Exploring the Tourism Development Potential and Distinctive Features of Traditional Wooden Architecture in Central Hunan: A Case Study of 18 Villages

Abstract

Timber-adorned and rich in heritage, the traditional villages of central Hunan are famed for their wooden architecture, which is both a cornerstone of their cultural identity and a key driver of local tourism. The aim of this study is to evaluate the tourism development level and current status of these villages, providing insights for the enhancement and sustainability of tourism in similar ethnic settlements. This paper scrutinizes 18 villages in central Hunan, considering their resources, development context, and market conditions. A factor analysis-based evaluation system with 30 indicators was developed to assess tourism development potential. The findings indicate that the villages’ potential can be divided into high, medium, and low tiers. Tourism conditions are identified as the main stimulant for regional tourism growth. High-potential villages are scattered, with Da’an Village standing out due to its excellent transportation links; others are clustered in burgeoning tourism areas, notably around the Ziqujie terrace tourism district and Anhua County. Medium-potential villages are largely found in the Daxiong Mountain region, while low-potential villages lack a discernible distribution pattern. In light of these insights, this paper proposes development strategies tailored to the potential of each village, aimed at boosting tourism in central Hunan’s traditional villages and securing their long-term sustainable development.

1. Introduction

1.1. Research Background

With the vigorous development of the national economy and the significant improvement of residents’ income level, the tourism consumption mode is undergoing a profound change [1]. Tourism has played an increasingly prominent role in promoting economic growth, social progress, cultural prosperity, and ecological protection, showing a strong momentum of development [2]. This study aimed to further explore this potential of traditional villages in central Hunan. Existing studies extensively explore the role of rural tourism in economic development, emphasizing its potential in promoting local economic growth and creating creation [2,3,4]. For example, Lin et al. [1] recorded the evolution process of rural tourism in China, pointing out its transition from the initial stage to the mass tourism stage. Similarly, Pratt [2] emphasized the importance of rural tourism in promoting regional economic growth and social progress. However, these studies focused on short-term economic gains and focused less attention on the long-term sustainability of rural tourism development and the protection of cultural heritage. In recent years, in the face of the high pressure and fast pace of urban life, people are increasingly eager to escape from the hustle and bustle and seek a peaceful and comfortable rural environment [5]. At the same time, with the change in consumption concept, people are no longer only satisfied with the traditional basic needs of life but are beginning to pursue a higher quality of leisure experience [6]. Rural tourism, with its convenient travel conditions, affordable costs, and low travel preparation requirements, has gradually become one of the preferred travel modes for urban people [7]. Driven by the national rural revitalization strategy, rural tourism has become a key force to promote the economic and social development of rural areas by virtue of its rapid effect speed, wide coverage, and small environmental impact [3]. As a new engine of rural development under the new normal, rural tourism is not only the theoretical starting point to realize the rural revitalization strategy and the new rural construction but also an important breakthrough to realize the goal of the new socialist countryside. It is also an important way to solve the urban–rural dual structure and promote the integrated development of urban and rural areas [4]. Guided by sustainable tourism principles, rural tourism can promote the rational flow and optimal allocation of urban–rural resources, ensuring environmental protection and cultural heritage preservation. This supports coordinated urban–rural development and common prosperity, while maintaining economic viability, social benefits, and environmental sustainability [8].

Against the backdrop of rapidly evolving rural tourism, stark differences emerge when comparing China’s and the West’s development and maturity in this sector. Since the mid-1980s, China’s rural tourism has progressed through four distinct stages: startup, development, expansion, and upgrading. In 2016, it entered an era of mass tourism, with 1.36 billion visitors, marking it as one of the fastest-growing tourism sectors [9,10]. Zhejiang province has been identified as the most advanced in rural tourism development, featuring sophisticated version 3.0 vacation products such as boutique home stays and rural resort towns. Despite the theoretical emphasis on humanized service in China’s rural tourism, implementation often falls short, with a tendency towards utilitarian and disposable consumption. Additionally, tourism products and services face issues of uniformity and homogenization. China’s rural tourism is characterized by government-led simplification in operation and management [11]. In contrast, Western rural tourism has seen traditional development from the 19th century to the 1930s, with a rapid rise in modern rural tourism post-World War II. These countries prioritize humanization and refined service, with many achieving high levels of informatization and superior rural facilities. Western countries place a strong emphasis on developing and providing unique tourism products and services, integrating local culture and customs into the essence of rural tourism [12]. Foreign rural tourism also highlights cooperation among various entities, including governments, industry associations, enterprises, non-profit organizations, and communities, resulting in a diversified operation and management model [13]. Spain, for instance, focuses on preserving traditional landscapes and buildings to attract tourists and ensure sustainable development, while France regulates the quality of rural tourism and protects rural characteristics [14]. Overall, Western countries prioritize the protection of traditional culture and the environment, the provision of distinctive services, and the diversification of operation and management.

The differences between rural tourism development in China and the West are mainly reflected in three aspects: cultural background, development mode, and policy environment. In terms of cultural background, Western rural tourism often focuses on protecting and utilizing natural landscapes, emphasizing interactive experiences between tourists and nature. In contrast, China’s rural tourism not only includes natural landscapes but also rich traditional culture and historical heritage, such as traditional architecture and folk culture. These cultural elements are key attractions in China’s rural tourism but also require protection and inheritance during development. Regarding development modes, Western rural tourism is relatively mature, with a focus on brand building and market segmentation. It offers diverse tourism products and services to meet different tourist needs. In comparison, China’s rural tourism initially relied more on government policy support and capital investment, with a lower degree of marketization. However, China has recently been exploring diversified business models, such as “company + peasant household” and “cooperative + peasant household”, to enhance the economic and social benefits of rural tourism. In terms of policy environment, the Chinese government has implemented a series of policies to support rural tourism, including rural revitalization and tourism-based poverty alleviation. These policies provide a strong foundation for rural tourism development. In Western countries, rural tourism development relies more on market mechanisms and private forces, with a relatively limited government role. These differences significantly impact rural tourism strategies in China. For example, in tourism product development, China needs to focus more on exploring and displaying cultural connotations through activities such as cultural experiences and traditional handicraft displays. In marketing, China’s rural tourism needs to strengthen brand building and improve market awareness and competitiveness. Additionally, attention must be paid to improving tourism infrastructure to enhance the overall tourist experience.

At present, China’s rural tourism is generally facing the following prominent problems: First, the management and service level of rural tourism urgently needs to be improved. Although rural landscape is an important factor to attract tourists, some villages overemphasize landscape construction [15] while ignoring the actual experience of tourists [10]. At the same time, due to the lack of business management and standardized service training for villagers, the awareness of tourism service is not strong, which further affects the satisfaction of tourists [16]. Secondly, the development model of rural tourism has led to a homogenization of competition. The indiscriminate expansion of rural tourism, primarily in the form of “farmhouse music”, has resulted in a glut in the market. This is due to a superficial approach that fails to delve into the unique characteristics and cultural depth of each village, leading to a monotonous landscape where “thousands of villages look alike” [17]. In response, the Key Points of Rural Industry Work in 2021 specifically advocates for a diversified rural development strategy, emphasizing the creation of distinct profiles such as “one village, one product”, “one town, one specialty”, “one county, one industry”, and “one industry, one province”. Lastly, poorly conceived development plans can easily result in the degradation of the rural tourism landscape. The absence of effective guidance in rural tourism planning, coupled with substandard health conditions, inadequate tourism infrastructure, insufficient environmental protection measures, and the overdevelopment of surrounding landscapes, can lead to a disconnect between villages and their natural surroundings. This not only harms the rural landscape but also impedes the sustainable growth of rural tourism.

In light of these issues, it is imperative to conduct an objective assessment of the current state of rural tourism development [18]. Such evaluations encompass a broad spectrum of content and employ a variety of flexible and diverse methods. They should be able to provide a macro-level overview while also delving into the micro-level specifics of rural tourism, such as the development of tourism resources, the benefits of tourism in poverty alleviation, and the quality of health services [19]. These studies are crucial for addressing the pressing challenges faced by rural tourism. As rural tourism continues to evolve and innovate, new challenges arise, necessitating that scholars regularly update the evaluation indicators and content to meet the evolving demands of our times. They must develop new theoretical frameworks and strategies to guide the industry forward. Rural tourism has significantly driven economic growth and social development, but its impact on the local ecosystem, resource management, and long-term sustainability is also notable. In areas with traditional timber structures, urgent issues such as deforestation, conservation efforts, and sustainable building practices need to be explored. These issues will be analyzed in detail in the following sections, with corresponding strategies proposed.

Despite existing contributions, prior studies have limitations, often focusing on specific regions or using qualitative methods without comprehensive quantitative assessments. Additionally, the relationship between traditional timber architecture and sustainable rural tourism remains underexplored. This study addresses these gaps by developing a factor analysis-based evaluation system for traditional villages in central Hunan. It provides a quantitative assessment of rural tourism potential while integrating cultural heritage protection into the framework, offering a new perspective for sustainable rural tourism development.

1.2. Research Status

Crafting an evaluation index system for rural tourism development is crucial for precisely identifying and leveraging the unique rural characteristics, as well as for fostering the high-quality, distinctive development of traditional village tourism tailored to local conditions. Prior research has identified the development characteristics of village tourism as primarily encompassing the dimensions of stakeholders, resources, market, and development strategies. Firstly, regarding stakeholder characteristics, the tourists themselves, as the catalysts and participants in the village tourism development, hold the potential for value creation [20]. The engagement of villagers in collective actions is pivotal to enhancing governance efficiency and achieving positive outcomes [21]. The development initiatives of the primary stakeholders may, however, pose challenges to the sustainable development of village tourism [22]. Conversely, government efforts to facilitate capital investment are vital for ensuring the socio-economic progress of villages [23]. Secondly, resource characteristics are vital. The deep integration and development of village cultural tourism resources are essential for the comprehensive revitalization of rural areas [24]. Ecological tourism is not just about enhancing the tourist experience; it also significantly impacts the conservation of local ecological resources and cultural heritage [25]. The optimization of the spatial distribution of building resources and the strategic organization of construction provide a cultural, material, and spatial foundation for village revitalization [26]. Thirdly, market characteristics are significant. A sustainable livelihood market is a key indicator of village revitalization and sustainable development [27]. Employing service design principles and methods can enhance the village tourism service market and improve the quality of service experiences [28]. Building on the practical foundations of agricultural industrialization, it is possible to stimulate innovation in village tourism marketing models and harness the power of industry integration [29]. Lastly, development characteristics are essential. Cultural development is a critical pathway for advancing the implementation of the village revitalization strategy, integrating urban and rural development, and achieving common prosperity [30]. Digital development enables the high-quality progression of village tourism and provides a scientific basis for the development of village natural and cultural characteristics [31]. Developing the ecological development on the basis of village natural customs and cultural customs plays a significant role in fully tapping the potential of rural economic development [32]. Developing a leisure industry in villages with resource conditions is an important development path combined with the implementation of a village revitalization strategy [33].

Contrasting with the typical masonry constructions found in Western villages [34], Chinese wooden residential buildings are not only emblematic of the essence of traditional Chinese architecture but also serve as vivid conduits for cultural heritage [35]. Hunan province, a gem nestled in the heart of China, boasts abundant ethnic diversity and a dynamic geological landscape. This rich natural and cultural tapestry has given rise to a plethora of wooden architectural masterpieces in central Hunan, which have become the shining jewels of Chinese traditional wooden residential structures [36]. However, as urban–rural integration and rural tourism continue to progress [37], traditional villages in central Hunan are confronted with significant challenges. These include the gradual vanishing of traditional buildings and a dwindling supply of timber resources. These issues not only impact the local tourism development environment but also exacerbate the imbalance in tourism and contribute to a chaotic market environment [38]. Meishan culture, a beacon of central Hunan’s cultural identity, with its distinctive traditional architecture, is likewise facing these challenges. Addressing these problems, the task at hand has become one of utmost urgency: to achieve comprehensive regional planning and coordinated development to bolster the market competitiveness of this cultural heritage.

This study, initiated in December 2022, involved the design of a detailed protocol and questionnaire. The survey, conducted in 2023, is elaborated upon in subsequent chapters (specific timing and content are detailed therein). Data analysis was undertaken from September to October of that year, followed by the drafting of this paper from November to December. Subsequent to the review feedback, this paper underwent revision and review from July to August 2024. This structured research process ensures a comprehensive assessment of the tourism development potential of traditional villages constructed with wood.

Based on the above background and status quo, this study presents the following research questions and hypotheses:

Question:

1. How to improve the management level and service quality of rural tourism to enhance the tourist experience?

2. How to realize the characteristic development of rural tourism to avoid homogeneous competition?

3. How to promote the integration of rural tourism and rural revitalization on the basis of protecting traditional architecture and cultural heritage?

4. How to achieve the sustainable development of rural tourism through scientific planning?

Hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1. 

Constructing a scientific evaluation index system can effectively improve the management level and service quality of rural tourism.

Hypothesis 2. 

The introduction of a diversified operation mode and combining with local cultural characteristics can avoid the homogenized competition of rural tourism.

Hypothesis 3. 

The protection of traditional buildings and cultural heritage can enhance the cultural connotation and market competitiveness of rural tourism.

Hypothesis 4. 

Scientific planning and environmental protection measures can realize the sustainable development of rural tourism.

These problems and hypotheses aim to solve the key challenges such as insufficient management, homogeneous competition, cultural protection and sustainable development in the current development of rural tourism.

1.3. Research Meaning

Gaining an in-depth understanding of the development conditions and future trajectory of key villages in rural tourism is pivotal for fostering the high-quality development of village tourism across China [39]. Evaluating the development level of rural tourism in Meishan, a central region of Hunan, holds significant theoretical importance: (1). Rural tourism is a crucial component of rural and human geography studies and serves as a key metric for assessing rural economic and social development. This paper quantitatively evaluates the development level of key villages in Meishan’s rural tourism, thereby enriching the theoretical framework of rural and human geography. It also offers a valuable supplement and enhancement to the existing theoretical research on rural tourism. (2). This paper endeavors to refine the evaluation index system at the village level. Eighteen traditional villages in central Hunan were selected as case studies, as depicted in Figure 1. This study, initiated in December 2022, encompassed the development of a detailed protocol and questionnaire. The survey, conducted in 2023, is further elaborated in subsequent chapters, where specific timing and content are introduced. Data analysis was carried out from September to October of that year, with this paper’s drafting taking place from November to December. In response to review feedback, this paper was revised and reviewed from July to August 2024. This systematic research approach ensures a thorough evaluation of the tourism development potential of wooden-constructed traditional villages. It designs questionnaires, analyzes the research outcomes, and constructs an evaluation system that includes main indicators such as resource endowment, development environment, and market conditions. Resource endowment refers to the richness of natural and cultural resources in villages and their potential value for tourism development. This factor reflects the core attraction of the village and serves as the foundation for tourism development. The development environment encompasses village infrastructure, policy support, and community participation, all of which directly affect the feasibility and sustainability of tourism development. Market conditions refer to the tourism market performance of villages, including tourist satisfaction, market demand, and economic income. These factors reflect the market acceptance and economic viability of tourism development. This system comprises nine secondary indices and thirty level-3 indices. Additionally, it identifies the characteristics of villages based on different development types. The evaluation of rural tourism development level in Meishan also carries substantial practical implications: (1). It guides sustainable rural development by providing insights into the development status and ranking of each region. This enables governments to plan and integrate rural tourism resources rationally. It also assists areas slated for development in selecting suitable directions based on their unique strengths, thus preventing resource wastage. (2). It promotes productive integration in rural areas by drawing on the successful experiences of leading villages. This facilitates the transition of Meishan’s rural tourism from its primary stage to intermediate and advanced stages, achieving the multifaceted utilization of rural resources. (3). It offers a reference for other countries and regions by providing in-depth analysis and evaluation. The insights gained from this study can serve as valuable experiences and inspiration for rural tourism development in other locales. In promoting the rural tourism model of Meishan to other regions, challenges such as preserving rural characteristics, managing environmental carrying capacity, ensuring the rationality of project planning, and adapting operational modes must be addressed. This involves safeguarding the authenticity of local culture, emphasizing the sustainability of rural tourism, ensuring the rationality and uniqueness of project planning, and tailoring operational management to local conditions to enhance efficiency and service quality. In summary, adopting the Meishan experience requires a comprehensive consideration of these factors, with localized adjustments to achieve sustainable rural tourism development. Furthermore, this study explores the impact of rural tourism on the local ecosystem and resource management and analyzes the sustainability of traditional timber structures. This analysis enriches the theoretical framework of rural tourism sustainability and provides an important reference for actual tourism development and resource management.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Regional Introduction

In China, “traditional villages” or “ancient villages” refer to those natural villages with a long history and rich culture. According to the definition of the state department, these villages have protective value. At present, China has identified 8155 traditional villages, which will receive financial support from the state, demonstrating China’s determination to protect these villages. The central region of Hunan, with Meishan at its heart and connected by the capital’s waterways, is a place where history has unfolded in relative isolation from foreign influences. This has allowed the local folk culture to remain stable and distinctive, giving rise to the unique Meishan culture. This culture is reflected in the traditional wooden residential architecture, such as the Meishan dry-column type board houses (as shown in Figure 2), stilted floors, and wind-and-rain bridges. These structures not only convey a sense of primitive simplicity but also showcase the local cultural identity. As a testament to the region’s historical and cultural heritage, these dwellings represent the material and spatial manifestation of regional culture, encapsulating traditional living practices and spiritual values. The predominant construction method for local traditional houses is the wooden structure, which can be categorized into beam-type and bucket-type buildings. The beam-type structure is characterized by the use of horizontal beams and vertical columns that interlock to form a robust framework. This framework supports the weight of the roof and floors, with the name deriving from the method of beam placement, which involves “lifting the beam” onto the column to bear the roof’s load. This construction technique is typically used for large public buildings, such as ancestral halls and temple complexes, with some larger structures employing a combination of beam-lifting and bucket-piercing techniques. The bucket-type building, on the other hand, is distinguished by its use of shorter wooden columns and beams that are joined through mortise-and-tenon joints, creating a solid frame to support the roof and floors. This type of construction dates back 3000 years in central Hunan and is considered an “architectural living fossil”. The bucket-type structure is the most common residential building application in Meishan, known for its frugality in material use, ease of construction, and its practicality and cost-effectiveness.

The presence of wooden architecture in traditional villages within central Hunan province faces significant challenges, primarily due to Western architectural style impact, new building material impact, preservation difficulties, and the erosion of traditional skills. Initially, as modernization progresses, the sway of local ethnic minority cultures wanes, with the relentless diminishment of indigenous traditions [40]. The blind adoption of foreign cultural elements results in a progressive loss of traditional architectural heritage [41]. Some villagers have forsaken the upkeep of their traditional structures, opting instead to employ modern techniques to erect Western-style buildings [42]. These new residences are no longer crafted from pine and fir; they are now constructed with contemporary materials such as steel, cement, and glass [43]. As the sway of new building materials persistently broadens [44], the villages’ original character has been partially eroded [45], and the folk culture, particularly the architectural aspect, is also progressively exhibiting a decline [46]. Secondly, central Hunan experiences abundant rainfall during the summer months, leading to high atmospheric humidity [47]. Wooden structures, in comparison to modern masonry buildings, are not only susceptible to rain-induced decay but also to the deteriorating effects of circulating air currents, which cause the wood to become increasingly brittle and loose [48]. Moreover, with the widespread adoption of electrical appliances in rural households, the prevalence of haphazard wiring is a significant concern. In villages where wooden buildings are densely packed and fire safety measures are lacking, the risk of fire can lead to devastating losses [49]. These issues pose a grave and often overlooked threat to the integrity of traditional architecture. With the popularization of modern lifestyle, people are more and more inclined to choose comfortable and convenient modern houses, which has makes the demand for traditional wooden houses gradually decrease. Accordingly, there were fewer construction opportunities for traditional carpenters, and many craftsmen had to turn to other industries for new development opportunities [50]. However, the younger generation often shows a lack of interest in traditional culture, preferring instead to seek employment opportunities outside their communities [51]. As the older craftsmen age, a gap emerges in the younger generation’s skills [52], and the traditional building techniques face the imminent risk of being lost [53], necessitating immediate protection and revitalization efforts [54]. With traditional architecture as a key tourism resource, these villages are now confronting an unprecedented development crisis, highlighting the urgent need for preservation and innovation to sustain their cultural heritage [55].

2.2. Data Sources

To bolster data accuracy, a two-pronged strategy was deployed: information was gathered by mining public data from diverse sources, including statistical yearbooks, academic papers, planning documents, news, videos, and WeChat articles. The focus was on key issues such as the classification and count of traditional wooden buildings, cultural relics, and the assessment of tourism-related regulations, policy implementation, investment, tourist satisfaction, revenue, and growth metrics. Challenges arose during data collection: the public dataset was not updated promptly, potentially rendering the information outdated and unable to reflect current rural tourism trends. Additionally, data were dispersed across various departments, institutions, and platforms, complicating collection and integration. The completeness and accuracy of data, especially from unofficial sources, were also in question. Technical barriers, like anti-crawler mechanisms, hindered comprehensive data gathering. Lastly, considering the seasonal nature of rural tourism, the timeliness of data collection was crucial.

To address potential inaccuracies in evaluation indicators, a supplementary survey was conducted via questionnaire to verify and enrich the dataset. This method ensured the data’s comprehensiveness and reliability from various perspectives. During questionnaire design, consideration was given to the cognitive diversity among respondents, including local government staff, village residents, professional researchers, tour guides, and tourists with varying familiarity with the research topics. Similarly, it was acknowledged that, within the village population, there would be cadres, ordinary villagers, and experts with different research focuses. Given this diversity, although a uniform questionnaire was used, verbal instructions were provided during field surveys, advising respondents to skip questions that they were uncertain or unfamiliar with. The questions in Table 1 were crafted to accommodate the characteristics of different respondents, allowing for a broad range of participants to contribute answers without restrictions on question selection. This approach aimed to gather extensive and precise data. Although a detailed classification and statistics of the collected data were conducted later, due to the sheer volume, this part was not included in this article. This methodology ensured that the findings encompassed not only the views of ordinary visitors but also the insights of professionals.

2.2.1. Questionnaire Design

The variable selection of this questionnaire refers to the mature scale “Traditional Village Evaluation Index System” and was combined with the previous literature, including basic information [56], cultural resources [57], spatial characteristics [17], traditional architecture [58], cultural tourism development status [59] and satisfaction [60], for a total of 44 questionnaires (Table 1). Excluding the questions that will provide specific answers, the rest of the questionnaire comprehensively weighs the actual effect and access efficiency, and the questionnaire was designed through the index concept, so as to more effectively evaluate the respondents’ impact on village tourism and the feedback of tourism experience. “Feeling” data were obtained by assessing the extent of changes experienced by the local area, while “evaluation” data pertained to the degree of each change item. Among them, the degree of change was divided into five levels: very poor (1 point), poor (2 points), general (3 points), good (4 points), and excellent (5 points).

Table 1. Questionnaire on the current status of cultural and tourism development in Meishan area.

Basic information
Visitors, residents, or specialists	Domicile	Age
Sex	Highest education	How many times have you been here
Traditional architecture
Number of wooden buildings X1	The scale of the traditional buildings X2	The earliest construction date X3
The number of wooden cultural relics protection units X4	Pattern preservation situation X5	The variety and richness of wood shape, structure, and decoration X6
The integration degree of new building materials and wooden architectural style
Spatial features
Integrity of wooden buildings X7	What kind of site X8	Degree of harmony with the surrounding environment X9
Water resource richness degree X10	The contemporary value of site selection planning	The relevance of surrounding attractions
The integration degree of new buildings and traditional wooden buildings
Cultural resources
The number of characteristic cultures X11	Number of non-genetic inheritors X12	Number of emerging cultures
The acceptance degree of the characteristic culture	Propaganda investment of traditional culture	The number of traditional skills
The development status of cultural tourism
Industry scale X13	The number of tourism practitioners X14	Infrastructure construction situation X15
Degree of ecological environment satisfaction X16	The number of cooperative tourism development enterprises is X17	Number of tourism-related regulations X18
Implementation of cultural and tourism policies X19	Infrastructure construction level X20	Tourism investment in X21
Near town distance X22	How accessible is the road X23
Degree of satisfaction
Visibility X24	Are you willing to share the village X25	Pollutant treatment level X26
Number of visitors X27	Tourism income X28	Tourist growth rate X29
Growth rate of tourism revenue X30	Tourism experience	The harmony of communication with the villagers
The preservation of traditional lifestyles

Notes: The indicators labeled with X1–X30 in Table 1 are the same as the corresponding indicators labeled in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5. “Traditional architecture” refers to the buildings with historical value and cultural characteristics. They are an important part of the traditional villages and reflect the local architectural style and historical evolution. “Spatial features” cover the layout and form of villages, including the site selection of villages, the arrangement of streets and the setting of public space, etc. These features reflect the harmonious coexistence of villages and the natural environment. “Cultural resources” refer to various cultural elements contained in villages, such as folk customs, festivals, traditional skills, etc. These resources are the basis for the development of village tourism. “The development status of cultural tourism” reflects the development degree and operation situation of village cultural tourism, including the construction of tourism facilities, the development of tourism products and the reception volume of tourists, etc., which is an important indicator to measure the maturity of village tourism. “Degree of satisfaction” refers to the satisfaction degree of tourists to the village tourism experience, including the evaluation of the village environment, tourism services and cultural experience, which is the key factor to measure the quality of tourism. “Harmony” can refer to the coordination between traditional architecture and the natural environment, while “integrity” can refer to the degree of architectural preservation in terms of culture and history.

Table 1. Questionnaire on the current status of cultural and tourism development in Meishan area.

Basic information
Visitors, residents, or specialists	Domicile	Age
Sex	Highest education	How many times have you been here
Traditional architecture
Number of wooden buildings X1	The scale of the traditional buildings X2	The earliest construction date X3
The number of wooden cultural relics protection units X4	Pattern preservation situation X5	The variety and richness of wood shape, structure, and decoration X6
The integration degree of new building materials and wooden architectural style
Spatial features
Integrity of wooden buildings X7	What kind of site X8	Degree of harmony with the surrounding environment X9
Water resource richness degree X10	The contemporary value of site selection planning	The relevance of surrounding attractions
The integration degree of new buildings and traditional wooden buildings
Cultural resources
The number of characteristic cultures X11	Number of non-genetic inheritors X12	Number of emerging cultures
The acceptance degree of the characteristic culture	Propaganda investment of traditional culture	The number of traditional skills
The development status of cultural tourism
Industry scale X13	The number of tourism practitioners X14	Infrastructure construction situation X15
Degree of ecological environment satisfaction X16	The number of cooperative tourism development enterprises is X17	Number of tourism-related regulations X18
Implementation of cultural and tourism policies X19	Infrastructure construction level X20	Tourism investment in X21
Near town distance X22	How accessible is the road X23
Degree of satisfaction
Visibility X24	Are you willing to share the village X25	Pollutant treatment level X26
Number of visitors X27	Tourism income X28	Tourist growth rate X29
Growth rate of tourism revenue X30	Tourism experience	The harmony of communication with the villagers
The preservation of traditional lifestyles

Notes: The indicators labeled with X1–X30 in Table 1 are the same as the corresponding indicators labeled in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5. “Traditional architecture” refers to the buildings with historical value and cultural characteristics. They are an important part of the traditional villages and reflect the local architectural style and historical evolution. “Spatial features” cover the layout and form of villages, including the site selection of villages, the arrangement of streets and the setting of public space, etc. These features reflect the harmonious coexistence of villages and the natural environment. “Cultural resources” refer to various cultural elements contained in villages, such as folk customs, festivals, traditional skills, etc. These resources are the basis for the development of village tourism. “The development status of cultural tourism” reflects the development degree and operation situation of village cultural tourism, including the construction of tourism facilities, the development of tourism products and the reception volume of tourists, etc., which is an important indicator to measure the maturity of village tourism. “Degree of satisfaction” refers to the satisfaction degree of tourists to the village tourism experience, including the evaluation of the village environment, tourism services and cultural experience, which is the key factor to measure the quality of tourism. “Harmony” can refer to the coordination between traditional architecture and the natural environment, while “integrity” can refer to the degree of architectural preservation in terms of culture and history.

2.2.2. Sample Determination

Given the stringent limitations on this study’s scope and subjects, an electronic questionnaire was deemed inappropriate for this survey, necessitating a face-to-face distribution and collection method. Initially, our team of eight members, split into four pairs, conducted a comprehensive survey across 18 villages. Extending the sampling timeframe to include both peak tourist seasons and off-seasons was based on previous research that revealed significant differences in residents’ perceptions and attitudes during these periods [61]. This included the peak season (2023 Spring Festival and May Day golden week) and the off-season periods (20 January 2023–30 March 2022, and 5 August 2023–15 August 2023). The reliability test was conducted using the following methodology: the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for each dimension of the questionnaire was ensured to exceed 0.7 using SPSS 29.0.1.0(171) software, indicating strong internal consistency. For instance, the six questions related to cultural resources had a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of 0.823, demonstrating high internal consistency. To evaluate test–retest reliability, the questionnaire was administered to the same respondents at different times, and the correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the stability of the questionnaire.

In screening the traditional village tour development status questionnaire questions, experts follow a set of strict standards, including ensuring that the assessment of wooden traditional village tourism development potential is closely related to research goals, clear to avoid misunderstanding, concise to reduce the burden of respondents, respectful of cultural differences, and protecting the privacy of respondents. At the same time, they also focus on the combination of quantitative and qualitative questions, maintain the logical order, and stimulate the feedback of the respondents, so as to ensure that the questionnaire can scientifically and effectively collect rich and accurate data. In terms of validity testing, the survey incorporated several approaches: Content validity was established through expert review, ensuring the comprehensiveness and appropriateness of the questionnaire’s content. At the beginning of this study, several experts in tourism planning, cultural heritage protection, and rural development were invited to evaluate the preliminary index system. They provided valuable advice on index selection and factor definition, which helped optimize the system. During the factor interpretation process, each factor was defined in detail based on expert opinions. For example, for the “resource endowment” factor, experts suggested incorporating indicators such as natural resource richness and cultural resource diversity to comprehensively reflect the resource base of villages. This paper will elaborate on how these expert opinions influenced the final definition of the factors. Subject matter experts were invited to review the questions to ensure that each item accurately reflected the research objectives. During the questionnaire design phase, exploratory factor analysis was conducted using SPSS 29.0.1.0(171) to verify the categorization of questions into the intended factors. The KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were utilized to assess the data’s suitability for factor analysis, and factor extraction was performed to confirm that each factor represented a distinct concept. KMO test: In short, the KMO test is like a “fitness test”, which helped us determine whether the data were suitable for factor analysis. If the KMO value was high (greater than 0.7), it was like good weather for running, indicating that our data were suitable for factor analysis. And “Eigenvalue criterion”: The eigenvalue criterion is like an “importance filter” that helped us decide which factors were really important. If the eigenvalue of a factor was greater than 1, it was like a “pass line”, indicating that this factor was indeed important in the data and deserved our attention. These rigorous reliability and validity tests ensured the questionnaire’s quality and reliability, providing a robust basis for subsequent data analysis and this study’s conclusions.

Following the selection criteria of research objects outlined in the related literature [62], meticulous data collection was conducted across 18 villages to ensure the validity of the questionnaires, as presented in

Table 2. Background of surveyed residents.

Object	Total Number	Category	Description	Frequency	Percentage	Cumulative Percentage
villager	600	Gender	Female	352	58.67%	58.67%
			Male	248	41.33%	100%
		Age	20 or under	21	3.5%	3.5%
			21–30	77	12.83%	16.33%
			31–40	98	16.33%	32.66%
			41–50	217	36.17%	68.83%
			51 or above	187	31.17%	100%
		Education level	Primary School or below	258	43%	43%
			High School	181	30.17%	73.17%
			Junior College	141	23.5%	96.67%
			Bachelor’s Degree	17	2.83%	99.05%
			Postgraduate or above	3	0.5%	100%
tourist	200	Gender	Female	121	60.5%	60.5%
			Male	79	39.5%	100%
		Age	20 or under	5	2.5%	2.5%
			21–30	33	16.5%	19%
			31–40	98	49%	68%
			41–50	43	21.5%	89.5%
			51 or above	21	10.5%	100%
		Education level	Primary School or below	3	1.5%	1.5%
			High School	33	16.5%	18%
			Junior College	61	30.5%	48.5
			Bachelor’s Degree	91	45.5%	94%
			Postgraduate or above	12	6%	100%

. In this study assessing the tourism development potential of 18 traditional villages in central Hunan, a detailed examination was made of the gender, age, and educational distribution of 600 villagers and 200 tourists. The survey revealed that 58.67% of the villagers were women, slightly exceeding the 41.33% that were men, with the majority aged between 41–50 and 51 years old, indicating a significant presence of middle-aged and older individuals in the sample. Regarding educational attainment, 43% of the villagers completed junior high school or below, while 30.17%, 23.5%, 2.83%, and 0.5% held high school, junior college, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees or higher, respectively, highlighting the generally low level of education in the region’s rural population. Among the tourist group, women accounted for 60.5%, slightly higher than that of men. The age distribution was mainly 31–40 years old, and the educational level was generally higher than that of villagers. Tourists with bachelor’s degrees constituted the largest proportion, at 45.5%. These figures offer crucial insights for the subsequent survey questionnaire design, indicating a need to maintain gender balance, craft targeted questions for various age groups, and ensure the ample representation of the age demographic. The questionnaire for villagers should be designed to be concise and clear, reflecting their lower levels of education, while, for tourists with higher education, more probing questions can be included to delve into their nuanced tourism needs. Furthermore, given the significant number of highly educated tourists, follow-up research and marketing efforts should leverage digital platforms such as the Internet and social media to engage this group without disrupting their leisure time, thereby enhancing data collection efficiency and the profundity of research insights. To ensure the integrity of the data, a series of stringent procedures were implemented: Comprehensive training was provided to the team members prior to questionnaire distribution, ensuring a thorough understanding of each question and the ability to guide respondents accurately. It was ensured that all participants comprehended the survey’s objectives and adhered to the completion instructions diligently. For participants with limited literacy, the team offered patient explanations of each question to ensure responses that genuinely reflected their situations. During the administration of the questionnaires, care was taken to prevent any guidance that could bias respondents’ answers, allowing them to express their opinions independently and honestly. Each questionnaire was meticulously checked for completeness, ensuring that all questions were answered and responses were legible. Following collection, a thorough screening process was conducted, discarding any incomplete or randomly filled questionnaires. Data cleaning was also performed to remove outliers and errors, preventing distortion in the analysis. Ethical considerations were observed; although this study did not involve human experimentation or collection of personal privacy information, informed consent was obtained from participants, and the confidentiality of their information was assured. A factor analysis-based evaluation system with 30 indicators was developed to assess the tourism potential of 18 traditional villages in central Hunan province. The indicators, based on literature review and expert consultation, covered resource endowment, development environment, market conditions, environmental protection, socio-cultural preservation, and economic viability. Data collection involved questionnaires and field interviews. The indicators were categorized into three main dimensions: (1) resource endowment (focusing on cultural and natural resources); (2) development conditions (focusing on infrastructure and environmental sustainability); and (3) market conditions (focusing on economic benefits and visitor satisfaction). The questionnaire survey was conducted from January to August 2023, distributing 871 questionnaires and collecting 800 valid responses, achieving an effective recovery rate of 91.84%. Field interviews were also conducted with respondents from diverse backgrounds, including villagers, village cadres, tourism practitioners, and tourists, to gather in-depth qualitative data. Stratified random sampling was used to select 18 villages categorized by high, medium, and low tourism development potential. Respondents were randomly chosen from each level, with sample sizes allocated based on village population size and tourism development level to ensure representation across different backgrounds. The respondents were primarily aged 41–50 and over 51, with 58.67% female. Their education levels were predominantly junior middle school or below (43%), and their professional backgrounds included villagers, village cadres, tourism practitioners, and tourists. These characteristics reflect the actual demographics of traditional village residents and enhance the sample’s representativeness. To minimize selection bias, respondents were randomly selected during sampling, and the questionnaire design avoided leading questions. Seasonal bias was reduced by conducting surveys across different seasons and considering seasonal influences in data analysis. Data reliability was ensured through internal validation (logic inspection and consistency checks) and external validation (comparison with official data).These steps were taken to ensure the quality and reliability of the questionnaire data. The number of effective questionnaires recovered from each village is as follows: Yellow Shaping 45, Road Brook Village 40, Tang Village 51, Hole Community 39, Mei Village 44, General Village 46, Is Dragon Village 42, Kowloon Pool Village 42, Double Smoke Village Downstairs 49, Ann Village 41, High City Village 47, River Village 48, Post Pond Community 41, Yellow Creek Village 49. Although this study did not involve human experimentation or the collection of personal privacy information, informed consent was obtained, and the privacy of participants’ information was ensured as a precaution. The valid questionnaires represented a 96.27% response rate of the total distributed, providing a robust dataset for our analysis.

2.2.3. Indicator Selection

Assessing the tourism development potential of traditional villages entails a broad scope and involves a sophisticated internal system. Precisely identifying the evaluation indices is a critical aspect of the research and its outcomes. In the selection of these indices, arbitrary choices by researchers were avoided, and the impact of external factors was considered. The chosen indicators were aligned with the inherent laws governing the subject. Based on the performance data from 18 traditional villages in central Hunan and the initial questionnaire analysis (as shown in Table 1), the evaluation index system for tourism development potential was streamlined. The initial set of 41 questionnaire items was refined to focus on resource endowment, development environment, and market conditions as the main indicators, resulting in a more concise system that includes 9 secondary indices and 30 tertiary indices. Reasons are as follows: “and with the relevance of the surrounding attractions”, “contemporary value of location planning” problem for respondents is difficult to give accurate answers. The “tourism experience”, “Degree of ecological environment satisfaction X16”, “Are you willing to share the village X25” problem on the content of repetition, “The integration degree of new building materials and wooden architectural style”, “The integration degree of new buildings and traditional wooden buildings”, “The number of traditional skills”, and “The number of characteristic cultures X11” contain a relationship between problems and cause some problems covered by other broader problems, such as “The acceptance degree of the characteristic culture”, “The preservation of traditional lifestyles”, “Propaganda investment of traditional culture”, “emerging cultures”, the answer to effective statistics and analysis, and “The harmony of communication with the villagers”; however, the content of the problem may not apply to all research objects, as our goal is to ensure the effectiveness and practicability of the questionnaire, in order to collect high-quality and actionable data. The aim was to ensure the questionnaire’s effectiveness and practicability for the collection of high-quality, actionable data. This refinement process involved removing indicators such as the number of emerging cultures within cultural resources, the acceptance of characteristic cultures, the publicity investment in traditional cultures, the count of traditional skills, and the contemporary value of site selection planning in terms of spatial characteristics and their correlation with surrounding scenic spots. Indicators concerning the integration of new building materials with wooden building styles in traditional structures, the harmony between new and traditional wooden buildings, the preservation of traditional lifestyles, satisfaction levels, communication harmony with villagers, and the overall tourism experience were also removed. The questionnaire was curated to balance comprehensiveness with manageability, ensuring that the data collected would be pertinent and beneficial for analyzing the tourism development potential in these traditional villages.

Tourism resources are the basic conditions of tourism development [63] (such as

Table 3. Indicators and assignments of traditional village resource endowment.

Secondary Indicators	Tertiary Indicators	Assignment Criteria	1 Point	2 Points	3 Points	4 Points	5 Points
Traditional Architecture	Richness X1	Number of traditional buildings such as ancient river channels, commercial streets, docks, residential buildings, and ancient roads (Unit: Category)	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9
	Scale X2	Traditional building area (Unit: km2)	10	11–15	16–20	21–25	≥26
	Era X3	The era when the oldest wooden structure in the village was built (Unit: Era)	Modern Times	Late Qing Dynasty	Mid Qing Dynasty	Early Qing Dynasty	Before the Ming Dynasty
	Conservation Unit X4	City level: 1 point, Provincial level: 2 points, National level: 3 points, Total score (Unit: Points)	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9
	Architectural Layout X5	Types of wooden house floor plans such as “one”-shaped, “L”-shaped, “H”-shaped, etc. (Unit: Category)	1	2	3	4	≥5
	Details X6	Number of wooden decorations such as door frames, window frames, etc. (Unit: Item)	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9
Site Selection and Layout	Integrity X7	Percentage of modern buildings in the traditional building cluster area (Unit: Percentage)	≥41%	31–40%	21–30%	11–20%	≤10%
	Cultural Value X8	Degree of manifestation of traditional Feng Shui culture such as “backing mountains and facing water”, “embracing Yin and Yang”, “adapting to local conditions”, etc.	Extremely Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
	Harmony X9	The impact of site selection and layout on the ecological environment of the village	Very Large	Large	Medium	Small	Extremely Small
	Water Resources X10	Number of water sources such as rivers, lakes, ponds, and mountain springs around the village (Unit: Item)	1	2	3	4	≥5
Intangible Cultural Heritage	Folk Arts X11	Number of folk arts such as traditional operas, shadow puppetry, and legends (Unit: Item)	1	2	3	4	≥5
	Heritage Successors X12	Number of inheritors of intangible cultural heritage (Unit: Person)	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9

), which can be divided into two kinds: material culture and intangible culture [64]. Material culture mainly refers to the building [65] and pattern [66] of traditional villages, which is a direct ornamental object to attract tourists. Traditional buildings can be specifically shown from the number of buildings [67], scale [68], age [69], protection unit [70], pattern type [71], detail [72], and so on. The site selection [73] and pattern [74] of villages are specifically shown from the aspects of integrity [75], cultural value [76], coordination [77], water resources [78], etc., which are related to the “feng shui” culture in China and reflect the livability of villages. Intangible culture of folk art [79] and inheritors [80] influences the strength of traditional village tourism development: the richer and the larger the scale of intangible culture, the more valuable the development value.

The development environment is a pivotal catalyst for the growth of traditional village tourism, as indicated in

Table 4. Index system and scoring for the development environment of traditional villages.

Secondary Indicators	Tertiary Indicators	Assignment Criteria	1 Point	2 Points	3 Points	4 Points	5 Points
Reception Capacity	Industry Scale X13	Number of hotels, restaurants, and small supermarkets	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9
	Employment Ratio X14	Percentage of tourism Industry employees (Unit: Percentage)	≤5	6–10	11–15	16–20	≥21
Living Environment	Facility Conditions X15	Number of public toilets, clinics, and parking lots	1–2	3–4	5–6	7–8	≥9
	Environmental Conditions X16	Cleanliness of green spaces, road surfaces, and service facilities	Extremely Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
	Resident Happiness X17	Impact of the tourism industry on local residents’ lives	Extremely Small	Small	Medium	Large	Extremely Large
Government Support	Management Level X18	Implementation of tourism policies	Extremely Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
	Support Intensity X19	Policy support and financial investment (Unit: CNY 10,000)	≤50	51–100	101–150	151–200	≥200
	Basic Investment X20	Investment in infrastructure Construction (Unit: CNY 10,000)	≤50	51–100	101–150	151–200	≥200
	Tourism Investment X21	Investment in tourism development (Unit: CNY 10,000)	≤50	51–100	101–150	151–200	≥200
Location Conditions	Distance to Adjacent Towns X22	Time required to drive to the county town (Unit: Hours)	≥2.6	2.1–2.5	1.6–2	1–1.5	≤1
	Traffic Accessibility X23	Percentage of village roads to higher administrative areas (Unit: Percentage)	≥41	31–40	21–30	11–20	≤10

. This is primarily evident in the tourism reception capability, which can be gauged from the quality of services [81] and the quantity of tourism practitioners [82]. The living environment [81] significantly influences the immediate experience of tourists [83]. Generally, the more refined the environment, the greater the satisfaction among tourists [84]. This can be specifically observed through the condition of facilities and the ambient village conditions [82,85,86]. The government’s role is central in the tourism development process, as seen in the number of cooperative enterprises [87], the establishment of relevant regulations [88], the execution of policies [89], the level of basic investments [90], and the amount of tourism-specific investments [84,91]. Additionally, location conditions play a crucial role in driving tourism development. These conditions affect the ease with which tourists can access the area [92], including factors such as the distance from the nearest town [93] and the ease of accessing interregional transportation [94].

Market conditions in tourist source areas are a critical consideration in the tourism development process, as highlighted in

Table 5. Traditional village market condition indicator system and valuation.

Secondary Indicators	Tertiary Indicators	Assignment Criteria	1 Point	2 Points	3 Points	4 Points	5 Points
Current Status of Village Development	Popularity X24	Number of Well-Known Village Attractions (Unit: Number)	1	2	3	4	≥5
	Reputation X25	Tourist Satisfaction with Tourism (Unit: Satisfaction Level)	Extremely Poor	Poor	Average	Good	Excellent
	Economic Condition X26	Total Output Value of Agriculture, Forestry, Animal Husbandry, and Fishery (Unit: CNY 10,000)	≤1000	1001–1500	1501–2000	2001–2500	≥2501
Tourism Demand	Number of Tourists X27	Number of Tourist Arrivals (Unit: People/Year)	≤1000	1001–1500	1501–2000	2001–2500	≥2501
	Tourism Revenue X28	Total Economic Consumption by Tourists in the Area (Unit: CNY 10,000/Year)	≤50	51–100	101–200	201–300	≥301
	Tourist Growth Rate X29	Year-on-Year Growth in Tourism Numbers (Unit: Percentage)	≤5	6–10	11–15	16–20	≥21
	Revenue Growth Rate X30	Year-on-Year Growth in Tourism Revenue (Unit: Percentage)	≤5%	6–10	11–15	16–20	≥21

. Tourists are the lifeblood of tourism revenue, and market conditions encompass both the volume of tourists and their spending capacity. These factors are largely shaped by the current state of village development [95] and the prevailing tourism demand [96]. The current state of village development can be assessed through various indicators, such as the popularity of the village [97], the level of acclaim it receives [98], and the effectiveness of its waste management practices [99]. Concurrently, fluctuations in the number of tourists [10], tourism income [100], and the growth rates of both tourists and income [101] are key indicators that reflect the tourism demand. These metrics provide valuable insights into the market’s dynamics and the potential for revenue generation within the tourism sector.

2.3. Research Methods and Questions

2.3.1. Interpretation of Study Methods

Factor analysis was utilized in this study to evaluate the tourism development potential of 18 traditional timber-made villages in central Hunan. This method enabled the complex array of indicators to be organized into a few key communal factors, representing the primary dimensions of tourism development potential in these villages. These communal factors, encapsulating the shared traits of various variables, provided a streamlined framework for analyzing and comparing the tourism development potential among different villages (Figure 3).

KMO (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin) and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were initially conducted on the constructed evaluation indicators to assess the suitability of the variables for factor analysis. The KMO test, with a value above 0.7 indicating significant common variation among variables, yielded a result of 0.82 in this study, signifying high common variability. Concurrently, Bartlett’s test revealed a significance level below 0.05, further validating the strong inter-variable association. These outcomes substantiated the decision to proceed with factor analysis. In our study, the KMO value reached 0.82, signifying a high degree of common variability among the variables, thus deeming them appropriate for factor analysis. Furthermore, the significance level of Bartlett’s test was below 0.05, reinforcing the notion that the variables are strongly correlated and suitable for factor analysis.

Subsequently, the number of factors to be extracted was determined by applying the criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1 and targeting a cumulative variance contribution of approximately 80%. This approach resulted in the identification of three principal communal factors representing resource endowment, development environment, and market conditions, which collectively accounted for 85% of the total variance.

The communal factors were then interpreted through the rotation of the initial loading matrix using the maximum variance method, resulting in the rotated factor loading matrix. Factor loading matrix: The factor loading matrix indicates the correlation strength between each index and the extracted common factor. A high loading value (close to 1) signifies a strong association between the indicator and the factor. Rotation of the initial loading matrix: The rotation of the initial loading matrix aims to simplify and clarify the factor loading matrix for easier interpretation. Variance-maximizing rotation methods, such as Varimax rotation, are commonly used to ensure that each indicator is primarily associated with one factor, thereby clearly defining the factor’s meaning. The relationship between each communal factor and the original indicators was examined, and, with the incorporation of expert insights, explanations and designated names were provided for the selected communal factors.

Ultimately, scoring coefficients for each factor were calculated, and the factor scoring coefficient matrix was derived using regression analysis. This facilitated the assignment of a quantitative score to the tourism development potential of each village. The calculation formula is as follows:

$$F_q=a_{q1}{X}_1+a_{q2}{X}_2+\cdots +a_{qj}{X}_j\left(q=\mathrm{1,2},\cdots ,t\right)······$$

(1)

In the formula, (F_q) represents the scores of each factor for the tourism development potential of each village; (a_qj) represents the corresponding score coefficient of each factor; (X_j) is the standardized variable; (q) represents the serial number of each factor; (F) represents the (t) factors; (X) represents the original (j) variables; and (a) represents the factor score coefficients for each indicator.

Calculate the weight (W) of each factor to obtain the comprehensive evaluation value (E):

$$E=\mathsf{\Sigma }{W}_q{F}_q\left(q=\mathrm{1,2},\cdots ,t\right)······$$

(2)

This article employs factor analysis to assess the tourism development potential of traditional villages in the Meishan area, focusing on three critical dimensions: resource endowment, travel conditions, and market conditions. This analysis was conducted utilizing the SPSS 29.0.1.0(171) software, a powerful statistical tool. Upon calculating the score values for these three major indicators, this study proceeded to rank 18 traditional villages in a comprehensive manner. This ranking facilitates a thorough analysis of the spatial characteristics of villages that exhibit greater potential for tourism development. By identifying the villages with the most promising tourism prospects, this study aims to provide actionable insights for strategic planning and resource allocation within the region.

2.3.2. Construction of Research Questions

The research content of this paper covers the research background and importance, research methods, resources, the role of tourism and market conditions, the geographical distribution characteristics of Meishan traditional villages, research limitations, and future research directions. Based on these contents, this study puts forward the following core questions: RQ 1: What is the cultural and historical value of the traditional wooden folk dwellings in central Hunan province? How can the RQ 2 factor analysis method be applied to evaluate the integrated development level of culture and tourism in traditional villages? How to determine the key indicators and factors in the RQ 3 evaluation system? How does RQ 4 divide the traditional villages with strong potential, medium potential, and weak potential? What is the enlightenment of the stratification of RQ 5 tourism development potential to the village development strategy? RQ 6: Which condition is the key factor to promote regional tourism development? What are the geographical distribution characteristics of traditional villages with strong potential and medium potential of RQ 7? What is the guiding significance of these RQ 8 features for tourism planning and resource allocation? How do RQ 9 findings support policy making, and how do they guide practice? What are the limitations of this RQ 10 study? How should RQ 11 deepen and expand the results of this study? RQ 12: By raising these questions, this paper clearly plans the research direction, methods, and expected results in the early stage of this research, to ensure the systematic and scientific research.

3. Results

3.1. Evaluation Results and Analysis of Resource Endowment

Data for indicators X1 through X12 from the 18 traditional villages in the Meishan area were entered into the analysis. The resulting KMO measure of 0.713 indicated that the data were well suited for factor analysis. Examination of the explained total variance matrix revealed that the eigenvalues of the first three common factors exceeded 1, with a combined variance contribution rate of 76.202%, which was deemed sufficient to adequately represent the subject matter’s characteristics. Utilizing the rotated factor loading matrix, the first common factor was named the “External Manifestation of Traditional Villages”, predominantly encapsulating variables such as “integrity” and “harmony”. The second common factor, reflecting variables like the “number of provincial and municipal cultural relics protection units” and “richness”, is termed the “Internal Connotation of Traditional Villages”. The third common factor, which is primarily associated with the variable “earliest construction era”, is designated as “Historical Origin”. Subsequently, the score coefficients for the selected common factors were calculated (Figure 4). This calculation led to the determination of comprehensive characteristic values and the ranking of each factor, as illustrated in Figure 5. The ranking offers a clear overview of the villages’ tourism development potential, facilitating a nuanced understanding of their spatial characteristics and historical significance.

The findings show that the villages’ tourism potential can be categorized into high, medium, and low tiers. In the context of sustainable tourism development, tourism conditions such as infrastructure and environmental sustainability are key drivers of regional tourism growth. High-potential villages like Da’an Village exhibit strong environmental protection and socio-cultural preservation efforts, contributing to their sustainable development potential. From the standpoint of resource endowment, the quintet of villages that stand out in terms of ranking are Zhenglong Village, Da’an Village, Tangjia Guan Village, Huangsha Ping, and Xiatuan Village. These villages are characterized by extensive ancient architectural complexes and a rich tapestry of cultural heritage, which bestows upon them a considerable edge in forging tourism brands and establishing their uniqueness in the tourism resource landscape. Take Zhenglong Village, for instance; it is nestled within the heart of the Zi Que Jie Terraces’ scenic area and boasts a lengthy historical lineage. The majority of its residential structures have maintained the traditional wooden “dry-column-style plank house” architecture from the Ming and Qing dynasties. This architectural preservation harmoniously integrates with the surrounding environment, thereby affording it a competitive edge in tourism resource evaluation. Villages that find themselves in the mid-ranking bracket for tourism resources do not possess the same level of quality and quantity as the top-ranked ones, and their architectural and cultural legacies have yet to shine with distinctive characteristics. Conversely, those villages that are ranked at the lower end have not yet revealed substantial tourism resources. They necessitate further in-depth investigation in subsequent stages, which will demand considerable time and effort, thus resulting in their less favorable ranking concerning resource endowment.

3.2. Evaluation Results and Analysis of Tourism Conditions

Factor analysis was performed on the survey indicator data ranging from X13 to X23 using SPSS 29.0.1.0(171) software. The analysis produced a KMO (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin) value of 0.733, which indicates that the data are suitable for factor analysis. The software subsequently extracted three common factors, which together account for a variance contribution cumulative rate of 80.608%, effectively capturing the essence of the variables under study. Drawing from the rotated factor loading matrix data, the first common factor, predominantly reflecting variables such as “industry scale”, “tourism employment ratio”, and “government management level”, has been designated as “Facility Support”. The second common factor, chiefly reflecting variables like “government support intensity” and “basic investment”, is termed “System Support”. The third common factor, primarily reflecting variables such as “distance from the relying town”, is named “Environmental Support” (Figure 6). The score coefficients of the three common factors were integrated into the established formula to derive the comprehensive evaluation value and ranking concerning the development environment for traditional village tourism, as shown in Figure 7. When considering the development environment for traditional village tourism, the overall tourism industry in the Meishan area appears to be in its nascent stages, with the developmental status of individual villages being relatively similar. Nonetheless, Da’an Village, Zhenglong Village, Xiatuan Village, Gaocheng Village, and Dongshi Community have demonstrated notable progress. These villages, endowed with abundant tourism resources, initiated their development preparations early and have since achieved a considerable scale of development, thereby enhancing their tourism development potential. Da’an Village, renowned as the core production area for Anhua dark tea, has attracted significant capital investment. This investment has been instrumental in the collaborative creation of the Wang Daxi Leisure Farm, which showcases a harmonious blend of modern wooden buildings with traditional wooden structures. At present, the village enjoys relatively robust economic development and boasts more comprehensive tourism supporting facilities compared to its counterparts. The residents exhibit a strong desire for development, thus earning Da’an Village a high ranking in the development environment of traditional villages. Conversely, villages that are ranked lower have encountered sluggish tourism development at the current stage. This stagnation can be attributed to a variety of factors, including economic and policy constraints, or divergent development objectives from other villages.

3.3. Evaluation Results and Analysis of Market Conditions

The SPSS 29.0.1.0(171) software was utilized to calculate indicators X24–X30, yielding a KMO (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin) value of 0.735 in the assessment of market conditions for traditional villages, which indicates suitability for factor analysis. Two common factors, with eigenvalues exceeding 1, were identified, which cumulatively accounted for 88.708% of the variance, effectively encapsulating the information of the variables. Based on the rotating factor load, the primary public factor that predominantly captures “popularity”, “praise”, and the “tourist growth rate” is designated as the “Current Tourism Foundation”, while the secondary public factor that chiefly reflects the “income growth rate” is termed the “Current Economic Foundation” (Figure 8). The scoring coefficients for each of these factors are incorporated into the formula to calculate the comprehensive evaluation scores and rankings for the market conditions of traditional villages (Figure 9). Xiatuan Village, which ranks at the top, already boasts a stable influx of tourists and an established marketing operation model, with a significant proportion of income derived from the tourism industry, signifying favorable market conditions. However, the village is susceptible to market influences, which can place it in a reactive position, catering to market development trends. Moreover, the influx of excessive commercial elements has diminished the village’s traditional character, potentially impacting its tourism development potential. Villages with medium rankings are still in the nascent stages of tourism development and have not yet achieved high market visibility. Nonetheless, due to minimal intervention from external factors, these villages enjoy a higher reputation among tourists. With the anticipated support of funds and policies in later stages, the developmental prospects for these villages are expected to expand. Notably, Huanghuaxi Village, which is ranked eighth, holds an important position on the ancient tea-horse road. Although it enjoys a high reputation among tourists, the village’s tourism market development is in need of enhancement, primarily due to economic and transportation limitations.

4. Discussion

4.1. Comprehensive Ranking

Taking into account a diverse array of perspectives, the indicator weights assigned are 0.4 for resource endowment, 0.3 for the development environment, and 0.3 for market conditions. These weights are then combined with the total characteristic values (Eq) of each principal indicator for the 18 traditional villages in the Meishan area to compute the comprehensive evaluation characteristic value (F) for each village, as detailed in

Table A1. Comprehensive score of tourism development level evaluation of traditional villages.

Village Name	Resource Endowment	×0.4	Tourism Conditions	×0.3	Market Conditions	×0.3	Comprehensive Characteristic Value	Adding Three Times the Standard Deviation	Sorting
Huangsha Ping Village	0.5668	0.5668	0.4592	0.1378	0.3689	0.11067	0.48	3.19	7
Maluxi Village	0.2248	0.2248	−0.4457	−0.1337	−0.2400	−0.072	−0.12	2.59	9
Tangjia Guan Village	0.6192	0.6192	0.5226	0.1568	0.8034	0.24102	0.65	3.36	5
Dongshi Community	0.2519	0.2519	0.5944	0.1783	0.8291	0.24873	0.53	3.24	6
Meishan Village	−0.3897	−0.3897	−0.6155	−0.1847	−0.4179	−0.12537	−0.47	2.24	12
Jiangjun Village	−0.6995	−0.6995	−0.1699	−0.0510	−0.8140	−0.2442	−0.57	2.14	15
Zhenglong Village	1.3574	1.3574	0.9163	0.2749	1.1301	0.33903	1.16	3.87	1
Xiatuan Village	0.5573	0.5573	0.7370	0.2211	1.1810	0.3543	0.80	3.51	2
Jiulongchi Village	−0.2293	−0.2293	−0.4420	−0.1326	−0.5179	−0.15537	−0.38	2.33	11
Louxia Village	−0.6766	−0.6766	−0.4909	−0.1473	−0.7141	−0.21423	−0.63	2.08	16
Shuangyan Village	−0.5614	−0.5614	−0.0841	−0.0252	−0.3382	−0.10146	−0.35	2.36	10
Da’an Village	0.8212	0.8212	0.9673	0.2902	0.2385	0.07155	0.69	3.40	3
Jinhui Village	−0.7397	−0.7397	−1.0252	−0.3076	−0.8140	−0.2442	−0.85	1.86	18
Gaocheng Village	0.4839	0.4839	0.6526	0.1958	1.0024	0.30072	0.69	3.40	4
Tianzishan Village	−0.5007	−0.5007	−0.6094	−0.1828	−0.4179	−0.12537	−0.51	2.20	13
Shangxi Village	−0.7156	−0.7156	−0.6782	−0.2035	−0.7325	−0.21975	−0.71	2.00	17
Langtang Community	−0.8710	−0.8710	−0.1817	−0.0545	−0.5528	−0.16584	−0.57	2.14	14
Huanghuaxi Village	0.5007	0.5007	−0.1067	−0.0320	0.0058	0.00174	0.17	2.88	8

. The specific calculation methodology is as follows:

$$F_j^{\text{'}}=0.4E_{aj}+0.3E_{bj}+0.3E_{cj}\left(j=\mathrm{1,2},\cdots ,24\right)······$$

(3)

After calculations, the highest characteristic value is 3.87, and the lowest is 1.86.

Employing comprehensive characteristic values of 3.19 and 2.14 as demarcation points, the villages in the Meishan area are stratified into high-potential, medium-potential, and low-potential categories. The analysis reveals that there are seven villages with high potential, six with medium potential, and five with low potential. The high-potential villages, in descending order of ranking, are as follows: Zhenglong Village, Xiatuan Village, Gaocheng Village, Da’an Village, Tangjia Guan Village, Dongshi Community, and Huangsha Ping. The medium-potential villages, ranked from highest to lowest, are as follows: Huanghuaxi Village, Maluxi Village, Shuangyan Village, Jiulongchi Village, Meishan Village, Tianzishan Village, Jiangjun Village, and Langtang Community. The low-potential villages, ranked from highest to lowest, are as follows: Louxia Village, Shangxi Village, and Jinhui Village. Tourism conditions have become the core competitive element in the region. Based on these insights and guided by sustainable tourism principles, this paper proposes tailored development strategies for each village. These strategies include the following: (1) strengthening environmental protection to preserve natural landscapes and traditional wooden architecture; (2) promoting socio-cultural heritage through community engagement and cultural festivals; and (3) enhancing economic viability by developing unique tourism products and improving infrastructure. These measures aim to boost tourism in central Hunan’s traditional villages while ensuring long-term sustainability and community well-being.

4.2. Analysis of the Results

The strong potential types of villages are typically endowed with plentiful tourism resources and solid developmental foundations, coupled with a stable customer base and diverse tourist profiles. As the tourism industry continues to evolve and expand, the growth potential of these villages is anticipated to escalate progressively. The developmental trajectories of medium-sized potential villages can be bifurcated into two scenarios. The first scenario encompasses villages such as Huanghuaxi Village, Maluxi Village, and Shuangyan Village, which are replete with tourism resources but are impeded by economic and geographical constraints, resulting in a slower tourism development pace and less potential compared to high-potential villages. The second scenario includes villages like Jiulongchi Village, Meishan Village, Tianzishan Village, Jiangjun Village, and Langtang Community, which exhibit a balanced performance across all dimensions without any remarkable attributes. However, given that their conditions are not severely lacking, they are viable candidates for reserve development, with the local economic mainstay industry as the primary focus and tourism development as a secondary consideration at this juncture. Among the traditional villages with weak potential, most of the tourism development resources of Louxia Village and Shangxi Village have been destroyed, resulting in small development potential; Jinhui Village has rich traditional construction resources, but various development factors have not been activated, the residents mainly develop agriculture, most young people work, the village construction is slow, the traffic environment is poor, and it is not suitable for the development of tourism industry. Although the principal conditions for tourism development in these villages are not yet favorable, their tourism potential may evolve as they incrementally nurture pertinent development factors during the economic development process, owing to the dynamic adaptability of the tourism system. Hence, it would be premature to entirely discount the tourism development prospects of these villages. Adopting a long-term perspective to safeguard the village’s intrinsic value is advisable, awaiting the emergence of opportune moments.

Tourism conditions, particularly infrastructure and market accessibility, are crucial for regional tourism development. High-potential villages like Da’an Village have leveraged these conditions to attract significant external investment. They have transformed traditional wooden structures into unique tourism products. This strategic approach promotes local economic growth, protects cultural heritage, and serves as a model for sustainable rural tourism. The convergence of traditional wooden architecture with modern infrastructure has enhanced service quality, preserved regional characteristics, and opened up broader developmental prospects for Da’an Village. Ultimately, superior tourism conditions, which provide better infrastructure under essentially equivalent resource endowment and market conditions, enhance visitor satisfaction and experience, thus becoming a critical factor influencing village rankings. On one hand, some villages with superior tourism conditions are proximate to renowned scenic spots. For instance, Xiatuan Village and Zhenglong Village are situated in the core area of the Zi Que Jie Terraces, benefiting from early tourism development and boasting mature infrastructure conditions. On the other hand, some villages are in close proximity to supporting urban areas, such as Huangsha Ping and Tangjia Guan Village, both located in Anhua County. These villages not only possess unique natural resources but also capitalize on the county’s comprehensive infrastructure support resources, offering more comprehensive services to visitors and emerging as high-potential traditional villages.

Examining the spatial distribution of the three categories of traditional villages, as depicted in Figure 10, high-potential traditional villages are predominantly clustered around Anhua County and the Zi Que Jie Terraced Field scenic area. Anhua County boasts comprehensive infrastructure, while Zi Que Jie has long been a renowned scenic spot in Hunan Province, characterized by early tourism development and robust supporting facilities. This destination has drawn a wide array of tourists, establishing a solid customer base for the region and cementing its status as the primary area where high-potential traditional villages are concentrated. Notably, Da’an Village, despite not being situated within these two areas, is also classified as a high-potential traditional village. This is attributable to its proximity to Qujiang Railway Station and its location along the Qujiang River, offering a variety of transportation options including train, bus, and boat. These factors provide exceptional traffic conditions for its tourism development, making it a significant contributor to its emergence as a high-potential tourism village. Medium-potential traditional villages are largely dispersed in the Da Xiongshan area. Da Xiongshan is a celebrated scenic spot encompassing numerous attractions associated with Meishan culture and is exceedingly rich in tourism resources. Concurrently, the unique topography of the forest park endows traditional villages with distinctive natural conditions on one hand, but it also poses as a limiting factor for tourism development. Surveys have revealed that, while traditional villages in this area are in close proximity in terms of planar space, the roads connecting the villages are predominantly mountainous, with intricate road conditions. During the rainy season, natural disasters such as mudslides may occur, and, often, a short distance can entail a lengthy journey, rendering tour routes extremely inconvenient and significantly impeding tourism development. In the case of low-potential villages, Jinhui Village possesses favorable resource endowment conditions but is deficient in tourism development strategies and is relatively underdeveloped. Louxia Village and Shangxi Village, despite being nestled in the core area of Zi Que Jie Terraced Fields, have undergone rapid modernization, with a diminishing number of preserved traditional wooden buildings, thus lacking the resource endowment necessary for tourism development. Collectively, the distribution characteristics of low-potential traditional villages are not pronounced, and their tourism development challenges are diverse, culminating in a generally low ranking.

4.3. Development Proposal

Considering the advancement of rural tourism in the 18 traditional villages of central Hunan, here are detailed recommendations and strategies: To leverage resource endowment and distinctive development, it is essential to intensify the exploration and presentation of Meishan culture, thereby amplifying the cultural allure of the villages through a variety of cultural activities, festivals, exhibitions, and similar initiatives. Addressing the challenge of uniform architectural styles, villages are urged to delve into their unique historical narratives and features, enhancing their individuality through architectural restoration and landscape design. For the enhancement of market conditions and infrastructure, in villages with established market conditions like Da’an Village, efforts should focus on reinforcing the integration of traditional architecture and culture to boost the cultural value and distinctiveness of tourism products. Conversely, in villages with nascent market conditions such as Huangxi Village, there is a need to persistently attract external investment, capitalize on the village’s traditional character to develop unique resorts, and elevate service quality. In terms of improving tourism conditions and service standards, it is crucial to bolster the construction of tourism infrastructure, including road improvements, the addition of parking lots and public toilets, and enhanced network coverage, all aimed at enriching the tourist experience. For villages that capitalize on proximity to renowned scenic spots, like Tuan Village and Zhenglong Village, cooperation with these attractions should be strengthened, and innovative products such as joint tickets and set tickets should be developed to entice tourists to extend their stay and increase their spending. To foster community participation and equitable benefit sharing, local residents should be encouraged to engage in the tourism industry by establishing homestays, restaurants, and handicraft shops, ensuring that they directly benefit from tourism development. A fair profit distribution mechanism should be established to guarantee that the benefits of tourism are distributed justly among local residents.

In rural tourism management, training and education should enhance service awareness and management capabilities to ensure direct benefits from tourism development. A fair benefit distribution mechanism should be established to allocate tourism income reasonably among local residents. Digital platforms and social media should be used for precision marketing to boost the popularity and attractiveness of traditional villages. Developing characteristic tourism products and services while avoiding excessive commercialization is crucial to preserving the rural charm. Sustainable building practices, such as using local sustainable wood and traditional wood structure building techniques, should be prioritized in restoration and new construction to protect timber-framed buildings and reduce reliance on modern materials. A special fund should be set up to support the restoration and protection of traditional wooden structures, with the strengthened monitoring and management of cultural heritage to prevent degradation. Ecotourism routes combining ecological protection and tourism development can enhance tourist experiences and provide financial support for conservation efforts. A comprehensive long-term tourism plan should balance tourism activities with cultural heritage protection, incorporating ecological conservation, cultural inheritance, and economic development. The government should introduce policies, provide financial and technical support, and promote cooperation among the government, enterprises, communities, and academic institutions to encourage sustainable rural tourism projects.

Environmental protection and sustainable development should be at the forefront of tourism development, with a focus on avoiding over-commercialization and environmental harm. The promotion of green and sustainable tourism practices, such as eco-tourism and low-carbon tourism, is essential. Innovative development and policy support are also vital, with an emphasis on creating innovative tourism experiences using modern technology, including virtual reality and augmented reality. Efforts should be made to secure policy support and capital investment from the government and relevant departments to underpin tourism development. Long-term planning and dynamic adjustment are necessary to formulate comprehensive tourism development plans that align with the sustainable development of the villages. These plans should be adaptable to market changes and the actual outcomes of tourism development. For medium-potential villages like Huangxi Village, Luxi Village, and Shuangyan Village, infrastructure and tourism service levels should be enhanced through policy support and capital investment. For villages with weaker potential, such as Xia Lou Village, Shangxi Village, and Jinhui Village, the long-term protection of village value is crucial, with a focus on waiting for development opportunities while diligently protecting resources and constructing infrastructure. By implementing these suggestions and strategies, rural tourism in the 18 traditional villages of central Hunan can be significantly boosted, safeguarding and perpetuating the villages’ traditional culture and resources, and improving the tourism experience for visitors, thereby generating greater economic benefits for local residents.

4.4. Limitations and Future Directions

In this study, the evaluation method of the tourism development potential of traditional wooden structure villages is deeply explored, the results are analyzed in detail, and the corresponding development strategies are proposed. Research has achieved remarkable results, but it also has some limitations. First, the study sample was limited to 18 traditional villages in Hunan Province, which may limit the general applicability of the findings. To improve the broad applicability of this study, it is recommended that future studies expand the sample scope to cover traditional villages in more areas. Secondly, although this study used various data collection methods, such as questionnaires and field visits, the potential problem of sampling bias and biased data collection methods still need further in-depth analysis. The current questionnaire has some limitations in index selection, data collection methods, questionnaire design, the influence of external factors, and the selection of respondents. For example, although the index simplification improves the manageability of the questionnaire, it may miss key factors such as community participation and intangible cultural heritage protection, affecting the comprehensive assessment of the tourism development potential. Data collection, concentrated from January to August 2023 and covering different seasons, may not fully reflect all changes within the year, affecting the comprehensiveness of the results. Some problems in the questionnaire design are subjective and ambiguous, such as “harmony between traditional architecture and environment”, and the lack of clear definition and quantitative standards, resulting in insufficient data reliability and consistency. Furthermore, seasonal fluctuations and unrecorded policy or market changes during the survey period may affect the stability and long-term applicability of the data. Despite random sampling, there may be selection bias such as positive attitude, meaning that residents are more willing to participate in the survey, affecting the objectivity of the results. The sample may also be underrepresented, and certain villages or specific groups (such as young tourists) may be underrepresented. Future studies can further improve the quality and credibility of studies by adding key indicators, optimizing sampling methods, refining the questionnaire design, considering more external factors, and expanding the sample range. Furthermore, introducing more qualitative research methods, such as in-depth interviews, are recommended to gain deeper insights. Finally, despite a detailed statistical analysis of the collected data, data accuracy issues may result due to poor knowledge of local information by villagers and tourists and an incomplete grasp of relevant expertise. To this end, it is suggested to take the following measures to improve the accuracy of the data: expand the number of research objects, simplify and transform the research problems, and fully and accurately explain the problems in the process of research. Overall, although this study provides valuable insights into the sustainable development of traditional villages, the existing shortcomings still need to be compensated by broader data collection, more comprehensive consideration, and clearer interpretation to enhance the academic value and practical application of this research.

4.5. Sustainability Issues and Strategies

Rural tourism drives economic growth and social development but also impacts the local ecosystem, resource management, and long-term sustainability. In areas with traditional timber structures, urgent environmental issues include deforestation, conservation, and sustainable building practices. While rural tourism can lead to habitat destruction and pollution, it can also support conservation through eco-tourism. In central Hunan, the construction and maintenance of traditional timber structures require large amounts of wood, potentially causing deforestation. Additionally, increased tourism can strain local water resources and waste management systems. Sustainable resource management is crucial for long-term rural tourism sustainability. To address these challenges, sustainable forestry practices such as afforestation, selective logging, and sustainable wood certification should be implemented. Efficient water management and renewable energy use can reduce tourism’s ecological footprint. Sustainable building practices, including locally sourced materials, energy-efficient designs, and traditional technologies, can minimize environmental impacts. Community engagement and capacity building are essential to align tourism development with local values and environmental goals. The cultural and historical significance of traditional wooden structures demands attention to conservation efforts. Initiatives could include restoring damaged buildings, establishing heritage sites, and promoting sustainable tourism practices. These actions not only preserve cultural heritage but also protect local ecosystems, ensuring a balance between economic growth, cultural preservation, and environmental sustainability.

5. Conclusions

This study provides a comprehensive quantitative assessment of rural tourism potential in traditional villages in central Hunan and integrates cultural heritage protection into its framework. The results emphasize the importance of tourism conditions for regional economic growth and the necessity of preserving cultural heritage. These insights offer valuable guidance for policymakers and practitioners seeking to promote sustainable rural tourism. This paper initiates with a theoretical exploration of the confluence of culture and tourism within traditional villages, drawing upon disciplines such as geography, management, and sociology. It distills relevant factors including resource endowment, tourism conditions, and market conditions from the unique and stable living environment, social fabric, and customs of the Meishan area in central Hunan. By integrating factor analysis methods, this paper constructs an evaluation system and an influence factor model for the cultural and tourism integration in traditional villages. Subsequently, this system model is applied to assess and analyze 18 villages in central Hunan, culminating in a comprehensive ranking. This study’s ranking outcomes reveal that the tourism development potential of traditional villages in central Hunan can be stratified into three tiers: high potential, medium potential, and low potential. Tourism conditions emerge as a potent catalyst for tourism development in the region. High-potential traditional villages, with the exception of Da’an Village, which stands alone due to its transportation benefits, are predominantly clustered around the Zi Que Jie Terraced Fields tourism area and Anhua County, coalescing into a burgeoning tourism hub. Villages with medium potential are scattered along the Da Xiongshan, while those with low potential do not exhibit a discernible distribution pattern. Moreover, through empirical analysis, this study preliminarily validates the feasibility and applicability of the evaluation system and the influence factor model. It aligns with existing research findings, thereby enriching the body of knowledge on the evaluation of traditional village indicator systems. This study dissects the multifaceted influencing factors and configuration pathways of the cultural and tourism integration in traditional villages. Focusing on traditional villages with wooden architecture, this research transcends the macro and meso-scale limitations of previous evaluations on the cultural and tourism industry integration, thereby enriching the micro-scale research on the integration of the cultural and tourism industries within the context of wooden residential architecture. This study extends the previous qualitative research on the cultural and tourism integration in traditional villages to encompass both quantitative and qualitative research, guided by the principles of sustainable tourism development. By integrating environmental, socio-cultural, and economic dimensions, this study offers a comprehensive and scientific understanding of the developmental status and influencing pathways of traditional villages. The application of sustainable tourism development theory not only enriches the theoretical framework but also provides practical guidance for future research and policy making in rural tourism. To a certain extent, it can offer directional guidance and theoretical insights for subsequent related research endeavors. This study examines the impact of rural tourism on local ecosystems, resource management, and long-term sustainability, and it proposes relevant strategies. Emphasizing sustainable building practices, resource management, and conservation, this study offers theoretical insights and practical guidance for the sustainable development of rural tourism..