As one of the largest and fastest-growing industries in the world [1-2], and has become one of the leading sectors driving the economy in Indonesia [3] Tourism is a sector that can become a potential source of foreign exchange and a significant source of employment for a country [4]. Tourism is one of the important agendas of Indonesia's economic development, so that the development of one of the indicators, namely foreign tourist visits, is the focus of government attention. In the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN), which is prepared every five years, foreign tourist visits are always included in the indicators for the performance of the tourism sector. The amount of attention given to this indicator shows how important foreign tourist visits are in every aspect of tourism development in Indonesia. For the 2020-2024 RPJMN agenda, the Indonesian government focuses on increasing added value, where foreign tourist visits are focused on increasing the length of stay and tourist spending [5].

The definition of foreign tourist used by Indonesia is every person who travels to a country outside the country of residence, for less than one year, driven by the main purpose (business, vacation, or other personal purposes), other than to work with residents of the country visited [6]. According to the BPS-Statistics Indonesia report, during 2019 the number of foreign tourist visits to Indonesia reached 16.11 million visits, an increase of 1.88 percent compared to the number of visits during 2018 [7]. In that year, the average daily expenditure spent by foreign tourists to Indonesia was USD 129.21, while the average length of stay of foreign tourists to Indonesia was 8.87 days [7].

To achieve the main objective of developing this international market, studies are needed that can support decision making, especially those that can provide an overview of which international market focus has the most potential in increasing tourist visits, spending, and length of stay. There are several important indicators to measure aspects of tourism demand. Some of these important indicators are among the many indicators to measure aspects of tourism demand, including the number of tourist visits, tourist expenditures, exports of travel services, and length of stay [8-9]. In tourism, demand aspects are divided into three, namely (1) actual demand or tourists who are visiting a destination; (2)             

Suppressed demand, people who have the potential to be used as actual demand in the future; and (3) No demand or those who are completely unwilling or unable to travel [10]. The concept of tourism demand originated from the classical definition of demand in economics, namely the desire to possess a commodity or to make use of a service, combined with the ability to purchase it [11].

This study aims to describe the potential of a country in terms of two aspects of demand, namely actual and suppressed demand. This study is expected to be able to provide an overview and facilitate stakeholders in focusing and distributing their marketing budgets more effectively and efficiently and on target in making certain policies related to demand aspects.

Research Method

This study is descriptive quantitative by using secondary data derived from official statistical reports published by national and international agencies. This study uses four indicators, namely the number of visits, average expenditure per day, and the average length of stay of foreign tourists in 2019 published by the Indonesian Central Statistics Agency (BPS-Statistics Indonesia), as well as GTP which is sourced from calculations based on data obtained from the World Bank or other official international websites for 2019 or the latest available year.

The definitions of indicators used in this study are as follows: (1) Foreign tourist visits are the number recorded by BPS for each visit made by foreign tourists. Statistics of International Tourist Visits are based on reports of arrivals of people entering Indonesian territory from the Directorate General of Immigration, and since October 2016 BPS added Mobile Positioning Data (MPD) to record visits in border areas [6] (2) Length of stay is the number of days spent in Indonesia where the addition of days is marked by a change of date, while the expenditure of foreign tourists is the number of expenses or costs incurred during the trip. [33] and (3) This study will use the GTP indicator, which according to Boniface and Cooper [34] is to divide the total trips generated in a country, by the total population of that country in the same period, then multiply by 100.

The data obtained from the above indicators will be processed in the following stages. First, the countries that will be assessed are countries that have data available in reports issued by BPS, including Russia, Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, France, Spain, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Egypt, United Kingdom, USA, China, New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, Hong Kong, Portugal, Thailand, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, India, Japan, Philippines, Malaysia, and Singapore. Second, the data collected will be normalized on a scale of 1-5, with the formula:

Third, the scores of each of these indicators will be added up to become the total score of each country that describes the potential of that country to be categorized as a potential market for Indonesian tourism. Fourth, to then categorize these countries. The description of the potential market will be divided into five categories, namely: Very High Potential, Low Potential, Medium Potential, Low Potential, and Very Low Potential. The formula for calculating the interval for each category is carried out as follows.

Fifth, see future opportunities for market development through the percentage of outbound penetration using a formula.

Based on the data collected from various statistical sources, the indicators used in this study can be seen in the following table.

From the table above, it can be seen that of the 32 countries observed in terms of indicators of foreign tourist visits to Indonesia, the highest score indicators are those who are Malaysian, Chinese, Singaporean, Australian, and Indian. It can also be seen that in the average expenditure per day indicator, there are several countries with expenditures higher than the overall average expenditure of foreign tourists when visiting Indonesia (USD 129.21), these countries include Singapore, India, Australia, Portugal, Japan, New Zealand, Taiwan, Philippines, and South Korea. Meanwhile, if viewed from the indicator of the average length of stay, the countries with the highest length of stay of the average length of stay of foreign tourists as a whole when visiting Indonesia (8.87 Days) are Russia, Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, France, Spain, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Egypt, UK, USA, China, New, Zealand, and Australia. In the two indicators above, namely length of stay and expenditure per day, only Australia and New Zealand have both values above the national average.

In the Travel Propensity indicator, the countries with the highest GTP levels are Hong Kong, Sweden, Singapore, Switzerland, and Finland. From the table above, it can also be seen that several countries have more than one GTP number, which means that every one of the existing populations produces more than one trip abroad. These countries are Hong Kong, Sweden, Singapore, Switzerland, Finland, Norway, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Malaysia, Belgium, and the UK.

Table 1:  Value of Indicators of Number of Visits, Average Spending Per Day, Average Length of Stay of International Tourists to Indonesia, and Number of Outbound Trips and Total Population of Indonesian Tourism Market Countries

World Bank Data 2018; 2016 World Bank Data; World Bank Data Year 2014; World Bank Data Year 2004; https://admin.taiwan.net.tw/upload/cont entFile/auser/b/annual_2019_htm/en/01_3_Domestic-Travel.html; https://eng.stat.gov.tw/point.asp?index=9

To be able to see the potential of the tourist market country for Indonesia as a whole from each indicator used, it can be seen in the table below.

From the results above, it can be seen that two countries are categorized as having very high potential as foreign tourist markets, namely Singapore and Hong Kong. Meanwhile, there are two countries in the high potential category, namely Malaysia and China. In the medium potential category, there are four countries, namely Australia, the Netherlands, Russia, and Sweden. Of the eight countries that have very high, high, and medium potential, four of them are countries with the highest contributors to tourist visits among other markets, namely Singapore, Malaysia, China, and Australia. Tourists from Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong are markets that need a strategy to increase their length of stay, while Russia, the Netherlands, Sweden, Malaysia, China, and Hong Kong are markets that require a strategy to increase the average spending during a visit to Indonesia. The countries of Singapore and Malaysia with the highest visits are influenced by geographical proximity to Indonesia, this is in line with the statement [20], Mariyono, and Mishra and Bansal [21].

Indonesia's opportunities to take advantage of the number of overseas tourist trips from the countries in the table above are shown in the outbound penetration column. The highest outbound penetration is in the Singapore market (18.1%) and Australia (12.2%). Meanwhile, other markets that have more than 1% outbound and less than 10% of the trips they generate include Malaysia (9.7%), New Zealand (4.9%), the Philippines (4.6%), Japan (2.7%), India (2.5%), Sri Lanka (2.0%), Portugal (1.4%), Thailand (1.4%), South Korea (1.4%), China (1,4%), Taiwan (1.2%), and France (1.1%) (Table 2).

Indonesia has a higher opportunity to take advantage of countries such as Hong Kong which has a very high GTP value, but its outbound penetration is still low (0.1%), as well as other market countries such as the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Belgium, Norway, Finland, UK, and Austria which have a GTP value of more than 1.0 are potential markets to increase tourist visits. When viewed from the aspect of the length of stay, only Hong Kong has an average length of stay below the national average. The biggest challenge can also be seen from other markets that have average spending below the national average.

The strategy of increasing length of stay and spending on visits can be through optimizing the development of tourism products that can make tourists

Table 2: Scores from Indicators of Number of Visits, Average Expenditures Per Day, Average Length of Stay of International Tourists to Indonesia, and Number of Outbound Trips and Total Population of Indonesian Tourism Market Countries, along with a description of the Category of Market Potential and Outbound Penetration 

stay longer and spend more money while visiting Indonesia. For countries with several tourist visits that have not been optimal, a strategy to increase awareness about Indonesia as an attractive destination to visit needs to be done, this is in line with what was conveyed by J. Liu, Pan, and Zheng [30], and Sukirman [31] which states that the amount of marketing effort can affect the level of tourist visits. 

According to the above table, it can be seen that generally, countries with longer length of stay indicators have an average expenditure per day which tends to be less, this is in accordance with what was conveyed by Garcia-Sanchez, Fernanez-Rubio, and Collado [16]. But of course, these two indicators, both length of stay and spending, are important aspects that can increase the possibility of potentially having a more economic impact on a destination as stated by [15] and [13].

The number of visits, length of stay, and expenditure of tourists during their visit to a destination, as well as the tendency to travel are some important indicators in considering the potential of a country to be the focus of the tourism market. If the number of visits, length of stay, and expenditure of tourists during their visit are indicators that come from requests that are classified as actual demand, which describes the actual number of tourists who have visited. It is different from the tendency of trips that fall into suppressed demand, where this illustrates the amount of potential demand that allows it to be optimized. Suppressed demand itself is influenced by many factors, both from the supply and demand aspects.

Therefore, this study recommends several markets that have even greater potential to be developed for Indonesian tourism. In carrying out this study, of course, it has limitations, in addition to using only secondary data, this study also only focuses on four indicators. Expansion of indicators and additional use of other data sources are important to complete and enrich the study of foreign tourist market development in the future.

1. Algieri B. et al. “International competitive advantages in tourism: an eclectic view.” Tourism Management Perspectives, vol. 25, no. 2017, 2017, pp. 41-52. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.11.003.

2. Gnanapragasam S.R. “Tourist arrivals in Sri Lanka: a comparative study of Holt-Winter’s versus Box-Jenkin’s modeling methods.” OUSL Journal, vol. 13, no. 1, 2018, pp. 65-91. https://doi.org/10.4038/ouslj.v13i1.7395.

3. Maulana A. “Kajian perhitungan global gross travel propensity (GTP) dan country potential generation index (CPGI) 2016.” Jurnal Pariwisata Pesona, vol. 4, no. 2, 2019, pp. 139-148. https://doi.org/10.26905/jpp.v4i2.2594.

4. Mariyono J. “Determinants of demand for foreign tourism in Indonesia.” Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, vol. 18, no. 1, 2017, pp. 82-92. https://doi.org/10.23917/jep.v18i1.204 2.

5. Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia. Attachment I to Presidential Regulation No. 18/2020 concerning the 2020-2024 National Medium-Term Development Plan. 2020. https://jdih.bappenas.go.id/data /peraturan/Perpres_Nomor_ 18_tahun_2020_tentang_RPJMN_lampiran.pdf.

6. Wulandari H. et al. International visitor arrivals statistics 2020. Jakarta, 2021. https://www.bps.go.id/publication /2021/06/3 0/ddea1823bc9cd63789d51b05/statistik-kunjungan-wisata wan-mancanegara-2020.html.

7. Arifiatin D and Indriani R. International visitor arrivals statistics 2019. Badan Pusat Statistik, Jakarta, 2020. https://www.bps. go.id/publication/2020/06/26/94ceb011540bd0cd73e3474c/statistik-kunjungan-wisatawan-manca negara-2019.html.

8. Menezes A.G. et al. “The determinants of length of stay of tourists in the Azores.” Tourism Economics, vol. 14, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5367/0000000087835 54866.

9. Wijaya I.B.P. and Mustika M.D.S. “Pengaruh jumlah kunjungan wisatawan, lama tinggal dan pengeluaran wisatawan mancanegara terhadap pendapatan sektor perdagangan, hotel dan restoran (PHR) Provinsi Bali tahun 2000-2012.” Ekonomi Pembangunan Universitas Udayana, vol. 3, no. 4, 2012, pp. 124-133. https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eep/article/view/8396.

10. Cooper C. Essentials of tourism. 2nd ed., Pearson Education, Harlow, 2016.

11. Song H. et al. “Tourism demand modelling and forecasting: how should demand be measured?” Tourism Economics, vol. 16, no. 1, 2010, pp. 63-81. https://doi.org/10.5367 /000000010790 872213.

12. Munandar R. and Amar S. “Pengaruh kunjungan wisatawan mancanegara, rata-rata pengeluaran dan tingkat hunian hotel terhadap pendapatan Indonesia pada sektor pariwisata.” Jurnal Kajian Ekonomi dan Pembangunan Universitas Negeri Padang, vol. 1, no. 1, 2019, pp. 37-48. https://doi.org/10.24036/jkep.v 1i1.5348.

13. Brida J.G. and Scuderi R. “Determinants of tourist expenditure: a review of microeconometric models.” Tourism Management Perspectives, vol. 6, 2013, pp. 28-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tmp.2012.10.006.

14. Maulana A. et al. “The mapping of quality tourists prospects for Indonesia’s tourism markets.” Binus Business Review, vol. 11, no. 3, 2020, pp. 167-174. https://doi.org/1 0.21512/bbr.v11i3.63 73.

15. Barros C.P. and Machado L.P. “The length of stay in tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 37, no. 3, 2010, pp. 692-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2009.12.0 05.

16. Garcia-Sanchez A. et al. “Daily expenses of foreign tourists, length of stay and activities: evidence from Spain.” Tourism Economics, vol. 19, no. 3, 2013, pp. 613-630. https://doi.or g/10.5367/te.2013.0218.

17. Maulana A. “Pemetaan prospek kunjungan wisatawan asal Tiongkok di pasar global.” Jurnal Ekonomi dan Pembangunan, vol. 26, no. 2, 2018, pp. 117-130. https://do i.org/10.1420 3/JEP.26.2.2018.117-130.

18. Moon H. and Han H. “Tourist experience quality and loyalty to an island destination: the moderating impact of destination image.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, vol. 35, no. 1, 2018, pp. 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2018.149 4083.

19. Subadra I.N. et al. “Investigating push and pull factors of tourists visiting Bali as a world tourism destination.” International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 8, 2019, pp. 253-269. https://doi.org/1 0.6084/m9.figshare.9916 247.

20. Artal-Tur A. et al. “Examining the impact of visa restrictions on international tourist flows using panel data.” Estudios de Economia, vol. 43, no. 2, 2016, pp. 265-279. https://doi.org /10.4067/S0718-528620160002000 05.

21. Mishra S.S. and Bansal V. “Role of source-destination proximity in international inbound tourist arrival: empirical evidences from India.” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 22, no. 5, 2017, pp. 540-553. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2 017.1287107.

22. Theara C. “On the investigation of factors affecting international tourist arrivals to Cambodian market: a static and dynamic gravity approach.” Southeast Asian Journal of Economics, vol. 5, no. 2, 2017, pp. 115-138. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/ 83813/1/MPRA_pap er83813.pdf.

23. Utama I.G.B.R. “Destination image of Bali based on the push motivational factors, identity and destination creations in the perspective of foreign senior tourist.” Jurnal Manajemen & Kewirausahaan, vol. 18, no. 1, 2016, pp. 16-24. https://doi .org/10.9744/jmk.18.1.16.

24. Battour M. et al. “The perception of non-Muslim tourists towards halal tourism: evidence from Turkey and Malaysia.” Journal of Islamic Marketing, vol. 9, no. 4, 2018, pp. 823-840. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-07-2017-007 2.

25. Liu X. et al. “The role of travel experience in the structural relationships among tourists’ perceived image, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions.” Tourism and Hospitality Research, vol. 15, no. 1, 2015, pp. 18-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/14673584 15610371.

26. Jayaprakash K. “Factors influencing the tourists to visit Udhagamandalam.” International Journal of Management & Social Science Research Review, vol. 1, 2017, pp. 40-44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321051267.

27. Yusup M.F. et al. “Determinants of factors and the growth of tourism industry in Langkawi Island.” Journal of Scientific Research and Development, vol. 3, no. 2, 2016, pp. 13-20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30289 6554.

28. Santos A. and Cincera M. “Tourism demand, low cost carriers and European institutions: the case of Brussels.” Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 73, 2018, pp. 163-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.04.026.

29. Andres E.A.S. et al. Tourist arrivals and inclusive growth. APEC Issue Paper No. 11, 2016. https://www.apec.org/-/media /APEC/Publications/2016/8/Tourist-Arrivals-and-Inclusive-Growth/Tourist-Arrivals-and-Inclusive-Growth_final-report _11Aug2016.pdf.

30. Liu J. et al. “Tourism development, environment and policies: differences between domestic and international tourists.” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 1390, 2019, pp. 1-15. https://doi. org/10.3390/su11051390.

31. Sukirman O. “Apakah anggaran pemasaran pariwisata pemerintah efektif dalam meningkatkan jumlah kunjungan wisatawan?” Tourism and Hospitality Essentials Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, 2017, pp. 121-128. https://doi.org/10.17509/ thej.v7i2.9 018.g5613.

32. Boniface B and Cooper C. Worldwide destinations: the geography of travel and tourism. 4th ed., Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2005.

33. Indriani R. and Ulfa Y.A. Expenditure statistics of international tourists 2019. Jakarta, 2020. https://www.bp s.go.id/public ation/2020/10/22/300a7a65c3ab81bfd6476e2d/statistik-pengeluaran-wisatawan-mancanegara-2019.html.

34. Boniface B. and Cooper C. Worldwide destinations: the geography of travel and tourism. 5th ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2009. https://doi.org/10.4324/978 0080454917.

35. Rudkin S. and Sharma A. “Enhancing understanding of tourist spending using unconditional quantile regression.” Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 67, 2017, pp. 48-60. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.06.003.

36.