Next Article in Journal
Urban Revitalization of World Heritage Cities Through Cultural and Creative Industries: A Case Study of Pingyao Under the Cities, Culture, and Creativity Framework
Previous Article in Journal
Linking Inward Foreign Direct Investment to Innovative Entrepreneurship: The Mediating Role of Economic Institutions in Chinese Regions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 17
Issue 10
10.3390/su17104291
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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Harnessing Environmental Triggers to Shape Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior: Evidence from Gilgit-Baltistan

by
Wang Ying
1,
Ahmed Bostani
2,
Syed Hussain Murtaza
2 and
Anwar Ali
3,*
1
Department of Music, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou 412007, China
2
SGH Warsaw School of Economics, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland
3
Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2025, 17(10), 4291; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104291
Submission received: 12 April 2025 / Revised: 4 May 2025 / Accepted: 6 May 2025 / Published: 9 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Tourism, Culture, and Heritage)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In order to achieve environmental sustainability within the tourism industry, it is vital to understand the components that encourage sports tourists to behave in an environmentally friendly way. However, the approach by which environmental aspects affect sports tourists’ behavior is not well studied, particularly the mediating role of sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. Employing the norm activation model (NAM), this study addressed how environmental consciousness, environmental values, and environmental knowledge influence sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices and how sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices mediate these relationships in promoting sports tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior. The data were gathered from 302 participants utilizing purposive sampling and analyzed by employing structural equation modeling (SEM). This study’s results revealed a positive association between environmental values, environmental knowledge, and sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. Interestingly, the relationship between environmental consciousness and sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices was found to be insignificant. In addition, the relationship between environmental consciousness, environmental values, environmental knowledge, and sports tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior was mediated by sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. This mediating effect underlines the role of sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices in translating environmental values and environmental knowledge into actual behavior; hence, the development of positive attitudes toward sustainability is important for encouraging eco-friendly behaviors among sports tourists. These findings provide theoretical and practical insights for tourism practitioners in formulating strategies that would encourage environmental responsibility in the sports tourism industry.

1. Introduction

In the last few decades, environmental sustainability has been challenged by severe issues, including the effects of greenhouse gases, pollution to the air, water, and soil, the extinction of species, and natural resource depletion [1]. All these key contributors to environmental concerns can be highly attributed to careless behavior exhibited by individuals [2]. The tourism industry is studied when discussing inadvertent human-made environmental harms [3]. According to Lee et al. [4], being involved in inappropriate tourism and engaging in inappropriate tourism activities impact the environment of the tourist attraction directly and indirectly. A previous study by Gössling et al. [5] confirmed that tourists are major contributors to the adverse environmental effects at destinations, generating numerous severe problems related to sustainability.
There is an urgent need to thoroughly examine the different aspects of greening behavior in consideration of the rising concern regarding the degradation of the environment globally. Despite its significant contribution to the economy, excess tourist activity exceeding a destination’s carrying capacity and having negative impacts on natural and sociocultural environments, known as overtourism, has become a major issue in recent years [6]; for instance, the damage to the Venice canals [7], the pollution of Thailand’s Maya Bay [8] and the overloading of the Himalayan infrastructure and resources [9]. There is more urgency concerning the incorporation of sustainability in tourism policies because of the current issues. Researchers have highlighted the necessity of researching factors affecting tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior toward adopting low-impact tourism practices [10,11]. For the aim of addressing this call, this research investigates the extent to which sports tourists’ environmental consciousness, values, and awareness contribute to their environmentally responsible attitudes and behaviors.
Despite the increasing interest in pro-environmental behavior, while the existing literature has addressed general tourist behavior extensively, no specific attention is paid to sports tourists’ sustainable behavior [12], particularly those visiting ecologically fragile mountain destinations. Sports tourism has become highly popular and is now a significant source of tourism in Gilgit-Baltistan [13,14]. Furthermore, sports tourism transforms travelers’ behavior toward active living, enhancing sustainable destinations [15], which depends on their activities and motivations because sports tourists may vary in their environmental behavior [16]. Gilgit-Baltistan is a region in northern Pakistan, located in the mountains, an ideal setting for examining these dynamics. It is one such destination where polo attracts numerous tourists annually [17,18]. This research gap indicates the extent to which it is necessary to conduct empirical research that takes these critical factors into account to increase knowledge of sustainable tourism practices. To incorporate sustainable values into all the aspects of tourism, including sports tourism, it is necessary to understand the impact of environmental consciousness, values, and knowledge on sports tourists’ sustainable attitudes and behaviors, especially in ecologically sensitive areas like Gilgit-Baltistan. Further examination of these correlations might provide insightful knowledge on how to promote eco-friendly travel by illuminating the processes by which eco-friendly notions translate into eco-friendly action [19].
Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to investigate how environmental values, consciousness, and knowledge among tourists affect their sustainable behavior, particularly, sports tourists’ visits to environmentally sensitive destinations. The NAM was applied in this research to investigate the mediating role of tourists’ perceptions toward ecologically sustainable behaviors. This research aimed to address the gap in the literature by researching sports tourists, an overlooked demographic in the sustainable tourism context, within the distinct context of Gilgit-Baltistan, a Pakistani region that is impacted by environmental degradation due to greater tourism. Gilgit-Baltistan, increasingly recognized for its mountain tourism, offers a relevant and underexplored framework to analyze these dynamics in sports tourism. Additionally, the findings may assist in the formulation of policy targeted specifically at environmental conservation and ecologically sustainable tourism practice, thereby enhancing the preservation of natural assets and long-term ecologically sustainable tourism development in fragile mountain regions such as Gilgit-Baltistan.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Environmental Consciousness

Environmental consciousness is a multifaceted construct consisting of cognitive comprehension and affective engagement with the critical environmental problem(s) [20]. Awareness itself is not the answer; thorough comprehension regarding the causes and outcomes of the environmental problem is implied [21], from which enhanced awareness inevitably translates into desired measures toward avoiding further environmental harm. Individuals who have more environmental sensitivity tend to have a higher sense of the importance of sustainability and hence tend to behave accordingly toward the preservation of the environment [22]. In the tourism and hospitality sector, environmental sensitivity greatly influences decisions such as the use of environmentally friendly hotels and involvement in activities that have the least harmful impact on the environment [23]. Environmentally conscious tourists are most likely to support conservation activities, including wildlife conservation and carbon emissions reduction [24]. Additionally, their consciousness prompts individuals to embrace sustainable practices like reducing waste, water conservation, and the use of eco-friendly modes of transport [25].

2.2. Environmental Values

Environmental values, as described by the perceived value or importance of the environment, influence individual behavior [26] and are important to elicit sustainable behavior, particularly within the tourism industry [27]. Further, environmental values influence attitudes toward environmentally conscious behavior and reflect intrinsic views of nature’s value [28]. Scholars emphasize the need to acknowledge the variation of values toward the environment, particularly when one is describing conditions involving morality and extrinsic elements [29]. Such values influence the behavior of tourists toward sustainability cues and evaluations of environmentally sustainable tourist destinations [30]. Particularly, among eco-aware tourists, satisfaction and loyalty are increased when tourists’ values are consistent with the destination’s environmental position [31]. Thus, reinforcing positive attitudes is essential to translating environmental values into sustainable tourist actions.

2.3. Environmental Knowledge

Environmentally friendly behavior practice and promotion depend on environmental knowledge, which improves individuals’ capability to make the correct, informed decisions for the sustainability of the environment [32]. The knowledge involves environmental problems like pollution and global warming, and how to potentially lower these challenges [33]. Tourists who are highly conscious of the effect their actions have on the environment tend to choose the mode of transportation, play their part in preserving the environment through active participation, and try to reduce their resource consumption during transportation [19]. Assessing environmental knowledge might help to indicate how informed tourists could be persuaded to adopt and sustain environmentally sustainable behavior [34]. By examining this critically, one can ascertain the involvement of knowledge and awareness in enhancing environmentally friendly behavior. It is essential knowledge for developing plans that not only raise awareness among visitors but also stimulate them to remain involved in sustainable tourism practices. Linking knowledge, values, and environmental awareness to green tourist behavior depends chiefly on the visitors’ behavior toward sustainable behavior [35]. Environmental knowledge, values, and awareness among tourists will determine their chances of adopting sustainable practices like energy conservation, waste reduction, and participation of local communities in sustainable tourism [36].

2.4. Tourists’ Environmentally Sustainable Behavior

Environmentally sustainable behavior is driven by behavioral intentions that are formed via attitudes, norms, and behavior control [37]. In this study, environmental values, concerns, and knowledge shape the behavioral intentions of tourists toward environmental sustainability [38]. Further, tourists must recognize the requirements and advantages of environmentally sustainable behavior in the long run, which means that they have to experience a process of changing non-sustainable behavioral habits gradually [39]. Behaviors resulting from human engagements with the environment through tourism activities [40] are critical to the sustainability of tourist sites and the sustainability of the entire tourism sector [41]. Tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior is crucial to attaining social sustainability, whose purpose is enhancing the environment through the conservation of natural resources to satisfy human requirements for living and growth [42]. Tourists present the most potential for greening the environment in tourism [43]. Tourists can mitigate this harmful effect by choosing environmentally oriented holiday activities and behaving responsibly on their trip [44]. So, this study explores sports tourists’ sustainable behavior in ecologically sensitive areas from an environmental psychology perspective.

2.5. Norm Activation Model

The NAM developed by Schwartz [45] is widely employed to understand altruistic, prosocial, and pro-environmental behavior in several fields. The NAM demonstrates that pro-environmental action is positively affected by personal norms [46]. The NAM involves the factors predicting behavior, including personal norms influencing the intention to perform environmentally friendly actions, perception of the consequences, and attributing responsibility. Pro-social and environmentally friendly action has been explained with the help of the NAM and its extended forms [47]. The NAM was expanded by Harland et al. [48] by adding more components, such as situational accountability, efficacy, ability, and need knowledge, and these components allow people to derive personal norms for pro-environmental behavior. Likewise, He and Zhan [49] expanded the NAM by adding perceived consumer effectiveness as an antecedent of personal norms. In addition, the NAM assumes that people are more likely to be green when they believe that they have a moral responsibility to act [50]. Furthermore, personal norms impact (green) behavior when provoked by situational cues [51]. Individuals must accept and take responsibility for the negative consequences of pro-environmental behavior. Previous research in the NAM literature indicates that increased attention and a sense of responsibility toward environmental issues are linked with greater belief in the benefits of such measures to mitigate such threats [52]. This view triggers personal norms, thereby leading to the strengthening of the act of enacting environmentally friendly behavior. The NAM is effective in forecasting pro-environmental behaviors, including pro-environmental policy adoption and engaging in environmental activism. Ascribed responsibility and moral norms were some of the elements of the NAM that also affected pro-environmental behavior [53]. Therefore, the NAM is thus appropriate for this study since it explains the process by which individual norms are elicited through awareness (environmental consciousness), moral duty (values), and information-driven pro-environmental conduct. In sports tourism, the NAM justifies that internalized attitudes toward sustainable practices serve as the mediator between environmental triggers and sustainable behavior. When sports tourists perceive sustainability as personally relevant and morally obligatory, their attitudes are reinforced, activating behavioral norms in line with environmentally friendly behavior. This consistency demonstrates the mediating role of attitudes, illustrating that knowledge and values alone are insufficient without activated personal norms, as postulated by the NAM framework.

3. Hypotheses Formulation

3.1. Environmental Consciousness and Sustainable Practices

Environmental consciousness refers to the psychological determinants that influence an individual’s willingness to adopt pro-environmental behavior [54]. Moreover, environmental consciousness is synonymous with an individual’s cognitive awareness, concern, and willingness to solve problems related to the environment. Environmental consciousness entails an individual’s perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge about conservation and problems related to the environment, and it is also crucial to promoting pro-environmental behaviors [55]. Research indicates that environmental consciousness and attitudes significantly influence sustainable tourism practices [56]. Similarly, tourists with higher sustainability consciousness develop positive environmental attitudes, leading to increased green purchasing intentions [57]. This consciousness promotes a stronger dedication to adopting tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices, as these individuals aspire to align their behaviors with their environmental values [58]. Therefore, this study argues that environmental consciousness encourages awareness of ecological effects, which results in sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. For instance, eco-conscious participants may attend carbon-offsetting programs and plastic-free events, increasing the demand for sustainable sports tourism activities. Thus, we develop the following hypothesis:
H1: 
Environmental consciousness positively influences tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices.

3.2. Environmental Values and Attitudes Toward Sustainable Practices

Environmental values are the perceived value that an individual feels about being important to the environment [59]. Environmental values are the basic rules and assumptions that people, societies, and communities have about the natural world [60]. These values guide how individuals relate to the environment and influence their choices in terms of environmental protection and conservation [61]. Research indicates that environmental values, assessing the significance to individuals of protecting the environment, result in enhancing tourists’ attitudes toward sustainability [35]. Therefore, this study presumes that environmental values determine individuals’ moral considerations of nature and positively influence sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainability. For example, environmentally oriented sports tourists are more likely to prioritize sustainable accommodation and low-impact transportation means during events and demonstrate pro-sustainability behavior in tourism situations as per their values. Therefore, we formulate the following hypothesis:
H2: 
Environmental values positively influence sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices.

3.3. Environmental Knowledge and Sustainable Practices

Environmental knowledge refers to the understanding and knowledge of environmental problems and the solutions that go with them [62]. Environmental knowledge is also considered a trait that differentiates individuals who are highly devoted to environmental protection from others who are less devoted [63]. An individual with good environmental knowledge would exhibit effective practices for sustainable consumption [64]. Prior studies have shown that individuals with strong environmental knowledge are more inclined to recognize the significance of sustainability and cultivate positive attitudes among tourists toward sustainable practices [55,65]. Furthermore, environmental knowledge enables individuals to make well-informed decisions that are in line with environmental values, resulting in a strong dedication to tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices [66]. Thus, we presume that environmental knowledge enhances sports tourists’ sense of the environmental effect of their activity, which enhances positive attitudes toward sustainable practices. For instance, environmentally knowledgeable tourists are likely to engage in waste reduction and carbon-offsetting activities during sporting events, valuing their role in mitigating the adverse environmental consequences. So, we propose the following hypothesis:
H3: 
Environmental knowledge positively influences sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices.

3.4. Sustainable Practices and Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior

The tourist’s attitude toward sustainable practices significantly impacts their adoption of environmentally sustainable behavior [67]. Mobilizing tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices, such as supporting ecologically conscious accommodations and minimizing waste, not only aligns with the environmentalist values of tourists but also strengthens the pro-environmental attitudes of tourists, exerting an impact on sustained environmentally friendly behavior in various contexts [68]. Previous research has shown that embracing tourists’ attitude toward sustainable practices led to a long-term commitment to being eco-friendly [69]. Furthermore, positive encounters with tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices amplify tourists’ inherent drive to engage in these behaviors and inspire others to adopt the same practices [70]. Therefore, we presume that sports tourists with positive attitudes toward sustainability may engage in environmentally friendly behavior, such as staying in green-certified accommodation or cleaning up trash around event venues. These actions demonstrate how positive attitudes are transformed into environmentally friendly actions during the sport tourism experience. Thus, we suggest the following hypothesis.
H4: 
Sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices positively influence their sustainable behavior.

3.5. The Mediating Role of Sustainable Practices

Tourists’ sustainable practice attitudes act as a mediating variable in determining the interrelation between environmental consciousness, environmental values, environmental knowledge, and their sustainable behavior. Environmental consciousness, characterized as a person’s concern and awareness toward environmental problems, naturally imitates the development of positive attitudes toward sustainability [25]. Travelers with a heightened consciousness of environmental issues are more inclined to have positive attitudes toward sustainable behavior; subsequently, this leads them to engage in activities that align with their environmental concerns [71]. In addition, the connections between such values and the perceptions of visitors toward sustainable practices are enhanced by environmental values that enable the preservation of nature [72]. Tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable behavior, such as reducing waste and patronizing ecologically certified businesses, are more likely to be adopted by ecotourists, leading to sustainable behavior [73,74]. In the same vein, sustainable tourists are likely to have attitudes toward sustainable practices; these attitudes function as a mediator between environmentally aware and environmentally responsible visitor behavior, thereby ensuring that perceived environmental sustainability and behaviors are congruent [19]. For these reasons, therefore, this study assumes that sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices are the core of converting environmental knowledge, value, and knowledge into behavioral action to encourage sustainable behavior; for example, a reusable water bottle and eco-friendly transportation are used by an environmentally conscious participant at a polo event who respects the environment and is concerned about climate change. For these reasons, we develop the following hypotheses:
H5a: 
Sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices positively mediate the link between environmental consciousness and their environmentally sustainable behavior.
H5b: 
Sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices positively mediate the link between environmental values and their environmentally sustainable behavior.
H5c: 
Sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices positively mediate the link between environmental knowledge and their environmentally sustainable behavior.
Based on the above discussion, we present the following research model (see Figure 1):

4. Methods

4.1. Sampling and Data Collection

This research focused on sports tourists who visited Gilgit-Baltistan, a mountainous region of northern Pakistan, specifically to attend traditional polo matches, a major recreational destination. Purposive sampling was employed to specifically target this subgroup since their environmental attitudes and reasons may be distinct from general tourists. Purposive sampling is regarded as the most credible sampling approach in marketing and social sciences research [75]. This approach was suitable because of the accessibility of sports tourists at designated destinations and the research aim of examining a particular population group. Data were collected using face-to-face questionnaires during April and July 2024 from prominent polo locations like Skardu, Gilgit, Hunza, Shigar, and Khaplu. Tourists were approached at the polo grounds, nearby hotels, and destinations during events. Out of 338 questionnaires distributed, 302 valid responses were utilized for the final analysis, because 36 responses were disregarded due to insufficient information. A sample size of 302 is recommended for SEM analysis. Yet, it is also important to consider the complexity of the model. All the participants were provided with enough time to complete the survey, and any questions they had were resolved during the data collection process.

4.2. Survey Development

The structured questionnaire used comprised three sections: demographic information, verification questions, and construct-related questions, followed by a short introductory statement. The constructs were assessed through a series of items on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), adapted from previously validated research. Originally, the survey was designed in English, then the questionnaire was translated into Urdu and reviewed by two bilingual professors to avoid linguistic errors and ensure conceptual relevancy. Further, verification questions were also included to ensure participant eligibility based on two exclusive inclusion criteria: (1) the respondent was not a resident of Gilgit-Baltistan, and (2) watching a polo match was a major reason for visiting. To verify this, the respondents were asked the following: (a) What brought you to Gilgit-Baltistan? and (b) Have you attended or are you attending a polo game while here? Only those respondents who replied positively proceeded with the full questionnaire, in line with the focus of this study on sports tourists.

4.3. Construct Measurement

All the measurement items used in the current study were obtained from prior well-established studies; for instance, three items on environmental consciousness from [25], three items on environmental values from [76], three items on environmental knowledge from [77], three items on tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices from [78], and four items on tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior from [79]. However, the scales employed in this study were modified from credible and cited sources related to environmental behavior, although some constructs were not originally designed for a tourism setting. They corresponded to this study’s conceptual framework and were evaluated for cultural suitability. The questionnaire was translated into Urdu and evaluated by bilingual professors to make sure of the clarity and contextual appropriateness for sports tourists visiting Gilgit-Baltistan.

4.4. Respondents’ Demographic Details

The respondents’ descriptive characteristics are reported in Table 1. Out of the 302 participants, 193 (63.9%) were men and 109 (36.1%) were women. Most respondents in this study fell between the age range of 18 to 48 years, with the biggest proportion being between 29 and 38 years old, representing 34.4% of the total. Nearly one-third of the participants consisted of 90 students (29.8%). Most of the participants had bachelor’s degrees. The high-income group consisted of 123 respondents who earned a monthly salary between USD 70.97 and USD 106.45 (see Table 1).

5. Data Analysis

PLS-SEM was used in the statistical analysis, a robust method commonly used in consumer studies [80]. PLS-SEM was especially appropriate for this study because it evaluated three direct relationships: the impact of environmental triggers (consciousness, value, and knowledge) on attitudes toward sustainable practices, the mediating impact of attitudes toward sustainable practices, and their impact on sports tourists’ sustainable behavior. This approach is ideally suited for complex models with multiple constructs, where the sample sizes are comparatively small [81]. PLS-SEM accommodates mediation analysis, and hence, direct and indirect effects can be estimated [80], which made it fit perfectly for the data analysis in this study.

5.1. Analysis of the Measurement Model

The validity and reliability of the current study’s constructs were examined using SmartPLS-4. The analysis process depends on the use of the outer loadings, which surpass a threshold of 0.70; a cutoff of 0.50 was used for the AVE, while both Cronbach’s alpha and the composite reliability were assessed using a cutoff of 0.70 as recommended in [82]. Table 2 presents the results of the current study, demonstrating that all the values met the required conditions, hence showing our construct’s reliability (see Table 2). Furthermore, the discriminant validity was evaluated using the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) and Fornell–Larcker methods. According to Sarstedt, Hair and Ringle [82], the HTMT values are deemed satisfactory if they fall below the cutoff of 0.85; all of our values fulfilled the required values, proving our study’s discriminant validity. Further, the variance inflation factor (VIF) values examine multicollinearity and common method bias (CMB) in PLS-SEM. The VIF values in PLS SEM were employed to test the presence of multicollinearity and CMB problems. Sarstedt, Hair and Ringle [82] indicate that all the data values should be below the threshold of 5 or the more conservative threshold of 3; all the resulting values are below this threshold, proving there is no sign of multicollinearity or CMB problems (see Table 2 and Table 3).

5.2. Analysis of the Structural Model

To examine the structural model, the predictive power of the model (R2 and Q2) was evaluated by employing SmartPLS, which examined the predictors. In the current study, all the R2 values were above the cutoff of 0.10 [83], including tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices with a value of 0.383, and tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior with a value of 0.354. Furthermore, the Stone–Geiser’s Q2 values for all our endogenous constructs were positive, including the tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices value of 0.367 and the tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior value of 0.365, showing the model’s high predictive power. This study’s results demonstrate that the model had a strong capability to produce precise predictions. Additionally, we calculated the effect size (f2) to measure the effect of the latent constructs on the endogenous variables, with f2 values of 0.02 and 0.15. and 0.35 are classified as small, medium, and large, as suggested in [84]. Finally, we computed the goodness of fit (GOF) to analyze the accuracy of the model’s fit. The GOF was confirmed by the obtained value of 0.495, which surpassed the previously established criterion of 0.36 [85] (see Table 4).

5.2.1. Hypothesis Testing

Table 5 and Figure 2 display the hypotheses and results of our study related to the direct and indirect effects. In this conceptual framework, we put forward a total of four direct hypotheses and three indirect hypotheses. A bootstrapping resampling method was employed to evaluate the statistical significance of the hypotheses. The process entailed 5000 resamples. The results of this study, as shown in Table 5, provide evidence that all the direct and indirect associations were supported, indicating a highly significant level of p < 0.01.

5.2.2. Direct Relationships

The result of this study showed that the associations between environmental consciousness and tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices were insignificant (β = 0.241, t = 3.923, p = 0.302), so H1 not supported. The relationships between environmental values and tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices (β = 0.182, t = 2.747, p = 0.006) and between environmental knowledge and tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices (β = 0.273, t = 3.885, p = 0.000) were found positive, supporting H2 and H3. In addition, there was a positive link between tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices and tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior (β = 0.595, t = 12.71, p = 0.000), supporting H4 (see Table 5).

5.2.3. Mediation Relationships

The findings demonstrated that there are positive indirect links between environmental consciousness -> tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices -> tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior (β = 0.144, t = 3.613, p = 0.000), environmental values -> tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices -> tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior (β = 0.108, t = 2.692, p = 0.007), and environmental knowledge -> tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices -> tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior (β = 0.162, t = 3.483, p = 0.001), supporting H5a, H5b, and H5c (see Table 5).

6. Discussion and Implications

This study aims to broaden the scope of the NAM in the realm of sustainable tourism by evaluating sports tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior. The current study empirically examines the effects of various environmental factors (such as environmental consciousness, environmental values, and environmental knowledge) that strengthen sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices, which leads to sports tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior. This study utilizes the NAM [45] to examine the compatibility of the model and evaluate the study hypotheses. Both the measurement and structural models exhibit a good fit.
Our results demonstrate that the link between environmental consciousness and sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices was found to be insignificant, which is contrary to prior studies [86,87]. This inconsistency is explained by the value–action gap and other theoretical frameworks, such as the theory of planned behavior [88], which implies that knowledge or awareness alone does not necessarily result in action. For sports tourists, environmental consciousness may not impact sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices because other factors like convenience, affordability, and rapid gratification may take priority [44]. Despite sports tourists knowing about environmental issues, their practical concern typically outweighs their environmental consciousness, resulting in a gap between their knowledge and their willingness to adopt tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices, therefore not supporting H1.
Furthermore, the results show a positive correlation between environmental values and the attitudes of sports tourists toward sustainable practices, which verifies a previous study [89]. Hansmann et al.’s [90] results showed that environmental values are a significant predictor of pro-environmental behaviors. This supports H2 and is consistent with prior research, which highlights that high environmental value tourists were most likely to be committed to promoting attitudes for sustainable practices, aligning with the work of [73], which shows that one of the key predictors of tourists’ attitudes toward green behavior is their knowledge of the environment. Frick et al. [91] found that environmental knowledge provides visitors with sufficient information for making informed choices and thus makes environmental knowledge a contributing factor toward environmentally sustainable practices. The findings of this study support H3, as the knowledge of visitors regarding the environment encourages visitors to adopt sustainable practices.
Moreover, the findings of the current research also confirm that positive sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices have a direct impact on tourists engaging in environmental behaviors, which is in line with the findings of the study by [92], stating that sports tourists who are highly interested in pro-environmental behaviors are most likely to support and engage in sustainable practices. Our results contribute to existing research, showing that improving sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainability can result in the adoption of environmentally friendly behavior, supporting H4. Additionally, this study’s results indicate that tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices serve as a mediator between environmental consciousness, environmental values, environmental knowledge, and sports tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior, consistent with the value–belief–norm theory [93]. The findings suggest that merely having knowledge and values regarding the environment is not enough; it is necessary to transform them into practical measures through the implementation of sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. Our findings indicate that it is important for the tourism industry to promote sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices to inspire environmentally friendly behavior among sport tourists, supporting H5a, H5b, and H5c.

6.1. Theoretical Implications

The findings of this study make important theoretical contributions to the NAM by expanding its core assumptions in the sports tourism setting. Traditionally, the NAM contends that pro-social and pro-environmental behaviors are driven by personal norms, which in turn are triggered by awareness of consequences and ascription of responsibility. However, the present results refute and extend this model by revealing that environmental consciousness alone does not play a significant role in shaping sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainability practices. Instead, environmental values and environmental knowledge are more influential determinants of such attitudes. This variation implies that generic environmental awareness may be insufficient to activate personal norms unless internalized as value-based concern or supported by specific knowledge.
Further, this study supports the idea that attitudes toward sustainable behaviors by sports tourists contribute significantly to influencing their sustainable behavior, thereby confirming the NAM’s core hypothesis that individual norms (as communicated via attitudes) are crucial to action and intention of behavior. The mediating role of attitude between environmental consciousness, value, knowledge, and sustainable behavior suggests a more complex activation path for personal norms, where consciousness, values, and knowledge enhance positive attitudes, which in turn find their way into sustainable action. These results contribute to the NAM by focusing on the differential impact of cognitive and affective environmental constructs on personal norm activation. In particular, the attitude’s intermediary function highlights the necessity of targeting value-based education and environmental literacy in a bid to initiate behavioral change among sports tourists. Consequently, the research not only extends the use of the NAM to sports tourism but also highlights the flexibility of the model when integrating constructs such as environmental knowledge and value, which may be more actionable in intervention designs than consciousness alone.

6.2. Practical Implications

The findings of the current study offer some practical implications for sports tourism by enhancing our understanding of sustainable behavior according to the NAM. Although the NAM implies environmental consciousness (awareness of consequences) as a factor in the activation of personal norms and pro-environmental conduct, the results of the present study indicate that environmental consciousness alone does not significantly influence the attitudes of sports tourists toward sustainable activities. This suggests that awareness creation activities, even though important, may not be adequate in the context of sports tourism. Instead, values and knowledge regarding the environment emerge as important predictors of positive attitudes toward sustainable practices. This highlights the necessity of integrating value-based and knowledge-based interventions with sports tourism activities. For example, organizers of polo or eco-friendly sports may incorporate educational briefings, green equipment promotion, or guided tours to incorporate local biodiversity and conservation efforts. These strategies can help inculcate sustainability as a source of value among tourists, thus enabling them to take part in experiences more meaningfully.
Furthermore, this study finds that sports tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices directly influence their behavior and mediate the effect between environmental triggers and behavior. The significance of focusing on changing positive attitudes to impact behavior is reinforced. For instance, sports tourism operators in Gilgit-Baltistan can offer sports tourists a reward or some form of praise for exhibiting sustainable behaviors (such as the use of refillable bottles, proper waste disposal, or environmentally friendly transportation). These behaviors can reinforce positive attitudes and stimulate personal norms in favor of environmental stewardship. Finally, this research motivates stakeholders to move beyond prevailing awareness programs and instead embrace context-specific, value-based, and knowledge-intensive programs that tap into sports tourists’ motivations. Through this process, the sports tourism sector can more effectively stimulate moral obligations and promote sustainable, long-term conduct in alignment with the principles of the NAM in real-life settings.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

The current study has many limitations that future research can address. First, the dependence on self-reported data involves the potential for social desirability bias, where respondents may exaggerate their environmentally friendly behaviors. To validate the self-reported data, future research should incorporate observational data and experimental designs. Second, this research’s cross-sectional structure limits the capacity to establish a causal relationship between environmental consciousness, environmental values, environmental knowledge, and tourists’ attitudes toward sustainable practices. Longitudinal studies are suggested to examine the development of these links across time. Third, this study limits its geographical scope, which hinders the capacity to apply the findings to diverse cultural and regional situations. Future research should evaluate these relationships in diverse populations for wider relevance. Fourth, the sample in this study exhibited a majority of men (63.9%), which constrains the generalizability; future research should incorporate an equitable number of male and female participants. Fifth, the usage of purposive sampling may result in bias. Future studies may employ random sampling to improve the generalizability among various tourist demographics. Finally, this study overlooks a relevant moderator, including demographic variables or personal experiences, which may impact the magnitude of these relationships. Future studies should explore these moderating relationships for an in-depth analysis and enhanced understanding of sustainable tourism behaviors.

Author Contributions

W.Y. and A.B.: writing and draft preparation; validation and data analysis: S.H.M. and A.A.; supervision: A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

No funding has been received for this research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study adhered to ethical protocols approved by the Ethical Governance Committee for Science and Technology (EGCST), Food and Nutrition Society, Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan (FNSGB) (Registered Act. 1860). The approval number is (FNSGB-116-004).

Informed Consent Statement

Written informed consent has been obtained from the participants to publish this paper.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the authors for their contributions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Xu, F.; Huang, L.; Whitmarsh, L. Home and away: Cross-contextual consistency in tourists’ pro-environmental behavior. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 1443–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hopkins, D. Sustainable mobility at the interface of transport and tourism: Introduction to the special issue on ‘Innovative approaches to the study and practice of sustainable transport, mobility and tourism’. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 129–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bhutto, T.A.; Farooq, R.; Talwar, S.; Awan, U.; Dhir, A. Green inclusive leadership and green creativity in the tourism and hospitality sector: Serial mediation of green psychological climate and work engagement. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1716–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lee, T.H.; Jan, F.-H.; Yang, C.-C. Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the perspective of community-based tourists. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 454–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gössling, S.; Scott, D.; Hall, C.M. Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 29, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dodds, R.; Butler, R. The phenomena of overtourism: A review. Int. J. Tour. Cities 2019, 5, 519–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bertocchi, D.; Camatti, N.; Giove, S.; van Der Borg, J. Venice and overtourism: Simulating sustainable development scenarios through a tourism carrying capacity model. Sustainability 2020, 12, 512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Koh, E.; Fakfare, P. Overcoming “over-tourism”: The closure of Maya Bay. Int. J. Tour. Cities 2020, 6, 279–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kapoor, S.; Wangdus, J. Impact of overtourism on sustainable development and local community wellbeing in the Himalayan region. Int. J. Leis. Tour. Mark. 2022, 7, 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Miller, D.; Merrilees, B.; Coghlan, A. Sustainable urban tourism: Understanding and developing visitor pro-environmental behaviours. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 26–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Streimikiene, D.; Svagzdiene, B.; Jasinskas, E.; Simanavicius, A. Sustainable tourism development and competitiveness: The systematic literature review. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 29, 259–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mazza, B. A theoretical model of strategic communication for the sustainable development of sport tourism. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Qasim, M.; Ahmed, Z. Adventure Tourism in Gilgit Baltistan Region: Opportunities, Trends and Destinations. Ann. Hum. Soc. Sci. 2022, 3, 44–54. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ali, A. Estimating the recreational value of mountain tourism to shape sustainable development in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 426, 138990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Morfoulaki, M.; Myrovali, G.; Kotoula, K.-M.; Karagiorgos, T.; Alexandris, K. Sport tourism as driving force for destinations’ sustainability. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shahzeidi, M.; Moghimehfar, F. Environmental Aspects of Sport Tourism and Recreation. In International Perspectives in Sport Tourism Management; Routledge: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2024; pp. 46–57. [Google Scholar]
  17. Arshad, M.I.; Iqbal, M.A.; Shahbaz, M. Pakistan tourism industry and challenges: A review. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2018, 23, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aziz, K.Z. CPEC issues and threatening cultural diversity in Gilgit-Baltistan. J. Punjab Univ. Hist. Soc. 2021, 34, 10. [Google Scholar]
  19. Passafaro, P. Attitudes and tourists’ sustainable behavior: An overview of the literature and discussion of some theoretical and methodological issues. J. Travel Res. 2020, 59, 579–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jang, Y.J.; Kim, W.G.; Lee, H.Y. Coffee shop consumers’ emotional attachment and loyalty to green stores: The moderating role of green consciousness. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 44, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Motamedi-Barabadi, S.; Almeida-García, F.; Cortés-Macías, R. Influence of environmental attitudes in Iranian ecotourist behaviour. Cuad. Tur. 2023, 52, 285–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Biswas, S.R.; Uddin, M.A.; Bhattacharjee, S.; Dey, M.; Rana, T. Ecocentric leadership and voluntary environmental behavior for promoting sustainability strategy: The role of psychological green climate. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 1705–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Murtaza, S.H.; Khan, A.; Mustafa, S.M. Eco-centric success: Stakeholder approaches to sustainable performance via green improvisation behavior and environmental orientation in the hotel industry. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024, 33, 7273–7286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Holden, A. Tourism and the green economy: A place for an environmental ethic? Tour. Recreat. Res. 2013, 38, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Khan, A.N. Elucidating the effects of environmental consciousness and environmental attitude on green travel behavior: Moderating role of green self-efficacy. Sustain. Dev. 2024, 32, 2223–2232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Beall, J.M.; Boley, B.B.; Landon, A.C.; Woosnam, K.M. What drives ecotourism: Environmental values or symbolic conspicuous consumption? J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1215–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ribeiro, M.A.; Seyfi, S.; Elhoushy, S.; Woosnam, K.M.; Patwardhan, V. Determinants of generation Z pro-environmental travel behaviour: The moderating role of green consumption values. J. Sustain. Tour. 2023, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Godinho Filho, M.; Gonella, J.d.S.L.; Latan, H.; Ganga, G.M.D. Awareness as a catalyst for sustainable behaviors: A theoretical exploration of planned behavior and value-belief-norms in the circular economy. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 368, 122181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Deplazes-Zemp, A. Beyond intrinsic and instrumental: Third-category value in environmental ethics and environmental policy. Ethics Policy Environ. 2024, 27, 166–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lin, Z.C.; Wong, I.A.; Wu, S. The rising environmentalists: Fostering environmental goal attainment through volunteer tourism. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2023, 55, 482–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Venugopal, K.; Ranganath, N.S. Eco-Conscious Travellers: Preferences and Perceptions of Homestay Accommodations. In Global Practices and Innovations in Sustainable Homestay Tourism; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2025; p. 203. [Google Scholar]
  32. Fawehinmi, O.; Yusliza, M.Y.; Mohamad, Z.; Noor Faezah, J.; Muhammad, Z. Assessing the green behaviour of academics: The role of green human resource management and environmental knowledge. Int. J. Manpow. 2020, 41, 879–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Komolafe, A.A.; Adegboyega, S.A.-A.; Anifowose, A.Y.; Akinluyi, F.O.; Awoniran, D.R. Air pollution and climate change in Lagos, Nigeria: Needs for proactive approaches to risk management and adaptation. Am. J. Environ. Sci. 2014, 10, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dolnicar, S.; Crouch, G.I.; Long, P. Environment-friendly tourists: What do we really know about them? J. Sustain. Tour. 2008, 16, 197–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Han, H. Consumer behavior and environmental sustainability in tourism and hospitality: A review of theories, concepts, and latest research. Sustain. Consum. Behav. Environ. 2021, 29, 1021–1042. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hassan, T.H.; Fazia, C.; Abdelmoaty, M.A.; Bekzot, J.; Gozner, M.; Almakhayitah, M.Y.; Saleh, M.I.; Aleedan, M.H.; Abdou, A.H.; Salem, A.E. Sustainable pathways: Understanding the interplay of environmental behavior, personal values, and tourist outcomes in farm tourism. Discov. Sustain. 2024, 5, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Meng, B.; Lee, M.J.; Chua, B.-L.; Han, H. An integrated framework of behavioral reasoning theory, theory of planned behavior, moral norm and emotions for fostering hospitality/tourism employees’ sustainable behaviors. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2022, 34, 4516–4538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yadav, R.; Pathak, G.S. Determinants of consumers’ green purchase behavior in a developing nation: Applying and extending the theory of planned behavior. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 134, 114–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Denley, T.J.; Woosnam, K.M.; Ribeiro, M.A.; Boley, B.B.; Hehir, C.; Abrams, J. Individuals’ intentions to engage in last chance tourism: Applying the value-belief-norm model. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 1860–1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, C.; Zhang, J.; Cao, J.; Duan, X.; Hu, Q. The impact of behavioral reference on tourists’ responsible environmental behaviors. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 694, 133698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Juvan, E.; Dolnicar, S. Drivers of pro-environmental tourist behaviours are not universal. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 166, 879–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Panda, T.K.; Kumar, A.; Jakhar, S.; Luthra, S.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Kazancoglu, I.; Nayak, S.S. Social and environmental sustainability model on consumers’ altruism, green purchase intention, green brand loyalty and evangelism. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 243, 118575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Dolnicar, S. Designing for more environmentally friendly tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020, 84, 102933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Juvan, E.; Dolnicar, S. The attitude–behaviour gap in sustainable tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2014, 48, 76–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Schwartz, S.H. Normative influences on altruism. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1977; Volume 10, pp. 221–279. [Google Scholar]
  46. Schwartz, S.H.; Howard, J.A. A normative decision-making model of altruism. In Altruism and Helping Behavior: Social, Personality, and Developmental Perspectives; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1981; pp. 189–211. [Google Scholar]
  47. Jhawar, A.; Kumar, P.; Israel, D. Impact of materialism on tourists’ green purchase behavior: Extended norm activation model perspective. J. Vacat. Mark. 2023, 30, 841–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Harland, P.; Staats, H.; Wilke, H.A. Situational and personality factors as direct or personal norm mediated predictors of pro-environmental behavior: Questions derived from norm-activation theory. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 29, 323–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. He, X.; Zhan, W. How to activate moral norm to adopt electric vehicles in China? An empirical study based on extended norm activation theory. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 3546–3556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ritchie, B.W.; Prideaux, B.; Thompson, M.; Demeter, C. Understanding tourists’ attitudes toward interventions for the Great Barrier Reef: An extension of the norm activation model. J. Sustain. Tour. 2022, 30, 1364–1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Meng, B.; Chua, B.-L.; Ryu, H.B.; Han, H. Volunteer tourism (VT) traveler behavior: Merging norm activation model and theory of planned behavior. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 1947–1969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Manosuthi, N.; Lee, J.-S.; Han, H. Predicting the revisit intention of volunteer tourists using the merged model between the theory of planned behavior and norm activation model. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2020, 37, 510–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gadenne, D.L.; Kennedy, J.; McKeiver, C. An empirical study of environmental awareness and practices in SMEs. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 84, 45–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shah, S.H.A.; Al-Ghazali, B.M.; Bhatti, S.; Aman, N.; Fahlevi, M.; Aljuaid, M.; Hasan, F. The impact of Perceived CSR on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors: The mediating effects of environmental consciousness and environmental commitment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zeng, Z.; Zhong, W.; Naz, S. Can environmental knowledge and risk perception make a difference? The role of environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior in fostering sustainable consumption behavior. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Demir, M.; Rjoub, H.; Yesiltas, M. Environmental awareness and guests’ intention to visit green hotels: The mediation role of consumption values. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gulzar, Y.; Eksili, N.; Koksal, K.; Celik Caylak, P.; Mir, M.S.; Soomro, A.B. Who Is Buying Green Products? The Roles of Sustainability Consciousness, Environmental Attitude, and Ecotourism Experience in Green Purchasing Intention at Tourism Destinations. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ashraf, S.; Ali, S.Z.; Khan, T.I.; Azam, K.; Afridi, S.A. Fostering sustainable tourism in Pakistan: Exploring the influence of environmental leadership on employees’ green behavior. Bus. Strategy Dev. 2024, 7, e328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Tamar, M.; Wirawan, H.; Arfah, T.; Putri, R.P.S. Predicting pro-environmental behaviours: The role of environmental values, attitudes and knowledge. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2021, 32, 328–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Cuadrado, E.; Macias-Zambrano, L.; Carpio, A.J.; Tabernero, C. The moderating effect of collective efficacy on the relationship between environmental values and ecological behaviors. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 24, 4175–4202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Andrade, R.; van Riper, C.J.; Goodson, D.; Johnson, D.N.; Stewart, W. Learning pathways for engagement: Understanding drivers of pro-environmental behavior in the context of protected area management. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 323, 116204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Solekah, N.A.; Handriana, T.; Usman, I. Environmental sustainability in Muslim-friendly tourism: Evaluating the influence of Schwartz’s basic value theory on tourist behaviour in Indonesia. Oppor. Chall. Sustain. (OCS) 2023, 2, 172–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yusuf, R.; Fajri, I. Differences in behavior, engagement and environmental knowledge on waste management for science and social students through the campus program. Heliyon 2022, 8, e08912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Farrukh, M.; Ansari, N.; Raza, A.; Wu, Y.; Wang, H. Fostering employee’s pro-environmental behavior through green transformational leadership, green human resource management and environmental knowledge. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2022, 179, 121643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Raza, S.A.; Khan, K.A. Impact of green human resource practices on hotel environmental performance: The moderating effect of environmental knowledge and individual green values. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2022, 34, 2154–2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Yu, T.-Y.; Liu, C.-H.; Horng, J.-S.; Chou, S.-F.; Ng, Y.-L.; Lin, J.-Y. Integrating the critical concepts of sustainability to predict sustainable behavior–the moderating role of information seeking. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Adeel, H.B.; Sabir, R.I.; Shahnawaz, M.; Zafran, M. Adoption of environmental technologies in the hotel industry: Development of sustainable intelligence and pro-environmental behavior. Discov. Sustain. 2024, 5, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Fichter, T.; Martín, J.C.; Román, C. Young Segment Attitudes towards the Environment and Their Impact on Preferences for Sustainable Tourism Products. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ferdian, F.; Zahari, M.S.M.; Abrian, Y.; Wulansari, N.; Azwar, H.; Adrian, A.; Putra, T.; Wulandari, D.P.; Suyuthie, H.; Pasaribu, P. Driving Sustainable Tourism Villages: Evaluating Stakeholder Commitment, Attitude, and Performance: Evidence from West Sumatra, Indonesia. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Cheng, P.; Wang, W.; Yang, S. Doing the right thing: How to persuade travelers to adopt pro-environmental behaviors? An elaboration likelihood model perspective. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2024, 59, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Sharmin, F.; Sultan, M.T.; Badulescu, A.; Bac, D.P.; Li, B. Millennial tourists’ environmentally sustainable behavior towards a natural protected area: An integrative framework. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ahsan, M.J.; Ishaq, M.I.; Raza, A.; Talpur, Q.u.a. Let leaders permit nature! Role of employee engagement, environmental values, and sustainable behavioral intentions. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024, 33, 7905–7921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Mazhenova, S.; Choi, J.-g.; Chung, J. International tourists’ awareness and attitude about environmental responsibility and sustainable practices. Glob. Bus. Financ. Rev. 2016, 21, 132–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hosta, M.; Zabkar, V. Antecedents of environmentally and socially responsible sustainable consumer behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 2021, 171, 273–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Campbell, S.; Greenwood, M.; Prior, S.; Shearer, T.; Walkem, K.; Young, S.; Bywaters, D.; Walker, K. Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. J. Res. Nurs. 2020, 25, 652–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Qazi, W.; Qureshi, J.A.; Raza, S.A.; Khan, K.A.; Qureshi, M.A. Impact of personality traits and university green entrepreneurial support on students’ green entrepreneurial intentions: The moderating role of environmental values. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 2020, 13, 1154–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kim, M.-S.; Stepchenkova, S. Altruistic values and environmental knowledge as triggers of pro-environmental behavior among tourists. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 1575–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Afroz, N.; Ilham, Z. Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice of University Students towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). J. Indones. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2020, 1, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ren, J.; Su, K.; Chang, Y.; Wen, Y. Formation of environmentally friendly tourist behaviors in ecotourism destinations in China. Forests 2021, 12, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Guenther, P.; Guenther, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Zaefarian, G.; Cartwright, S. Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2023, 111, 127–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Hair, J.; Alamer, A. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Res. Methods Appl. Linguist. 2022, 1, 100027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sarstedt, M.; Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M. “PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet”–retrospective observations and recent advances. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2023, 31, 261–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Falk, R.F.; Miller, N.B. A Primer For Soft Modeling; University of Akron Press: Akron, OH, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  84. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  85. Wetzels, M.; Odekerken-Schröder, G.; Van Oppen, C. Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Q. 2009, 33, 177–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Mataracı, P.; Kurtuluş, S. Sustainable marketing: The effects of environmental consciousness, lifestyle and involvement degree on environmentally friendly purchasing behavior. J. Glob. Sch. Mark. Sci. 2020, 30, 304–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Martínez García de Leaniz, P.; Herrero Crespo, A.; Gómez López, R. Customer responses to environmentally certified hotels: The moderating effect of environmental consciousness on the formation of behavioral intentions. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 1160–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Hedlund, T. The impact of values, environmental concern, and willingness to accept economic sacrifices to protect the environment on tourists’ intentions to buy ecologically sustainable tourism alternatives. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2011, 11, 278–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Hansmann, R.; Laurenti, R.; Mehdi, T.; Binder, C.R. Determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A comparison of university students and staff from diverse faculties at a Swiss University. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 121864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Frick, J.; Kaiser, F.G.; Wilson, M. Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: Exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2004, 37, 1597–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lee, W.H.; Moscardo, G. Understanding the impact of ecotourism resort experiences on tourists’ environmental attitudes and behavioural intentions. J. Sustain. Tour. 2005, 13, 546–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1999, 6, 81–97. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 17 04291 g001
Figure 1. Conceptual framework. Source: Authors.
Figure 1. Conceptual framework. Source: Authors.
Sustainability 17 04291 g001
Sustainability 17 04291 g002
Figure 2. Path coefficient values. Source: Authors.
Figure 2. Path coefficient values. Source: Authors.
Sustainability 17 04291 g002
Table 1. Respondents’ characteristics.
Table 1. Respondents’ characteristics.
VariablesFrequency%
Total number of respondents302100
Gender
Male19363.9
Female10936.1
Age group
18 to 2810735.5
29 to 3811939.4
39 to 486521.5
Above 48113.6
Educational level
High school graduate or below144.6
Technical/vocational school graduate3310.9
Bachelor’s degree17959.2
Master’s degree or higher7625.1
Monthly household income
Less than USD 70.97196.2
USD 70.97–106.4512340.7
USD 106.45–141.936320.8
USD 141.93–177.41258.2
Above USD 177.417223.8
Occupation
  Student9029.8
  Government employee7825.8
  Private employee6120.2
  Entrepreneur7324.2
Note: USD = United States Dollar. Source: Authors.
Table 2. Measurement model for the reliability and validity analysis results.
Table 2. Measurement model for the reliability and validity analysis results.
ConstructsFLVIFAlphaCRAVE
ASTP 0.720.840.64
ATSP10.832.17
ATSP20.852.23
ATSP30.711.14
ENCN 0.810.880.72
ENCN10.862.70
ENCN20.822.42
ENCN30.861.46
ENKL 0.890.930.82
ENKL10.882.15
ENKL20.923.38
ENKL30.923.27
ENVS 0.840.900.76
ENVS10.872.23
ENVS20.862.14
ENVS30.881.81
TEFB 0.700.810.52
TEFB10.701.29
TEFB20.741.32
TEFB30.721.29
TEFB40.711.30
Note 1: FL = factor loadings; alpha = Cronbach’s alpha; CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted; VIF = variance inflation factor. Note 2: items are dropped due to a factor loading less than 0.60. Source: Authors.
Table 3. Discriminant validities and reliabilities of the research.
Table 3. Discriminant validities and reliabilities of the research.
Heterotrait–Monotrait (HTMT) RatioFornell and Larcker Method
VariablesATSPENCNENKLENVSTEFBVariablesATSPENCNENKLENVSTEFB
ATSP ATSP0.804
ENCN0.676 ENCN0.5580.850
ENKL0.6840.741 ENKL0.5540.6720.909
ENVS0.6720.8470.737 ENVS0.5370.7300.6550.872
TEFB0.8340.7730.8080.738 TEFB0.5950.6150.6340.5800.721
ATSP = attitude toward sustainable practices; ENCN = environmental consciousness; ENKL = environmental knowledge; ENVS = environmental values; TEFB = tourists’ environmentally friendly behavior. Source: Authors.
Table 4. Model fit, R2, Q2, and f2.
Table 4. Model fit, R2, Q2, and f2.
VariablesR2Q2Model Fit Variablesf2
ATSP0.3810.367SRMR0.910ATSP -> TEFB0.54
TEFB0.3560.365NFI0.748ENCN -> ATSP0.38
GOF0.495ENKL -> ATSP0.59
ENVS -> ATSP0.22
Source: Authors.
Table 5. Path coefficient results.
Table 5. Path coefficient results.
HypothesesBetaT Valuesp ValuesDecision
Direct Relationships
H1    ENCN -> ATSP0.2413.9230.302Not Supported
H2    ENVS -> ATSP0.1822.7470.006Supported
H3    ENKL -> ATSP0.2733.8850.000Supported
H4    ATSP -> TEFB0.59512.710.000Supported
Indirect Relationships
H5a  ENCN -> ATSP -> TEFB0.1443.6130.000Supported
H5b  ENVS -> ATSP -> TEFB0.1082.6920.007Supported
H5c  ENKL -> ATSP -> TEFB0.1623.4830.001Supported
ATSP = attitude towards sustainable practices; ENCN = environmental consciousness; ENKL = environmental knowledge; ENVS = environmental values; TEFB = tourists’ environmentally friendly behavior. Source: Authors.
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

Ying, W.; Bostani, A.; Murtaza, S.H.; Ali, A. Harnessing Environmental Triggers to Shape Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior: Evidence from Gilgit-Baltistan. Sustainability 2025, 17, 4291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104291

AMA Style

Ying W, Bostani A, Murtaza SH, Ali A. Harnessing Environmental Triggers to Shape Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior: Evidence from Gilgit-Baltistan. Sustainability. 2025; 17(10):4291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104291

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ying, Wang, Ahmed Bostani, Syed Hussain Murtaza, and Anwar Ali. 2025. "Harnessing Environmental Triggers to Shape Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior: Evidence from Gilgit-Baltistan" Sustainability 17, no. 10: 4291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104291

APA Style

Ying, W., Bostani, A., Murtaza, S. H., & Ali, A. (2025). Harnessing Environmental Triggers to Shape Sports Tourists’ Sustainable Behavior: Evidence from Gilgit-Baltistan. Sustainability, 17(10), 4291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104291

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