Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Chen Wei
 -- 1251 2023-06-20 13:00:14 |
2 format correction
Dean Liu
 -23 word(s) 1228 2023-06-25 03:18:05 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Wei, C.; Zhang, T. Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/45858 (accessed on 06 July 2024).
Wei C, Zhang T. Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/45858. Accessed July 06, 2024.
Wei, Chen, Tao Zhang. "Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/45858 (accessed July 06, 2024).
Wei, C., & Zhang, T. (2023, June 20). Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/45858
Wei, Chen and Tao Zhang. "Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty." Encyclopedia. Web. 20 June, 2023.
Industrial Heritage as the Drivers of Tourists’ Loyalty
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su15118791

Industrial heritage—a testament to urban progress and an emblem of urban civilization—is at risk during urban development and the transformation of aging cities. Consequently, the preservation and enhancement of urban heritage resources are crucial. Concerning the tourism development of industrial heritage, various challenges arise.

industrial heritage authentic experience experience quality

1. Industrial Heritage Tourism

The TICCIH organization was founded in Sweden and is widely acknowledged by the international community for its primary responsibility in matters related to the preservation of industrial heritage and sites in the global community. It was the first global organization of industrial heritage conservation associations. In the Netherlands, information on industrial heritage began to be gathered and compiled in 1986. Additionally, France has created a long-term strategy for documenting industrial heritage. The world Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) was founded, the United Nations passed pertinent legislation, and the world community has been united in its support for the protection of industrial heritage since 2001. The Nizhny Tagil Charter for the Industrial Heritage notes that, according to the classification of cultural heritage, industrial heritage includes tangible and intangible heritage. Tangible heritage consists of movable industrial relics, immovable industrial buildings, and industrial sites, while intangible industrial heritage includes craft processes, traditional craftsmanship skills, and so on. Industrial heritage is considered a living heritage form with substantial historical significance (Pozo and Gonzalez [1]). Engaging in industrial heritage tourism can evoke memories from one’s past (Bryce, Curran, O’Gorman, and Taheri [2]; Cohen [3]; Lee, Riley, and Hampton [4]). There has been a growing emphasis on industrial heritage tourism (Adongo, Choe, and Han [5]; Taylor [6]; Yeoman, Brass, and McMahonBeattie [7]). Authenticity plays a crucial role in industrial heritage tourism (Williams and Stewart [8]; Yi, Fu, Yu, and Jiang [9]). Many scholars believe that authenticity in industrial heritage tourism contributes to enhancing experience quality and tourist satisfaction (Adongo et al. [5]; Lau [10]). Other researchers argue that existential authenticity can significantly impact tourist loyalty (Belhassen et al. [11], Poria, Butler, and Airey [12]). However, few scientific studies have examined loyalty, authenticity, and satisfaction, with no known instances of these factors being jointly analyzed in the context of industrial heritage tourism (Kolar and Zabkar [13]; Lee et al. [4]). 

2. S-O-R Theory

S-O-R was initially applied to research consumer behavior, focusing on the dynamic interactions between internal consumer behaviors and responses to stimuli from the outside world. S-O-R theory includes three basic elements: stimulus, organism, and response. Bitner [14] elaborated on alterations in consumers’ mental activity using the service environment as an entrance point, contending that consumers’ cognitive, emotional, and physical responses are easily influenced by outside variables. Vieira [15] claimed that external influences might easily excite consumers’ brain processes throughout the purchase period. Keller [16]; Schmitt and Zarantonello [17]; and Pantano and Timmermans [18] employed S-O-R as a foundation for their examination of consumer purchasing patterns, contending that the majority of customers’ willingness to buy is influenced by outside forces. Pantano and Viassone [19] used retailers’ integration of numerous channels as the starting point for their argument and claim that consumers are more likely to buy desired goods through many channels as a result of multi-channel integration methods. Ai [20] examined the primary determinants of consumers’ willingness to buy in the context of online shopping, using S-O-R as the foundation and cognition and emotion as the point of entry to examine and study the determinants of consumers’ purchase intention.

