Next Article in Journal
Does Independent Directors’ Interlocking Network Position Affect Green Innovation?
Next Article in Special Issue
The Impact of the Integration of the Culture Industry and Tourism on Regional Green Development: Empirical Evidence from China
Previous Article in Journal
Assessing the Community Perception in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, of Proper Waste Disposal: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Resilience and Sustainable Urban Tourism: Understanding Local Communities’ Perceptions after a Crisis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 3
10.3390/su16031088
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

How Are Rural Homestays Achieving Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID-19 Period: Value Co-Creation by Operators, Tourists, and Government

by
Yue Li
1,*,
Liwen Xia
1,
Li Wang
2,3,*,
Mengyuan Qiu
1 and
Sulistyo Utomo
4
1
College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210018, China
2
College of Cultural Industry and Tourism Management, Sanjiang University, Nanjing 210018, China
3
Department of Tourism Operation, Woosuk University, Wanju 55338, Republic of Korea
4
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Gold Coast 4222, QLD, Australia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(3), 1088; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031088
Submission received: 1 November 2023 / Revised: 24 November 2023 / Accepted: 22 January 2024 / Published: 26 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Impact of Sustainable Tourism on Regional Development)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The mental fatigue of rural homestay operators is of great significance to their performance as well as the sustainability of the rural tourism industry. Mental fatigue is a state of mind caused by consistently demanding cognitive activities. The mental health of rural homestay operators has been severely hit during the COVID-19, and they are in urgent need of finding a path to recovery. Based on value co-creation theory, this paper explores how rural homestay operators’ mental fatigue affects their performance under the moderating effects of government support and tourists’ participation. We conducted a questionnaire survey in the 19 rural tourist destinations of Nanjing, China, and collected a total of 201 questionnaires from the homestay operators. The results reveal that the operators’ mental fatigue has a negative effect on the performance of rural homestays. What’s more, tourists’ participation could moderate the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and their performance. Although the moderating effects of government support are not significant, they can influence operators’ performance directly and indirectly. Through the value co-creation of operators, tourists, and government with the aim of improving the performance value of the rural homestay co-creation process, the operators’ mental fatigue could be alleviated and their performance restored. These findings can help us explore the recovery mechanism of rural homestays and promote the sustainable development of rural tourism in the post-COVID-19 period.

1. Introduction

Rural revitalization is China’s basic state policy, and rural homestays play a significant role in the revitalization of rural industries [1]. Rural homestays are defined as the transformation of idle rural farmhouses or factories into part of the tourist economy, providing tourists with accommodation, catering, and rural experiences [2]. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has created a serious crisis for rural homestays [3]. In particular, it has inflicted psychological damage on rural homestay operators, causing them to experience irritability, burnout, depression and other mental pressures. Damage to mental health is not conducive to sustainable development in the rural homestay industry. Therefore, it is important to explore the mental health problems of operators and how to recover the industry.
According to relevant research, mental fatigue is becoming a growing problem in our modern society, and it has a substantial impact on people’s performance and behavior [4]. Mental fatigue is defined as a mental state caused by persistently demanding cognitive activities and is characterized by fatigue and a lack of energy [5]. During the pandemic, individuals’ psychological distress deepened because of long-term exposure to negative news about COVID-19 [6]. Compared to urban areas, fatigue is worse in most rural areas [7]. Field research found that rural homestay operators suffered from varying degrees of psychological fatigue and rejected pandemic-related information, which led to negligent behavior due to burnout. Mental fatigue induces homestay operators to negatively perceive and construct events, relationships, and environments in work situations. This can occur through a consumption lens, reducing their motivation and negatively affecting business performance [8]. Therefore, when rural homestay operators face resource loss, they experience a high level of fatigue [9]. To counter the stress caused by mental fatigue, operators conserve resources by adjusting their business strategies, thereby affecting the performance of rural homestays.
Value co-creation theory proposes that enterprises gain a competitive advantage by co-creating value [10]. When value co-creation is extended to the tourism industry, some thoughts emphasized by service-dominant logic are very consistent with the characteristics of the tourism experience [11]. For example, “value is co-created by multiple participants”. Rural tourism is considered an ideal environment for value co-creation [12]. In the case of China’s rural tourism, tourists, and the government are vital subjects of value co-creation, and they play important roles in operators’ psychological state and business behavior. The government is heavily involved in business development [13] and provides an overall regulatory framework for tourism business operations by shaping its economic environment [14]. Government support can influence the resilience and sustainability of small businesses [15]. Moreover, the input of tourists’ willingness, knowledge, and experience allows homestays to provide differentiated products and services based on their individual needs. Through this, they can improve product quality, service efficiency, and customer satisfaction [16,17].
The mental health of rural homestay operators is a critical factor in promoting the recovery of the tourism industry following COVID-19. Moreover, government support and tourist participation are important for the value co-creation of rural homestays. However, several studies on rural tourism have promoted performance recovery using macroeconomic indicators, and few have focused on the combined effects of rural homestay operators, the government, and tourists. Based on the theory of value co-creation, this study analyzes the influencing mechanism of the performance recovery of rural homestays. Moreover, it also explores how tourists and the government adjust the performance level of rural homestays through various participation methods. Nanjing is famous in China’s rural homestay industry. Currently, there are more than 300 rural homestays in Nanjing City, and 227 are supervised by the Nanjing Smart Homestays Service platform. After COVID-19, more than 60% of rural homestays in Nanjing were adversely affected, thus weakening their performance; therefore, there is an urgent need to seek an effective recovery path. As a result, Nanjing of Jiangsu Province was considered as a case site in this study; we analyzed the problem of how the operators, tourists, and the government affect the performance and development of rural homestays. The purpose of this study is to explore the recovery path of the Chinese rural homestay industry. We try to provide practical inspiration for the development of rural homestays during the post-COVID-19 period, narrowing the gap between rural tourism and urban tourism.

2. Literature Review

2.1. The Value Co-Creation Theory

Value co-creation theory, based on service-dominant logic, considers the service ecosystem as a typical example. This theory highlights that value is defined by beneficiaries based on phenomenology, and that value is co-created by multiple stakeholders. Among them, service is the primary exchange content, while product only serves as the distribution mechanism for service exchange [11]. The concept of value co-creation applies to the experience environment, and tourism is considered an ideal environment for value co-creation [12]. Research on value co-creation has been continuously enriched and developed, and the theory has been increasingly applied to multi-subject value co-creation activities. It is believed that value comes from the joint participation of different subjects, such as enterprises, customers, governments, suppliers, and other partners [11]. What’s more, it is the integration of resources post interaction among members of the value network [18]. Value co-creation theory is widely used in the study of enterprise performance. Carlson found that customer participation in value co-creation can be transformed into brand relationship performance results, thus contributing to brand building [19]. Through empirical research, Piotr Zaborek found that co-creation leads to positive operational and financial outcomes for service providers and manufacturers [20].
In the tourism industry, tourism experiences are not only created by tourism enterprises, but also co-created by multiple economic participants. Based on the theory of value co-creation, we believe that rural homestay operators, tourists, and the government are important subjects in rural homestay performance value co-creation. During and after the pandemic, destination managers, practitioners, and residents needed to work together to improve the consumer experience and restore the economies of tourist destinations [21]. Amongst relevant scholars’ research, Jacqueline Doyle believes that co-creation and tourist participation in tourism are inseparable. Furthermore, the process of customer participation requires interaction and participation, which can promote co-creation by increasing attention, participation, and memory [22]. From the business operators’ perspective, value co-creation helps design more personalized, authentic, and memorable purposes and experiences [23]. Government departments understand the general trend of tourism development at the macro level and promote tourism development by formulating policies and implementing management strategies [24].

2.2. Mental Fatigue

Mental fatigue is defined as a state of mind caused by consistently demanding cognitive activities [5]. This state is progressive and cumulative, with subjective and objective manifestations, including increased resistance to further effort, mood changes, and feelings of “tiredness” and “lack of energy”. Mental fatigue is known to negatively impact cognitive performance [25]. Poor mental health reduces organizational effectiveness and has broader social implications owing to decreased physical health [26].
Under the influence of COVID-19, the psychological distress caused by this complex and multifaceted interference rapidly eroded people’s mental health and well-being, owing to long-term overexposure to negative information about the disease [6]. Therefore, based on psychological fatigue, the concept of “pandemic fatigue” was proposed. Pandemic fatigue is a continuous and changing psychological state, and it did not disappear immediately at the end of the pandemic. Yue proposed that the direct or indirect impact of the ongoing pandemic caused great pressure and led to adverse mental health outcomes [27]. Cuadrado presents that negative information about the pandemic can have a negative impact on people’s mental health. He developed and validated a reliable pandemic fatigue instrument to explore the pandemic fatigue experienced by individuals and societies [28]. The economic burden of the pandemic has caused people to become tired of it and ignore its threat [29]. In addition, compared to urban areas, most rural areas have a higher degree of pandemic fatigue [7], which has a profound impact on rural hostel operators in all aspects of the body and mind. While the discussion of mental fatigue was widespread before COVID-19, it has taken on a new dimension since the pandemic [6]. Therefore, based on the actual post-pandemic situation of rural homestay operators, this study proposes that operators’ psychological fatigue is the result of exposure to media and individuals that discuss the pandemic. Operators are tired and display negative attitudes towards COVID-19; hence, they are eager to completely disconnect from the reality of the pandemic to restore the performance of their rural homestays.

2.3. The Performance of Rural Homestays

Corporate performance is generally measured by stock market valuation or objective measurement indicators; however, these evaluation indicators do not apply to small tourism enterprises such as rural homestays [30]. For rural homestays, it is difficult to select performance indicators that explain their overall situation. This approach is also prone to bias [31]. Therefore, scholars have measured the performance of rural homestays by creating a performance system from the perspective of homestay operations and evaluating their environment, service quality, and family facilities [32]. Some studies have measured the abilities of rural homestays from the perspective of individual organizations or social factors [33]. Based on previous studies, this study defines the performance of rural homestay as, under certain resources, conditions and environments, the measurement and feedback of the degree and efficiency of operators to achieve their business objectives. Among these, the most intuitive indicators are operating income, tourist occupancy rate, and their comparison with industry competitors.
In the study of fatigue and performance, scholars generally agree that fatigue negatively impacts employee and firm performance. Stress and the various health problems associated with fatigue caused by physical overwork tend to affect employee performance [34]. Mental fatigue generated in a multitasking environment not only negatively affects primary task performance, but also affects recovery from task interruptions [35]. In their study of the effect of fatigue on nurses’ performance, Kalyan et al. found that as both mental and physical fatigue decreased, performance also decreased [36]. Khan found that social media fatigue negatively affects job performance [37]. In summary, fatigue can affect performance in various industries and occupations. Under the effects of mental fatigue, rural homestay operators and employees are demotivated, and emotional labor leads to burnout and reduced job satisfaction [38], which, in turn, affects the performance of rural homestays.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). 
The operators’ mental fatigue affects the performance of rural homestays.

2.4. Government Support

When facing major public crises, the tourism industry cannot develop without the participation of stakeholders [39]. Among them, government departments, as an important force for the value co-creation of rural homestays, grasp the overall trend in the development of homestays at the macro level and provide policy and economic support for the recovery of tourism. After COVID-19, several small and medium-sized enterprises sought government action to help them recover their business [40]. These enterprises are highly dependent on tourism. Moreover, policies promulgated by the government can affect the duration of economic recovery more than tourists and residents can.
In the study on the relationship between government and enterprise performance, scholars generally believe that government policy subsidies to enterprises are important and can have a positive impact on enterprise production [41]. Chaminade investigated the Thai government’s support for businesses in innovation policies [42]. In the rural homestay industry, government policies are an important determinant of increased rural homestays. Policies provide a good institutional environment for the homestay industry and practical insights into the sustainable development of homestays [43]. Governments also play an important role in the recovery of these sectors. Fiscal policy stimuli can be used to mitigate the adverse impact of a pandemic [44]. Dvorak analyzed the economic support measures taken by local governments in Lithuania to help residents and businesses amid COVID-19 [45]; Brzyska and Szamrej-Baran have studied the impact of COVID-19 on the European Union’s Sustainable Development Goals [46]. The above analysis indicates that government support can provide corresponding policy, financial, and environmental resources for homestays. This can help mobilize business owners, customers, and employees to participate in the value creation system, thus moderating the impact of mental fatigue on the performance of rural homestays.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis (H2). 
Government support moderates the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and rural homestay performance.

2.5. Tourists’ Participation

Customer value co-creation has received considerable attention in the tourism and hotel accommodation industries [47]. Tourists, as indispensable subjects in the value co-creation system, form a core part of tourism activities. Tourists invest their knowledge, skills, and experience in the system [10] and realize value co-creation with the host through participation in or implementation of civic behavior. Thus, it promotes the high-quality development of rural homestays. Tourists’ value co-creation can bring unique and different tourism experiences benefiting both tourists and service providers [47]. Visitors interact with staff, operators, and corporate guests before, during, and after their homestays. They transfer their own resources, such as knowledge and skills, to the homestays [48]. This enables service providers to further optimize and innovate their services, and to seek and maintain competitive advantages and performance.
Researchers have studied the influence of customer participation on firm performance. Previous studies have revealed that customer participation can help enterprises obtain relevant information such as customer demand [49], and customer value co-creation can improve enterprise brand performance [50]. However, Thomas believes that the influence of customer participation ability on the performance of small and medium-sized enterprises is different in financial and non-financial aspects. A higher level of customer participation can optimize the financial performance of enterprises [51]. Through questionnaire analysis, Jiao found that customer participation would have a positive impact on employees’ performance, thereby improving enterprise performance [52]. For tourism enterprises, resilience is crucial for facilitating accurate forecasting after the COVID-19 pandemic [53]. Moreover, studies have indicated that social interactions can alleviate travel fatigue caused by COVID-19 [54]. Therefore, tourists participating in the value co-creation of rural homestays can optimize the performance of homestay operators. Furthermore, it alleviates the psychological fatigue of hosts to adjust the influence of psychological fatigue on the performance of homestays.
As a result, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis (H3). 
Tourist participation moderates the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and performance in rural homestays.
We then developed a conceptual model to explain how mental fatigue affects the performance of rural homestays (see Figure 1).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

This study employed the partial least squares structural equation model of SmartPLS 3.0 software (PLS-SEM) as a multivariate analysis technique to explore the moderating effects of government support and tourist participation on homestay performance. SPSS 26.0 was used for data entry and the frequency distribution of demographic profiles.

3.2. Sample

Influenced by China’s unique social culture and geographical environment, Chinese villages exhibit distinctive features and charm tourists from around the world. For instance, during the 2023 Mid-Autumn Festival, 24.3% of the tourists in Nanjing’s rural homestays were from outside the province and abroad. Unlike some Western countries, the development of rural homestays in China is readily affected by policies. Therefore, taking China as a case can enable better exploration of the roles of the three main bodies of government, tourists and operators, which aligns with the focus of this study. The development of rural homestays in China builds on the successful examples of foreign countries. In the post-COVID-19 period, China is the largest developing country, and the recovery of rural homestays in China holds important reference value for other developing nations.
According to data from the Nanjing Culture and Tourism Bureau, the number of tourists visiting Nanjing in the first quarter of 2023 ranked first in the province, and the annual tourism key performance indicator was completed in three months. During the May Day holiday of 2023, Nanjing became a popular tourist city in China. Nanjing is a tourist resort with rich and independent cultural resources. Homestay construction reflects the distribution characteristics of tourist attractions and natural resources. Simultaneously, the main body of Nanjing homestays is also very distinct, including humanistic feelings, ecological nature, and retro literature. After the end of the pandemic, Nanjing witnessed a strong recovery of rural homestays, with the number of rural homestays available during the May Day holiday increasing by more than 9.2 times year-on-year. Therefore, we selected rural homestays in Nanjing as the research subject to explore this industry’s performance recovery after the pandemic.
According to statistics, by May 2022, there were more than 300 rural homestays in Nanjing, 227 of which were supervised by the Nanjing Smart Homestay Service Platform. According to this information, we conducted research from 1 March to 27 March 2023, with the help of a team of four graduate students from the School of Economics and Management. The survey focused on 19 rural homestay villages located in the mid-south area of Nanjing, as shown in Figure 2 and Table 1. We used convenience sampling to interview rural homestay operators face to face, and finally collected 205 questionnaires. The process was not smooth. During the survey, the epidemic in China had not completely ended, and many rural homestays were temporarily closed for investigation. At the same time, some rural hostel operators had serious psychological anxiety, which made the process of investigation and interview difficult. Nonetheless, we managed to complete the survey successfully.
After removing invalid questionnaires, 201 valid questionnaires were obtained, with an effective response rate of 98.05%. We conducted an analysis to determine the representativeness of the 201 questionnaires. Firstly, during the sampling process, the case locations we selected were representative of the operational conditions of typical rural homestays in Nanjing in the post-COVID-19 period. Secondly, the characteristics of the farmers we surveyed were consistent with the basic characteristics of homestay operators reported by the statistics bureau. For example, these rural homestays are the use of local idle tourism resources, and the villagers participate in the reception of tourists. Therefore, despite having only 201 samples, they are highly representative. Thirdly, we employed SmartPLS, a data analysis software with a minimum sample requirement of 60. The 201 samples in this study meet the minimum requirements for software operation. Furthermore, the data analysis results demonstrate that the samples passed reliability and validity tests.

3.3. Variable Selection and Measurement

The questionnaire comprised two main parts. The first section examined the respondents’ demographic characteristics. The second section contained the measurement scale consisting of four modules: mental fatigue, government support, tourist participation, and the performance of homestays (see Appendix A for the questionnaire).
The measurement items were based on previous studies. Based on a specific theoretical background, items were selected according to their specific performance. “Mental fatigue” incorporates the influence of “pandemic fatigue”; therefore, the scale developed by Cuadrado et al. was used as the basis for this assessment [28]. In this study, the concept of epidemic fatigue was incorporated into mental fatigue for research. Therefore, based on Cuadrado’s research results, the scale of “mental fatigue” was developed in this study, including 4 questions. “Government support” was primarily based on the research scale developed by Chaminade et al. Chaminade measures the Thai government’s innovation policies [42]. This study draws on some of his questions to compile the scale of “government support”, including 3 questions. “Tourist participation” was measured using Jiao’s scale [52]. As it is challenging to obtain the objective performance of homestays, it becomes difficult to select performance indicators to illustrate their overall situation; thus, discriminant bias is prone to occur [31]. Therefore, this study used Niehm and Frazier’s scale as a reference [55,56]. The scale of “Performance of rural homestay” was compiled using subjective indicators to measure performance, including 3 questions. As for the scale of the above researchers, this study modified the characteristics of rural homestays in China in the post-COVID-19 period and finally obtained a scale consisting of 13 items. The questionnaire was designed using a 5-point Likert scale, in which respondents were asked to rate items on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Further details are presented in Table 2.

3.4. Sample Summary

According to the SPSS description and statistical analysis results, there were slightly more female rural homestay operators than male operators in Nanjing, most of whom were between 25 and 44 years old. This group is generally considered to face greater psychological pressure [26], and suffered significantly from mental fatigue during the pandemic. While operators with junior college education accounted for the majority (40.3%) of the sample, most rural homestays were established within 10 years, accounting for 93.6%. These rural homestays are dominated by small and micro enterprises, which solve the problem of an idle rural labor force. However, small and micro enterprises are highly vulnerable to external shocks; therefore, several rural homestays struggled during the pandemic and urgently needed to be revived. Owing to the impact of COVID-19, the occupancy rate of rural homestays in 2022 was generally low (Table 3).

4. Results

4.1. Reliability and Validity Test

SmartPLS 3.0 was used in a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to check the variables’ validity, reliability, and discriminant validity. Reliability indicates whether the scale results are credible, and validity includes aggregation and discriminant validity. Aggregation validity indicates the degree of correlation between a variable and its corresponding variables. Discriminant validity was used to test whether the degree of correlation between a variable and its corresponding variable was greater than that between the variable and the other variables. Table 3 presents the results of the relevant indicators used to measure the model’s reliability and aggregate validity. Scale reliability was measured using the variable’s Cronbach’s alpha value (α value) and composite reliability (CR). Table 3 indicates that all the α values are greater than 0.6, and CR values greater than 0.7, proving that the model has good reliability. Polymerization validity was tested using each variable’s mean Average Variance Extracted (AVE). The AVE values for all variables were greater than 0.5, indicating the model’s good aggregation validity (Table 4).

4.2. Verification of Structural Models

The verification of the structural model tested the validity of the model’s assumptions through the path coefficient and significance level. SmartPLS was used to solve for the path coefficient and test the model’s path significance level. The verification results of the structural model are presented in Figure 3 and Table 5.
We assume that the standardized path coefficient of H1—that is, the operators’ mental fatigue, which affects the performance of rural homestays—is −0.231, and its significance level p-value is 0.016 (less than 0.05). This indicates that the mental fatigue of rural homestay operators has a highly significant relationship with the homestay performance. This further indicates that managers’ mental fatigue affects the rural homestay performance. Suppose the path coefficient of H2, that is, the government support adjusted for the influence of mental fatigue on the performance of rural homestays, is 0.034, and the p-value is 0.623 (greater than 0.05). This indicates government support’s inability to alleviate the influence of mental fatigue on performance, and there is no moderating effect. However, the p-value of the significance level of government support’s direct effect on rural homestays is 0.005, which is significant at the 5% level. This value indicates that government support can directly and powerfully affect rural homestay performance without indirect means. Suppose that the path coefficient of the moderating effect of tourist participation in relation to H3 is −0.181, and the p-value is 0.030, which is significant at the 5% level. This indicates that tourist participation’s moderating effect weakens mental fatigue’s negative influence on the performance of rural homestays. The p-value of the direct effect of tourist participation on rural homestay performance is 0.630 (greater than 0.05), indicating the indirect tourist influence on rural homestay performance.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theoretical Implications

First, this study found that the performance of rural homestays was significantly and negatively influenced by operators’ mental fatigue. This finding validates the core idea of resource conservation theory, which states that when individuals face external resource threats, mental fatigue can affect project success [8]. Our results are consistent with previous academic research proving fatigue’s negative impacts on performance [57]. By incorporating the concept of pandemic fatigue into mental fatigue, we found that mental fatigue has a significant impact on the rural homestay industry. It is an important variable for the performance recovery of rural homestays in the post-COVID-19 period. This investigation found that after COVID-19, rural homestay operators’ psychological fatigue was no longer just the fatigue of pursuing high performance and high recognition of their homestays. It also increased the negative emotions brought about by the long-term epidemic, resulting in pain, and negatively impacted emotions, cognition, and behavior. Operators were reluctant to talk to people about the outbreak or accept the frenzied media coverage of the crisis. Therefore, when the rural homestay operators’ mental health is significantly compromised, it inevitably negatively impacts their business performance. Adjusting the operators’ mental fatigue is conducive to the sustainable development of the rural homestay industry and rural tourism culture [58].
Second, we found that government support has no significant moderating effect on the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and the performance of rural homestays; however, it can directly and effectively affect the performance of rural homestays. This conclusion reveals that the government is an important participant in the rural tourism industry according to the value co-creation theory [24]. This is consistent with the conclusions of previous studies that government support has a direct impact on firm performance [59]. However, based on the situation in China, the government often guides macroeconomic policies and creates a fair market environment for rural homestays by promulgating and implementing relevant support and talent introduction policies. Therefore, the role of government support may not be directly reflected at the micro level in operators’ mental health.
Furthermore, this study found that in the co-creation of tourist value, tourist participation can significantly moderate the negative impact of mental fatigue on the performance of rural homestay operators. This finding supports the conclusions of previous studies, and further validates the importance of tourist participation in rural operators’ mental health and business performance [50]. Tourism is characterized by high-contact services, and tourists play an important role in the co-creation of tourism services. Tourists can improve the performance of rural homestay operators by sharing information about their needs and providing them with ideas for new operations and services. When tourists experience the characteristics and customs of rural homestays, they spend a lot of time communicating with the operators. This interaction not only alleviates the tourism fatigue of tourists, but also effectively reduces the anxiety of operators, thereby decreasing the mental fatigue of operators.

5.2. Practical Implications

First, the mental fatigue of rural homestay operators negatively impacts the performance of rural homestay operations. During the field investigation, we found that most rural homestay operators were majorly troubled by the pandemic and experienced varying degrees of fatigue. They were eager for rural homestays to recover; however, the lingering effects of COVID-19 have made recovery difficult. The conflict between demand and reality leads to mental pain and burnout among rural homestay operators and deepens their mental fatigue. It is not conducive to the sustainable development of rural homestays. Therefore, operators should pay attention not only to the adjustment of their own mental fatigue, but also to the sustainable development of individual mental health. For example, operators can adjust their own emotional state and improve the service level and professional skills of rural homestays, digital innovation, and other perspectives to alleviate mental fatigue for a long time.
Second, our research found that in the context of China, government support has no significant effect on operators’ mental fatigue. However, the government, as a powerful body, can directly and effectively affect rural homestay performance. This finding reveals the role of government support in performance recovery during the post-COVID-19 period. Therefore, from the perspective of the government, on the premise of continuing to use macroeconomic policies to promote performance recovery, more attention can be paid to the mental health of operators. More humanized care measures rather than forced administrative means can be taken to achieve psychological and economic recovery.
Third, tourist participation in the value co-creation of rural homestays can moderate the negative effects of operators’ mental fatigue and play an important role in the recovery of rural homestays. Therefore, from the perspective of tourists, they can exert their subjective initiative through interactions with operators and governments. Based on their own experiences with rural homestays, tourists can propose innovative suggestions for improving rural homestay services and facilities for operators. Tourist participation in the value co-creation of rural homestays is sufficient to care for the mental health of operators. This is conducive to jointly promote the recovery of rural homestay performance in the post-COVID-19 period.

6. Conclusions

Based on the theory of value co-creation, this study conducted interviews and questionnaires with 201 operators of rural homestays in Nanjing of Jiangsu Province, employed a structural equation model to explore the recovery path of rural homestay performance, and analyzed how the government and tourists participate in this performance recovery. Our research results indicate that the mental fatigue of operators has a significant negative impact and hinders the performance recovery of rural homestays in the post-COVID-19 period. This conclusion verifies the validity of hypothesis 1, that is, the operators’ mental fatigue can affect the performance of rural homestays, and we find that the impact is negative. In this process, government support has a direct and effective impact on rural homestay performance recovery. This conclusion verifies that hypothesis 2 is not valid, that is, government support cannot regulate the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and the performance of rural homestays. Moreover, tourist participation can influence the mental fatigue and performance of rural homestay operators, thereby significantly moderating the relationship between operators’ mental fatigue and rural homestay performance. This conclusion verifies hypothesis 3 and finds that the moderating effect of tourist participation is positive. Therefore, through value co-creation among rural homestay operators, the government, and tourists, the mental fatigue of operators can be effectively alleviated and the business performance of rural homestays be restored. Before this study, there were also foreign scholars who carried out relevant research on rural tourism and rural homestays in China [60,61]. We learned from their research experience and combined it with the actual situation, hoping that the research results can provide a theoretical basis for the recovery of the rural homestay industry and promote the sustainable development of the industry and tourism.
Our study has some limitations that need to be addressed. First, although the samples we collected were representative, as the survey was conducted within a limited time and location, not all rural homestays in Nanjing were included within its scope. Therefore, the next step is to compare different types of rural homestay operators. We will expand the scope of the sample, while tracking the existing sample. Second, the research method is relatively simple. In future, we can consider collecting long-term panel data through interviews, ethnography, and follow-up surveys, for a comparative analysis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.L. and M.Q.; methodology, M.Q.; software, Y.L.; validation, Y.L.; formal analysis, Y.L. and M.Q.; investigation, Y.L. and L.X.; resources, M.Q.; data curation, Y.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.L.; writing—review and editing, Y.L., L.W. and M.Q.; visualization, Y.L.; supervision, M.Q.; project administration, M.Q.; funding acquisition, L.W., M.Q. and S.U. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study is supported by the project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China: ‘Comprehensive Effects and Mechanisms of Multi-dimensional Rehabilitative Landscape in Tourism Destinations’, project number: (41901174), funder: Mengyuan Qiu. This study is supported by the project of Supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation: ‘Cross-local Adaptation of Amphibious population in Rural tourism areas from the perspective of Mobility’. project number: (2021M701729), funder: Mengyuan Qiu.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data is unavailable due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Liwen Xia, Mengyuan Qiu, Li Wang, and Sulistyo Utomo for their contributions to the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A. The Questionnaire of This Article

Part 1
This information is completely confidential.
1. What is your gender? (Please √ check one)
○ Male
○ Female
○ Other
2. How old are you? (Please √ check one)
○ 18–24
○ 25–44
○ 45–64
○ 65 and above
3. What’s your level of education? (Please √ check one)
○ Primary school and below
○ Junior high school
○ Senior high school
○ Junior college
○ Bachelor and above
4. The age of the rural homestay you operate. (Please √ check one)
○ Less than 3 years
○ 3–5 years
○ 6–10 years
○ 11–15 years
○ 16 years and above
5. The total assets of the rural homestay you operate. (Please √ check one)
○ Less than 500,000 ¥
○ 500,000–1,000,000 ¥
○ 1,000,000–2,000,000 ¥
○ Over 2,000,000 ¥
6. The number of staff at the rural homestay you operate. (Please √ check one)
○ Less than 10 people
○ 10–20 people
○ 21–50 people
○ Over 50 people
7. The annual occupancy rate of the rural homestay you operate. (Please √ check one)
○ Less than 50%
○ 50%–60%
○ 61%–70%
○ 71%–80%
○ Over 80%
Part 2
For each of the statements, please indicate the degree to which you think it is true for you by choosing ONE option per statement.
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutrality 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
1. I’m fed up with all the media talking about the pandemic.12345
2. I’m not interested when someone discusses the pandemic.12345
3. I don’t want to hear more about the outbreak.12345
4. I’m too tired of the pandemic and to be as cautious as I was at the beginning.12345
5. The government has introduced relevant policies to support homestays.12345
6. The government provides corresponding advisory services on rural homestay operations.12345
7. The government has created a fair market environment and broken down unnecessary barriers to entry.12345
8. Visitors take the time to share information about their needs with us.12345
9. Visitors give us comments and suggestions.12345
10. Visitors often give us new ideas for businesses or services.12345
11. Compared with the previous year, the overall performance of rural homestays was good.12345
12. Homestays’ overall performance profile is better compared to its main competitors.12345
13. The overall performance of the rural homestay you operate is better compared to other rural homestays in the industry.12345

References

  1. Bi, G.; Yang, Q. The spatial production of rural settlements as rural homestays in the context of rural revitalization: Evidence from a rural tourism experiment in a Chinese village. Land Use Policy 2023, 128, 106000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mura, P. Perceptions of authenticity in a Malaysian homestay—A narrative analysis. Tour. Manag. 2015, 51, 225–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gossling, S.; Scott, D.; Hall, C.M. Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Brazaitis, M.; Satas, A. Regular short-duration breaks do not prevent mental fatigue and decline in cognitive efficiency in healthy young men during an office-like simulated mental working day: An EEG study. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2023, 188, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Boksem, M.A.S.; Tpos, M. Mental fatigue: Costs and benefits. Brain Res. Rev. 2008, 59, 125–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Grelle, K.; Shrestha, N.; Ximenes, M.; Perrotte, J.; Cordaro, M.; Deason, R.G.; Howard, K. The Generation Gap Revisited: Generational Differences in Mental Health, Maladaptive Coping Behaviors, and Pandemic-Related Concerns during the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Adult Dev. 2023, 30, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Wu, X.Y.; Lu, Y.; Jiang, B. Built environment factors moderate pandemic fatigue in social distance during the COVID-19 pandemic: A nationwide longitudinal study in the United States. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2023, 233, 104690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hobfoll, S.E.; Halbesleben, J.; Neveu, J.P.; Westman, M. Conservation of Resources in the Organizational Context: The Reality of Resources and Their Consequences. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2018, 5, 103–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Qiu, M.; Ni, Y.; Utomo, S. Does Pandemic Fatigue Prevent Farmers’ Participation in the Rural Tourism Industry: A Comparative Study between Two Chinese Villages. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. A Service logic for Service Science. Serv. Sci. Res. Innov. Serv. Econ. 2006, 83–88. [Google Scholar]
  12. Shaw, G.; Bailey, A.; Williams, A. Aspects of service-dominant logic and its implications for tourism management: Examples from the hotel industry. Tour. Manag. 2011, 32, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Veronica, S.; Manlio, D.; Shlomo, T.; Antonio, M.P.; Victor, C. International social SMEs in emerging countries: Do governments support their international growth? J. World Bus. 2020, 55, 100995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Liu, C.Y.; Dou, X.T.; Li, J.F.; Cai, L.P.A. Analyzing government role in rural tourism development: An empirical investigation from China. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 79, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Sobaih, A.E.; Elshaer, I.; Hasanein, A.M.; Abdelaziz, A.S. Responses to COVID-19: The role of performance in the relationship between small hospitality enterprises’ resilience and sustainable tourism development. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 94, 102824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2016, 44, 5–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Prebensen, N.K.; Xie, J.H. Efficacy of co-creation and mastering on perceived value and satisfaction in tourists’ consumption. Tour. Manag. 2017, 60, 166–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gummesson, E.; Mele, C. Marketing as value co-creation through network interaction and resource integration. J. Bus. Mark. Manag. 2010, 4, 181–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Carlson, J.; Wyllie, J.; Rahman, M.M.; Voola, R. Enhancing brand relationship performance through customer participation and value creation in social media brand communities. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 50, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zaborek, P.; Mazur, J. Enabling value co-creation with consumers as a driver of business performance: A dual perspective of Polish manufacturing and service SMEs. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 104, 541–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ju, Y.Y. Complexity analysis about formation mechanism of residents’ value co-creation behavior in tourism communities: Based on the social embeddedness perspective. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2022, 53, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Doyle, J.; Kelliher, F. Bringing the past to life: Co-creating tourism experiences in historic house tourist attractions. Tour. Manag. 2023, 94, 104656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Eletxigerra, A.; Caldeira, A.M.; Kastenholz, E. A cost-benefit approach of consumers’ intentions to participate in highly co-creative tourism activities during and after COVID-19: Evidence from wine tourism. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2023, 56, 506–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, Y.Y.; Deng, H.W.; Wang, L. A research on the mechanism of interest connection and value co-creation of tourism development in ecologically fragile areas: A multiple participants perspective. Tour. Sci. 2022, 36, 56–74. [Google Scholar]
  25. Martin, K.; Thompson, K.G.; Keegan, R.; Ball, N.; Rattray, B. Mental fatigue does not affect maximal anaerobic exercise performance. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2015, 115, 715–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Wu, J.N.; Mei, W.J.; Liu, L.; Ugrin, J.C. The bright and dark sides of social cyberloafing: Effects on employee mental health in China. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 112, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Yue, Y.Y.; Li, L.; Liu, R.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Zhang, S.Y.; Sang, H.; Tang, M.Q.; Zou, T.; Shah, S.M.; Shen, X.H.; et al. The dynamic changes of psychosomatic symptoms in three waves of COVID-19 outbreak and fatigue caused by enduring pandemic in China. J. Affect. Disord. 2023, 331, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Cuadrado, E.; Maldonado, M.A.; Tabernero, C.; Arenas, A.; Castillo-Mayén, R.; Luque, B. Construction and Validation of a Brief Pandemic Fatigue Scale in the Context of the Coronavirus-19 Public Health Crisis. Int. J. Public Health 2021, 66, 1604260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Raheel, H.; Rahim, A.; Naeem, U. Pandemic fatigue amidst COVID-19: Are we slacking off? Ann. Med. Surg. 2022, 81, 104356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Liu, F.J.; Wu, X.Y.; Xu, J.Y.; Chen, D.D. Examining cultural intelligence, heritage responsibility, and entrepreneurship performance of migrant homestay inn entrepreneurs: A case study of Hongcun village in China. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2021, 48, 538–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Van Gils, A.; Zwart, P. Knowledge Acquisition and Learning in Dutch and Belgian SMEs: The Role of Strategic Alliances. Eur. Manag. J. 2004, 20, 685–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hu, Y.C.; Wang, J.H.; Wang, R.Y. Evaluating the performance of Taiwan homestay using analytic network process. Math. Probl. Eng. 2012, 2012, 827193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ramli, R.; Kasim, M.M.; Ramli, R.; Kayat, K.; Razak, R.A. Ranking the criteria for sustainability of community-based rural homestay programmes from the perspective of the operators. In Proceedings of the 2nd Innovation and Analytics Conference and Exhibition IACE, Kedah, Malaysia, 29 September–1 October 2015; Volume 1691, p. 030025. [Google Scholar]
  34. Lastya, S.D.; Helen, S.; Ribka, I.; Putri, S.; Fergyanto, E.G.; Muhammad, A.; Perwira Redi, A.A.N. The effect of job stress to employee performance: Case study of manufacturing industry in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 794, 012085. [Google Scholar]
  35. Chen, Y.Y.; Fang, W.N.; Guo, B.Y.; Bao, H.F. The moderation effects of task attributes and mental fatigue on post-interruption task performance in a concurrent multitasking environment. Appl. Ergon. 2022, 102, 103764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Pasupathy, K.S.; Barker, L.M. Impact of Fatigue on Performance in Registered Nurses: Data Mining and Implications for Practice. J. Healthc. Qual. 2012, 34, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Khan, A.N. A Diary study of social media and performance in service sector: Transformational leadership as cross-level moderator. Curr. Psychol. 2021, 42, 10077–10091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lee, L.; Madera, J.M. A Systematic Literature review of Emotional Labor research from the Hospitality and Tourism Literature. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 2808–2826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ye, X.C.; Miao, L. Research on Decision-Making Based on the Three-Party Evolutionary Game of Tourists, Scenic Spots, and Government. J. Organ. End User Comput. 2011, 34, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wong, J.W.C.; Lai, I.K.W. The mechanism influencing the residents’ support of the government policy for accelerating tourism recovery under COVID-19. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2022, 52, 219–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Luo, G.L.; Liu, Y.X.; Zhang, L.P.; Xu, X.; Guo, Y.W. Do governmental subsidies improve the financial performance of China’s new energy power generation enterprises? Energy 2021, 227, 120432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chaminade, C.; Intarakumnerd, P.; Sapprasert, K. Measuring systemic problems in National Innovation Systems. Appl. Thailand. Res. Policy 2012, 41, 1476–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zheng, J.; Huang, L. Characterizing the Spatiotemporal Patterns and Key Determinants of Homestay Industry Agglomeration in Rural China Using Multi Geospatial Datasets. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Abdelmoety, Z.H.; Alamoudi, H.; Alharthi, M.; Sharkasi, N.; Agag, G. Ensuring a Sustainable Hospitality and Tourism Industry in the COVID-19 Era: Using an Open Market Valuation Technique. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Dvorak, J. Response of the Lithuanian municipalities to the First Wave of COVID-19. Balt. Reg. 2021, 13, 70–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Brzyska, J.; Szamrej-Baran, I. The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals: The EU Per-spective. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Teng, H.Y.; Tsai, C.H. Can tour leader likability enhance tourist value co-creation behaviors? The role of attachment. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2020, 45, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tian, H.H.; Huang, S.H.; Cheablam, O. How green value co-creation mediates the relationship between institutional pressure and firm performance: A moderated mediation model. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023, 32, 3309–3325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wang, J.H. Research on the Impact of Customer Participation in Virtual Community on Service Innovation Performance—The Role of Knowledge Transfer. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 847713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Yu, Z.F. Mediating Role of Customer Value Co-creation and Internal Branding Between Brand Orientation and Brand Performance: Moderating Effect of Enterprise Innovative Capabilities-Evidence from Agri Product Users. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 938225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Anning-Dorson, T. The level matters: Building capabilities for innovation and enterprise performance through customer involvement. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2023, 26, 48–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jiao, Y.B.; Lou, L.G.; Yang, J. Customer Participation, Value Co-creation and Firm Performance in Social Media—The Mod-erating Roles of Perceived Fit. China Bus. Mark. 2020, 34, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
  53. Zhu, J.S.; Zhang, H.; Feng, W.Y. Enterprise operational resilience with digitalization approach amid the COVID-19 Era: An Empirical Assessment. J. Environ. Public Health 2022, 2022, 6274670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Li, Z.F.; Qiu, H.L.; Zhao, J.W.; Li, M.L. Is social interaction a source or an inhibitor of tourism fatigue? A study during the COVID-19 trough period. Curr. Issues Tour. 2023, 27, 305–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Niehm, L.S. Retail Superpreneurs and Their Influence on Small Communities. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  56. Frazier, B. The Influence of Network Characteristics on Information Access, Marketing Competence and Perceptions of Performance in Small, Rural Businesses. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  57. Lin, Z.B.; Chen, Y.; Filieri, R. Resident-tourist value co-creation: The role of residents’ perceived tourism impacts and life satisfaction. Tour. Manag. 2017, 61, 436–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Burksiene, V.; Dvorak, J.; Burbulyte-Tsiskarishvili, G. Sustainability and sustainability marketing in competing for the title of European Capital of Culture. Organization 2018, 51, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Nguyen, H.T.T.; Van, H.V.; Bartolacci, F.; Tran, T.Q. The impact of government support on firm performance in Vietnam: New evidence from dynamic approach. Asian Acad. Manag. J. 2018, 23, 101–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Parhad, K. Tourism and rural development in western China: A case from Turpan. Community Dev. J. 2016, 51, 534–551. [Google Scholar]
  61. Park, C.H. Nongjiale Tourism and Contested Space in Rural China. Mod. China 2014, 40, 519–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 01088 g001
Figure 1. Theoretical framework of the study. Note: The diagrammatic figure is drawn by the author according to the research content. The yellow ovals represent the independent variable, the green ovals represent the independent variables, and the blue ovals represent the independent variable.
Figure 1. Theoretical framework of the study. Note: The diagrammatic figure is drawn by the author according to the research content. The yellow ovals represent the independent variable, the green ovals represent the independent variables, and the blue ovals represent the independent variable.
Sustainability 16 01088 g001
Sustainability 16 01088 g002
Figure 2. Survey map of rural homestay villages. Note: The map is based on the standard map GS (2021) 5447, downloaded from the standard map service website belonging to the National Bureau of Surveying. Mapping and Geoinformation; the base map was not modified. Green indicates the sampling points, the other colors show the terrain of Nanjing.
Figure 2. Survey map of rural homestay villages. Note: The map is based on the standard map GS (2021) 5447, downloaded from the standard map service website belonging to the National Bureau of Surveying. Mapping and Geoinformation; the base map was not modified. Green indicates the sampling points, the other colors show the terrain of Nanjing.
Sustainability 16 01088 g002
Sustainability 16 01088 g003
Figure 3. Results of model test.
Figure 3. Results of model test.
Sustainability 16 01088 g003
Table 1. Number of homestays in each rural homestay village.
Table 1. Number of homestays in each rural homestay village.
Rural Homestay VillagesThe Number of Rural Homestays
Tangjiajia Hot Spring Village20+
Huashu Village4
Longshang Village6
She village7
Sanguo Village24
Bulao Village21
Huang Long Dan Tea Culture Village20+
Qixian Dafu Village2
Shitang Village10+
Gongtangtou Village1
Longxiang Shuangfan10+
Mountain Dew Village10+
Shishanxia Village23
Stonewall Village20
Dashanxia Village20+
Lu Family Gourmet Village10+
Country Companion Sujia Ideal Village10+
Lijiaying Village2
Gongtangtou Village1
Table 2. Latent variables and observed variables scale.
Table 2. Latent variables and observed variables scale.
Latent VariablesMeasurement QuestionsSource
Mental fatigueI’m fed up with all the media talking about the pandemic.Cuadrado (2021) [28]
I’m not interested when someone discusses the pandemic.
I don’t want to hear more about the outbreak.
I’m too tired of the pandemic and to be as cautious as I was at the beginning.
Government supportThe government has introduced relevant policies to support homestays.Chaminade (2012) [42]
The government provides corresponding advisory services on rural homestay operations.
The government has created a fair market environment and broken down unnecessary barriers to entry.
Visitors’ participationVisitors take the time to share information about their needs with us.Jiao, Y.B. (2020) [52]
Visitors give us comments and suggestions.
Visitors often give us new ideas for businesses or services.
Performance of homestaysCompared with the previous year, the overall performance of rural homestays was good.Niehm (2002) [55], Frazier (2000) [56]
Homestays’ overall performance profile is better compared to its main competitors.
The overall performance of the rural homestay you operate is better compared to other rural homestays in the industry.
Table 3. Sample characteristics.
Table 3. Sample characteristics.
Variable NamesCategoryRatio
GenderMale44.3%
Female55.7%
Age18–24 years old16.9%
25–44 years old53.7%
45–64 years old27.9%
65+1.5%
LiteracyElementary school and below4%
Junior high8%
High school23.9%
Junior college40.3%
Undergraduate19.9%
Graduate students and above4%
Establishment periodUnder 3 years40.8%
3–5 years28.9%
6–10 years23.9%
11–15 years5.5%
15+ years1%
Total assetsLess than 500,00017.9%
500,000 to 1 million24.4%
One to two million24.4%
More than 2 million33.3%
Number of employeesLess than 10 people72.6%
10–20 people15.4%
20–50 people11.9%
Annual occupancyUnder 50%37.3%
51–60%.27.9%
61–70%.25.9%
71–80%9%
Table 4. The relative indices of the model reliability and aggregation validity.
Table 4. The relative indices of the model reliability and aggregation validity.
VariablesQuestion ItemFactor LoadCronbach’s AlphaCRAVE
Mental fatigueFat10.4280.7350.7840.500
(Fat)Fat20.601
Fat30.851
Fat40.837
Government supportGov10.8430.7760.8700.691
(Gov)Gov20.851
Gov30.798
Tourist participationTou10.5000.6000.7460.504
(Tou)Tou20.752
Tou30.836
Performance of rural Per10.8540.8630.9150.783
homestay (Per)Per20.902
Per30.898
Table 5. Table of path coefficients.
Table 5. Table of path coefficients.
Path RelationInitial SampleSample MeanStandard DeviationT-Valuep-ValueSignificant or Not
Government support → performance of homestay0.2110.2060.0752.8090.005yes
Tourists’ participation → performance of homestay0.0450.0590.0940.4820.630no
Mental fatigue → performance of homestay−0.231−0.2450.0962.4150.016yes
Regulatory effect 1 → performance of homestay0.0340.0040.0700.4920.630no
Regulatory effect 2 → performance of homestay−0.1810.1350.0832.1780.030yes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, Y.; Xia, L.; Wang, L.; Qiu, M.; Utomo, S. How Are Rural Homestays Achieving Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID-19 Period: Value Co-Creation by Operators, Tourists, and Government. Sustainability 2024, 16, 1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031088

AMA Style

Li Y, Xia L, Wang L, Qiu M, Utomo S. How Are Rural Homestays Achieving Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID-19 Period: Value Co-Creation by Operators, Tourists, and Government. Sustainability. 2024; 16(3):1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031088

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Yue, Liwen Xia, Li Wang, Mengyuan Qiu, and Sulistyo Utomo. 2024. "How Are Rural Homestays Achieving Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID-19 Period: Value Co-Creation by Operators, Tourists, and Government" Sustainability 16, no. 3: 1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031088

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