Place Identity and Environmental Conservation in Heritage Tourism: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to Iranian Rural Heritage Villages

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

tourismhosp-3676360-peer-review-v1

Review of:

 

The paper applied the  Theory of Planned Behavior concept to the interface between  Environmental Conservation and  Place Identity using Iranian  ‘Heritage Villages’ as a testbed. The paper is overall well written (albeit full of minor editing mistakes) and makes a convincing point.

The methodology and analysis sections seem to be thorough. The discussion is thorough as far as the findings are concerned, but could be better tied in with the literature discussed in the framing.

 

 

Line 131           What is a “heritage village”? You need to define your understanding of the concept and not take it for granted. A reader may think it is something fully constructed like Old Sturbridge Village or Sovereign Hill, or an open air museum such as the Avoncroft Museum of Historic Buildings where buildings are collected like stamps, or a genuine historic community.

 

Line 131 ff “Heritage villages constitute complex socio-ecological systems” This is a bit limited as it overlooks/ignores the cultural heritage values that the resident community attach to the place. And these values may change intergenerationally.

 

Minor issues

The manuscript is somewhat sloppily prepared, being riddled with stray or missing spaces, as well as stray and missing full stops. Further there are different referencing styles at work  [number] and (author date). The latter are not listed the references.

 

Figure  1. Environmental is listed twice (at left) Also: Environmental …what?, perceived …what?

Environmentally is shown twice and also incomplete. Why is there a dashed red line? This is really sloppy.

 

Also, the figure is nowhere referred to in the text, so that does not help either…

 

Line 65 TBP needs an explanation the first time it appears in the body text (being explained in the abstract does not suffice)

 

Line 376           It is not a Likert scale, it is a Likert-type scale…

 

The layout will need to be fixed as they tables run across pages

 

Figures 2 and 3 have labelling problems

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely thank you for your constructive review and positive assessment of our theoretical contribution. Your detailed feedback has significantly improved our manuscript. Please find our point-by-point responses below:

Response to Major Comments:

Comment: "What is a 'heritage village'? You need to define your understanding of the concept..."

Response: We completely agree with this important observation. We have added a comprehensive definition in the introduction (lines 131-145):

"Heritage villages, as defined in this study, refer to authentic rural communities that retain their original residents and traditional way of life while possessing significant cultural, architectural, and historical value. Unlike constructed heritage sites or open-air museums where buildings are collected and relocated, heritage villages represent living heritage where contemporary community life continues alongside preservation of traditional practices and built environment."

Comment: "This is a bit limited as it overlooks/ignores the cultural heritage values that the resident community attach to the place..."

Response: Thank you for highlighting this conceptual gap. We have expanded our framework to explicitly include "intergenerational cultural transmission processes" and community-attached cultural values. We also acknowledge this limitation in section 5.3 and suggest future research examining intergenerational value changes within heritage communities.

Comment: "Discussion...could be better tied in with the literature discussed in the framing."

Response: We have strengthened the discussion by adding comparative analysis with previous studies, particularly in sections 5.1-5.2, and better integrated our findings with the theoretical framework established in the literature review.

Response to Minor Issues:

Comment: Figure 1 problems - "Environmental is listed twice...This is really sloppy."

Response: We apologize for these errors. Figure 1 has been completely redesigned with correct labels ("Environmental Attitudes," "Environmental Norms," "Perceived Behavioral Control"), clear distinction between solid lines (direct effects) and dashed lines (moderating effects), and proper reference added in the text.

Comment: "Different referencing styles at work [number] and (author date)."

Response: All references have been standardized to the numbered format [1], [2], etc. All (author, date) citations without corresponding references have been removed.

Comment: "TBP needs an explanation the first time it appears in the body text."

Response: Added complete explanation at line 65: "The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), developed by Ajzen (1991), suggests that behavioral intentions—the immediate antecedent to actual behavior—are determined by three key factors: attitudes toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control."

Comment: "It is not a Likert scale, it is a Likert-type scale..."

Response: Corrected to "Likert-type scale" throughout the manuscript (Table 1, methodology section, etc.).

Comment: "The layout will need to be fixed as they tables run across pages" and "Figures 2 and 3 have labelling problems."

Response: All tables have been reformatted to fit properly within page margins. Figures 2 and 3 have been corrected with proper labeling, clear path coefficients, and improved visual quality.

Comment: "The manuscript is somewhat sloppily prepared, being riddled with stray or missing spaces..."

Response: We have conducted comprehensive proofreading throughout the manuscript, correcting spacing issues, missing punctuation, and formatting inconsistencies.

We believe these revisions have substantially addressed all your concerns and improved the manuscript's overall quality and clarity. Thank you again for your valuable time and expertise.

Sincerely, 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Introduction section is ok.

Literature review must be reinforced. Please, discuss other theories stablishing why TPB is the most suitable for the understanding of the environmental concerns.

H justification must be reinforced too.

 

Please, consider updated literature, such as:

How to finance sustainable tourism: Factors influencing the attitude and willingness to pay green taxes among university students. Green Finance, 6 (4): 649–665.

 

Please, redo the figure 1. It is wrong.

Table 2 must be fixed too.

Please include the IC of the model, not only the discriminant and the reliability analysis.

In general is a good research with a high interest for the tourism community.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate your positive assessment of our research and its relevance to the tourism community. Your constructive feedback has helped us significantly improve the manuscript. Please find our detailed responses below:

Response to Comments:

Comment: "Literature review must be reinforced. Please, discuss other theories establishing why TPB is the most suitable for the understanding of the environmental concerns."

Response: We have substantially strengthened the literature review by adding a comparative theoretical analysis section. We now explicitly discuss alternative theories including Value-Belief-Norm Theory (VBN), Norm Activation Model (NAM), and Social Cognitive Theory, providing clear justification for TPB selection based on:

• Superior predictive capacity for intention-behavior relationships in tourism contexts
• Established validity in cross-cultural environmental behavior research
• Theoretical flexibility for integrating place-related constructs
• Methodological compatibility with heritage tourism settings

Comment: "H justification must be reinforced too."

Response: We have enhanced hypothesis justification by:

• Adding 2-3 empirical studies supporting each hypothesis
• Providing theoretical mechanisms linking variables
• Including effect size expectations based on previous research
• Strengthening the logical flow from literature to hypotheses

For example, H1 now includes support from recent heritage tourism studies and explains the cognitive-evaluative pathway through which environmental attitudes influence behavioral intentions.

Comment: "Please, consider updated literature, such as: How to finance sustainable tourism: Factors influencing the attitude and willingness to pay green taxes among university students. Green Finance, 6(4): 649–665."

Response: Thank you for this valuable reference. We have incorporated this study into our literature review, particularly in discussing the role of environmental attitudes and financial behavior in sustainable tourism contexts. This reference strengthens our theoretical foundation regarding attitude-behavior relationships.

Comment: "Please, redo the figure 1. It is wrong."

Response: Figure 1 has been completely redesigned with:

• Correct variable labels (Environmental Attitudes, Environmental Norms, Perceived Behavioral Control)
• Clear pathway distinctions (solid lines for direct effects, dashed for moderating effects)
• Proper integration of place-related variables
• Professional formatting and clarity
• Appropriate reference in the manuscript text

Comment: "Table 2 must be fixed too."

Response: Table 2 (Demographic Characteristics) has been reformatted with:

• Corrected percentage calculations (now sum to 100%)
• Improved layout and spacing
• Additional descriptive statistics where relevant
• Professional formatting consistent with journal standards

Comment: "Please include the IC of the model, not only the discriminant and the reliability analysis."

Response: We have added comprehensive model fit indices in the measurement model section (3.3), including:

• Information Criteria: AIC, BIC, and other relevant IC measures
• Additional fit indices: SRMR (0.067), d_ULS (0.452), d_G (0.318), NFI (0.947)
• Comparative model assessment between baseline and extended models
• Predictive relevance measures (Q² values)

These additions provide a more complete evaluation of model quality beyond reliability and discriminant validity.