3. Authenticity Experience (AE)

Since it was first used in the document The Venice Charter in 1964, the term “authenticity”, which in English implies true, original, and sacred, has increasingly been applied to the field of cultural heritage tourism. Authenticity is primarily about making sure that cultural legacy is preserved and transmitted in its original, true form. At that time, the conservation of Western stone architecture was the main focus of the study of authenticity. Due to cultural differences between the East and the West, there are significant discrepancies in the understanding of the authenticity of cultural heritage, especially in regard to the preservation of East Asian wooden architecture. A Japanese scholar published The Nara Document on Authenticity in 1994 [21], which made the case that the application of the concept of authenticity should take into account the specific cultural environment in order to ensure the diversity and richness of cultural heritage. All forms of cultural heritage should be appreciated and preserved. The concept of authenticity has been continuously utilized in the field of cultural heritage protection as awareness of the need to safeguard it has arisen, and it has been updated and refined as technology has advanced. Authenticity is essential for a significant tourist experience (Hargrove [22]). The concept of authenticity has been explored in numerous disciplines and understood from various perspectives. MacCannell [23] believes that the tourism industry should incorporate authenticity. Ruijgrok [24] considered authenticity as a crucial factor in determining the value of preserving and maintaining a site. Xie [25] posited that cultural heritage sites, such as shipyards, present genuine opportunities for conservation and learning. Xie [25] also recommended that destination management organizations (DMOs) should maintain the shipyard’s original state to prevent the loss of authenticity due to excessive exploitation of the natural environment.

4. Experience Quality (EQ)

Experience quality refers to a customer’s emotional response to positive aspects of their travel experience (Chan and Baum [26]). In heritage tourism, experience quality encompasses tourists’ psychological and social reactions (Chen and Chen [27]). Consequently, experience quality is regarded as the psychological impact on individuals participating in tourism activities (Crompton and Love, 1995 [28]; Cole and Scott [29]; Chen and Chen [27]). As per the literature, experience quality possesses various dimensions, including entertainment, aesthetics, education, and escapism (Pine [30]); tranquility, hedonics, recognition, and involvement (Otto [31]); and surprise, immersion, enjoyment, and participation (Kao et al., 2008 [32]).

5. Tourists’ Satisfaction (TS)

Satisfaction represents a psychological state (Pizam, Shapoval, and Ellis [33]). Customer satisfaction refers to the evaluation a visitor makes following a tourism experience (Deng et al. [34]). Overall satisfaction encompasses the aggregation of all prior customers’ satisfaction levels (Jones and Suh [35]). Visitor satisfaction, encompassing the visitor experience at various stages, is a critical factor for DMO to understand (M. Kim and B. Thapa [36]).

6. Environmentally Responsible Behavior (ERB)

Environmentally responsible behavior (ERB) reflects consumers’ commitment, concern, and environmental awareness (Aragon-Correa, Martin Tapia, and de la Torre-Ruiz [37]; Cottrell and Graefe [38]). Furthermore, ERB is the outcome of environmental attitudes and behavioral norms of visitors to natural sites (Kang and Moscardo [39]). Moreover, ERB also demonstrates tourists’ understanding of the impact of attitudes on natural tourism sites (M Kim and B Thapa [36]). It encompasses a broad array of environmentally and ecologically friendly behaviors (Kiatkawsin and Han [40]; Miller, Merrilees, and Coghlan [41]; Tsarenko, Ferraro, Sands, and McCleod [42]). ERB acts as an environmental protection mechanism, enabling tourists to reduce or avoid harming environmental resources (Chiu, Lee, and Chen [43]; Su, Swanson, and Chen [44]). Based on previous research, ERB represents individual actions undertaken to protect the environment (Schultz [45]; Stern [46]). It refers to visitors’ commitment to environmental protection (Lee [47]), including environmental concerns, waste recycling activities, and ecological knowledge (Cottrell and Graefe [38]). Additionally, ERB is manifested in individual recycling behavior and educational activities (Thapa [48]).

7. Destination Loyalty (DL)

Destination loyalty represents a firmly established behavior (Kandampully, Zhang, and Bilgihan [49]; Oliver [50]). Tourists exhibiting destination loyalty tend to revisit the same attractions and are more likely to provide positive word-of-mouth communication (Chi and Qu [51]). In contrast, tourists lacking destination loyalty are more prone to being influenced by negative information (Chen and Phou [52]). Therefore, visitor loyalty benefit management organizations should be strengthened and enhanced by providing them with a competitive advantage (M Kim and B Thapa [36]).

References

  1. Del Pozo, P.B.; González, P.A. Industrial Heritage and Place Identity in Spain: From Monuments to Landscapes. Geogr. Rev. 2012, 102, 446–464.
  2. Bryce, D.; Curran, R.; O’Gorman, K.; Taheri, B. Visitors’ engagement and authenticity: Japanese heritage consumption. Tour. Manag. 2015, 46, 571–581.
  3. Cohen, E. Heterogenization of tourist art. Ann. Tour. Res. 1993, 20, 138–163.
  4. Lee, T.J.; Riley, M.; Hampton, M.P. Conflict and progress: Tourism development in Korea. Ann. Tour. Res. 2010, 37, 355–376.
  5. Adongo, R.; Choe, J.Y.; Han, H. Tourism in Hoi An, Vietnam: Impacts, perceived benefits, community attachment and support for tourism development. Int. J. Tour. Sci. 2017, 17, 86–106.
  6. Taylor, J.P. Authenticity and sincerity in tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2001, 28, 7–26.
  7. Yeoman, I.; Brass, D.; McMahon-Beattie, U. Current issue in tourism: The authentic tourist. Tour. Manag. 2007, 28, 1128–1138.
  8. Williams, P.W.; Stewart, J.K. Canadian aboriginal tourism development: Assessing latent demand from France. J. Tour. Stud. 1997, 8, 25–41.
  9. Yi, X.; Fu, X.; Yu, L.; Jiang, L. Authenticity and loyalty at heritage sites: The moderation effect of postmodern authenticity. Tour. Manag. 2018, 67, 411–424.
  10. Lau, R.W.K. Revisiting authenticity: A social realist approach. Ann. Tour. Res. 2010, 37, 478–498.
  11. Belhassen, Y.; Caton, K.; Stewart, W.P. The search for authenticity in the pilgrim experience. Ann. Tour. Res. 2008, 35, 668–689.
  12. Poria, Y.; Butler, R.; Airey, D. Clarifying Heritage Tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2001, 28, 1047–1049.
  13. Kolar, T.; Zabkar, V. A consumer–based model of authenticity: An oxymoron or the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 652–664.
  14. Bitner, M.J. Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. J. Mark. 1992, 56, 57–71.
  15. Vieira, V.A. Stimuli–organism-response framework: A meta-analytic review in the store environment. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1420–1426.
  16. Keller, K.L. Brand Equity Management in a Multichannel, Multimedia Retail Environment. J. Interact. Mark. 2010, 24, 58–70.
  17. Schmitt, B.; Zarantonello, L. Consumer Experience and Experiential Marketing: A Critical Review. Rev. Mark. Res. 2013, 10, 25–61.
  18. Pantano, E.; Timmermans, H. What is smart for retailing? Procedia Environ. Sci. 2014, 22, 101–107.
  19. Pantano, E.; Viassone, M. Engaging consumers on new integrated multichannel retail settings: Challenges for retailers. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2015, 25, 106–114.
  20. Ai, L. A Comparative Study on the Influence of Recommendation and Promotion on Consumers’ Purchase Intention in Online Shopping Environment. Master’s Thesis, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China, 2017.
  21. ICOMOS. The Nara Document on Authenticity. In Proceedings of the ICOMOS, Nara, Japan, 1–6 November 1994; pp. 1–6.
  22. Hargrove, C.M. Heritage tourism. Cult. Resour. Manag. 2002, 25, 10–11.
  23. MacCannell, D. Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings. SSRN Electron. J. 1973, 79, 589–603.
  24. Ruijgrok, E.C.M. The three economic values of cultural heritage: A case study in the Netherlands. J. Cult. Herit. 2006, 7, 206–213.
  25. Xie, P.F.; Lee, M.Y.; Wong, J.W.-C. Assessing community attitudes toward industrial heritage tourism development. J. Tour. Cult. Chang. 2020, 18, 237–251.
  26. Lian Chan, J.K.; Baum, T. Ecotourists perception of ecotourism experience in Lower Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malaysia. J. Sustain. Tour. 2007, 15, 574–590.
  27. Chen, C.-F.; Chen, F.-S. Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 29–35.
  28. Crompton, J.L.; Love, L.L. The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to Evaluating Quality of a Festival. J. Travel Res. 1995, 34, 11–24.
  29. Cole, S.T.; Scott, D. Examining the Mediating Role of Experience Quality in a Model of Tourist Experiences. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2004, 16, 79–90.
  30. Pine, B.J.; Gilmore, J.H. Welcome to the Experience Economy; Harvard Business Review Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1998; pp. 97–105.
  31. Otto, J.E.; Ritchie, J.R.B. The service experience in tourism. Tour. Manag. 1996, 17, 165–174.
  32. Kao, Y.-F.; Huang, L.-S.; Wu, C.-H. Effects of Theatrical Elements on Experiential Quality and Loyalty Intentions for Theme Parks. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2008, 13, 163–174.
  33. Pizam, A.; Shapoval, V.; Ellis, T. Customer satisfaction and its measurement in hospitality enterprises: A revisit and update. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 28, 2–35.
  34. Deng, Z.; Lu, Y.; Wei, K.K.; Zhang, J. Understanding customer satisfaction and loyalty: An empirical study of mobile instant messages in China. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2010, 30, 289–300.
  35. Jones, M.A.; Suh, J. Transaction-specific satisfaction and overall satisfaction: An empirical analysis. J. Serv. Mark. 2000, 14, 147–159.
  36. Kim, M.; Thapa, B. Perceived value and flow experience: Application in a nature-based tourism context. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2017, 8, 373–384.
  37. Aragon-Correa, J.A.; Martin-Tapia, I.; de la Torre-Ruiz, J. Sustainability issues and hospitality and tourism firms’ strategies: Analytical review and future directions. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 27, 498–522.
  38. Cottrell, S.P.; Graefe, A.R. Testing a Conceptual Framework of Responsible Environmental Behavior. J. Environ. Educ. 1997, 29, 17–27.
  39. Kang, M.; Moscardo, G. Exploring cross-cultural differences in attitudes towards responsible tourist behavior: A comparison of Korea, British and Australian tourists. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2006, 11, 303–320.
  40. Kiatkawsin, K.; Han, H. Young travelers’ intention to behavior pro-environmentally: Merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. Tour. Manag. 2017, 59, 76–88.
  41. Miller, D.; Merrilees, B.; Coghlan, A. Sustainable urban tourism: Understanding and developing visitor pro-environmentally behavior. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 26–46.
  42. Tsarenko, Y.; Ferraro, C.; Sands, S.; McLeod, C. Environmentally conscious consumption: The role of retailers and peers as external influences. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2013, 20, 302–310.
  43. Chiu, Y.-T.H.; Lee, W.-I.; Chen, T.-H. Environmentally responsible behavior in ecotourism: Antecedents and implications. Tour. Manag. 2014, 40, 321–329.
  44. Su, L.; Swanson, S.R.; Chen, X. Reputation, subjective well-being, and environmental responsibility: The role of satisfaction and identification. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 1344–1361.
  45. Schultz, P.W. Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 391–406.
  46. Stern, P.C. New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424.
  47. Lee, T.H. How recreation involvement, place attachment and conservation commitment affect environmentally responsible behavior. J. Sustain. Tour. 2011, 19, 895–915.
  48. Thapa, B. The Mediation Effect of Outdoor Recreation Participation on Environmental Attitude-Behavior Correspondence. J. Environ. Educ. 2010, 41, 133–150.
  49. Kandampully, J.; Zhang, T.; Bilgihan, A. Customer loyalty: A review and future directions with a special focus on the hospitality industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 27, 379–414.
  50. Oliver, R.L. Whence consumer loyalty? J. Mark. 1999, 63, 33–44.
  51. Chi, C.G.-Q.; Qu, H. Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tour. Manag. 2008, 29, 624–636.
  52. Chen, C.-F.; Phou, S. A closer look at destination: Image, personality, relationship and loyalty. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 269–278.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Green & Sustainable Science & Technology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Chen Wei
,
Tao Zhang
View Times: 269
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 25 Jun 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback