Abstract
Purpose
This study examines the factors that influence the ecotourist behavior of university students. The understanding of what motivates these students can inform future suggestions for strategies and actions in ecotourism.
Design/methodology/approach
The study was applied to university students of the University of Medellín, Colombia. It was an exploratory empirical study that surveyed a total of 696 students.
Findings
The results show that students with a positive attitude toward ecology tend to be interested in nature-related activities, therefore generating an intention to engage in ecotourism. The authors found that those who view ecotourism as an activity that promotes fun and happiness tend to engage more frequently in these activities.
Originality/value
This study is of great interest for research in motivational theory, specifically the analysis of personality profiles and how these relate to specific tourism behaviors. The findings of this study strongly suggest that those interested in the management and development of ecotourism should establish practices and programs that consider factors such as tourist segmentation, effective communication of the positive qualities of ecotourism and environmental stewardship involved in these activities.
Keywords
Citation
Sánchez-Torres, J.A., Hernández Fernández, Y.L. and Perlaza Lopera, C. (2023), "Factors influencing university students in conducting ecotourism", Journal of Tourism Futures, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-09-2020-0139
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2022, Javier A. Sánchez-Torres, Yuri Lorene Hernández Fernández and Carolina Perlaza Lopera
License
Published in Journal of Tourism Futures. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
According to the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), the most frequently utilized definition of tourism is as follows: tourism is the sector that includes the activities carried out by people during trips and occupancies in places different from their usual environment for a consecutive period of time of less than year for leisure, business and other purposes (Camilleri, 2018). With another description of the term, Ledhesma (2018) expresses that tourism is the entire spectrum that is generated from the idea and/or action that involves the displacement of human beings to a place different from their residence and that holds recreational possibilities. Here recreation is understood as the intention of rest, fun and/or contact with the host destination.
Tourism is a highly complex subject. According to Cohen et al. (2014), tourism not only comprises many components but its development also involves various sectors of the economy, most prominently, income generation, job creation and foreign exchange contributions. These can, in turn, offset the balance of payments and increases in public revenue while promoting business activity in the towns where tourism occurs. Thus, tourism is especially important for its substantial contribution to add value in matters of economic and global development (Ledhesma, 2018; Pasquinelli et al., 2022).
Because of tourism's broad cross-sectional presence in other areas of knowledge, modalities are generated and classified according to the spatial, temporal component or sometimes according to the purpose of the trip (Camilleri, 2018; Cohen et al., 2014).
In accordance with the aforementioned, a new paradigm has emerged in the last decade that has motivated the analysis of tourism focused on nature, natural trends and the environment (Dávid, 2011). Aimed at rebuilding tourism as a system that is environmentally friendly and highly sustainable (Chi, 2022; Tseng et al., 2019), “ecotourism” is a type of tourism that creates awareness of its impact on the environment. Ecotourism seeks to preserve natural and cultural values without damaging them and to help solve the problems caused by tourism itself (Cobbinah, 2015).
Hence, the aim of this study is to examine the behavior of the ecotourist who is a university student. To this end, first a theoretical review is carried out to define the variables that can explain the behavior of this population. Second, an empirical study conducted on the University of Medellín campus in Colombia is presented. Finally, an analysis and the results of this study are presented.
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Ecotourism
In a general context, it can be said that ecotourism is one of the fastest growing industries worldwide (Nematpour and Faraji, 2019). Within the tourism industry, ecotourism is growing three times faster than the industry as a whole (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019). The number of travelers who prefer this alternative form of tourism increases by 20% each year, generating between 10 and 20% of the total world tourism market, thus making it the fastest growing sector of the tourist industry (Dorofeeva et al., 2020). Ecotourism is also considered to be one of the five leading strategic areas of future development in the tourism industry (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019; Dorofeeva et al., 2020; Tseng et al., 2019).
However, it is important to clarify that, in essence, tourism and ecotourism do not differ because they are economic activities with unequally distributed revenues but rather because of the type of attractions that characterize them and for the value contribution that they generate, given that ecotourism is particularly important for standardized and reasonable tourist behavior and the rational use and management of natural resources (Tseng et al., 2019). Thus, various definitions have emerged that will be examined in the following sections.
Ecotourism is an approach to travel to natural spaces derived from the experience of tourism in a natural setting, but differing from the latter in that ecotourism includes sustainability, environmental values and education, making it something more specific than simply utilizing a natural environment for the purpose of recreational activity (Dávid, 2011).
According to Andarani et al. (2018), ecotourism is a responsible trip to a natural area during which the environment is preserved and the well-being of the local population is improved. Similarly, the experience is geared toward caring for the environment, focusing on trips of limited magnitude that minimize the ecological, cultural and behavioral impact of tourist activities carried out on a massive scale (Wondirad, 2019).
Alternately, Stronza et al. (2019) define ecotourism as any recreational activity explicitly involving the observation or extraction of living entities in nature, which includes some sort of environmental education, has low environmental impact, aims to be sustainable and, in some cases, supports local conservation efforts.
Ecotourism activities vary by region, but most of these activities focus on interaction with the natural environment (Huang et al., 2020). The choice of places designated for these activities is influenced by the size of the sites themselves (Agius et al., 2019).
In recent years, international ecotourism has developed rapidly, and national parks have been crucial locations for this development (Li et al., 2020). We must bear in mind that this activity is carried out primarily in natural settings, national parks and protected public areas, all of which are becoming increasingly important locations for this type of activity throughout the world (Agius et al., 2019). As these areas increasingly gear themselves toward ecotourism, they have become important destinations because these are places that can efficiently protect the environment while supporting education, recreation and the creation of new economies (Li et al., 2020). Additionally, these locations offer high levels of access to natural resources such as landscapes, rivers, forests and wildlife (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019).
Ecotourism is then a responsible trip to a natural area that preserves the environment, bolsters the well-being of the local population and integrates education with understanding. Ecotourism must provide an educational experience for tourists as well as economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability for the destination (Cobbinah, 2015). Thus, this tourist trend can also be viewed as an effective means of promoting natural conservation and sustainable development in less developed regions, while also acting as a learning tool that can link conservation to sustainable development goals (Mondino and Beery, 2019). Therefore, ecotourism is increasingly recognized as a way to promote not only local lifestyles and culture but also the conservation of the environment (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019). This type of tourism has the potential to provide economic incentives to preserve natural habitats but only if the income is great enough and accessible to the target populations (Andarani et al., 2018).
Under the aforementioned definitions, the motivations for traveling of the tourists who engage in this type of tourism must also be taken into account (Cohen et al., 2014). Some ecotourists travel to satisfy recreational and pleasure-seeking needs, along with a desire to educate themselves about specific areas. These are tourists with motivations and behaviors related only to nature and the learning criteria of ecotourism. The primary intrinsic motivation of these tourists is to observe and appreciate natural attributes and those cultural facets that are related to learning about nature, while being physically active and meeting people with similar interests (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019).
Despite the positive attributes and effects of the concept, the impact of ecotourism appears ambiguous and requires more research (Kim et al., 2018). Ecotourism can have many positive and negative effects, usually as a function of how it is perceived, developed and the focus of the planning (Andarani et al., 2018).
Because of environmental pollution resulting from human activities including tourism, the development of ecotourism is of particular interest today (Dorofeeva et al., 2020). Although it has been seen as a vehicle to support ecological conservation and local communities, there are concerns that the potential arrival of more tourists to such small areas, which are already under intense pressure, will aggravate the situation or worsen the potential of ecotourism (Agius et al., 2019). Consequently, the limitations of visitors must be taken into account to avoid a violent reaction and a negative environmental impact.
2.2 The university and ecotourism
Universities have always been considered by society as substantial organizations with a significant global impact. In this new millennium, a new trend has emerged in the evolution of universities, the rise of so-called “living laboratories,” in which universities are seen as actors, mediators, generators and solvers of environmental impact (Gu et al., 2019). The aforementioned finding surpasses the traditional concept of a “business ecosystem” (Kim et al., 2018), which involves the commitment not only of traditional actors and stakeholders in higher education but also of nongovernmental organizations, local institutions, students, educators, nonprofit organizations, the environment and local community (Reid, 2018; Thomsen et al., 2018).
Consequently, universities take a leadership role in formulating objectives for sustainable development. This implies that within their own stated mission, these institutions consider actions related to these objectives such as making the university campus “green” to make changes to the community with regard to sustainable development (Dagiliūtė et al., 2018).
This is where the concept of a “green campus” or “greenspace” arises, a concept that envisions a different set of interpretations with regard to everything related to land, habitat, geography, architecture, ecology, sustainable policies, inhabitants, local and regional impact, among other factors (Agustina et al., 2022; Gulwadi et al., 2019). Therefore, universities must assume a proactive environmental role where campuses serve as examples of ecosystem regeneration that could potentially be adopted by the cities (Mangrich et al., 2019).
Several researchers have developed and applied tools that measure, within the university community, the perceptions of students and the impact of policies related to having a green campus; simultaneously, diverse studies have measured other factors as well in different universities around the world. Some of the scales that were used were perceived greenery, perceived restoration related to the individual and his/her environment and the scale of the World Health Organization on the quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF). The latter includes a cross-cultural instrument that also evaluates physical and psychological health, social relations, and the environment (Gulwadi et al., 2019).
Dagiliūtė et al. (2018) specifically proposes a tool to determine students' perception regarding green universities and to examine whether universities truly offer concrete practices with regard to sustainability. In their results, the authors observe that university students positively value their university's actions regarding sustainable development, social well-being and inclusion, and the authors point out that these factors need to be included in the educational process.
Other global metrics, specifically the IU Green Metric Word University Ranking, evaluate sustainable practices at universities. This tool is still new. Few universities have adopted it because of its demanding metrics and the requirements to actually establish the concept of a green campus (Ounsaneha, 2018).
For their part, studies investigating the environmental consciousness of university students show that, in general, this population has a high level of interest in global problems such as climate change (Muflihaini et al., 2020). University students recognize that environmental problems are serious, and they adopt a positive attitude regarding these issues although they engage in few environmentally friendly behaviors in the course of their daily activities (Gurbuz and Ozkan, 2019).
2.3 The embracing of tourism among university students
The existing research on students and tourism focuses primarily on the use of vacation time. Very few studies analyze the use of university campuses as tourist destinations although some have focused on university choices made by foreign students and how these choices relate to educational tourism (Garrido Yserte, 2007; Martínez Roget et al., 2013). Regarding the behavior of carrying out edu-tourism, the following considerations are found: risk aversion, discrimination and racism, learning another language, geographical proximity, cultural proximity, the educational system's reputation, security, need for international experience, benefits of the course, visa acquisition procedures, price and cost of travel, cost of the course, legislation and related policies and social influence (Harazneh et al., 2018). For example, in the case of Malaysia, the things students look for in tourism are challenges, relaxation, to have fun, to build social relationships and to experience new adventures (Mohsin et al., 2017). This supports theories about motivations during free time, in which the most important findings reveal that free time is dedicated to social relationships, such as making new friends (Beard and Ragheb, 2018).
There is a scarcity of literature that explains the behavior of university students with regard to ecotourism although there is an urgent need for these types of studies as new generations demonstrate a greater concern for environmental stewardship. However, some studies have found that although many university students demonstrate a positive attitude toward the environment, they do not display proenvironmental behaviors (Heyl et al., 2014).
3. Research framework and hypotheses
This study proposes that the practice of ecotourism can result from an individual's intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics, that is to say, from an individual's attitude toward ecology and the degree to which ecological experiences occupy one's leisure time. These would, in turn, relate to an enjoyment of, or a kind of hedonism related to, the practice of ecological tourism (Figure 1).
The first correlation that is examined is the attitude toward ecology. An attitude is understood as a summarized psychological evaluation of an object attributing measurable dimensions, such as good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant (Ajzen, 2001). According to Gurbuz and Ozkan (2019), an ecological attitude is the sum of all the intrinsic positive and negative attitudes toward the environment, that is, the individual's thoughts that produce behaviors toward the environment, as well as an individual's environmental value judgments and their willingness to resolve them. We bear in mind that attitudes toward something can generate a behavior associated with such an attitude (Chaiken and Baldwin, 1981; Dodds et al., 2019; Okumus et al., 2019). Those with an ecological attitude will tend to want to engage in tourist activities related to ecology (Chang and Chung, 2018; Dolnicar, 2010).
In view of the foregoing, the following hypotheses are raised.
Ecological attitude positively influences the perception of ecotourists/hedonism.
Ecological attitude positively influences the intention of engaging in ecotourism.
Ecological attitude positively influences the ecotourist identity.
Hedonistic psychological theories demonstrate a direct relationship between a behavior and motivation rooted in hedonism or enjoyment (Mees and Schmitt, 2008). Hedonism, derived from sensations that involve happiness and pleasurable feelings associated with a behavior, is consequently one of the motivations for tourism (Elomba and Yun, 2015). Engaging in various types of tourism, such as ecotourism, will also be influenced by hedonistic motivation (Chang and Chung, 2018; Juvan and Dolnicar, 2017). In the case of ecotourism, tourists will highly value the ecotourism experience over other possible deciding factors (Ruhanen, 2019). Ecotourism can generate “delight factors” that can be defined as reassuring, relaxing, comforting and pleasure sensations (Hong and Ma, 2019).
We therefore propose the following hypothesis.
Hedonism in ecotourism positively influences the intention of engaging in ecotourism
Leisure identity is defined as a belief structure related to self-worth, self-identity, social identity and the emotional attachment tied to a positive leisure belief structure (Chang and Chung, 2018). In the case of ecotourism, individuals can develop an identity related to ecotourism based on their habits, life experiences and the social factors surrounding them (Dolnicar, 2010; Juvan and Dolnicar, 2017).
An ecotourist identity positively influences the intention of engaging in ecotourism.
Finally, the intention of engaging in ecotourism will be the best determining factor predicting the practice of ecotourism (Zheng et al., 2018).
The intention to perform ecotourism affects the continuous practice of ecotourism.
4. Research method
4.1 Sampling and data collection methods
A nonprobabilistic sample based on the convenience method was developed through personal surveys administered to students at the University of Medellín, Colombia. Because the nature of the model is exploratory and the target population comprises university students, all sampling requirements for analysis of the model using the partial least square (PLS) method were satisfied (Hair et al., 2014).
The questionnaire was collected from university students of all courses regardless of the number of years of study. They were asked to indicate to what extent they agreed with statements in the questionnaire on a five point Likert-type scale (1 = Totally disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = No opinion, 4 = Agree and 5 = Totally agree). A greater number of responses were received from female students, which did not affect the results of the study (Statistical tests were performed by gender and for moderating effect without finding any significant differences). Similarly, no significant differences were found between the two participating age ranges (Table 1).
4.2 Questionnaire design
The questionnaire comprised two sections. The first section collected basic demographic information of the participants, mainly gender and age range (Table 1). The second section included five variables taken from the literature. The environmental attitude variable was adapted from Gurbuz and Ozkan (2019), and the variables of ecotourism identity, hedonism in ecotourism, ecotourism intention and ecotourism practice were adapted from Chang and Chung (2018) (Table 2).
5. Data analysis and results
The data were analyzed using the Smart PLS 3.2.8 program following Hair et al. (2017) recommendations for examining undertested relations or underdeveloped theories. First, the measurement tool was validated; then we evaluated the validity of the model and the hypothesis.
5.1 Validating the measuring instrument
The discriminant validity test was applied. This test checks that the items measure only to their corresponding variable. The results showed that all the item values of the discriminant loadings were greater than 0.505; consequently, they were all valid (Table 3) (Hair et al., 2017). The other reliability tests, such as Cronbach’s alpha tests (>0.70), average variance extracted (AVE) (>0.5), compound reliability (>0.6) and Rho_A (>0.70) exceeded the minim required levels (Table 4) (Gefen et al., 2000; Henseler et al., 2015). The divergent validity was verified comparing the AVE value of the variables with the correlation of the constructs with respect to each variable elevated to the square, being that these are inferior to the square root of the AVE, demonstrating that each variable is related more strongly to its items than to the other (Table 5) (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Finally, Henseler-Ringle test also was confirmed the divergent validity (Table 6) (Henseler et al., 2015).
The results confirm the proposed model (Table 7), first in their power to predict the practice of ecotourism, showing an R-squared level of
With respect to the other hypotheses, the results have all demonstrated validity; therefore, it is validated that the environmental attitude in university students positively affects the perception of hedonism with regard to ecotourism (H1a: β = 0.417*). The environmental attitude also affects the strengthening of the students' ecotourist identity (H1c: β = 0.418*). For its part, the ecotourism identity positively influences the ecotourism intention (H3: β = 0.378*), thus proving that a tourist who likes activities linked to ecology will tend to prefer ecotourism over other types of tourism. Finally, ecotourism intention positively affects the practice of ecotourism (H4: β = 0.417*) (Figure 2).
6. Discussion and implications
6.1 Theoretical implications
The aim of this study is to explore whether the practice of ecotourism depends on the extent of an individual's positive ecological attitude and on the level of engagement in ecological experiences demonstrated during their leisure time, which in turn relates to high levels of hedonism in the enjoyment of ecological tourism.
The results showed that in the case of university students, those with the highest levels of ecotourism intention and practice will tend to be the students who exhibit an individual profile with a clearly positive environmental attitude as part of their approach to life. These students also exhibit an appreciation for, (identity) and enjoyment of (hedonism), the activities taking place in nature. This result is consistent with the study conducted by Dodds et al. (2019) with regard to the ecological attitude being one of the strongest predictors of participation in environmental activities, which in this case is the participation in ecotourism. This finding is of great interest for research in motivational theory, specifically the analysis of personality profiles and how these relate to specific behaviors. The application of personality profile analysis is important not only because it explains the cause of a positive behavior such as ecotourism, but rather because it represents a continuation of previous theoretical research about attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, this research helps us understand that behaviors that demonstrate environmental stewardship are linked to an individual's psychological and educational profile. Therefore, environmental education is very important at every stage of an individual's education, including at the university level.
While the objectives of the present study did not include other determinants of individual attitudes and behaviors, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has generated attitudinal and behavioral changes of all kinds in relation to tourism (Ahmad et al., 2022). For example, recent studies have shown that certain personality types are more likely to engage in local ecotourism, which is more popular these days (Isaac and Keijzer, 2021). It seems that rural and natural tourist activities will become increasingly attractive in the future (Li et al., 2021) not only because they are considered safer than other forms of mass tourism but also because people are more environmentally aware. This may be related to a perception that the pandemic was partly the result of environmental despoilation (Carvache-Franco et al., 2022; Chi, 2022; Sanjeev and Tiwari, 2021). Meanwhile, the increased use of virtuality, especially amongst young people, has led to a lesser intention to engage in physical tourism, ecotourism included (Bui et al., 2021; Sanjeev and Tiwari, 2021). At the same time, some scholars have argued that young people can integrate digital and virtual tourism with sustainable tourism and ecotourism, given their empathy with both trends (Sfodera et al., 2022).
6.2 Practical implications
The practical implications of this study allow us to offer recommendations to organizations that work with ecotourism. These recommendations include implementing communication programs focusing on tourists with a highly positive attitude toward environmental issues, for example, individuals belonging to environmental nongovernmental organizations or green parties. Likewise, it is recommended to guide tourist offerings to include activities related to stewardship of the natural world, such as planting, interventions, area clean-up activities and clean (environmentally conscious) production and consumption.
Conversely, it is important that all servuction and other points of contact with the client do not exhibit pollution and do exhibit an efficient use of resources, especially with regard to resources that are nonrenewable. Other aspects of the ecotourism experience that should be considered with regard to the provision of ecotourism services are sociocultural impact (such as social and cultural development), increased awareness, identity construction, community attachment, perceived community belonging, community revitalization and the sharing of positive sociocultural expression that ecotourism brings.
Finally, the management of ecological tourism must pay special attention to improving the relationship between tourists and nature, to environmental education through the development and implementation of behavioral standards within natural environments and to environmental tourism itineraries. Ecological tourism management must planned to fully assist tourists (as in state-owned natural resources and natural areas with special protections), and ecotourism management must function as a protector of nature for the tourist, along with the profitable creation and implementation of tourism products and services, should derive from the consideration of all possible economic and social consequences.
6.3 Limitations and future studies
This study is greatly limited due to its sample that is only the representative of Colombian university students. Likewise, other factors of both an intrinsic and an extrinsic nature were not evaluated as possible motivating factors for the practice of ecotourism. Therefore, future research examining similar populations of university students is recommended. It is also necessary that future studies analyzing the practice of ecotourism consider other variables that were not taken into account in this study (e.g. Covid-19 pandemic, virtuality, climate change among others).
Figures
Sample
| Variables | Demographic traits | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 34.6 |
| Female | 65.4 | |
| Age of the respondent | Between 16 and 20 years of age | 51.9 |
| Between 21 and 30 years of age | 48.1 |
Descriptive analysis of the measures
| Variable/adopted from | Measurement items |
|---|---|
| Ecological attitude (Gurbuz and Ozkan, 2019) | AE1. I take an active part in protecting the environment |
| AE2. I try to use resources like electricity, water, etc., in the most efficient way possible | |
| AE3. I consider that the environment is the responsibility of all of us | |
| Ecotourism intention (Chang and Chung, 2018) | BT1. I engage in ecotourism activities whenever I have free time |
| BT2. I schedule ecotourism activities regularly | |
| BT3. I spend a great deal of my leisure time engaging in ecotourism activities | |
| Hedonism in ecotourism (Chang and Chung, 2018) | HE1. Leisure and tourist activities in nature are fun for me |
| HE2. I really enjoy engaging in tourist and free-time activities in nature | |
| HE3. My favorite type of tourism is in nature, and I really like it | |
| Ecotourism identity (Chang and Chung, 2018) | ID1. My favorite activity in my free time involves enjoying tourist activities in nature |
| ID2. The enjoyment of tourism in nature during my free time is a reflection of who I am | |
| ID3. Other people are important to me when they engage in ecotourism activities | |
| Ecotourism practice (Chang and Chung, 2018) | B1. How likely is it that you will engage in tourism activities in nature over the coming months? |
Validity of measuring instrument
| Indicators/variable | Loads | Statistics t (| O/STDEV|) | p values |
|---|---|---|---|
| AE1 ← Ecological attitude | 0.822 | 13.234 | 0.000 |
| AE2 ← Ecological attitude | 0.784 | 13.695 | 0.000 |
| AE3 ← Ecological attitude | 0.740 | 25.667 | 0.000 |
| BT1 ← Ecotourism intention | 0.931 | 75.862 | 0.000 |
| BT2 ← Ecotourism intention | 0.947 | 87.236 | 0.000 |
| BT3 ← Ecotourism intention | 0.939 | 84.212 | 0.000 |
| HE1 ← Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.928 | 57.568 | 0.000 |
| HE2 ← Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.900 | 46.019 | 0.000 |
| HE3 ← Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.888 | 33.889 | 0.000 |
| ID1 ← Ecotourism identity | 0.908 | 36.491 | 0.000 |
| ID2 ← Ecotourism identity | 0.933 | 41.249 | 0.000 |
| ID3 ← Ecotourism identity | 0.899 | 14.742 | 0.000 |
Note(s): Significant at *p < 0.01, t-value >2,576
Reliability test
| Variable | Cronbach's alpha | Rho_A | Compound reliability | Average variance extracted (AVE) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecological attitude | 0.751 | 0.705 | 0.764 | 0.627 |
| Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.891 | 0.906 | 0.931 | 0.819 |
| Ecotourism intention | 0.933 | 0.933 | 0.957 | 0.882 |
| Ecotourism identity | 0.796 | 0.864 | 0.880 | 0.713 |
Discriminant validity test – Fornell and Larcker criterion (AVE)
| Ecological attitude | Hedonism in ecotourism | Intention of tourism in nature | Ecotourism identity | Performs ecotourism | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecological attitude | 0.726 | ||||
| Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.417 | 0.905 | |||
| Ecotourism intention | 0.377 | 0.766 | 0.939 | ||
| Ecotourism identity | 0.418 | 0.832 | 0.756 | 0.845 | |
| Performs ecotourism | 0.310 | 0.662 | 0.670 | 0.602 | 1.000 |
Discriminant validity test – The heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratio
| Ecological attitude | Hedonism in ecotourism | Ecotourism identity | Ecotourism identity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hedonism in ecotourism | 0.586 | |||
| Ecotourism intention | 0.492 | 0.823 | ||
| Ecotourism identity | 0.619 | 0.808 | 0.847 | |
| Performs ecotourism | 0.414 | 0.701 | 0.693 | 0.671 |
Validity of empirical model
| Hypothesis | Validation | Original sample (β) | Statistics t (| O/STDEV|) | p values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1a: Ecological attitude → Hedonism in ecotourism | Supported | 0.417* | 10.945 | 0.000 |
| H1b: Ecological attitude → Ecotourism intention | Not supported | 0.040 | 1.410 | 0.290 |
| H1c: Ecological attitude → Ecotourism identity | Supported | 0.418* | 11.361 | 0.000 |
| H2: Hedonism in ecotourism → Ecotourism intention | Supported | 0.441* | 11.295 | 0.000 |
| H3: Ecotourism intention → Performs ecotourism | Supported | 0.670* | 27.717 | 0.000 |
| H4: Ecotourism identity → Ecotourism intention | Supported | 0.378* | 9.513 | 0.000 |
Note(s): Significant at *p < 0.01, t-value >2,576
References
Agius, K., Theuma, N., Deidun, A. and Camilleri, L. (2019), “Small islands as ecotourism destinations: a central mediterranean perspective”, Island Studies Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 115-136, doi: 10.24043/isj.97.
Agustina, L., Meyliana, M. and Hanny, H. (2022), “Constructing CSR student self-consciousness through university social responsibility implementation: evidence in Indonesia”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-05-2020-0170.
Ahmad, N., Harun, A., Muhammad, H., Khizar, U. and Khalid, J. (2022), “Drivers and barriers of travel behaviors during and post COVID-19 pandemic : a systematic literature review and future agenda”, Journal of Tourism Futures, pp. 1-23, Vol. in press.
Ajzen, I. (2001), “Nature and operation of attitudes”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 27-58, doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27.
Andarani, P., Lestari, D.F., Rezagama, A. and Sariffuddin, S. (2018), “Sustainable ecotourism development based on participatory rural appraisal: a case study of Thekelan Village”.
Beard, J.G. and Ragheb, M.G. (2018), “Measuring leisure motivation”, Journal of Leisure Research. doi: 10.1080/00222216.1983.11969557.
Bui, P.L., Tzu-Ling Chen, C. and Wickens, E. (2021), “Tourism industry resilience issues in urban areas during COVID-19”, International Journal of Tourism Cities, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 861-879.
Camilleri, M.A. (2018), “The tourism industry: an overview”, Travel Marketing, Tourism Economics and the Airline Product, Springer Nature, pp. 3-27, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-49849-2_1.
Carvache-Franco, M., Segarra-Oña, M. and Carrascosa-López, C. (2019), “Motivations analysis in ecotourism through an empirical application: segmentation, characteristics and motivations of the consumer”, Geojournal of Tourism and Geosites, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 60-73, doi: 10.30892/gtg.24106-343.
Carvache-Franco, M., Alvarez-Risco, A., Carvache-Franco, W., Carvache-Franco, O. and Del-Aguila-Arcentales, S. (2022), “Post-COVID-19 pandemic motivations and segmentation in coastal cities: a study in Lima, Peru”, Journal of Tourism Futures, pp. 1-13, Vol. In press.
Chaiken, S. and Baldwin, M.W. (1981), “Affective-cognitive consistency and the effect of salient behavioral information on the self-perception of attitudes”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.41.1.1.
Chang, S. and Chung, G.E. (2018), “Leisure-tourism connection behaviors by life stage and gender”, International Journal of Culture, Tourism, and Hospitality Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 292-309, doi: 10.1108/IJCTHR-03-2018-0036.
Chi, N.T.K. (2022), “Environmentally responsible behaviour in outdoor recreation: the moderating impact of COVID-19 related risk perception”, Journal of Tourism Futures, pp. 1-16, Vol. In press.
Cobbinah, P.B. (2015), “Contextualising the meaning of ecotourism”, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 179-189, doi: 10.1016/j.tmp.2015.07.015.
Cohen, S.A., Prayag, G. and Moital, M. (2014), “Consumer behaviour in tourism: concepts, influences and opportunities”, Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis, Vol. 17 No. 10, pp. 872-909, doi: 10.1080/13683500.2013.850064.
Dagiliūtė, R., Liobikienė, G. and Minelgaitė, A. (2018), “Sustainability at universities: students' perceptions from green and non-green universities”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 181, pp. 473-482, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.213.
Dávid, L. (2011), “Tourism ecology: towards the responsible, sustainable tourism future”, Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 210-216, doi: 10.1108/17554211111142176.
Dodds, R., Walsh, P.R. and Koç, B. (2019), “Environmentally sustainable lifestyle indicators of travelers and expectations for green festivals: the case of Canada”, Event Management, Vol. 23 Nos 4-5, pp. 685-697, doi: 10.3727/152599519X15506259855661.
Dolnicar, S. (2010), “Identifying tourists with smaller environmental footprints”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 717-734, doi: 10.1080/09669581003668516.
Dorofeeva, A.A., Shamayeva, N. and Nyurenberger, L.B. (2020), “Ecotourism as a factor of the development of off-season tourism in southern Russia”, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/421/6/062016.
Elomba, M.N. and Yun, H.J. (2015), “Utilitarianism and hedonism with theory of planned behavior: examining behavioral intentions of tourists”, The Journal of International Trade and Commerce, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 129-142, doi: 10.16980/jitc.11.3.201506.129.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi: 10.2307/3151312.
Garrido Yserte, R. (2007), “Un estudio del impacto de la universidad sobre la economía local: el corredor de Henares, España”, Urbano, Vol. 16, pp. 17-21, available at: http://revistas.ubiobio.cl/index.php/RU/article/view/373.
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W. and Boudreau, M.-C. (2000), “Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 2-76, doi: 10.17705/1CAIS.00407.
Gu, Y., Wang, H., Xu, J., Wang, Y., Wang, X., Robinson, Z.P., Li, F., Wu, J., Tan, J. and Zhi, X. (2019), “Quantification of interlinked environmental footprints on a sustainable university campus: a nexus analysis perspective”, Applied Energy, Vol. 246, pp. 65-76.
Gulwadi, G.B., Mishchenko, E.D., Hallowell, G., Alves, S. and Kennedy, M. (2019), “The restorative potential of a university campus: objective greenness and student perceptions in Turkey and the United States”, Landscape and Urban Planning, Elsevier, Vol. 187, pp. 36-46, doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.03.003.
Gurbuz, I.B. and Ozkan, G. (2019), “What’s going on at the universities? How much has the research revealed university students’ attitudes towards the environment? A case study of Bursa, Turkey”, Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 5109-5138, doi: 10.15666/aeer/1702_51095138.
Hair, J.F.J., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2014), “A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)”, Long Range Planning, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002.
Hair, J.F.J., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), “A primer on partial Least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 46, pp. 1-2, doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002.
Harazneh, I., Al-Tall, R.M., Al-Zyoud, M.F. and Abubakar, A.M. (2018), “Motivational factors for educational tourism: marketing insights”, Management and Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 796-811, doi: 10.2478/mmcks-2018-0006.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing, Vol. 43 No. 1, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
Heyl, M., Díaz, E.M. and Cifuentes, L. (2014), “Environmental attitudes and behaviors of college students: a case study conducted at a Chilean university”, Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologia, Vol. 45 No. 3, p. 487, doi: 10.14349/rlp.v45i3.1489.
Hong, B. and Ma, M.Y. (2019), “Exploration of the charm factors of ecological tourism”, Ekoloji.
Huang, Q., Fei, Y., Yang, H., Gu, X. and Songer, M. (2020), “Giant Panda National Park, a step towards streamlining protected areas and cohesive conservation management in China”, Global Ecology and Conservation. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00947.
Isaac, R.K. and Keijzer, J. (2021), “Leisure travel intention following a period of COVID-19 crisis: a case study of the Dutch market”, International Journal of Tourism Cities, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 583-601, doi: 10.1108/IJTC-08-2020-0158.
Juvan, E. and Dolnicar, S. (2017), “Drivers of pro-environmental tourist behaviours are not universal”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 166, pp. 879-890, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.087.
Kim, C., Park, S.-H. and Seol, B.-M. (2018), “The role of universities for the change of a network structure in the regional business ecosystem”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 77-89, doi: 10.1108/APJIE-04-2018-044.
Ledhesma, M. (2018), Tipos de Turismo: Nueva Clasificación, 1st ed., OMPT, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires.
Li, X., Yu, X., Hou, X., Liu, Y., Li, H., Zhou, Y., Xia, S., Liu, Y., Duan, H., Wang, Y., Dou, Y., Yang, M. and Zhang, L. (2020), “Valuation of Wetland ecosystem services in national nature reserves in China’s coastal Zones”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 8, doi: 10.3390/su12083131.
Li, Z., Zhang, X., Yang, K., Singer, R. and Cui, R. (2021), “Urban and rural tourism under COVID-19 in China: research on the recovery measures and tourism development”, Tourism Review, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 718-736.
Mangrich, C.P., Pavan, L.H., Gomes, F., Oliveira, L., Kos, J. and Martina, J.E. (2019), “Campus regenerative design supported by university Wi-Fi connections”, International Journal of Architectural Computing, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 206-219, doi: 10.1177/1478077119849682.
Martínez Roget, F., Pereira López, X. and Pawlowska, E. (2013), “El Turismo académico en galicia: otra Forma de contribución de Las universidades a Las economías Locales”, Cuadernos de Turismo, Vol. 32, pp. 229-242.
Mees, U. and Schmitt, A. (2008), “Goals of action and emotional reasons for action. A modern version of the theory of ultimate psychological hedonism”, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 157-178, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.2008.00364.x.
Mohsin, A., Lengler, J. and Subramonian, H. (2017), “The influence of Malaysian students' travel motives on their intentions to discover new places and things”, Annals of Leisure Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 490-506, Taylor & Francis, doi: 10.1080/11745398.2017.1309984.
Mondino, E. and Beery, T. (2019), “Ecotourism as a learning tool for sustainable development. The case of Monviso Transboundary Biosphere Reserve, Italy”, Journal of Ecotourism, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 107-121, doi: 10.1080/14724049.2018.1462371.
Muflihaini, M.A., Ertando, A. and Suryadarma (2020), “How is the attitude of students' environmental literacy through the myth of beringin (Ficus sp.) in adiwiyata school?”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1440, pp. 1-10.
Nematpour, M. and Faraji, A. (2019), “Structural analysis of the tourism impacts in the form of future study in developing countries (case study: Iran)”, Journal of Tourism Futures, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 259-282, doi: 10.1108/JTF-05-2018-0028.
Okumus, F., Köseoglu, M.A., Chan, E., Hon, A. and Avci, U. (2019), “How do hotel employees’ environmental attitudes and intentions to implement green practices relate to their ecological behavior?”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Elsevier, Vol. 39, pp. 193-200.
Ounsaneha, W. (2018), “Predictors of behavior intention to develop a green university: a case of an undergraduate university in Thailand”, International Journal of GEOMATE, Vol. 15 No. 49, pp. 162-168, doi: 10.21660/2018.49.7277.
Pasquinelli, C., Trunfio, M., Bellini, N. and Rossi, S. (2022), “Reimagining urban destinations: adaptive and transformative city brand attributes and values in the pandemic crisis”, Cities, Elsevier, Vol. 124 No. 1, p. 103621.
Reid, S.R.M. (2018), “University extension and rural tourism enterprise development: a rare Australian case”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, Elsevier.
Ruhanen, L. (2019), “The prominence of eco in ecotourism experiences: an analysis of post-purchase online reviews”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 39, pp. 110-116, Elsevier, doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.03.006.
Sanjeev, G.M. and Tiwari, S. (2021), “Responding to the coronavirus pandemic: emerging issues and challenges for Indian hospitality and tourism businesses”, Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 563-568.
Sfodera, F., Cain, L.N. and Di Leo, A. (2022), “Is technology everywhere? Exploring Generation Z's perceptions of sustainable tourism in developing countries”, International Hospitality Review, pp. 1-26, Vol. In press.
Stronza, A.L., Hunt, C.A. and Fitzgerald, L.A. (2019), “Ecotourism for conservation?”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 229-253, doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033046.
Thomsen, B., Muurlink, O. and Best, T. (2018), “The political ecology of university-based social entrepreneurship ecosystems”, Journal of Enterprising Communities, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 199-219, doi: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0068.
Tseng, M.L., Lin, C., Remen Lin, C.W., Wu, K.J. and Sriphon, T. (2019), “Ecotourism development in Thailand: community participation leads to the value of attractions using linguistic preferences”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 231, pp. 1319-1329, Elsevier, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.305.
Wondirad, A. (2019), “Does ecotourism contribute to sustainable destination development, or is it just a marketing hoax? Analyzing twenty-five years contested journey of ecotourism through a meta-analysis of tourism journal publications”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 24 No. 11, pp. 1047-1065, doi: 10.1080/10941665.2019.1665557.
Zheng, Q.J., Xu, A.X., Kong, D.Y., Deng, H.P. and Lin, Q.Q. (2018), “Correlation between the environmental knowledge, environmental attitude, and behavioral intention of tourists for ecotourism in China”, Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 51-62, doi: 10.15666/aeer/1601_051062.
Further reading
Mutaliyeva, L., Kurmanov, N. and Akisheva, A. (2020), “Analysis of tourism potential and ecological tourism development in Kazakhstan”, E3S Web of Conferences, Vol. 159, p. 0403, doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202015904031.
Acknowledgements
This study was carried out under the internal innovation project entitled, “Green Path,” one of the research teams at Tourism Research Group (GET) and the group, Tetrix Marketing at the University of Medellín, Colombia. The authors also thank Professors Dora Luz Delgado Díaz and Hermman Eduardo Noreña Betancur for the participation in this study. The authors thank Crimson Interactive Pvt. Ltd. (Enago) – https://www.enago.com/es/ for the assistance in manuscript translation and editing.
Declarations of interest: None.
Compliance with ethical standards: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.