Sustainable Waste Management as a Determinant of Quality of Life in Croatian Island Communities

Abstract

This study examines the impact of sustainable waste management on the quality of life of the inhabitants of Croatian island communities, focusing on how waste management practices contribute to sustainable tourism development. This study aims to provide policymakers and local stakeholders with insights into the implementation of effective waste management strategies that improve environmental protection and the well-being of residents. This research aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by promoting sustainable waste management in island communities, SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) by encouraging waste reduction and recycling, and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). This study uses a survey-based quantitative research method, collecting data from 585 residents of the Kvarner islands using a structured questionnaire. The hypotheses are tested, and the relationships between waste management practices, quality of life, and sustainable tourism development are looked at using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). This study concludes that sustainable waste management, driven by the active participation of residents in waste separation and recycling, significantly increases the quality of life of residents and supports the sustainable development of tourism on the Kvarner islands. This study concludes that effective waste management supported by community participation is crucial for improving the quality of life of residents and promoting sustainable tourism on the Croatian islands. It emphasizes that integrating sustainable waste management practices into tourism development policies can conserve environmental resources and ensure the long-term well-being of communities.

1. Introduction

Waste management is one of the biggest environmental problems worldwide, as inadequacy leads to serious environmental degradation. This is particularly evident in island destinations, which experience increased waste generation due to the increased influx of tourists during the summer months. Due to the influence of seasonality and their particular geographical locations, island tourist destinations generally face a greater challenge in the appropriate disposal of the waste generated [1,2,3]. Tourist destinations face various challenges, including environmental issues due to increased tourist arrivals. The above-mentioned increase in tourist numbers directly and indirectly affects the quality of life of the inhabitants of a given destination [4].

This research is in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), namely SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). SDG 11 emphasizes the need for sustainable urban and community development that includes efficient waste management systems to improve environmental quality and public health. SDG 12 emphasizes the need to reduce waste through responsible production and consumption and advocates measures such as waste separation and recycling to reduce pollution. In addition, SDG 14 emphasizes the prevention of marine pollution, which is especially important for the island population as inadequate waste management could endanger marine ecosystems. This study aims to clarify how the integration of SDG principles into sustainable waste management could improve the quality of life of the inhabitants while promoting environmental protection and the sustainability of tourism [5,6].

Tourism is more sensitive to environmental degradation than other economic activities. Tourism needs a high-quality and clean environment to develop successfully, and its development jeopardizes its quality daily. We should seek a solution to this problem in the so-called sustainable development of tourism. It means development that satisfies the current needs of tourists and the local population while preserving resources for their future use [7]. Tourism is generally not a major polluter if adequate community infrastructure is provided [2].

Quality of life refers to the extent of well-being experienced by an individual or collective [8] and is strongly connected with economic development [9,10,11]. Researchers at the University of Toronto’s Quality of Life Research Unit characterized quality of life as the extent to which an individual appreciates the opportunities presented by life, with these opportunities encompassing the results of the interactions between a person and their environment, including both opportunities and constraints [12]. The World Health Organization (WHO) characterizes quality of life as an individual’s assessment of their status within the cultural and value framework of their environment, as well as their aspirations, expectations, standards, and worries [13]. The aforementioned definitions indicate that quality of life is a comprehensive, multifaceted, and intricate notion that includes the options available to individuals, the significance they ascribe to their existence, and their enjoyment of their possessions [14].

The influence of tourism on people’s quality of life can be examined from multiple angles, including economic, social, cultural, and ecological [15]. This article emphasizes the ecological dimension.

The circular economy is a sustainability-oriented economic framework that aims to reduce waste and improve resource efficiency by promoting recycling, reuse, and material recovery. Efficient waste management is essential for realizing the principles of the circular economy, as it reduces dependence on landfills, minimizes environmental damage, and promotes sustainable production cycles. Key stakeholders—governments, businesses, consumers, and the waste industry—are working together to make this change possible. Improper waste disposal poses a significant risk to the environment and public health, especially in island communities where waste disposal infrastructure is often limited [16,17,18]. The accumulation of unmanaged waste can lead to the pollution of terrestrial and marine ecosystems, threaten biodiversity, contaminate water sources, and reduce the overall quality of life for residents. In addition, inefficient waste management systems can undermine the attractiveness of island destinations and have a negative impact on tourism-dependent economies. Addressing these challenges through sustainable waste management practices is essential for environmental protection, public health, and long-term economic sustainability on islands [19,20,21].

The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between sustainable waste management practices and the quality of life of residents in Croatian island communities, with a particular focus on their impact on sustainable tourism development. By analyzing waste management behavior, environmental challenges, and community involvement, this paper aims to provide actionable insights for policymakers and stakeholders to improve waste management systems, protect the environment, and improve both the well-being of residents and the long-term sustainability of tourism on the Kvarner islands. The main objective of this research is to link waste management on Croatian islands with the quality of life of the inhabitants of these areas, taking into account the criteria of sustainable development.

2. Literature Review

Research conducted by surveying residents in Thailand links the perceived impact of tourism development to their quality of life. The results confirm that the intensive development of tourism hurts the environment and, thus, the quality of life of residents [22]. A study in Vietnam pointed out that the amount of produced waste has been increasing for years, and the capacity of municipal waste management facilities cannot meet the growing demand, which can significantly worsen the quality of life of residents. The authors suggested greater monitoring and control of activities at landfills and waste treatment facilities, the use of modern waste treatment technologies, and the relocation of landfills and facilities at least 5 km away from residential areas to protect the environment and improve the quality of life of residents [23]. A study conducted in Malaysia investigated the relationship between residents’ life satisfaction and their active participation in various activities that would improve their quality of life. The results indicate that the majority of respondents are satisfied with their socio-environmental quality of life, although there is a need to manage green infrastructure more effectively due to the problems identified in urban centers in terms of waste management and environmental management [24].

On the north coast of Mauritius, a study investigated the attitudes of the inhabitants toward the socio-cultural, economic, and environmental aspects of tourism. The results showed that most inhabitants support the development of tourism. Socio-cultural and economic influences had a significant and positive impact on tourism development as they led to a better quality of life, while environmental influences had a negative impact on tourism development. In situations where residents derive significant benefits from tourism, they are more willing to support its further development. On the other hand, residents are concerned about the impact of tourism on the environment. The authors pointed out that understanding residents’ attitudes can help people and policymakers plan the sustainable development of a destination better [25]. The residents of Tioman Island (Malaysia) state that the island’s environment can be an important factor in attracting tourists. The aim of the research was to determine residents’ perceptions of environmental impacts and their support for tourism development. The results showed that a poorly regulated tourism sector can lead to a poorer quality of life at sea. A strong positive relationship was found between positive environmental impacts and residents’ support for the tourism sector [26]. A major challenge on the island of Muharraq in the Kingdom of Bahrain for the city’s decision-makers was investigating the public awareness of residents regarding household waste management due to the growing population, increasing waste generation, the limited availability of land, and insufficient space for waste disposal. The survey’s results showed a high level of awareness and proper waste disposal among residents [27].

A study carried out in Romania investigates the adverse effects of a tourism event on locals’ quality of life, which are attributed to significant trash production, environmental degradation, and the overutilization of public infrastructure and local services. The organizers proposed the implementation of a series of initiatives to enhance awareness regarding recycling and the environmental impact of plastic, aiming to convert the tourist event into one centered on environmental sustainability through the utilization of recycled materials, segregated waste collection, and the adoption of electric vehicles [28]. A study was conducted in a Mediterranean locale in southeastern Italy to validate or invalidate the hypothesis that residents’ attitudes toward tourism and individual quality of life fluctuate with tourism development and to ascertain whether these changes are enduring or transient, given that tourism is the primary economic activity in the area. The findings indicated that in the spring, participants reported that tourism did not significantly jeopardize their quality of life; nevertheless, during the peak season, their assessments became unfavorable, asserting that tourism could instigate conflicts between tourists and inhabitants. The primary factors were the disproportionate allocation of expenses and benefits among inhabitants and the detrimental effects of tourism on the environment, public services, and overall quality of life [29].

A study was carried out in a tourist resort in Northern Cyprus on the environmentally conscious behavior of the inhabitants. Community engagement, community involvement, and attitudes have a positive impact on pro-environmental behaviors that contribute to the sustainability of a destination. They emphasized the need to focus on the long-term sustainability of a destination and to achieve positive interactions between residents, tourists, and the environment [30]. The Spanish island of Mallorca was investigated to assess the perception of over-tourism by residents of a destination. The findings indicate that over-tourism notably influences residents’ perceptions of the destination as a desirable place to live and underscores their attitudes toward limiting tourism during peak seasons [31].

Research conducted in Croatia indicates that tourism contributes the most to waste generation in the coastal part of Croatia, where tourism-related municipal waste generation is 22% higher than in the continental part [32]. The intensive development of tourism in Croatia has neither improved nor reduced the general quality of life of its inhabitants. The support of Croatian residents for tourism development shows that such an attitude may not be entirely rational due to the immediate benefits it brings, without considering the potential long-term consequences. In situations where environmental quality becomes crucial for the local population in the context of further tourism development, support for mass tourism is likely to be significantly lower [33].

The findings of a study conducted on the island of Krk indicate that the island residents endorse the waste sorting system and the current integrated waste management system. The respondents consider waste separation crucial for enhancing landscape quality and promoting tourism [34]. The Croatian Adriatic was considered a possible direction for the development of sustainable waste management, using the example of best practices on the island of Krk. The conclusion was that the pronounced seasonality of tourism has a direct impact not only on the environment but also on waste management infrastructures. Accordingly, the authors see a moderate intensity of tourism as a solution, which would ensure sustainable waste management with less pressure on the environment and waste management infrastructures [3]. In the analysis of waste management on the Kvarner islands (Krk, Cres, Lošinj, and Rab), data on the amount of waste were compared with tourism indicators. The authors proved that with an increase in the number of tourist overnight stays, the amount of waste generated also increases and concluded that despite the pronounced seasonality of tourism on the Kvarner islands, the waste management model is not disrupted as it is well-organized and has a predetermined and consistent application [35]. In Croatia, the importance and benefits of the circular economy were analyzed, along with the legal framework for waste management and green economy trends, with a focus on the island of Krk, which is the leader in terms of the percentage of separately collected waste, was the first in the region to start recycling and sorting waste, and has the largest number of recycling yards in Primorje-Gorski Kotar County [36]. On the island of Lošinj, the current waste management situation was analyzed, and possible solutions were attempted. The establishment, advancement, and execution of a complete waste management system in the Croatian islands is a significant political and economic concern, as well as a crucial determinant of quality of life [1]. On the Kvarner islands (Krk, Cres, Lošinj, and Rab), the residents’ perceptions concerning garbage separation were analyzed, and the impact of residents’ waste separation behaviors on the sustainable growth of a tourist destination was assessed. The findings indicated that residents’ attitudes towards garbage separation favorably affect the waste separation behaviors of the Kvarner people, thus contributing to sustainable development [37]. A study conducted on the Croatian islands proposed a methodology and principles for waste management in island tourist sites. The findings indicated that surveyed residents exhibit a significant degree of waste segregation and engage in the sustainable development of tourism through their ecological practices in garbage separation. The respondents demonstrated significant interest in environmental conservation, deeming it essential for a destination’s appeal, including visitor attraction, tourism development, and the quality of life of residents [2].

3. Methodology

This chapter delineates the hypotheses and conceptual research model, the design of the questionnaire, the study location, the sample size, the data collection method, and the statistical data analysis techniques employed.

3.1. Hypothesis and Conceptual Framework for This Research

Tourism is considered to be the fastest-growing economic sector in the world and is, therefore, one of the most important drivers of global socio-economic progress. However, when attempting to establish a link between tourism and quality of life, researchers seem to look at the well-being of tourists rather than the quality of life of residents [38]. When looking at the impact of tourism on the environment, this is usually a negative impact due to unsustainable and irresponsible tourism development, which includes the construction of infrastructure and accommodation without adequate waste disposal, sewage systems, or sufficient water and energy supplies, as well as the devastation of coastal areas, etc. [4]. Sustainable tourism development serves as a tool to reduce negative environmental, social, and economic impacts while increasing the positive impacts of tourism development. However, if residents feel that tourism development is occurring at the expense of their resources, they may experience anger and negative attitudes toward tourists [8]. Although tourism can provide economic growth and contribute to the quality of life of residents, it is important to consider the environmental context of tourism development that affects residents. We formulated the first hypothesis with this in mind.

H1: 

The relationship between the ecological impact of tourism and the quality of life of the inhabitants is both positive and statistically significant.

Sustainable waste management can only be achieved with the support and activity of the residents [2,37]. Through their efficiency in waste sorting, residents play an important role in preserving the environment, achieving a better quality of life, and participating in the sustainable development of the island [34,39,40].

H2: 

The way residents deal with waste is positively and statistically significantly related to sustainable waste management.

The management of waste at a destination is closely associated with the quality of life for its residents, serving as a fundamental requirement for the advancement of sustainable tourism. Research indicates that pollution negatively impacts the quality of life of residents [41]. Consequently, sustainable waste management must become a requirement. Furthermore, the management of municipal solid waste serves as a critical indicator for evaluating the quality of life index established by the United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat) [42].

H3: 

Sustainable waste management is positively and statistically significantly linked to the quality of life of residents.

The management of waste presents a significant challenge for destinations during the tourist season, characterized by a notable increase in visitor numbers and leading to greater volumes of waste generated. During the tourist season, the influx of visitors places significant pressure on waste management systems at various destinations. Nonetheless, despite the evident seasonality of tourism, a well-structured and consistently executed waste management model remains unaffected, ultimately fostering sustainability [35].

H4: 

Sustainable waste management has a positive and statistically significant correlation with sustainable tourism development.

Residents’ satisfaction and quality of life are key to the success and sustainability of tourism development [29]. Environmental protection is of great importance when developing tourism, especially in destinations with existing problems of mass tourism. The overall quality of life results from the sustainability of the destination and responsible tourism initiatives. Although tourist destinations strive to maintain a balance between sustainability and development, responsible tourism practices lead to sustainable tourism development that significantly improves the quality of life of residents in tourist destinations. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the needs of residents, determine potential impacts, and determine tourism development constraints based on resource and infrastructure capacities [43].

H5: 

A positive and statistically significant correlation exists between residents’ quality of life and the sustainable development of tourism.

Considering the hypotheses set, Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of this study.

3.2. Questionnaire Design and Study Site

Based on a review of previous research, a questionnaire was designed for the survey of residents to serve as an empirical research tool. The questionnaire consists of five constructs: Environmental Impact of Tourism, Residents’ Waste Treatment, Sustainable Waste Management, Residents’ Quality of Life, and Sustainable Tourism Development. A five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was used to measure all items.

Each of the five constructs consists of 3 to 5 items that were adopted from related studies after a comprehensive review of the literature in the areas of quality of life and waste management for the local population.

This study was performed on the Kvarner islands, comprising Krk, Cres, Lošinj, and Rab. The Kvarner islands are situated in the northern Adriatic of Croatia, within Primorje-Gorski Kotar County, in Kvarner Bay. Krk is the northernmost island in the Kvarner region in the Croatian Adriatic. The island of Rab is the southernmost island in the Kvarner archipelago, situated south of Krk and east of the Cres and Lošinj islands. The Kvarner islands constitute 29.2% of the country’s total area [4,44]. The map (Figure 2) illustrates the geographical position of the islands examined in this study.

The Kvarner islands (blue circle) possess a highly advantageous location within the European and domestic tourism sectors and are well-linked. The island of Krk is linked to the mainland via a bridge. The Cres and Lošinj islands are linked by a bridge. The Kvarner islands possess many ferry and catamaran links to the mainland and are well-interconnected among themselves [44,45,46]. The chosen islands share similarities as appealing sites that draw significant visitor traffic, predominantly during the summer season. The allure of the Croatian islands is attributable to their advantageous geographical location and connectivity to the mainland, Mediterranean climate, characterized by hot, arid summers and temperate winters, the abundant and varied flora and fauna, pristine nature, appealing cultural and historical heritage, gastronomy, convoluted coastline, and natural sandy and pebbly beaches [44,45].

We chose the Kvarner islands as the research site due to the significant increase in waste generation during the peak tourist season. However, despite the pronounced seasonality of tourism, the existing waste management system remains effective and well-structured [35]. These islands share a unified ecologically integrated waste management model, which includes waste separation by material type, the presence of recycling facilities, and the transportation of waste to the Marišćina County Waste Management Center on the mainland [2].

3.3. Sample Size Selection and Data Collection

The survey involved the residents of the Kvarner islands, emphasizing that sustainable development relies heavily on the engagement of the local population in any given area [47,48].

The sample selection framework is based on the population data derived from the 2021 census [49]. To ensure representative data, a suitable sample size was established for the chosen islands, taking into account the uneven distribution of the population across the observed locations. An appropriate sample size was established based on the criterion that a sample is considered representative if it includes 1.5% of the overall population. Consequently, the results’ representativeness was confirmed at 1.5% of the total population of the islands chosen for this study [50,51]. The proposed sample size consists of 577 participants, distributed as follows: 299 participants from the island of Krk, 41 from the island of Cres, 113 from the island of Lošinj, and 124 from the island of Rab [50,51]. The most recent census from 2021 presents a table detailing the area of each Kvarner island (m²), the population count, and the intended sample size (

Table 1. Geographical data and planned sample size of the islands included in this study (author’s elaboration based on [49,52]).

Island	Area (m2)	Number of Inhabitants (2021 Census)	Planned Sample Size
Krk	405,218,994	19,916	299
Cres	405,705,293	2716	41
Losinj	74,366,091	7537	113
Rab	86,115,120	8268	124
Total	971,405,498	38,437	577

). The participants were adequately informed about the research objectives, the intended use of their data, and any potential risks associated with participation. In addition, participants were assured of their anonymity, and verbal informed consent was obtained before they were included in this study.

The participants were chosen utilizing the stratified random selection technique [50,51]. The authors executed this research by identifying respondents who willingly completed a questionnaire. An exclusion question regarding place of residence was posed to determine if potential respondents were permanently residing on the island. The poll was executed in May and June 2024 on the Kvarner islands (Krk, Cres, Lošinj, and Rab) with residents who opted to participate.

3.4. Methods of Statistical Data Analysis

This research analyzes the results of the questionnaire. A structural equation modeling method called the partial least squares technique (PLS-SEM) was used to test the hypotheses in the real world. The SmartPLS 4 program was used for this analysis. PLS-SEM is a method that enables the estimation of complex cause–effect relationships in path models with latent variables. In this paper, for the analysis of the results, PLS-SEM is an appropriate method because it tests recent research theories, can handle formative and reflective measurement models, supports a small sample, is a complex structural model with a large number of construct variables and relationships, allows the use of latent variables in subsequent analyses, and supports a non-normal data distribution [53].

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

A total of 600 individuals participated in the survey, with 585 questionnaires deemed validly completed. The responses included 300 from the island of Krk, 45 from the island of Cres, 113 from the island of Lošinj, and 127 from the island of Rab. Among the 15 improperly filled questionnaires, seven originated from the island of Krk, one from the island of Cres, three from the island of Lošinj, and four from the island of Rab.

Table 2. Demographic profile of respondents (n = 585) (author’s calculation).

Characteristic	Respondents
	Frequency	Percentage
Gender
Male	280	47.9
Female	305	52.1
Age
18–30	101	17.3
31–45	156	26.7
46–60	168	28.7
61 and older	160	27.4
Education
Primary	17	2.9
Secondary (high school)	297	50.8
Undergraduate degree	169	28.9
Graduate degree	101	17.3
Postgraduate degree	1	0.2
Island
Krk	300	51.3
Cres	45	7.7
Lošinj	113	19.3
Rab	127	21.7

presents the demographic profiles of respondents categorized by gender, age, and education.

The demographic profile of respondents (n = 585) shows a nearly even gender distribution, with 52.1% female and 47.9% male participants. Most respondents have a secondary (50.8%) or undergraduate (28.9%) education, while the largest age group falls within the 46–60 range (28.7%) and the majority reside on Krk (51.3%).

Respondents were most positive about the sustainable development of tourism (M = 4.45; SD = 0.485), with the item “Tourism has improved the quality of life of the local community” receiving the highest score (M = 4.49; SD = 0.652). Respondents are only slightly less satisfied with the quality of life of residents (M = 4.34; SD = 0.785). The average values for the construct of sustainable waste management are between 4.26 and 4.29. The constructs of the ecological impact of tourism and waste treatment by residents have very similar results (M = 4.18; SD = 0.804 and M = 4.20; SD = 0.817, respectively) with a small range (the average values are between 4.16 and 4.21). These constructs also have the lowest values. The research results in the

Table 3. Descriptive statistics (n = 585) (author’s calculation).

Item Number	Construct/Item	Mean	SD
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF TOURISM		4.18	0.804
eco1	Tourism contributes to the preservation and prosperity of the natural environment.	4.19	0.821
eco2	I believe that the quality of the environment in my city has not deteriorated as a result of tourism.	4.21	0.823
eco3	Tourism maintains roads and other public areas to a high standard, which would not otherwise be the case.	4.17	0.799
eco4	In general, tourism has more positive than negative effects on the environment in the community.	4.16	0.775
RESIDENTS’ WASTE TREATMENT		4.20	0.817
rwt1	I make sure others put trash in designated places, not on the street.	4.19	0.861
rwt2	I currently separate the components of household waste at home in special containers or bags (food, plastic, glass, paper, etc.).	4.18	0.831
rwt3	I reuse some components of household waste (empty plastic cans, bottles, etc.) for useful things.	4.20	0.782
rwt4	In parks and other public places, I remove all trash and put it in the bins before leaving.	4.22	0.794
SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT		4.27	0.814
swm1	People maintain a hygienic environment well.	4.26	0.853
swm2	The tourism industry on the island where I live is environmentally friendly.	4.26	0.811
swm3	Waste sorting on the island is essential for the development of tourism.	4.29	0.798
swm4	The island where I live has a favorable reputation in the ecological and environmental field.	4.27	0.792
QUALITY OF LIFE OF RESIDENTS		4.34	0.785
QoL1	Tourists do not disturb my quality of life in my city with their arrival.	4.32	0.816
QoL2	I like dealing with tourists.	4.35	0.779
QoL3	The landscape that has been prepared for this area is beautiful and attractive.	4.36	0.759
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT		4.45	0.485
std1	The development of tourism in my city promotes a positive ethic of environmental protection among all stakeholders in my city.	4.43	0.690
std2	Tourism in my city develops in harmony with the natural and cultural environment.	4.41	0.738
std3	I believe that the tourism industry can improve the environment in my town for future generations.	4.44	0.708
std4	Decision-makers consider the concerns of residents when making decisions about waste.	4.45	0.693
std5	Tourism has improved the quality of life of the local community.	4.49	0.652

show that all respondents have a positive attitude towards all constructs.

4.2. Measurement Model

The formulated hypotheses were tested utilizing partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM proves to be especially beneficial when the objective of the structural model is to forecast and elucidate the target outcomes derived from both in-sample and out-of-sample metrics [54,55]. The assessment of this reflective measurement model’s reliability involves examining indicator reliability and internal consistency reliability, which includes Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR). Validity is assessed through convergent validity, average variance extracted (AVE), and discriminant validity.

Table 4. PLS results for the measurement model (author’s calculation).

Item Number	Construct/Item	λ *	α	CR	AVE
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF TOURISM			0.853	0.901	0.694
eco1	Tourism contributes to the preservation and prosperity of the natural environment.	0.841
eco2	I believe that the quality of the environment in my city has not deteriorated as a result of tourism.	0.857
eco3	Tourism maintains roads and other public areas to a high standard, which would not otherwise be the case.	0.814
eco4	In general, tourism has more positive than negative effects on the environment in the community.	0.819
RESIDENTS’ WASTE TREATMENT			0.841	0.894	0.678
rwt1	I make sure others put trash in designated places, not on the street.	0.820
rwt2	I currently separate the components of household waste at home in special containers or bags (food, plastic, glass, paper…).	0.845
rwt3	I reuse some components of household waste (empty plastic cans, bottles, etc.) for useful things.	0.848
rwt4	In parks and other public places, I remove all trash and put it in the bins before leaving.	0.778
SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT			0.778	0.857	0.600
swm1	People maintain a hygienic environment well.	0.800
swm2	The tourism industry on the island where I live is environmentally friendly.	0.814
swm3	Waste sorting on the island is essential for the development of tourism.	0.757
swm4	The island where I live has a favorable reputation in the ecological and environmental field.	0.725
QUALITY OF LIFE OF RESIDENTS			0.829	0.898	0.746
QoL1	Tourists do not disturb my quality of life in my city with their arrival.	0.839
QoL2	I like dealing with tourists.	0.886
QoL3	The landscape that has been prepared for this area is beautiful and attractive.	0.865
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT			0.831	0.881	0.598
std1	The development of tourism in my city promotes a positive ethic of environmental protection among all stakeholders in my city.	0.825
std2	Tourism in my city develops in harmony with the natural and cultural environment.	0.829
std3	I believe that the tourism industry can improve the environment in my town for future generations.	0.771
std4	Decision-makers consider the concerns of residents when making decisions about waste.	0.712
std5	Tourism has improved the quality of life of the local community.	0.720

* All factor loadings were significant at p < 0.001. α stands for Cronbach’s alpha; CR stands for composite reliability; AVE stands for average variance extracted.

presents the results of the PLS analysis for the measurement model.

The values of the individual item loadings or cross-loadings, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, composite reliability, and AVE are presented in Table 4. The cross-loading values observed in this study span from 0.712 to 0.886, suggesting a satisfactory level of internal consistency [55]. The values for Cronbach’s alpha range from 0.778 to 0.853, while the composite reliability falls between 0.857 and 0.901. The values for Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.70 [55], indicating that no items required deletion. The average variance extracted (AVE) serves as a measure for evaluating convergent validity. The values of AVE for each construct range from 0.598 to 0.746. All values exceeded the threshold of 0.5, demonstrating the convergent validity of the measurement [56]. The discriminant validity of the constructs is evaluated through an analysis of the cross-loadings and the application of the Fornell and Larcker [57] criterion [56]. The data presented in

Table 5. Discriminant validity—squared interactor correlation vs. average variance extracted (AVE) (author’s calculation).

Construct	Development	Ecology	Management	Quality	Residents
Development	0.773
Ecology	0.731	0.833
Management	0.735	0.752	0.775
Quality	0.763	0.723	0.749	0.864
Residents	0.732	0.819	0.780	0.731	0.823

show that the square root of the AVE for the separate construct exceeds its correlation with all other constructs. Moreover, it was discovered that no item achieved a higher score on any contrasting construct [56,58]. There are several disagreements regarding the management construct. Nonetheless, the difference (0.005) is minimal yet significant and should not be overlooked [59]. In conclusion, we can affirm the discriminant validity of this measurement model, which reinforces the distinctiveness between the constructs.

Furthermore,

Table 6. Cross-loadings (author’s calculation).

Construct	Development	Ecology	Management	Quality	Residents
QoL1	0.648	0.618	0.634	0.839	0.625
QoL2	0.662	0.650	0.674	0.886	0.662
QoL3	0.667	0.604	0.632	0.865	0.606
eco1	0.600	0.841	0.654	0.608	0.707
eco2	0.625	0.857	0.640	0.627	0.712
eco3	0.575	0.814	0.596	0.567	0.643
eco4	0.634	0.819	0.614	0.605	0.662
rwt1	0.616	0.684	0.633	0.587	0.820
rwt2	0.582	0.696	0.621	0.602	0.845
rwt3	0.625	0.670	0.682	0.609	0.848
rwt4	0.586	0.645	0.627	0.609	0.778
std1	0.825	0.616	0.608	0.657	0.632
std2	0.829	0.578	0.602	0.615	0.593
std3	0.771	0.566	0.570	0.618	0.559
std4	0.712	0.527	0.518	0.519	0.483
std5	0.720	0.536	0.539	0.529	0.555
swm1	0.618	0.634	0.800	0.636	0.654
swm2	0.628	0.632	0.814	0.632	0.663
swm3	0.504	0.525	0.757	0.512	0.532
swm4	0.511	0.524	0.725	0.525	0.552

demonstrates that the external loadings of all indicators on their respective constructs exceed their loadings on alternative constructs [60]. Furthermore, the variance of no other latent construct is more effectively explained than that of its indicator, thereby confirming the discriminant validity of the measurement model.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

We used PLS-SEM 5000 bootstrapping to find the structural model relationships and see how significant the correlations were [56,58,61].

Table 7. Significance testing of the structural model path coefficients (author’s calculation).

Path	Path Coefficients	t-Value	p-Value	Hypothesis
ECOLOGY → QUALITY	0.368	8.44	0.000	H1: supported
MANAGEMENT → DEVELOPMENT	0.372	9.44	0.000	H4: supported
MANAGEMENT → QUALITY	0.472	11.31	0.000	H3: supported
QUALITY → DEVELOPMENT	0.485	12.05	0.000	H5: supported
RESIDENTS → MANAGEMENT	0.780	50.77	0.000	H2: supported

contains the standardized estimates of the path coefficients and their respective t-values and p-values and summarizes the results of the hypothesis tests.

Table 7 reveals that all relationships are statistically significant. The structural model results indicate a significant and strong positive correlation between residents’ waste treatment practices and sustainable waste management (β = 0.780; t = 50.77; p < 0.000); therefore, H2 was strongly supported. The environmental impact of tourism has a positive influence on the quality of life of residents (β = 0.368; t = 8.44; p < 0.000), but this influence is smaller than in hypothesis 2. This result supports H1. Sustainable waste management has a positive effect on sustainable tourism development (β = 0.372; t = 9.44; p < 0.000), which confirms H4, and residents’ quality of life (β = 0.472; t = 11.31; p < 0.000), which confirms H3. Finally, residents’ quality of life has a positive relationship with sustainable tourism development (β = 0.485; t = 12.05; p < 0.000), which confirms H5.

The indirect effects of the constructs from the conceptual model are presented in

Table 8. Special and total indirect effects (author’s calculation).

Path	Path Coefficients	t-Value	p-Value
RESIDENTS → MANAGEMENT → DEVELOPMENT	0.290	9.01	0.000
RESIDENTS → MANAGEMENT → QUALITY → DEVELOPMENT	0.179	9.13	0.000
RESIDENTS → MANAGEMENT → QUALITY	0.368	10.69	0.000
ECOLOGY → QUALITY → DEVELOPMENT	0.178	6.09	0.000
MANAGEMENT → QUALITY → DEVELOPMENT	0.229	9.43	0.000

and

Table 9. Total indirect effects (author’s calculation).

Path	Path Coefficients	t-Value	p-Value
ECOLOGY → DEVELOPMENT	0.178	6.09	0.000
MANAGEMENT → DEVELOPMENT	0.229	9.43	0.000
RESIDENTS → DEVELOPMENT	0.469	16.48	0.000
RESIDENTS → QUALITY	0.368	10.69	0.000

.

All indirect effects are statistically significant. According to Cohen [62], the tourism waste management of the inhabitants has a major influence on sustainable tourism development (β = 0.469; t = 16.48; p < 0.000). In particular, sustainable waste management has an impact on the quality of life of the inhabitants (β = 0.368; t = 10.69; p < 0.000). The environmental component has the least influence on the sustainable development of tourism, also through the quality of life of the inhabitants (β = 0.178; t = 6.09; p < 0.000).

Table 10. R-squared values (author’s calculation).

Construct	R-Square	Adjusted R-Square
Development	0.643	0.642
Management	0.608	0.607
Quality	0.620	0.619

shows the R2 value of the quality variable, which explains 64.3% of the total variance in development. The exogenous latent variable ecology explained 60.8% of the variance in the endogenous latent quality variable, while the exogenous latent variable of residents explained 62.0% of the total variance in the endogenous latent variable of management. Falk and Miller [62] recommended an R2 value of 0.10 as an acceptable minimum value. Taking into account the recommendations of Falk and Miller [62], it can be concluded that organizational performance exhibits suitable R-squared values.

The regressions of the structural model are examined for possible collinearity, as the variable of development is predicted by the variables of management and quality, the variable of management by the variable of residents, and the variable of quality by the variables of ecology and management.

VIF values are from 1.000 to 2.278 and are far below the threshold of 5 [60]; therefore, multicollinearity is not an issue (

Table 11. VIF values (author’s calculation).

	Development	Ecology	Management	Quality	Residents
Development
Ecology				2.301
Management	2.278			2.301
Quality	2.278
Residents			1.000

).

5. Discussion

This study’s findings indicate that the residents of the Kvarner islands are content with their quality of life and that the ecological effects of tourism have a positive and statistically significant correlation with the residents’ quality of life. Multiple studies have substantiated the aforementioned hypothesis, demonstrating a reciprocal relationship between the effects of tourism development on the environment and the residents’ quality of life [22,33,41]. The participants in this study indicated that tourism positively influences the environment, enhances its beauty and appeal, aids in its preservation, and does not disrupt it; they asserted that tourists do not adversely affect their quality of life and that they appreciate engaging with visitors. When environmental quality is paramount for the local population for future tourist growth, support for mass tourism is likely to diminish considerably [33]. Citizens recognize the tourism sector’s contribution to the national economy via the influx of tourists, although they also desire the preservation of natural resources [26]. Consequently, citizens’ impressions of tourist development are crucial as they represent a primary stakeholder in endorsing the sector. The quality of life of residents may substantially decline if the capacity of municipal waste treatment facilities fails to satisfy the increasing demand, a situation not observed on the islands analyzed in this study [23].

Skills development is a key factor in sustainable waste management and the promotion of tourism. It empowers communities to overcome inertia, encourage collaboration, and align local commitments with a global sustainability framework. Investing in educational initiatives that improve environmental awareness, waste segregation, and sustainable resource management promotes community engagement and resilience. Teaching skills in waste recycling, the circular economy, and sustainable tourism empowers local communities to participate in sustainability efforts and ensure that economic development is aligned with environmental protection. These skills development initiatives strengthen social solidarity, improve problem-solving skills, and promote innovation in the field of sustainable waste management. An important finding of this study relates to the distribution of economic benefits arising from tourism and waste management systems. Although mass tourism can promote economic growth, it is essential that the resulting benefits are shared equitably between the various stakeholders, including local businesses, municipalities, waste management companies, and tourism providers. Policies that include waste reduction incentives, sustainable business models, and municipal waste management programs can create new revenue streams while reducing the environmental impact. In addition, creative alliances between the public and private sectors can improve the efficiency of investments in waste infrastructure and ensure that tourism-generated funds are reinvested in local sustainability initiatives.

Knowledge and education are essential in cultivating sustainable communities, especially when it comes to the convergence of waste management, tourism, and quality of life. Raising public awareness through information campaigns, community workshops, and educational initiatives promotes a shared commitment to environmental protection. In addition, knowledge-sharing networks between different island communities could promote the implementation of best practices and novel waste management strategies. Sustainable communities are based on informed choices, collective responsibility, and sustainable environmental management and are therefore in line with SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). By integrating skills development, the equitable distribution of economic benefits, and information-sharing channels, island communities can strengthen their resilience to environmental challenges while promoting sustainable tourism and a higher quality of life. Together, these factors form a comprehensive approach to sustainability that balances economic, social, and environmental concerns.

In addition, the results of this research have shown that residents’ handling of waste is positively and statistically significantly associated with sustainable waste management. This research has also shown that the inhabitants of the Kvarner islands dispose of their waste in the designated places, sort it, and reuse it [24]. The respondents of this study believe that the environment is clean and is not threatened by tourism, that waste sorting on the island is necessary for the development of tourism, and that they have a good reputation for ecology and the environment. The inhabitants of the Kvarner islands handle waste responsibly and are interested in waste separation and participation, which leads to sustainable waste management [2,34,37].

Sustainable waste management necessitates the establishment of a comprehensive system, which is implemented on the Kvarner islands, rendering them more advanced than other Croatian islands. The islands in this study have implemented distinct trash collection systems, recycling centers, sorting facilities, and composting plants, therefore substantially diminishing the volume of mixed municipal waste [2].

The island of Krk is the most advanced Croatian island in terms of waste management, followed by other islands in the northern Adriatic (the Kvarner islands—Cres, Lošinj, and Rab), which still have room for improvement (e.g., the construction of composting plants and sorting stations), but collect significant quantities of all types of separately collected waste thanks to the established municipal infrastructure. Krk was forced to make certain changes a long time ago due to the limited capacity of the island’s landfill, unlike other islands that had sufficient space on the island’s landfills and, therefore, accumulated waste. Mixed municipal waste from the Kvarner islands, which used to be disposed of at the island landfills, is now transported to the waste management center of the Marišćina district on the mainland via the established island transfer stations [2]. The pronounced tourist seasonality of the Kvarner islands does not interfere with the established and applied waste management model and is reflected in the demonstration of the realization that only through sustainable waste management can environmental degradation be reduced, a circular economy developed, and sustainable development of island tourist destinations achieved, which also includes improving the quality of life of residents [35].

This research establishes a robust positive and statistically significant correlation between sustainable waste management and the quality of life of residents. Therefore, the environment is recognized as a key determinant of well-being [15]. Inadequate municipal solid waste (MSW) management not only contributes to environmental pollution but also negatively impacts residents’ quality of life [63]. Addressing waste management challenges can lead to global improvements in well-being [64].

Furthermore, the findings indicate a significant link between sustainable waste management and sustainable tourism development. An efficient municipal waste management system is a crucial measure of sustainability [43]. Survey respondents expressed strong support for sustainable tourism, recognizing its role in environmental preservation, harmony with natural surroundings, and overall quality of life improvements [2]. Proper waste management enhances the appeal of tourist destinations and fosters sustainable tourism growth [3,25,65].

Promoting a circular economy through waste management is critical to reducing environmental impact, improving resource efficiency, and promoting sustainable economic development in island communities. A circular economy model emphasizes waste minimization, reuse, and recycling to transform waste into valuable resources rather than allowing it to accumulate in landfills. In island regions with limited waste disposal facilities, implementing circular economy principles can reduce waste production, extend product life cycles, and create new economic opportunities through material recovery and sustainable business models. The introduction of composting programs, deposit systems, and upcycling activities can facilitate the transition from a linear “take–make–dispose” model to a regenerative and sustainable framework. Effective waste management within the circular economy paradigm requires the successful engagement of stakeholders. Local authorities play a crucial role in creating legal frameworks, investing in waste management infrastructure, and promoting sustainability incentives. Tourism businesses and accommodation providers need to adopt sustainable practices, minimize the use of single-use plastics, and educate tourists on proper waste disposal. Community organizations and NGOs need to raise awareness, coordinate cleanups, and advocate for more robust sustainability policies. Residents, as the main waste generators, need to actively participate in waste separation, conscious consumption, and involvement in local sustainability initiatives. Collaboration between the public and private sectors, including municipal authorities working with waste management companies and local businesses, can provide creative waste solutions, collective responsibility, and improved efficiency in resource recovery.

The role of local communities is significant in promoting sustainable tourism by engaging in responsible waste sorting and environmental conservation [2,37]. The same trend is evident in the Kvarner islands, where residents play a key role in environmental protection and sustainable development [34]. This study confirms a positive correlation between quality of life and sustainable tourism development.

Improving municipal waste management systems is essential for protecting environmental resources, particularly in ecologically sensitive island areas [2]. This, in turn, ensures long-term well-being for residents and supports the sustainable growth of tourism without compromising environmental integrity. Sustainable development fosters both destination resilience and improved quality of life for local populations [23]. Residents’ well-being is fundamental to the success of sustainable tourism, and their active participation is essential [29]. By integrating sustainable waste management, quality of life, and tourism development, this study concludes that enhancing waste management efficiency directly contributes to higher living standards and long-term sustainability in tourism-driven destinations.

These findings align with previous studies that emphasize the importance of community engagement, environmental stewardship, and sustainable waste practices in improving residents’ quality of life and supporting tourism development. By building on this literature, our study offers additional evidence that effective waste management systems, when supported by local participation, can lead to positive social and environmental outcomes in tourism-dependent island communities.

We propose several strategies to mitigate the impact of waste management challenges on island communities, including sustainable tourism practices and community involvement. These include expanding waste separation systems, improving recycling infrastructure, introducing stricter waste regulations, and promoting educational initiatives to encourage responsible waste disposal among residents and tourists alike. In addition, these policy proposals emphasize the inclusion of sustainable waste management solutions in local tourism development plans to ensure long-term environmental preservation and an improved quality of life. We highlight the need for awareness-raising activities carried out by tour operators, accommodation providers, and local governments to properly disseminate these measures to travelers. The proposed strategies include information brochures, digital signage, social media initiatives, in-room materials, and awareness activities at prominent tourist sites. In addition, partnerships with local businesses, tour guides, and travel agencies are proposed to actively engage visitors in responsible waste management during their visit.

6. Conclusions

Waste management on islands poses a particular challenge due to their distance from the mainland and their dependence on tourism. As attractive tourist destinations, islands attract numerous visitors from various countries around the world. The development of infrastructure and tourism brings with it the problem of increased waste generation during the summer months when most of the tourist season takes place. Mass tourism can hurt the environment through the destruction of natural resources and the population through the disruption of traditional elements of folk life on the islands, an important motive for tourists to visit. The most important goal in the development of tourism on the Croatian islands is to improve the quality of life of the inhabitants.

This research is in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), namely SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). SDG 11 emphasizes the importance of sustainable urban and community development, which includes effective waste management systems that improve the living conditions of citizens. By implementing systematic waste management strategies and involving local communities, the Croatian islands can be an example of sustainable tourism destinations that focus on environmental protection and community well-being. SDG 12 emphasizes minimizing waste generation through sustainable consumption and production practices. The results of this study underline the need to promote waste separation, recycling, and responsible waste disposal to residents and tourists in order to reduce the environmental impact of tourism.

The development of sustainable tourism is essential to reconcile growth and environmental protection. By separating waste, residents improve environmental protection, living standards, and economic viability. Incorporating sustainable waste management into tourism strategies ensures the prosperity of local communities and the tourism sector while preserving natural resources for future generations.

On tourism-driven islands, environmental quality is crucial, as landscape aesthetics significantly influence destination attractiveness. Tourism depends on a clean environment but also threatens it. Sustainable tourism development is key to balancing growth and preservation. By sorting waste, residents enhance environmental protection, quality of life, and economic sustainability. Integrating circular economy principles and fostering collaboration between stakeholders can transform waste management into a sustainable system that protects the environment, strengthens economic resilience, improves community well-being, and enhances the long-term sustainability of tourism-dependent areas.

This paper significantly contributes to the limited literature connecting waste management and quality of life on islands. The applied contribution is based on guiding managers and other stakeholders to become active participants, that is, to be guided by the principles of sustainable development when making decisions related to waste management. The research focuses on the Kvarner islands, but the model is broadly applicable. It is expected that the research results will benefit policymakers, drafters of waste management policies and regulations, representatives of municipalities and towns of tourist destinations on the islands, participants in the sustainable management of the island and its population, and policymakers at the local level, contributing to consulting, planning, and establishing modern infrastructure and ultimately improving the waste management system in terms of a higher quality of life for residents.

The results of this study can also be applied to other islands and coastal towns facing the same problems of seasonal, tourism-induced increases in litter and inadequate waste management systems. Using the same framework of community participation, policy-oriented waste management techniques, and sustainable tourism concepts, other regions could formulate efficient waste management models that improve the quality of life of residents while conserving environmental resources. This study’s analytical approach, which incorporates the residents’ perspective and statistical modeling, can provide a framework for evaluating waste management efficiency in other tourism-dependent communities around the world.

A potential limitation of this study is the inherent subjectivity in respondents’ self-reported perceptions. Questionnaire-based studies may be influenced by social desirability bias, where participants provide responses that they perceive as favorable rather than those reflective of actual behaviors. Additionally, the sample consists primarily of permanent residents, excluding perspectives from transient or seasonal populations, which may impact the generalizability of the findings. Future research must address these limitations by employing a mixed-methods approach that integrates quantitative surveys with qualitative interviews to obtain more profound insights into the perceptions of waste management. Incorporating seasonal residents, local business owners, and policymakers into the sample would enhance the understanding of stakeholder perspectives. A longitudinal study that repeats the survey at five- and ten-year intervals could evaluate long-term trends in the effectiveness of waste management and its effects on residents’ quality of life. Comparative analyses of islands in the northern and southern Adriatic, along with benchmarking against other Mediterranean islands, would provide context for the findings and emphasize best practices in sustainable island tourism. This study primarily examines the general impact of tourism on waste management and people’s quality of life, without explicitly distinguishing between different forms of tourism, such as party tourism, leisure tourism, or ecotourism. The data show that the seasonality and intensity of tourism have a significant impact on the generation of waste and environmental pollution. As different forms of tourism can have different impacts on waste management, subsequent studies should improve the analysis by classifying the activities and behaviors of visitors. A comprehensive segmentation of tourist profiles could lead to specific waste management solutions tailored to the different problems of different tourism sectors.