Next Article in Journal
Life Cycle Assessment of an Innovative Technology against Late Frosts in Vineyard
Next Article in Special Issue
The Role of Rural Tourism in Strengthening the Sustainability of Rural Areas: The Case of Zlakusa Village
Previous Article in Journal
Youth Guarantee: Looking for Explanations
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Perspectives on Sustainable Tourism Development in the Hotel Industry—A Case Study from Southern Europe

1
Balkan Network of Tourism Experts, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
2
Department of Educational Sciences, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy
3
Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
4
Institute of Sports, Tourism and Service, South Ural State University, 454080 Chelyabinsk, Russia
5
Institute of Architecture and Urban & Spatial Planning of Serbia, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
6
Institute of Economics, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
7
College of Academic Studies “Dositej“, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2021, 13(10), 5563; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105563
Submission received: 18 April 2021 / Revised: 5 May 2021 / Accepted: 10 May 2021 / Published: 17 May 2021

Abstract

:
Sustainable development is in many ways the fundamental basis of tourism. The importance and role of sustainable tourism development in the 21st century is at the center of this paper on eco-certificates and green procurement in the hotel industry, within the field of the responsible or green economy. The green hotel economy implies the selection of accommodation in environmentally responsible hotels and other facilities, which are directing their business operations towards green procurement, eco-labeling, and the responsible economy. This paper includes quantitative research of the attitudes of 506 international tourists, who expressed their views on their needs regarding eco-hotels and the green economy in the hotel industry. This research also included the collection of data on green (responsible) businesses by surveying 100 hotels situated in the capitals of southern Europe. Comparing results from hotels with the needs of tourists in terms of the green economy in the hotel industry, significant results were obtained that contribute to sustainable tourism development.

1. Introduction

The tourism and hotel industry, as economic activities, are exposed to constant market fluctuations, which are the result of everyday changes in consumers’ habits [1,2]. The tourism market records a steady increase in many tourists turning to green consumption [3,4,5,6], the product of green procurement and business operations [7,8]. A large number of tourism facilities within the hotel industry globally tend towards such a successful working process [9,10,11]. The green economy is characterized by the following: quality [12], energy efficiency [13], exclusion of dangerous substances [14,15], recycling, a significant use of organic products, eco-labels and labeling schemes, financing via “green” and “eco” funds, and the use of renewable energy and raw materials [1,5,16], etc.
A very important starting point in this research was to consider that hotels have a significant impact on the natural environment [1,5]. Due to this, special attention within the green economy is directed to the construction of facilities that fulfill “green” standards [17]. When the term “green economy” is identified within the business operations of specific markets [11,18], it can be concluded that certain criteria for sustainable tourism development have been fulfilled [19,20]. Hotels and other tourism facilities, by adopting business operations associated with green procurement [21], represent a significant indicator of sustainable tourism development [22] and the rural benefits of specific forms of tourism [11,23,24]. The use of eco-certification and the idea of the green business in the hotel industry aims to preserve the environment and raise the quality of sustainable tourism [25,26,27].
To highlight the importance of eco-friendly business and sustainable tourism development, we have explored the needs of international tourists, as well as those of the hotel industry in southern Europe. The study included international tourists (n = 506) from different countries.
The research also analyzed the role of eco-certification and green procurement in the performance of 100 selected hotels of different categories in selected capitals of Southern Europe. These facilities have been promoted by local tourism organizations as potential eco facilities [5]. There is considerable research on sustainability in hotels [6,28], but studies which emphasize eco-certificates and green procurement in this sector are scarce, and this is even more glaring in contexts such as that of Southern Europe. Facilities for the provision of accommodation and catering services, which do not have the necessary business certificates and do not implement green procurement sufficiently, still operate widely in southern Europe [29,30].
The research, based on a questionnaire survey, aimed to investigate the first hypothesis (H1): Hoteliers are environmentally conscious and ready to improve their business operations to support green procurement, eco-labeling, the responsible economy, and sustainable tourism development [11,31]. The second hypothesis (H2) of this research is as follows: Green procurement is present in the hotel industry of southern Europe and hoteliers’ awareness of the green economy’s significance is being developed.
Quantitative research has identified that customers perceive energy conservation, recycling, and the green economy as sustainable practices pertaining to the hotel industry [32].
Using written and online questionnaires, posted on major global social networks (Questionnaire No. 1) or sent by e-mail to several selected hotels (Questionnaire No. 2), resulted in significant data related to the responsible economy and green business models. Responses given by the managers of the surveyed hotels were analyzed and examined using the statistical methods of SPSS Software. In addition to the descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation analysis [33], the one-sample test [34], and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were employed [35,36]. With the help of correlation analysis, the collected data were examined, after which conclusions were drawn about the existence of certain attitudes, expressed via the answers of the respondents to Questionnaire No. 1. Analyzing the survey data helped us to identify the attitudes towards eco-hotel user certificates, eco-labels, and sustainable tourism development. Via ANOVA tests of Questionnaire No. 2, it was determined whether there was a statistically significant difference in the answers of hoteliers depending on the category of hotels [1,36].

2. Sustainability and Green Hotels

In the tourism and hotel industry, the green economy, responsible procurement, and eco-labeling are important elements of business operations benefiting sustainable tourism development [37]. Walker and Brammer emphasize that environmental awareness regarding the use and procurement of ecological products and services is taking up an important place in the world economy [38]. According to Stroebel [39], tourism is an important economic factor in the green economy today [5], and therefore it should be considered as the initiator of green procurement and labeling as part of responsible consumption [40]. Bastić and Gojčić [41] and Ban and Ramsaran [42] stated that the green economy not only encourages the consumption and use of environmentally acceptable products and services in the wider market, but it also encourages innovations and the introduction and spread of new and sustainable products, while Camilleri concludes that green procurement also encourages new technologies and business models within tourism [43,44]. Simula et al. [45] point out that procedures for eco-labeling in tourism include all the most significant activities, including application and verification, while Maksin et al. [25] highlight both labeling and green marketing. Labeling in tourism, and especially ecotourism, achieves many positive effects [46]. Eco-labels have been implemented according to modern programs [47,48]; therefore, they have had the function of managerial tools bringing a wide range of benefits [44,49]. In their research thus far, scholars Gelderman et al. [50] state that one of the postulates of green procurement is that achieving of business results cannot disregard the constant minimizing of environmental impacts, which is similar to the findings of the study by Nepal et al. [51]. Green procurement must include green suppliers in its system [52], besides products and consumers [53]. Su and Swanson [54] emphasize that eco-labeling represents a guide for the consumers, i.e., tourists, when making decisions regarding spending, helping them to find and recognize the responsible service providers, who have harmonized their business operations with the sustainable tourism development, which is identical to the views expressed in the research [55,56,57]. Achieving the positive ecological, economic, and socio-cultural effects represents the main principles of sustainable tourism development [11,58,59,60]. Moreover, tourist companies have to provide significant proof, to create confidence in their “green” consumers, as summarized by the scholars Gupta et al. [61]. In fact, guests who experience stays in a green hotel are more likely to develop a specific loyalty toward hotels implementing green practices [62,63,64,65].
Ethics, responsibility, ecological orientation, and sustainability are some of the new models that individuals seek by also subjecting their choices to continuous review and reflection [66,67,68,69]. In fact, Buckley concludes that eco-labeling of the responsible economy represents a warranty for green procurement and consumption [70,71,72]. If the labeled products and services are placed on the tourism market, numerous analyses show that the consumers will choose them first [73,74,75,76]. According to Trišić et al. [77], this means that hotels implementing green procurement business policies achieve significant business results based on commercial, environmental, and social sustainability [78]. At the same time, this is the basic postulate of sustainable tourism development.

3. Materials and Methods

The research in this paper included the use of two separate questionnaires: Questionnaire No. 1 for the surveyed tourists, and Questionnaire No. 2 for the selected hotels in the countries of southern Europe. Questionnaire No. 1 examined the needs of tourists for a green economy in hotel business. The questionnaire was available to tourists around the world on several global social networks and websites dealing with hotel business in the field of eco-tourism and green economy. Additionally, respondents were able to receive Questionnaire 1 via their e-mail address. The survey was conducted in 2020. The questionnaire contained questions about the characteristics of the respondents, such as age structure, place or country of residence, and travel experience [7]. In addition to the items relating to the characteristics of respondents, Questionnaire No. 1 contained 6 questions related to the attitudes and travel needs in terms of eco-hotel and green economy in the hotel industry [79]. The respondents answered the questions in the form of statements, according to the Likert Scale from 1 to 5 (Frequency: 1—I do not agree at all; 2—I partially disagree; 3—I’m not sure; 4—I partially agree; 5—I completely agree) [80,81,82,83,84]. The questions answered by the respondents are shown in Table 1.
For the research of the hotel industry, Questionnaire No. 2 contained 9 questions, in the form of a Word document, in which the respondent entered an answer to each of the statements. The questions referred to the representation of green procurement, eco-labeling, and green consumption within the business operations. These data were obtained by an electronic data collection method—written questionnaire responses were provided by competent hotel staff managers or executives, who knew the operations of their hotel facility in which they worked and were competent to give statements (Table 2). The largest cities in southern Europe were selected for the research of the hotel business. In fact, where the data were gathered for this study were locations where there are large hotel sectors and an abundance of international customers. Madrid, Rome, Zagreb, Belgrade, Bucharest, Sofia, Skopje, Tirana, Podgorica, and Athens were the capitals where this research was performed. Most of the capitals are also located in areas close to Pan-European Corridor X, which is an important transport and tourist route [85]. It is one of the crucial Pan-European corridors connecting Austria, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, North Macedonia, and Greece. The selected hotels in this research were promoted by local tourism organizations as potential accommodation facilities for tourists in these cities. Hotels were selected for analysis by the method of random sampling, but it was taken into account that the sample consisted of different categories of hotels. Eighty-one (81) hotels belonged to international hotel chains, while 19 facilities were family owned (Bucharest 4, Madrid 3, Sofia 3, Rome 2, Podgorica 2, Tirana 2, Athens 2 and Skopje 1).
By the method of data descriptive analysis using SPSS software, the obtained results were examined and tabulated. The differences obtained in certain responses were examined by One-Sample Test [34]. The existence of variables of answers from Questionnaire No. 1 were examined through analysis of the Pearson Correlation [33] to determine if the model of obtained differences was relevant for the analysis. By ANOVA of the answers from Questionnaire No. 2, it was determined whether there were statistically significant differences in the answers [35,36] of hoteliers depending on the category of hotels.

4. Results and Discussion

Using Questionnaire No. 1, a total of 506 respondents were surveyed (Table 3). The characteristics of respondents consisted of international tourists from many countries around the world. These were Italy (9.89%), the United States (9.50%), Great Britain (9.40%), Switzerland, France and Spain (6.68% each), Germany (5.93%), Norway (5.53%), the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden (3.95% each), Austria and Japan (3.55% each), Canada, Slovenia and Croatia (2.96% each), Hungary and Montenegro (2.57% each), Serbia (2.37%), Belgium, Finland, Iceland, the Czech Republic and Greece (0.98% each), Australia (0.59%), North Macedonia and Bulgaria (0.39% each), and Bosnia and Herzegovina, Pakistan, Turkey, Malta, Luxembourg, Zimbabwe, Russia, Colombia, China, New Zealand and Brazil (0.3% respondent each).
Analyzing the data (Table 3), it can be concluded that the respondents were almost equally represented in the age structure. Most respondents were in the age category 46–59, and the fewest belonged to the age category 18–30. A total of 232 respondents had significant experience in terms of the number of annual trips, i.e., in terms of using hotel services during the year. This age structure and travel experience indicated that the answers given may be significantly valid for the analysis of the current situation in terms of the needs of tourists in the tourism market, for eco-hotels and the green economy in the hotel industry [75,86]. These data can have significant ecological and social effects, especially in the tourism and hospitality sector [87]. Representatives of these sectors are often under pressure to import a great number of products, including food from far away countries, to fulfil the greater demands of tourists [61,88,89].
Analyzing the respondents’ answers to the questionnaire, 32.8% of the respondents answered that they were not sure whether they would choose hotels that have a restaurant with organic food for their stay [90]. A total of 29.2% of the respondents stated that they would not do so in full or in part, while 37.9% of them would choose a hotel that has a restaurant with organic food. A total of 50.8% of the respondents would choose an eco-hotel for their stay if they had the opportunity. These are important data for sustainable tourism development research [5,6,86]. If we add to this number the 29.1% of the respondents who said they partially agreed with this statement, we obtained a total of 79.9% of respondents who would rather choose an eco-hotel for their stay compared to the other categories and types of hotels offered. A total of 69.2% of the respondents said they would choose a hotel that recycles waste safely. In total, 44.5% of the respondents were partially sure that they would choose hotels that have eco-certificates. With 33.0% of the survey participants who would surely choose such hotels, this makes it a significant category. A total of 37.7% of the survey participants said they were not sure enough about the decision to choose a hotel that implements or supports various environmental actions. With 34.6% of the respondents who would surely choose such facilities, this makes a significant cate-gory (Table 4). When asked whether they would choose hotels that use renewable energy sources for their stay, 63.6% of the respondents answered in the affirmative.
This also explains that the scientific literature is rich in theories concerning the consumer/tourist, not only and not so much concerning aspects of a strictly economic nature (consumption/production), but also regarding the social, psychological, and environmental aspects, linked to respect and protection of the environment [63,64,65].
By analyzing the structure of the respondents, it can be concluded that the most sensitive to the questions asked were the age groups 46–59, and 60 and older. This means that the respondents of these age groups rated the importance of the questions mostly on a scale of 4 and 5. Out of a total of 108 respondents older than 60, 70 of them rated all the questions with a score of 5. From a total of 159 respondents in the age structure 46–59, a total of 47 respondents rated all the questions with a score of 5. The overview of the respondents’ answers in relation to the age structure can be seen in Table 5.
To analyze the answers of the respondents, it was important to determine which nationalities were most sensitive to the questions asked. Table 6 shows the answers with the highest average values (16 countries) in relation to the nationality of the respondents, out of a total of 38 countries. It was evident that the inhabitants of Norway and Japan were the most sensitive.
The answers were analyzed by the One-Simple Test method and the obtained differences in the answers can be seen in Table 7.
Using the Pearson’s correlation method of statistical data processing [33], it was concluded that the answers were correlated with certain statements from the questionnaire. Analysis of the obtained research results concluded that all the answers of the respondents showed that tourist needs are focused on the use of eco-hotels and hotels whose business is related to the green economy (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7 and Table 8). The results suggest that when planning for sustainable tourism development, special attention should be focused on the construction of such facilities of the hotel industry; respondents’ answers largely indicated the importance of eco-hotels in the hotel industry [6]. In addition, as significant hotel activities, tourists recognized waste recycling, sustainable energy use, possession of eco-certificates, and support for various environmental actions [11]. The development of such a hotel industry directly supports sustainable tourism development [1,5,6].
By analyzing the answers from Questionnaire No. 2, significant results were obtained related to the hotel offers of southern Europe, which should meet the existing needs of tourists for eco-hotels and hotel facilities whose businesses are related to the green economy. This research also provides results on whether hoteliers tend to harmonize their business with environmental protection [1,11,31].
All the questionnaires were valid and filled properly. Questions asked to the representatives of the hotels were about responsible procurement, possession of certificates, and the significance of green economy in the hotel business operations. The responses given by the hotels to the nine questions asked (n1 … n9), were expressed by ‘no’ or ‘yes’. The answers of the respondents are ranked with marks 1 or 2, where the answer under number 1 refers to ‘not applicable’ and the answer under number 2 refers to ‘applicable’. An overview of the structure of the surveyed hotels can be seen in Table 9.
As a first step, by analyzing the responses to questions n6, n7 and n8, it can be concluded that hotels completely try to conform their business to green procurement and to obtaining certain eco-labels, for which certain funds or other material resources are allocated (Table 10).
All 100 surveyed hoteliers also believed that the introduction of specified activities in their own business would contribute to more significant and better working results. All this leads to the fact that environmental awareness is the symbol of today’s tourism and world economy [6,25,31,91].
By analyzing the responses with expressed differences, it can be concluded that only 34 hotels had restaurants that serve meals prepared with organically produced food. A total of 70 hotels classified their waste, 66 hotels recycled different raw materials, and 59 hotels used renewable sources of energy. These were organic products that were exclusively supplied by local producers in the region or nearby regions to the hotels. A total of 83 hotels tended to include the procurement of work tools made of eco-materials into their business operations. Only 40 facilities of the total number of the surveyed facilities, had certain eco-labels. It should be emphasized that business characterized by green procurement is not only connected to facilities of high categories or greater accommodation capacity. Of the 70 hotels which classified their waste, 14 were 3-star facilities, 23 were 4-star facilities, and 33 were 5-star facilities. A similar situation arose in the case of hotels that recycled. Using renewable sources of energy is a business characteristic of high category hotels, important data for the research of sustainable tourism development [92]. The obtained results show that the awareness of the green procurement, consumption, and possession of certain eco-labels is developing in all the surveyed hotels, especially within management and business planning [6,13,93]. The most important is that all facilities have a business tendency following green procurement and green economy. This is indicated by all positive responses to questions n6, n7 and n8. The existence of this tendency is important for sustainable tourism development [1,11,49].
Results from Questionnaire No. 2 showed that hoteliers had a tendency to express differences in responses to questions n6, n7 and n8. Such a result shows that a significant number of surveyed hotels have not yet fully conformed their business operations to eco-labeling and green economy, which would confirm basic postulates of sustainable tourism development [31]. A total of 100 hotel facilities of different capacities and categories from capitals in southern Europe have been surveyed; therefore, it can be assumed that the this represents the significant sample of facilities for the analysis. The positive responses were expressed in the form of statements (n6, n7 and n8), thus it can be concluded that such responsible business operations represent motives in the future work of all the examined hotels. It has been confirmed by the demonstrated methods of research (Table 11).
By using ANOVA assessments for the answers from Questionnaire No. 2, it has been determined that there are statistically significant differences in hoteliers’ responses depending on the hotel category. After applying the ANOVA, it can be concluded that there are significant statistical differences in the answers, except for the answers to questions n6, n7 and n8, where all the answers were identical. Additionally, the results of the ANOVA tests were such that there are 4- and 5-star hotels that did not have eco-certificates, did not select and recycle waste, or did not use renewable energy sources.

5. Conclusions

This research has dealt with the problems of hotels of southern Europe, and not hotels as parts of larger international hotel chains, with the desire to obtain a real insight into the hotel industry in Europe and its participation in green, i.e., responsible procurement. Green hotels can be viewed as the source of and the solution to many actual economic, social, and environmental challenges. Due to this, the EU is promoting various activities to drive cities to be more sustainable, resource-efficient, and inclusive. The green economy and eco-certificates are linked to the hotel business, which aims to protect nature and improve its sustainability factors. Apart from the fact that the business of these hotels is imperative in protected natural areas, nature reserves, in destinations with vulnerable ecosystems, or in rural areas, they are also significant in urban destinations. These hotels are directly linked to specific forms of tourism and are their symbol, such as ecotourism, science tourism, bird and animal watching, excursions, recreations, and other forms of nature-based tourism, wine tourism, events, etc. The participation of tourists in the movement toward nature and its protection is a hallmark of 21st century tourism [11,94]. The obtained results are significant for the comparative analysis of business operations in the tourism and hotel industry of the selected hotels in southern Europe. It can be concluded that the understanding of green procurement significance is present in the hotel industry because such a business surely provides a profit. This refers to the data implying that a small number of facilities implemented green procurement and had eco-labels. It will be significant to observe the intensive increase in environmental awareness of hoteliers. They have certain intentions to harmonize environmentally sustainable business operations in the future with a green economy.
The tourism industry depends on global trends in the tourism market influencing both the type of demanded products and further directions of sustainable tourism development. This is why successful businessmen should take care of the following: increased demand for the preserved natural environment, good traffic connections, built infrastructure in conformity with the environment, as well as the sustainable tourism development of tourist destinations. Special care should be taken of the sustainability of the tourism product, too, in the sphere of the eco-destination existence. Such tourism products must fulfill the needs of tourists, the local communities, and tour operators.
The deficiencies in the work on the part of the hotel industry of southern Europe is manifested through the insufficient use of organic products as well as the insufficient use of eco-materials. This means that the first hypothesis in this paper was partially confirmed. Moreover, the problem of waste recycling, sorting of packaging, and use of alternative sources of energy are some of the problems the hotel industry of southern Europe faces. This must be changed for the country to be desirable for tourist visits because tourism is not an isolated activity. It is the activity, which, primarily, demands the synergy of resources, eco-procurements, as well as environmental postulates in its sustainable tourism development. The tendency of improving tourism industry business operations to obtain certain certificates of the green economy is becoming significantly stronger. The obtained research results in this paper show that the awareness of the green procurement, consumption, and possession of certain eco-labels was developing in all the surveyed hotels, especially within the management and business planning. The most important is that all the facilities have a business tendency by green procurement and green economy.
These results, representing the beginning of comprehensive research of the entire hospitality industry, show both the positive and negative elements of business operations of this part of the tourism market. It is obvious that hospitality and catering facilities which do not have certain business certificates and do not implement green procurement sufficiently still operate in southern Europe.
When comparing the results of analysis 1 with analysis 2, it can be concluded that eco-hotels and the green economy are a priority in the selection by tourists from around the world. They are also an important business strategy for hotels of various categories in southern Europe, which is both a goal and a priority in their business. Thus, the main hypothesis in the research is confirmed. It is evident that all of the above represents a perspective of hospitality and sustainable tourism development around the world.
This confirms the second hypothesis of this research, i.e., whether green procurement is present in the hotel industry of southern Europe and if the hoteliers’ awareness of the green economy significance is being developed. The experiences of tourists visiting hotels in southern Europe regarding the selection of hotels operating according to the green procurement principle will be shown in future research.
The undertaken research has opened new topics and possibilities for further work on this issue; the authors will continue to study this field. Our future research will focus on examining water consumption in hotels and contributing to reducing water availability in certain areas. Other aspects of the ecological functioning of public facilities will also be examined, as well as the significant contributions of green certificates to the development of environmental activities. Additionally, issues related to the legislation or subsidy policies of each country regarding the matters in question will be addressed; these are very important and will be part of future research.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.T., S.Š., D.P., M.D.P., M.M., S.V., Z.J. and M.K.; methodology, I.T., S.Š., D.P., M.D.P., M.M., S.V., Z.J. and M.K.; software, I.T. and S.Š.; validation, S.Š., M.D.P., M.M. and D.P.; formal analysis, I.T., S.Š. and M.M.; investigation, S.Š., M.D.P.; resources, I.T., S.Š., D.P., M.D.P., Z.J. and M.K.; data curation, S.Š. and M.K.; writing—original draft preparation, I.T., M.D.P., M.M., S.V. and M.K.; writing—review and editing, S.Š., D.P., M.D.P., S.V. and M.K.; supervision, D.P. and Z.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all respondents for their kind cooperation in our survey.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Radwan, H.R.I.; Jones, E.; Minoli, D. Solid waste management in small hotels: A comparison of green and non-green small hotels in Wales. J. Sustain. Tour. 2012, 20, 533–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Han, H.; Yoon, H. Customer retention in the eco-friendly hotel sector: Examining the diverse processes of post-purchase decision-making. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 1095–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Barber, N.A. Profiling the potential “Green” hotel guest: Who are they and what do they want? J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2012, 38, 361–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Aboelmaged, A. Direct and indirect effects of eco-innovation, environmental orientation and supplier collaboration on hotel performance: An empirical study. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 537–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Peng, N.; Chen, A. Luxury hotels going green—The antecedents and consequences of consumer hesitation. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 1374–1392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ahn, J.; Kwon, J. Green hotel brands in Malaysia: Perceived value, cost, anticipated emotion, and revisit intention. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 1559–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kruger, M.; Viljoen, A.; Saayman, M. Who visits the Kruger National Park and why? Identifying target markets. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2017, 34, 312–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bag, S.; Gupta, S.; Telukdarie, A. Exploring the relationship between unethical practices, buyer–supplier relationships and green design for sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2018, 11, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Park, J.; Page, G.W. Innovative green economy, urban economic performance and urban environments: An empirical analysis of US cities. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2017, 25, 772–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pareira, V.; Gupta, J.J.; Hussain, S. Impact of travel motivation on tourist’s attitude toward destination: Evidence of mediating effect of destination image. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2019, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Romero, I.; Tejada, P. Tourism intermediaries and innovation in the hotel industry. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 641–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hunter, C. Sustainable tourism and the touristic ecological footprint. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2002, 4, 7–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Law, A.; DeLacy, T.; McGrath, G.M. A green economy indicator framework for tourism destinations. J. Sustain. Tour. 2017, 25, 1434–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Namkung, Y.; Jang, S. Are consumers willing to pay more for green practices at restaurants? J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2014, 41, 329–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nimri, R.; Patiar, A.; Kensbock, S.; Jin, X. Consumers’ intention to stay in green hotels in Australia: Theorization and implications. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2019, 44, 149–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kupika, O.L.; Gandiwa, E.; Nhamo, G. Green economy initiatives in the face of climate change: Experiences from the Middle Zambezi Biosphere Reserve, Zimbabwe. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2019, 21, 2507–2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wong, J.K.W.; Chan, J.K.S.; Wadu, M.J. Facilitating effective green procurement in construction projects: An empirical study of the enablers. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 859–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Law, A.; DeLacy, T.; McGrath, G.M.; Whitelaw, P.A.; Lipman, G.; Buckley, G. Towards a green economy decision support system for tourism destinations. J. Sustain. Tour. 2012, 20, 823–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tisdell, C.; Wilson, C. Perceived impacts of ecotourism on environmental learning and conservation: Turtle watching as a case study. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2005, 7, 291–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Štetić, S.; Trišić, I.; Nedelcu, A. Natural potentials of significance for the sustainable tourism development—The focus on the special nature reserve. J. Geogr. Inst. Jovan Cvijić SASA 2019, 69, 279–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Milićević, S.; Petrović, J.; Đorđević, N. ICT as a factor of destination competitiveness: The case of the republics of former Yugoslavia. Manag. Mark. Chall. Knowl. Soc. 2020, 15, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jones, P.; Hillier, D.; Comfort, D. Sustainability in the global hotel industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 26, 5–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Sharpley, R. Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. J. Sustain. Tour. 2000, 8, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Trišić, I.; Štetić, S.; Privitera, D.; Nedelcu, A. Wine routes in Vojvodina Province, Northern Serbia—A tool for sustainable tourism development. Sustainability 2020, 12, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Maksin, M.; Ristić, V.; Nenković-Riznić, M.; Mićić, S. The role of zoning in the strategic planning of protected areas: Lessons learnt from EU countries and Serbia. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2018, 26, 838–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Olafsdottir, G. On nature-based tourism. Tour. Stud. 2013, 13, 127–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Rantala, O.; Varley, P. Wild camping and the weight tourism. Tour. Stud. 2019, 19, 295–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Jones, P.; Hillier, D.; Comfort, D. Sustainability in the hospitality industry: Some personal reflections on corporate challenges and research agendas. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 28, 36–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bramwell, B.; Lane, B. Tourism and sustainable development in an economic downturn. J. Sustain. Tour. 2003, 11, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Boluk, K.A.; Cavaliere, C.T.; Higgins-Desbiolles, F. A critical framework for interrogating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2030 Agenda in tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 847–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Zientara, P.; Zamojska, A. Green organizational climates and employee pro-environmental behaviour in the hotel industry. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 1142–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Verma, V.K.; Chandra, B. Sustainability and customers’ hotel choice behaviour: A choice-based conjoint analysis approach. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2018, 20, 1347–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, C.; Xu, H.; Li, G. The corporate philanthropy and legitimacy strategy of tourism firms: A community perspective. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 1124–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Koburtay, T.; Syed, J. A contextual study of female-leader role stereotypes in the hotel sector. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019, 27, 52–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hawkins, D.E.; Chang, B.; Warnes, K. A comparison of the National Geographic Stewardship Scorecard Ratings by experts and stakeholders for selected World Heritage destinations. J. Sustain. Tour. 2009, 17, 71–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ramón-Hidalgo, A.E.; Harris, L.M. Social Capital, political empowerment and social difference: A mixed-methods study of an ecotourism project in the rural Volta region of Ghana. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 2153–2172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cerqua, A. The signalling effect of eco-labels in modern coastal tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2017, 25, 1159–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Walker, H.; Brammer, S. The relationship between sustainable procurement and E-procurement in the public sector. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 256–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Stroebel, M. Tourism and the green economy: Inspiring or averting change? Third World Q. 2015, 36, 2225–2243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kim, Y.J.; Kim, W.G.; Choi, H.M.; Phetvaroon, K. The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 76, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bastič, M.; Gojčič, S. Measurement scale for eco-component of hotel service quality. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2012, 31, 1012–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ban, J.; Ramsaran, R.R. An exploratory examination of service quality attributes in the ecotourism industry. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2017, 34, 132–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Camilleri, M.A. Responsible tourism that creates shared value among stakeholders. Tour. Plan. Dev. 2016, 13, 219–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Leković, M. Cognitive biases as an integral part of behavioral finance. Econ. Themes 2020, 58, 75–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Simula, H.; Lehtimäki, T.; Salo, J. Managing greenness in technology marketing. J. Syst. Inf. Technol. 2009, 11, 331–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fairweather, J.R.; Maslin, C.; Simmons, D.G. Environmental values and response to ecolabels among international visitors to New Zealand. J. Sustain. Tour. 2005, 13, 82–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Wood, M.E. Ecotourism: Principles, Practices & Policies for Sustainability; United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics: Paris, France, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  48. Holden, A. Tourism and the green economy: A place for an environmental ethic? Tour. Recreat. Res. 2013, 38, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Harris, K.; Divakarla, S. Supply chain risk to reward: Responsible procurement and the role of ecolabels. Procedia Eng. 2017, 180, 1603–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gelderman, C.J.; Semeijn, J.; Vluggen, R. Development of sustainability in public sector procurement. Public Money Manag. 2017, 37, 435–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Nepal, R.; Irsyad, M.I.; Nepal, S.K. Tourist arrivals, energy consumption and pollutant emissions in a developing economy–implications for sustainable tourism. Tour. Manag. 2019, 72, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mélon, L. More than a nudge? Arguments and tools for mandating green public procurement in the EU. Sustainability 2020, 12, 988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Blome, C.; Hollos, D.; Paulraj, A. Green procurement and green supplier development: Antecedents and effects on supplier performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2014, 52, 32–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Su, L.; Swanson, S.R. Perceived corporate social responsibility’s impact on the well-being and supportive green behaviors of hotel employees: The mediating role of the employee-corporate relationship. Tour. Manag. 2019, 72, 437–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Chan, E.S. Green marketing: Hotel customers’ perspective. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2014, 31, 915–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fennell, D.A. Ecotourism; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ge, H.; Chen, S.; Chen, Y. International alliance of green hotels to reach sustainable competitive advantages. Sustainability 2018, 10, 573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Manente, M.; Minghetti, V.; Mingotto, E. Ranking assessment systems for responsible tourism products and corporate social responsibility practices. Anatolia 2012, 23, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Trišić, I. Opportunities for sustainable tourism development and nature conservation in Special Nature Reserve “Deliblatska Peščara”. Hotel Tour. Manag. 2019, 7, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Parker, L.; Chung, L. Structuring social and environmental management control and accountability: Behind the hotel doors. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2018, 31, 993–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Gupta, A.; Dash, S.; Mishra, A. All that glitters is not green: Creating trustworthy eco-friendly services at green hotels. Tour. Manag. 2019, 70, 155–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Dewald, B.; Bruin, B.J.; Jang, Y.J. US consumer attitudes towards “Green” restaurants. Anatolia 2014, 25, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Tsai, Y.H.; Wu, C.T.; Wang, T.M. Attitude towards green hotel by hoteliers and travel agency managers in Taiwan. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2014, 19, 1091–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Grandia, J.; Voncken, D. Sustainable public procurement: The impact of ability, motivation, and opportunity on the implementation of different types of sustainable public procurement. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Merli, R.; Preziosi, M.; Acampora, A.; Faizan, A. Why should hotels go green? Insights from guests experience in green hotels. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 81, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lee, M.; Han, H.; Willson, G. The role of expected outcomes in the formation of behavioral intentions in the green-hotel industry. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2011, 28, 840–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Strick, S.; Fenich, G.G. Green certifications and ecolabels in the MEEC industry: Which are really worth it? J. Conv. Event Tour. 2013, 14, 162–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Lira, J.M.S.; Salgado, E.G.; Beijo, L.A. Characterization of evolution and dissemination of ISO 14001 in countries and economic sectors in Europe. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2019, 62, 1166–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Waltner, E.M.; Rieß, W.; Mischo, C. Development and validation of an instrument for measuring student sustainability competencies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Buckley, R. Social-benefit certification as a game. Tour. Manag. 2013, 37, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Barbulescu, A.; Moraru, A.; Duhnea, C. Ecolabelling in the Romanian seaside hotel industry—Marketing considerations, financial constraints, perspectives. Sustainability 2019, 11, 265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Waxin, M.; Knuteson, S.L.; Bartholomew, A. Drivers and challenges for implementing ISO 14001 environmental management systems in an emerging Gulf Arab country. Environ. Manag. 2019, 63, 495–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Sasidharan, V.; Sirakaya, E.; Kerstetter, D. Developing countries and tourism ecolabels. Tour. Manag. 2002, 23, 161–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Capacci, S.; Scorcu, A.E.; Vici, L. Seaside tourism and eco-labels: The economic impact of Blue Flags. Tour. Manag. 2015, 47, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Manganari, E.E.; Dimara, E.; Theotokis, A. Greening the lodging industry: Current status, trends and perspectives for green value. Curr. Issues Tour. 2016, 19, 223–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Schmidt, S.; Langner, S.; Hennigs, N.; Wiedmann, K.P.; Karampournioti, E.; Lischka, G. The green brand: Explicit and implicit framing effects of ecolabelling on brand knowledge. Cogent Psychol. 2017, 4, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Trišić, I.; Štetić, S.; Maksin, M. The significance of protected natural areas for the tourism of the Vojvodina Province (Northern Serbia)—Relevant factors analysis of the sustainable tourism development. Spatium 2020, 43, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Mandić, A.; Petrić, L. The impacts of location and attributes of protected natural areas on hotel prices: Implications for sustainable tourism development. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 833–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Sæþórsdóttir, A.D.; Hall, C.M. Visitor satisfaction in wilderness in times of overtourism: A longitudinal study. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 123–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Scholtz, M.; Kruger, M.; Saayman, M. Determinants of visitor length of stay at three coastal national parks in South Africa. J. Ecotour. 2015, 14, 21–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Dolnicar, S.; Grün, B. Validly measuring destination images in survey studies. J. Travel Res. 2013, 52, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Queiroz, R.E.; Guerreiro, J.; Ventura, M.A. Demand of the Tourists Visiting Protected Areas in Small Oceanic Islands: The Azores Case Study (Portugal). Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2014, 16, 1119–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Adam, I.; Adongo, C.A.; Amuquandoh, F.E. A structural decompositional analysis of eco-visitors’ motivations, satisfaction and post-purchase behaviour. J. Ecotour. 2019, 18, 60–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Trišić, I. Using indicators to assess sustainable tourism development—The case of protected natural areas of Vojvodina (Northern Serbia). Turizam 2020, 24, 178–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Miltiadou, M.; Taxiltaris, C.; Mintsis, G.; Basbas, S. Pan-European Corridor X development: Case of literal implementation of the European transport strategy itself or of change of the general environment in the region? Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 48, 2361–2373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Ketter, E. Eating with EatWith: Analysing tourism-sharing economy consumers. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 1062–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Mittal, S.; Dhar, R.L. Effect of green transformational leadership on green creativity: A study of tourist hotels. Tour. Manag. 2016, 57, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Jarvis, N.; Weeden, C.; Simcock, N. The benefits and challenges of sustainable tourism certification: A case study of the green tourism business scheme in the West of England. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2010, 17, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Hensens, W. The integration of environmental management standards in contemporary hotel classification systems. Res. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 6, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Aoki, M. Motivations for organic farming in tourist regions: A case study in Nepal. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2014, 16, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Buclet, N.; Lazarević, D. Principles for sustainability: The need to shift to a sustainable conventional regime. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2015, 17, 83–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Beer, M.; Rybár, R.; Kaľavský, M. Renewable energy sources as an attractive element of industrial tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 21, 2139–2151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Mishra, A.; Gupta, A. Green hotel servicescape: Attributes and unique experiences. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 2566–2578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Vidon, E.S. Why wilderness? Alienation, authenticity, and nature. Tour. Stud. 2017, 19, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Questionnaire No. 1.
Table 1. Questionnaire No. 1.
nQuestion
n1Do you choose a hotel that has a restaurant with organic food for your stay?
n2How likely is it that you would choose an eco-hotel when choosing hotels of different categories?
n3How likely are you to choose a hotel that recycles waste when choosing hotels of different categories?
n4How likely are you to choose an eco-certified hotel when choosing hotels of different categories?
n5How important is support for environmental actions in choosing a hotel for your stay?
n6How important is the use of renewable energy sources in choosing a hotel for your stay?
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 2. Questionnaire No. 2.
Table 2. Questionnaire No. 2.
nQuestion
n1Does the hotel have a restaurant with organic food?
n2Does the hotel tend to procure work tools made of eco-materials?
n3Does the hotel classify the waste?
n4Does the hotel recycle different raw materials?
n5Does the hotel have eco-labels?
n6Do you think that possession of eco-labels can help have more successful business?
n7Does the hotel allocate funds for environmental actions?
n8Does the hotel tend to implement green procurement?
n9Does the hotel use renewable sources of energy?
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 3. Characteristics of respondents and travel experience.
Table 3. Characteristics of respondents and travel experience.
Age StructureFrequencyPercentValid Percent
Valid18–308917.617.6
31–4515029.629.6
46–5915931.431.4
60 and older10821.321.3
Total506100.0100.0
Using the Hotel Services per YearFrequencyPercentValid Percent
Once27454.254.2
Twice5611.111.1
Three and more17634.834.8
Total506100.0100.0
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics.
nn1n2n3n4n5n6
Valid506506506506506506
Missing000000
Mean3.094.204.514.043.974.34
Std. Error of Mean0.0690.0550.0460.0490.0540.055
Std. Dev.1.2111.0240.8560.8810.9771.019
Variance1.4671.0500.7330.7760.9541.039
Min.444444
Max.111111
Sum555555
Frequencyn1n2n3n4n5n6
1N66
13.0
18
3.6
8
1.6
8
1.3
10
2.0
10
2.0
%
2N82
16.2
16
3.2
8
1.6
16
3.2
29
5.7
24
4.7
%
3N166
32.8
68
13.4
50
9.9
90
17.8
101
20.0
74
14.6
%
4N123
24.3
147
29.1
90
17.8
225
44.5
191
37.7
76
15.0
%
5N69
13.6
257
50.8
350
69.2
167
33.0
175
34.6
322
63.6
%
TotalN506506506506506506
%100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 5. Respondents’ answers according to age structure.
Table 5. Respondents’ answers according to age structure.
Age Structuremean
n1n2n3n4n5n6
18–302.443.883.963.113.433.79
31–452.773.974.623.553.574.23
46–593.254.414.644.614.114.52
60 and older3.884.524.804.894.784.82
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 6. The responses by nationality.
Table 6. The responses by nationality.
CountriesMean
n1n2n3n4n5n6
Norway4.284.683.893.783.983.69
Japan4.173.873.883.573.894.03
Denmark4.293.963.793.623.523.91
Sweden4.333.883.713.893.663.51
Switzerland4.273.813.723.773.883.13
Germany4.313.653.683.813.483.23
France3.893.783.293.683.523.11
Great Britain4.173.603.213.243.473.10
Belgium3.774.023.113.213.563.09
Canada3.584.273.093.104.013.01
Australia4.333.513.093.173.513.22
Luxembourg3.793.593.023.563.523.05
China3.524.013.013.473.213.11
USA3.473.683.033.273.313.21
Spain3.294.113.123.013.093.19
Italy4.143.693.093.113.073.08
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 7. One-Sample Test.
Table 7. One-Sample Test.
nTest Value = 0
tdfSig. (2-Tailed)Mean Difference95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
LowerUpper
n157.4495050.0003.0932.993.20
n292.2975050.0004.2044.114.29
n3118.5585050.0004.5144.444.59
n4103.1695050.0004.0423964.12
n591.4995050.0003.9723.894.06
n695.6705050.0004.3364.254.43
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 8. The Pearson correlation.
Table 8. The Pearson correlation.
n1n2n3n4n5n6
n1Pearson Correlation10.543 **0.387 **0.362 **0.469 **0.465 **
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.0000.0000.0000.0000.000
N506506506506506506
n2Pearson Correlation0.543 **10.607 **0.462 **0.528 **0.664 **
Sig. (2-tailed)0.000 0.0000.0000.0000.000
N506506506506506506
n3Pearson Correlation0.387 **0.607 **10.515 **0.569 **0.709 **
Sig. (2-tailed)0.0000.000 0.0000.0000.000
N506506506506506506
n4Pearson Correlation0.362 **0.462 **0.515 **10.572 **0.315 **
Sig. (2-tailed)0.0000.0000.000 0.0000.000
N506506506506506506
n5Pearson Correlation0.469 **0.528 **0.569 **0.572 **10.624 **
Sig. (2-tailed)0.0000.0000.0000.000 0.000
N506506506506506506
n6Pearson Correlation0.465 **0.664 **0.709 **0.315 **0.624 **1
Sig. (2-tailed)0.0000.0000.0000.0000.000
N506506506506506506
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 9. Structure of hotel’s respondents.
Table 9. Structure of hotel’s respondents.
Hotel RatingCapitals
NValid100100
Missing00
Mean4.105.29
Std. Deviation0.8102.935
Variance0.6578.612
Minimum31
Maximum510
Sum410529
Hotel RatingFrequencyPercent
Valid3 *2828.0
4 *3434.0
5 *3838.0
Total100100.0
CapitalsFrequencyPercent
ValidMadrid1212.0
Rome1212.0
Zagreb99.0
Belgrade88.0
Bucharest1212.0
Sofia1212.0
Podgorica88.0
Tirana77.0
Skopje1010.0
Athens1010.0
Total100100.0
* Hotel star ratings are often used to classify hotels according to their quality. A five-star hotel is the highest category; Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 10. Statistic of answers.
Table 10. Statistic of answers.
n1n2n3n4n5n6n7n8n9
NValid100100100100100100100100100
Missing000000000
Mean1.341.831.701.661.402.002.002.001.59
Median1.002.002.002.001.002.002.002.002.00
Std. Dev.0.4760.3780.4610.4760.4920.0000.0000.0000.494
Variance0.2270.1430.2120.2270.2420.0000.0000.0000.244
Minimum111112221
Maximum222222222
Source: Author’s calculation.
Table 11. Analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Table 11. Analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareFSig.
n1Between Groups1.04020.5202.3580.100
Within Groups21.400970.221
Total22.44099
n2Between Groups0.51520.2571.8370.165
Within Groups13.595970.140
Total14.11099
n3Between Groups2.21721.1085.7240.004
Within Groups18.783970.194
Total21.00099
n4Between Groups4.15322.07711.0150.000
Within Groups18.287970.189
Total22.44099
n5Between Groups5.06522.53212.9720.000
Within Groups18.935970.195
Total24.00099
n6Between Groups0.00020.000..
Within Groups0.000970.000
Total0.00099
n7Between Groups0.00020.000..
Within Groups0.000970.000
Total0.00099
n8Between Groups0.00020.000..
Within Groups0.000970.000
Total0.00099
n9Between Groups8.19924.09924.8650.000
Within Groups15.991970.165
Total24.19099
Source: Author’s calculation.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Trišić, I.; Štetić, S.; Privitera, D.; Petrović, M.D.; Maksin, M.; Vujović, S.; Jovanović, Z.; Kalinić, M. Perspectives on Sustainable Tourism Development in the Hotel Industry—A Case Study from Southern Europe. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5563. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105563

AMA Style

Trišić I, Štetić S, Privitera D, Petrović MD, Maksin M, Vujović S, Jovanović Z, Kalinić M. Perspectives on Sustainable Tourism Development in the Hotel Industry—A Case Study from Southern Europe. Sustainability. 2021; 13(10):5563. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105563

Chicago/Turabian Style

Trišić, Igor, Snežana Štetić, Donatella Privitera, Marko D. Petrović, Marija Maksin, Slavoljub Vujović, Zoran Jovanović, and Marija Kalinić. 2021. "Perspectives on Sustainable Tourism Development in the Hotel Industry—A Case Study from Southern Europe" Sustainability 13, no. 10: 5563. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105563

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop