This page sets out the methodology by which The Corridor researches, analyses and publishes. It is provided so that readers — including those who disagree with the publication's conclusions — can engage with the analytical method rather than only the analytical output.
Source hierarchy
The publication uses a four-tier source hierarchy.
Tier 1. Peer-reviewed scholarship. Articles from journals including Tourism Management, Annals of Tourism Research, Journal of Air Transport Management, African Affairs, Review of African Political Economy, Journal of Modern African Studies. Used as theoretical anchors and for structural claims.
Tier 2. Multilateral institution data. UN Tourism Barometer and statistical annexes, World Bank Tourism Satellite Accounts, IMF Article IV consultations, AfDB country diagnostics, ICAO data, UNCTAD reports. Used for cross-country quantitative claims.
Tier 3. Primary government and corporate documents. Cabinet decisions, gazette notices, parliamentary committee reports, central bank statements, listed-company annual reports, regulator filings. Used in preference to media reports referencing them.
Tier 4. Tier-one media. Financial Times, The Economist, Reuters, Bloomberg, Associated Press, Africa Report. Used only when they break news that has not yet been formalised in primary documents, or where they provide unique on-the-ground reporting that other sources do not.
Citation practice
The publication cites sources inline using author-date format where possible (Smith 2025; AFCAC 2026, p.14) with a numbered footnote section at the end of each issue providing full reference detail. Where space constraints in the issue prevent full footnoting, sources are credited with their publication name and date inline, with full references available on request.
Analytical frameworks
The publication's six analytical frameworks (Mobility Corridors, Displacement Dividend, Corridor Index, Sovereign Tourism Architecture, Climate Re-routing, Sovereign Signalling) are described in detail on the Frameworks page. Each is positioned within the existing political economy of tourism literature and identified as either an original analytical contribution or an extension of an established concept. Frameworks are revised as the published evidence requires.
Quantitative claims
All quantitative claims are sourced. Where sources disagree, the range is reported and the reason for the disagreement noted. Where the publication produces an original calculation from underlying data, the calculation is identified as such and the input data is named.
The Corridor Index
The Corridor Index measures value retention: of the money a visitor spends in a destination, the share that remains in the host economy rather than leaving it. Leakage is the complement, the share that departs again through foreign-owned accommodation, offshore booking and payment platforms, imported food, fuel and furnishings, expatriated wages and repatriated profit. A higher index reading means more of the tourism dollar stays where it was spent.
The index is anchored to published benchmarks rather than to a single proprietary formula. UN Tourism estimates that import-related leakage alone removes forty to fifty per cent of gross tourism earnings in small economies, against ten to twenty per cent in large diversified ones, and that for an all-inclusive package bought in a developed market as little as five to twenty per cent of the price reaches the destination. These benchmarks set the scale. Country-level readings are reported as indicative ranges, not point estimates, because national tourism satellite accounts, balance-of-payments travel data and sector ownership records capture different parts of the picture and are revised over time. Each country figure is marked by the confidence the underlying data supports, and is refined as individual issues examine that market in detail. Where a reading rests on a firm published source it is labelled as such; where it is the publication's own interpolation from partial data, it is labelled indicative. No figure is presented with more precision than its sources sustain.
House style
From Issue 031 the publication adopted a consistent prose standard: argument carried in plain, connected sentences rather than rhetorical contrast; claims stated with the evidence that sustains them; and a stated limit to each argument, set out in an honest-limit section, so that the strongest version of the counter-case is acknowledged within the issue itself. From Issue 036 headlines follow a measured, declarative register, naming the finding and, where the material allows, a concrete anchor. The institutional voice is the default; individual authorship is named only on landmark analytical pieces.
Editorial review
Each issue passes through a structural review (does the argument hold), a sourcing review (is each claim sourced and the source rated against the hierarchy), and a copy review (is the writing clear and the analytical voice consistent) before publication.
Corrections
Errors are corrected publicly on the Corrections page. Corrections are not buried; significant corrections are noted at the top of the affected issue. Readers who identify errors are invited to submit them to corrections@thecorridorafrica.com.
Independence and conflicts
The publication accepts no advertising and no sponsored content. The editor maintains professional engagements in African tourism that are disclosed on the About page. Where any issue concerns a destination, operator or institution with which the editor has a direct professional relationship, the relationship is disclosed within the issue.