Satisfaction Factors That Predict Loyalty in Ecotourism: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 1 by Wilmer Carvache-Franco and Version 2 by Yvaine Wei.

Recently, foreign tourists have revealed a growing interest for natural environment enjoyment. Results show three satisfaction factors in ecotourism: “nature and culture”, “infrastructure”, and “service”, where “nature and culture” was the most influential predictor of tourists’ loyalty. The entry also found a positive correlation between satisfaction and loyalty in ecotourism. 

  • satisfaction
  • loyalty
  • ecotourism
  • foreign tourist
  • Costa Rica

1. Introduction

Visitor satisfaction is a vital aspect of national park marketing and management practice [1][2]. Therefore, understanding the importance of satisfaction allows managers to provide facilities and services according to the expectations of visitors [3][4][5]. In this sense, ecotourists tend to show significant levels of perceived satisfaction with the experiences lived during an ecotourism visit [6][7][8][9]. In addition, marketing approaches, which consider tourism satisfaction and behavioral intentions, remain an essential area for research in tourism studies [10].
Ecotourism includes contact with nature, culture, agriculture, wildlife, and adventure activities [11]. Ecotourism areas have become important destinations due to their efficiency in protecting the environment and supporting education, recreation, and job creation [12]. The growing popularity of ecotourism around the world has encouraged tourist destinations to receive more and more tourists who like contact with nature and are willing to comply with the protection regulations of the chosen natural space [13]. Ecotourists search for nature and culture in a national park with their family and friends [14]. Managers must realize the economic importance of meeting the needs of visitors and providing them with memorable experiences [15]. Hence, satisfaction is often an important goal that park managers seek to achieve [5]. Likewise, mega faunas and impressive ecosystems are attributes of satisfaction in ecotourism [16][17][18]. 
Inbound tourism encompasses the activities carried out by a non-resident visitor in the country of reference as part of an inbound tourist trip World Tourism Organization UNWTO [19]. In this sense, foreign tourists play an important role in national economies [20]. Therefore, the entry of foreign tourists to countries can play an effective role in increasing income exchange, creating new and more employment opportunities and fertilizing the tourism industry, and consequently, can promote quality of life and accelerate the country’s development process [21]. Satisfaction factors are vital studies around the world, because the study of satisfaction in foreign tourists is an important indicator to analyze the return of foreign tourists, an important indicator in national economies. 

2. Study Area

In particular, the Arenal National Park is selected, because it is one of the parks with the most visits nationwide and it is considered a natural laboratory and the Caño Negro National Wildlife Refuge in Costa Rica, since its characteristics make it a wetland of international importance (Figure 1).
Land 11 00125 g001 550
Figure 1. The geographic location of protected areas: Arenal Volcano National Park and Caño Negro Mixed National Wildlife Refuge (Costa Rica).

3. Relationship of Satisfaction Factors with Return Intentions

To analyze the most important predictors in return intentions, a stepwise multiple regression was used, which included the satisfaction factors that were significant for the model. The results are presented in Table 12.
Table 12. Relationship of satisfaction factors with return intentions (Multiple regression).
Satisfaction Factors Beta t Sig. Tolerance
Nature and culture 0.227 3.716 0.000 1.000
Infrastructure 0.171 2.807 0.005

p < 0.05), indicating a real relationship between significant predictors and return intentions. Furthermore, the tolerance values indicated that there was no multicollinearity between the independent variables. Likewise, the Durbin–Watson statistic reached a value of 1.43, which suggests the absence of auto-correlation in the errors and confirms the suitability of the model. The satisfaction factor “Nature and culture” was the most significant predictor in return intentions (Beta = 0.227, p < 0.05), followed by the satisfaction factor “Infrastructure” (Beta = 0.171, p < 0.05).

4. Relationship of General Satisfaction with the Loyalty Variables

A multiple stepwise regression was used to analyze the relationship of general satisfaction with the loyalty variables. The results are presented in Table 25.
Table 25. Relationship of general satisfaction with the loyalty variables.
Variable Return Intentions Recommendation Intentions Say Positive Things about Destination
Beta T Sig. Beta t Sig. Beta t Sig.
1.000
Overall satisfaction 0.513 9.317 0.000 0.732 16.763 0.000 0.709 15.696 0.000
(Constant)   −0.197 0.844   2.487 0.014   5.681 0.000
Services 0.165 2.703 0.007 1.000
Adj. R² 0.260     Adj. R2 0.533   Adj. R2 0.500   (Constant)   43.846 0.000
F statistic 86.799   
  F statistic 281.004   F statistic 246.379   Adj. R² 0.096      
F statistic
Sig. 0.000     Sig. 0.000   Sig. 0.000   9.637
Durbin–Watson  86.799   
    Durbin–Watson 1.858   Durbin–Watson 2.024   Sig. 0.000      
Tolerance 1.000     Tolerance 1.000   Tolerance 1.000   Durbin–Watson 1.428      

According to Table 2, the three satisfaction factors seemed to predict return intentions. The F test was significant (

5. Research Findings

The first satisfaction factor was “Nature and Culture”, whose results were similar to the study by Tsiotsou and Va-sioti [22], who found the factor “satisfaction with the landscape”. Another result related to nature was found in the study by Meng et al. [23], who found the satisfaction factor in “natural landscapes”. Another study related to nature was that of Xu et al. [24], who identified “satisfaction with the natural environment”. The second factor found in this enstrudy was “infrastructure.” Infrastructure-related results were found in the study by Lee [25], who called it “recreational facilities”, while “Service” was the third satisfaction factor in the present study, finding similar results with the service in the study by Tsiotsou and Vasioti [22], who found the factors “satisfaction with food” and “satisfaction with food excursion”. Furthermore, similar results were found with the service in the study by Meng et al. [23], who called the factor “friendly services/quality”. Another study related to service was that of Chan et al. [26], who found that the quality of the service has a significant and positive impact on satisfaction.

6. Conclusions

In ecotourism, the study of satisfaction is essential for identifying the factors that deeply influence the loyalty of tourists. Hence, with proper planning, the service can be improved to achieve greater satisfaction and return of tourists. As a result, the destination and its community will benefit, with higher income and employment. “Nature and culture”, “infrastructure”, and “service” are the three satisfaction factors found in ecotourism. The satisfaction factor “nature and culture” and the satisfaction factor “services” are the ones that greatly influence the intentions to recommend and the intentions to say positive things about the destination, while the satisfaction factors “nature and culture” and “infrastructure” are the ones that considerably influence the return of tourists. Moreover, the satisfaction factor “nature and culture” is the main predictor in the loyalty of tourists; this means that the natural and cultural heritage of the protected areas should be preserved to increase the level of tourists’ loyalty to the destination. Moreover, general satisfaction influences return and recommendation intentions and saying positive things about the destination. Regarding the practical implications, ecotourism companies must plan strategies to improve the conservation and care of the natural and cultural heritage of protected areas. For this, activities that improve the conservation of natural and cultural heritage must be organized. It is necessary to counteract the effects on the natural heritage, take care of natural species, improve compliance with environmental regulations, and reduce pollution and the misuse of natural resources. Likewise, companies must conserve cultural heritage, with an emphasis on maintaining and restoring cultural wealth. In addition, traffic signs, parking lots, infrastructure, and accommodation should be improved; in this way, the level of satisfaction of foreign tourists will be improved. For this, strategies can be implemented that improve the facilities of the accommodation in terms of furnishings and decoration that can give a better comfort to foreign tourists. On the other hand, the service and gastronomy of restaurants, guided tours, and complementary leisure activities can be promoted. For this, the quality of food, furniture, and equipment in restaurants can be improved, which can provide a better experience for tourists through better quality food and a more comfortable and pleasant establishment, notably improving the service and consequently the satisfaction of foreign tourists. Likewise, service trainings can be implemented for guides, which improve the expectations of tourists in relation to environmental and cultural information and education.

References

  1. Hwang, S.N.; Lee, C.; Chen, H.J. The relationship among tourists’ involvement, place attachment and interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national parks. Tour. Manag. 2005, 26, 143–156.
  2. Ramkissoon, H.; Smith, L.D.G.; Weiler, B. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 552–566.
  3. Borrie, W.T.; Birzell, R.M. Approaches to measuring quality of the wilderness experience. In Proceedings of the Visitor Use Density and Wilderness Experience: Proceedings, Missoula, MT, USA, 13 June 2000; pp. 29–38, RMRS-P-20. Available online: https://winapps.umt.edu/winapps/media2/leopold/pubs/876.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2022).
  4. Hornback, K.E.; Eagles, P.F. Guidelines for Public Use Measurement and Reporting at Parks and Protected Areas; IUCN: Fontainebleau, France, 1999.
  5. Tonge, J.; Moore, S.A. Importance-satisfaction analysis for marine-park hinterlands: A Western Australian case study. Tour. Manag. 2007, 28, 768–776.
  6. Buckley, R. Eco-Tourism: Principles and Practices; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2009.
  7. Butler, R.; Boyd, S. Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications; Wiley: Chichester, UK, 2000.
  8. Lawton, L.J. Public protected areas. In The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism; Bond University: Gold Coast, Australia, 2001; pp. 287–302.
  9. Weaver, D. Eco-Tourism, 2nd ed.; Milton, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia: Milton, Australia, 2008.
  10. Prayag, G.; Hosany, S.; Odeh, K. The role of tourists’ emotional experiences and satisfaction in understanding behavioral intentions. J. Dest. Mark. Manag. 2013, 2, 118–127.
  11. Dowling, R.K. Book Review: Critical Issues in Ecotourism: Understanding a Complex Tourism Phenomenon, Edited by James Higham. Int. J. Tour. Policy 2007, 1, 286.
  12. Tao, T.C.; Wall, G. Tourism as a sustainable livelihood strategy. Tour. Manag. 2009, 30, 90–98.
  13. Cheng, T.-M.; Wu, H. How do environmental knowledge, environmental sensitivity, and place attachment affect environmentally responsible behavior? An integrated approach for sustainable island tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 557–576.
  14. Carvache-Franco, M.; Carvache-Franco, O.; Carvache-Franco, W.; Villagómez-Buele, C.; Saltos-Layana, A. Sociodemographic aspects and their relationship with the ecotourists’motivations in a coastal national park from Ecuador. Geoj. Tour. Geosites. 2020, 31, 1075–1082.
  15. Fletcher, D.; Fletcher, H. Manageable Predictors of Park Visitor Satisfaction: Maintenance and Personnel. J. Park Recreat. Admi. 2003, 21, 21–37.
  16. Blamey, R. Principles of Ecotourism. In The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism; Weaver, D.B., Ed.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2001.
  17. Curtin, S. Whale-watching in Kaikoura: Sustainable destination development? J. Ecotourism. 2003, 2, 173–195.
  18. Hvenegaard, G.T. Using tourist typologies for ecotourism research. J. Ecotourism. 2002, 1, 7–18.
  19. World Tourism Organization UNWTO. Glossary of Tourism Terms. 2021. Available online: https://www.unwto.org/es/glosario-terminos-turisticos (accessed on 20 November 2021).
  20. Castellano, R.; Chelli, F.M.; Ciommi, M.; Musella, G.; Punzo, G.; Salvati, L. Trahit sua quemque voluptas. The multidimensional satisfaction of foreign tourists visiting Italy. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 70, 100722.
  21. Tiwari, A.K.; Dash, A.K.; Narayanan, B.G. Foreign tourist arrivals in India from major source countries: An empirical analysis. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 21, 1137–1156.
  22. Tsiotsou, R.; Vasioti, E. Using demographics and leisure activities to predict satisfaction with tourism services in Greece. J. Hosp. Leis. Mark. 2006, 14, 69–82.
  23. Meng, F.; Tepanon, Y.; Uysal, M. Measuring tourist satisfaction by attribute and motivation: The case of a nature-based resort. J. Vacat. Mark. 2008, 14, 41–56.
  24. Xu, L.; Ao, C.; Liu, B.; Cai, Z. Exploring the Influence of Multidimensional Tourist Satisfaction on Preferences for Wetland Ecotourism: A Case Study in Zhalong National Nature Reserve, China. Wetlands 2021, 41, 1–16.
  25. Lee, C.F. Tourist satisfaction with forest recreation experience: A segment-based approach. Anatolia 2015, 26, 535–548.
  26. Chan, W.C.; Wan Ibrahim, W.H.; Lo, M.C.; Mohamad, A.A.; Ramayah, T.; Chin, C.H. Controllable drivers that influence tourists’ satisfaction and revisit intention to Semenggoh Nature Reserve: The moderating impact of destination image. J. Ecotourism. 2021, 1–19.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback