear relationship (correlation) between
business travel intensity and trade intensity over time.
A strong correlation does not necessarily imply a true causal relationship and
Granger causality tests have been run on a country-bycountry basis. Tests
measure the extent to which lagged values of business travel influence the
current value of trade and vice versa, by running a series of regressions
involving different lag structures. Results suggest that relationships are not
exclusively in one direction (trade also drives business travel) The statistical
analysis must next identify and isolate the causal effect of business travel on
trade.

R
2
=0.7595
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Imports (US$ bn)
I
n
b
o
u
n
d

B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

T
r
a
v
e
l

(
U
S
$
b
n
)
World imports vs inbound business travel
Each data point represents a country
R
2
=0.6785
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Exports (US$bn)
O
u
t
b
o
u
n
d

B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

T
r
a
v
e
l

(
U
S
$
b
n
)
World exports vs outbound busi ness travel
Each data point represents a country
0.20%
0.25%
0.30%
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
15%
20%
25%
30%
Business travel intensity (lhs)
Trade intensity (rhs)
Business Travel and World Trade Intensity
Intensity is calculated as
relative to GDP
23
Examples of causality are shown here for UK and Brazil. Granger casuality tests
identify that changes in UK outbound business travel are statistically proven to
be a driver of UK exports (with a 95% confidence level). The same relationship
exists for Brazil (with a 90% confidence level).

Correlations and causality were tested across a range of both developed and
developing economies. Analysis at the country level better isolates specific
relationships by removing any intra-regional double-counting. Business travel is
a component of international trade in services so we focus on goods trade here
to remove this direct link and focus on the causal relationship.

Correlation
Travel causes
Trade
Trade causes
Travel Correlation
Travel causes
Trade
Trade causes
Travel
US 0.87 95% 26% 0.65 82% 86%
Canada 0.92 100% 99% 0.85 98% 87%
UK 0.54 65% 85% 0.61 95% 80%
France 0.49 57% 85% 0.63 61% 92%
Germany 0.97 90% 81% 0.69 60% 98%
Italy 0.52 99% 100% 0.17 58% 99%
Spain 0.20 75% 99% 0.74 91% 80%
J apan 0.91 97% 53% 0.40 74% 92%
China 0.32 92% 95% 0.67 90% 99%
Russia 0.83 50% 90% 0.52 100% 95%
Brazil 0.57 100% 100% 0.98 88% 87%
India 0.72 84% 66% 0.46 99% 58%
UAE 0.42 83% 49% 0.82 95% 64%
Singapore 0.70 96% 94% 0.74 83% 53%
Hong Kong 0.67 95% 100% 0.43 86% 78%
Note: causality is shown as the probability that the identified casual relationship is true
Tr ade & Busi ness Tr avel by c ount r y
Inbound business travel vs import s Out bound business travel vs exports
Causality (% confidence) Causality (% confidence)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
1995 1999 2003 2007
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.3%
0.4%
0.5%
0.6%
Exports relative to GDP (LHS)
Outbound business travel relative
to GDP (RHS)
UK: Exports & Outbound Travel Intensity
We can reject the null hypothesis that travel does not
cause trade at the 95% confidence level
% GDP
% GDP
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
1995 1999 2003 2007
0.00%
0.01%
0.01%
0.02%
0.02%
0.03%
0.03%
0.04%
0.04%
Exports relative to GDP
(LHS)
Outbound business travel
relative to GDP (RHS)
Brazil: Exports & Outbound Travel Intensity
We can reject the null hypothesis that travel does not cause
trade at the 90% confidence level
% GDP % GDP
BUSINESS TRAVEL
24
As expected, the modeling proves that causality runs in both directions as trade
has a more immediate influence on business travel activity. Further to this, the
tests showed that there is a lag in the influence of business travel on trade and it
takes approximately three years for full effects to be realised. By including more
lagged terms in the Granger causality tests a higher probability was found that
business travel causes trade. On average, the highest confidence was found by
including 3 years of lagged variables. For the inverse relationship: a shorter lag
time delivered greater confidence that trade causes business travel.
Following the above observed relationships, we then estimated specific
equations for export intensity as a function of outbound travel intensity; import
intensity as a function of inbound intensity; and finally for total trade intensity as
a function of total international business travel intensity. All equations were
estimated on a pooled basis across countries grouped by regions including
country specific trend factors. Different lag lengths were also tested for business
travel as the explanatory variable. We also included lagged values of trade
intensity including different lag lengths to deliver equations that had the best
possible fit while raising confidence that autocorrelation is not an issue. Equation
R-squared statistics and Durban Watson statistics were improved by the
presence of lagged dependent variable terms.
All above methodologies gave comparable results as well as robust test
statistics to improve confidence that the derived relationships are valid.
Some further evidence exists at the country level for specific bilateral
relationships. Reliable time series data for bilateral business travel are not
available for many countries but data reported by the UK and US for business
travel arrivals from key trading partners can be compared with bilateral trade
flows. The charts below illustrate the relationship of travel and trade on a bi-
lateral basis between the United Kingdom and the US and between the UK and
France. Pooled modelling for the US and UK bilateral data provides comparable
results to the total trade and business travel model.

0.00%
0.01%
0.02%
0.03%
0.04%
0.05%
0.06%
0.07%
0.08%
0.09%
0.10%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
Business travel intensity: US travel to UK
Export intensity: US exports to UK
UK - US bil ateral travel & trade
% UK GDP
% UK GDP
0.00%
0.01%
0.01%
0.02%
0.02%
0.03%
0.03%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
Business travel intensity: France travel to UK
Export intensity: France exports to UK
UK - France bi lateral travel & trade
% UK GDP % UK GDP
25
This analysis yields the conclusion that business travel is integral to international
trade. Estimated elasticities can be applied to historic data for business travel
intensity to determine its impact on trade over the past decade. By comparing
this to actual world trade developments we estimated that approximately one
third of the growth in international trade over the past decade can be attributed
to business travel, confirming that survey results that business travel is crucial
for sales growth and customer retention.
The modelling indicates that a 10% increase in international business travel
would increase world trade on average by 3%. This is consistent with
productivity impact analysis described in the following section. Estimated
equations have been used to determine the specific impact of a 10% increase in
international business travel intensity on world trade intensity and by extension
on world trade volumes. By comparing the associated dollar value of the
increase in trade to the implied dollar value of travel spending return on
investment can be estimated.
Calculated as a Return on Investment, this implies that one extra dollar invested
in international business travel would on average generate 17 dollars in trade.
BUSINESS TRAVEL
26
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
3% 5% 7% 9% 11% 13% 15%
Tr ade
P
e
r

C
a
p
i
t
a

G
D
P
Trade and Per Capita GDP
CAGR 1980-2010
China
Singapore
Mexico
Canada
Chile
UK
Korea
Taiwan
India
Thailand
Why does this matter?
Quantifying the relationship between business
travel and trade is a key part of identifying the
overall economic benefit of business travel
because the implications of these trade effects
are significant. Trade not only generates
income for companies, but also advances
economic development by lowering prices,
creating economies of scale, allowing countries
to focus on areas of comparative advantage,
spurring innovation and creating competition.
The adjacent chart illustrates the strong historic
relationship between growth in trade and
growth in per capita GDP.

We can therefore say that business travel, as a catalyst of global trade, plays a
significant role in driving faster GDP growth via productivity improvements,
improving standards of living and creating jobs.
As business travel drives trade, it drives the development of the global economy.

Increased Trade
Lower Prices
Faster GDP Growth
Rising Incomes
Job Creation
Macro Stability
Tech transfer
& innovation
Economi es
of Scale
Comparative
advantage
Increased
competition
Business Travel
Increased Trade
Lower Prices Lower Prices
Faster GDP Growth
Rising Incomes
Job Creation
Macro Stability
Tech transfer
& innovation
Tech transfer
& innovation
Economi es
of Scale
Economi es
of Scale
Comparative
advantage
Comparative
advantage
Increased
competition
Increased
competition
Business Travel
27
These benefits have been shared by both developed and developing
economies. The implication, supported by the surveys, is that business travel is
particularly integral to the relationships, investments, supply chains, and logistics
which are necessary for international trade to occur. For example, a significant
majority of international travellers feel it is extremely important to travel to
international subsidiaries to expand business in international markets (70%) and
to invest internationally (65%).
Importance of Travel to International Subsidiaries

4%
8%
7%
10%
19%
28%
27%
33%
35%
29%
37%
30%
26%
5%
3%
Expand business in
international markets
Invest in international
markets
Employ additional
staff in international
markets
Not at al l i mportant Sl i ghtl y i mportant Moderatel y i mportant Very i mportant Extremel y i mportant
70%
65%
55%
BUSINESS TRAVEL
28
3.2 Broader Productivity Effects
Key Findings
Business travel improves global corporate productivity, yielding an overall
return on investment of 10:1. In other words, one unit of new business
travel spending produces incremental industry sales of ten units.
Growth in business travel from 2000 to 2007 facilitated the creation of
over 40 million jobs through related increases in trade and productivity.
This represented almost 20% of the growth in global employment over
the same period.

The effects of business travel on corporate and economic performance go
beyond the facilitation of international trade. Domestic business travel also
generates a positive return. The survey results indicate that business travel has
an impact on overall productivity and, therefore, on business performance and
profitability. And these impacts are evident with regards to both domestic
company performance and international trade. Again, we find that causality runs
in both directions: while business performance does influence business travel
mainly through budgets allocated to it - in the short term, there is a longer-term
impact of business travel on overall business performance.
By running extensive causality tests and through the combination of time series
and cross-sectional panel econometrics across more than 20 countries, it was
possible to identify the specific effects of business travel on productivity
1
and, by
extension, on sales and profits. This approach ensures that it captures both the
direct and indirect benefits of business travel and builds on historical industry
data. Through this analysis, the indirect benefits of higher sales conversions,
human capital developments, and partnership benefits are quantifiable.
2

1
The measure used, Total Factor Productivity, accounts for the effects of technology and
other capital and provides a purer benchmark of changes in industry-by-industry
productivity over time.
2
This approach follows a proven methodology that has been used by Oxford Economics
in previous analyses for European travel and in particular detail for business travel in the
US and UK and has been documented in academic literature.
29
This analysis was then extended to cover
each world region on a country-by-country
basis by applying industry-specific results for
representative countries to the broader
region. The industry composition and the
business travel intensity (domestic and
international) for each country determine ROI
estimates for this broader set. A range of
values is estimated, as well as the average
for each region according to volatility across
countries as well as country-specific
uncertainty.
On a worldwide basis, the analysis shows
that, on average, business travel yields a
return on investment of 10:1 that is, one
unit of incremental business travel spending
produces incremental industry sales of ten units.
Differences across regions are partly determined by the industry composition of
countries within each region. Historic relationships between business travel and
industry-by-industry productivity are also important reflecting structural factors
and the type of business travel typically undertaken by each country. For
example, a higher estimated ROI has been determined for the US than for the
EU, consistent with previous Oxford Economics studies noted in section 4 and
higher productivity growth in the US over the past twenty years.
Typically we observe a stronger response to business travel in emerging
markets which are receptive to growth in key productivity sectors. However, the
Asia-Pacific region as a whole has a relatively low estimated ROI. This is
influenced by low estimated ROI for J apan which carries a large weight in
calculation as a key regional source market for business travel.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Pacific
Middle
East
Africa World
Range Average
ROI of Business Travel
Incremental sales per dollar invested
Business Travel
Spending (US$
bn)
Business Travel
Intensity (%
GDP)
International
outbound share
of travel spend
Average
Estimated ROI
Range of
possible ROI
values
Americas 302 1.6% 10% 11.9 +/-4.1
North America 275 1.7% 8% 11.5 +/-4
Other America 27 0.9% 26% 13.3 +/-4.2
Europe 290 1.5% 31% 7.9 +/-3.6
EU 243 1.5% 31% 6.9 +/-3.3
Other Europe 47 1.4% 27% 12.8 +/-5.7
Asia Pacific 226 1.7% 17% 9.4 +/-2.9
N.E. Asia 175 1.8% 14% 8.9 +/-2.8
S.E. Asia 15 1.1% 75% 13.6 +/-4
S. Asia 19 1.4% 6% 12.2 +/-3.6
Oceania 18 1.6% 17% 7.8 +/-1.8
Middle East 18 1.2% 58% 10.1 +/-3.7
Africa 21 1.5% 27% 9.7 +/-3.3
World 856 1.5% 20% 9.9 +/-3.6
ROI of Busi ness Tr avel by Regi on
Return on investment to business of additional spending in business travel
BUSINESS TRAVEL
30
Time series analysis shows that the effects of business travel on corporate
performance tend to be realised in the medium term. The majority of the impact
realized over approximately three years according to different lag structures
tested in both regression analysis as well as Granger causality tests.
It is important to note that this model was also tested for causality in both
directions. That is, the effects of business travel on corporate performance were
isolated from the effects of corporate performance on business travel. It is also
important to recognize that other factors contribute to multi-factor productivity in
addition to travel. Although data are not available to isolate the effects of these
other factors, the model clearly indicates a strong and positive correlation
between business travel spend and a sectors changes in productivity over time.
Combined with the previously
estimated return on international
travel, this implies that domestic
business travel alone has a return on
investment of 8:1. Differences in the
proportions of domestic and
international business travel
spending also help to explain the
cross-country differences.

By applying these results to historic economic data we can see the degree to
which business travel has driven overall economic performance. The impact of
business travel on productivity has clearly been identified above and can be
combined with historic business travel data to asses the relative impact on the
wider economy over this period. The Oxford Economics global macroeconomic
model was then used to consider a counterfactual scenario in which the
productivity benefits of business travel were not realised. By placing productivity
into this context we can determine the impact on trade, whole economy GDP
and jobs.
Based on this Oxford Economics global macroeconomic model scenario, the
growth in business travel in the years 2000 to 2007 drove the creation of over 40
million jobs through the related increases in trade and productivity. This is
equivalent to almost 20% of the increase in global employment over the same
period.

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Total International Domestic
Return on Investment of Busi ness Travel
31
3.3 Scenario Analysis: What would happen if business travel
were cut by 25% over two years?
Key Findings
If business travel were cut by 25% for two consecutive years, global GDP
would be 5% lower than would otherwise be the case after a five-year
period.
This would mean 30 million fewer jobs than forecast under baseline
assumptions for the same period an average loss of 1% of global
employment.

The model can also be used to consider an alternative scenario in which
business travel is cut by 25% for two consecutive years compared to the
baseline projections of continued steady recovery. This assumes that business
travel in 2011 is 25% lower than we would otherwise expect and remains at that
level in 2012 before returning to normal patterns.
We can use the Oxford Economics macroeconomic forecasting model to
determine the broader effects of this on GDP and employment.The relationship
between business travel and total factor productivity for each country was used
as an input to the global macroeconomic model. Under the above scenario, GDP
would be 5% lower than would otherwise be the case after five years. In
addition, employment would be 1% lower than under baseline asumptions in
each year: 30 million fewer jobs than we would otherwise expect.

-6%
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
Pacific
Middle
East
Africa World
GDP l oss if 25%drop in busi ness travel
Scenario of 25%
drop in business
travel spending for
two years - average
five-year impact
-3.0%
-2.5%
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
AmericasEurope Asia
Pacific
Middle
East
Africa World
Jobs loss if 25% drop in busi ness travel
Scenario of 25% drop in
business travel spending
for two years - average
five-year impact
BUSINESS TRAVEL
32
Within the total GDP impact in the above scenario, world trade would be 5%
lower than under baseline assumptions after just three years: a quicker
response than observed for the GDP impact which is the same, but over five
years . Roughly half of the total impact would be directly from a reduction in
international business travel spending with the remainder due to slower world
demand arising from domestic travel impacts. World trade impacts also help to
explain some of the disparity across countries and regions.

Trade tends to recover more quickly than GDP,
returning to baseline growth after four years and
even exceeding it in the fifth year to close the gap
between baseline assumptions and the alternative
scenario. However after five years trade would still
be 4% lower than under baseline assumptions.
This would not be sufficient to tip the world back into
recession but the gobal economy would grow
significantly slower than if business travel continued
at the current expected rate. After five years, growth
would begin to return to to the baseline growth
patternalthough the level of GDP and employment
would remain lower than under baseline
assumptions.

0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
World GDP growth
% growth
Baseline
Alternative scenario: no
business travel
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.0%
1.2%
1.4%
1.6%
1.8%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
World employment growth
% growth
Baseline
business travel
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
World trade growth
% growth
Baseline
business travel
33
Methodology
BUSINESS TRAVEL
34
35
4 Methodology
This approach follows a proven methodology that has been successfully used by
Oxford Economics in previous analyses for European travel and in particular
detail for business travel in the UK, and has been documented in academic
literature.
Analysis of existing literature suggests that a 10% increase in business travel
raises productivity by between 0.5% and 4%. Previous Oxford Economics
estimation has found results within the lower half of that range.
Methodology used for previous Oxford Economics studies
In previous Oxford Economics studies for the UK and the US, business travel
spending was defined by sector to identify specific trends for each industry
arising from different travel usage. This also substantially increased the number
of observations in the estimation compared to estimation at the whole economy
level and improved confidence that the estimated results are valid. The same
methodology was applied to a broader set of countries for this study. However,
due to issues of data availability this could not be applied to all countries of
interest and previous results provided part of the input into the final sectoral
intensity analysis.
Performance was measured in terms of multi-factor productivity: this is the most
complete measure of productivity and is defined as output per combined units of
labour and capital inputs. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, a
change in multi-factor productivity reflects the change in output that cannot be
accounted for by the change in combined inputs of labour and capital. By using
this measure we were able to control for any increases in per-employee
productivity arising from investment in new, more efficient technology. This
measure also accounts for changes in the composition of the labour force, for
example a shift towards fewer highly skilled (and highly compensated) workers
rather than more low skilled workers.
In an initial review of the academic literature it was found that a 10% increase in
transport services would raise productivity by between 0.5% - 4.0%. Oxford
Economics results for Europe and the UK are towards the lower end of this
range. Results for the U.S. are slightly higher than for Europe but are also within
the lower half of that range.
A clear relationship was identified between business air usage and productivity
for 24 EU countries over a 10 year period. Countries which spent most on travel
as a share of GDP also experienced the highest productivity. Robust
econometric techniques confirmed a long-run relationship between business air
travel and productivity. A 10% increase in transport raises productivity by
roughly 1%.
In more detailed analysis for the UK, a similar long-run relationship was found
between business travel relative to economic activity and productivity taking
sectoral differences into consideration. Pooled estimation was carried out across
BUSINESS TRAVEL
36
sectors covering the entire economy. This helped to account for different trends
and travel intensity across sectors and added to confidence in results by relying
on a richer sample of information than by just assessing trends at the whole
economy level. This study also found that a 10% increase in business travel
raises productivity by roughly 1% in the long-run.
Importantly, estimation results for the UK were able to find a relationship
between the level of travel and the level of productivity rather than just growth
rates. This raised confidence that the estimated long-run relationships are valid.
A similar approach was applied to U.S. in
2009 based on a pooled data estimation
across 14 sectors and 13 years. The primary
benefit of this approach is that a greater
number of observations can be used to
generate more robust estimates of common
factors giving greater confidence in results.
Changes in aggregate productivity arising
from differences in sectoral composition are
also controlled for while sector specific
trends are also incorporated. Sectors are
defined at the NAICS 2-digit level of
aggregation covering all private sector
business activities. A view of this analysis is
shown on the adjacent chart, clearly
illustrating the relationship between these
controlled measures of productivity and
business travel.
In estimating the impact of business travel, intensity (i.e. the proportion of
expenses represented by travel) is more relevant than the level of business
travel. Business travel spending has increased for all sectors over time, partly
due to higher costs/prices but also as growth in real output generates greater
demand for inputs. An increase in business travel spending proportional to an
increase in staff numbers is unlikely to add to employee performance other than
any scale effects. Improved performance is more likely to arise from an increase
in travel relative to other measures of economic activity. Estimating productivity
relative to business travel spending may also generate spurious results as
productivity has also trended upwards over time.
To increase confidence that valid results were estimated two specific tests were
run, which have also been replicated in this study for the US and other countries.
First unit root and co-integration tests are carried out to confirm that
productivity and business travel follow a consistent linear trend. This is
essential for valid relationships to be identified.
Causality has been tested to ensure that observed correlations are not
spurious and that the assumed causal relationship does exist. We find that
causality works both ways as expected. An improvement in economic
performance can result in almost immediate increase in travel intensity
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
1995 1999 2003 2007
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
Business travel spend & MFP
%
Source : U.S. Travel, BLS, Oxford Economics
Multi-Factor
Productivity relative
to trend
2000=100
Business travel
relative to
employment
Business travel
relative to GDP
37
whilst in economic downturns we have observed some cuts in intensity.
However, tests also indicate that there is a lagged response between travel
and performance. An increase in travel intensity has performance benefits
which are realized in the medium term, which we next quantify.
Unit root testing
Unit root tests suggest that travel intensity and productivity share the same order
of integration. It is essential that this is the case for dependent and explanatory
variables in order for estimation of levels to be valid and suggests that they are
co-integrated. Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP) tests
show that for whole economy productivity and all four measures of intensity have
a single unit root. On this basis all four measures of intensity are valid for
estimation. This test also suggests that there is a unit root for business travel
spending and is also valid for estimation.

Since estimation will rely on panel estimation techniques we have also tested
the equivalent statistics in panel data across sectors. Panel tests on productivity
and business intensity across sectors also suggest that all time series have a
single unit root. Since panel tests are involve more observations this increases
confidence in statistical properties.

Unit Root tests for business travel intensity
Null Hypothesis: Unit root in intensity Level 1
st
Difference Obs

t-statistic P-value t-statistic P-value
Employment intensity
ADF -0.29 0.91 -3.34 0.03 13
PP -0.29 0.91 -3.34 0.03 13
Intermediate inputs intensity
ADF 0.83 0.99 -4.32 0.00 13
PP 1.04 0.99 -4.30 0.00 13
GDP intensity
ADF -0.45 0.88 -4.52 0.00 13
PP -0.45 0.88 -4.53 0.00 13
Gross output intensity
ADF 0.20 0.97 -4.50 0.00 13
PP 0.28 0.97 -4.50 0.00 13
BUSINESS TRAVEL
38

Further co-integration tests on the validity of the estimated relationships have
been carried out for productivity and travel intensity by sector. These are an
extension of unit root tests to jointly determine whether dependent and
explanatory variables follow a consistent trend over time. Unit root tests have
been performed on equation residuals and indicate they are stable over time.
Formal co-integration tests also confirm that estimation is valid. Differences
between trend growth rates in dependent and explanatory variables have
remained constant.
Panel Unit Root tests for productivity by sector
Null Hypothesis: Unit root in ln(MFPi) Level 1
st
Difference Obs
Null Hypothesis: Unit root (assumes common unit root process)
Levin, Lin & Chu t* 1.92 0.97 -7.86 0.00 267
Breitung t-stat 4.01 1.00 -7.12 0.00 253
Null Hypothesis: Unit root (assumes individual unit root process)
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat 1.45 0.93 -8.79 0.00 267
ADF Fisher Chi-square 22.62 0.75 115.35 0.00 267
PP Fisher Chi-square 19.48 0.88 150.75 0.00 280
Panel Unit Root tests for business travel intensity by sector
Level 1
st
Difference Obs
Employment Intensity
Levin, Lin & Chu t* 2.00 0.98 -11.38 0.00 174
Intermediate inputs intensity
Levin, Lin & Chu t* 1.09 0.86 -10.37 0.00 174
GDP intensity
Levin, Lin & Chu t* -1.04 0.15 -12.32 0.00 174
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat -0.08 0.47 -8.55 0.00 174
Gross output intensity
Levin, Lin & Chu t* -0.73 0.23 -11.34 0.00 174
39
Causality testing
Having determined that identified time series are correlated and co-integrated
the assumed causality must be tested. Even though time series properties imply
that valid estimation is being carried out it does not necessarily follow that
assumed causal relationships are true.
Granger causality tests are used to check the validity of the assumption that
business travel intensity influences productivity at a sectoral level. The
alternative is that correlation is coincident or both series being influenced by a
common third factor. The Granger causality test compares the performance of
indicators over time and establishes precedence. The extent to which past
values of both the explanatory and dependent variable influence current values
is assessed in a series of regressions involving different lag structures. If the
inclusion of lagged values of business travel intensity makes a statistically
significant contribution to predictions of productivity then business travel can be
said to Granger cause productivity. Tests are run for the null hypothesis that
there is no causal relationship between indicators and the regression F-statistic
is used to reject or accept this.

The above table clearly indicates that we can reject the null hypothesis that
business travel intensity does not granger cause productivity. This is evident for
most measures at the 95% confidence level and for all measures at the 90%
level. This is less certain at the sectoral level where data are more erratic, but
the null hypothesis can be rejected for some key high intensity sectors, with a
degree of agreement across intensity measures to increase confidence. It is
Granger causality tests
Null Hypothesis: Business travel does not Granger cause Productivity
(maximum tested lag length: 4 years)
Intensity measure: Employment Intermediate inputs GDP Gross output
F-stat P-value F-stat P-value F-stat P-value F-stat P-value
Whole economy
3.8 0.06 5.2 0.03 4.1 0.05 4.5 0.04
By sector:
Agriculture 5.1 0.20 0.6 0.57 3.2 0.39 1.0 0.62
Mining 554.1 0.01 16.2 0.00 86.4 0.01 322.2 0.00
Utilities 1.1 0.39 0.4 0.77 1.5 0.30 1.0 0.41
Construction 8.5 0.03 3.7 0.08 1.6 0.52 0.3 0.65
Manufacturing 4.5 0.18 0.8 0.56 8.1 0.16 1.5 0.35
Wholesale 5.7 0.08 17.6 0.09 5.5 0.04 6.2 0.05
Retail 0.8 0.51 1056.6 0.02 6.8 0.28 23.0 0.16
Transportation 1.4 0.37 2.3 0.17 2.5 0.15 2.3 0.17
Information 15.7 0.11 3.3 0.10 3.5 0.27 1.6 0.23
FIRE 52.7 0.07 8.5 0.03 3.8 0.13 4.0 0.12
Professional 0.1 0.88 0.5 0.63 1.2 0.30 1.0 0.34
Ed & Health 0.5 0.68 3.2 0.14 1.9 0.28 2.4 0.21
Leisure 27.3 0.14 1.2 0.47 4.6 0.34 3.0 0.41
Other Services 171.4 0.03 8.5 0.25 1418.3 0.02 132.6 0.07
BUSINESS TRAVEL
40
unlikely that a casual relationship exists for some sectors but not others and we
do not exclude any sectors on the basis of this test. Results may also be skewed
by some erratic data for sectors taking a high weight in calculation with relatively
few time series observations. This highlights the benefit of using pooled
estimation across sectors to increase the number of observations and
confidence.
It is to be expected that causality runs both ways in the strong observed
correlations between travel intensity and productivity. Higher productivity (and
revenue and profit) may cause an immediate increase in travel and profits are
often included as an explanatory variable in models of business travel. The
impact of travel on performance is likely to occur with more of a lag with benefits
being fully realized in the medium to long term.
The dual causality is indicated below as the null hypothesis that productivity
does not cause travel can be rejected for most measures at the whole economy
and sectoral level. Causality is evident for a shorter lag length as expected.

Interestingly, by using employment intensity productivity can be seen to be
influenced by business travel as for other measures, but the inverse relationship
is not clear. Employment intensity is the measure which we would expect to best
fit theoretical relationships.

Granger causality tests
Null Hypothesis: Productivity does not Granger cause Business Travel
(maximum tested lag length: 2 years)
Intensity measure: Employment Intermediate inputs GDP Gross output
F-stat P-value F-stat P-value F-stat P-value F-stat P-value
Whole economy
1.1 0.37 5.5 0.02 4.2 0.05 5.4 0.03
By sector:
Agriculture 2.3 0.46 18.5 0.09 3.2 0.10 4.5 0.09
Mining 5.1 0.05 1.3 0.47 6.2 0.07 2.9 0.17
Utilities 2.1 0.18 7.0 0.02 2.9 0.12 4.0 0.07
Construction 1353.7 0.02 3.7 0.08 3.8 0.08 6.4 0.03
Manufacturing 4.5 0.06 13.0 0.00 6.3 0.03 12.2 0.01
Wholesale 1.6 0.23 53.3 0.01 1.1 0.32 3.3 0.10
Retail 7.0 0.02 26.9 0.02 9.3 0.18 2022802 0.00
Transportation 5.4 0.21 12.6 0.01 5.9 0.04 8.7 0.01
Information 28.0 0.00 24.8 0.00 23.7 0.00 28.6 0.00
FIRE 10.1 0.23 31.6 0.04 744.7 0.03 654.0 0.03
Professional 1.6 0.26 2155.8 0.02 3.4 0.09 8.4 0.03
Ed & Health 13.3 0.20 4.8 0.33 4.2 0.29 3.5 0.37
Leisure 30.7 0.13 7.2 0.27 243.5 0.05 33.1 0.13
Other Services 5.1 0.32 1.5 0.25 8.9 0.18 44.5 0.11
41
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
Employment Inputs GDP Output
Business Travel Impact
GDP response to 10% increase in travel estimated according to 4 different
measures of business travel intensity
Estimation results for intensitymeasured as
business travel relativeto GDP andoutput
isless certain thanfor other measures
The effect of business travel on productivity in
recent years was calculated using regression
analysis and used to calculate the expected impact
of current and future changes. Productivity is
defined as a function of business travel intensity
using panel estimation techniques over time and
across industries. The impact of business travel on
industry GDP, total revenue and profits can then be
calculated once the direct impact on productivity
has been estimated.
Calculation was undertaken for business travel
spending relative to four different measures of
broader economic activity to ensure that the most
statistically valid results are derived. It also gives a
range of plausible results.
Initial cross-country testing
As a first approximation, the relationship between business travel and
productivity was considered at the whole economy level for 20 OECD countries
for which whole economy MFP data were available.
This enabled causality to be checked for a broad range of developed economies
and increased confidence that relationships exist globally.
Initial estimates on this basis also give an approximation of elasticities of
productivity with respect to business travel. Results vary significantly when
estimated on a country-by-country basis and test statistics are generally invalid.
This is partly due to volatility in data and confirms the benefit the detailed
sectoral approach.
Estimated on a pooled regional basis better results can be obtained and an
initial range of results can be derived.
Sectoral intensity analysis
To produce more statistically valid results a sectoral approach must be taken;
comparable to the previous detailed studies for UK and US. However, the
number of countries that this methodology can be applied to is limited by the
availability of both sectoral MFP data and input-output table data for multiple
years.
We have been able to replicate similar results for the US and the UK in the
context of this study as well as producing comparable analysis for France,
Germany and J apan. Estimation suggests that the response in productivity to
changes in business travel are comparable for these additional countries to
previously estimated results for UK. An average elasticity in response to
changes in business travel was calculated across these countries which can be
applied to all other countries.
BUSINESS TRAVEL
42
Although similar elasticities are derived for each country, clear differences in
actual response is evident. This is because we are estimating the average
response in intensity by sector. Differences in sectoral intensity within each
economy and further differences in business travel intensity will influence the
actual response.
An average elasticity can then be applied to a further set of countries taking into
account differences in both sectoral intensity and business travel intensity.
Calculation has been applied to 47 countries (both developed and emerging)
according to data availability but comprising the largest countries in all world
regions.
Model results
The model produces a range of possible returns for business travel for each
country and therefore world region. The size of the range represents any
uncertainty in calculation. Estimation quantifies the response in productivity and
therefore total gross output and GDP that arises from a change in business
travel intensity. This can be extended to estimate the effect that a one dollar
incremental change in business travel would have on output: the return on
investment (ROI) of business travel.
Global results show that a 10% increase in business travel would result in an
increase in GDP for each country within an overall range of 0.5% and 3.5%;
consistent with the academic literature. The average response for any given
country is calculated to be within the narrower range of 0.6% to 2.5%.
On average this tells us that for every dollar invested in business travel globally
multi-national companies on average have experienced a $10 return in terms of
revenue. The exact return varies by region and country.

The World Travel & Tourism Council is the forum for business leaders in the Travel &
Tourism industry.
With the Chairs and Chief Executives of the 100 foremost Travel & Tourism companies as its Members,
WTTC has a unique mandate and overview on all matters related to Travel & Tourism.
WTTC works to raise awareness of Travel & Tourism as one of the worlds largest industries, supporting
around 260 million jobs and forecast to generate over 9% of global GDP in 2011.
Together with its research partner, Oxford Economics, WTTC produces comprehensive reports on an annual
basis with updates whenever required to quantify, compare and forecast the economic impact of Travel &
Tourism on 181 economies around the world. It also publishes a World report highlighting global trends.
To download one-page summaries, the full reports or spreadsheets, visit www.wttc.org
Assisting WTTC to provide tools for analysis, benchmarking, forecasting and planning
through its Tourism Economics subsidiary.
Over the last 30 years Oxford Economics has built a diverse and loyal client base of over 300 organisations
worldwide, including international organisations, governments, central banks, and both large and small
businesses. Tourism Economics was created to forge a union of tourism expertise and economic discipline
to provide real world insights based on quantitative frameworks. Headquartered in Oxford, England, with
ofces in London, Belfast, Paris, the UAE, Singapore, Philadelphia, New York and San Francisco, Oxford
Economics employs over 70 full-time, highly qualifed economists and data specialists, while maintaining
links with a network of economists in universities worldwide.
For more information please take advantage of a free trial on our website, www.oxfordeconomics.com, or
contact John Gaster, Oxford Economics, Abbey House, 121 St Aldates, Oxford, OX1 1HB, UK.
Tel: +44 (0) 1865 268900; email: jrgaster@oxfordeconomics.com
1-2 Queen Victoria Terrace
Sovereign Court
London E1W 3HA, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7481 8007
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7488 1008
Email: enquiries@wttc.org
www.wttc.org
WTTC would like to acknowledge the unique contribution of
business travel spending data, industry subject matter expertise, and
publication peer review from American Express Business Travels
Global Advisory Services and its eXpert insights research practice.
WTTC would like to thank the following sponsors:

WTTC Business Travel 2011

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

WTTC Business Travel 2011

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1

S-ar putea să vă placă și