Next Article in Journal
Chinese VFR Travel in Budapest: The Hosts’ Roles
Previous Article in Journal
Expressing the Experience: An Analysis of Airbnb Customer Sentiments
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Tourism and Hospitality
Volume 3
Issue 3
10.3390/tourhosp3030043
tourismhosp-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

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

Tourists Becoming Involved: The Influence of Pro-Environmental Voluntourism on Destination Image Formation

by
Weronika Lis
1,*,
Mirek Dymitrow
2 and
Elżbieta Grzelak-Kostulska
3
1
Interdisciplinary Doctoral School of Social Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Toruń, Poland
2
Department of Human Geography, Faculty of Social Sciences, Lund University, 223-62 Lund, Sweden
3
Department of Urban Studies and Regional Development, Faculty of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management, Nicolaus Copernicus University, 87-100 Toruń, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Tour. Hosp. 2022, 3(3), 706-719; https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp3030043
Submission received: 30 May 2022 / Revised: 20 June 2022 / Accepted: 11 July 2022 / Published: 4 August 2022
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The purpose of this research was to explore the realization of the pro-environmental initiative in the Faroe Islands in which tourists were involved as volunteers. The research was aimed at understanding how this influences tourists’ perceptions of a destination. We were interested in filling the research gap regarding the importance of tourists’ direct involvement in pro-environmental initiatives in terms of how this experience stimulates their perceptions of a destination image. The quantitative research method was adopted, whereby surveys were conducted among volunteering tourists and regular tourists visiting the Faroe Islands archipelago. The latter group was divided into two subsamples of arriving and departing tourists to understand how their perception changed after the visit. This study challenges the assumptions of the destination image theory, according to which only “accidental” information can affect the organic image of a destination within the mind of a tourist. The study reveals that tourists who tangibly experience a green marketing initiative have a positive opinion about the destination in terms of environmental protection. The organic image itself can be changed through purposeful action on the part of destination managers. We show the importance of the direct involvement of tourists in a volunteering project that is considered valuable in promoting the destination’s environmental image.

1. Introduction and Research Goals

In line with the current concerns around making the effects of tourism more neutral to the natural environment, an important attribute is the increasing significance of a tourist destination’s environmental sustainability [1]. Tourism has long been considered an industry that advances economies, but today it is also accused of having adverse effects, such as environmental degradation and the exploitation of cultural resources. Accordingly, tourism managers and stakeholders are expected to ensure better destination management, and tourists are encouraged to adopt various sustainable behaviors. Therefore, traditional leisure tourism is slowly giving way to less known, seemingly sustainable options. Activities such as agritourism, citizen science tourism, and volunteer tourism are interlinked and overlap each other in the notion of alternative tourism or eco-tourism. These offerings are particularly attractive as they promise something different than traditional 3S (Sun, Sea, and Sand) tourism and an experience that seems less burdened when it comes to environmental issues. This is particularly important due to the challenges tourism has faced since the beginning of 2020. The spread of COVID-19 and the travel restrictions that followed have raised the question of whether it is possible to return to the tourism market structure of the past. The major challenges of the industry, such as environmental protection and effective marketing, have now come into an even sharper focus, which links directly to the issues around destination image creation. The question is how to do it effectively.
According to the destination image theory, tourists’ choices are directly linked to the way they perceive and imagine a destination [2]. As Bilynets et al. [1] argue, it is the presence of attributes that are attractive to tourists that influences their decision to visit a particular place. The importance of some of these features remains unchanged over time, such as natural and wilderness activities, price levels, accommodation infrastructure, and cleanliness [3]. At the same time, other emerging factors, such as a country’s environmental sustainability level, are gaining importance in terms of destination choice [4]. This consideration might be related to a location’s water management policy and use of energy resources, etc. but also to its commitment towards environmental conservation initiatives, for example with the help of volunteers. Various aspects, therefore, can influence how a destination is perceived, and not all are controlled by destination managers. For this reason, destination image formation theory identifies two categories of destination image: organic image and induced image [3].
The organic image is formed by the information and impressions a tourist acquires from people’s opinions, as well as from educational and non-commercial sources, such as news and books, all of which comprise the so-called “accidental” information. In contrast, the information that is explicitly delivered by representatives of the travel industry, such as advertisements and travel tour packages (i.e., targeted tourist information), creates an induced image of a destination [5]. According to the destination image theory, a destination cannot easily influence the most relevant, naturally developing organic image [6] with the use of activities that are under its control. However, Bilynets et al. [1] challenged this assumption in their recent studies, taking as an example publicly visible pro-environmental initiatives, such as making a city center free of traffic. They argue that, in fact, destination managers can exert such control in the formation of an eco-friendly destination image by implementing environmental initiatives. A necessary precondition is that these initiatives be visible to tourists.
Our research adds to these considerations as we analyze a pro-environmental volunteer tourism initiative controlled and marketed by a local tourism organization and its influence on the organic destination image. Our first hypothesis is that local governors can affect their area’s organic destination image by supporting pro-environmental initiatives, such as conservation work. Following the model proposed by Bilynets et al. [1], we set up the first aim of the research and study how tourists evaluate certain attributes of a given location. We observe that encouraging tourists to genuinely notice these actions, although the most important part of the whole process, is also the most difficult to achieve.
In the present paper, we explore the realization of a pro-environmental initiative in which tourists were involved as volunteers working on hiking trails maintenance. The second research goal is to discover how this experience influences tourists’ perceptions of the destination in question. We propose to fill in the research gap regarding the importance of tourists’ direct involvement in pro-environmental initiatives in stimulating the perceptions of a destination image by tourists in general.
The location for the research is the Faroe Islands. The voluntourism project under study in this area is one of the elements of the “Preservolution” campaign promoted by the local tourism authority [7]. Our study adds novelty to the research on volunteer tourism by analyzing this phenomenon in view of its role in self-governance and local tourism promotion. The Faroe Islands voluntourism project constitutes a rare example of a volunteer initiative that is arranged, advertised, and managed directly by the local authorities and community with the obvious intention to attract foreign visitors. Volunteer tourism here is intended to serve different objectives than the usual, which are not only local environmental preservation but also specific tourism policy creation and destination marketing. The proposed research offers new insight to the debate about what volunteer tourism offers civil society [8] and the tourism industry [9] and under what conditions it can support the marketing purposes of building the image of a destination.
Additionally, the study adds value to the research on local authorities’ influence on the destination image and its competitiveness from the point of view of sustainability [10,11]. It also provides interesting insight into the maintenance and sustenance of tourism supply and demand, which is crucial for the creation and image of a successful and sustainable tourism industry [12].
The paper is structured in five parts. The next section provides a comprehensive review of the literature that was conducted to identify the research gap. Section 3 introduces the methodology, and Section 4 presents the survey results. The last section discusses the results and suggests possibilities for further research.

2. Current State of Knowledge of Destination Image Creation

An overview of the current literature on destination image shows that it strongly influences the travel intentions and choices of tourists [13,14]. Two important streams in the research are the specific attention given to the measurement of the destination image and its components [11,15,16,17] and the factors that influence its growth in certain directions [18,19]. The role of a destination in the process of projecting its image has also been discussed in the literature [20], the same as the actual purpose of this image [21]. In a theoretical study on the topic [3], Baloglu and McCleary [13] addressed the lack of a conceptual framework, while Fakeye and Crompton [22] proposed a comprehensive model of destination image formation. More recently, Almeida-Santana and Moreno-Gil [10] discussed models to develop the brand of a destination, using the concept of sustainable image.
Destination image is an idea in a tourist’s mind that relates to what he or she believes about and expects from a destination [23]. Gunn [6,24] distinguished between organic and induced images and the kind of communication that forms them. Although the induced image depends on the promotional activity of the tourism stakeholders, the organic image does not result from any marketing activities towards the destination but rather is the outcome of all the manifestations of a destination in various spheres [1]. Of the two, the organic image is considered to ensure higher consistency between the image and the actual experience of a destination [25]. Gunn claims that although the initiatives of destinations have a limited impact on organic images, they might be changed through promotional activities [24]. Gartner [25] introduced a typology of image-creating agents, which Bilynets et al. [1] relate to in their study. Agents of an induced nature include traditional advertising (overtly induced), information from tour operators (overtly induced), traditional advertising through a second party or commonly known person (overtly induced), and unbiased reports (covertly induced). News and popular culture are considered autonomous agents. Organic agents are, conversely, word-of-mouth and randomly acquired (unsolicited induced) or collected in a situation in which a person is interested in a destination and does research about it (unsolicited induced), as well in actual visits to the destination (organic).
With today’s common concerns around environmental protection, destination managers face the additional challenge of creating an image that is not only leisure-attractive but also environmentally friendly. Green marketing focuses, by definition, on satisfying human needs or wants with a minimal harmful impact on the environment [26]. However, since tourists are increasingly attentive to these issues [1], poorly considered marketing activities can do more harm than good to a destination’s image, as tourists might skeptically perceive these initiatives as mere greenwashing. With these two issues in mind, tourism stakeholders and scholars are interested in understanding how destination management can be carried out for destinations to be perceived as environmentally sustainable. From a theoretical point of view, the aim is therefore to create an impact on a destination’s organic image [6], but in a way that is perceived as authentic [27].
We are interested in finding out how an actual visit to the destination influences the organic image within a tourist’s mind and specifically in the role of a local volunteer initiative in this process. Voluntourism, or volunteer tourism, has enjoyed continuous growth since the late 20th century. The research on the topic covers both the positive and negative influences it has on local communities, including their culture and economies [28,29], but also on the tourists themselves [30,31]. Serious concerns have been raised regarding this activity, mostly due to its association with colonialism, dependency creation, and exploitation of the host community [32,33]. In this regard, the available research provides broad insight into the projects managed by NGOs or by profit-making organizations functioning as tour operators. The fact that these bodies, while acting in the name of the local communities, do not originate from them, influences the way volunteers are recruited, what needs are being addressed, and, interestingly, how the destinations are being presented and imagined by the actual and potential tourists [34,35,36]. Volunteer tourism has been often accused of prioritizing the needs of under-skilled volunteers over locals, thus exacerbating the problems of societies plagued by poverty. It is important to note, however, that these remarks are predominantly about volunteers who represent the Global North and travel to destinations in the Global South. In fact, due to these criticisms, volunteer tourism has undergone massive evolution. The result has been a more attentive approach to local communities and to the quality or authenticity of the volunteer’s experience, which translates into a greater trust in the actual sustainability of volunteer tourism. We also expect programs and initiatives undertaken in developed countries to grow in popularity.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Context: Destination Image of the Faroe Islands

To conduct our research, we looked for a destination engaged in a pro-environmental campaign that applies volunteer tourism as one of its elements. We selected the Faroe Islands, an independent country within the Danish Kingdom, with a population of 53,613 in 2021 [37]. We looked for a destination located in one of the countries of the Global North. This meets the awaited changes in volunteer tourism that has grown mainly in the Global South [38]. In recent years, the Faroe Islands have developed from one of the least popular places in Europe to a “budget list” tourist destination, with over 166,000 overnight stays in 2019, compared to just 100,000 in 2013 [39]. Apart from its stunning nature and other prerequisites for developing tourism, such as modern transport infrastructure, this success is due to creative marketing campaigns developed by the local tourism organization “Visit Faroe Islands” [40], which is supported by the government of the Faroe Islands. The location’s remoteness and small community atmosphere were exploited in entertaining videos narrating the history and status of the archipelago. For instance, the videos took advantage of the scarce knowledge of Faroese, the local language, and the fact that it is not covered by the Google Translator service. Faroe Islands Translator, a resource with some popular expressions in Faroese translated by locals into English, has won multiple prizes within the marketing sector. Most important, however, is the fact that the resource generated an estimated 25 million EUR of public relations value and received requests for translations from 181 countries, thus demonstrating a global range of interest [41].
The most recent campaign introduced by the tourism authority of the Faroe Islands is called “Preservolution” and was chosen as the subject of the present research. Its holistic and long-term perspective model corresponds with what has been advocated by researchers and others as a necessary approach to building the very essence of a “green” destination brand, without the risk of its being accused of greenwashing [42]. One of the core elements of this sustainable development campaign is a volunteer tourism initiative. The project called “Closed for maintenance, open for voluntourism” gained worldwide attention with the announced closure of the Faroese’s most popular touristic sites for two days in 2019 and the call for one hundred unskilled volunteer workers to help with the maintenance work on the archipelago. More than 3000 people enthusiastically applied to clear, build, and mark trails in exchange for room and board, and the idea turned out to be a successful marketing campaign for the Faroe Islands as a vacation destination. Participants were required to cover only the cost of their flight tickets and they were given additional 25% discount. The second round of the project had been planned for September 2020 but was postponed to the next year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It finally took place from 23 to 24 September 2021. Fifty-four participants from 20 countries were randomly selected from over 10,000 online applications to participate in the project (Data Shared directly with the Authors by Visit Faroe Islands Office via e-mail).

3.2. Data Collection

There were two categories of respondents whose perceptions of the Faroe Islands were analyzed. The first were the so-called “regular tourists”, those not involved in the volunteer tourism project. The second were tourists directly involved in the volunteer tourism project, the so-called “volunteer tourists”.
For the first group, we hypothesized that if the tourists were to notice a publicly advertised, local volunteer tourism project during their stay, it would have a positive influence on their perceptions of the destination’s attributes, such as green and/or sustainable [1]. To verify this assumption, we surveyed foreigners visiting the Faroe Islands for vacationing/holiday purposes.
We first gathered data from the tourists on their arrival to the Faroe Islands, thus inquiring about their view of the destination before they actually experienced it. We asked the other group of tourists the same questions on their departure, with the aim of discovering whether the perception of the Faroe Islands was different among these two groups of tourists (i.e., arrival and departure). Impressions tourists make upon arrival and departure are considered in the literature as, “powerful determinants of post-trip images” [43]. Using quantitative methods, we analyzed how strongly certain attributes resonated with the tourists regarding the destination image of the Faroe Islands, focusing on “green”, “sustainable”, and similar characteristics. This is particularly important since these dimensions stand as the core values of the destination marketing policy proposed and managed by the local tourism organization “Visit Faroe Islands”. The by-product of the conducted research is therefore the average image of the Faroe Islands a tourist has when he or she visits the archipelago for the first time.
Eight evaluation characteristics applicable to the study of the destination were chosen, based on a sustainable tourism literature review [15,44,45] and content analysis of the marketing brochures and guidebooks for Nordic destinations. The respondents were asked to assess the Faroe Islands according to the following pre-defined attributes included in the questionnaire: “safe”, “sustainable”, “remote”, “clean environment”, “environment friendly”, “green”, “unspoiled nature”, and “responsible tourism policy”.
Both groups of visitors expressed their attitudes towards these eight characteristics through their responses on a 5-point Likert scale. First, for the perceptual evaluation of the touristic destination, the respondents were asked to rate to what extent they agreed with each of the destination characteristics as the Faroe Islands’ attributes, compared with other Nordic destinations (from 1 to 5, “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”, respectively). To discover if the volunteer tourism project had an influence on the organic image of the Faroe Islands, the respondents were additionally asked whether they knew about the initiative or not and, if so, to indicate their source of knowledge about the project. The survey data from the tourists was collected in September 2021, around the time when the volunteer tourism project was taking place. We applied a qualitative method only, after taking into consideration the nature of the respondents in question. In simple terms, people tend to value their time more when they are on vacation; therefore, we found a short survey to be the most adequate.
The first group of respondents, i.e., the “regular tourists”, were recruited at the Copenhagen and Vágar Airports, as well as at other places and forms of transportation that are known for a high density of tourism traffic. These included hostels and hotels; the tourist information office in Tórshavn, the capital town of the Faroes; ferries between the islands of the archipelago, and an airport shuttle bus. Individuals who agreed to participate in the survey completed a paper and pencil questionnaire or its online version in the English language. The sample group was foreign tourists that had never been to the Faroe Islands before. Thus, Faroe Islanders, non-tourists, and tourists visiting the archipelago for a second or further time were excluded. Two subsamples of “regular tourists” were surveyed: the group of vacationers on their day of arrival to the Faroe Islands, and the other group on the day of their departure from the archipelago. We analyzed the data obtained from the questionnaires conducted with 63 arriving tourists and 83 departing tourists (146 in total). Two groups means also that there were not exactly the same people completing both surveys. This is because in such studies, people often forget about or ignore the second phase of the study. Moreover, in this study, the measures to successfully contact travelers at their departures were scarce.
When it comes to the sample size, this case strongly depends on the specificity of the Faroe Islands as a destination, including its accessibility and the duration of the tourism season there. Despite international recognition of the Faroe Islands as a bucket destination, tourism traffic remains quite low compared to similar destinations. Additionally, the number of visitors has been even smaller since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to Statistics Faroe Islands, the national statistical authority, there has been steady growth in overnight stays at hotels, hostels, and guesthouses in the Faroe Islands since 2014, amounting to 166,452 in 2019 [39], with 81.6% of these occupied by foreign guests. According to the data available, at that time 41,825 check-ins were made by leisure guests (while the rest was made by business guests). However, in 2020, the number of overnight stays decreased to 94,940, with 64.7% those of international guests [39], and there were 23,226 check-ins for leisure purposes [39].
In addition, the present research was conducted during the second part of September 2021, during the so-called shoulder season, between the high and low traffic months. We assume that the number of tourists could have been even lower in September 2021—first, due to the travel restrictions imposed due to the sudden increase of reported COVID-19 infections in the Faroes (According to korona.fo, There Were 17 Cases Reported on the 24 September 2021, in Comparison to Zero or One Case at the Beginning of August 2021) [46], and second, because of the dolphin slaughter that took place there on 14 September 2021 [47], which possibly discouraged environmentally oriented travelers.
Finally, when discussing the sample size, another factor to consider is the number of aircraft passengers, since most of the responses were collected at the airport in Vágar. According to data shared by the Vága Floghavn (Passengers’ Nationality Statistics shared with the authors by the Administration of FAE Vága Floghavn via e-mail), the only airport in the Faroe Islands, there were 29,015 passengers traveling to or from the archipelago by plane in September 2021. This translates into roughly 967 passengers per day. At the time the research was conducted (September 2021), 44% of all passengers were Faroese. Additionally, among the foreign passengers, some were not tourists. Taking into consideration the above, as well as the six-day timeframe of this research, the number of responses collected seems to represent a satisfactory sample size. The second category of respondents, i.e., the volunteer tourists, were contacted directly by the “Visit Faroe Islands” organization and requested to take part in the survey. The sample size was determined by the number of individuals who actually took part in the project, which was 44, of whom 35 agreed to answer the survey questions. The survey tool applied was the paper and pencil questionnaire in the English language or its online version.

4. Results and Data Analysis

In this section, we present research results and analyze the collected data point by point.
Table 1 presents the sample characteristics of the arriving and departing tourists, which are gender, age, country of residence, education level, work status, financial situation, duration of the trip, and self-assessed level of environmental knowledge. The respondents were almost evenly distributed by gender (49.3% females and 50.7% males). In the group of arriving tourists, however, there was a high disproportion—almost twice as many men as women. Mostly, the respondents were highly educated, and 52.8% were aged 35 and under. The majority were employed full-time and were in good financial situations. More than 40% of the tourists taking part in the survey reported at least medium environmental knowledge, with 48% stating they had high or very high environmental knowledge. Almost 85% of all the tourists were European, and 20% were from Denmark.
The questions regarding the financial situation and the level of environmental knowledge are followed by the answers of a discretionary character (good, bad, standard). We decided to allow participants to define themselves, seeking to know their subjective perspectives on these sensitive issues.
Subsequently, regarding the country groups, we avoided including the breakdown of all respondents who declared having originated from the 14 European countries other than Denmark since this could be confusing for a reader. The geographical distribution of the “regular tourist” respondents is presented on Map Chart (Figure 1).
The Mann–Whitney U test was applied to ascertain the differences in perceptions of the Faroe Islands between the independent samples of arriving and departing tourists. The aim was to determine if and how the views of the two groups varied. We found that the attributes of the Faroe Islands that relate to the natural environment were generally perceived positively by the tourists. This relates both to those leaving the destination and those who had no real experience of it yet, as shown in Table 2. The departing tourists saw the Faroe Islands as safer (Marr. = 64.92; Mdep. = 76.18), with a cleaner environment (Marr. = 71.25; Mdep. = 71.67) and a less spoiled nature (Marr. = 70.81; Mdep. = 71.99). Keeping in mind that the rankings below show an overall positive perception of the visitors, for some attributes, the departing tourists viewed the Faroe Islands as less sustainable (Marr. = 74.39; Mdep. = 69.45), less remote (Marr. = 78.14; Mdep. = 66.78), less environment friendly (Marr. = 77.14; Mdep. = 67.49), less green (Marr. = 74.74; Mdep. = 69.20), and as having less responsible tourism policy (Marr. = 76.78; Mdep. = 67.75).
The second aim concerned tourists’ grasp of one of the initiatives organized within the policy, which was the environment conservation volunteer tourism project. The results from the survey conducted with tourists arriving in the Faroe Islands showed that only 10.94% of them had heard about the project. For the tourists asked the same question at their departures, the percentage of those who had heard about the project had doubled but remained quite low. Of the departing individuals—those who had an actual experience of the Faroe Islands—only 20.24% acknowledged the environmental volunteering initiative before or during their stay. For both groups, social media and the tourism organization’s website were the main sources of this information. The result suggests that the physical presence of tourists at a destination correlates positively with these tourists’ acknowledgment of advertised environmental initiatives towards the destination. However, among the departing tourists who admitted to having just learned about the volunteer tourism project, we observed troubling outcomes. As presented in Table 3, among the group of departing vacationers, those who acknowledged the volunteer tourism project (compared with those who did not) considered the Faroe Islands less safe (Md.ack. = 30.47; Md.n-ack. = 44.97), less sustainable (Md.ack. = 34.68; Md.n-ack. = 43.89), less remote (Md.ack. = 36.06; Md.n-ack. = 43.53), less environmentally clean (Md.ack. = 35.82; Md.n-ack. = 43.59), less abundant in unspoiled nature (Md.ack. = 32.29; Md.n-ack. = 44.50), and less green (Marr. = 40.12; Mdep. = 42.48). In contrast, those who acknowledged the project viewed the Faroe Islands as having a more responsible tourism policy (Marr. = 42.53; Mdep. = 41.86) and as more environmentally friendly (Md.ack. = 43.82; Md.n-ack. = 41.53). The positive evaluation of the last two attributes suggests the direct impact of the volunteer tourism project on the perception of tourists. This is because a responsible tourism policy and a positive approach towards the environment are the main values underlying the campaign. As for the “sustainable”, “clean environment”, and “unspoiled nature” attributes, we imagine that this could have been connected to the volunteer tourism project goals themselves. The existing need to preserve nature with volunteers’ help could have made tourists perceive the destination as less sustainable, where the local governors face natural environmental issues.
