tourism in environmental science

What Is Sustainable Tourism and Why Is It Important?

Sustainable management and socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental impacts are the four pillars of sustainable tourism

• Chapman University

• Harvard University Extension School
• Sustainable Fashion
• Art & Media

What Makes Tourism Sustainable?

The role of tourists, types of sustainable tourism.

Sustainable tourism considers its current and future economic, social, and environmental impacts by addressing the needs of its ecological surroundings and the local communities. This is achieved by protecting natural environments and wildlife when developing and managing tourism activities, providing only authentic experiences for tourists that don’t appropriate or misrepresent local heritage and culture, or creating direct socioeconomic benefits for local communities through training and employment.

As people begin to pay more attention to sustainability and the direct and indirect effects of their actions, travel destinations and organizations are following suit. For example, the New Zealand Tourism Sustainability Commitment is aiming to see every New Zealand tourism business committed to sustainability by 2025, while the island country of Palau has required visitors to sign an eco pledge upon entry since 2017.

Tourism industries are considered successfully sustainable when they can meet the needs of travelers while having a low impact on natural resources and generating long-term employment for locals. By creating positive experiences for local people, travelers, and the industry itself, properly managed sustainable tourism can meet the needs of the present without compromising the future.

What Is Sustainability?

At its core, sustainability focuses on balance — maintaining our environmental, social, and economic benefits without using up the resources that future generations will need to thrive. In the past, sustainability ideals tended to lean towards business, though more modern definitions of sustainability highlight finding ways to avoid depleting natural resources in order to keep an ecological balance and maintain the quality of environmental and human societies.

Since tourism impacts and is impacted by a wide range of different activities and industries, all sectors and stakeholders (tourists, governments, host communities, tourism businesses) need to collaborate on sustainable tourism in order for it to be successful.

The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) , which is the United Nations agency responsible for the promotion of sustainable tourism, and the Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC) , the global standard for sustainable travel and tourism, have similar opinions on what makes tourism sustainable. By their account, sustainable tourism should make the best use of environmental resources while helping to conserve natural heritage and biodiversity, respect the socio-culture of local host communities, and contribute to intercultural understanding. Economically, it should also ensure viable long-term operations that will provide benefits to all stakeholders, whether that includes stable employment to locals, social services, or contributions to poverty alleviation.

The GSTC has developed a series of criteria to create a common language about sustainable travel and tourism. These criteria are used to distinguish sustainable destinations and organizations, but can also help create sustainable policies for businesses and government agencies. Arranged in four pillars, the global baseline standards include sustainable management, socioeconomic impact, cultural impacts, and environmental impacts.

Travel Tip:

The GSTC is an excellent resource for travelers who want to find sustainably managed destinations and accommodations and learn how to become a more sustainable traveler in general.

Environment 

Protecting natural environments is the bedrock of sustainable tourism. Data released by the World Tourism Organization estimates that tourism-based CO2 emissions are forecast to increase 25% by 2030. In 2016, tourism transport-related emissions contributed to 5% of all man-made emissions, while transport-related emissions from long-haul international travel were expected to grow 45% by 2030.

The environmental ramifications of tourism don’t end with carbon emissions, either. Unsustainably managed tourism can create waste problems, lead to land loss or soil erosion, increase natural habitat loss, and put pressure on endangered species . More often than not, the resources in these places are already scarce, and sadly, the negative effects can contribute to the destruction of the very environment on which the industry depends.

Industries and destinations that want to be sustainable must do their part to conserve resources, reduce pollution, and conserve biodiversity and important ecosystems. In order to achieve this, proper resource management and management of waste and emissions is important. In Bali, for example, tourism consumes 65% of local water resources, while in Zanzibar, tourists use 15 times as much water per night as local residents.

Another factor to environmentally focused sustainable tourism comes in the form of purchasing: Does the tour operator, hotel, or restaurant favor locally sourced suppliers and products? How do they manage their food waste and dispose of goods? Something as simple as offering paper straws instead of plastic ones can make a huge dent in an organization’s harmful pollutant footprint.

Recently, there has been an uptick in companies that promote carbon offsetting . The idea behind carbon offsetting is to compensate for generated greenhouse gas emissions by canceling out emissions somewhere else. Much like the idea that reducing or reusing should be considered first before recycling , carbon offsetting shouldn’t be the primary goal. Sustainable tourism industries always work towards reducing emissions first and offset what they can’t.

Properly managed sustainable tourism also has the power to provide alternatives to need-based professions and behaviors like poaching . Often, and especially in underdeveloped countries, residents turn to environmentally harmful practices due to poverty and other social issues. At Periyar Tiger Reserve in India, for example, an unregulated increase in tourists made it more difficult to control poaching in the area. In response, an eco development program aimed at providing employment for locals turned 85 former poachers into reserve gamekeepers. Under supervision of the reserve’s management staff, the group of gamekeepers have developed a series of tourism packages and are now protecting land instead of exploiting it. They’ve found that jobs in responsible wildlife tourism are more rewarding and lucrative than illegal work.

Flying nonstop and spending more time in a single destination can help save CO2, since planes use more fuel the more times they take off.

Local Culture and Residents

One of the most important and overlooked aspects of sustainable tourism is contributing to protecting, preserving, and enhancing local sites and traditions. These include areas of historical, archaeological, or cultural significance, but also "intangible heritage," such as ceremonial dance or traditional art techniques.

In cases where a site is being used as a tourist attraction, it is important that the tourism doesn’t impede access to local residents. For example, some tourist organizations create local programs that offer residents the chance to visit tourism sites with cultural value in their own countries. A program called “Children in the Wilderness” run by Wilderness Safaris educates children in rural Africa about the importance of wildlife conservation and valuable leadership development tools. Vacations booked through travel site Responsible Travel contribute to the company’s “Trip for a Trip” program, which organizes day trips for disadvantaged youth who live near popular tourist destinations but have never had the opportunity to visit.

Sustainable tourism bodies work alongside communities to incorporate various local cultural expressions as part of a traveler’s experiences and ensure that they are appropriately represented. They collaborate with locals and seek their input on culturally appropriate interpretation of sites, and train guides to give visitors a valuable (and correct) impression of the site. The key is to inspire travelers to want to protect the area because they understand its significance.

Bhutan, a small landlocked country in South Asia, has enforced a system of all-inclusive tax for international visitors since 1997 ($200 per day in the off season and $250 per day in the high season). This way, the government is able to restrict the tourism market to local entrepreneurs exclusively and restrict tourism to specific regions, ensuring that the country’s most precious natural resources won’t be exploited.

Incorporating volunteer work into your vacation is an amazing way to learn more about the local culture and help contribute to your host community at the same time. You can also book a trip that is focused primarily on volunteer work through a locally run charity or non profit (just be sure that the job isn’t taking employment opportunities away from residents).

It's not difficult to make a business case for sustainable tourism, especially if one looks at a destination as a product. Think of protecting a destination, cultural landmark, or ecosystem as an investment. By keeping the environment healthy and the locals happy, sustainable tourism will maximize the efficiency of business resources. This is especially true in places where locals are more likely to voice their concerns if they feel like the industry is treating visitors better than residents.

Not only does reducing reliance on natural resources help save money in the long run, studies have shown that modern travelers are likely to participate in environmentally friendly tourism. In 2019, Booking.com found that 73% of travelers preferred an eco-sustainable hotel over a traditional one and 72% of travelers believed that people need to make sustainable travel choices for the sake of future generations.

Always be mindful of where your souvenirs are coming from and whether or not the money is going directly towards the local economy. For example, opt for handcrafted souvenirs made by local artisans.

Growth in the travel and tourism sectors alone has outpaced the overall global economy growth for nine years in a row. Prior to the pandemic, travel and tourism accounted for an $9.6 trillion contribution to the global GDP and 333 million jobs (or one in four new jobs around the world).

Sustainable travel dollars help support employees, who in turn pay taxes that contribute to their local economy. If those employees are not paid a fair wage or aren’t treated fairly, the traveler is unknowingly supporting damaging or unsustainable practices that do nothing to contribute to the future of the community. Similarly, if a hotel doesn’t take into account its ecological footprint, it may be building infrastructure on animal nesting grounds or contributing to excessive pollution. The same goes for attractions, since sustainably managed spots (like nature preserves) often put profits towards conservation and research.

Costa Rica was able to turn a severe deforestation crisis in the 1980s into a diversified tourism-based economy by designating 25.56% of land protected as either a national park, wildlife refuge, or reserve.

While traveling, think of how you would want your home country or home town to be treated by visitors.

Are You a Sustainable Traveler?

Sustainable travelers understand that their actions create an ecological and social footprint on the places they visit. Be mindful of the destinations , accommodations, and activities you choose, and choose destinations that are closer to home or extend your length of stay to save resources. Consider switching to more environmentally friendly modes of transportation such as bicycles, trains, or walking while on vacation. Look into supporting locally run tour operations or local family-owned businesses rather than large international chains. Don’t engage in activities that harm wildlife, such as elephant riding or tiger petting , and opt instead for a wildlife sanctuary (or better yet, attend a beach clean up or plan an hour or two of some volunteer work that interests you). Leave natural areas as you found them by taking out what you carry in, not littering, and respecting the local residents and their traditions.

Most of us travel to experience the world. New cultures, new traditions, new sights and smells and tastes are what makes traveling so rewarding. It is our responsibility as travelers to ensure that these destinations are protected not only for the sake of the communities who rely upon them, but for a future generation of travelers.

Sustainable tourism has many different layers, most of which oppose the more traditional forms of mass tourism that are more likely to lead to environmental damage, loss of culture, pollution, negative economic impacts, and overtourism.

Ecotourism highlights responsible travel to natural areas that focus on environmental conservation. A sustainable tourism body supports and contributes to biodiversity conservation by managing its own property responsibly and respecting or enhancing nearby natural protected areas (or areas of high biological value). Most of the time, this looks like a financial compensation to conservation management, but it can also include making sure that tours, attractions, and infrastructure don’t disturb natural ecosystems.

On the same page, wildlife interactions with free roaming wildlife should be non-invasive and managed responsibly to avoid negative impacts to the animals. As a traveler, prioritize visits to accredited rescue and rehabilitation centers that focus on treating, rehoming, or releasing animals back into the wild, such as the Jaguar Rescue Center in Costa Rica.

Soft Tourism

Soft tourism may highlight local experiences, local languages, or encourage longer time spent in individual areas. This is opposed to hard tourism featuring short duration of visits, travel without respecting culture, taking lots of selfies , and generally feeling a sense of superiority as a tourist.

Many World Heritage Sites, for example, pay special attention to protection, preservation, and sustainability by promoting soft tourism. Peru’s famed Machu Picchu was previously known as one of the world’s worst victims of overtourism , or a place of interest that has experienced negative effects (such as traffic or litter) from excessive numbers of tourists. The attraction has taken steps to control damages in recent years, requiring hikers to hire local guides on the Inca Trail, specifying dates and time on visitor tickets to negate overcrowding, and banning all single use plastics from the site.

Traveling during a destination’s shoulder season , the period between the peak and low seasons, typically combines good weather and low prices without the large crowds. This allows better opportunities to immerse yourself in a new place without contributing to overtourism, but also provides the local economy with income during a normally slow season.

Rural Tourism

Rural tourism applies to tourism that takes place in non-urbanized areas such as national parks, forests, nature reserves, and mountain areas. This can mean anything from camping and glamping to hiking and WOOFing. Rural tourism is a great way to practice sustainable tourism, since it usually requires less use of natural resources.

Community Tourism

Community-based tourism involves tourism where local residents invite travelers to visit their own communities. It sometimes includes overnight stays and often takes place in rural or underdeveloped countries. This type of tourism fosters connection and enables tourists to gain an in-depth knowledge of local habitats, wildlife, and traditional cultures — all while providing direct economic benefits to the host communities. Ecuador is a world leader in community tourism, offering unique accommodation options like the Sani Lodge run by the local Kichwa indigenous community, which offers responsible cultural experiences in the Ecuadorian Amazon rainforest.

" Transport-related CO 2  Emissions of the Tourism Sector – Modelling Results ." World Tourism Organization and International Transport Forum , 2019, doi:10.18111/9789284416660

" 45 Arrivals Every Second ." The World Counts.

Becken, Susanne. " Water Equity- Contrasting Tourism Water Use With That of the Local Community ." Water Resources and Industry , vol. 7-8, 2014, pp. 9-22, doi:10.1016/j.wri.2014.09.002

Kutty, Govindan M., and T.K. Raghavan Nair. " Periyar Tiger Reserve: Poachers Turned Gamekeepers ." Food and Agriculture Organization.

" GSTC Destination Criteria ." Global Sustainable Tourism Council.

Rinzin, Chhewang, et al. " Ecotourism as a Mechanism for Sustainable Development: the Case of Bhutan ." Environmental Sciences , vol. 4, no. 2, 2007, pp. 109-125, doi:10.1080/15693430701365420

" Booking.com Reveals Key Findings From Its 2019 Sustainable Travel Report ." Booking.com.

" Economic Impact Reports ." World Travel and Tourism Council .

• Costa Rica’s Keys to Success as a Sustainable Tourism Pioneer
• How to Be a Sustainable Traveler: 18 Tips
• Regenerative Travel: What It Is and How It's Outperforming Sustainable Tourism
• What Is Experiential Tourism?
• What Is Ecotourism? Definition, Examples, and Pros and Cons
• What Is Community-Based Tourism? Definition and Popular Destinations
• 3 More Rules for Sustainable Tourism
• What Is Overtourism and Why Is It Such a Big Problem?
• How to Become a Geo-Traveler
• What Is Voluntourism? Does It Help or Harm Communities?
• The World Doesn't Want Your Inukshuk
• 8 Incredible Rainforest Destinations Around the World
• 'Scattered Hotels' Are Saving Historic Villages in Italy and Beyond
• 15 Travel Destinations Being Ruined by Tourism
• How to Make Travel More Sustainable
• What's Special About the Faroe Islands

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 16 August 2024

Sustainable tourism in the Tremiti Islands (South Italy)

• Francesca Ranieri 1 ,
• Gianfranco D’Onghia 2 , 5 ,
• Antonio Felice Uricchio 3 , 6 ,
• Ranieri Ada Cristina 4 , 7 ,
• Luigi Lopopolo 2 &
• Ezio Ranieri 2  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  19021 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

197 Accesses

Metrics details

• Climate-change policy
• Environmental economics
• Environmental impact
• Sustainability

An analysis of the pressure factors that influence the sustainable tourism in the Tremiti Islands (TI) has been performed. Tourist’s fluxes have been investigated in terms of monthly arrival and presences showing a high value of the territorial exploitation index with high number of arrivals, particularly in August, and low occupancy rate. Effects of climatic change has been analyzed in TI with reference to the increase of average air and sea temperature in the islands. Some measures of contrast to climate change and to favour sustainable tourism have been discussed also. The CO 2 emissions by ferries transport, solid waste and wastewater treatment have been calculated. Environmental taxation for sustainable tourism aimed tat CO 2 content reduction is also assessed identifying the value in 1.47 €/capita on the basis of the tourist arrivals and presences considering the environmental cost for CO 2 removal and showing that tourism taxation should be well accepted if funds are destined to environmental purposes.

Similar content being viewed by others

Comparative study of the environmental footprints of marinas on European Islands

Fishing in the city for food—a paradigmatic case of sustainability in urban blue space

The benefits of tourism for rural community development

Introduction.

The Tremiti Islands (TI) are located in Apulia, Southeast of Italy, and consist of five islands: San Domino (the largest), San Nicola, Capraia, Cretaccio (little more than a large rock) and Pianosa (11 miles from Capraia), for a total extension of 3.34 km 2 ; it is 12.5 miles from the nearest town in the Gargano (Torre Mileto, a hamlet of Sannicandro Garganico). The emerged surface of the archipelago is part of the Gargano National Park. Tremiti Islands are one of the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) in the Mediterranean Sea.

The Mediterranean Sea is a densely populated region where multiple human activities have placed stress on biodiversity, food webs, and ecosystems for centuries 1 , 2 , 3 . The Mediterranean coastal region is home to more than 150,000,000 people and is by far the largest global tourism destination, attracting almost a third of the world’s international tourists annually (343,000,000 out of 980,000,000 worldwide in 2014, with a projection of 500,000,000 by 2030 4 . The demand for marine resources and space is quite high, leading many users to oppose the establishment of MPAs. This is because such conservation measures may limit or displace activities such as local commercial and recreational fishing, boating, and diving. In such situations, it is crucial to understand whether MPAs are actually effective and under what circumstances. This can help raise awareness among the public and decision-makers, and guide decisions about creating, maintaining, expanding, managing, enforcing, and supporting MPAs.

One of the areas most affected by the tourism phenomenon in Puglia is the Tremiti Islands archipelago. The Italian Institute of Statistics, ISTAT, which recently classified the Italian municipalities by tourist areas prevalent concerning tourist density and territorial vocations, has defined the municipality of the Tremiti Islands as a “municipality with a maritime vocation and with a cultural, historical, artistic and maritime, cultural” 5 . The Tremiti Islands municipality boasts a unique blend of natural and man-made heritage. Its natural elements—such as inlets, sea caves, stunning views, and diverse underwater ecosystems—are a sight to behold. The island’s archaeological sites, like Greco-Roman tombs, and architectural landmarks, such as the fortified walls and the Abbey of San Nicola, are equally impressive. The monastery, which was home to three different religious orders from 1000 to 1700, is another must-see attraction. Overall, the archipelago’s rich heritage makes it a perfect destination for tourism.

The Tremiti islands are now in a delicate balance between the delicacy of their natural beauty and the high pressure of tourist fluxes.

Human activity, through the emission of greenhouse gases, has caused global warming, resulting in a significant increase in the global surface temperature of the earth and oceans, and coastal areas are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 .

TI are also subject to the effects of climate change, regarding the rise of the average and maximum temperatures of the air and water which can have consequences in the management of sustainable tourism. In TI, different approaches should be taken to manage the indirect impacts of climate change on tourism, depending on the specific impacts under consideration for sustainable tourism. For example, implementing a program to reduce CO 2 emissions, preserving biodiversity in the TI, optimizing waste collection and disposal, reducing organic and inorganic pollution and managing the increased risk of forest fires in the interior 10 , 11 . All these climate change adaptation measures should include specific actions for the environmental, social and economic sectors, as well as tailor-made adaptation measures for well-managed and participatory sustainable tourism 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 . In TI, sustainable tourism development is closely linked to ecotourism, a form of tourism based on natural resources that preserves environmental sustainability and develops people's well-being. It should be characterized by community participation and conservation for the sustainable development of the MPA as a key strategy for environmental education 11 , 16 , 17 , 18 .

The problem of the negative impact of tourism on the environment in TI arises from the growth of mass tourism.

The aim of this paper is to discuss principal aspects affecting sustainable tourism in the Tremiti Islands including tourist’ fluxes, climate change, and environmental taxation suggesting measures to promote an environmental awareness in the management of tourism at the Tremiti Islands.

The specific objectives of the paper are:

To analyze the tourist fluxes during the year at TI

To illustrate the effects of climate change in TI

To assess the CO 2 emissions correlated to solid waste, wastewater and ferry transport

To propose measures to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change

To determine the value of an environmental tax necessary to facilitate sustainable tourism development.

Dataset and statistics

The tourist arrival and presence data were obtained from “Osservatorio Turistico Regionale 2019,” while the climatic data were sourced from “Protezione Civile Puglia, Annali Idrologici – Parte 1 (2021)” and ERA5 global reanalysis Hersbach 19 , 20 , 21 .

The accuracy of the linear regressions of the climatic data was evaluated by calculating the R-squared values. For the tourist data, a one-way ANOVA was performed to determine significant differences between the values. Correlation tests were also carried out to confirm the trends observed in the regressions.

Tourists fluxes pressure index

In the Tremiti Islands, there is predominant tourism characterized by high seasonality with short-term stays and a notable density of tourists especially in the months of July and August. The month of August alone accounts for 35% of the annual tourist presences with 20,859 presences as illustrated in Fig.  1 .

Total tourist presences and arrivals at TI during the year.

These data confirm the Apulian seaside tourism vocation. This seasonal tourism is concentrated in July and August and alone covers more than 51% of annual tourist presences (Osservatorio Turistico Regionale, 2021) 19 .

Another critical issue regards the daily arrivals, 73,240 in August, at TI. Every day, in August, as average 20,859 represents the number of the presences, i.e., the number of the tourists that are sleeping in the islands, and 52,381 are the one-day tourists who contribute significantly at the tourism pressure index and to the CO 2 emissions.

The use of Mediterranean islands, including the TI, by both the resident population and tourists is often evaluated using a Territorial Exploitation Index. This index measures the pressure on the environment caused by tourists and the resident population from the demand side. It calculates the impact of tourist arrivals and residents on the total area of the territory. The value of this index can be seen as an indirect measure of the pressure that tourists and residents put on the region’s infrastructure 22 , whereby:

TEI = (arrivals/area(km 2 ) + residents/area (km 2 ))/100.

This indicator makes it possible to classify islands according to the degree of exploitation of their territory. The Tremiti Islands Territorial Exploitation Index is equal to 59.8, one of the highest in Mediterranean. This means that TI have a high tourism pressure index, but Tremiti islands have also a low occupancy rate, because the supply of bed spaces is being underutilized, so a design growth strategy is needed 22 , 23 .

Throughout the Mediterranean, the tourism sector is economically important in terms of job creation, infrastructure development and foreign exchange. Tourism policies aimed at moving towards sustainability should be focused on seasonality reduction, tourism restraint and the upgrading of, but not increasing supply of tourism 22 , 24 . In these territories, which are often fragile and highly vulnerable to tourist activities, as well as being characterized by developmental backwardness, the strategies to be defined and approaches to be followed must consider the peculiarities of the islands 25 .

Case study of Tremiti Islands.

Climate change at ti.

A progressive increase of the effects of climate change has been evidenced over the last 40 years throughout the Mediterranean and in the Mediterranean islands 26 . Climate change contributes to the progressive decline of these islands’ extraordinarily rich marine biodiversity 27 . Since they are islands, they are more exposed to marine risks than mainland locations 28 , 29 . They share common vulnerabilities to climate change, derived from low economic diversification and capacity for sewage treatment, among other aspects. They are also characterized by having less climate-related data to inform decision-making, compared to the mainland 30 . Climatic conditions have also changed in the Tremiti islands with an increase of the average air temperature and of the average sea temperature over the last 40 years as shown in Figs.  2 , 3 .

Tremiti Islands—Average and max. extreme air temperature in the last 40 years.

Tremiti Islands—Average Sea temperature in the last 40 years.

Figure  2 shows a constant trend of increasing air temperature over the last 40 years, which is remarkable for the average maximum temperature.

Figure  3 shows the increase in average seawater temperature in the range of about 1.5 ℃ in the last 40 years, with serious implications for marine flora and fauna.

Calculation of CO 2 from the tourist fluxes

CO 2 production has been calculated as the contribution of Ferry Transport, Solid Waste and Wastewater Treatment.

CO 2 from ferries transport

The Tremiti Islands can be reached from five ports: Port of Vasto (Abruzzo); Port of Peschici (Apulia); Port of Termoli (Molise); Port of Vieste (Apulia) and Port of Rodi Garganico (Apulia).

The average speed of the ferries is 19 knots per hour (35 km/h) and the average diesel consumption is 2700 l/h (0.0132 km/l). One litre of diesel produces about 2.66 kg of CO 2 , so according to similar calculations, ferry transport produces about 201 kg CO 2 /km 31 .

Total Ferries routes are 300 in August and 46 km is the average distance between Italian ports and TI, the total ferries routes cover a distance of 13,800 km.

The total number of tourists transported, arrivals and presences, in the Tremiti Islands in August is 73,240. A total of 13,800 * 201 = 2773.8 t of CO 2 /August is produced by the ferries and 2,773.8:73,240 = 0.038 t of CO 2 /tourist*day is produced by each tourist in August including the one-day tourists.

CO 2 from solid waste

The seasonal nature of tourism also requires additional efforts from local authorities to provide services such as policing, traffic control, water management and waste management. The seasonality of tourism greatly amplifies the impact of tourism on waste management. It also shows that this additional impact comes through scale effects, with seasonality making it harder to manage solid waste at optimal scale. Therefore, relating to the size of touristic seasonal flow of presences, it should be preferred a lower number of tourists who stay longer over a larger number of short stays 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 . It is assumed that 1 kg of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) produces 1.11 kg CO 2 , mainly due to CH 4 content and emission, and collection and transport 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 .

101,740 kg of USW are produced by tourists in August (Apulian Osservatorio Regionale Rifiuti, 2021) so an amount of 101,740 * 1.11 kg CO 2 /kg MSW = 112,931.5 kg CO 2 is expected in the month of August by tourists wastes. 112,931.5 kg CO 2 : 73,240 = 1.54 kg CO 2 /tourist*day are produced in the month of August per capita. Therefore, 112.93 t CO 2 are estimated to be produced by tourists as total in August for the disposal of Municipal Solid Wastes.

CO 2 from wastewater treatment

Wastewater treatment is primary source of CO 2 due to CO 2 biogenic direct emission and to fossil CO 2 correlated to electric energy consumption in wastewater treatment plants 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 . According to Ranieri et al. (2023b) 44 , a tourist produces 125 kg/year*capita and therefore 0.342 kg CO 2 /capita per day is produced by a tourist in wastewater treatment, mainly due to electrical energy and the sludge treatment line 14 .

Considering that the total number of arrivals of tourists in the Tremiti Islands in August is 73,240, calculated in 31 days of August, a quantity of 25.08 t of CO 2 is produced by tourists in August through wastewater treatment.

Total CO 2 Contributes

Taking into account the three sources of CO 2 sources – ferries, waste and wastewaters—(2,773.8 tCO 2 /month, 112.93 tCO 2 /month, 25.08 tCO 2 /month) produced by tourists in August in the Tremiti Islands, a quantity of 2,911.81 tCO 2 /August is expected and a quantity of 0.04 tCO 2 /day*capita produced by a tourist as average in one day based on the August arrivals.

Results and discussion

Climatological data collected at TI showed a clear tendency to the increase of the average temperature of the sea water and air temperature. Meanwhile a positive effect should regard the extension of the touristic season and bathing period due to warmer air and sea water temperature. This trend can result in a serious modification of the sea marine habitat with negative effects for a lot of vegetal and animal species of the Adriatic Sea. So, some measures to contrast the climate change have been outlined at TI.

Measures for GHGs reduction and to contrast to climate change at TI

In order to face the effects of climate change at local and global level some contrast measures are suggested for their implementation in TI.

These measures of contrast to climate change should be addressed for achieving the Ecological Management Effectiveness (EME) of MPAs and to favor sustainable tourism that is the degree to which TI-MPA reaches his ecological goals 51 .

EME refers to the achievement of ecological goals and is the most frequently assessed aspect of MPA management effectiveness 51 , 52 . It is usually assessed by comparing one or more biological descriptors -e.g., density, size and biomass of species, species richness- or assemblages' patterns inside and outside protected areas 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 .

The contrast measures may include:

Incentive for tourists out of the season; this is facilitated by the average increase in temperatures and the lengthening of the bathing season observed at TI;

Energy: development and dissemination of interventions and practices aimed at reducing energy consumption

Water: rationalization of the use of water

Wastewater: implementation of affination and reuse of wastewater for irrigation of agriculture or green areas 59 , 60 , 61 , 62

Trees and green areas: plantation of endemic specie to contrast land degradation and CO 2 emissions

Solid Waste: reduction separate collection and sustainable management of waste

Food and products: rationalization, promotion of the short chain

Awareness raising: training and promotion of practices with reduced environmental impact

Plastics: reducing the use of plastics on all the islands. In this regard, the local municipality has already banned all plastic plates, cups and utensils on the Tremiti Islands from 1 May 2018.

Environmental taxation for sustainable tourism

These environmental measures can be financed by application tourism/environment taxes. In the recent years tourism taxes have been largely used in Italy but principally as method to store funds aimed at supporting tourist services 63 .

The use of the tourism taxation has proved its general acceptability, contrary to the opinion of many tourism facility managers who frequently complain about the negative impact that this fiscal policy could have on the number of tourists and on the length of their stays 64 .

Environmental purposes are also well accepted as a destination for tourism tax funds.

Some authors (Rotaris and Carrozzo, 2019) 65 demonstrate also that the Willingness To Pay (WTP) for the tourism tax depends not only on the vacation and the tourist type but also on how the tax revenue is used. Thus, if no mention is made of the use of the tax revenues, the WTP can be as low as € 0.85 per person per night. If the tax revenues are used to improve and to protect the environment, the WTP can be as high as € 3.96 65 . This environmental contribution is an environmental tax for tourism purposes in the wrong sense, because the protection of the environment is not included in the taxable case, but the revenue from the contribution is intended to repair the damage caused by tourists in the marine reserve of the Tremiti Islands 66 . Similarly, the Government of the Autonomous Community of the Balearic Islands has proposed the introduction of an environmental tax on visitors in order to internalize external environmental costs 67 in the sense of a Pigouvian tax.

Social cost of carbon at Tremiti Islands

Environmental measures are very fundamental to promote the sustainable tourism but can be also quantified using economical method that can prove their financial sustainability.

According to Visintin et al. (2022) 64 , a Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) can be adopted as monetary conversion factor. The SCC is the marginal cost of damage caused by carbon emissions or the marginal benefit resulting from reduced greenhouse gas emissions 64 . In our analysis, the SCC damage cost was assumed to be 36.92 €/tCO2. So, 36.92 * 0.04 = 1.47 €/capita*day, it is the cost necessary to compensate the quantity of CO 2 produced by a tourist in one day, and this value should be the environmental tax to be considered. Considering the low occupancy rate for the bed occupancy and to limiting the phenomena of one day tourism the tax should be applied “una tantum” just for the arrivals and then equal to 1.47 €/capita*day.

Finally, it is fundamental to create and maintain a network among all stakeholder in the MPA and Tremiti Islands in particular management to support the economic growth and sustainable tourism.

Conclusions

The touristic fluxes have been analyzed in the Tremiti Islands showing that the territorial exploitation index: (arrivals/area + population/area)/100 is very high in comparison with other Mediterranean islands and the tourist pressure index – (overnight stays + population)/area – reveals that the tourism and population pressure is high in proportion to the island area but there is a low occupancy rate in the Tremiti archipelago.

The climatic conditions of the Tremiti islands are varied at with an increase in the average sea temperature and in the average air temperature during last decade.

Several measures of contrast for the climatic changes regarding the tourism and the existing infrastructures have been outlined.

These measures have also a positive return in terms of environmental balance considering the value for the greenhouse gases reduction.

Finally, these measures may be financed by environmental taxes estimated in 1.47 €/person*day that have been showed that are well perceived by tourists if they have consciousness that they are visiting a well-managed area with respect to the territory and to all the environments.

The sustainable tourism policy should be implemented in the Tremiti Islands, but it needs to be strengthened by adopting specific measures 16 , especially regarding the reduction of CO 2 emissions and all the environmental issues illustrated.

Data availability

All data analysed during this study are included in this published article.

Coll, M. et al. The Mediterranean sea under siege: Spatial overlap between marine biodiversity, cumulative threats and marine reserves: The Mediterranean sea under siege. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 21 , 465–480 (2012).

Article   Google Scholar  

Giakoumi, S. et al. Towards a framework for assessment and management of cumulative human impacts on marine food webs. Conserv. Biol. 29 , 1228–1234 (2015).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brander, L. M. et al. The global costs and benefits of expanding marine protected areas. Mar. Policy 116 , 103953 (2020).

Guidetti, P. & Sala, E. Community-wide effects of marine reserves in the Mediterranean sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 335 , 43–56 (2007).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

ISTAT. Rapporto Annuale 2022. La situazione del Paese (ISTAT, Chicago, 2022).

Google Scholar  

IPCC. Climate change 2023: Synthesis report in contribution of working groups I, II and III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC, Geneva, 2023).

Menduni, G. et al. Measurement of methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia in atmosphere with a compact quartz-enhanced photoacoustic sensor. Sens. Actuators B: Chem. 375 , 132953 (2023).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ranieri, E. et al. Influence of climate change on wastewater treatment plants performances and energy costs in Apulia, south Italy. Chemosphere 350 , 141087 (2024).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wang, B. et al. Impact of climate change on the dynamic processes of marine environment and feedback mechanisms: An overview. Arch. Computat. Methods Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-024-10072-z (2024).

Ranieri, E. et al. Sampling, characterisation and processing of solid recovered fuel production from municipal solid waste: An Italian plant case study. Waste Manag. Res. 35 , 890–898 (2017).

Ranieri, F. Grilli, L. De Lucia, C. Pazienza, P. Evaluation of the tourism carrying capacity: the case study of the Tremiti Islands. In Proceedings of the 10th International Tourism Conference, Tourism priorities & challenges: Recovery & Resilience, Barcelona, Spain, June 27, 2023, pp. 107- 129. (2023a) ISBN: 978-84-09-12684-2

Liu, Z. Sustainable tourism development: A critique. J. Sustain. Tour. 11 , 459–475 (2003).

Buongiorno, A. & Intini, M. Sustainable tourism and mobility development in natural protected areas: Evidence from Apulia. Land Use Policy 101 , 105220 (2021).

Ranieri, E. et al. Compensatory measures to reduce GHGs in wastewater treatment plants in southern Italy. J. Water Process Eng. 60 , 105128 (2024).

Parete, G. et al. Climate impacts and adaptation strategies for coastal erosion, aquaculture, and tourism along the Adriatic side of Apulia region. Front. Clim. 6 , 1378253 (2024).

Franceschelli, V. From tourism to sustainable tourism. In Sustainable tourism law 37–100 (ESHTE, Barcelona, 2018).

Cusumano, M. Sustainable approaches and business challenges. In Times of crisis (eds Negrușa, A. L. & Coroş, M. M.) 29–43 (Springer Nature, 2024).

Zhu, K. et al. Regional sustainability: Pressures and responses of tourism economy and ecological environment in the Yangtze river basin, China. Front. Ecol. Evol. 11 , 1148868 (2023).

Agenzia Regionale del Turismo PUGLIAPROMOZIONE. Dati. (2021). at < https://www.agenziapugliapromozione.it/portal/osservatorio-del-turismo >

Hersbach, H. et al. The ERA5 global reanalysis. Quart. J. Royal Meteor. Soc. 146 , 1999–2049 (2020).

Protezione Civile Puglia. Annali Idrologici - Parte 1. (2022). at < https://protezionecivile.puglia.it/annali-idrologici-parte-i >

Ruggieri, G. & Calò, P. Tourism dynamics and sustainability: A comparative analysis between Mediterranean islands—evidence for post-COVID-19 strategies. Sustainability 14 , 4183 (2022).

Ruggieri, G. Tourism in Mediterranean islands: A comparative analysis. In Island tourism: Sustainable perspectives (eds Carlsen, J. & Butler, R.) 186–196 (CAB International, London, 2011).

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Dodds, R. Sustainable tourism and policy implementation: Lessons from the case of Calviá Spain. Curr. Issues Tour. 10 , 296–322 (2007).

Figueroa, B. The economics of sustainable tourism: making green and cultural viable. in (2004).

Kalimeris, A., Ranieri, E., Founda, D. & Norrant, C. Variability modes of precipitation along a Central Mediterranean area and their relations with ENSO, NAO, and other climatic patterns. Atmos. Res. 198 , 56–80 (2017).

Rilov, G. et al. Adaptive marine conservation planning in the face of climate change: What can we learn from physiological, ecological and genetic studies?. Global Ecol. Conserv. 17 , e00566 (2019).

González Hernández, M. M., León, C. J., García, C. & Lam-González, Y. E. Assessing the climate-related risk of marine biodiversity degradation for coastal and marine tourism. Ocean Coast. Manage. 232 , 106436 (2023).

Gumusay, M. U., Bakirman, T., Tuney Kizilkaya, I. & Aykut, N. O. A review of seagrass detection, mapping and monitoring applications using acoustic systems. Eur. J. Remote Sens 52 , 1–29 (2019).

Jorda, G. et al. Ocean warming compresses the three-dimensional habitat of marine life. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4 , 109–114 (2019).

Pagano, D., Caserini, S., De Marco, S., Campo, F. & Grosso, M. Analisi dei dati del traffico marittimo per la stima delle emissioni di co2 dalle navi e del potenziale di alcalinizzazione del mar mediterraneo (In Italian). IdA 7 , 175–186 (2020).

Ciudin, R. et al. Vacuum waste collection system for an historical city centre. U.P.B. Sci. Bull. 76 (215), 222 (2014).

Ranieri, E., Antognoni, S., Istrate, I. & Apostol, T. Municipal solid waste management in Italian and Romanian tourist areas. UPB Sci. Bull. 76 (277), 288 (2014).

Ranieri, E., Rada, E. C., Ragazzi, M., Masi, S. & Montanaro, C. Critical analysis of the integration of residual municipal solid waste incineration and selective collection in two Italian tourist areas. Waste Manag. Res. 32 , 551–555 (2014).

Sgobba, F. et al. Quartz-enhanced photoacoustic detection of ethane in the near-IR exploiting a highly performant spectrophone. Appl. Sci. 10 , 2447 (2020).

Caponi, V. The economic and environmental effects of seasonality of tourism: A look at solid waste. Ecol. Econ. 192 , 107262 (2022).

European Environment Agency. Waste opportunities: Past and future climate benefits from better municipal waste management in Europe (EEA Copenhagen, 2011).

Wang, Z. & Geng, L. Carbon emissions calculation from municipal solid waste and the influencing factors analysis in China. J. Clean. Prod. 104 , 177–184 (2015).

Obersteiner, G., Gollnow, S. & Eriksson, M. Carbon footprint reduction potential of waste management strategies in tourism. Environ. Dev. 39 , 100617 (2021).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Bovea, M. D., Ibáñez-Forés, V., Gallardo, A. & Colomer-Mendoza, F. J. Environmental assessment of alternative municipal solid waste management strategies a Spanish case study. Waste Manag. 30 , 2383–2395 (2010).

Verma, R. L. & Borongan, G. Emissions of greenhouse gases from municipal solid waste management system in Ho Chi Minh city of Viet Nam. Urban Sci. 6 , 78 (2022).

Van Lienden, C., Shan, L., Rao, S., Ranieri, E. & Young, T. M. Metals removal from stormwater by commercial and non-commercial granular activated carbons. Water Environ. Res. 82 , 351–356 (2010).

Ranieri, E. & Świetlik, J. DBPS control in European drinking water treatment plants using chlorine dioxide: Two case studies. J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag. 18 , 85–91 (2010).

Ranieri, E. et al. Evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions from aerobic and anaerobic wastewater treatment plants in southeast of Italy. J. Environ. Manag. 337 , 117767 (2023).

Herrera-Melián, J. A. et al. The effect of effluent recirculation in a full-scale constructed wetland system. Sustainability 15 , 4310 (2023).

Ranieri, E. et al. Phytoextraction technologies for mercury- and chromium-contaminated soil: A review. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 95 , 317–327 (2020).

Butterworth, E. et al. Performance of four full-scale artificially aerated horizontal flow constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment. Water 8 , 365 (2016).

Ranieri, E. et al. Phytoextraction of Cr(VI)-contaminated soil by Phyllostachys pubescens : A case study. Toxics 9 , 312 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ranieri, E. et al. Phytoextraction from chromium-contaminated soil using moso bamboo in Mediterranean conditions. Water Air Soil Pollut. 231 , 408 (2020).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ranieri, E., Giuliano, S. & Ranieri, A. C. Energy consumption in anaerobic and aerobic based wastewater treatment plants in Italy. Water Pract. Technol. 16 , 851–863 (2021).

Scianna, C. et al. Organization science improves management effectiveness of marine protected areas. J. Environ. Manag. 240 , 285–292 (2019).

McClanahan, T. R., Marnane, M. J., Cinner, J. E. & Kiene, W. E. A comparison of marine protected areas and alternative approaches to coral-reef management. Curr. Biol. 16 , 1408–1413 (2006).

Gill, D. A. et al. Capacity shortfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally. Nature 543 , 665–669 (2017).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Micheli, F., Halpern, B. S., Botsford, L. W. & Warner, R. R. Trajectories and correlates of community change in no-take marine reserves. Ecol. Appl. 14 , 1709–1723 (2004).

Micheli, F. et al. Cumulative human impacts on Mediterranean and black sea marine ecosystems: Assessing current pressures and opportunities. PLoS ONE 8 , e79889 (2013).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Guidetti, P. et al. Large-scale assessment of Mediterranean marine protected areas effects on fish assemblages. PLoS ONE 9 , e91841 (2014).

Giakoumi, S. et al. Ecological effects of full and partial protection in the crowded Mediterranean sea: A regional meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 7 , 8940 (2017).

Lester, S. et al. Biological effects within no-take marine reserves: A global synthesis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 384 , 33–46 (2009).

Gikas, P., Ranieri, E., Sougioultzis, D., Farazaki, M. & Tchobanoglous, G. Alternative collection systems for decentralized wastewater management: An overview and case study of the vacuum collection system in Eretria town, Greece. Water Pract. Technol. 12 , 604–618 (2017).

Capodaglio, A. G., Ranieri, E. & Torretta, V. Process enhancement for maximization of methane production in codigestion biogas plants. Manag. Environ. Qual. 27 (3), 289–298 (2016).

Menduni, G. et al. Measurement of methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia in atmosphere with a compact quartz-enhanced photoacoustic sensor. Sens. Actuators B 375 (7), 132953 (2023).

Uricchio, et al. Circular economy and environmental taxation’: Atti della Summer School, Bari 9–15 settembre 2019. Collana Del 49 (1), 385 (2020).

Visintin, F. et al. Integrated environmental accounting for assessing the value for money in marine protected areas: The case of Tremiti Islands (Italy). JEAM 10 , 253–267 (2022).

Rotaris, L. & Carrozzo, M. Tourism taxes in Italy: A sustainable perspective. JGBI 4 , 92–105 (2019).

Uricchio A. F. and Selicato G. (2020) La Fiscalità del Turismo (in italian). Cacucci Ed. ISBN: 9788866118954, Bari, Italy. (2020)

Palmer, T. & Riera, A. (2003) Tourism and environmental taxes With special reference to the “Balearic ecotax”. Tour. Manag. 24 (6), 665–674 (2003).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Dipartimento di Scienze Sociali, Università Degli Studi Di Foggia, 71121, Foggia, Italy

Francesca Ranieri

Dipartimento Di Bioscienze, Biotecnologie Ed Ambiente, Università Degli Studi Di Bari, 70125, Bari, Italy

Gianfranco D’Onghia, Luigi Lopopolo & Ezio Ranieri

Dipartimento Jonico in Sistemi Giuridici Ed Economici Del Mediterraneo: Società, Ambiente, Culture, 74100, Taranto, Italy

Antonio Felice Uricchio

Dipartimento Interateneo Di Fisica, Politecnico Di Bari, 70126, Bari, Italy

Ranieri Ada Cristina

CoNISMa, Consorzio Nazionale Interuniversitario per Le Scienze del Mare, 00196, Rome, Italy

Gianfranco D’Onghia

Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes (ANVUR), 00153, Rome, Italy

Università Internazionale Telematica Uninettuno, 00186, Roma, Italy

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

F.R. and E.R. wrote the main manuscript text. F.R. has coordinated all the revisions and additions to this article. G.D. has suggested the ecological informations related to tremiti Islands. A.C.R. reviewed the manuscript. L.L. prepared Figs. 1–3. A.F.U. made the scientific supervision of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesca Ranieri .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Ranieri, F., D’Onghia, G., Uricchio, A.F. et al. Sustainable tourism in the Tremiti Islands (South Italy). Sci Rep 14 , 19021 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70171-6

Download citation

Received : 20 January 2024

Accepted : 13 August 2024

Published : 16 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70171-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Impact of tourism development upon environmental sustainability: a suggested framework for sustainable ecotourism

Qadar bakhsh baloch.

1 Abasyn University, Peshawar, Pakistan

Syed Naseeb Shah

Nadeem iqbal.

2 Air University School of Management, Air University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Muhammad Sheeraz

3 Department of Commerce, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

Muhammad Asadullah

4 IBA, Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan

Sourath Mahar

5 University of Sialkot, Sialkot, Pakistan

Asia Umar Khan

6 Islamia College University Peshawar, Peshawar, Pakistan

Associated Data

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available on request.

The empirical research investigated the relationship between tourism development and environmental suitability to propose a framework for sustainable ecotourism. The framework suggested a balance between business and environmental interests in maintaining an ecological system with the moderating help of government support and policy interventions. The study population encompasses tourism stakeholders, including tourists, representatives from local communities, members of civil administration, hoteliers, and tour operators serving the areas. A total of 650 questionnaires were distributed to respondents, along with a brief description of key study variables to develop a better understanding. After verifying the instrument’s reliability and validity, data analysis was conducted via hierarchical regression. The study findings revealed that a substantial number of people perceive socio-economic benefits, including employment and business openings, infrastructure development from tourism development, and growth. However, the state of the natural and environmental capital was found to be gradually degrading. Alongside the social environment, social vulnerability is reported due to the overutilization of land, intrusion from external cultures, and pollution in air and water due to traffic congestion, accumulation of solid waste, sewage, and carbon emissions. The study suggested a model framework for the development of sustained ecotourism, including supportive government policy interventions to ensure effective conservation of environmental and natural resources without compromising the economic viability and social well-beings of the locals. Furthermore, the variables and the constructs researched can be replicated to other destinations to seek valuable inputs for sustainable destination management elsewhere.

Introduction

Tourism is a vibrant force that stimulates travel to explore nature, adventures, wonders, and societies, discover cultures, meet people, interact with values, and experience new traditions and events. Tourism development attracts tourists to a particular destination to develop and sustain a tourism industry. Moreover, environmental sustainability is the future-based conscious effort aimed at conserving socio-cultural heritage and preserving natural resources to protect environmental ecosystems through supporting people’s health and economic well-being. Environment sustainability can be reflected in clean and green natural landscaping, thriving biodiversity, virgin sea beaches, long stretches of desert steppes, socio-cultural values, and archeological heritage that epitomize tourists’ degree of motivation and willingness of the local community to welcome the visitors. In this context, tourism growth and environmental sustainability are considered interdependent constructs; therefore, the increase in tourism development and tourists’ arrivals directly affects the quality of sustained and green tourism (Azam et al. 2018 ; Hassan et al.  2020 ; Sun et al. 2021 ).

According to the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), tourism is one of the fastest-growing industries, contributing more than 10% to the global GDP (UNWTO 2017; Mikayilov et al. 2019 ). Twenty-five million international tourists in 1950 grew to 166 million in 1970, reaching 1.442 billion in 2018 and projected to be 1.8 billion by 2030. Mobilizing such a substantial human tourist’s mass is most likely to trickle environmental pollution along with its positive effects on employment, wealth creation, and the economy. The local pollution at tourist destinations may include air emissions, noise, solid waste, littering, sewage, oil and chemicals, architectural/visual pollution, heating, car use, and many more. In addition, an uncontrolled, overcrowded, and ill-planned tourist population has substantial adverse effects on the quality of the environment. It results in the over-consumption of natural resources, degradation of service quality, and an exponential increase in wastage and pollution. Furthermore, tourism arrivals beyond capacity bring problems rather than a blessing, such as leaving behind soil erosion, attrition of natural resources, accumulation of waste and air pollution, and endangering biodiversity, decomposition of socio-cultural habitats, and virginity of land and sea (Kostić et al. 2016 ; Shaheen et al. 2019 ; Andlib and Salcedo-Castro  2021 ).

Tourism growth and environmental pollution have been witnessed around the globe in different regions. The ASEAN countries referred to as heaven for air pollution, climate change, and global warming are experiencing economic tourism and pollution (Azam et al. 2018 ; Guzel and Okumus 2020 ). In China, more than fifty-eight major Chinese tourism destinations are inviting immediate policy measures to mitigate air pollution and improve environmental sustainability (Zhang et al. 2020 ). Similarly, Singapore, being a top-visited country, is facing negative ecological footprints and calling for a trade-off between tourism development and environmental sustainability (Khoi et al. 2021 ). The prior studies established that international tourism and the tourism-led growth surge tourists’ arrival, energy consumption, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions, and air pollution resultantly cause climate change (Aslan et al. 2021 ). South Asian countries, more specifically Sri Lanka and Pakistan, are on the verge of tourism growth and environmental pollution compared to other countries (Chishti et al. 2020 ; Tiwari et al. 2021 ).

Pakistan is acknowledged in the tourism world because of its magnificent mountains with the densest concentration of high peaks in the world, scenic beauty of Neelum Valley, Murree, Chitral, and swat Valleys’, Kaghan, Naran, Hunza, Gilgit Baltistan (Baloch 2007 ), sacred shrines of Sikhism, archeological sites of the Gandhara and Indus Valley civilizations such as Mohenjo-Daro, Taxila including pre-Islamic Kalasha community (Baloch and Rehman 2015 ). In addition, Pakistan’s hospitable and multicultural society offers rich traditions, customs, and festivals for the tourists to explore, commemorate, cherish, and enjoy. Pakistan’s geographical and socio-cultural environment represents its resource and an opportunity (Baloch and Rehman 2015 ); therefore, Pakistan is looking to capitalize on it as a promising source of the foreign reserve to compensate for its mounting trade deficit (Baloch et al. 2020 ).

Tourism expansion has been established as a very deleterious ecological cost vis-à-vis the socio-economic benefits it passes to the host communities (Pulido-Fernández et al. 2019 ; Simo-Kengne 2022 ). In this context, the research is motivated to investigate the relationships between Pakistan’s tourism development activities and environmental sustainability. Drawing from the arguments of Pulido-Fernández et al. ( 2019 ) and Simo-Kengne ( 2022 ), it is feared that Pakistan’s ongoing determination to tourism development is likely to cause environmental degradation in two ways. Firstly, the tourism infrastructure developmental process would consume natural resources in the form of air and water pollution, loss of nature, and biodiversity. Secondly, the proliferation of tourism-related energy-consuming activities harms the environment by adding CO 2  emissions (Andlib and Saceldo-Castro 2021 ; Chien et al. 2021a ). Therefore, to tape this tourism-rich potential without compromising the sustainability of the natural and socio-cultural environment in the area, there is a dire need to develop Pakistan’s tourism areas into environment-friendly destinations.

Against the backdrop of a widening level of trade deficit, Pakistan’s rich tourism potential is being perceived as an immediate alternative for earning revenue to compensate for the current account gap. However, the developing large-scale tourism industry is considered a threat to deforestation, and air and water pollution, endangering biodiversity trading on resilient ecological credentials. The research study attempts to find an all-inclusive and comprehensive answer to the socio-ecological environmental concerns of tourism development and growth. Therefore, the research investigates the relationship between tourism development and its environmental sustainability to suggest a model framework for the development and growth of Sustainable Ecotourism in Pakistan along with its most visited destinations.

Literature review

Tourism development and growth.

Tourism is considered a force of sound as it benefits travelers and communities in urban and suburban areas. Tourism development is the process of forming and sustaining a business for a particular or mix of segments of tourists’ as per their motivation in a particular area or at a specific destination. Primarily, tourism development refers to the all-encompassing process of planning, pursuing, and executing strategies to establish, develop, promote, and encourage tourism in a particular area or destination (Mandić et al. 2018 ; Ratnasari et al. 2020 ). A tourism destination may serve as a single motivation for a group of tourists or a mix of purposes, i.e., natural tourism, socio-cultural or religious tourism, adventure or business tourism, or a combination of two or more. Andlib and Salcedo-Castro ( 2021 ), drawing from an analysis approach, contended that tourism destinations in Pakistan offer a mix of promising and negative consequences concerning their socio-economic and environmental impressions on the host community. The promising socio-economic impacts for the local community are perceived in the form of employment and business opportunities, improved standard of living, and infrastructural development in the area. The adverse environmental outcomes include overcrowding, traffic congestion, air and noise pollution, environmental degradation, and encroachment of landscaping for the local community and the tourists. An extensive review of the literature exercise suggests the following benefits that the local community and the tourists accrue from the tour are as follows:

• Generate revenue and monetary support for people and the community through local arts and culture commercialization.
• Improve local resource infrastructure and quality of life, including employment generation and access to improved civic facilities.
• Help to create awareness and understanding of different ethnic cultures, social values, and traditions, connecting them and preserving cultures.
• Rehabilitate and conserve socio-cultural and historical heritage, including archeological and natural sites.
• Establishment of natural parks, protracted areas, and scenic beauty spots.
• Conservation of nature, biodiversity, and endangered species with control over animal poaching.
• Improved water and air quality through afforestation, littering control, land and soil conservation, and recycling of used water and waste.

Tourism and hospitality business incorporates various business activities such as travel and transportation through the air or other modes of travel, lodging, messing, restaurants, and tourism destinations (Szpilko 2017 ; Bakhriddinovna and Qizi 2020 ). A tourist’s tourism experience is aimed at leisure, experiencing adventure, learning the culture or history of a particular area or ethnic entity, traveling for business or health, education, or religious purposes. The chain of activities adds value to the Tourism experience. Every activity contributes toward economic stimulation, job creation, revenue generation, and tourism development encompassing infrastructure for all activities involved in the tourism process. Tourism growth expresses the number of arrivals and the time of their stay/trips over a period of time. Tourism growth is measured through the interplay between tourists’ arrivals, tourism receipts, and travel time duration (Song et al. 2010 ; Arifin et al. 2019 ). The following factors drive the degree and level of tourism development and growth:

• Environmental factors include scenic beauty, green spaces, snowy mountains, towering peaks, good climate and weather, the interconnectivity of destination, quality of infrastructure, etc.
• Socio-economic factors: the distinctiveness of community, uniqueness of culture and social values, hospitality and adaptability, accessibility, accommodation, facilities and amenities, cost-effectiveness, price index, and enabling business environment.
• Historical, cultural, and religious factors include historical and cultural heritage, religious sites, and cultural values and experiences.

The tourism development process and its different dynamics revolve around the nature of tourism planned for a particular destination or area, which can be specified as ecotourism, sustainable tourism, green tourism or regenerative tourism, etc. Ecotourism is “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and involves interpretation and education” (Cheia, 2013 ; TIES, 2015). According to the World Conservation Union (IUCN), ecotourism involves “ Environmentally responsible travel to natural areas, to enjoy and appreciate nature (and accompanying cultural features, both past, and present) that promote conservation, have a low visitor impact and provide for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local peoples ”. Moreover, Blangy and Wood ( 1993 ) defined it as “ responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and sustains the well-being of local people ” (p. 32). The concept of ecotourism is grounded upon a well-defined set of principles including “environmental conservation and education, cultural preservation and experience, and economic benefits” (Cobbinah 2015 ; De Grosbois and Fennell 2021 ).

Ecotourism minimizes tourism’s impact on the tourism resources of a specific destination, including lessening physical, social, interactive, and psychosomatic impacts. Ecotourism is also about demonstrating a positive and responsible attitude from the tourists and hosts toward protecting and preserving all components of the environmental ecosystem. Ecotourism reflects a purpose-oriented mindset, responsible for creating and delivering value for the destination with a high degree of kindliness for local environmental, political, or social issues. Ecotourism generally differs from mass tourism because of its following features (Liang et al. 2018 ; Ding and Cao 2019 ; Confente and Scarpi 2021 ):

• Conscientious behavior focuses on the low impact on the environment.
• Sensitivity and warmth for local cultures, values, and biodiversity.
• Supporting the sustenance of efforts for the conservation of local resources.
• Sharing and delivering tourism benefits to the local communities.
• Local participation as a tourism stakeholder in the decision-making process.
• Educating the tourist and locals about the sensitivity and care of the environment because tourism without proper arrangement can endanger the ecosystems and indigenous cultures and lead to significant ecological degradation.

Sustainability aims to recognize all impacts of tourism, minimize the adverse impacts, and maximize the encouraging ones. Sustainable tourism involves sustainable practices to maintain viable support for the ecology of the tourism environment in and around the destination. Sustainable tourism is natural resource-based tourism that resembles ecotourism and focuses on creating travel openings with marginal impact and encouraging learning about nature having a low impact, conservation, and valuable consideration for the local community’s well-being (Fennell 2001 & 2020 ; Butowski 2021 ). On the other hand, ecotourism inspires tourists to learn and care about the environment and effectively participate in the conservation of nature and cultural activities. Therefore, ecotourism is inclusive of sustainable tourism, whereas the focus of sustainable tourism includes the following responsibilities:

• Caring, protecting, and conserving the environment, natural capital, biodiversity, and wildlife.
• Delivering socio-economic welfare for the people living in and around tourists' destinations.
• Identifying, rehabilitating, conserving, and promoting cultural and historical heritage for visitors learning experiences.
• Bringing tourists and local groups together for shared benefits.
• Creating wide-ranging and reachable opportunities for tourists.

Environment and sustainability of ecosystem

The term “environment” is all-inclusive of all the natural, organic living, inorganic, and non-natural things. The environment also denotes the interface among all breathing species with the natural resources and other constituents of the environment. Humans’ activities are mainly responsible for environmental damage as people and nations have contemplated modifying the environment to suit their expediencies. Deforestation, overpopulation, exhaustion of natural capital, and accumulation of solid waste and sewage are the major human activities that result in polluted air and water, acid rain, amplified carbon dioxide levels, depletion of the ozone, climate change, global warming, extermination of species, etc. A clean, green, and hygienic fit environment has clean air, clean water, clean energy, and moderate temperature for the healthy living of humans, animals, and biodiversity as nature is destined for them by their creatures. Maintaining and sustaining a clean environment is indispensable for human and biodiversity existence, fostering growth and development for conducting business and creating wealth. The environment can be sustained through conservation, preservation, and appropriate management to provide clean air, water, and food safe from toxic contamination, waste, and sewage disposal, saving endangered species and land conservation.

The globalization process, known for building socio-economic partnerships across countries, is also charged with encouraging environmental degradation through the over-consumption of natural resources and energy consumption, deforestation, land erosion, and weakening (Adebayo and Kirikkaleli 2021 ; Sun et al. 2021 ). Chien et al. ( 2021b ), while studying the causality of environmental degradation in Pakistan, empirically confirmed the existence of a significant connection between CO 2  emissions and GDP growth, renewable energy, technological innovation, and globalization. However, Chien et al. ( 2021a ) suggested using solar energy as a source of economic intervention to control CO 2  emissions and improve environmental quality in China. The danger of air pollution is hard to escape as microscopic air pollutants pierce through the human respiratory and cardiovascular system, injuring the lungs, heart, and brain. Ill-planned and uncontrolled human activities negatively affect ecosystems, causing climate change, ocean acidification, melting glaciers, habitation loss, eutrophication, air pollution, contaminants, and extinction of endangered species ( Albrich et al. 2020 ) .

Humans have a more significant effect on their physical environment in numerous ways, such as pollution, contamination, overpopulation, deforestation, burning fossil fuels and driving to soil erosion, polluting air and water quality, climate change, etc. UNO Agenda for 2030 “Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) mirrors the common premise that a healthy environment and human health are interlaced as integral to the satisfaction of fundamental human rights, i.e., right to life, well-being, food, water and sanitation, quality of life and biodiversity to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages (SDG3)—which includes air quality that is dependent upon terrestrial ecosystems (SDG15), oceans (SDG14), cities (SDG11), water, cleanliness, and hygiene (SDG6) (Swain 2018 ; Opoku 2019 ; Scharlemann et al. 2020 ). The UNEP stated that 58% of diarrhea cases in developing economies is due to the non-provision of clean water and inadequate sanitation facilities resulting in 3.5 million deaths globally (Desai 2016 ; Ekins and Gupta 2019 ).

Climate change overwhelmingly alters ecosystems’ ability to moderate life-threatening happenings, such as maintaining water quality, regulating water flows, unbalancing the temporal weather and maintaining glaciers, displacing or extinction biodiversity, wildfire, and drought (Zhu et al. 2019 ; Marengo et al. 2021 ). Research studies advocate that exposure to natural environments is correlated with mental health, and proximity to green space is associated with lowering stress and minimizing depression and anxiety (Noordzij et al. 2020 ; Slater et al. 2020 ; Callaghan et al. 2021 ). Furthermore, the Ecosystem is affected by pollution, over-exploitation of natural resources, climate change, invasive and displacing species, etc. Hence, providing clean air and water, hygienic places, and green spaces enriches the quality of life: condensed mortality, healthier value-added productivity, and is vital to maintaining mental health. On the other hand, climate change aggravates environment-related health hazards through adverse deviations to terrestrial ecology, oceans, biodiversity, and access to fresh and clean water.

Tourism development denotes all activities linked with creating and processing facilities providing services for the tourists on and around a destination. Infrastructure development is vital for developing a tourism destination to advance tourists’ living conditions and preserve natural and cultural heritage by constructing new tourist facilities, the destinations administrative and supporting echelons, including community living, etc. Development for tourism infrastructure and land use often burdens natural capital through over-consumption, leading to soil erosion, augmented pollution, loss of natural habitats, and endangered species. Development of tourism infrastructure and construction work has profound implications on environmental degradation, reduction in green spaces, deforestation, solid waste and sewage, overutilization of air and water, emission of CO 2 and other gases contributing to air and water pollution, climate change, loss and displacement of biodiversity, and the degradation of ecosystems. These negative consequences of tourism development result in many problems for the tourists and the indigenous people in the foreseeable future (Azam et al. 2018 ; Hoang et al. 2020 ).

A report published by UNEP titled “Infrastructure for climate action” has suggested governments introduce sustainable infrastructure as the prevailing one is responsible for causing 79% of all greenhouse gas emissions in struggling climate change, alleviation, and adaptation efforts. Sustainable infrastructure signifies that structures’ planning, construction, and functioning do not weaken the social, economic, and ecological systems (UNEP 2021 ; Krampe 2021 ). Sustainable infrastructure is the only solution that ensures societies, nature, and the environment flourish together. Therefore, Sustainable Ecotourism supports adapting pro-environment and nature-based climate change strategies that help resilient biodiversity and ecosystem to impact climate change. The proposed strategy is to focus on the conservation and restoration of ecosystems to combat climate hazards, fluctuating rainfalls, soil erosion, temperature variations, floods, and extreme wind storms (Niedziółka 2014 ; Setini 2021 )

Pakistan’s tourism infrastructure suffered a colossal amount of damage during the earthquake of October 8, 2005, which left widespread demolition and destruction to its human, economic assets, and infrastructure networks, especially in Kashmir and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's tourism areas. The tourism-related infrastructure, including hotels, destination facilities of social service delivery and commerce, water channels, and communications networks, were either drained or virtually destroyed. The destruction in the aftermath of the earthquake was further added by the war against terror in tourism-hit areas, resulting in the redundancy of tourists and tourism facilities for a long time (Akbar et al. 2017 ; Zakaria and Ahmed 2019 ). The tourism revival activities during the post-earth quack, post-terrorism scenario, and COVID-19 period called for various entrepreneurial activities, including the construction of infrastructure, hotels, road networks, community living, etc. Development and reconstruction of the livelihood and hospitality infrastructure through entrepreneurship were undertaken intensively through a public-private partnership from national and international findings (Qamar and Baloch 2017 ; Sadiq 2021 ; Dogar et al. 2021 ).

The revival and reinvigoration of infrastructure in tourism areas were backed up by extensive deforestation, use of local green land, rebuilding of the road network, displacement of biodiversity, and overtaxing the consumption of water and other natural resources. The deforestation, extensive use of green land, and over-consumption of water and other natural resources have depleted the tourism value of the area on the one hand and degraded the environment on the other. However, it was the focused rehabilitation activities of earthquake and Pakistan’s Government’s socio-environment conservation strategy of the Billion Trees plantation program in the province, including dominating tourism areas. The afforestation and loss of green tops are being reclaimed through these efforts, and the tourism environment is soon expected to regenerate (Qamar and Baloch 2017 ; Rauf et al. 2019 ; Siddiqui and Siddiqui 2019 ).

Government support and policy interventions

Tourism generates wide-ranging benefits for the economy, community, and people. Tourism contributes to the economy through revenue generation and shares responsibility with the Government to alleviate poverty alleviation, create opportunities for job placements, protect environments, and conserve natural ecosystems and biodiversity. It is assumed that if the tourism industry is left to its own, it will most likely prefer its business interests over environments or biodiversity. Governments, custodians of the life and well-being of their subjects, are directly responsible for providing a clean environment, nature, and Ecosystem. Therefore, national and local governments are responsible for preparing and implementing tourism development plans and enforcing values and standards for tourism development in conformity with the prerequisites of environmental sustainability. Through institutional governance, governments help tourism development by providing financial and budgetary support, regulatory framework, land, physical resources, infrastructure, etc. Provision and facilitation for Sustainability of Ecotourism and conservation of environment and biodiversity are dependent upon Government-supported interventions as follows:

• The regulatory framework for setting up tourism-related entrepreneurship and quality standards can support ecotourism and prevent environmental degradation on any account.
• Provision of budgetary support for ecosystem conservation and regeneration of bio-diversity-related projects.
• Plan, rehabilitate if needed, promote conservation and protection of socio-cultural, historic, antique, and natural endowments in coordination with other public and private agencies, and deal with the defaulters, if any.
• Promoting and undertaking afforestation alongside land conservation and discouraging deforestation, soil erosion, accumulation of solid waste, littering, and any direct or indirect loss or threat to biodiversity.
• Setting restrictions for over-tourism beyond capacity and quality standards for transportation, restaurants, hotels, food and drinking water, etc.
• Placing enforcement mechanism necessary to ensure application of the regulatory framework and quality standards applicable along with all activities inclusive to the Ecotourism value chain.

Theoretical support and hypothesis development

According to the social disruption theory, rapidly expanding societies usually experience a period of widespread crisis and a loss of their conventional routines and attitudes. The crisis impacts people whose mental health, worldviews, behavioral patterns, and social networks may all be impacted (Çalişkan and Özer 2021 ). According to the social disruption theory, fast community change brought on by population growth will result in a variety of social issues that are signs of a generally disorganized community (Smith et al. 2001 ). Because some types of tourism communities experience rapid expansion accompanied by intensive development and rapid social change over a relatively short period of time, they seem to be great settings for studying various postulations of the social disruption theory.

Place change and social disruption theory are closely connected. According to this assumption, when a community undergoes fast expansion, it tends to experience a generalized crisis that might culminate in several social issues as changes spread throughout the community and among individuals (Rasoolimanesh et al. 2019 ). Place change can result from fundamental community restructuring due to economic development, new class divides, and migration of both long-term and temporary people (Nelson 2001 ). Social unrest, though, is not enduring. Instead, it is transitory; societies gradually adjust to these changes (Deery et al.  2012 ).

The standard of living may initially deteriorate, but due to the adaptability of people and communities, they will gradually reinvigorate and strengthen themselves accordingly. Furthermore, the social disruption proposition reinforces one of the challenges in analyzing the effects of tourism, particularly in emerging nations, since it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the effects of tourism and the overall ongoing development (Park and Stokowski 2009 ) (Fig. ​ (Fig.1 1 ).

• Tourism development and growth significantly affect natural environment resources.
• Tourism development and growth significantly affect environmental pollution.
• Tourism development and growth significantly affect the physical ecosystem of the environment.
• Tourism development and growth significantly affect the socio-cultural environment.
• Tourism development and growth significantly affect the economic environment of people and the community.
• Government policy and support significantly moderate the relationship between tourism development and growth and the environmental factors.

Conceptual framework

Methodology

The study aimed to investigate the association of tourism development and its impact on environmental factors. Therefore, a survey method was employed to collect data by including all the relevant people in the locality. The study is based on stakeholders’ opinions from Pakistan’s most visited tourist areas, including Murree, Swat, Chitral, Naran, Kaghan, Neelum Valley, Malam Jabba, Ayubia, and Nathia Gali. A total of 650 stakeholders were contacted from the above-mentioned tourist destinations through survey. The distribution of the sample is mentioned in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Sample configuration

Field survey—2021

Using quantitative techniques, hierarchical linear regression analysis was employed to investigate the possible relationships between tourism growth and various dimensions of environmental sustainability. The results below reveal that tourism development translates into environmental deterioration, and the relationship between tourism and environmental sustainability is bidirectional.

Tourism growth and development were measured through a five-item scale. The environment was measured through 16 items combined scale with sub-dimensions; depletion of Natural Resources=3 items, Polluting Environment=3 items, Physical Effects on Ecosystem=4 items, Socio-Cultural Degradation=3 items, and Economic Environment=3-items. Similarly, our moderating variable, Government Interventions and Support, was measured using a 5-item scale. Table ​ Table2 2 below presents the details of the instruments.

Instrument reliability

Analysis and results

Data were analyzed using SPSS Version 26. It includes correlation, linear regression, and stepwise hierarchal regression analysis.

Table ​ Table3 3 above shows that our Tourism Growth and Development has significant and positive relationship with Polluting Environment ( r = 0.20**), Physical Effects on Ecosystem ( r = 0.19**), Depletion of Natural Resource ( r = 0.24**), Socio-Cultural Degradation ( r = 0.18**). However, Tourism Growth and Development has positive relationship with Economic Environment ( r = 0.29**) and Government Interventions and Support ( r = 0.13**).

Correlation matrix

* p  < 0.05; ** p  < 0.01

Results of linear regression analysis at Table ​ Table4 4 above depict that tourism growth and development predicts 4.1% variance in Depletion of Natural Resources ( β = 0.20, p <0.01), 3.9% variance in pollution ( β = 0.19, p <0.01), 6% variance in Physical Effects on Ecosystem ( β = 0.24, p <0.01), 3.6% variance in Socio-Cultural Degradation ( β = 0.18, p <0.01), and 8.8% variance in Economic Environment ( β = 0.29, p <0.01).

Regression analysis for H1–H5

** p  < 0.01

The study analyzes the applied two-step hierarchal regression. In the first step, Tourism Growth and Government Interventions were treated as independent variables, and their significant impact was measured. In the second step, the interaction term Tourism and Growth× Government Interventions was added, and its impact was measured. The results suggest that Government Interventions and Support moderate the relationship between Tourism Growth and the Environmental variables (Table ​ (Table5 5 ).

Moderation analysis

* p  < 0.05;** p  < 0.01

The study has reported unique findings regarding tourism and its environmental impacts. We found that tourism growth and development generate economic activity on the one hand. However, it has specific adverse environmental and socio-cultural outcomes on the other hand as well. Our study revealed that tourism growth and development predict a 4.1% variance in Depletion of Natural Resources ( β = 0.202*, p <0.01). This suggests that due to the expansion of tourism in the country, natural resources are continuously depleted to meet the needs of tourists. Studies also supported our findings and suggested that revival and reinvigoration of infrastructure in tourism areas were backed up by extensive deforestation, use of local green land, rebuilding of the road network, displacement of biodiversity, and overtaxing the consumption of water and other natural resources (Qamar and Baloch 2017 ; Sadiq 2021 ; Dogar et al. 2021 ). The prior studies are consistent with our hypothesis that “tourism development and growth significantly affect natural environment resources.”

We further found that tourism growth and development predict a 3.9% variance in pollution ( β = 0.198*, p <0.01), suggesting that tourism expansion may pollute the natural environment. Furthermore, recent national statistics depict that major human activities at local tourism destinations such as Kalam, Sawat, Muree, and Northern Areas have accumulated solid waste and sewage, resulting in polluted air and water. Further, research also suggests that the overflow of tourists to tourist destinations may adversely affect the environment due to human activities (Noordzij et al. 2020 ; Slater et al. 2020 ; Andlib and Salcedo-Castro  2021 ; Callaghan et al. 2021 ). Thus, it is safe to argue that the growth of tourism has a particularly detrimental effect on the environment. These findings also support our hypothesis, “Tourism development and growth significantly contribute to environmental pollution.”

The results reported that tourism growth and development predict a 6% variance in Physical Effects on the Ecosystem ( β = 0.245*, p <0.01). Studies have reported that deforestation and alteration in species’ natural environment for tourism facilities construction may adversely affect environmental health (Kuvan, 2010 ; Azam et al. 2018 ; Hoang et al. 2020 ; Andlib and Salcedo-Castro  2021 ). During post-terrorism and post-Covid-19 times in Pakistan, millions of local tourists moved to popular tourist destinations that required new infrastructure to accommodate these tourists. Consequently, colossal deforestation and other detrimental human activities have negatively affected ecosystem. These findings also support our hypothesis that tourism development and growth significantly affect the physical ecosystem of the environment.

The study reported a total of 3.6% variance in socio-cultural degradation ( β = 0.189*, p <0.01) due to tourism growth and development. These findings suggest that tourism’s growth and development may lead the inhabitants to imitate the foreign tourists regarding their living standards, which may endanger their traditional culture. Thus, our hypothesis that “tourism development and growth significantly affect the socio-cultural environment” is confirmed.

Further, it was found that tourism growth and development predict an 8.8% variance in the economic environment ( β = 0.297*, p <0.01). It is established from the literature that tourism growth and development generate economic activity in the country. Development projects such as the construction of infrastructure, hotels, and road networks generate economic activity to facilitate international and indigenous tourists, positively affecting the community’s living standard (Baloch et al. 2020 ). Thus, our hypothesis, “tourism development and growth significantly affect economic environment of people and community,” is confirmed.

Due to tourism growth and development, our study reported a 1.8% variance in Government Support and Interventions ( β = .133*, p <0.01). However, more recently, the Government of Pakistan has devised specific interventions that may help curb the adverse impacts of detrimental environmental factors. For example, developmental schemes such as the Billion Trees Plantation drive and Road-Infrastructure Network Development under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor initiative may prove moderators to curb the negative impacts of tourism growth on the environment (Qamar and Baloch 2017 ; Rauf et al. 2019 ; Siddiqui and Siddiqui 2019 ). Therefore, the hypothesis, Government policy and support, significantly moderates the relationship between tourism development and growth with the environment is confirmed based on these findings.

Suggested model for ecotourism framework

Through its detailed review of existing literature, prevailing tourism policies, and empirical inputs from the stakeholders’ perspectives, the study has identified a wide range of obstacles limiting the development and growth of ecotourism in Pakistan. The study suggests National Tourism Management authorities carefully invest in ecotourism destination’s planning and development in coordination with the environment development agency. The suggested model for ecotourism framework is initially meant for the tourism destinations specifically designated for ecotourism. However, selected points can also be extended to the quality management parameters set for the National Parks, Conservation and Protracted Areas, Museums, National or International event sites, etc. The national tourism authorities are to lay particular emphasis in their forthcoming National Tourism Policy on the development and promotion of Sustainable Ecotourism having, with focus on the following key areas:

• Identify and classify four to five ecotourism destinations, including ecotourism-centered activities of value chains for priority development, which are administratively possible within budgetary constraints. However, the development plan shall consider the integral benefits of other developmental schemes such as the Billion Trees Plantation drive, Road-Infrastructure Network Development under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor initiative, International Union for Conservation of Nature (ICUN) programs in the area.
• While staying within the alignment of UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG) calling for ‘environmental sustainability’ and the development vision of each designated destination, the Tourists Management System shall take into cognizance of issues like managing capacity of the place, quality parameters for the conservation of the environment, and allowable activities thereof.
• Identify degenerated destinations of religious, socio-cultural, or historical significance for their rehabilitation under the Regenerated tourism program.
• i. To deflect the tourist pressure upon these destinations, the potential tourists from nearby cities and metropolitan areas be provided with nearby alternative destinations for leisure tourism as stay-tourism sites.
• ii. To prevent the environment from air pollution, the traffic load on the destination be curtailed through an effective traffic management strategy, provision of off-destination parking for combustion engine vehicles, and encouraging electric driven or hybrid vehicles for nearby parking.
• iii. Provision of clean drinking water through public infiltration plants, public toilets, solid waste carriers, and recycling of sewage and used water is recommended in the most visited areas of the destination.
• iv. Signposting at appropriate places, giving social messages encouraging to maintain cleanliness, avoid littering, ensure nature conservation, and humility toward biodiversity.
• Develop all-inclusive, comprehensive execution plans to expedite the investments for the sustainable ecotourism, encouraging public–private cooperation, community involvement, and infrastructure mapping guaranteeing environmental conservation and safeguards.
• Develop and place on the ground an all-inclusive program of capacity building for sustainable ecotourism, regenerative and green tourism services.
• Develop and launch Pakistan tourism profile and Sustaining Ecotourism obligatory framework “to promote tourism on the one hand and nurture conscious ecological behavior among the potential tourists of the area”.
• In order to fetch local ownership for the ecotourism center developments, all efforts shall be made to share the socio-economic benefits integral to the development scheme with the local population for community development.
• As part of the destination management planning, identify complementary value chains and livelihood activities that could be developed as part of the overall ecotourism destination package.
• i. Setting new quality standards facilitating the promotion of ecotourism and environmental sustainability through acts of various bodies operating in the Ecotourism value chain, such as:
• Revision of Private hotels Management Act (1976) and Tourists Operators Act (1976) alongside introduction and promulgation of a new “Tourism Destination Management Act” incorporating new quality standards as of today.
• Promulgating laws to make all new construction/development projects responsible from any agency in the area, incorporating quality standards needed for environmental sustainability, and promoting ecotourism.
• Set measures for the preservation of the local biodiversity and preservation of endangered species, including seeking support from internationally active environment conservation agencies, declaring local hunting illegal, introducing licensing programs for hunting of certain selected animals/ birds on the payment of a handsome amount to be used for the welfare of the local community.
• Create awareness programs against deforestation, land conservation, and biodiversity, and maintain cleanliness, inculcating a culture of respecting and enjoying nature instead of spoiling it.

Conclusion, implications, and limitations of the study

The study premise was based on the contention that sustenance of ecotourism focuses on the economic viability of the business interests alongside the conservation and preservation of natural ecosystems, including ethical fairness to the socio-cultural environment of the host community. Ecotourism is a phenomenon that contributes to environmental sustainability through well-planned and careful destination management capable of balancing conflicting interests of business growth and environmental sustainability. Tourism-environment paradox suggests that the sustainability and survival of both are dependent upon the flourishing mode of each other. Quality of environment and sustainability of bio-ecosystem stimulates tourists’ arrivals and over-tourism beyond capacity with irresponsible behavior from tourists negatively influencing the environment and harming the ecosystem of nature. Ecotourism is not inevitably sustainable unless it is economically sustainable and environmentally maintainable besides being socio-culturally acceptable. Socio-culturally intolerable ecotourism means the activity which does not benefit locals and their socio-cultural values. Hence, the study concludes that ecotourism has to positively interplay between economy, environment, and culture without compromising one over others. The pursuit of sustainable ecotourism is not an end in meeting the little comforts of the business interests but rather a means to end the sustainability issues created due to ill-conceived tourism development and unmanageable growth.

Practical implications

Drawing from the findings and conclusions of the research, the study extends the following practical implications for effectively managing the process of tourism development and environmental sustainability in line with the dictates of the philosophy behind ecotourism:

• Paradoxically tourism necessitates ecological capitals as primary ingredients for the creation of tourism experiences on the one hand. However, it is also contingent upon the conservation and preservation of ecological integrity on the other. The study suggests that unbalancing this “resource paradox” results in the harshness and tenacity of adversarial climate change, natural calamities, environmental pollution, and endangered biodiversity.
• The research findings and the suggested framework for ecotourism imply that sustainable ecotourism principles-based planning is mandatory for destination management to assure effective trade-off between the business interests’ sustainability of the environmental ecosystem.
• Tourism development and growth shall be steered through ecotourism principles as its sustainable model offers enduring social, environmental and economic, ecological integrity, and social and cultural benefits for the local community. Therefore, ecotourism is a recipe for preventing environmental degradation and guarantees sustainability of ecosystems nature and its biodiversity. Hence, ecotourism shall stand central priority focus for strategic management to nurture quality experiences from sustainable tourism.
• To revive back the sustainability of the environment, in the areas where over-tourism has degraded the environment, schemes for regenerated tourism shall be immediately launched to mitigate the negative footprints on the sustainability of destinations, including reinforcing protracted conservation sites, biodiversity, and recouping endangered species, afforestation drives, recycling of water and solid waste, refurnishing of landscaping, preservation, and rehabilitation of cultural heritage and refurbishing of depleted infrastructure accordingly. Furthermore, to regenerate and sustain the tourism infrastructure of the destinations experiencing over-tourism, capacity building measures like capacity, recycling of water and solid waste, preventive measures to control air and water pollution, traffic control management, and spread of entertainment facilities shall be the focus of the regeneration plans.
• The study implies that government authorities and policymakers have a special role in placing their moderating intervention in terms of policy guidelines, regulatory framework, and budgetary support, provision of inter-organizational synergy in planning and implementation of ecotourism strategies, protection of environmental resource base and conservation of natural and biological ecosystem, sustenance of socio-cultural value of local community over and above their economic and social well-being/quality life for the long run.
• The study also implies that public and private policymakers lay down threshold criteria for responsible travel and tourism standards for destination management and its related supply chain. The laid criterion would facilitate management in nurturing “responsible behavior” to plan, protect, conserve, preserve, and sustain natural and cultural resources and responsible socio-economic development without compromising the sustainability of the environment and long-term well-being of the hoist community. The deep-seated adherence to social responsibility protocols by the tourism supply chain network can significantly increase the capacity of tourism destinations and improve the conscious awareness of green consumers along the tourism supply chain. Furthermore, the consciously responsible behavior among stakeholders and legislatures can strike a needed balance between the business interests and environments in favor of sustainability of socio-cultural, economic, and natural capital.
• The study elucidates that responsible behavior necessitates purpose-built eco-friendly infrastructure and policy parameters to support the sustainability of environments across destinations. The strategic planning aligned with the sustainability-focused objectives dictates the need for artistic, innovative, and talented people and quality intuitions in harnessing quality tourism services and responsible tourism behavior. Furthermore, the study encourages community involvement in the developmental process, enactment of structural policies, preservation of socio-cultural heritage, and conservation of natural biodiversity as it would foster emotional bondage between the people of the host community and the tourism undertakings. Therefore, community and value chain managers shall collaborate to maximize the perceived benefits of responsible tourism while developing cultural exchanges and planning opportunities for leisure and tourism.
• Regulatory measures help offset negative impacts; for instance, controls on the number of tourist activities and movement of visitors within protected areas can limit impacts on the ecosystem and help maintain the integrity and vitality of the site. Limits should be established after an in-depth analysis of the maximum sustainable visitor capacity. Furthermore, the variables and the constructs researched can be replicated to other destinations to seek valuable inputs for sustainable destination management elsewhere.

Study limitation

Besides the functional, practical applications, the study has some limitations. Besides having integral disadvantages of cross-sectional research, the respondents selected for the study were visitors on peak days with the highest tourist arrivals, thereby having experiences of a higher degree of environmental pollution and natural disorder. Furthermore, the research is limited to stakeholders’ perspectives instead of any scientifically generated data or mathematical or econometric model.

Author contribution

QBB: conceptualization, methodology, writing—original draft. SNS: data curation and supervision. NI: visualization, editing, proofreading. MS: review and editing. MA: review and editing. SM: editing, data curation. AUK: review and editing.

Data availability

Declarations.

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. We also declare that we do not have human participants, data, or tissue.

We do not have any person’s data in any form.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Qadar Bakhsh Baloch, Email: moc.liamg@bqhcolabrd .

Syed Naseeb Shah, Email: moc.liamtoh@hahs_beesan .

Nadeem Iqbal, Email: moc.oohay@1labqimeedanrd .

Muhammad Sheeraz, Email: [email protected] .

Muhammad Asadullah, Email: moc.liamg@apmdasa .

Sourath Mahar, Email: moc.oohay@mhtaros .

Asia Umar Khan, Email: kp.ude.pci@ramu-aisa .

• Abir T, Khan MYH (2022) Importance of ICT advancement and culture of adaptation in the tourism and hospitality industry for developing countries. In: ICT as innovator between tourism and culture. IGI Global, pp 30–41
• Adebayo TS, Kirikkaleli D. Impact of renewable energy consumption, globalization, and technological innovation on environmental degradation in Japan: application of wavelet tools. Environ Dev Sustain. 2021; 23 (11):16057–16082. doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-01322-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Akbar J, Tanveer S, Khan MN, Naeem A. Role of facilities available and un-available in attracting of tourist in Swat Valley Pakistan. J Landsc Ecol. 2017; 10 (1):5–19. doi: 10.1515/jlecol-2017-0006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Albrich K, Rammer W, Seidl R. Climate change causes critical transitions and irreversible alterations of mountain forests. Glob Change Biol. 2020; 26 (7):4013–4027. doi: 10.1111/gcb.15118. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andlib Z, Salcedo-Castro J. The impacts of tourism and governance on CO2 emissions in selected south Asian countries. ETIKONOMI. 2021; 20 (2):385–396. doi: 10.15408/etk.v20i2.17449. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arifin M, Ibrahim A, Nur M. Integration of supply chain management and tourism: an empirical study from the hotel industry of Indonesia. Manage Sci Lett. 2019; 9 (2):261–270. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aslam AM. Intertemporal relationship between tourism demand and environmental quality in Sri Lanka. Test Eng Manage. 2020; 82 (January-February):17841–17856. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aslan A, Altinoz B, Özsolak B. The nexus between economic growth, tourism development, energy consumption, and CO 2 emissions in Mediterranean countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021; 28 (3):3243–3252. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-10667-6. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Azam M, Alam MM, Hafeez MH. Effect of tourism on environmental pollution: further evidence from Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. J Clean Prod. 2018; 190 :330–338. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.168. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bakhriddinovna AN, Qizi KDR (2020) Tourism logistics: relationship between tourism and logistics. Academy 7(58):22–23
• Baloch QB. Managing tourism in Pakistan: a case study of Chitral valley. J Manag Sci. 2007; 2 (2):169–190. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baloch QB, Rehman A. Regional integration of Pakistan tourism: exploring prospects. Abasyn Univ J Soc Sci. 2015; 8 (2):405–415. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baloch QB, Irshad M, Qamar FM, Naseebullahshah S (2020) Development of tourism’s sector in the face of scarce economy. The Discourse 6(1):75–96
• Blangy S, Wood ME (1993) Developing and implementing ecotourism guidelines for wildlands and neighboring communities. Ecotourism Society, pp 32–54
• Boers B, Cottrell S. Sustainable tourism infrastructure planning: a GIS-supported approach. Tour Geogr. 2007; 9 (1):1–21. doi: 10.1080/14616680601092824. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bramwell B, Lane B. Sustainable tourism: contributing to the debates. J Sustain Tour. 1999; 7 (1):1–5. doi: 10.1080/09669589908667323. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Briassoulis H, Van Der Straaten J (eds) (2013) Tourism and the environment: regional, economic, cultural and policy issues, vol 6. Springer Science & Business Media
• Butowski L. Sustainable tourism: a human-centered approach. Sustainability. 2021; 13 (4):1835. doi: 10.3390/su13041835. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Callaghan A, McCombe G, Harrold A, McMeel C, Mills G, Moore-Cherry N, Cullen W. The impact of green spaces on mental health in urban settings: a scoping review. J Ment Health. 2021; 30 (2):179–193. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2020.1755027. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Çalişkan U, Özer Ö. Relationship between local residents’ perceptions of tourism and support attitudes in post-communist countries: case of Turkestan (Kazakhstan) Tour Plan Dev. 2021; 18 (5):573–593. doi: 10.1080/21568316.2020.1837228. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheia G. Ecotourism: Definition and concepts. Revista De Turism-Studii Si Cercetari in Turism. 2013; 15 :56–60. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chien F, Ajaz T, Andlib Z, Chau KY, Ahmad P, Sharif A. The role of technology innovation, renewable energy and globalization in reducing environmental degradation in Pakistan: a step towards sustainable environment. Renew Energy. 2021; 177 :308–317. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.05.101. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chien F, Sadiq M, Nawaz MA, Hussain MS, Tran TD, Le Thanh T. A step toward reducing air pollution in top Asian economies: the role of green energy, eco-innovation, and environmental taxes. J Environ Manag. 2021; 297 :113420. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113420. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chingarande A, Saayman A. Critical success factors for tourism-led growth. Int J Tour Res. 2018; 20 (6):800–818. doi: 10.1002/jtr.2233. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chishti MZ, Ullah S, Ozturk I, Usman A (2020) Examining the asymmetric effects of globalization and tourism on pollution emissions in South Asia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(22):27721–27737 [ PubMed ]
• Cobbinah PB. Contextualizing the meaning of ecotourism. Tour Manag Perspect. 2015; 16 :179–189. doi: 10.1016/j.tmp.2015.07.015. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Confente I, Scarpi D. Achieving environmentally responsible behavior for tourists and residents: a norm activation theory perspective. J Travel Res. 2021; 60 (6):1196–1212. doi: 10.1177/0047287520938875. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Grosbois D, Fennell DA. Sustainability and ecotourism principles adoption by leading ecolodges: learning from best practices. Tour Recreat Res. 2021 doi: 10.1080/02508281.2021.1875170. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deery M, Jago L, Fredline L. Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: a new research agenda. Tour Manag. 2012; 33 (1):64–73. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2011.01.026. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dogar AA, Shah I, Elahi N. Sports tourism in post conflict peace building: evidence from Swat, Pakistan. J Contemp Issues Bus Government. 2021; 27 (1):480–489. [ Google Scholar ]
• Desai BH. 14. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Yearbook Int Environ Law. 2016; 27 :481–488. doi: 10.1093/yiel/yvx069. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ding ZF, Cao B. Exploring the factors in visitors’ behavioral intentions–mediation effects on perceived environmental involvement and ecotourism support. Appl Ecol Environ Res. 2019; 17 (1):1083–1092. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1701_10831092. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ekins P, Gupta J. Perspective: a healthy planet for healthy people. Global Sustainability. 2019; 2 (e20):1–9. doi: 10.1017/sus.2019.17. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fennell DA. A content analysis of ecotourism definitions. Curr Issue Tour. 2001; 4 (5):403–421. doi: 10.1080/13683500108667896. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fennell DA (2020) Ecotourism. Routledge
• Guzel AE, Okumus İ. Revisiting the pollution haven hypothesis in ASEAN-5 countries: new insights from panel data analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2020; 27 (15):18157–18167. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-08317-y. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hassan A, Kennell J, Chaperon S. Rhetoric and reality in Bangladesh: elite stakeholder perceptions of the implementation of tourism policy. Tour Recreat Res. 2020; 45 (3):307–322. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris R, Williams P, Griffin T (2012) Sustainable tourism. Routledge, Oxford
• Hill J, Gough G (2009) Can the conservation attitudes and behavioural intentions of tourists to tropical forest be improved through biodiversity interpretation? A case study from Australia. Principles and practice, ecotourism and environmental sustainability, pp 175–196
• Hoang TTH, Van Rompaey A, Meyfroidt P, Govers G, Vu KC, Nguyen AT et al (2020) Impact of tourism development on the local livelihoods and land cover change in the northern Vietnamese highlands. Environ Dev Sustain 22(2):1371–1395
• Holden A (2008) Tourism and the environment, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York
• Khoi NH, Le NH, Ngoc BH (2021) The effect of tourism development on the ecological footprint in Singapore: evidence from asymmetric ARDL method. Curr Issue Tour 25(15):2500–2517
• Kostić M, Milićević S, Nedeljković I. Research of tourists’ perception of the relationship between tourism and environment. Becтник aпк Cтaвpoпoлья 2016; S4 :32–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Krampe F (2021) Ownership and inequalities: exploring UNEP’s environmental cooperation for Peacebuilding program. Sustain Sci 16(4):1159–1172
• Kuvan Y. Mass tourism development and deforestation in Turkey. Anatolia. 2010; 21 (1):155–168. doi: 10.1080/13032917.2010.9687096. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liang Y, Wang L, Zhu Y. Using environmental sensitivity for discussing the correlation between ecotourism cognition and environmental attitude. Ekoloji. 2018; 27 (106):1653–1659. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mandić A, Mrnjavac Ž, Kordić L. Tourism infrastructure, recreational facilities and tourism development. Tour Hosp Manag. 2018; 24 (1):41–62. doi: 10.20867/thm.24.1.12. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marengo JA, Cunha AP, Cuartas LA, Deusdará Leal KR, Broedel E, Seluchi ME, Bender F (2021) Extreme drought in the Brazilian Pantanal in 2019–2020: characterization, causes, and impacts. Frontiers in Water 3:639204
• Mikayilov JI, Mukhtarov S, Mammadov J, Azizov M. Re-evaluating the environmental impacts of tourism: does EKC exist? Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2019; 26 (19):19389–19402. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-05269-w. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nelson CA. The development and neural bases of face recognition. Infant and Child Development: An International Journal of Research and Practice. 2001; 10 (1–2):3–18. doi: 10.1002/icd.239. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niedziółka I. Sustainable tourism development. Reg Form Dev Stud. 2014; 8 (3):157–166. [ Google Scholar ]
• Noordzij JM, Beenackers MA, Groeniger JO, Van Lenthe FJ. Effect of changes in green spaces on mental health in older adults: a fixed effects analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020; 74 (1):48–56. doi: 10.1136/jech-2019-212704. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Park M, Stokowski PA. Social disruption theory and crime in rural communities: comparisons across three levels of tourism growth. Tour Manag. 2009; 30 (6):905–915. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.11.015. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Opoku A. Biodiversity and the built environment: implications for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Resour Conserv Recycl. 2019; 141 :1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pforr C (2001) Concepts of sustainable development, sustainable tourism, and ecotourism: definitions, principles, and linkages. Scand J Hosp Tour 1(1):68–71
• Pulido-Fernández JI, Cárdenas-García PJ, Espinosa-Pulido JA. Does environmental sustainability contribute to tourism growth? An analysis at the country level. J Clean Prod. 2019; 213 :309–319. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.151. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Qamar F, Baloch QB (2017) Reviving tourism through entrepreneurial capabilities in swat, Dir & Chitral Triangle in post operation environment. Journal of Managerial Sciences 11(2):209–228
• Rasoolimanesh SM, Md Noor S, Schuberth F, Jaafar M. Investigating the effects of tourist engagement on satisfaction and loyalty. Serv Ind J. 2019; 39 (7–8):559–574. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2019.1570152. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ratnasari SL, Susanti EN, Ismanto W, Tanjung R, Darma DC, Sutjahjo G. An experience of tourism development: how is the strategy? J Environ Manag Tour. 2020; 11 (7):1877–1886. doi: 10.14505//jemt.v11.7(47).26. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rauf T, Khan N, Shah SJ, Zada M, Malik SY, Yukun C, Sadique A. Poverty and prosperity: impact on livelihood assets of billion trees afforestation program in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Pakistan. Forests. 2019; 10 (10):916. doi: 10.3390/f10100916. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raza SA, Jawaid ST. Terrorism and tourism: a conjunction and ramification in Pakistan. Econ Model. 2013; 33 :65–70. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.03.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sadiq N (2021) COVID-19, adaptive capacity and tourism governance: the case of Pakistan's tourism industry. In: Pandemics and travel. Emerald Publishing Limited, pp 49–66
• Scharlemann JP, Brock RC, Balfour N, Brown C, Burgess ND, Guth MK, Kapos V (2020) Towards understanding interactions between sustainable development goals: the role of environment–human linkages. Sustain Sci 15(6):1573–1584
• Setini M, Wardana I, Sukaatmadja I, Ekawati N, Yasa N, Astawa I. Policy models for improving ecotourism performance to build quality tourism experience and sustainable tourism. Manage Sci Lett. 2021; 11 (2):595–608. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shaheen K, Zaman K, Batool R, Khurshid MA, Aamir A, Shoukry AM, Gani S. Dynamic linkages between tourism, energy, environment, and economic growth: evidence from top 10 tourism-induced countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2019; 26 (30):31273–31283. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-06252-1. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Siddiqui F, Siddiqui DA. Causality between tourism and foreign direct investment: an empirical evidence from Pakistan. Asian J Econ Mod. 2019; 7 (1):27–44. doi: 10.18488/journal.8.2019.71.27.44. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simo-Kengne BD. Tourism growth and environmental sustainability: trade-off or convergence? Environ Dev Sustain. 2022; 24 (6):8115–8144. doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-01775-5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Slater SJ, Christiana RW, Gustat AJ (2020) Recommendations for keeping parks and green space accessible for mental and physical health during COVID-19 and other pandemics. Prev Chronic Dis 17:200204. 10.5888/pcd17.200204 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Smith MD, Krannich RS, Hunter LM. Growth, decline, stability, and disruption: a longitudinal analysis of social well-being in four western rural communities. Rural Sociol. 2001; 66 (3):425–450. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.2001.tb00075.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Song H, Li G, Witt SF, Fei B. Tourism demand modelling and forecasting: how should demand be measured? Tour Econ. 2010; 16 (1):63–81. doi: 10.5367/000000010790872213. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stefănica M, Butnaru GI. Research on tourists’ perception of the relationship between tourism and environment. Procedia Econ Finance. 2015; 20 :595–600. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00113-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sun Y, Yesilada F, Andlib Z, Ajaz T. The role of eco-innovation and globalization towards carbon neutrality in the USA. J Environ Manag. 2021; 299 :113568. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113568. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sunchindah A (2015) Transboundary haze pollution problem in Southeast Asia: reframing ASEAN’s response working papers DP-2015-82, economic research institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
• Swain RB. Handbook of sustainability science and research. Cham: Springer; 2018. A critical analysis of the sustainable development goals; pp. 341–355. [ Google Scholar ]
• Szpilko D. Tourism supply chain—overview of selected literature. Procedia Eng. 2017; 182 :687–693. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.180. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tiwari AK, Nasreen S, Iqbal Z. Nexus between tourism and environmental pollution in South Asia: a comparative analysis using time-varying and non-parametric techniques. Curr Issue Tour. 2021; 24 (21):2996–3020. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1862070. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• UNEP (2021) New report reveals how infrastructure defines our climate. October, 12
• Zakaria M, Jun W, Ahmed H. Effect of terrorism on economic growth in Pakistan: an empirical analysis. Econ Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2019; 32 (1):1794–1812. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2019.1638290. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zakaria M, Jun W, Ahmed H. Effect of terrorism on economic growth in Pakistan: an empirical analysis. Economic Research-Ekonomska istraživanja. 2019; 32 (1):1794–1812. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2019.1638290. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang L, Gao J. Exploring the effects of international tourism on China’s economic growth, energy consumption and environmental pollution: evidence from a regional panel analysis. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2016; 53 :225–234. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.040. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang N, Ren R, Zhang Q, Zhang T. Air pollution and tourism development: an interplay. Ann Tour Res. 2020; 85 :103032. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2020.103032. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhu L, Ives AR, Zhang C, Guo Y, Radeloff VC. Climate change causes functionally colder winters for snow cover-dependent organisms. Nat Clim Chang. 2019; 9 (11):886–893. doi: 10.1038/s41558-019-0588-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Sustainable tourism

Related sdgs, promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable ....

Description

Publications.

Tourism is one of the world's fastest growing industries and an important source of foreign exchange and employment, while being closely linked to the social, economic, and environmental well-being of many countries, especially developing countries. Maritime or ocean-related tourism, as well as coastal tourism, are for example vital sectors of the economy in small island developing States (SIDS) and coastal least developed countries (LDCs) (see also: The Potential of the Blue Economy report as well as the Community of Ocean Action on sustainable blue economy).

The World Tourism Organization defines sustainable tourism as “tourism that takes full account of its current and future economic, social and environmental impacts, addressing the needs of visitors, the industry, the environment and host communities".

Based on General assembly resolution 70/193, 2017 was declared as the  International Year of Sustainable Tourism for Development.

In the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development SDG target 8.9, aims to “by 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products”. The importance of sustainable tourism is also highlighted in SDG target 12.b. which aims to “develop and implement tools to monitor sustainable development impacts for sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products”.

Tourism is also identified as one of the tools to “by 2030, increase the economic benefits to Small Island developing States and least developed countries” as comprised in SDG target 14.7.

In the Rio+20 outcome document The Future We want, sustainable tourism is defined by paragraph 130 as a significant contributor “to the three dimensions of sustainable development” thanks to its close linkages to other sectors and its ability to create decent jobs and generate trade opportunities. Therefore, Member States recognize “the need to support sustainable tourism activities and relevant capacity-building that promote environmental awareness, conserve and protect the environment, respect wildlife, flora, biodiversity, ecosystems and cultural diversity, and improve the welfare and livelihoods of local communities by supporting their local economies and the human and natural environment as a whole. ” In paragraph 130, Member States also “call for enhanced support for sustainable tourism activities and relevant capacity-building in developing countries in order to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development”.

In paragraph 131, Member States “encourage the promotion of investment in sustainable tourism, including eco-tourism and cultural tourism, which may include creating small- and medium-sized enterprises and facilitating access to finance, including through microcredit initiatives for the poor, indigenous peoples and local communities in areas with high eco-tourism potential”. In this regard, Member States also “underline the importance of establishing, where necessary, appropriate guidelines and regulations in accordance with national priorities and legislation for promoting and supporting sustainable tourism”.

In 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg called for the promotion of sustainable tourism development, including non-consumptive and eco-tourism, in Chapter IV, paragraph 43 of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation.

At the Johannesburg Summit, the launch of the “Sustainable Tourism – Eliminating Poverty (ST-EP) initiative was announced. The initiative was inaugurated by the World Tourism Organization, in collaboration with UNCTAD, in order to develop sustainable tourism as a force for poverty alleviation.

The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) last reviewed the issue of sustainable tourism in 2001, when it was acting as the Preparatory Committee for the Johannesburg Summit.

The importance of sustainable tourism was also mentioned in Agenda 21.

For more information and documents on this topic,  please visit this link

UNWTO Annual Report 2016

In December 2015, the United Nations General Assembly declared 2017 as the International Year of Sustainable Tourism for Development. This is a unique opportunity to devote a year to activities that promote the transformational power of tourism to help us reach a better future. This important cele...

UNWTO Annual Report 2015

2015 was a landmark year for the global community. In September, the 70th Session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a universal agenda for planet and people. Among the 17 SDGs and 169 associated targets, tourism is explicitly featured in Goa...

Emerging Issues for Small Island Developing States

The 2012 UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Global Environmental Issues primarily identified emerging environmental issues and possible solutions on a global scale and perspective. In 2013, UNEP carried out a similar exercise to identify priority emerging environmental issues that are of concern to ...

Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom, We recognize that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for su...

Towards Measuring the Economic Value of Wildlife Watching Tourism in Africa

Set against the backdrop of the ongoing poaching crisis driven by a dramatic increase in the illicit trade in wildlife products, this briefing paper intends to support the ongoing efforts of African governments and the broader international community in the fight against poaching. Specifically, this...

Status and Trends of Caribbean Coral Reefs: 1970-2012

Previous Caribbean assessments lumped data together into a single database regardless of geographic location, reef environment, depth, oceanographic conditions, etc. Data from shallow lagoons and back reef environments were combined with data from deep fore-reef environments and atolls. Geographic c...

15 Years of the UNWTO World Tourism Network on Child Protection: A Compilation of Good Practices

Although it is widely recognized that tourism is not the cause of child exploitation, it can aggravate the problem when parts of its infrastructure, such as transport networks and accommodation facilities, are exploited by child abusers for nefarious ends. Additionally, many other factors that contr...

Natural Resources Forum: Special Issue Tourism

The journal considers papers on all topics relevant to sustainable development. In addition, it dedicates series, issues and special sections to specific themes that are relevant to the current discussions of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)....

Thailand: Supporting Sustainable Development in Thailand: A Geographic Clusters Approach

Market forces and government policies, including the Tenth National Development Plan (2007-2012), are moving Thailand toward a more geographically specialized economy. There is a growing consensus that Thailand’s comparative and competitive advantages lie in amenity services that have high reliance...

Natural Resources Forum, a United Nations Sustainable Development Journal (NRF)

&nbsp; Natural Resources Forum, a United Nations Sustainable Development Journal,&nbsp;seeks to address gaps in current knowledge&nbsp;and stimulate relevant policy discussions, leading to the implementation of&nbsp;the sustainable development agenda&nbsp;and the achievement of&nbsp;the Sustainable...

Road Map on Building a Green Economy for Sustainable Development in Carriacou and Petite Martinique, Grenada

This publication is the product of an international study led by the Division for Sustainable Development (DSD) of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) in cooperation with the Ministry of Carriacou and Petite Martinique Affairs and the Ministry of Environment, Foreig...

UN Ocean Conference 2025

Our Ocean, Our Future, Our Responsibility “The ocean is fundamental to life on our planet and to our future. The ocean is an important source of the planet’s biodiversity and plays a vital role in the climate system and water cycle. The ocean provides a range of ecosystem services, supplies us with

UN Ocean Conference 2022

The UN Ocean Conference 2022, co-hosted by the Governments of Kenya and Portugal, came at a critical time as the world was strengthening its efforts to mobilize, create and drive solutions to realize the 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.

58th Session of the Commission for Social Development – CSocD58

22nd general assembly of the united nations world tourism organization, world tourism day 2017 official celebration.

This year’s World Tourism Day, held on 27 September, will be focused on Sustainable Tourism – a Tool for Development. Celebrated in line with the 2017 International Year of Sustainable Tourism for Development, the Day will be dedicated to exploring the contribution of tourism to the Sustainable Deve

World Tourism Day 2016 Official Celebration

Accessible Tourism for all is about the creation of environments that can cater for the needs of all of us, whether we are traveling or staying at home. May that be due to a disability, even temporary, families with small children, or the ageing population, at some point in our lives, sooner or late

4th Global Summit on City Tourism

The World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) and the Regional Council for Tourism of Marrakesh with support of the Government of Morroco are organizing the 4th Global Summit on City Tourism in Marrakesh, Morroco (9-10 December 2015). International experts in city tourism, representatives of city DMOs, of

2nd Euro-Asian Mountain Resorts Conference

The World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) and Ulsan Metropolitan City with support of the Government of the Republic of Korea are organizing the 2nd Euro-Asian Mountain Resorts Conference, in Ulsan, Republic of Korea (14 - 16 October 2015). Under the title “Paving the Way for a Bright Future for Mounta

21st General Assembly of the United Nations World Tourism Organization

Unwto regional conference enhancing brand africa - fostering tourism development.

Tourism is one of the Africa’s most promising sectors in terms of development, and represents a major opportunity to foster inclusive development, increase the region’s participation in the global economy and generate revenues for investment in other activities, including environmental preservation.

• January 2017 International Year of Tourism In the context of the universal 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the International Year aims to support a change in policies, business practices and consumer behavior towards a more sustainable tourism sector that can contribute to the SDGs.
• January 2015 Targets 8.9, 12 b,14.7 The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development commits Member States, through Sustainable Development Goal Target 8.9 to “devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products”. The importance of sustainable tourism, as a driver for jobs creation and the promotion of local culture and products, is also highlighted in Sustainable Development Goal target 12.b. Tourism is also identified as one of the tools to “increase [by 2030] the economic benefits to Small Island developing States and least developed countries”, through Sustainable Development Goals Target 14.7.
• January 2012 Future We Want (Para 130-131) Sustainable tourism is defined as a significant contributor “to the three dimensions of sustainable development” thanks to its close linkages to other sectors and its ability to create decent jobs and generate trade opportunities. Therefore, Member States recognize “the need to support sustainable tourism activities and relevant capacity-building that promote environmental awareness, conserve and protect the environment, respect wildlife, flora, biodiversity, ecosystems and cultural diversity, and improve the welfare and livelihoods of local communities” as well as to “encourage the promotion of investment in sustainable tourism, including eco-tourism and cultural tourism, which may include creating small and medium sized enterprises and facilitating access to finance, including through microcredit initiatives for the poor, indigenous peoples and local communities in areas with high eco-tourism potential”.
• January 2009 Roadmap for Recovery UNWTO announced in March 2009 the elaboration of a Roadmap for Recovery to be finalized by UNWTO’s General Assembly, based on seven action points. The Roadmap includes a set of 15 recommendations based on three interlocking action areas: resilience, stimulus, green economy aimed at supporting the tourism sector and the global economy.
• January 2008 Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria The Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria represent the minimum requirements any tourism business should observe in order to ensure preservation and respect of the natural and cultural resources and make sure at the same time that tourism potential as tool for poverty alleviation is enforced. The Criteria are 41 and distributed into four different categories: 1) sustainability management, 2) social and economic 3) cultural 4) environmental.
• January 2003 1st Int. Conf. on Climate Change and Tourism The conference was organized in order to gather tourism authorities, organizations, businesses and scientists to discuss on the impact that climate change can have on the tourist sector. The event took place from 9 till 11 April 2003 in Djerba, Tunisia.
• January 2003 WTO becomes a UN specialized body By Resolution 453 (XV), the Assembly agreed on the transformation of the WTO into a United Nations specialized body. Such transformation was later ratified by the United Nations General Assembly with the adoption of Resolution A/RES/58/232.
• January 2002 World Ecotourism Summit Held in May 2002, in Quebec City, Canada, the Summit represented the most important event in the framework of the International Year of Ecosystem. The Summit identified as main themes: ecotourism policy and planning, regulation of ecotourism, product development, marketing and promotion of ecotourism and monitoring costs and benefits of ecotourism.
• January 1985 Tourism Bill of Rights and Tourist Code At the World Tourism Organization Sixth Assembly held in Sofia in 1985, the Tourism Bill of Rights and Tourist Code were adopted, setting out the rights and duties of tourists and host populations and formulating policies and action for implementation by states and the tourist industry.
• January 1982 Acapulco Document Adopted in 1982, the Acapulco Document acknowledges the new dimension and role of tourism as a positive instrument towards the improvement of the quality of life for all peoples, as well as a significant force for peace and international understanding. The Acapulco Document also urges Member States to elaborate their policies, plans and programmes on tourism, in accordance with their national priorities and within the framework of the programme of work of the World Tourism Organization.

14 important environmental impacts of tourism + explanations + examples

The environmental impacts of tourism have gained increasing attention in recent years.

With the rise in sustainable tourism and an increased number of initiatives for being environmentally friendly, tourists and stakeholders alike are now recognising the importance of environmental management in the tourism industry.

In this post, I will explain why the environmental impacts of tourism are an important consideration and what the commonly noted positive and negative environmental impacts of tourism are.

Why the environment is so important to tourism

Positive environmental impacts of tourism, water resources, land degradation , local resources , air pollution and noise , solid waste and littering , aesthetic pollution, construction activities and infrastructure development, deforestation and intensified or unsustainable use of land , marina development, coral reefs, anchoring and other marine activities , alteration of ecosystems by tourist activities , environmental impacts of tourism: conclusion, environmental impacts of tourism reading list.

The quality of the environment, both natural and man-made, is essential to tourism. However, tourism’s relationship with the environment is complex and many activities can have adverse environmental effects if careful tourism planning and management is not undertaken.

It is ironic really, that tourism often destroys the very things that it relies on!

Many of the negative environmental impacts that result from tourism are linked with the construction of general infrastructure such as roads and airports, and of tourism facilities, including resorts, hotels, restaurants, shops, golf courses and marinas. The negative impacts of tourism development can gradually destroy the environmental resources on which it depends.

It’s not ALL negative, however!

Tourism has the potential to create beneficial effects on the environment by contributing to environmental protection and conservation. It is a way to raise awareness of environmental values and it can serve as a tool to finance protection of natural areas and increase their economic importance.

In this article I have outlined exactly how we can both protect and destroy the environment through tourism. I have also created a new YouTube video on the environmental impacts of tourism, you can see this below. (by the way- you can help me to be able to keep content like this free for everyone to access by subscribing to my YouTube channel! And don’t forget to leave me a comment to say hi too!).

Although there are not as many (far from it!) positive environmental impacts of tourism as there are negative, it is important to note that tourism CAN help preserve the environment!

The most commonly noted positive environmental impact of tourism is raised awareness. Many destinations promote ecotourism and sustainable tourism and this can help to educate people about the environmental impacts of tourism. Destinations such as Costa Rica and The Gambia have fantastic ecotourism initiatives that promote environmentally-friendly activities and resources. There are also many national parks, game reserves and conservation areas around the world that help to promote positive environmental impacts of tourism.

Positive environmental impacts can also be induced through the NEED for the environment. Tourism can often not succeed without the environment due the fact that it relies on it (after all we can’t go on a beach holiday without a beach or go skiing without a mountain, can we?).

In many destinations they have organised operations for tasks such as cleaning the beach in order to keep the destination aesthetically pleasant and thus keep the tourists happy. Some destinations have taken this further and put restrictions in place for the number of tourists that can visit at one time.

Not too long ago the island of Borocay in the Philippines was closed to tourists to allow time for it to recover from the negative environmental impacts that had resulted from large-scale tourism in recent years. Whilst inconvenient for tourists who had planned to travel here, this is a positive example of tourism environmental management and we are beginning to see more examples such as this around the world.

Negative environmental impacts of tourism

Negative environmental impacts of tourism occur when the level of visitor use is greater than the environment’s ability to cope with this use.

Uncontrolled conventional tourism poses potential threats to many natural areas around the world. It can put enormous pressure on an area and lead to impacts such as: soil erosion , increased pollution, discharges into the sea, natural habitat loss, increased pressure on endangered species and heightened vulnerability to forest fires. It often puts a strain on water resources, and it can force local populations to compete for the use of critical resources.

I will explain each of these negative environmental impacts of tourism below.

Depletion of natural resources

Tourism development can put pressure on natural resources when it increases consumption in areas where resources are already scarce. Some of the most common noted examples include using up water resources, land degradation and the depletion of other local resources.

The tourism industry generally overuses water resources for hotels, swimming pools, golf courses and personal use of water by tourists. This can result in water shortages and degradation of water supplies, as well as generating a greater volume of waste water.

In drier regions, like the Mediterranean, the issue of water scarcity is of particular concern. Because of the hot climate and the tendency for tourists to consume more water when on holiday than they do at home, the amount used can run up to 440 litres a day. This is almost double what the inhabitants of an average Spanish city use. 

Golf course maintenance can also deplete fresh water resources.

In recent years golf tourism has increased in popularity and the number of golf courses has grown rapidly.

Golf courses require an enormous amount of water every day and this can result in water scarcity. Furthermore, golf resorts are more and more often situated in or near protected areas or areas where resources are limited, exacerbating their impacts.

An average golf course in a tropical country such as Thailand needs 1500kg of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides per year and uses as much water as 60,000 rural villagers.

Important land resources include fertile soil, forests , wetlands and wildlife. Unfortunately, tourism often contributes to the degradation of said resources. Increased construction of tourism facilities has increased the pressure on these resources and on scenic landscapes.

Animals are often displaced when their homes are destroyed or when they are disturbed by noise. This may result in increased animals deaths, for example road-kill deaths. It may also contribute to changes in behaviour.

Animals may become a nuisance, by entering areas that they wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) usually go into, such as people’s homes. It may also contribute towards aggressive behaviour when animals try to protect their young or savage for food that has become scarce as a result of tourism development.

Picturesque landscapes are often destroyed by tourism. Whilst many destinations nowadays have limits and restrictions on what development can occur and in what style, many do not impose any such rules. High rise hotels and buildings which are not in character with the surrounding architecture or landscape contribute to a lack of atheistic appeal.

Forests often suffer negative impacts of tourism in the form of deforestation caused by fuel wood collection and land clearing. For example, one trekking tourist in Nepal can use four to five kilograms of wood a day!

There are also many cases of erosion, whereby tourists may trek the same path or ski the same slope so frequently that it erodes the natural landscape. Sites such as Machu Pichu have been forced to introduce restrictions on tourist numbers to limit the damage caused.

Tourism can create great pressure on local resources like energy, food, and other raw materials that may already be in short supply. Greater extraction and transport of these resources exacerbates the physical impacts associated with their exploitation.

Because of the seasonal character of the industry, many destinations have ten times more inhabitants in the high season as in the low season.

A high demand is placed upon these resources to meet the high expectations tourists often have (proper heating, hot water, etc.). This can put significant pressure on the local resources and infrastructure, often resulting in the local people going without in order to feed the tourism industry.

Tourism can cause the same forms of pollution as any other industry: Air emissions; noise pollution; solid waste and littering; sewage; oil and chemicals. The tourism industry also contributes to forms of architectural/visual pollution.

Transport by air, road, and rail is continuously increasing in response to the rising number of tourists and their greater mobility. In fact, tourism accounts for more than 60% of all air travel.

One study estimated that a single transatlantic return flight emits almost half the CO2 emissions produced by all other sources (lighting, heating, car use, etc.) consumed by an average person yearly- that’s a pretty shocking statistic!

I remember asking my class to calculate their carbon footprint one lesson only to be very embarrassed that my emissions were A LOT higher than theirs due to the amount of flights I took each year compared to them. Point proven I guess….

Anyway, air pollution from tourist transportation has impacts on a global level, especially from CO2 emissions related to transportation energy use. This can contribute to severe local air pollution . It also contributes towards climate change.

Fortunately, technological advancements in aviation are seeing more environmentally friendly aircraft and fuels being used worldwide, although the problem is far from being cured. If you really want to help save the environment, the answer is to seek alternative methods of transportation and avoid flying.

You can also look at ways to offset your carbon footprint .

Noise pollution can also be a concern.

Noise pollution from aircraft, cars, buses, (+ snowmobiles and jet skis etc etc) can cause annoyance, stress, and even hearing loss for humans. It also causes distress to wildlife and can cause animals to alter their natural activity patterns. Having taught at a university near London Heathrow for several years, this was always a topic of interest to my students and made a popular choice of dissertation topic .

In areas with high concentrations of tourist activities and appealing natural attractions, waste disposal is a serious problem, contributing significantly to the environmental impacts of tourism.

Improper waste disposal can be a major despoiler of the natural environment. Rivers, scenic areas, and roadsides are areas that are commonly found littered with waste, ranging from plastic bottles to sewage.

Cruise tourism in the Caribbean, for example, is a major contributor to this negative environmental impact of tourism. Cruise ships are estimated to produce more than 70,000 tons of waste each year. 

The Wider Caribbean Region, stretching from Florida to French Guiana, receives 63,000 port calls from ships each year, and they generate 82,000 tons of rubbish. About 77% of all ship waste comes from cruise vessels. On average, passengers on a cruise ship each account for 3.5 kilograms of rubbish daily – compared with the 0.8 kilograms each generated by the less well-endowed folk on shore.

Whilst it is generally an unwritten rule that you do not throw rubbish into the sea, this is difficult to enforce in the open ocean . In the past cruise ships would simply dump their waste while out at sea. Nowadays, fortunately, this is less commonly the case, however I am sure that there are still exceptions.

Solid waste and littering can degrade the physical appearance of the water and shoreline and cause the death of marine animals. Just take a look at the image below. This is a picture taken of the insides of a dead bird. Bird often mistake floating plastic for fish and eat it. They can not digest plastic so once their stomachs become full they starve to death. This is all but one sad example of the environmental impacts of tourism.

Mountain areas also commonly suffer at the hands of the tourism industry. In mountain regions, trekking tourists generate a great deal of waste. Tourists on expedition frequently leave behind their rubbish, oxygen cylinders and even camping equipment. I have heard many stories of this and I also witnessed it first hand when I climbed Mount Kilimanjaro .

The construction of hotels, recreation and other facilities often leads to increased sewage pollution. 

Unfortunately, many destinations, particularly in the developing world, do not have strict law enrichments on sewage disposal. As a result, wastewater has polluted seas and lakes surrounding tourist attractions around the world. This damages the flora and fauna in the area and can cause serious damage to coral reefs.

Sewage pollution threatens the health of humans and animals.

I’ll never forget the time that I went on a school trip to climb Snowdonia in Wales. The water running down the streams was so clear and perfect that some of my friends had suggested we drink some. What’s purer than mountain fresh water right from the mountain, right?

A few minutes later we saw a huge pile of (human??) feaces in the water upstream!!

Often tourism fails to integrate its structures with the natural features and indigenous architecture of the destination. Large, dominating resorts of disparate design can look out of place in any natural environment and may clash with the indigenous structural design. 

A lack of land-use planning and building regulations in many destinations has facilitated sprawling developments along coastlines, valleys and scenic routes. The sprawl includes tourism facilities themselves and supporting infrastructure such as roads, employee housing, parking, service areas, and waste disposal. This can make a tourist destination less appealing and can contribute to a loss of appeal.

Physical impacts of tourism development

Whilst the tourism industry itself has a number of negative environmental impacts. There are also a number of physical impacts that arise from the development of the tourism industry. This includes the construction of buildings, marinas, roads etc.

The development of tourism facilities can involve sand mining, beach and sand dune erosion and loss of wildlife habitats.

The tourist often will not see these side effects of tourism development, but they can have devastating consequences for the surrounding environment. Animals may displaced from their habitats and the noise from construction may upset them.

I remember reading a while ago (although I can’t seem to find where now) that in order to develop the resort of Kotu in The Gambia, a huge section of the coastline was demolished in order to be able to use the sand for building purposes. This would inevitably have had severe consequences for the wildlife living in the area.

Construction of ski resort accommodation and facilities frequently requires clearing forested land.

Land may also be cleared to obtain materials used to build tourism sites, such as wood.

I’ll never forget the site when I flew over the Amazon Rainforest only to see huge areas of forest cleared. That was a sad reality to see.

Likewise, coastal wetlands are often drained due to lack of more suitable sites. Areas that would be home to a wide array of flora and fauna are turned into hotels, car parks and swimming pools.

The building of marinas and ports can also contribute to the negative environmental impacts of tourism.

Development of marinas and breakwaters can cause changes in currents and coastlines.

These changes can have vast impacts ranging from changes in temperatures to erosion spots to the wider ecosystem.

Coral reefs are especially fragile marine ecosystems. They suffer worldwide from reef-based tourism developments and from tourist activity.

Evidence suggests a variety of impacts to coral result from shoreline development. Increased sediments in the water can affect growth. Trampling by tourists can damage or even kill coral. Ship groundings can scrape the bottom of the sea bed and kill the coral. Pollution from sewage can have adverse effects.

All of these factors contribute to a decline and reduction in the size of coral reefs worldwide. This then has a wider impact on the global marine life and ecosystem, as many animals rely on the coral for as their habitat and food source.

Physical impacts from tourist activities

The last point worth mentioning when discussing the environmental impacts of tourism is the way in which physical impacts can occur as a result of tourist activities.

This includes tramping, anchoring, cruising and diving. The more this occurs, the more damage that is caused. Natural, this is worse in areas with mass tourism and overtourism .

Tourists using the same trail over and over again trample the vegetation and soil, eventually causing damage that can lead to loss of biodiversity and other impacts. 

Such damage can be even more extensive when visitors frequently stray off established trails. This is evidenced in Machu Pichu as well as other well known destinations and attractions, as I discussed earlier in this post.

 In marine areas many tourist activities occur in or around fragile ecosystems. 

Anchoring, scuba diving, yachting and cruising are some of the activities that can cause direct degradation of marine ecosystems such as coral reefs. As I said previously, this can have a significant knock on effect on the surrounding ecosystem.

Habitats can be degraded by tourism leisure activities.

For example, wildlife viewing can bring about stress for the animals and alter their natural behaviour when tourists come too close. 

As I have articulated throughout this post, there are a range of environmental impacts that result from tourism. Whilst some are good, the majority unfortunately are bad. The answer to many of these problems boils down to careful tourism planning and management and the adoption of sustainable tourism principles.

Did you find this article helpful? Take a look at my posts on the social impacts of tourism and the economic impacts of tourism too! Oh, and follow me on social media !

If you are studying the environmental impacts of tourism or if you are interested in learning more about the environmental impacts of tourism, I have compiled a short reading list for you below.

• The 3 types of travel and tourism organisations
• 150 types of tourism! The ultimate tourism glossary
• 50 fascinating facts about the travel and tourism industry

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

How does agro-tourism integration influence the rebound effect of china’s agricultural eco-efficiency an economic development perspective.

• 1 College of Economics, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu, China
• 2 College of Economics and Management, Tarim University, Alar, China

Agro-tourism integration is a breakthrough to flourish rural industries and fulfill rural revitalization. Also, agricultural eco-efficiency and agro-tourism integration are closely linked, so investigating the relationship between the two is significant for realizing high-quality agro-ecological development in China. However, existing studies have ignored the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. For this purpose, using a dataset of 30 provincial administrative regions in China from 2001 to 2019, this paper employs the Entropy weight approach and super efficient Slack-Based Measure (SBM`) approach to measure the agro-tourism integration level and agricultural eco-efficiency, respectively. The system Generalized Method of Moments (SYS-GMM) approach is applied to investigate the effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. The statistical results reveal that agro-tourism integration significantly contributes to agricultural eco-efficiency, which remains valid after the robustness checks are executed. There is also significant path-dependence of agro-tourism integration. Finally, agro-tourism integration significantly contributes to agricultural eco-efficiency in the eastern region, while it significantly inhibits agricultural eco-efficiency in the central-western region. Our findings suggest that policymakers not only reinforced the deep integration of agriculture and tourism to stimulate the overall rural revitalization, but also formulated agro-tourism integration policies in a differentiated and green manner to contribute to agricultural eco-efficiency growth.

1 Introduction

Agriculture is the integration of natural reproduction and economic production ( Chandio et al., 2021 ), which is not only an essential foundation for national economic development ( Jinru et al., 2021 ), but also material support for human survival and development ( Lane and Kastenholz, 2015 ; Shi et al., 2022 ). Since 1978, agricultural development in China has made considerable contributions, with a total agricultural grain production of nearly 669 million tons in 2020, which accounts for 24.2% of the world’s total grain production ( Yang and Wang, 2021 ) 1 . Agriculture has served as a powerful guarantee for the sustainable development of China’s economy and society. However, there is also an imbalance in the supply of agricultural products with the unreasonable allocation of factors, weak competitiveness of agriculture, low-end locking of technology, and many varieties of agricultural products but not excellent. Simultaneously, to pursue high grain yield, Chinese chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and agricultural membranes have multiplied, while the excessive use of agricultural chemicals has brought about a grave problem of agricultural surface pollution ( Qiu et al., 2021 ). The National Plan for Sustainable Agricultural Development (2015–2030) stipulates that the current utilization rate of chemical fertilizers and pesticides is less than 1/3, the recycling rate of agricultural films is less than 2/3, the effective treatment rate of livestock and poultry manure is less than half, and straw burning and marine eutrophication are severely affected ( Yi et al., 2019 ) 2 . Just like that, agricultural pollution is a prominent problem seriously jeopardizing agricultural eco-efficiency ( Irfan and Ahmad 2022 ). The 2015 Central Rural Work Conference specified a strategy for the sustainable and healthy development of agriculture. The Chinese government further emphasizes various initiatives to boost the green development of agriculture ( Yu, 2011 ). Under such a background, it has emerged as an inevitable choice for the current and future development of agriculture to improve agricultural eco-efficiency, achieves resource conservation and environmental protection, and promote sustainable agricultural development.

Moreover, as China’s economy has shifted from the high-speed growth stage to the stage of high-quality development ( Hao et al., 2021 ; Rauf et al., 2021 ; Abbasi et al., 2022 ), agricultural development has also stepped into a new period from production-oriented to quality-oriented ( Zhao et al., 2008 ). How to reverse the previous factor-driven economic development model and focus on promoting quality change, efficiency change, and power change in economic development have become an urgent issue for policymakers to tackle. To crack the industrial deficiencies, power deficiencies, competition deficiencies, and environmental degradation challenges facing the revitalization of the countryside, the Chinese government has successively proposed to prioritize the development of agriculture and rural areas and promote high-quality agricultural development, and other major guidelines and strategies ( Iqbal et al., 2021 ; Irfan et al., 2021 ). Since then, the Chinese government has explicitly suggested that it is imperative to promote the revitalization of rural industries ( Wang J. et al., 2021 ; Khan et al., 2021 ; Fang et al., 2022 ), enrich new rural industries ( Wu et al., 2021a ; Shao et al., 2021 ), expand the value chain of agricultural industries, and realize the integrated development of agriculture and adjacent industries to fulfill the comprehensive revitalization of rural areas. The integration of rural industries has broadened the boundary of agricultural production possibilities, which is a powerful grip and significant driving force for China to break through the constraints of agricultural resources and the environment and fully implement the rural revitalization strategy. Among them, the integration of agriculture and tourism (agro-tourism integration) is a significant way to integrate rural industries, which is not only beneficial to broadening farmers’ income channels, promoting the transformation and upgrading of agriculture, and maintaining the prosperity and stability of rural areas but also helps to continuously enrich the tourism industry and lengthen the industrial chain. The Opinions on Accelerating the Modernization of Agriculture and Rural Areas by Comprehensively Promoting the Revitalization of the Countryside also clearly indicate that the synergistic development of agriculture and tourism is an essential element and the primary path to boost the “revitalization of the countryside” and deepen the structural reform on the supply side. Also, agro-tourism integration can develop power support for the agriculture and tourism industries, which not only significantly boosts the non-agricultural income of the rural population, but also has great practical significance for generating new rural industries and realizing ecological livability.

However, against such backgrounds as rising production costs, continuous deterioration of the ecological environment, and increasingly urgent resource constraints, the road to the development of the traditional crude agricultural tourism integration industry, relies on the original sparring resources, inputs, and ecology, which has been struggling. It is imperative to expeditiously facilitate the transformation and upgrading of agriculture, promote the coordinated development of new rural integration, and take the path of green and sustainable development of agriculture and enhancement of agricultural eco-efficiency. However, there are more researches on agricultural eco-efficiency that ignore the key factor of agro-tourism integration. Only some scholars have explored the development path of agro-tourism integration in terms of sustainable development ( Tang and Yin, 2006 ; Rajović and Bulatović, 2015 ; Pan et al., 2018 ). For example, Rajović and Bulatović (2015) find that agritourism, as a form of selective tourism, is not only a possible way to retain residents in rural areas, but also to promote economic growth and sustainable development in rural areas. Alternatively, some scholars have only investigated the measures and influencing factors of agricultural eco-efficiency ( Picazo-Tadeo et al., 2011 ; Deng, and Gibson, 2019 ; Liu et al., 2021 ). Agro-tourism integration is a major force to drive the development of the rural economy and realize the strategy of rural revitalization. So, what is the current status of agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency? Can agro-tourism integration contribute to the improvement of agricultural eco-efficiency? What is the role of agro-tourism integration in influencing agricultural eco-efficiency under different regional distributions? Such questions deserve further exploration. Therefore, a fixed-effects and the system generalized method of moments (SYS-GMM) and an instrumental variables methods are employed to empirically examine the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency on the basis of using a dataset of 30 provincial administrative regions from 2001 to 2019. It is significant to facilitate the development of agro-tourism integration for the comprehensive revitalization of rural regions and accelerate the sustainable development of agricultural green carpets by providing decision-making references and intellectual support as well as the formulation of relevant policies.

As such, this paper aims to conduct additional research in the following three categories. This paper uses the entropy weight approach and the Slack-Based Measure (SBM) model with undesired super-efficiency to measure agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency including agricultural carbon emissions, respectively, studying the impact of agro-tourism integration, with a view to providing evidence on whether agro-tourism integration can improve agricultural eco-efficiency and providing a reference for agricultural eco-environment improvement and industrial integration development. Furthermore, this paper identifies the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency by categorizing the research sample into an eastern and central-western region based on regional heterogeneity, to broaden the research content of agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency and propose deeper reference suggestions for how agro-tourism integration can differentially participate in environmental governance.

The remaining results of this paper are organized as follows. Section 2 gives a literature review on agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency. Section 3 provides the variable measures, model selection, and data description. Section 4 presents the empirical results and discusses it in detail. Finally, this paper concludes with precise policy implications and directions for future research based on the findings.

2 Literature Review

As the popularity of agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency has been increasing, researchers have carried out numerous useful explorations on the relationship between agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency from various dimensions, which also provides a rich research basis for this paper. Collectively, the research on agro-tourism integration and agro-ecological efficiency can be summarized in the following aspects.

2.1 Research on Agro-Tourism Integration

It is suggested that the research on agro-tourism integration has been conducted in the three primary dimensions as follows. First, it is the definition of agro-tourism integration and the study of cooperation mode ( Koutsouris et al., 2014 ; Lifang, 2018 ; Meng, 2019 ). Han et al. (2020) argue that agro-tourism integration involves the development process in which agriculture and tourism interpenetrate and intersect, and eventually merge into one, gradually forming a new type of business. Li et al. (2021) identifies agro-tourism integration as an economic model that adheres to the concept of green, low-carbon, and environmental protection and integrates agriculture and tourism. Some scholars have analytically defined agro-tourism integration in terms of agro-tourism and agro-tourism ( Torres, 2003 ; Ghadami et al., 2022 ). Hysa and Kruja (2022) , for example, consider agro-tourism integration as the economic realization of the sharing of the agricultural and tourism sectors. Dernoi (1983) outlines the possibilities of farm tourism for the development of rural areas when agriculture and tourism are combined in Europe, which is the prototype of agro-tourism integration development. Next, some scholars have measured agro-tourism integration ( Zhou et al., 2020 ; Uduji et al., 2021 ). Yi et al. (2019) used Yangjia town in Mianyang City as an example to gauge its level of agriculture-tourism integration through the AHP method and analyze the problems and solution measures in the process of its agriculture-tourism integration development. Qiu et al. (2021) explore the integration context of agriculture and tourism night from 2009 to 2018 by employing the entropy weight method and coupled coordination model in Henan Province. Yang and Wang (2021) measured the degree of agro-tourism integration based on the AHP-fuzzy integrated evaluation method considering the Enshu Gongshui grapefruit industry as an example. Finally, several scholars have undertaken profound analyses of the factors influencing agro-tourism integration ( Goreta Ban, 2021 ). Salihoglu and Gezici (2021) first investigate the link between the tourist and agricultural sectors and analyze the impact of supplier networks and geographic economies on the integration of the agro-tourism sector. Using Tanzania as a case study, Jani and Nguni (2021) identify the nature of supply and demand, agricultural scale, tourism destination, hotel scale, and scenic area type as significant factors influencing agro-tourism integration. Fleischer and Tchetchik (2005) suggest that agro-tourism integration can stimulate agricultural development and promote the diversification of special agro-tourism products, which satisfies the diversified needs of tourists and in turn promotes the rapid development of the agricultural economy. Gruia et al. (2021) reveal that after the new crown epidemic Romania needs to guide village governance according to the spirit of rural communities is to develop new agro-tourism policies and strategies and align with Europe.

2.2 Research on Agricultural Eco-efficiency

Scholars have yielded abundant achievements on agricultural eco-efficiency, and up to now, the research on agricultural eco-efficiency is mainly covering the following aspects. First, there are the definitions and origins of agricultural eco-efficiency. Agricultural eco-efficiency was most initially originating from the broad definition of eco-efficiency. Eco-efficiency was introduced by Schaltegger and Sturm (1990) , who interpreted it as the ratio of positive economic externalities to ecological load. Subsequently, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBSCD) and other official bodies jointly developed a definition of eco-efficiency at different levels, and concluded that eco-efficiency is the gradual reduction of ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout the life cycle to a level acceptable to the ecological carrying capacity of the earth, while achieving the goal of environmental quality and social harmony. The concept of agricultural eco-efficiency is an extension of eco-efficiency in the field of agriculture. Currently, there is no clear definition of agricultural eco-efficiency, but scholars have defined it in accordance with their research focus, and its connotation can be summarized as obtaining the maximum agricultural economic benefits with the minimum input of environmental and resource factors. Many scholars have transferred the applied concept of eco-efficiency to agriculture, and thus agro-ecological efficiency was introduced. However, there are many differences among the interpretations of agroecological efficiency because of the different research objectives and samples selected by scholars. However, the present study defines agroecological efficiency as the maximum agricultural economic return with the minimum agricultural resource input and the minimum undesired output. Furthermore, scholars in various research scales have tested agricultural eco-efficiency and analyzed its influencing factors. Scholars usually employ the ratio method ( Park et al., 2007 ), the indicator system method ( Lauwers, 2009 ; Van Caneghem et al., 2010 ), and the input-output method ( Akbar et al., 2021 ; Ji et al., 2021 ) to determine agricultural eco-efficiency ( Liu, and Cheng, 2022 ). For example, using factor analysis methods, Guthman (2000) estimates the scale of agricultural development and operational efficiency in California, United States.

Moradi et al. (2018) construct a DEA approach to the CCR model to assess the agricultural cycle efficiency of farms. Taking different agricultural ecological zones from Ghana in 2010, Addai et al. (2014) assess the technical efficiency of maize growers. Akbar et al. (2021) calculate the agroecological efficiency of 30 provincial administrative regions in China in terms of agroecological efficiency using an SBM that includes undesired outputs. The super-efficient SBM model has gradually emerged as a prevailing model for measuring agricultural eco-efficiency because it combines the advantages of the super-efficient DEA model and SBM model, incorporates undesired outputs into the model, and effectively eliminates the slack phenomenon of inputs and outputs and the juxtaposition of ranking ( Pang et al., 2016 ; Coluccia et al., 2020 ). In terms of the influencing factors of agricultural eco-efficiency, Yang et al. (2022) utilize a differential GMM model to quantify the influence mechanism between agricultural eco-efficiency and food security and the impact of different public investments in agriculture on them. Liu et al. (2020) suggest that agricultural infrastructure conditions, agricultural industry structure, agricultural development potential, and agricultural input intensity are the determinants of agricultural eco-efficiency. Liao et al. (2021) identify energy inputs, water inputs, and carbon emissions as the core drivers of spatial heterogeneity in agricultural eco-efficiency in China. Ma and Li (2021) examine digital inclusive finance and agricultural eco-efficiency and reveal that the effect of digital inclusive finance on agricultural eco-efficiency is non-linear with significant regional heterogeneity, which is dramatically reinforced by agricultural R&D investment.

Summarizing the above literature, it can be observed that agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency have emerged as hotspots of academic attention, scholars have made meticulous and in-depth analyses of agricultural tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency on the basis of different research approaches and research objects ( Chemnasiri, 2012 ; Zhou et al., 2021 ). Although scholars have separately examined the influencing factors of agricultural tourism integration and the influencing factors of agricultural eco-efficiency, few scholars have investigated the impact on agricultural eco-efficiency caused by agro-tourism integration ( Wang and Zhou, 2021 ). Additionally, despite the fact that the measurement approaches, index systems, and analysis perspectives of agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency have their distinctive features, there are some weaknesses ( Yi et al., 2019 ; Hysa and Kruja, 2022 ). Because of this, this paper introduces agricultural carbon emissions into the eco-efficiency evaluation system, and utilizes a non-radial super-efficient SBM model and the Entropy weight method model to respectively gauge 2001–2019 agricultural eco-efficiency and agro-tourism integration levels. The systematic GMM model is employed to explore the heterogeneous characteristics of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency, so as to promote agricultural ecological protection and high-quality agricultural development.

3 Model Setting, Variables Definition, and Data Description

3.1 model setting.

To alleviate the endogeneity problem, referring to Wu et al. (2020) , the generalized method of moments (GMM) is applied to assess the influence of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. However, compared to differential GMM, systematic GMM (SYS-GMM) has fewer bias problems and improved efficiency in estimating results with limited samples, which not only alleviates the weak instrumental variables arising from the differential GMM estimation method, but also contributes to the robustness of the model estimation. Therefore, this paper opts for a systematic GMM to estimate the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. The specific form of the equation is set as follows.

where the subscripts   i ( t ) and t denote provinces (years), respectively. A E E characterizes agricultural eco-efficiency. A T I characterizes agro-tourism integration. X denotes some other factors that may affect agro-ecological efficiency, including agricultural economic level ( A E L ) , agricultural machinery density ( A M D ) , industrialization level ( I N L ) , agricultural employment level   ( A E T ) , financial support for agriculture ( F S A ) , human capital ( H U M ) , information level ( I N F ) , marketization level ( M A R ) , and R&D investment ( R D I ) . α 0 , α 1 ,   α 2 , α n   denote the coefficient to be estimated. ε denotes the random perturbation term, which is subject to the white noise process.

3.2 Variables Selection

3.2.1 explained variables.

Agricultural eco-efficiency ( A E E ). Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is the method frequently employed to evaluate agricultural eco-efficiency. DEA approach is a nonparametric statistical method based on the concept of relative efficiency and the relative effectiveness of the same type of units based on multi-indicator inputs and multi-indicator outputs ( Hao et al., 2020 ; Yang et al., 2021a ; Ren et al., 2022a ). The principle of DEA lies in substituting the production function in microeconomics with an envelope and then mapping the inputs and outputs of all decision-making units (DMUs) into space. Then, the effective and ineffective points are divided by constructing a non-parametric envelope front line, with the effective points located on the frontier and the ineffective points located below the frontier ( Cecchini et al., 2018 ; Ren et al., 2021 ; Su et al., 2021 ). However, the traditional DEA model is also classified as a radial model by some scholars, but the probability that the inputs and outputs change in the same proportion is very low or even 0. Moreover, the traditional radial DEA model has neglected the input and output slack variables ( Li et al., 2021 ; Liu et al., 2021 ). Non-radial slack can often be found, with the possibility of improved slack non-proportionality as well as radial proportionality in the decision unit ( Li and Shi, 2014 ). When the input (output) slack plays a significant role in the evaluation of the efficiency of a decision unit, the efficiency derived from the measurement of the model alone is inherently unreasonable ( Hao et al., 2022 ). To fully capture the input (output) slack, Tone (2001) develops a super-efficient SBM model based on the SBM models. However, the SBM model, like the traditional DEA model, makes it difficult to further distinguish efficiency differences among efficient DMUs for DMUs that are all 1 efficient. Furthermore, the super-efficient SBM model can handle the “slack” problem better and provide a comparison for decision-making units (DMUs) with efficiency higher than or equal to 1. Therefore, the super-efficient SBM model is chosen for agricultural eco-efficiency measurement. The model construction is presented in the following form.

where A E E denotes the agricultural eco-efficiency value. There are n decision units, each of which includes m inputs, r 1   desired outputs, and   r 2 undesired outputs. x denotes an element in the input matrix. y d denotes an element in the desired output matrix. y u denotes an element in the undesired output matrix.

Agricultural eco-efficiency measurement system. Agriculture in a broad sense includes agriculture, livestock, and fishery, while agriculture in a narrow sense means plantation. This paper measures agricultural eco-efficiency with a narrow sense of agriculture as the focus of the survey. Based on the characteristics of plantation production, the input and output indicators are selected as follows.

3.2.1.1 Input Indicators

The inputs in agricultural production include fertilizer, irrigation, and mulch needed for crop growth, in addition to conventional labor and land inputs. This paper selects 8 input indicators that are associated with agricultural production, which basically cover the required inputs in the agricultural production cycle.

Labor input is quantified by the amount of labor input in agricultural production, which is the product of the number of people employed in the primary sector and the ratio of total agricultural output to total agricultural, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery output. Land input, as one of the necessary elements of agricultural production, is denoted by the total sown area of crops. Fertilizers containing nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and other elements are usually applied in agricultural production, and fertilizer inputs are characterized by the amount of fertilizer applied after converting the sum of nitrogen, phosphorus, and compound fertilizers. Pesticide inputs are characterized by the number of pesticides used. The agricultural film, a breakthrough in modern agriculture, whose inputs significantly improve crop survival and growth, is characterized by the amount of agricultural film used. The input of machinery in modern agriculture has boosted labor efficiency and mechanization is an important feature of modern agriculture. The total power of agricultural machinery is denoted as agricultural machinery power input. The use of machinery in modern agriculture requires energy to power it. Energy inputs are denoted by the amount of agricultural diesel used. Water is an essential element in crop production. The effective irrigated area is used to express the irrigation input.

3.2.1.2 Desired Output

Following Liao et al. (2021) and Ma and Li (2021) , the total agricultural output value is selected to denote the desired output of agriculture (to avoid the influence of price factors, this paper uses the price index of total agricultural, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery output value, which is smoothed with the consumer price index in 2000 as the base period).

3.2.1.3 Undesired Output

Agricultural carbon emissions are characterized as non-desired outputs, which derive from 6 major direct or indirect sources such as fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural films, agricultural diesel, irrigation electricity and water consumption, and tillage loss. Referring to Shi et al. (2022) and Liao et al. (2021) , the emission coefficients of 6 major carbon sources were 0.895 6  ( k g   / k g ) for fertilizer, 4.934 1 ( k g   / k g ) for pesticide, 5.18 ( k g   / k g ) for agricultural film, 0.592 7 (   k g   / k g ) for diesel, 20.476 ( k g / k m 2 ) for agricultural irrigation and 312.6 ( k g   / k m 2 ) for agricultural tillage.

3.2.2 Core Explanatory Variables

Agro-tourism integration ( A T I ). Agro-tourism integration is a new business model based on the industrial connection between agriculture and tourism, which derives from the development of the rural tourism industry from rural agriculture, and the derivation of agrarian caravans, agricultural estates, melon and fruit, and vegetable production bases ( Astuti et al., 2019 ). Meanwhile, it fully utilizes rural natural resources, absorbs rural surplus labor, forms new economic growth points in rural areas, as well as realizes good economic and social benefits for the whole society. Thus, the degree of association between agriculture and tourism is the basis for evaluating agro-tourism integration, and the economic and social benefits of integration development serve as the outcome ( Budiasa and Ambarawati, 2014 ) see ( Table 1 ). Referring to Zhou et al. (2021) , this paper establishes the following agro-tourism integration index system using the Entropy weight method.

TABLE 1 . Agro-tourism integration index system.

Agro-tourism integration level measurement. For the synthesis of the agro-tourism integration index system, referring to Cao et al. (2021) and Cao et al. (2022) , the more objective Entropy weight method is adopted to integrate each index. The specific steps are as follows.

Step 1. The indicators are normalized dimensionless using the extreme difference standardization method. Since the selected indicators all have a positive influence on agro-tourism integration, thus the indicators are processed as follows.

Step 2. Calculating the relative share of the i th region for the   j th indicator.

In Eq. 5 , P i j is the relative weight and m is the number of samples.

Step 3. Calculating the entropy value of the   j th indicator.

In Eq. 6 , e j is the entropy value of the   j th indicator.

Step 4. Calculating the weight ( ω j ) .

In Eq. 7 , ( 1 − e j ) is the information utility value of   j th .

Step 5. Calculating the indicator of different years in each region.

3.2.3 Control Variables

Referring to Shi et al. (2022) , Wang J. et al. (2022) , and Zhao et al. (2021) , the variables of agricultural economic level ( A E L ) , agricultural machinery density ( A M D ) , industrialization level ( I N L ) , agricultural employment level   ( A E T ) , financial support for agriculture ( F S A ) , human capital ( H U M ) , Informatization level ( I N F ) , marketization level ( M A R ) , and R&D investment ( R D I ) are considered to control for other factors affecting agricultural eco-efficiency. Agricultural economic level   ( A E L ) is quantified using the ratio of total agricultural output to the resident population. Agricultural machinery density ( A M D ) is captured by the ratio of total agricultural machinery power to total crop sown area. Industrialization level ( I N L ) is characterized by the ratio of industrial value-added to GDP. Agricultural employment level ( A E T ) is characterized using the ratio of employment in the primary sector to the total number of employees. Financial support for agriculture   ( F S A ) is summarized by the ratio of agricultural, forestry, and water expenditures to local general budget expenditures. The number of years of education per capita is selected to denote human capital ( H U M ) . Informatization level ( I N F ) is denoted by the volume of the postal and telecommunication business. Marketization level ( M A R ) is selected to measure the ratio of employees in private and individual enterprises to the resident population. R&D investment ( R D I ) is measured using R&D noted as a share of GDP.

3.3 Data Description

The study subjects are 30 provincial administrative regions in mainland China (limited to data availability and the special agricultural production conditions in Tibet and Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan, which are not included in the empirical study), and the time horizon is 2001–2019. The data involved in this paper are collected from “China Rural Statistical Yearbook”, “China Agricultural Statistics”, “Fifty Years of New China Agricultural Statistics”, “China Tourism Statistical Yearbook”, “China Statistical Yearbook” and provincial statistical yearbooks, the National Economic and Social Development Statistical Bulletin. Moreover, some of the missing data are supplemented by consulting the official websites of the relevant ministries and provincial statistical bureaus. The data measured in monetary units have been eliminated for inflation. Descriptive statistics are placed in Table 2 .

TABLE 2 . Descriptive statistics.

4 Results and Discussion

4.1 baseline regression results and discussion.

For comparison, columns 1) and 2) of Table 3 list the estimation results of the mixed least square method regression model. Columns 3) and 4) of Table 3 show the estimation results of the SYS- GMM model. Table 3 reports that the coefficients of A R   ( 2 ) and the H a n s e n   t e s t are not significant ( p − v a l u e   >   0.1 ), indicating that the disturbance terms do not have second-order serial autocorrelation as well as the validity of the instrumental variable selection, which confirms the rationality of employing the SYS- GMM to verify the effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. Further, an interesting finding is that the coefficient of A T I is significantly positive ( p − v a l u e       <   0.01 ) with or without control variables introduced, i.e., agro-tourism integration can contribute to agricultural eco-efficiency. Our findings are in line with those of Liu et al. (2020) and Wang G. et al. (2022) . One possible explanation is that agro-tourism integration converts the value of the agricultural ecological environment into economic benefits, which contributes to enhancing the agricultural producers’ capital accumulation level ( Wang J. et al., 2022 ). It allows them to have enough funds to purchase advanced and efficient agricultural equipment, thus diminishing factor inputs such as labor, arable land, and mechanical power and water, and ultimately improving agricultural production efficiency ( Chemnasiri, 2012 ; Ana, 2017 ). Also, the development process of agro-tourism integration always adheres to scale, industrialization, intensification, and clean production and operation. Moreover, agro-tourism integration is mainly a direct regenerative use of natural and human resources, transforming them into scenic resources and attractive tourism products, which carry natural ecological attributes ( Yi et al., 2019 ). During the process of agro-tourism integration development, the rural environment should be greened, purified, and beautified, which is conducive to the protection of the rural ecological environment ( Budiasa and Ambarawati, 2014 ). Simultaneously, agro-tourism integration strengthens the economic base of the countryside and provides a financial guarantee for the maintenance and improvement of the rural ecological environment ( Qiu et al., 2021 ). During the process, agricultural producers gradually realize that ecological factors in the agricultural production process can create higher and more sustainable premiums. Therefore, to keep long-term sustainable economic returns, relevant practitioners will embrace the concept of low-carbon development and strengthen environmental awareness and behavior, such as reducing harmful environmental factors such as fertilizer and pesticide inputs and using low-carbon products, which minimize the negative impact of production and operation activities on the natural environment and thus contribute to the improvement of agricultural eco-efficiency ( Rajović and Bulatović, 2015 ).

TABLE 3 . Baseline regression results.

4.2 Heterogeneity Results and Discussion

Because of the influence of the economy, human history, and geographical environment, there are form differences among various regions in China ( Yang et al., 2021b ; Ren et al., 2022b ; Wu et al., 2021b ). The impact of agro-tourism integration on agro-ecological efficiency may yield significant variations in terms of different regions ( Liu et al., 2020 ). Thus, this paper categorizes the research sample, which contains 30 provincial administrative divisions, into two regions (eastern and central-western). Table 4 reports that a significant regional heterogeneity is found in the effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency, i.e., the coefficient of agro-tourism integration is significantly positive at the 1% level in the eastern region and significantly negative at the 5% level in the central-western region. It is not surprising that our findings correspond to the study of Wang and Zhou (2021) . An underlying interpretation is that the eastern region has an advanced economy, sound agricultural infrastructure, and an interest in agricultural modernization ( Xiao et al., 2022 ). Also, the eastern regions are highly exploited and experienced in developing tourism resources, with rich industrial advantages in transforming rural ecological resources into tourism resources ( Wang Z. et al., 2021 ). Moreover, not only does the eastern region have more financial resources to align agricultural production, resource conservation, and environmental protection, but agro-tourism integration does not involve further sacrificing the rural environment as a cost ( Nie, 2021 ). The development of agro-tourism integration can swiftly transform rural ecological values into economic benefits, and the enhancement of economic benefits further impels the improvement of the agricultural ecological environment, so that the integration of agro-tourism and agricultural eco-efficiency improvement is driven into a virtuous cycle ( Wang and Zhou, 2021 ). However, although the rural ecological resources in the central and western regions are more abundant, the agricultural economic development mode is relatively rough and the agricultural technology level develops slowly ( Hernández-Mogollón et al., 2011 ). Meanwhile, the agricultural production mode in the central and western regions is yet comparatively backward, with a lower degree of agricultural mechanization and insufficient market demand for agro-tourism integration, which is more driven by uncertain policies ( Zhou et al., 2021 ). To fulfill agricultural tourism integration expeditiously, the central and western regions probably just emphasize economic benefits and forcefully graft on the agro-tourism integration model of the eastern regions, failing to apply strategies according to their local conditions and neglecting agro-ecological environmental protection, thus causing a reduction in agro-ecological efficiency.

TABLE 4 . Regional heterogeneity results.

4.3 Robustness Checks Results and Discussion

To ascertain that the benchmark regression results are robust, the following techniques are employed to perform robustness tests. First, aiming at the potential endogeneity problem, in addition to a dynamic panel model constructed by incorporating the lagged terms of the explanatory variables into the model, the instrumental variables approach can also be used to eliminate endogeneity. Following Wang J. et al. (2022) , this paper performs two-stage least squares (TSLS) estimation by selecting the lagged second term of agro-tourism integration as the instrumental variable (Columns 1) and 2) of Table 5 ). Next, it is observed that, in general, the presence of outliers in the sample has a significant effect on the estimation of the results. Thus, this paper utilizes tailoring to remove the 1% outliers (Columns 3) and 4) of Table 5 ). Finally, the emergence of extreme events can also cause huge fluctuations in the sample data within a particular year. And the worldwide U.S. subprime mortgage crisis in 2008 will undoubtedly produce a tremendous shock to sample stability. Therefore, the 2008 years data were excluded to check the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency (Columns 5) and 6) of Table 5 ). Table 5 reports that the effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency remains significantly positive after using TSLS estimation, removing outliers, and excluding special years, implying that empirical results are robust and reliable.

TABLE 5 . Robustness checks.

5 Conclusions and Policy Recommendations

This paper evaluates the agro-tourism integration level utilizing the Entropy weight method on the basis of a dataset of 30 provincial administrative regions in China from 2001 to 2019. Also, considering the diverse factors of ecological environmental protection and green low-carbon development, agricultural carbon emissions are incorporated into the measurement system of agricultural eco-efficiency, and the super-efficient SBM approach is employed to measure agricultural eco-efficiency. Further, the SYS-GMM approach is applied to investigate the effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. The major findings are as follows: Both static and dynamic panel models demonstrate a significant positive correlation between agro-tourism integration and agricultural eco-efficiency, i.e., agro-tourism integration can have a significant contribution to agricultural eco-efficiency. A significant positive effect of agro-tourism integration in the previous period on agro-tourism integration in the current period suggests that agro-tourism integration has strong inertia. Regional heterogeneity results report that agro-tourism integration significantly contributes to agricultural eco-efficiency in the eastern region, while it significantly inhibits agricultural eco-efficiency in the central-western region. Accordingly, this paper introduces the following two policy recommendations.

1) Policymakers should scientifically assess the development potential for both agriculture and tourism as well as the carrying capacity of the local ecological environment to determine the reasonableness and feasibility of agro-tourism integration development. Also, policymakers should actively explore a win-win model of total factor ecological protection and industrial development for mountains, water, forests, fields, and grasses, depending on local resource factor endowments. For example, policymakers should adhere to modernized green agriculture as a guide, broaden the depth and breadth of the agricultural industry chain, and strive to create a modern, green, and low-carbon agricultural industry system, thereby improving agricultural eco-efficiency.

2) Policymakers should dynamically adjust the development policy of agro-tourism integration in light of local conditions from the actual situation. In the specific implementation process of the policy, the significant regional heterogeneity that exists in the development of agro-tourism integration should be fully considered, and a dynamic, refined, and differentiated strategy of agro-tourism integration should be implemented to make agro-tourism integration development an effective tool to promote agricultural eco-efficiency. For example, given the sufficient market for agro-tourism integration in the eastern region and the perfect infrastructure construction of agriculture and tourism, policymakers should vigorously support the development of agro-tourism integration and improve the supervision function and institutional environment to actively guide consumer demand and broaden the scope of agro-tourism integration. In the central-western regions, due to their regional conditions, the foundation for developing agro-tourism integration is weak, and farmers’ ecological awareness is insufficient. Policymakers need not only to give strong financial support to agro-tourism integration but also to strengthen agricultural ecological education and agricultural ecological management.

Although this paper has thoroughly analyzed the impact of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency, some significant issues still deserve attention. First, this paper only quantifies the direct effect of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency. However, agro-tourism integration may indirectly affect agro-ecological efficiency through the paths of human capital, resource allocation, and environmental regulation. Therefore, future scholars can explore the diversified paths of agro-tourism integration on agricultural eco-efficiency from the above perspectives.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author Contributions

GJ: conceived the idea and contribute to the writing of the manuscript, performed the data collection, and statistical analysis, revised the manuscript, and gave guidance throughout the process of this study. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

The authors acknowledge financial support from the National Social Science Foundation of China: Study on Mechanism, Evaluation and Promotion Path of Multi-functional Value of Forestry and Fruit Industry in Southern Xinjiang under the background of rural revitalization (No. 19XJY009).

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

1 http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2022-02/28/content_5676015.htm .

2 http://www.moa.gov.cn/gk/tzgg_1/tz/201505/t20150527_4620018.htm .

Abbasi, K. R., Shahbaz, M., Zhang, J., Irfan, M., and Alvarado, R. (2022). Analyze the Environmental Sustainability Factors of China: The Role of Fossil Fuel Energy and Renewable Energy. Renew. Energy 187, 390–402. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.066

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Addai, K. N., Owusu, V., and Danso-Abbeam, G. (2014). Effects of Farmer–Based-Organization on the Technical Efficiency of Maize Farmers across Various Agro-Ecological Zones of Ghana. J. Econ. Dev. Stud. 2 (1), 141–161.

Google Scholar

Akbar, U., Li, Q.-L., Akmal, M. A., Shakib, M., and Iqbal, W. (2021). Nexus between Agro-Ecological Efficiency and Carbon Emission Transfer: Evidence from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28 (15), 18995–19007. doi:10.1007/s11356-020-09614-2

Ana, M. I. (2017). Ecotourism, Agro-Tourism and Rural Tourism in the European Union. Cactus Tour. J. 15 (2), 6–14.

Astuti, N. N. S., Armoni, L. E., Ginaya, G., and Bagiastuti, N. K. (2019). Integrating Agro-Tourism and Trekking for Accelerated Yielding of Pelaga Rural Tourism Development. nature 30, 33. doi:10.2991/icastss-19.2019.14

Budiasa, I. W., and Ambarawati, I. G. A. A. (2014). Community Based Agro-Tourism as an Innovative Integrated Farming System Development Model towards Sustainable Agriculture and Tourism in Bali. J. Int. Soc. Southeast Asian Agric. Sci. 20 (1), 29–40.

Cao, J., Law, S. H., Samad, A. R. B. A., Mohamad, W. N. B. W., Wang, J., and Yang, X. (2021). Impact of Financial Development and Technological Innovation on the Volatility of Green Growth-Evidence from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28 (35), 48053–48069. doi:10.1007/s11356-021-13828-3

Cao, J., Law, S. H., Wu, D., Tang, X., and Yang, X. (2022). Effect of Digital Financial Inclusion on Dredging the Path of Green Growth-New Evidence from Front-End and Back-End Perspectives. Front. Environ. Sci. 10, 865229. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.865229

Cecchini, L., Venanzi, S., Pierri, A., and Chiorri, M. (2018). Environmental Efficiency Analysis and Estimation of CO2 Abatement Costs in Dairy Cattle Farms in Umbria (Italy): A SBM-DEA Model with Undesirable Output. J. Clean. Prod. 197, 895–907. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.165

Chandio, A. A., Jiang, Y., Akram, W., Adeel, S., Irfan, M., and Jan, I. (2021). Addressing the Effect of Climate Change in the Framework of Financial and Technological Development on Cereal Production in Pakistan. J. Clean. Prod. 288, 125637. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125637

Chemnasiri, N. (2012). Community Potential Development for Sustainable Agro-Tourism: a Case in Daoruang Sub-district, Saraburi Province, Thailand. Revista de turism-studii si cercetari turism 14, 28–33.

Coluccia, B., Valente, D., Fusco, G., De Leo, F., and Porrini, D. (2020). Assessing Agricultural Eco-Efficiency in Italian Regions. Ecol. Indic. 116, 106483. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106483

Deng, X., and Gibson, J. (2019). Improving Eco-Efficiency for the Sustainable Agricultural Production: A Case Study in Shandong, China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 144, 394–400. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.027

Dernoi, L. A. (1983). Farm Tourism in Europe. Tour. Manag. 4 (3), 155–166. doi:10.1016/0261-5177(83)90060-2

Fang, Z., Razzaq, A., Mohsin, M., and Irfan, M. (2022). Spatial Spillovers and Threshold Effects of Internet Development and Entrepreneurship on Green Innovation Efficiency in China. Technol. Soc. 68, 101844. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101844

Fleischer, A., and Tchetchik, A. (2005). Does Rural Tourism Benefit from Agriculture? Tour. Manag. 26 (4), 493–501. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2003.10.003

Ghadami, M., Dittmann, A., Pazhuhan, M., and Aligholizadeh Firouzjaie, N. (2022). Factors Affecting the Change of Agricultural Land Use to Tourism: A Case Study on the Southern Coasts of the Caspian Sea, Iran. Agriculture 12 (1), 90. doi:10.3390/agriculture12010090

Goreta Ban, S. (2021). Sustainable Development of Agriculture and Tourism in the Context of Climate Change. Agric. Conspec. Sci. 86 (3), 0.

Gruia, R., Gaceu, L., and Oprea, O. B. (2021). Post-pandemic Development Renewal of Romanian Agro-Tourism. J. EcoAgriTourism 17, 60–65.

Guthman, J. (2000). Raising Organic: An Agro-Ecological Assessment of Grower Practices in California. Agric. Hum. values 17 (3), 257–266. doi:10.1023/a:1007688216321

Han, H., Ding, T., Nie, L., and Hao, Z. (2020). Agricultural Eco-Efficiency Loss under Technology Heterogeneity Given Regional Differences in China. J. Clean. Prod. 250, 119511. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119511

Hao, Y., Gai, Z., and Wu, H. (2020). How Do Resource Misallocation and Government Corruption Affect Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency? Evidence from China. Energy Policy 143, 111562. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111562

Hao, Y., Gai, Z., Yan, G., Wu, H., and Irfan, M. (2021). The Spatial Spillover Effect and Nonlinear Relationship Analysis between Environmental Decentralization, Government Corruption and Air Pollution: Evidence from China. Sci. Total Environ. 763, 144183. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144183

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hao, Y., Guo, Y., and Wu, H. (2022). The Role of Information and Communication Technology on Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency: Does Environmental Regulation Work? Bus. Strat. Env. 31 (1), 403–424. doi:10.1002/bse.2901

Hernández-Mogollón, J. M., Campón-Cerro, A. M., Leco-Berrocal, F., and Pérez-Díaz, A. (2011). Agricultural Diversification and the Sustainability of Agricultural Systems: Possibilities for the Development of Agrotourism. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 10 (12), 1911–1921. doi:10.30638/eemj.2011.255

Hysa, E., and Kruja, A. D. (2022). “Advances of Sharing Economy in Agriculture and Tourism Sectors of Albania,” in The Sharing Economy in Europe (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan ), 365–383. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86897-0_17

Iqbal, W., Tang, Y. M., Chau, K. Y., Irfan, M., and Mohsin, M. (2021). Nexus between Air Pollution and NCOV-2019 in China: Application of Negative Binomial Regression Analysis. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 150, 557–565. doi:10.1016/j.psep.2021.04.039

Irfan, M., and Ahmad, M. (2022). Modeling Consumers' Information Acquisition and 5G Technology Utilization: Is Personality Relevant? Personality Individ. Differ. 188, 111450. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.111450

Irfan, M., Elavarasan, R. M., Hao, Y., Feng, M., and Sailan, D. (2021). An Assessment of Consumers' Willingness to Utilize Solar Energy in China: End-Users' Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 292, 126008. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126008

Jani, D., and Nguni, W. (2021). “Contextual Differences in Tourism-Agriculture Linkages in Selected Regions of Tanzania,” in Sustainable Tourism Development in Tanzania ( Cambridge Scholars Publisher ).

Ji, T. G., Raza, A., Akbar, U., Ahmed, M., Popp, J., and Oláh, J. (2021). Marginal Trade-Offs for Improved Agro-Ecological Efficiency Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Agronomy 11 (2), 365. doi:10.3390/agronomy11020365

Jinru, L., Changbiao, Z., Ahmad, B., Irfan, M., and Nazir, R. (2021). How Do Green Financing and Green Logistics Affect the Circular Economy in the Pandemic Situation: Key Mediating Role of Sustainable Production. Econ. Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 1, 21. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2021.2004437

Khan, I., Hou, F., Irfan, M., Zakari, A., and Le, H. P. (2021). Does Energy Trilemma a Driver of Economic Growth? the Roles of Energy Use, Population Growth, and Financial Development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 146, 111157. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111157

Koutsouris, A., Gidarakou, I., Grava, F., and Michailidis, A. (2014). The Phantom of (Agri)tourism and Agriculture Symbiosis? A Greek Case Study. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 12, 94–103. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2014.09.001

Lane, B., and Kastenholz, E. (2015). Rural Tourism: the Evolution of Practice and Research Approaches–Towards a New Generation Concept? J. Sustain. Tour. 23 (8-9), 1133–1156. doi:10.1080/09669582.2015.1083997

Lauwers, L. (2009). Justifying the Incorporation of the Materials Balance Principle into Frontier-Based Eco-Efficiency Models. Ecol. Econ. 68 (6), 1605–1614. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.022

Li, H., and Shi, J.-f. (2014). Energy Efficiency Analysis on Chinese Industrial Sectors: an Improved Super-SBM Model with Undesirable Outputs. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 97–107. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.035

Li, Y., Zhang, J., Yang, X., Wang, W., Wu, H., Ran, Q., et al. (2021). The Impact of Innovative City Construction on Ecological Efficiency: a Quasi-Natural Experiment from China. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 28, 1724–1735. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.09.012

Liao, J., Yu, C., Feng, Z., Zhao, H., Wu, K., and Ma, X. (2021). Spatial Differentiation Characteristics and Driving Factors of Agricultural Eco-Efficiency in Chinese Provinces from the Perspective of Ecosystem Services. J. Clean. Prod. 288, 125466. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125466

Lifang, W. A. N. G. (2018). The Dynamic Mechanism and Development Path for Integration of Agriculture and Tourism in Shanxi Province. Agricult. Technol. Econ. 04, 136–144. (in Chinese). doi:10.13246/j.cnki.jae.2018.04.012

Liu, L., Yang, X., Meng, Y., Ran, Q., and Liu, Z. (2021). Does the Construction of National Eco-Industrial Demonstration Parks Improve Green Total Factor Productivity? Evidence from Prefecture-Level Cities in China. Sustainability 14 (1), 26. doi:10.3390/su14010026

Liu, Y., and Cheng, X. (2022). Does Agro-Ecological Efficiency Contribute to Poverty Alleviation? an Empirical Study Based on Panel Data Regression. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 1, 17. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-19408-3

Liu, Y., Zou, L., and Wang, Y. (2020). Spatial-temporal Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Agricultural Eco-Efficiency in China in Recent 40 Years. Land Use Policy 97, 104794. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104794

Ma, J., and Li, Z. (2021). Does Digital Financial Inclusion Affect Agricultural Eco-Efficiency? A Case Study on China. Agronomy 11 (10), 1949. doi:10.3390/agronomy11101949

Meng, T. (2019). Study on Motivation Mechanism and Countermeasures of Integration of Agriculture and Tourism Industry Based on Value Chain. Jiangsu Agric. Sci. 47 (6), 320–324. doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2019.06.067

Moradi, M., Nematollahi, M. A., Mousavi Khaneghah, A., Pishgar-Komleh, S. H., and Rajabi, M. R. (2018). Comparison of Energy Consumption of Wheat Production in Conservation and Conventional Agriculture Using DEA. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25 (35), 35200–35209. doi:10.1007/s11356-018-3424-x

Nie, S. (2021). Influence of Rural Infrastructure Construction on Agricultural Total Factor Productivity. Agric. For. Econ. Manag. 4 (1), 65–68. doi:10.23977/agrfem.2021.040112

Pan, S.-Y., Gao, M., Kim, H., Shah, K. J., Pei, S.-L., and Chiang, P.-C. (2018). Advances and Challenges in Sustainable Tourism toward a Green Economy. Sci. Total Environ. 635, 452–469. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.134

Pang, J., Chen, X., Zhang, Z., and Li, H. (2016). Measuring Eco-Efficiency of Agriculture in China. Sustainability 8 (4), 398. doi:10.3390/su8040398

Park, P.-J., Tahara, K., and Inaba, A. (2007). Product Quality-Based Eco-Efficiency Applied to Digital Cameras. J. Environ. Manag. 83 (2), 158–170. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.02.006

Picazo-Tadeo, A. J., Gómez-Limón, J. A., and Reig-Martínez, E. (2011). Assessing Farming Eco-Efficiency: a Data Envelopment Analysis Approach. J. Environ. Manag. 92 (4), 1154–1164. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.025

Qiu, P., Zhou, Z., and Kim, D.-J. (2021). A New Path of Sustainable Development in Traditional Agricultural Areas from the Perspective of Open Innovation-A Coupling and Coordination Study on the Agricultural Industry and the Tourism Industry. JOItmC 7 (1), 16. doi:10.3390/joitmc7010016

Rajović, G., and Bulatović, J. (2015). Possibilities and Limitations Valorization of Mountain Katuns through Sustainable Development of Agro Tourism: Case of the Municipality Andrijevica. Sochi J. Econ. 4, 45–64.

Rauf, A., Ozturk, I., Ahmad, F., Shehzad, K., Chandiao, A. A., Irfan, M., et al. (2021). Do Tourism Development, Energy Consumption and Transportation Demolish Sustainable Environments? Evidence from Chinese Provinces. Sustainability 13 (22), 12361. doi:10.3390/su132212361

Ren, S., Hao, Y., and Wu, H. (2022b). How Does Green Investment Affect Environmental Pollution? Evidence from China. Environ. Resour. Econ. 81 (1), 25–51. doi:10.1007/s10640-021-00615-4

Ren, S., Hao, Y., and Wu, H. (2022a). The Role of Outward Foreign Direct Investment (OFDI) on Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency: Does Institutional Quality Matters? Evidence from China. Resour. Policy 76, 102587. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102587

Ren, S., Hao, Y., Xu, L., Wu, H., and Ba, N. (2021). Digitalization and Energy: How Does Internet Development Affect China's Energy Consumption? Energy Econ. 98, 105220. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105220

Salihoglu, G., and Gezici, F. (2021). “Linkages between Tourism and Agriculture: The Case of Turkey,” in Regional Science Perspectives on Tourism and Hospitality (Cham: Springer ), 293–314.

Schaltegger, S., Sturm, A., and Kim, D.-J. (1990). Ȕkologische rationalitȨt: ansatzpunkte zur ausgestaltung von ቕkologieorientierten managementinstrumenten. die Unternehmung, 273–290. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24180467 .

Shao, L., Zhang, H., and Irfan, M. (2021). How Public Expenditure in Recreational and Cultural Industry and Socioeconomic Status Caused Environmental Sustainability in OECD Countries? Econ. Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 1, 18. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2021.2015614

Shi, R., Irfan, M., Liu, G., Yang, X., and Su, X. (2022). Analysis of the Impact of Livestock Structure on Carbon Emissions of Animal Husbandry: A Sustainable Way to Improving Public Health and Green Environment. Front. Public Health 145, 835210. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.835210

Su, X., Yang, X., Zhang, J., Yan, J., Zhao, J., Shen, J., et al. (2021). Analysis of the Impacts of Economic Growth Targets and Marketization on Energy Efficiency: Evidence from China. Sustainability 13 (8), 4393. doi:10.3390/su13084393

Tang, H., and Yin, C. (2006). “Models and Strategies for the Development of Circular Agriculture in China,” in Workshop on Environment, Resources, and Agricultural Policies in China , 19–21. doi:10.1787/9789264028470-16-en

Tone, K. (2001). A Slacks-Based Measure of Efficiency in Data Envelopment Analysis. Eur. J. operational Res. 130 (3), 498–509. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00407-5

Torres, R. (2003). Linkages between Tourism and Agriculture in Mexico. Ann. Tour. Res. 30 (3), 546–566. doi:10.1016/s0160-7383(02)00103-2

Uduji, J. I., Okolo-Obasi, E. N., Onodugo, V. A., Nnabuko, J. O., and Adedibu, B. A. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility and the Role of Rural Women in Strengthening Agriculture-Tourism Linkages in Nigeria's Oil Producing Communities. J. Tour. Cult. Change 19 (6), 754–780. doi:10.1080/14766825.2020.1826500

Van Caneghem, J., Block, C., Cramm, P., Mortier, R., and Vandecasteele, C. (2010). Improving Eco-Efficiency in the Steel Industry: the ArcelorMittal Gent Case. J. Clean. Prod. 18 (8), 807–814. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.016

Wang, G., Shi, R., Mi, L., and Hu, J. (2022b). Agricultural Eco-Efficiency: Challenges and Progress. Sustainability 14 (3), 1051. doi:10.3390/su14031051

Wang, J., and Zhou, I. (2021). The Effect of the Integrated Development of Agriculture and Tourism on Agricultural Ecological Efficiency. J. Hunan Agric. Univ. Soc. Sci. Ed. 2, 50–56. doi:10.13331/j.cnki.jhau.(ss).2021.02.007

Wang, J., Wang, W., Ran, Q., Irfan, M., Ren, S., Yang, X., et al. (2021a). Analysis of the Mechanism of the Impact of Internet Development on Green Economic Growth: Evidence from 269 Prefecture Cities in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29, 1–15. doi:10.1007/s11356-021-16381-1

Wang, J., Wang, W., Ran, Q., Irfan, M., Ren, S., Yang, X., et al. (2022a). Analysis of the Mechanism of the Impact of Internet Development on Green Economic Growth: Evidence from 269 Prefecture Cities in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29 (7), 9990–10004. doi:10.1007/s11356-021-16381-1

Wang, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, G., and Wang, Z. (2021b). Evaluation of Agricultural Extension Service for Sustainable Agricultural Development Using a Hybrid Entropy and TOPSIS Method. Sustainability 13 (1), 347. doi:10.3390/su13010347

Wu, H., Ba, N., Ren, S., Xu, L., Chai, J., Irfan, M., and Lu, Z. N. (2021a). The Impact of Internet Development on the Health of Chinese Residents: Transmission Mechanisms and Empirical Tests. Socio-Economic Plan. Sci. 81, 101178. doi:10.1016/j.seps.2021.101178

Wu, H., Hao, Y., and Ren, S. (2020). How Do Environmental Regulation and Environmental Decentralization Affect Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency: Evidence from China. Energy Econ. 91, 104880. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104880

Wu, H., Hao, Y., Ren, S., Yang, X., and Xie, G. (2021b). Does Internet Development Improve Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency? Evidence from China. Energy Policy 153, 112247. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112247

Xiao, H., Zheng, X., and Xie, L. (2022). Promoting Pro-poor Growth through Infrastructure Investment: Evidence from the Targeted Poverty Alleviation Program in China. China Econ. Rev. 71, 101729. doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101729

Yang, K., and Wang, C. (2021). Analysis of Integration Degree of Agriculture and Tourism Based on AHP- Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method-- Taking Enshi Gongshui White Pomelo Industry as an Example. Agric. Resour. Region. China 1, 220–230. (in Chinese).

Yang, X., Su, X., Ran, Q., Ren, S., Chen, B., Wang, W., et al. (2022). Assessing the Impact of Energy Internet and Energy Misallocation on Carbon Emissions: New Insights from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29 (16), 23436–23460. doi:10.1007/s11356-021-17217-8

Yang, X., Wang, J., Cao, J., Ren, S., Ran, Q., and Wu, H. (2021b). The Spatial Spillover Effect of Urban Sprawl and Fiscal Decentralization on Air Pollution: Evidence from 269 Cities in China. Empir. Econ. 1, 29. doi:10.1007/s00181-021-02151-y

Yang, X., Wang, W., Wu, H., Wang, J., Ran, Q., and Ren, S. (2021a). The Impact of the New Energy Demonstration City Policy on the Green Total Factor Productivity of Resource-Based Cities: Empirical Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment in China. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 1, 34. doi:10.1080/09640568.2021.1988529

Yi, Y., Zhao, C., and Fu, J. (2019). Research on the Integration and Development of Modern Agriculture and Rural Tourism Based on AHP—Take Yangjia Town in Mianyang City as an Example. Open J. Soc. Sci. 7 (7), 76–87. doi:10.4236/jss.2019.77008

Yu, C. (2011). China's Water Crisis Needs More Than Words. Nature 470 (7334), 307. doi:10.1038/470307a

Zhao, J., Luo, Q., Deng, H., and Yan, Y. (2008). Opportunities and Challenges of Sustainable Agricultural Development in China. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 363 (1492), 893–904. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2190

Zhao, J., Shen, J., Yan, J., Yang, X., Hao, Y., and Ran, Q. (2021). Corruption, Market Segmentation and Haze Pollution: Empirical Evidence from China. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 1, 23. doi:10.1080/09640568.2021.2001316

Zhou, P., Shen, Y., and Li, A. (2021). Can the Integration of Agriculture and Tourism Promote the High-Quality Development of Agriculture?-- an Empirical Test Based on Provincial Panel Data. Macroecon. Res. 10, 117–130. doi:10.16304/j.cnki.11-3952/f.2021.10.008

Zhou, Z., Yang, Q., and Kim, D.-J. (2020). An Empirical Study on Coupling Coordination between the Cultural Industry and Tourism Industry in Ethnic Minority Areas. JOItmC 6 (3), 65. doi:10.3390/joitmc6030065

Keywords: agro-tourism integration, agriculture, tourism, regional heterogeneity, agricultural ecoefficiency

Citation: Jiang G (2022) How Does Agro-Tourism Integration Influence the Rebound Effect of China’s Agricultural Eco-Efficiency? An Economic Development Perspective. Front. Environ. Sci. 10:921103. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.921103

Received: 15 April 2022; Accepted: 04 May 2022; Published: 27 May 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Jiang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Guirong Jiang, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Exploring tourism competitiveness in developing economies: residents’ perspective

• Open access
• Published: 17 August 2024
• Volume 5 , article number  201 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Sanja Kovačić 1 ,
• Marija Cimbaljević 1 ,
• Vanja Pavluković 1 &
• Slobodan Jovanović 2  

210 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Understanding the factors that contribute to tourism competitiveness in developing economies is essential for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers, as these countries still struggle to fully capitalize on their tourism potential. The residents’ perspective, often overlooked in Tourism Destination Competitiveness (TDC) models, is crucial because they are the primary stakeholders who directly experience the consequences of tourism activities in their daily lives. Their positive attitudes can contribute to a welcoming and friendly environment, enhancing the competitiveness of the destination in the global tourism market. Up to now, there have been a few studies that relate residents’ attitudes to tourism destination competitiveness. However, none have focused on developing a tailor-made model for measuring residents’ perspectives on TDC. To develop such a specific model and contribute to the existing theory in this area, our research applied a multi-step approach, including a literature review of existing models, pilot testing for indicator selection, and model validation through CFA. The data were collected through a survey of residents in Serbia, chosen as an example of a developing country. The final model of the study consists of five factors: Natural and Cultural Resources, Quality of Tourist Offer and Infrastructure, Situational Framework of Tourism Development and Management, Destination Perception and Experience, and Pollution, containing 32 indicators. Practical applicability of the model and theoretical contributions are discussed in the paper, as well as the TDC evaluation for Serbia.

Similar content being viewed by others

Formative-reflective scheme for the assessment of tourism destination competitiveness: an analysis of Italian municipalities

Qualitative Research in Tourism - Use of WebQDA in the C’s Tourist Destination Competitiveness Matrix

Territorial Differentiation, Competitiveness and Sustainability of Tourism

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Tourism plays a crucial role in the economic development of many nations, particularly in developing economies, where it can be a significant driver of growth and employment. Formerly marginalized in the tourism sector, the developing world has now evolved into a key driver of its expansion [ 1 ]. However, advanced nations consistently hold top positions in the World Economic Forum (WEF) Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index. Meanwhile, developing economies express concerns regarding environmental sustainability, human resources, job prospects in tourism, and the prioritization of tourism [ 2 ]. According to Sanches-Pereira and associates [ 3 ], developing countries have yet to fully capitalize on their tourism potential. Therefore, understanding the factors that contribute to tourism competitiveness in developing economies is essential for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers alike.

Numerous studies have explored tourism competitiveness, aiming to comprehend the diverse factors influencing a country’s capacity to attract and retain tourists [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. The evaluation of a country’s tourism competitiveness encompasses an analysis of various dimensions, including natural and cultural resources, infrastructure, policy environment, and overall appeal to tourists. The majority of these studies were carried out in well-established destinations and emphasize the viewpoints of tourism experts and industry practitioners, who are deemed to possess the highest level of knowledge regarding management and competitiveness [ 11 ]. Unfortunately, the perspective of residents has been largely overlooked.

Residents, as integral stakeholders, contribute to the co-creation of the destination’s identity, influencing its attractiveness and sustainability. They play a crucial role in shaping the destination’s image and influencing the overall visitor experience. To achieve sustainable and inclusive tourism development in any country, particularly a developing one, and to ensure the overall well-being of local communities, residents’ attitudes towards tourism development should be acknowledged [ 12 ]. Positive attitudes can contribute to a welcoming and friendly environment, enhancing the competitiveness of the destination in the global tourism market. The residents’ perspective is crucial because they are the primary stakeholders who directly experience the consequences of tourism activities in their daily lives. Residents of different destinations may have a different view of what characterizes a good stay and well-being in a destination compared to experts or tourists [ 13 , 14 ]. Unlike tourists, residents tend to have a more complex interpretation of a destination, as it holds greater significance for them beyond being just a vacation spot. For residents, a tourist destination is a social place where they earn their livelihood, interact with community members, utilize resources that influence their living and working conditions, and enjoy natural resources and cultural offerings for their personal well-being. When they have the opportunity to leverage these resources, they actively engage in tourism-related activities by providing services to tourists [ 15 ]. Additionally, these residents possess local knowledge that can enhance the tourist experience by recommending attractions or facilities to visit [ 16 ]. Thus, their role in evaluating destination attributes is significant, as they serve as prosumers—both consumers of local services and co-creators of the tourist experience. Moreover, the evaluation of destination attributes is complex for this group of stakeholders, as their perspectives can significantly impact the residents' quality of life [ 17 ]. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the key determinants of tourism competitiveness in a developing country from the residents’ viewpoint.

In this context, Serbia was chosen as the research area because it is an emerging tourism destination and a developing economy actively seeking a stronger presence in the global tourism arena. Strategically located in Southeast Europe, Serbia boasts a diverse cultural and historical heritage, abundant tourism attractions, and faces notable developmental challenges, sustainability efforts, and deliberate market positioning. This makes Serbia an interesting area for studying tourism destination competitiveness (TDC). The country holds a relatively modest competitive position globally, ranking 83rd among 140 countries listed in the WEF Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2019 [ 2 ]. The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) reported that in 2021, the total contribution of travel and tourism to Serbia’s GDP was 3.6%, and it accounted for 5.4% of employment [ 18 ]. Recognizing tourism as a priority sector, Serbia aims to leverage it for overall economic and social growth [ 19 ]. However, academic studies on TDC in Serbia are scarce and primarily focus on the perspectives of tourism experts and industry practitioners [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no attempt has been made so far to investigate residents’ opinions towards TDC in Serbia. Therefore, this study is significant as it aims to address this gap by developing a tailored competitiveness model that considers Serbian residents’ attitudes toward competitiveness indicators.

Through a comprehensive analysis, the study aims to shed light on the key factors influencing the tourism competitiveness of a developing economy, thereby offering valuable policy recommendations for fostering sustainable tourism development in developing economies. The paper is structured as follows: Sect.  2 sets the theoretical framework, Sect.  3 describes the methodology, Sect.  4 presents the main results, Sect.  5 provides a discussion, and Sect.  6 outlines the main conclusions.

2 Literature review

2.1 the role of residents in assessing the competitiveness of a tourist destination.

Tourist destinations that demonstrate the ability to foster economic prosperity or environmental well-being, while also prioritizing environmental conservation and enhancing residents’ quality of life, are likely to positively influence residents’ perceptions of tourism and increase the overall destination’s competitiveness [ 24 , 25 ]. Numerous empirical studies have been conducted to date, applying various TDC models. These studies utilize data on specific destinations to assess the significance of attributes relevant to tourism competitiveness [ 11 , 26 ]. It is unlikely that all these factors have the same impact and significance in shaping the level of competitiveness for different stakeholders within the tourism industry. Nonetheless, it is crucial to establish a comprehensive list of relevant variables and promote research conducted from the perspective of various stakeholders for a thorough understanding of a destination’s competitiveness. The role of residents in assessing destination competitiveness can be approached from different aspects. When managing the competitiveness and development of a destination, it is important to take into account local perspectives, as residents are inherent and deeply engaged stakeholders. Furthermore, the residents’ perspectives become increasingly significant, particularly in organizational aspects, as residents will assume a foundational role in presenting the destination's image, preserving its heritage, and enhancing its attractiveness [ 9 , 27 ].

Research focusing on destination image states that residents’ positive perceptions of the destination image may positively influence their views on the impacts and changes imposed by tourism in the community [ 28 ]. Since destination image serves as a reliable measure of destination attractiveness, it naturally contributes to the destination's competitiveness [ 29 ]. As a result, residents play a crucial role in strengthening the destination image, which is vital for setting the place apart from other destinations [ 9 ]. This, in turn, can increase their intention to support the development of tourism and enhance the destination’s competitiveness. When considering the contribution of communities to promoting tourism development, residents are recognized as both carriers and actors in destination marketing and competitiveness efforts. The competitiveness of a destination encompasses not only its natural landmarks but also its unique cultural and heritage aspects inherent to the locality. Strzelecka and associates [ 30 ] discovered that residents with deeper knowledge and comprehension of natural and cultural resources manifest a stronger sense of place attachment. This indicates that residents perceive various aspects of destination competitiveness that are closely related to the distinctive local environments and accessible resources at destinations. Initially, residents tend to perceive certain characteristics of TDC at a high level, including natural and cultural competitiveness. Ahn and Bessiere [ 15 ] examine that distinctive regional characteristics like contextual and natural competitiveness are valued as crucial tourism assets by residents. Additionally, technological advancements such as mobile applications, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and online information are recognized as significant elements of destination competitiveness. Consequently, practitioners and governments should aim to maximize the utilization of these competitive resources, foster the development of innovative travel products and activities, and create strategies for successful and sustainable destination management. Success for a tourist destination is often measured by various indicators such as the number of tourists, tourism revenue, length of stay, visitor satisfaction, and the destination’s image. However, true success goes beyond these quantitative measures to include qualitative aspects like resident satisfaction, environmental sustainability, and the overall quality of life for those living in the destination.

The connection between competitiveness and success lies in a destination’s ability to balance the needs and expectations of tourists with the well-being of its residents and the sustainability of its resources. A highly competitive destination that attracts many visitors might not be truly successful if it neglects the quality of life of its residents or the preservation of its natural and cultural assets [ 14 ]. Conversely, a destination that prioritizes resident satisfaction and sustainability is likely to achieve long-term success, fostering a supportive community and preserving its appeal for future visitors. Research by Dwyer [ 14 , 31 ] emphasizes the importance of incorporating broader measures of success into the evaluation of destination competitiveness. This includes considering factors such as resident well-being, environmental impact, and socio-cultural benefits.

Bu and associates [ 9 ] analyzed residents’ attitudes toward tourism development, focusing on perceived advantages, experienced effects, and willingness to support tourism initiatives. Their research highlighted residents’ belief in the government’s pivotal role in enhancing a destination’s image and competitiveness. This underscores the need to prioritize enhancing residents’ quality of life and well-being through tourism. Effective destination governance stresses the involvement of residents in the development process [ 32 ] acknowledging their direct experience of tourism's impacts [ 33 ]. Prioritizing residents’ interests is crucial for maximizing benefits from tourism development and fostering sustainable destination growth [ 30 , 34 ]. Detailed insights into residents' perspectives can validate planning processes and promote community-based sustainable development approaches [ 35 ]. Studies indicate that residents may perceive environmental impacts of tourism negatively. Gajdosik and associates [ 33 ] highlighted concerns such as noise pollution, water and air pollution, and issues with parking and construction. On the other hand, Vodeb [ 36 ] emphasized the importance of early engagement with residents in destination development to secure their participation and manage expectations effectively. This collaborative approach ensures that actions align with community interests and receive local support.

The role of residents in shaping the competitiveness of a destination is often underestimated but becomes apparent through their attitudes toward tourists and their impact on enhancing visitor experiences and the overall destination atmosphere. Previous studies have explored residents’ emotional responses and attitudes toward tourists [ 37 ], their behavioral interactions with tourists [ 25 ], and their cognitive assessments of tourism [ 38 ]. Local residents play a crucial role in shaping the visitor experience by actively participating in and contributing to tourism products and services. Positive interactions between residents and tourists contribute to a favorable destination image, thereby increasing competitiveness [ 9 , 27 ]. Tse & Wing Sun Tung [ 25 ] highlight various strategies for policymakers in the tourism sector to foster positive resident-tourist interactions, thereby enhancing destination attractiveness and competitiveness.

Studies also examine how residents act as ambassadors for their destinations, influencing others, including family and friends, to visit their hometowns [ 39 , 40 ]. As reliable informants, residents actively contribute to the uniqueness and attractiveness of their city when recommending it [ 41 ]. Thus, destination management organizations (DMOs) could benefit from involving residents more actively in destination promotion, potentially boosting both competitiveness and effective promotion [ 25 ].

Several studies have examined the economic impact of tourism from residents’ perspectives, revealing that residents typically view these impacts positively [ 42 ]. The competitive attributes of a destination can enhance its economic benefits, particularly when residents effectively utilize local resources [ 43 ]. This perspective suggests that increasing household income can confer a competitive advantage. Residents achieve this through various tourism-related business activities, such as selling handmade goods, running restaurants, and providing services as local travel agencies and guides [ 31 , 44 ].

Research on residents’ perceptions of tourism development and competitiveness primarily focuses on identifying, quantifying, and comparing different attributes that potentially shape perceptions of tourism and its effects [ 33 ]. Bu and colleagues [ 9 ] argue that tourism planners should actively seek input and recommendations from local residents regarding destination management and promotion, thereby evaluating resources as critical factors contributing to competitiveness. Additionally, tourism planning initiatives should offer opportunities for residents to engage in various activities and foster effective coordination among stakeholders.

While it is crucial for destinations to establish long-term competitive strategies aimed at enhancing their ability to offer diverse tourism experiences, it is equally important to understand how local residents perceive the competitiveness of their destination. Most significantly, local residents play an active role in contributing to tourism planning [ 45 ]. Despite this pivotal role, there remains a noticeable gap in the tourism literature regarding the analysis of residents' perceptions of destination competitiveness and their influential role in shaping this process. To address this gap, the present study aims to evaluate the developed model of competitiveness specifically with the local population as the target group. Developing and refining a measurement model tailored to assess residents' perspectives on tourism destination competitiveness involves creating comprehensive frameworks that capture their perceptions across different dimensions such as natural and cultural resources, quality of tourism offerings, infrastructure, management frameworks, and environmental concerns. While literature on residents’ perspectives regarding tourism destination competitiveness is currently limited, this research may prove valuable in conducting studies across developing economies to understand variations in resident attitudes and factors influencing tourism competitiveness.

The paper also outlines key points and highlights the gaps in research regarding the role of residents in evaluating TDC (see Table  1 ). Such research enables tourism planners and policymakers to assess the strengths and weaknesses of destinations [ 23 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ], drawing insights from local residents. The objective is to create a model that is tailored to the preferences and perspectives of this target group, thereby promoting the significance of local involvement and participation. Given the dynamic nature of destinations, which evolve over time and undergo continuous change, the primary contribution of the present study is to identify the key determinants and planning factors that residents perceive as crucial for enhancing the competitiveness of their destination.

3 Methodology

The creation of the model is performed in three stages: In-depth literature review, Pilot testing and Model set and validation.

3.1 In-depth literature review

In order to generate a pool of indicators for measuring TDC, a detailed literature review has been done, taking into account the Scopus database in the period of from 2000 to March 2022. A total of 558 papers with the main keywords “destination competitiveness” and “sustainable tourism indicators” were selected for the analysis, while after initial screening, 232 papers were selected as relevant for further analysis. Most of these studies utilized established models for TDC evaluation, particularly relying on well-known models such as the Integrated Destination Competitiveness model [ 50 ] or the Ritchie and Crouch [ 51 ] model, emphasizing the perspectives of tourism experts and industry stakeholders, while overlooking the viewpoint of residents. In the second round of analysis, 12 tourism experts from Serbia reviewed the indicators extracted from relevant papers and removed repetitive and irrelevant items for the analysis of TDC. After a long process of purifying the relevant indicators, a list of 165 indicators was extracted and included in the pilot questionnaire for local communities.

3.2 Pilot testing

Pilot testing was conducted from June to August 2022 via email and standard paper-pen surveys with representatives of local communities in Serbia. Participants were randomly selected from major cities and tourism destinations such as Subotica, Novi Sad, Belgrade, Niš, Leskovac, Zlatibor, and Kopaonik. The pilot research aimed to eliminate any misunderstandings related to the questions and to remove indicators that community members lacked sufficient knowledge to evaluate. Respondents were asked to estimate the relevance of each of the 165 indicators for measuring the tourism destination competitiveness (TDC) of Serbia on a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (1—not relevant at all, 5—very relevant). They were also given options to mark 6 if a question was “not well formulated” and 0 if they felt they “didn’t have enough knowledge.”

Indicators were divided into logical groups to facilitate the elimination and evaluation process. Pilot testing was conducted on a sample of 30 representatives of local communities. Typically, preliminary pilot tests are administered to a small set of respondents, with a sample size of about 30 to 50 individuals [ 52 ]. Afterwards, the responses were analyzed, and indicators were ranked based on the mean values of the answers and standard deviations. Indicators with a mean value below 4 and high standard deviations were marked for exclusion from the study. Additionally, any indicators that were unclear or beyond the scope of local knowledge were eliminated. From the initial 165 indicators, 60 relevant indicators were identified for the final stage of the research.

3.3 Model set and validation

3.3.1 participants.

A total of 456 representatives from local communities across Serbia participated in the final stage of the research. For model validation, the sample was divided into two parts: Sample 1 (N = 153 respondents) was used for Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), while Sample 2 (N = 303 respondents) was used for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). In both samples, there were slightly more female respondents. The age range was from 18 to 73 in Sample 1 and up to 75 in Sample 2. The highest number had completed secondary school, followed by those with higher education. Additionally, the majority of the sample were not employed in tourism.

3.3.2 Procedure and research instrument

The field research with the local population of Serbia was carried out from June until December in 2023. A total of 456 respondents from all over Serbia participated in the survey. The largest number of respondents are from Belgrade, Novi Sad, Niš, Subotica, Leskovac, Užice, Kopaonik and Zlatibor, but the sample also includes subjects from the rest of Serbia. One of the primary criteria for conducting the research was selecting cities and tourist regions that play a significant role in Serbia’s tourism industry, offer diverse tourist attractions, and have the potential to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing TDC. The sample selection was random, with the condition that respondents reside in the given city/destination and are above 18 years old.

The survey instrument consisted of 60 items measuring TDC of Serbia, which were extracted in the previous phases of model building, as well as socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. The participants were asked to evaluate their agreement with the statements referring to TDC of Serbia on a 5-point Likert scale (1-I totally disagree, 5-I totally agree). The research was conducted using standard paper-and-pen surveys by 10 trained researchers who collected data in the field. Additionally, respondents were offered the option to complete the survey via tablet or mobile phones to accommodate different preferences and ensure maximum reach. Researchers conducted on-site intercept surveys at key locations such as parks, shopping centres, public transportation hubs, tourist attractions, as well as during some local events and gatherings. This involved directly approaching individuals in these areas and inviting them to participate in the survey. In some cases, local tourism organizations helped to distribute the survey and encouraged participation. Small incentives, such as faculty promotional gifts (e.g. pencils, folders, notepads) were offered to encourage participation. Clear and concise information about the purpose of the survey, its importance, and how the data would be used was provided to potential respondents. The survey was anonymous and voluntary, but respondents were asked to provide some basic information such as age, gender and education (Table  2 ). Statistical software IBM SPSS 23 and AMOS were used for data analysis.

4.1 Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)

In order to identify the latent dimensions of Serbia's TDC, EFA was conducted on sample 1 (N = 153 respondents). Item analysis showed a high KMO = 0.923, and the statistically significant value of Bartlett’s sphericity test was confirmed (χ2 = 9896.90, df = 2485, p < 0,000). The analysis of item correlations revealed a significant number of correlations with values above 0.3, which led to the conclusion that the data are suitable for EFA. Items that had factor loadings lower than 0.3 (a total of 10 items) were excluded from the further analysis [ 53 ]. The method of principal components with Promax rotation (due to established correlations between factors) and Kaiser normalization was used to extract factors. As a result, considering only factors whose eigenvalues were equal to or greater than one, five factors were extracted with total of 50 items, which explain 50,56% of the variance. The five identified factors are: F1 Natural and cultural resources, F2 Quality of Tourist offer and infrastructure, F3 Situational conditions for tourism development and management, F4 Destination perception and experience, and F5 Pollution. The results of EFA are presented in Table  3 .

4.2 Confirmatory factory analysis

CFA is used on sample 2 (N = 303 respondents) to validate and confirm the factor structure obtained by EFA. The AMOS program for the Windows operating system was used for CFA. The Mardia index of multivariate kurtosis was above 3 for all tested models, indicating significant multivariate kurtosis. Therefore, it was justified to use robust methods and indices based on this method [ 54 ]. The fit or appropriateness of the model was assessed using the following indices: Sattora-Bentler χ 2 (S-B χ 2 )—if it is insignificant, then the model has a good fit, but since it is sensitive to the number of respondents, it is mostly significant in a greater number of cases, Standardized Root Mean-Square Residual (SRMR), Root Mean-Square Error Of Approximation (RMSEA)—SRMR and RMSEA should be less than 0.08 [ 55 ], Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Non-Normed Fit Index (NNFI)—if the CFI, NFI and NNFI are over 0.90, the model has a good fit [ 56 ]. In order to achieve adequate fit indices, modification indices were used with which AMOS suggests and proposes changes to the model.

When the first model obtained by exploratory factor analysis was tested, satisfactory fit indices were not achieved. First, it was suggested that several items should be excluded because they achieved saturation on several factors simultaneously (8 items in total). Moreover, the items that initially were part of the factor Situational conditions for tourism development and management (The positioning of the country as a tourist destination on the international market is effective, Social networks are effectively used to support the marketing activities) are suggested to be a part of the factor Destination perception and experience.

After these changes, the model was run again, and although the fit indices were visibly improved, a satisfactory fit index was still not achieved. The modification indices now suggested the exclusion of 10 more items. The final modifications related to the addition of correlations between individual items that belonged to the same factors. After these changes, a satisfactory fit model and the final structure of the competitiveness model were achieved. The final model consists of five factors: 1. Natural and cultural resources, 2. Quality of tourist offer and infrastructure, 3. Situational framework of tourism development and management, 4. Destination perception and experience and 5. Pollution.

The final fit indices are shown in Table  4 .

The final model is shown in Table  5 , it consists of the five mentioned factors and a total of 32 indicators.

Factor 1: Natural and cultural resources is a factor referring to natural and cultural resources (tangible and intangible) of Serbia. Factor 2: Quality of tourist offer and infrastructure—refers to the quality of tourist infrastructure, signalization and accessibility of destination, including the quality of tourist offer and activities. Factor 3: Situational framework of tourism development and management—refers to the extent to which the conditions in Serbia are favourable for tourism development. This factor also contains items related to sustainability and ethics in tourism, i.e., local community support for tourism development, tourism companies operate in accordance with ethical principles etc. Factor 4: Destination perception and experience—refers to the perception of the brand, the image of Serbia as a tourist destination, destination positioning, but also quality of the overall experience at the destination. This factor also includes an assessment of the possibility of booking services, and the willingness to recommend Serbia as a destination to others. Finally, the last extracted factor is Factor 5: Pollution, referring to the assessment of the noise level, water and air pollution. This factor is of immense importance, as it indicates that local population consider pollution as important element of TDC.

4.3 Descriptive statistics and measurement model validity

Descriptive statistics for all variables are presented in Table  6 . It can be seen that Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for all variables/dimensions is above 0.7. This means that the instruments used in the study are reliable and that they measure the given constructs. The results show that Natural and cultural resources are the best-rated factor in Serbia's competitiveness as a tourist destination, which means that Serbia has rich cultural and natural resources and great potential for tourism development. The lowest rated factor is the Factor 3: Situational framework of tourism development and management, especially the item Political values, the overall political situation and stability in Serbia are favourable for the development of tourism. Only one item in this group exceeds 3.5, which is the residents support the development of tourism. This is followed by factor Quality of tourist offer and infrastructure, where the items related to the transport infrastructure and signalization Local tourist and traffic signalization is in line with the needs of tourists, a high-quality air traffic infrastructure and A high quality bicycle and pedestrian paths are the lowest rated together with the item Quality offer of amusement and theme parks. On the other hand, the highest rated item in this group is Diverse and high-quality restaurant offer. The concerning fact is also that Pollution is rated above 3.5 which could negatively influence competitive position of Serbia on travel market.

The data obtained from the research pointed to the basic shortcomings that affect the competitiveness of Serbia as a tourist destination, and they should be the focus of further tourism strategies and initiatives.

Before conducting CFA, convergent and divergent validity of the constructs was calculated to check the measurement model validity. The convergent validity of each dimension was examined by calculating the score of the average variance extracted (AVE, [ 57 ]). A substantial convergent validity is achieved when all item-to-factor loadings are significant and the AVE score is higher than 0.50 within each dimension, but AVE of 0.40 is still acceptable if the composite reliability (CR) is higher than 0.60 [ 58 ]. Results showed that all dimensions had AVE higher than 0.40 and CR higher than 0.60 (Table  6 ) which indicates good convergent validity. Discriminant validity was then checked by comparing the average variances extracted (AVEs) for each latent factor with the squared correlation estimates between latent constructs. Fornell and Larcker [ 57 ] noted that the discriminant validity is guaranteed when the AVEs are greater than the squared correlation estimates (Table  7 ).

5 Discussion

The primary aim of this study was to address significant gaps identified in previous TDC research. These gaps primarily include the lack of consideration for residents’ attitudes towards TDC indicators and the absence of specifically tailored models to assess destination competitiveness in developing countries from the residents' perspective. Existing literature has predominantly focused on residents' perceptions of destination image [ 9 , 28 , 29 ] or place attachment [ 30 , 59 ], but lacked comprehensive models for measuring destination competitiveness. It is evident that residents possess specific knowledge, information, and emotional attachment to their living destinations [ 60 ]. Therefore, assessing competitiveness from their viewpoint requires specific indicators, which may differ in some aspects from traditional TDC models where assessments are typically conducted by tourism stakeholders or tourists. To address these gaps and contribute to theory in this area, our research employed a multi-step approach. This approach included a literature review of existing models, pilot testing for indicator selection, and model validation through CFA. Through this rigorous scientific process, we selected indicators and validated a model structure tailored for assessing residents’ perceptions in developing economies. This model represents the first of its kind in the existing literature on this topic, marking a significant theoretical contribution. The final model of the study comprises five factors: Natural and cultural resources, Quality of tourist offer and infrastructure, Situational framework of tourism development and management, Destination perception and experience and Pollution, encompassing 32 indicators. The model is tailor-made through pilot testing, where residents themselves identified indicators, they could assess based on their knowledge, experiences and information levels. Those indicators were further validated through survey research involving another sample of residents, and tested through EFA and CFA.

The application of this model to Serbia, a developing economy, has yielded insightful findings. Previous research has highlighted residents’ significant role in assessing natural and cultural resources [ 30 ] and shaping destination image [ 9 , 28 , 29 ], given their extensive knowledge and role as destination promoters and ambassadors. This aligns with two factors in our model: Natural and cultural resources, and Destination perception and experience. Additionally, our model underscores residents’ crucial role in evaluating the Quality of tourist offerings and infrastructure. Residents often utilize tourism infrastructure extensively [ 61 ], granting them firsthand insights into its quality. Moreover, some residents are directly involved in tourism-related businesses, providing further expertise in this area [ 15 , 44 ]. A novel aspect of our model is the recognition of residents’ capability to assess the Situational framework of tourism development and management. This factor evaluates the conditions favoring tourism development at a destination, a role traditionally fulfilled by tourism stakeholders without residents’ input [ 32 , 45 ]. Furthermore, sustainability factors, crucial for competitiveness in developing countries, receive attention through the Pollution factor, which reflects residents’ concerns about environmental conditions at their destination. This tailor-made model for residents’ assessment of TDC serves as a new tool for enhancing local involvement and participation in TDC assessment, particularly beneficial for developing economies in their early stages of tourism development [ 3 ]. Engaging residents in understanding factors influencing TDC is essential for effective tourism decision-making and planning processes.

Additionally, this study contributes to the limited understanding of residents' attitudes toward TDC in Serbia, marking the first inclusion of their perspectives in the competitiveness assessment. It offers long-term recommendations for integrating residents into the assessment process. The model indicates that Serbia's primary competitive advantage lies in its natural and cultural resources, while significant opportunities for improvement exist in the other four factors. Residents express concerns about the Situational framework of tourism development and management, particularly noting political stability as a factor negatively impacting destination competitiveness. They also highlight areas needing improvement in the Quality of tourist offerings and infrastructure. Pollution emerges as another concern, with residents indicating room for enhancing environmental sustainability to bolster Serbia's competitive position. A detailed analysis of each factor's components provides valuable insights for destination managers regarding residents' perceptions of the current state of TDC, identifying major gaps and advantages.

6 Conclusion

Numerous empirical studies have utilized various models to assess TDC predominantly from the perspectives of tourism experts and industry practitioners, often overlooking the viewpoint of residents. Establishing a comprehensive list of TDC variables and promoting research that incorporates perspectives from diverse stakeholders are crucial for a comprehensive understanding of TDC. Notably, destinations that successfully foster economic prosperity and environmental conservation while enhancing residents' quality of life tend to positively influence residents’ perceptions and overall TDC. This study focuses specifically on developing economies, which face unique challenges and opportunities in tourism development. The model developed is tailored to these contexts, providing insights that are more relevant and applicable to similar countries, thereby enhancing the theoretical framework of TDC in these regions.

To date, several studies have highlighted the significant role of residents, among other stakeholders, in comprehending and enhancing destination competitiveness. Their active involvement contributes to enhancing the destination's image, preserving its heritage, and increasing its overall attractiveness. Moreover, positive resident perceptions of the destination’s image can improve their attitudes towards tourism impacts and changes, thereby enhancing overall competitiveness. Success in tourism goes beyond mere quantitative metrics such as tourist numbers and revenue; it encompasses qualitative factors like resident satisfaction, environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life. Hence, achieving a balance between the needs of tourists, the well-being of residents, and the sustainability of resources is critical for long-term success. Integrating residents’ attitudes provides a more holistic view of TDC and acknowledges the pivotal role of the local population in shaping a welcoming and hospitable environment.

Finally, by understanding residents' perceptions across various dimensions such as natural and cultural resources, tourism offerings, infrastructure, management frameworks, and environmental aspects, tourism planners and policymakers can better assess the strengths and weaknesses of destinations. Encouraging local involvement and participation in tourism planning is vital, given the dynamic nature of destinations. This research helps identify the key determinants and planning factors that residents perceive as important for the competitiveness of their destination, highlighting the significance of local involvement in shaping successful and sustainable tourism development. The final model in this study consists of five distinct factors: Natural and cultural resources, Quality of tourist offer and infrastructure, Situational framework of tourism development and management, Destination perception and experience, and Pollution. These factors provide a comprehensive framework for assessing TDC from a residents' perspective, which can be used as a benchmark for future studies.

7 Practical implication

The practical application of the model lies in the fact that it is made to be used for the continuous evaluation of destination competitiveness by residents in developing economies. This could be performed as a regular research procedure of local or regional tourism organisations that could include residents in assessing destination competitiveness together with other important target groups such as tourism stakeholders and tourists. The model highlights the importance of community engagement in tourism development. By fostering positive attitudes among residents, destinations can enhance their attractiveness and competitiveness in the global market. The model provides a structured framework for evaluating TDC, which can be used by researchers and practitioners to benchmark performance and identify areas for improvement. Policymakers can use the model to understand residents' attitudes towards tourism, enabling them to create policies that align with local needs and preferences. This can lead to more sustainable and accepted tourism development strategies. Industry stakeholders can utilize the insights from the model to enhance the quality of tourist offerings and infrastructure, ensuring they meet both resident and tourist expectations. This can improve overall satisfaction and competitiveness. By considering factors such as pollution and the situational framework of tourism development, the model encourages sustainable practices that benefit, the environment, the local community, and visitors. It should be also emphasized that TDC is a multi-faced concept and its assessment requires the involvement of all important stakeholders at the destination in order to get a concrete pathway to increasing tourism competitive position on the market. The involvement of the local population in evaluating competitiveness may necessitate significant shifts in attitudes toward tourism planning, development, management, and destination marketing. Anticipated outcomes include a broader understanding of the factors contributing to destination competitiveness and clearer insights into the population’s role in this process. Developing a model to measure residents’ perspectives on tourism competitiveness ensures greater relevance to the diverse realities of various destinations, considering that the validation and adaptation of existing models might be less effective across different cultural and geographical contexts. The practical benefits of the application of the model are numerous. However, the most important is the fact that measuring residents’ attitudes about destination competitiveness is essential for creating a balance between the economic benefits of tourism and the well-being of the local community. It allows for sustainable development, positive destination branding, and the creation of an overall positive experience for both residents and visitors.

Based on the research findings, we propose several recommendations for policymakers to enhance Serbia’s TDC:

Engage residents: Involve residents in tourism planning and decision-making processes, as well as in TDC assessment, to foster more sustainable and accepted tourism development strategies.

Utilize the new model: Apply the newly developed model tailored to capture residents’ TDC assessments in developing economies, gaining comprehensive insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the destination from a local perspective.

Regular monitoring: Implement a regular monitoring system using this model to track changes in TDC over time, helping to identify trends, policy impacts, and areas needing improvement.

Focus on quality improvement: Address residents' concerns regarding the quality of tourism infrastructure and services. Improvements in these areas can enhance both resident and tourist satisfaction, boosting overall competitiveness.

Address environmental concerns and promote sustainability: Recognize environmental sustainability as a key competitiveness factor. Implement measures to reduce pollution and improve environmental conditions, responding to residents’ concerns and enhancing the destination’s appeal. Encourage sustainable tourism practices that benefit both the environment and the local community.

Improve tourism development conditions: Address residents’ concerns about the situational framework of tourism development, particularly regarding political stability and favourable conditions for tourism growth, to significantly enhance the destination’s competitiveness.

Strive for sustainable development: Ensure that tourism development strategies balance economic benefits with the well-being of the local community. This includes considering residents’ satisfaction, environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life in tourism planning and development

8 Limitation and further research

The current study also has certain limitations. Firstly, the model has been tested in one developing economy (Serbia) chosen as a case study to conduct initial research. The model should be applied and replicated in other developing economies to confirm and validate the structure and prove the comparability of results obtained in various developing economies. Secondly, since this was an initial study aimed at creating a new model, the research was conducted only once. Continuous monitoring and longitudinal studies are necessary to track progress and draw conclusions about changes in destination competitiveness. Longitudinal studies play a crucial role in evaluating TDC by offering insights into trends, policy impacts, and causal relationships over time. Such information is vital for making informed decisions, especially in developing economies where understanding the long-term effects of tourism policies and interventions is critical.

Future research should also examine the impact of certain independent variables (such as their active engagement in tourism, tourism and pro-environmental attitudes etc.) and sociodemographic characteristics on residents’ perceptions of TDC. It would be also beneficial to reshape, modify and test the model for different target groups such as tourists or tourism stakeholders to enable a holistic approach to TDC research in developing countries.

Data availability

Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information files Ethics approval: The consent of the Ethics Commission of the University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Science, is not required for the collection of data for the purpose of scientific research through survey research, in accordance with Article 7 paragraph 2 of the Code of Academic Integrity of the Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad number: 0601-351/5. All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Rasool H, Maqbool S, Tarique M. The relationship between tourism and economic growth among BRICS countries: a panel cointegration analysis. Futur Bus J. 2021;7(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-020-00048-3 .

Article   Google Scholar  

World Economic Forum (WEF). The travel & tourism competitiveness report 2019: travel and tourism at a tipping point. Geneva: WEF; 2019.

Google Scholar  

Sanches-Pereira A, Onguglo B, Pacini H, Gómez MF, Coelho ST, Muwanga MK. Fostering local sustainable development in Tanzania by enhancing linkages between tourism and small-scale agriculture. J Clean Prod. 2017;162:1567–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.164 .

Dwyer L, Armenski T, Knežević Cvelbar L, Dragićević V, Mihalic T. Modified Importance–performance analysis for evaluating tourism businesses strategies: comparison of Slovenia and Serbia. Int J Tour Res. 2016;18(4):327–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2052 .

Medina-Muñoz DR, Medina-Muñoz RD, Chim-Miki AF. Tourism competitiveness assessment: the current status of research in Spain and China. Tour Econ. 2013;19(2):297–318. https://doi.org/10.5367/te.2013.0197 .

Vila TD, Darcy S, González EA. Competing for the disability tourism market–a comparative exploration of the factors of accessible tourism competitiveness in Spain and Australia. Tour Manag. 2015;47:261–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.008 .

Armenski T, Dwyer L, Pavluković V. Destination competitiveness: public and private sector tourism management in Serbia. J Travel Res. 2018;57(3):384–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517692445 .

Goffi G, Cucculelli M, Masiero L. Fostering tourism destination competitiveness in developing countries: the role of sustainability. J Clean Prod. 2019;209:101–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.208 .

Bu NT, Kong H, Ye S. County tourism development in china: a case study. J China Tour Res. 2021;17(2):249–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388160.2020.1761501 .

Martínez-González JA, Díaz-Padilla VT, Parra-López E. Study of the tourism competitiveness model of the world economic forum using Rasch’s mathematical model: the case of Portugal. Sustainability. 2021;13(13):7169. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137169 .

Crouch GI. Destination competitiveness: an analysis of determinant attributes. J Travel Res. 2011;50(1):27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287510362776 .

López MFB, Virto NR, Manzano JA, Miranda JGM. Residents’ attitude as determinant of tourism sustainability: the case of Trujillo. J Hosp Tour Manag. 2018;35:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.02.002 .

Abreu-Novais ML, Ruhanen L, Arcodia C. Destination competitiveness: what we know, what we know but shouldn’t and what we don’t know but should. Curr Issues Tour. 2016;19(6):492–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1091443 .

Dwyer L. Destination competitiveness and resident well-being. Tour Manag Perspect. 2022;43(6):100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2022.100996 .

Ahn YJ, Bessiere J. The relationships between Tourism destination competitiveness, empowerment, and supportive actions for tourism. Sustainability. 2023;15:626. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010626 .

Campelo AR, Aitken MT, Gnoth J. Sense of place: the importance of destination branding. J Travel Res. 2014;53(2):154–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513496474 .

Stylidis D, Sit J, Biran A. An exploratory study of residents’ perception of place image: the case of Kavala. J Travel Res. 2014;55(5):659–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728751456316 .

World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC). SERBIA 2022 Annual Research: Key Highlights. 2022. https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact . Accessed 15 Feb 2024.

Government of the Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Trade, Tourism, and Telecommunications. Tourism Development Strategy of the Republic of Serbia 2016–2025. 2016. https://mto.gov.rs/tekst/177/strategije.php . Accessed 20 Feb 2024.

Armenski T, Gomezelj DO, Djurdjev B, Ćurčić N, Dragin A. Tourism destination competitiveness—between two flags. Econ Res. 2012;25(2):485–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2012.11517519 .

Dragićević V, Jovičić D, Blešić I, Stankov U, Bošković D. Business tourism destination competitiveness: a case of Vojvodina Province (Serbia). Econ Res. 2012;25(2):311–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2012.11517510 .

Drakulić Kovačević N, Kovačević L, Stankov U, Dragićević V, Miletić A. Applying destination competitiveness model to strategic tourism development of small destinations: the case of South Banat district. J Dest Mark Manag. 2018;8:114–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.01.002 .

Cimbaljević M, Panić A, Pavlović D, Pavluković V, Pivac T, Kovačić S, Stankov U. Systematic literature review on tourism destination competitiveness research. Turizam. 2023;27(1):51–6. https://doi.org/10.5937/turizam27-42000 .

Abreu Novais M, Ruhanen L, Arcodia C. Destination competitiveness: a phenomenographic study. Tour Manag. 2018;64:324–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.08.014 .

Tse S, Tung VWS. Measuring the valence and intensity of residents’ behaviors in host-tourist interactions: implications for destination image and destination competitiveness. J Travel Res. 2021;61(3):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287521997576 .

Fernández JAS, Azevedo PS, Martín JMM, Martín JAR. Determinants of tourism destination competitiveness in the countries most visited by international tourists: proposal of a synthetic index. Tour Manag Perspect. 2020;33:100582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100582 .

Nunkoo R, Gursoy D. Residents’ support for tourism: an identity perspective. Ann Tour Res. 2012;39(1):243–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.05.006 .

Stylidis D, Dominguez Quintero AM. Understanding the effect of place image and knowledge of tourism on residents’ attitudes towards tourism and their word-of-mouth intentions: evidence from Seville Spain. Tour Plan Dev. 2022;19(5):433–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2022.2049859 .

Miličević K, Mihalič T, Sever I. An investigation of the relationship between destination branding and destination competitiveness. J Travel Tour Mark. 2017;34(2):209–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1156611 .

Strzelecka M, Boley BB, Woosnam KM. Place attachment and empowerment: do residents need to be attached to be empowered? Ann Tour Res. 2017;66:61–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.06.002 .

Dwyer L. Tourism development to enhance resident well-being: a strong sustainability perspective. Sustainability. 2023;15(4):3321. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043321 .

Qian C, Sasaki N, Shivakoti G, Zhang Y. Effective governance in tourism development—An analysis of local perception in the Huangshan mountain area. Tour Manag Perspect. 2016;20:112–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.08.003 .

Gajdosik T, Gajdosikova Z, Strazanova R. Residents perception of sustainable tourism destination development: a destination governance issue. Glob Bus Finance Rev. 2018;23(1):24–35. https://doi.org/10.17549/gbfr.2018.23.1.24 .

Tempest I. Planning for tourists and residents in an historic destination - York UK. In: Morpeth ND, Yan HL, editors. Planning for tourism: towards a sustainable future. Wallingford: CABI; 2015. p. 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781780644585.0088 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Line ND, Wang Y. A multi-stakeholder market oriented approach to destination marketing. J Dest Mark Manag. 2017;6(1):84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.03.003 .

Vodeb K. Sustainable competitiveness of destination and resident’s attitude towards tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Industry, Congress Proceedings, Trends in Tourism and Hospitality Industry; 2014, pp. 79–89.

Ouyang Z, Gursoy D, Sharma B. Role of trust, emotions and event attachment on residents’ attitudes toward tourism. Tour Manag. 2017;63:426–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.06.026 .

Tung VWS, King BEM, Tse S. The tourist stereotype model: positive and negative dimensions. J Travel Res. 2020;59(1):37–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518821739 .

Lai PH, Gudergan S, Young T, Lee K. Resident intention to invite friends, relatives, and acquaintances: the dynamic process of place identity as a motivator. Tour Manag. 2021;84:104251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104251 .

Styvén ME, Mariani MM, Strandberg C. This is my hometown! the role of place attachment, congruity, and self-expressiveness on residents’ intention to share a place brand message online. J Advert. 2020;49(5):540–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2020.1810594 .

Andersson M, Ekman P. Ambassador networks and place branding. J Place Manag Dev. 2009;2(1):41–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538330910942799 .

García AF, Vázquez BA, Macías CR. Resident’s attitudes towards the impacts of tourism. Tour Manag Perspect. 2015;13:33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2014.11.002 .

Goffi G, Cucculelli M. Explaining tourism competitiveness in small and medium destinations: the Italian case. Curr Issues Tour. 2019;22(17):2109–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1421620 .

Abou-Shouk MA, Mannaa MT, Elbaz AM. Women’s empowerment and tourism development: a cross-country study. Tour Manag Perspect. 2021;37:100782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100782 .

Boley BB, McGehee NG, Hammett ALT. Importance-performance analysis (IPA) of sustainable tourism initiatives: the resident perspective. Tour Manag. 2017;58:66–77.

Campón-Cerro AM, Hernández-Mogollón JM, Alves H. Sustainable improvement of competitiveness in rural tourism destinations: the quest for tourist loyalty in Spain. J Destin Mark Manag. 2017;6(3):252–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.04.005 .

John A, Firoz CM, Ramanan TR. Destination competitiveness of a tourist region: a case of Kerala, India. J Glob Hosp Tour. 2023;2(1):71–98. https://doi.org/10.5038/2771-5957.2.1.1021 .

Oliveira T, de Lima PM, dos Anjos FA, Feger JE. Governance and competitiveness of tourism destinations: validation of the structural model in the case of Brazil. J Qual Assur Hosp Tour. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2023.2251686 .

González-Rodríguez MR, Díaz-Fernández MC, Pulido-Pavón N. Tourist destination competitiveness: an international approach through the travel and tourism competitiveness index. Tour Manag Perspect. 2023;47:101127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2023.101127 .

Dwyer L, Kim C. Destination competitiveness: determinants and indicators. Curr Issues Tour. 2003;6(5):369–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500308667962 .

Ritchie JRB, Crouch GI. The competitive destination—a sustainable tourism perspective. Cambridge: CABI Publishing; 2003.

Book   Google Scholar  

Aithal A, Aithal PS. Development and validation of survey questionnaire experimental data—a systematical review-based statistical approach. Int J Manag Technol Soc Sci. 2020;5(2):233–51. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3724105 .

Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 4th ed. London: SAGE; 2013.

Bentler PM. EQS 6, structural equations program manual. Encino: Multivariate Software Inc; 2006.

Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Methods Res. 1992;21(2):230–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005 .

Hoyle RH. The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 1995. p. 1–15.

Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312 .

Huang FL. Conducting multilevel confirmatory factor analysis using R. 2017. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12391.34724

Dimitrios S. Residents’ place image: a cluster analysis and its links to place attachment and support for tourism. J Sustain Tour. 2018;26(6):1007–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1435668 .

Chen N, Dwyer L. Residents’ place satisfaction and place attachment on destination brand-building behaviors: conceptual and empirical differentiation. J Travel Res. 2018;57(8):1026–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517729760 .

Mamirkulova G, Mi J, Abbas J, Mahmood S, Mubeen R, Ziapour A. New silk road infrastructure opportunities in developing tourism environment for residents better quality of life. Glob Ecol Conserv. 2020;24: e01194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01194 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by The Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia, GRANT No. 7739076, Tourism Destination Competitiveness—Evaluation Model for Serbia—TOURCOMSERBIA. Also, the authors acknowledge financial support of the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovation of the Republic of Serbia (Grant No. 451-03-66/2024-03/ 200125 & 451-03-65/2024-03/200125).‬‬‬‬‬

This research was supported by The Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia, GRANT No. 7739076, Tourism Destination Competitiveness—Evaluation Model for Serbia—TOURCOMSERBIA. Also, the authors acknowledge financial support of the Ministry of Science, Technological Development and Innovation of the Republic of Serbia (Grant No. 451-03-66/2024-03/200125 & 451-03-65/2024-03/200125).‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Sciences, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Sanja Kovačić, Marija Cimbaljević & Vanja Pavluković

Faculty of Business Economics and Entrepreneurship (PEP), Mitropolita Petra 8 Street, 11000, Belgrade, Serbia

Slobodan Jovanović

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

SK Methodology, Investigation, Software, Formal analysis, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing. MC Investigation, Formal analysis, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing. VP Conceptualisation, Formal analysis, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing, Supervision. SJ Investigation, Writing—Original Draft.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marija Cimbaljević .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The consent of the Ethics Commission of the University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Science, is not required for the collection of data for the purpose of scientific research through survey research, in accordance with Article 7 paragraph 2 of the Code of Academic Integrity of the Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad number: 0601-351/5. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kovačić, S., Cimbaljević, M., Pavluković, V. et al. Exploring tourism competitiveness in developing economies: residents’ perspective. Discov Sustain 5 , 201 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00416-x

Download citation

Received : 13 March 2024

Accepted : 12 August 2024

Published : 17 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00416-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Tourism destination competitiveness
• Developing countries
• Mix-method research
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research