Finally, we studied the reactions of the tourists directly involved in the volunteer tourism project and their perception of the destination (the so-called “volunteer tourists”). Regarding the sample characteristics, 82.86% of the responding voluntourists had never visited the Faroe Islands before and for 85.71% of this group, participation in the initiative was the only, or the main part of their trip to this destination (Participation in the project required at least a four-day stay in the Faroe Islands, including the welcoming event, volunteering at the working sites, and an event closing party. We consider that participation in the project was the main part of the trip if the whole journey to the Faroe Islands lasted seven days or fewer). The sample consisted of 35 volunteers aged between 15 and 64 years old who had never visited the Faroe Islands. For this group, we focused on how the tourists viewed the project in relation to the improvement in their own travel behaviors and the value of the initiative for the environment. We asked the voluntourists to rate, using a 5-point Likert scale, to what extent they agreed with the following statements regarding the volunteer tourism project: “It made me consider the impact of my travel behavior”; “It has value for environment education”; “It has value for the marketing of the destination (control question)”; “It helps create sustainable tourism behaviors”, and “It helps in maintaining trails” (Table 4). Application of the same survey tool as was used with the “regular tourists” would have had no point since the voluntourists’ perceptions of the Faroe Islands were strongly shaped by their project experience.
The study reveals that tourists who tangibly experienced the green marketing initiative had a positive opinion about the destination governor’s actions in terms of environmental protection.

5. Discussion

We concur that the promotion and encouragement of activities, such as volunteer tourism projects, is a sign of adaptation to tourists’ new demands. As Almeida-Santana and Moreno-Gil [45] found, entities engaged in tourism are expected to compensate for the negative influence of tourism. This translates into tourism stakeholders’ public relations management and their efforts to keep a “green positive” image of a destination. This aim seems easier to achieve when vacationers themselves are willing to offer their services while at the destination. Therefore, the research question investigated here pertained to the potential influence of volunteer tourism on the sustainable destination image perceived by potential visitors and, in turn, the improvement of tourist destinations’ competitiveness.
Referring to Kislali et al.’s [48] finding, induced and organic images are not always easily differentiated. In the researched case, the tourism managers’ practices that influenced the attitudes and perceptions of the surveyed volunteer tourists seem to be situated between the induced destination image and the organic destination image of the Faroe Islands. All voluntourists were aware that the project they participated in was a marketing campaign, thus a practice designed to address the induced image of a destination. Hence, one could predict voluntourists’ skepticism towards the environmental protection purpose of the “Closed for maintenance, open for voluntourism” initiative. On the other hand, the voluntourism project focused on creating an authentic and direct experience, and, as such, seems to go beyond what has been considered visible environmental activities fostering an “induced image”. In fact, the volunteer tourists genuinely agreed on the various expected positive aspects of the project, rating it as environmentally friendly and as positively influencing their travel behaviors. This occurred even though their experience was fully controlled by the tourism managers. Therefore, our contribution was to challenge the assumptions of the destination image theory, according to which only “accidental” information can affect the organic image within the mind of a tourist [49], and in this aspect, we agree with the previous research [44].
The Faroese model of sustainable destination marketing turned out to be successful not only in terms of its influence on the sustainable destination image perception of voluntourists but also on their satisfaction with their participation in the project. Engagement in physical work with visible results, done in cooperation with local people and with some competition, turned out to be very attractive for tourists. It seems to be an initiative worthy of consideration, especially for economies searching for alternative tourism marketing solutions. In our opinion, this ready-to-use model could be applied in other places where similar tourism-related issues must be tackled. The functioning of the program is also a sign of long-awaited changes in volunteer tourism, which for years has been associated with the initiatives undertaken in developing countries.
One can argue that the destination image of the Faroe Islands is strongly established since it was positively perceived by tourists both before and after their experience in the archipelago. This makes it quite difficult to grasp the influence of a single environmental initiative when it comes to its impact on the organic destination image. Additionally, we observed a very modest change in the perception of arriving and departing tourists, so an eventual impact is too little to prove the actual influence of the voluntourism initiative. In both cases, this can be explained by the scarce awareness of the project among tourists who simply could not be influenced by something they had not experienced either directly or indirectly. This is probably due to the relatively modest marketing of the “Closed for maintenance, open for voluntourism” initiative before its actual kick-off in September. However, the research conducted among tourists directly involved in the volunteering project shows their almost unanimous appreciation of the local tourism policy towards the environment. This fact does not preclude the influence of a single environmental initiative on the organic image of a destination. However, we find that the direct involvement and experience of an initiative, once certain conditions are met, provides for a stronger influence on a tourist’s perception.

6. Conclusions

In this study, we challenged the assumptions of the destination image theory, according to which only “accidental” information affects the organic image within the mind of a tourist. The study reveals that tourists tangibly experiencing so-called green marketing has a positive opinion about the destination governor’s actions in terms of environmental protection.
At the same time, our case introduces a model of tourism marketing that, under certain conditions, can influence the organic sustainable image of a destination in the mind of a tourist. It reminds us of the importance of direct and noticeable actions that are needed for fruitful tourism branding. Although this seems reason enough for local tourism governors and entrepreneurs to support environmental conservation initiatives, there is also a more direct implication [45]. We argue that attention to and participation in volunteering initiatives eventually causes tourists to reconsider some of their actions and attitudes while abroad. This study adds to the research on the importance of tourists’ involvement in pro-environmental initiatives.
When it comes to the link between destination image, environmental concerns, and voluntourism, we outlined how the latter activity served different objectives than the usual tourism activity, i.e., specific tourism policy creation and destination marketing. The proposed research thus offers new insight to the debate about what volunteer tourism can offer civil society and the tourism industry [9] and under what conditions it can support the marketing purposes of building the image of a destination.
The research’s focus is narrow, but the findings provide theoretical and practical insights into the influence of volunteer tourism initiatives on the destination image and its competitiveness from the point of view of sustainability. This is done by considering the importance of the direct involvement of tourists in a volunteering project that is considered valuable for the destination’s environmental image. Our position is that there is a great demand, especially in the field of tourism management, for research that builds knowledge from the observation of certain phenomena within a contextually ample environment.
Our study of the Faroe Islands’ unique initiative, while providing important insight into volunteer tourism’s contribution to the creation of a sustainable destination image, still needs to be complemented by further research regarding environmental initiatives that directly involve foreign vacationers experiencing a destination, especially for the first time. Future research could benefit from the analysis of projects such as citizen tourism, cultural exchange programs, and service learning. We hope that this study provides valuable input to the ongoing process of conceptualizing destination image in the literature [48,49,50,51].

Author Contributions

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

Funding

This research was funded by the Excellence Initiative—Research University program (IDUB) at the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland, grant number 2021.

Informed Consent Statement

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

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Bilynets, I.; Cvelbar, L.K.; Dolnicar, S. Can publicly visible pro-environmental initiatives improve the organic environmental image of destinations? J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ferreira, L.; Sérgio, D. Destination image: Origins, developments and implications. PASOS Rev. Tur. Patrim. Cult. 2011, 9, 305–315. [Google Scholar]
  3. Echtner, C.M.; Ritchie, J.R.B. The meaning and measurement of destination image. J. Tour. Stud. 1991, 2, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  4. Melo, F.V.S.; De Farias, S.A. Sustainability Communication and its Effect in Consumer Intention to Visit a Tourist Destination. Tour. Manag. Stud. 2018, 14, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Molina, A.; Gómez, M.; Martín-Consuegra, D. Tourism marketing information and destination image management. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2010, 4, 722–728. [Google Scholar]
  6. Gunn, C.A. Vacationscape, Designing Tourist Regions; Bureau of Business Research, University of Texas: Austin, TX, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  7. ‘Join the Preservolution’ Campaign. Available online: https://visitfaroeislands.com/en/meetings/sustainability/join-the-preservolution (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  8. McGehee, N.G. Oppression, emancipation, and volunteer tourism: Research propositions. Ann. Tour. Res. 2012, 39, 84–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wearing, S.; McGehee, N.G. Volunteer tourism: A review. Tour. Manag. 2013, 38, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Damayanti, M.; Scott, N.; Ruhanen, L. Coopetition for tourism destination policy and governance: The century of local power? In The Future of Tourism: Innovation and Sustainability; Fayos-Solà, E., Cooper, C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  11. Echtner, C.M.; Ritchie, J.R.B. The Measurement of Destination Image: An Empirical Assessment. J. Travel Res. 1993, 31, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Tasci, A.D. Consumer demand for sustainability benchmarks in tourism and hospitality. Tour. Rev. 2017, 72, 375–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Baloglu, S.; McCleary, K.W. A model of destination image formation. Ann. Tour. Res. 1999, 26, 868–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Milman, A.; Pizam, A. The Role of Awareness and Familiarity with a Destination: The Central Florida Case. J. Travel Res. 1995, 33, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bennett, M.; Fesenmaier, D.R.; O’Leary, J.T.; Uysal, M. Recent advances in tourism marketing re-search. Leis. Stud. 1998, 17, 61–62. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dann, G.M. Tourists’ Images of a Destination-An Alternative Analysis. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 1996, 5, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. MacKay, K.J.; Fesenmaier, D.R. Pictorial element of destination in image formation. Ann. Tour. Res. 1997, 24, 537–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Baloglu, S.; Brinberg, D. Affective Images of Tourism Destinations. J. Travel Res. 1997, 35, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Walmsley, D.J.; Jenkins, J.M. Appraisive images of tourist areas: Application of personal con-struct. Aust. Geogr. 1993, 24, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Stabler, M. The image of destination regions: Theoretical and empirical aspects. In Marketing in the Tourism Industry; Goodall, B., Ash-worth, G., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 1990; pp. 133–161. [Google Scholar]
  21. Javalgi, R.G.; Thomas, E.G.; Rao, S. Consumer Behavior in the U.S. Pleasure Travel Marketplace: An Analysis of Senior and Nonsenior Travelers. J. Travel Res. 1992, 31, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fakeye, P.C.; Crompton, J.L. Image differences between prospective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. J. Travel Res. 1991, 30, 10–16. [Google Scholar]
  23. Crompton, J.L. Motivations for pleasure vacation. Ann. Tour. Res. 1979, 6, 408–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gunn, C.A. Vacationscape: Designing Tourist Regions; Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York, NY, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gartner, W.C. Image formation process. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 1994, 2, 191–216. [Google Scholar]
  26. Polonsky, M.J. An Introduction to Green Marketing. Electron. Green J. 1994, 1, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Rahman, I.; Park, J.; Chi, C.G.Q. Consequences of ‘greenwashing’: Consumers’ reactions to hotels’ green initiatives. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 27, 1054–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Guttentag, D.A. The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2009, 11, 537–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wearing, S.; Larsen, L. Assessing and managing the sociocultural impacts of ecotourism: Revisiting the Santa Elena rainforest project. Environmentalist 1996, 16, 117–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Brumbaugh, A.M. The Impact of Diversity Seeking and Volunteer Orientation on Desire for Alternative Spring Break Programs. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2010, 27, 474–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zoë, A. International volunteer tourism experience in South Africa: An investigation into the impact on the tourist. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2012, 21, 779–799. [Google Scholar]
  32. Palacios, C.M. Volunteer tourism, development and education in a postcolonial world: Conceiving global connections beyond aid. J. Sustain. Tour. 2010, 18, 861–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Theerapappisit, P. Pro-poor ethnic tourism in the Mekong: A study of threen approaches in Northern Thailand. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2009, 14, 201–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Carter, K.A. Volunteer Tourism: An Exploration of the Perceptions and Experiences of Volunteer Tourists and the Role of Authenticity in Those Experiences. Master’s Thesis, Lincoln University, Lincoln, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  35. Grimm, K.E.; Needham, M.D. Moving beyond the “I” in motivation: Attributes and perceptions of conservation volunteer tourists. J. Travel Res. 2012, 51, 488–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. More than an "industry": The forgotten power of tourism as a social force. Tour. Manag. 2006, 27, 1192–1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pupulation in the Faroe Islands. Available online: https://hagstova.fo/en/population/population/population (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  38. Brown, F.H.; Hall, D.K. Tourism and Development in the Global South: The issues. Third World Q. 2008, 29, 839–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Overnight Stays at Hotels, Hostels and Guest Houses 2013–2021 (Annually). Available online: https://hagstova.fo/en/business/tertiary-sector/tourism (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  40. Visit Faroe Islands. Available online: https://visitfaroeislands.com/en (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  41. The Success of the Faroe Islands Translator. Available online: https://www.faroeislands.fo/the-big-picture/news/faroe-islands-translate-wins-lion-at-cannes-festival-of-creativity/ (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  42. Insch, A. Conceptualization and anatomy of green destination brands. Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2011, 5, 282–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Smith, W.W.; Li, X.R.; Pan, B.; Witte, M.; Doherty, S.T. Tracking destination image across the trip experience with smartphone technology. Tour. Manag. 2015, 48, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Carey, S.; Gountas, Y.; Gilbert, D. Tour operators and destination sustainability. Tour. Manag. 1997, 18, 425–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Almeida-Santana, A.; Moreno-Gil, S. Understanding tourism loyalty: Horizontal vs. destination loyalty. Tour. Manag. 2018, 65, 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. COVID-19 in the Faroe Islands–Statistics. Available online: https://korona.fo/statistics (accessed on 8 December 2021).
  47. Nevett, J. Faroe Islands: Anger over Killing of 1400 Dolphins in One Day. Available online: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58555694 (accessed on 8 December 2021).
  48. Kislali, H.; Kavaratzis, M.; Saren, M. Rethinking destination image formation. Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2016, 10, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Hyangmi, K.; Chen, J. Destination image formation process: A holistic model. J. Vacat. Mark. 2016, 22, 154–166. [Google Scholar]
  50. Iordanova, E.; Stylidos, D. The impact of visitors’ experience intensity on in-situ destination image formation. Tour. Rev. 2019, 74, 841–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Zins, A.H.; Lin, S. From intended to projected destination image elements: The case of prefectures in China. Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2016, 10, 38–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Tourismhosp 03 00043 g001 550
Figure 1. Geographical representation of tourists arriving in the Faroe Islands. Own elaboration, QGIS 3.22.3.
Figure 1. Geographical representation of tourists arriving in the Faroe Islands. Own elaboration, QGIS 3.22.3.
Tourismhosp 03 00043 g001
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of the arriving and departing regular tourists, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Table 1. Characteristics of the arriving and departing regular tourists, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
VariableCategoryPre-VisitPost-VisitAll
Gender n (%)Female22 (34.9)50 (60.2)72 (49.3)
Male41 (65.1)33 (39.8)74 (50.7)
Age group n (%)under 180 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
19–269 (14.3)12 (14.5)21 (14.4)
27–3527 (42.9)29 (34.9)56 (38.4)
36–457 (11.1)15 (18.1)22 (15.1)
45–557 (11.1)14 (16.9)21 (14.4)
55+13 (20.6)13 (15.7)26 (17.8)
Country group n (%)Denmark7 (11.3)21 (25.6)28 (19.4)
Other European countries42 (67.7)52 (63.4)94 (65.3)
Other Nordic countries0 (0)8 (9.8)8 (5.6)
Other countries13 (21.0)1 (1.2)14 (9.7)
Education level n (%)1st tier0 (0)4 (4.8)4 (2.8)
2nd tier10 (16.1)17 (20.5)27 (18.6)
3rd tier52 (83.9)62 (74.7)114 (78.6)
Financial situation n (%)Good35 (56.5)38 (45.8)73 (50.3)
Standard27 (43.5)44 (53.0)71 (49.0)
Bad0 (0)1 (1.2)1 (0.7)
Environmental knowledge n (%)Very high7 (12.5)15 (18.1)22 (15.8)
High20 (35.7)28 (33.7)48 (34.5)
Medium26 (46.4)34 (41.0)60 (43.2)
Low0 (0)4 (4.8)4 (2.9)
Very low3 (5.4)2 (2.4)5 (1.4)
Duration of stay n (%)≤4 days20 (31.7)15 (18.1)35 (24.0)
5–10 days39 (61.9)59 (71.1)98 (61.1)
11–15 days0 (0)7 (8.4)7 (4.8)
≥16 days4 (6.3)2 (2.4)6 (4.1)
Table
Table 2. Pre-and post-experience destination image of the Faroe Islands, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Table 2. Pre-and post-experience destination image of the Faroe Islands, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Rankings
VariableTouristNMean RankingSum of Rankings
SafePre-visit (Arr.)5964.923830.00
Post-visit (Dep.)8376.186323.00
Total142
SustainablePre-visit (Arr.)5974.394389.00
Post-visit (Dep.)8369.455764.00
Total142
RemotePre-visit (Arr.)5978.144610.50
Post-visit (Dep.)8366.785542.50
Total142
Environment friendlyPre-visit (Arr.)5977.144551.00
Post-visit (Dep.)8367.495602.00
Total142
Clean environmentPre-visit (Arr.)5971.254204.00
Post-visit (Dep.)8371.675949.00
Total142
GreenPre-visit (Arr.)5974.744409.50
Post-visit (Dep.)8369.205743.50
Total142
Unspoiled naturePre-visit (Arr.)5970.814177.50
Post-visit (Dep.)8371.995975.50
Total142
Responsible tourism
policy		Pre-visit (Arr.)5976.784530.00
Post-visit (Dep.)8367.755623.00
Total142
Table
Table 3. Evaluation of the destination attributes and tourists’ acknowledgment of the volunteer tourism project, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Table 3. Evaluation of the destination attributes and tourists’ acknowledgment of the volunteer tourism project, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Rankings
VariableAcknowledgment of the ProjectNMean RankingSum of Rankings
SafeYes1730.47518.00
No6644.972968.00
Total83
SustainableYes1734.68589.50
No6643.892896.50
Total83
RemoteYes1736.06613.00
No6643.532873.00
Total83
Clean environmentYes1735.82609.00
No6643.592877.00
Total83
Environment friendlyYes1743.82745.00
No6641.532741.00
Total83
Unspoiled natureYes1732.29549.00
No6644.502937.00
Total83
GreenYes1740.12682.00
No6642.482804.00
Total83
Responsible tourism policyYes1742.53723.00
No6641.862763.00
Total83
Table
Table 4. Reactions of tourists directly involved in the volunteer tourism project, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Table 4. Reactions of tourists directly involved in the volunteer tourism project, PS Imago Pro, own elaboration.
Descriptive Statistics
NMin.Max.Av.Standard Dev.
It made me consider the impact of my travel behavior on the environment.34153.790.946
It has value for environment education.35254.170.747
It has value for the marketing of the destination.35354.510.658
It helps create sustainable tourism behaviors.35354.200.759
It helps in maintaining trails.35354.660.539
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lis, W.; Dymitrow, M.; Grzelak-Kostulska, E. Tourists Becoming Involved: The Influence of Pro-Environmental Voluntourism on Destination Image Formation. Tour. Hosp. 2022, 3, 706-719. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp3030043

AMA Style

Lis W, Dymitrow M, Grzelak-Kostulska E. Tourists Becoming Involved: The Influence of Pro-Environmental Voluntourism on Destination Image Formation. Tourism and Hospitality. 2022; 3(3):706-719. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp3030043

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lis, Weronika, Mirek Dymitrow, and Elżbieta Grzelak-Kostulska. 2022. "Tourists Becoming Involved: The Influence of Pro-Environmental Voluntourism on Destination Image Formation" Tourism and Hospitality 3, no. 3: 706-719. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp3030043

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop