Next Article in Journal
Construction of Community Grid Unit Assessment System from the Perspective of Refined Governance
Previous Article in Journal
Robust Gas-Path Fault Diagnosis with Sliding Mode Applied in Aero-Engine Distributed Control System
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 13
10.3390/su151310277
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles 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

How Ski Tourism Involvement Promotes Tourists’ Low-Carbon Behavior?

by
Yang Yang
1,
Xiaodong Sun
2,
Lingli Hu
2,
Yuzhu Ma
2 and
He Bu
3,*
1
School of Mathematics, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 610074, China
2
School of Business Administration, Faculty of Business Administration, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 610074, China
3
School of Recreation Sport and Tourism, Beijing Sport University, Beijing 100084, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10277; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su151310277
Submission received: 7 June 2023 / Revised: 23 June 2023 / Accepted: 26 June 2023 / Published: 29 June 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
China’s ski tourism industry has grown tremendously in the past few years, leading to an increasing amount of tourism-related carbon emissions with negative environmental impacts. Although the government and other market participants are trying to solve the problem from both legislative and technological perspectives, encouraging tourists to engage in low-carbon behavior may play a more important role. This study aims to explore how tourism involvement influences ski tourists’ low-carbon behavior. A sampling survey was conducted to collect 422 valid responses from two ski resorts (indoor and outdoor). Findings from structural equation modeling revealed a significant positive impact of tourism involvement on both low-carbon tourism behavior and low-carbon daily behavior, and this impact can be serially mediated by place attachment and environmental responsibility. In addition, we confirmed that the impact of ski tourism involvement on place attachment is more significant for outdoor ski resorts compared with indoor ones. This study expands the categories of destinations for research on ski tourism and low-carbon behavior. It provides implications for encouraging visitor pro-environmental behavior while corroborating the social value of ski tourism in addressing environmental issues. It also offers insights for government low-carbon campaigns, business management practices, and individuals with actionable attitudes. However, it is worth noting that this study was conducted in a single latitude region and did not conduct a comparative analysis with different locations across latitudes. Future research could investigate skiers in cities of different latitudes to gain a more comprehensive understanding.

1. Introduction

Glaciers are valuable natural resources that serve as the backdrop for winter sports [1], but they have suffered from significant recession in recent years due to climate change [2]. The ski industry, as a critical component of winter tourism, has been severely impacted by a lack of snow, insufficient snow depth, and earlier snowmelt [3]. Therefore, it is vital to preserve glaciers by minimizing carbon emissions [4]. In 2021, China released the “Action Plan for Peak Carbon Emissions and Carbon Neutrality” to the entire society, proposing various low-carbon initiatives focusing on energy conservation and environmental protection, the conservation of energy resources, caring for the ecological environment, opting for green commuting, and choosing green products. In addition to establishing and implementing legal measures to curb carbon emissions, governments and environmental organizations should also encourage low-carbon behavior. Successful marketing could aid in such efforts; for instance, the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics embraced green energy supply, green construction, and low-carbon transportation [5] in the “Green Olympics” theme promotion, which helped to raise public awareness of climate change. However, increased awareness on environmental issues (e.g., climate change) may not always lead to climate-friendly action [6]. Whitburn et al. (2019) suggested that a human connection to nature could promote pro-environmental engagement behavior [7]. As a result, people may become more conscious of the impact of tourism on climate change when they participate in climate-dependent tourism activities [8]. In the case of ski tourism, it is postulated that, from their onsite experience, tourists might realize the influence of climate change on their skiing activity, which may result in climate-friendly behavior onsite and in daily life.
Prior research on the determinants of low-carbon consumption behavior mainly focused on internal factors, such as subjective norms, attitudes, habits, and demographic factors [9,10], and external factors, including policies and reference groups [11,12,13]. Most studies [14,15,16] have examined low-carbon consumption behavior in nontourism contexts, such as the use of clean energy, ETC payment, and idle transactions. Only a few studies [17,18,19] have investigated how tourism involvement influences low-carbon consumption behavior. Therefore, understanding how and to what extent ski-tourism experiences can impact pro-environmental behavior is critical for the future development of ski tourism. In recent years, ski tourism has become increasingly popular in China and worldwide. To meet the growing demands of ski tourists, more ski facilities have been built, including both indoor and outdoor facilities. However, little is known about how ski tourist experiences in different facilities may influence climate-friendly behavior.
Place attachment, derived from attachment theory, refers to the positive relationship between a person and a physical or social environment [20]. In nature-based tourism, it can be created through functional and tangible factors and social relationships of a co-creative nature [21]. A multidimensional perspective on place attachment is frequently used in the literature and may provide a premium understanding of the relationships between visitors and destinations [22]. Williams and Vaske (2003) devised a scale to measure place attachment based on place identity and place dependence [23]. Place identity represents the symbolic importance of a place as a context for personal emotions or social relationships. Place dependence examines a person’s functional or physical attachment to a location. It reflects how the site can meet an individual’s functional needs (e.g., landscape or activities) [23]. Prior social and environmental psychology studies have suggested that how people perceive the physical environment and form bonds with the physical environment consequently influences specific behavior [24,25], such as environmentally responsible behavior [26].
Tourism involvement represents a psychological state of enjoyment and interest caused by a specific stimulus or situation [27]. A favorable tourism experience can stimulate involvement, which helps individuals to perceive the environment better and form bonds with the environment. As a result, visitors are prone to feeling that their functional needs are met, and a sense of belonging and identification to the place is created, which is called place attachment. Subsequently, attachment to a place awakens people‘s environmental awareness or norms and guides them to conduct environmentally responsible behaviors eventually. Thus, our research was carried out under the framework of place attachment theory.
To address gaps in the literature, this study aimed to (1) elucidate the underlying mechanism linking ski tourism involvement and low-carbon behavior; and (2) investigate whether different types of ski facilities (indoor vs. outdoor) moderate the relationship between ski tourism involvement and low-carbon behavior. This study contributes to the existing literature by introducing and exploring tourism involvement as an antecedent for low-carbon behavior. The results also provide implications for encouraging tourist low-carbon behavior.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

2.1. Ski Tourism, Climate Change, and Low-Carbon Behavior

There are approximately 135 million skiers globally [28]. The ski tourism industry attracts between 300 and 350 million skier visits annually, generating a multi-billion-dollar market [29]. Snow is the primary factor influencing the destination choice for ski tourists. Warm winter seasons can result in financial losses for individual ski businesses [30], as poor snow conditions lower the number of tourist visits [31]. While advancements in snowmaking technology have alleviated some limits imposed by natural snow on ski tourism operations, outdoor ski resorts still require a sufficiently low temperature for snow [32]. As such, the ski tourism industry is heavily reliant on snow and is particularly sensitive to climate change [33].
Tourism is vulnerable to climate change impacts as its service offering depends on the environment (e.g., skiing), but it also contributes to climate change through the use of transportation and natural resources [34,35]. In the case of ski tourism, the growth of ski tourism activities could potentially deteriorate the climate and environment of destinations [36,37]. Previous studies suggested that interventions could help to trigger pro-environmental behavior [38,39]. Tourists’ knowledge about alpine ski areas’ voluntary environmental programs is more biocentric than that of others [40]. They are therefore encouraged to engage in pro-environmental behavior to help to preserve the ecosystems of tourism destinations, especially for ski resorts that are heavily reliant on snow (quantity and quality). Thus, it is critical to understand how to encourage low-carbon behavior to ensure the long-term viability of ski resorts and destinations.
Low-carbon behavior, defined as behavior that reduces the carbon footprint or offsets emissions that cannot be reduced directly for environment and heritage preservation purposes [41], is considered a type of pro-environmental behavior, but it is more specific to the mitigation of global warming and to the ski tourism context, and thus, was the focus of this research. Existing studies have examined factors that influence low-carbon behavior (e.g., recycling, energy conservation, green hotel selection, and green product purchasing). Some influencing internal factors identified include subjective norms, behavioral control, attitude, habits, and demographic factors [9,10,42], while some external factors include policies, environmentally friendly programs, and reference groups [11,12,13]. Nature-based tourists were found to be more likely to engage in pro-environmental behavior than non-nature-based tourists [43], implying that engagement in outdoor or wildlife activities could promote pro-environmental behavior [44]. However, little research has examined whether and how participation in ski tourism activities may influence low-carbon behavior, let alone how the effects of settings of skiing facilities (indoor vs. outdoor) affect tourist involvement in ski tourism. Thus, this study aimed to examine how ski tourism involvement is associated with place attachment, environmental responsibility, and low-carbon behavior. Additionally, the moderating effect of skiing facilities (indoor vs. outdoor) on the relationship between involvement and place attachment was included.

2.2. Hypothesis Development

2.2.1. Ski Tourism Involvement and Low-Carbon Behavior

Involvement in leisure recreation and tourism refers to the psychological state of enjoyment and interest [45]. Individual involvement consists of three dimensions: attraction, centrality, and self-expression [46]. In this study, “attraction” refers to the combined enjoyment and interest associated with skiing, while “centrality” refers to the centrality of a ski activity in an individual’s life, and “self-expression” reflects how individuals define their values through skiing. Of the three dimensions, “attraction” and “centrality” determine the importance of skiing and the value of snow perceived by visitors. Such psychological arousal can also directly motivate visitors to contribute to the preservation of the current skiing environment. The theory of self-consistency shows that individuals have a self-concept, and doing things that align with their beliefs enhances their self-concept. Therefore, people tend to purchase products and services that align with their self-image [47]. For tourists, participating in skiing is a practical way to engage in low-carbon behavior. Through maintaining a good skiing environment, skiing can be a way to express pro-environmental behavior and help tourists to establish an image of being close to nature. Meanwhile, from visitors’ perspective, demonstrating pro-environmental behavior impacts their self-image positively and enables them to make a favorable impression on others. Given the skiing industry’s heavy reliance on cold temperatures and adequate amounts of snow, visitors need to implement low-carbon behavior (e.g., using green transportation, conserving energy, and recycling reusable products) to maintain a high-quality ski environment. Additionally, when ski tourists return to their daily lives, they might keep practicing low-carbon behaviors. For example, when tourists return from skiing trips to their daily lives, they might have increased awareness of low-carbon behavior, knowing that the effort contributes to addressing climate change concerns which, in return, will increase the likelihood of engaging in daily low-carbon behavior [48]. Therefore, participation in ski tourism may have a long-lasting effect on tourists’ attitudes and behavior [49], resulting in everyday low-carbon behavior. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1a: 
Ski tourism involvement positively influences low-carbon travel behavior.
H1b: 
Ski tourism involvement positively influences low-carbon daily life behavior.

2.2.2. The Mediating Effect of Place Attachment and Environmental Responsibility

Place attachment theory helps to explain visitors’ self-definition and identification with the chosen ski destination and the sport. Although snow resources can be leveraged to fulfil tourists’ hedonic needs through tourism involvement, this psychological connection is not stable during the early phase of ski tourism engagement [50]. While the snow resource continues to meet the tourists’ functional needs, they will link skiing with their individual lives and perceive the value of such tourism experiences to be high [51]. The more attractive ski destinations are to tourists, being a significant part of their trip, the more likely tourists are to become attached to the destinations. Additionally, ski tourism can be viewed as a medium for exploring a visitor’s individuality and personality and illustrating their self-image. When visitors regard a ski resort as a pleasant topic of conversation, they will form an emotional attachment and a sense of belonging to the destination, leading to the perception of place identity [52]. Thus, tourists’ recreational needs, reliance, and psychological–emotional identity characteristics are generated by their involvement in tourism, which eventually leads to the formation of place attachment to ski destinations [53].
Place attachment emphasizes the positive emotional connections formed during an individual’s interaction with a place. As a foundation of ski tourism, snow resources can convey natural climate change signals by emphasizing the scarcity and importance of snow. Additionally, snow resources can enable tourists to link the seemingly distant climate threat of “carbon emissions” to their daily and personal lives. Due to tourists’ individual awareness of environmental issues, visitors who recognize the self-beneficial features of the snow environment are more likely to opt for low-carbon behavior over those detrimental to the snow ecosystem, for example, reducing the use of paper-based products, fuel-powered transport, and high-energy-consuming goods. By making such low-carbon choices, tourists will form a sense of environmental responsibility [54].
The sense of environmental responsibility is an awareness of taking proactive efforts to address environmental problems arising from an individual’s full commitment to the environment [55,56]. It is a moral trait that encompasses views of environmental issues, behavioral attitudes, and emotions [57]) and is a proclivity for individuals to initiate the adoption and internalization of social standards as personal norms [58]. As ski tourists become more involved, the value perceptions and local attachments to snow resources become stronger. Thus, individuals begin to actively receive environmental signals and pay attention to environmental issues related to ski destinations. When tourists recognize their interconnectedness with local environmental protection and carbon emission reduction, they will further adjust the focus from snow resource protection to commitments to the broader tourism ecosystem. Therefore, ski tourism involvement and place attachment can positively impact visitors’ sense of environmental responsibility and ultimately lead to environmentally beneficial behavior.
As visitors instinctively participate in low-carbon behavior to preserve the ski environment, the perceived distance between individuals and environmental problems will continue to shrink [48]. Unlike the audiovisual propaganda from the media, this perception is a structure of consciousness generated by real experience, including emotional and cognitive components that may have a lasting effect on visitors’ psychological awareness and conduct [49]. In the study by Vaske and Kobrin (2001), it was found that as individuals’ environmental awareness and attachment increase, their sense of environmental responsibility can be converted into a commitment or behavior towards the environment in general [59]. A higher level of consistency between visitors’ awareness and behavior has a positive effect on low-carbon behavior and thus enhances the likelihood of low-carbon everyday behavior. Based on the theory of the responsible environmental behavior model [60], when tourists recognize the sense of environmental responsibility during ski tourism, they will carry such awareness with them when they return to their habitual living environments. Every time they encounter low-carbon travel opportunities, such as opportunities for consuming low-carbon products and energy-saving options, the more responsible consumers feel for environmental protection and the more motivated they will be to reduce carbon emissions and increase their perceived behavioral control. Therefore, this study proposes that place attachment and environmental responsibility may have a spillover effect on tourists’ low-carbon behavior, transferring awareness and behavior to the more ordinary, everyday environment, and eventually leading to a positive effect on ordinary low-carbon behavior.
According to the literature, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H2a: 
Place attachment mediates the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon tourism behavior.
H2b: 
Place attachment mediates the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon everyday behavior.
H3a: 
Environmental responsibility mediates the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon tourism behavior.
H3b: 
Environmental responsibility mediates the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon everyday behavior.
H4a: 
Place attachment and environmental responsibility serially mediate the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon tourism behavior.
H4b: 
Place attachment and environmental responsibility serially mediate the effect of ski tourism involvement on low-carbon everyday behavior.

2.2.3. The Moderating Effect of the Ski Resort Type

Ski tourism is mainly supported by natural snowfall, but snow-making technology is also used if necessary [61]. Modern ski resorts are broadly classified into two types: outdoor and indoor. Outdoor ski resorts are typically located in natural places, such as high-altitude mountains or locations with temperatures consistently below zero degrees. On the other hand, indoor ski resorts are predominantly enclosed structures that rely entirely on artificial snow-making to maintain a cold climate inside. The same activities carried out in different places may bring different feelings to tourists, and the tourists’ reactions will be different. For example, compared to urban tourism settings, tourists in natural environments are more sensitive to environmental changes and reflect more on the environment [56]. Similarly, tourists surrounded by real snow can intuitively perceive the connection between snow resources and the natural environment, enhancing their awareness, understanding, and identification of the natural environment. This can result in the formation of dependency and identity associated with these places, affecting the place attachment [62]. However, in indoor ski resorts, visitors pay little attention to the impact of the local environment on the snow resource, making it more challenging to establish a connection between snow and the local environment. The differences in ski facilities and environments will have varying degrees of influence on how tourists perceive the destination during ski tourism. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H5: 
The ski resort type moderates the effect of ski tourism involvement on place attachment with a more significant effect of ski tourism involvement on attachment to a place in outdoor ski resorts than indoor ski resorts.
In summary, a theoretical model was constructed as shown in Figure 1.

3. Methodology

3.1. Data Collection

This study tested the hypotheses using an online questionnaire survey. A survey was launched from 12 January to 28 February 2021. Questionnaires were distributed to individuals who had previously participated in ski tourism. We conducted a sampling survey on skiing tourists at Sunac Snow Park, an indoor ski resort, and Xiling Snow Mountain Tours, an outdoor ski resort, in Chengdu, China. A total of 422 valid questionnaires were obtained out of 1000 distributed questionnaires. Validation questions were set for each questionnaire, and invalid questionnaires, such as those with missing data, a short filling content, a short filling time, and incorrect answers to validation questions were screened out. Finally, 422 valid questionnaires were obtained.
Most respondents were women (59.0%), aged 18–30 (65.9%) years old, with at least a bachelor’s degree (69.7%) and a monthly income between CNY 5000 and 8000 (45.7%), who had visited an outdoor ski facility (61.1%, Table 1).

3.2. Measurement

The questionnaire was divided into two sections: (1) a scale for each of the five core variables, including tourist involvement, place attachment, individual environmental responsibility, and low-carbon (site specific and general) behavior; and (2) demographic information (i.e., age, gender, average monthly income, educational background, and ski facility setting).
The scales utilized in the study were developed based on previous studies and were rated on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree”, 7 = “strongly agree”). For example, to measure tourism involvement, the Zatori (2018) [63] and Campos (2017) [64] consumer involvement profiles (CIP) scale was adopted, including all three dimensions (i.e., centrality, hedonic value, and symbolic value) with a total of nine items. Place attachment was measured by seven items from the two dimensions, place identity (four items) and place dependence (three items), as proposed by Williams and Vaske (2003) [23], with items also modified from Brown and Raymond (2007) [65] and Hallak et al. (2015) [66]. The sense of environmental responsibility scale was developed based on research on environmentally responsible behavior (e.g., Stone et al., 1995 [58]) with five items. Low-carbon behavior was evaluated in two dimensions, site-specific (6 items) and general behavior (6 items), based on previous studies [67,68]. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for each scale was greater than 0.9 (see Table 2), and the scale had good reliability in this study.
Considering that all respondents were Chinese, we first translated the classical scale into a Chinese version. Then, the Chinese version was translated to an English version by another translator who was not versed in either the research area or the classical scale. At last, both the Chinese version and the English version scales were evaluated by experts to make sure that the Chinese version was appropriate to show to respondents.
SPSS 22.0 and AMOS 22.0 were used to analyze the sample data. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the model fit was sufficient: (χ2/df = 2.701, RMSEA = 0.064 < 0.08, IFI = 0.936 > 0.9, CFI = 0.936 > 0.9, IFI = 0.936 > 0.9, TLI = 0.930 > 0.9). The standardized factor loadings for all items were greater than 0.70. The composite reliability (CR) for tourism involvement, place attachment, environmental responsibility, low-carbon tourism behavior, and low-carbon everyday behavior was 0.947, 0.930, 0.945, 0.945, and 0.933, respectively, with average variance extracted (AVE) values of 0.670, 0.654, 0.775, 0.742, and 0.700, respectively, which exceeded the critical value of 0.5 and indicated a high convergent validity. The square root of the mean variance was greater than the correlation coefficient between the two variables (Table 2), indicating a good discriminant validity (see Table 3).
Since all variables were taken from a single questionnaire, this study employed Harman’s one-way test for common method bias via the exploratory factor analysis. A factor analysis using unrotated factor solutions found that approximately 31.1% of the total variance (not exceeding the 50% threshold) was explained by a single factor. Therefore, common method bias was not a significant issue in this study.

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive and Correlation Analysis

Gender, age, education level, and monthly income were used as control variables, tourism involvement was the independent variable, and low-carbon tourism behavior/low-carbon everyday behavior was the dependent variable. The regression results indicate that the overall model fit was adequate (F = 56.658, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.405; F = 46.963, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.361). The effects of tourism involvement on low-carbon tourism behavior (β = 0.616, t = 16.109, p < 0.001) and low-carbon everyday behavior (β = 0.583, t = 14.703, p < 0.001) were significant. Gender (tourism: β = 0.049, t = 1.267, p = 0.206; daily: β = −0.053, t = −1.343, p = 0.180), age (β = −0.077, t = −1.926, p = 0.055; daily: β = −0.026, t = −0.639, p = 0.523), educational level (β = 0.022, t= 0.568, p = 0.571; daily: β = 0.002, t = 0.040, p = 0.968), and monthly income (β = −0.037, t = −0.930, p = 0.353; daily: β = −0.079 t = −1.927, p = 0.055) had no significant effects. Thus, H1, H1a, and H1b were initially verified with ski tourism involvement generating a significant positive association with low-carbon tourism behavior and a significant positive association with low-carbon everyday behavior.

4.2. Test of Mediation Effects

The test was conducted with 5000 replicate samples using Hayes’ SPSS macro program PROCESS (Model 6). Tourism involvement was used as the independent variable, low-carbon tourism behavior was the dependent variable, and place attachment and environmental responsibility were mediating variables. The test results indicate that significant mediating effects exist for place attachment (β = 0.158, Boot SE = 0.067, 95% CI = [0.327, 0.297], excluding 0); significant mediating effects exist for environmental responsibility (β = 0.063, Boot SE = 0.036, 95% CI = [0.090, 0.148], excluding 0); and significant serial mediating effects exist for both place attachment and environmental responsibility (β = 0.029, Boot SE = 0.084, 95% CI = [0.014, 0.071], excluding 0), validating H2a, H3a, and H4a.
Similarly, with tourism involvement as the independent variable and low-carbon everyday behavior as the dependent variable, the mediating effect of place attachment was significant (β = 0.185, Boot SE = 0.067, 95% CI = [0.066, 0.328], excluding 0); the mediating effect of environmental responsibility was significant (β = 0.116, Boot SE = 0.049, 95% CI = [0.029, 0.220], excluding 0); and the serial mediating effects of place attachment and environmental responsibility were significant (β = 0.053, Boot SE = 0.029, 95% CI = [0.005, 0.120], excluding 0), validating H2b, H3b, and H4b. Thus, H2, H3, and H4 were validated. The path coefficient results are shown in Figure 2.

4.3. Test of Moderating Effects

The moderating effect of the ski resort type was tested with 5000 replicate samples using Hayes’ SPSS macro program PROCESS (Model 83). The results indicated that when low-carbon tourism behavior was used as the dependent variable, the overall model indicators were significant (mediator index moderated = 0.0239, BootSE = 0.0162, 95% CI = [0.000, 0.064], excluding 0). Additionally, the interaction between tourism involvement and the ski resort type had a significant effect on place attachment (β = 0.469, p < 0.001) which, in turn, influenced environmental responsibility (β = 0.275, p < 0.001) and finally low-carbon tourism behavior (β = 0.185, p < 0.001) with indirect effects on low-carbon tourism behavior in the outdoor ski resort visitor group (258) via place attachment, and environmental responsibility was significant (β = 0.026, 95% CI = [0.000, 0.065], excluding 0). The serial moderating effects of place attachment and environmental responsibility remained significant in the indoor ski resort visitor group (164) (β = 0.050, 95% CI = [0.000, 0.123], excluding 0).
When low-carbon everyday behavior was used as the dependent variable, the moderating effect of the ski resort type was significant (moderated mediator index = 0.1338, BootSE = 0.0522, 95% CI [0.0401, 0.2454], excluding 0). The interaction between tourism involvement and the ski resort type had a significant effect on place attachment (β = 0.469, p < 0.001) which, in turn, affected environmental responsibility (β = 0.275, p < 0.001) and, ultimately, low-carbon everyday behavior (β = 0.293, p < 0.001). The indirect effects on low-carbon everyday behavior of place attachment and environmental responsibility were significant in the outdoor ski resort visitor group (β = 0.041, 95% CI [0.005, 0.095], excluding 0). However, the serial moderating effects of place attachment and environmental responsibility in the indoor ski resort visitor group remained significant (β = 0.079, 95% CI [0.009, 0.177], excluding 0).
To sum up, the effect of ski tourism involvement on place attachment was moderated by the ski resort type for both low-carbon tourism behavior and low-carbon everyday behavior. At the same time, through the analysis, it was concluded that the impact of ski tourism involvement on place attachment in outdoor ski resorts is indeed greater than that in indoor ski resorts. Therefore, H5 is supported.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Conclusions

This study focused on ski tourists and constructed a theoretical model of tourism involvement, place attachment, environmental responsibility, low-carbon tourism behavior, and low-carbon everyday behavior in the context of ski tourism with the aim of revealing the drivers of ski tourists’ low-carbon behavior and the mechanisms of their behavior. Finally, 422 questionnaires were used to verify the model and proposed hypotheses, and the study had the following conclusions:
Ski tourism involvement has a significant positive impact on both low-carbon tourism behavior and low-carbon everyday behavior. This is because customers are more likely to comprehend the environment’s relevance and present and express themselves through it when they are emotionally engaged and excited by their surroundings. Additionally, maintaining an optimal environment requires behavioral support from individuals in addition to the management of the ski resort itself. Consequently, tourists with a high degree of involvement in ski tourism are more willing to set an example by not damaging the snow environment and doing what they can to protect it. By the end of their skiing experience, visitors can understand the critical nature of reducing carbon emissions and preserving snow resources. Therefore, when they return to their usual environment, they are more aware of the carbon footprint of their daily activities. Eventually, their low-carbon tourism behavior will translate into low-carbon everyday behavior, for example, conserving water and electricity and reducing exhaust emissions by walking or cycling. Previous research on tourists’ pro-environmental behavior have focused on behavior during the tour [69,70]. Although these studies have demonstrated that contact between tourists and destinations can promote tourists’ pro-environmental behavior, they have paid less attention to sustained changes after travel through tracking research. This study found that the establishment of human–destination relationships during skiing participation promotes the enhancement of people’s sense of environmental responsibility. This psychological transformation is continuous and can continue from the in-tourism to the post-tourism period.
The second finding indicates that place attachment and environmental responsibility play mediating roles in the relationship between ski tourism involvement and low-carbon behavior. A previous study also attempted to analyze the formation mechanism of low-carbon behavior [14]. Dlamini et al., (2021) discussed low-carbon behavior from the perspective of human–destination relations [71]. There are many mediating variables in research that can generate positive environmental behavior, such as place attachment [72]. However, the essential mechanisms responsible for people’s positive behavior and how the psychological changes arise from behavioral changes were ignored in their research. This study refined the psychological mechanism operating between place attachment and behavior and stated that people’s thoughts change after establishing connections between humans and destinations, which is why positive behaviors are carried out. Specifically, this study proposed a sense of environmental responsibility based on the place attachment theory and provided a comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms that shape low-carbon tourism behavior and low-carbon everyday behavior from the perspective of an awakened sense of responsibility. First of all, ski tourism has the potential to create an emotional bond with the destination through attachment and identification. Previous research on local residents has indicated that individuals are more willing to take action to protect places that are meaningful to them [73]. Therefore, the place attachment developed through tourism involvement could have a positive impact on low-carbon behavior. Secondly, the sense of environmental responsibility formed based on place attachment is essentially an awareness of environmental issues. Ski tourism demonstrates to visitors the benefits of a cold snow environment on their skiing activities. Thus, visitors are likely to develop a sense of responsibility for preserving the current ecosystem to achieve a better skiing experience. This, in turn, enhances individual relevance to the issue of climate change issue, bridging personal perceptions associated with reducing carbon emissions and slowing global warming. The findings suggest that the sense of place attachment and environmental responsibility that visitors develop during skiing will encourage low-carbon behavior, while the sense of environmental responsibility will also ensure more effective implementation of low-carbon everyday behavior.
Finally, empirical evidence indicates that the type of ski resort moderates the relationship between ski tourism involvement and place attachment. Furthermore, tourists in natural snow environments are more sensitive to carbon emissions and are more likely to develop a sense of place attachment and environmental responsibility towards the ski destination. Previous research showed that the stronger an individual’s perception of scarcity of resources is, the more likely they are to engage in pro-environmental behavior [74]. Similarly, in this study, indoor and outdoor ski resorts were used to adjust tourists’ perceptions of the scarcity of snow resources. Natural snow can make tourists more aware of the importance of the environment [75]. On the contrary, artificial snow weakens people’s sense of urgency and crisis regarding environmental protection [74]. It has been suggested that, at the individual level, the perception of scarcity refers primarily to the perception and sense of scarce access to resources in terms of quantity, quality, and future availability. Due to the constraints imposed by the climate, seasons, and geographical locations, natural snow is perceived to have a higher intensity of scarcity in terms of its future availability and prolonged accessibility compared to artificial snow. Therefore, individual tourists have a stronger perception of scarcity regarding outdoor snow compared to indoor snow. As a result, place attachment to the destination is more likely to be developed during ski tourism in outdoor ski resorts, eventually contributing to low-carbon behavior.

5.2. Theoretical Contributions

Firstly, this study contributes to the current literature on tourism and low-carbon behavior by examining both low-carbon tourism behavior and low-carbon everyday behavior among ski resort visitors. Ski tourism can be a vivid and positive expression of tourism involvement that enhances individuals’ motivation and incentive to address climate change issues and environmental concerns. Moreover, tourism involvement has a positive effect on tourists’ low-carbon tourism behavior and their everyday low-carbon behavior afterwards. This study, therefore, sheds light on the environmental social value of tourism.
Secondly, this study demonstrates the mediation effects of place attachment and environmental responsibility on the influence of tourism involvement on tourists’ low-carbon behavior. The majority of previously published research examined the impact of carbon information promotion on individuals’ low-carbon behavior. This study, however, used ski tourism involvement as a measure to argue that authentic tourism experiences can lead to place attachment and environmental responsibility, both of which ultimately contribute to low-carbon behavior. Thus, the current study provides a new perspective on the mechanisms behind individuals’ low-carbon behavior.
Finally, this study compared and analyzed two types of ski resort—indoor ski resorts and outdoor ski resorts—to broaden the category of destinations related to ski tourism and low-carbon behavior. The majority of the current literature on ski tourism in China focuses on outdoor ski resorts, examining the impacts of various factors on their development, and rarely makes a distinction between indoor and outdoor ski destinations. With the continued growth of the Chinese ski tourism market, this research assessed both outdoor and indoor ski resorts to determine the effects of different ski environments on visitors’ behavior, thereby enriching the scope and type of research on ski tourism.

5.3. Practical Implications

It is anticipated that the findings of this study will offer insights to governments in terms of the promotion of low-carbon legislation and to practitioners in business management in terms of tourists’ behavioral attitudes. Historically, the majority of governmental campaigns on reducing carbon emissions have been performed at national or global macro levels and have primarily targeted local residents with limited effectiveness and scope. As indicated previously, reducing carbon emissions is an act that is closely linked to individuals, and there is a need to strengthen the awareness of the individual relevance of carbon emission consequences. The development of ski tourism has the potential to boost the tourism industry while also actively guiding the public toward environmental conservation.
Destination managers can encourage tourists to participate in environmental conservation by promoting ski tourism. For instance, in destinations that have already developed ski tourism, local governments can incorporate elements of environmental protection and low-carbon promotion to convey the concepts of low-carbon tourism and environmental conservation to ski tourists. This encourages tourists to connect with nature and develop a love for, and commitment to, protecting the natural environment. It is crucial to improve relevant policies and legislation and advocate for businesses to establish a green tourism image. Controlling the intensity of development by ski-tourism-related enterprises is essential while vigorously promoting outdoor ski tourism activities.
Additionally, destination marketing organizations (DMOs) can collaborate with cities to create a social atmosphere of environmental stewardship. For example, in cooperation with tourist source cities, customized ski tourism programs can be developed based on the needs of tourists from these cities, encouraging their participation in ski tourism and providing education and training on low-carbon and environmental practices. In collaboration with destination cities, emphasis should be placed on the creation of a city brand and the establishment of an image as a low-carbon ski tourism destination. Specific measures should be taken to regulate the behavior of urban residents and provide an incentive for low-carbon practices. Similarly, tourism enterprises can promote tourists’ pro-environmental behavior by offering a greater variety of tourism products. Since outdoor settings have a stronger impact on fostering tourists’ pro-environmental behavior, tourism companies should enhance outdoor skiing facilities and provide diverse skiing activities that are based on natural resources. This will increase tourists’ engagement in ski tourism activities and evoke emotional responses, fostering a sense of place attachment and awakening their conscious awareness of environmental protection. Additionally, while the influence of indoor ski tourism activities on tourists’ pro-environmental behavior may be less significant compared to that of outdoor activities, empirical evidence suggests that indoor ski tourism activities do have an impact. Therefore, when creating indoor skiing environments, companies can utilize virtual technology to enhance the authenticity of ice and snow facilities, thereby inducing changes in tourists’ attitudes. In summary, tourism enterprises should strive to offer tourists a greater quantity, higher quality, and wider range of ski tourism products.
Lastly, in terms of tourists’ attitudes, it is important to strengthen environmental education before, during, and after their trips, with particular emphasis on education during the trip itself. When tourists are actively engaged in the specific tourism environment, their attitudes and behaviors are most likely to change, and their connection with the environment becomes stronger. Integrating environmental education into ski tourism activities can effectively evoke a sense of responsibility and identification among tourists, leading to more noticeable pro-environmental behaviors.

5.4. Limitations and Future Research

This research does have limitations that can be modified and explored further in future research. To begin with, this study analyzed tourists’ psychological perceptions in the tourism context using place attachment. However, it did not investigate them in relation to objective factors, such as the timing of implementing low-carbon behavior, monetary costs, and policy support. Moreover, this study only conducted research in the same latitude region and did not compare and analyze different places across latitudes. Future research could investigate skiers from cities with different dimensions. Due to the correlation between low-carbon behavior and morality, respondents to self-response questionnaires often overestimate ethical behavior. Therefore, the observation method can be used to observe actual environmental behavior, which will increase the data reliability and credibility.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.Y.; Methodology, X.S.; Validation, L.H.; Formal analysis, Y.M.; Investigation, H.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Guanghua Talent Project of Southwestern University of Finance and Economicms grant number 2021SWUFEtoLv and Undergraduate Research and Learning Program of Southwestern University of Finance and Economics grant number SWUFELV202301.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of NAME OF INSTITUTE (protocol code SWUFE Ethics 20220510 and date of approval: 1 June 2022–31 December 2023).

Informed Consent Statement

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

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request due to restrictions eg privacy or ethical. The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Wu, B.H.; Dang, N. Research on China’s Ski Tourism Market Demand. Reg. Res. Dev. 2004, 23, 78–82. [Google Scholar]
  2. Siirila-Woodburn, E.R.; Rhoades, A.M.; Hatchett, B.J.; Huning, L.S.; Szinai, J.; Tague, C.; Kaatz, L. A low-to-no snow future and its impacts on water resources in the western United States. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2021, 2, 800–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Malasevska, I.; Haugom, E. Alpine skiing demand patterns. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour. 2019, 19, 390–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Demiroglu, O.C.; Dannevig, H.; Aall, C. Climate change acknowledgement and responses of summer (glacier) ski visitors in Norway. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour. 2018, 8, 419–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Wu, C. Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics Set to Become First Olympic Games Fully Powered by Green Energy. People’s Daily Online. Available online: http://en.people.cn/n3/2021/1119/c90000-9921881.html (accessed on 19 November 2021).
  6. Schuldt, J.P.; Rickard, L.N.; Yang, Z.J. Does reduced psychological distance increase climate engagement? On the limits of localizing climate change. J. Environ. Psychol. 2018, 55, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Whitburn, J.; Linklater, W.L.; Milfont, T.L. Exposure to urban nature and tree planting are related to pro-environmental behavior via connection to nature, the use of nature for psychological restoration, and environmental attitudes. Environ. Behav. 2019, 51, 787–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Xiao, X.; Perry, E.E.; Gao, J.; Lu, J.; Manning, R. Winter tourism and climate change: Exploring local and non-local snowmobilers’ perceptions of climate change and adaptation behaviors. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. 2020, 31, 100299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, D.; Du, H.; Southworth, F.; Ma, S. The influence of social-psychological factors on the intention to choose low-carbon travel modes in Tianjin, China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 105, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jiang, X.; Ding, Z.; Liu, R. Can Chinese residential low-carbon consumption behavior intention be better explained? The role of cultural values. Nat. Hazards 2019, 95, 155–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Y.; Liu, R.; Jiang, X. What drives low-carbon consumption behavior of Chinese college students? The regulation of situational factors. Nat. Hazards 2019, 95, 173–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mi, L.; Zhu, H.; Yang, J.; Gan, X.; Xu, T.; Qiao, L.; Liu, Q. A new perspective to promote low-carbon consumption: The influence of reference groups. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 161, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Steinhorst, J.; Matthies, E. Monetary or environmental appeals for saving electricity?–Potentials for spillover on low carbon policy acceptability. Energy Policy 2016, 93, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cheng, X.; Long, R.; Wu, F.; Geng, J.; Yang, J. How social interaction shapes habitual and occasional low-carbon consumption behaviors: Evidence from ten cities in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2023, 182, 113387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dubois, G.; Sovacool, B.; Aall, C.; Nilsson, M.; Barbier, C.; Herrmann, A.; Bruyère, S.; Andersson, C.; Skold, B.; Nadaud, F.; et al. It starts at home? Climate policies targeting household consumption and behavioral decisions are key to low-carbon futures. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2019, 52, 144–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gunarathne, A.N.; Kaluarachchilage, P.K.H.; Rajasooriya, S.M. Low-carbon consumer behaviour in climate-vulnerable developing countries: A case study of Sri Lanka. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 154, 104592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chen, T.; Wu, Z. Employing a sort of “we” based VBN model to gauge Chinese tourists’ intentions to support low-carbon tourism. Acta Psychol. 2022, 230, 103761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ma, D.; Hu, J.; Yao, F. Big data empowering low-carbon smart tourism study on low-carbon tourism O2O supply chain considering consumer behaviors and corporate altruistic preferences. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2021, 153, 107061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chen, A.; Peng, N. Antecedents to Consumers’ Green Hotel Stay Purchase Behavior during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The influence of green consumption value, emotional ambivalence, and consumers’ perceptions. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2023, 47, 101107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Brown, B.; Perkins, D.D.; Brown, G. Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: Individual and block levels of analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 2003, 23, 259–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lewicka, M. Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? J. Environ. Psychol. 2011, 31, 207–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ramkissoon, H.; Smith, L.D.G.; Weiler, B. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 552–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Williams, D.R.; Vaske, J.J. The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. For. Sci. 2003, 49, 830–840. [Google Scholar]
  24. Devine-Wright, P.; Howes, Y. Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 271–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Larson, S.; De Freitas, D.M.; Hicks, C.C. Sense of place as a determinant of people’s attitudes towards the environment: Implications for natural resources management and planning in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 117, 226–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Scannell, L.; Gifford, R. The relations between natural and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 289–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Havitz, M.E.; Dimanche, F. Leisure involvement revisited: Conceptual conundrums and measurement advances. J. Leis. Res. 1997, 29, 245–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Vanat, L. International Report on Snow and Mountain Tourism. Available online: https://www.vanat.ch/RM-world-report-2020.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2020).
  29. Steiger, R.; Stötter, J. Climate change impact assessment of ski tourism in Tyrol. Tour. Geogr. 2013, 15, 577–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Steiger, R. The impact of climate change on ski season length and snowmaking requirements in Tyrol, Austria. Clim. Res. 2010, 43, 251–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pickering, C. Changes in demand for tourism with climate change: A case study of visitation patterns to six ski resorts in Australia. J. Sustain. Tour. 2011, 19, 767–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rutty, M.; Scott, D.; Johnson, P.; Pons, M.; Steiger, R.; Vilella, M. Using ski industry response to climatic variability to assess climate change risk: An analogue study in Eastern Canada. Tour. Manag. 2017, 58, 196–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Steiger, R.; Posch, E.; Tappeiner, G.; Walde, J. The impact of climate change on demand of ski tourism-a simulation study based on stated preferences. Ecol. Econ. 2020, 170, 106589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fang, Y.; Yin, J.; Wu, B. Climate change and tourism: A scientometric analysis using CiteSpace. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 108–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Xu, S.; Wilhelm Stanis, S.; Zhang, H.; Groshong, L.; Morgan, M. Impact of travel distance and experience use history on visitors’ climate friendly behavior and support for climate friendly management action. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 981–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Holden, A. The environment-tourism nexus: Influence of market ethics. Ann. Tour. Res. 2009, 36, 373–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zheng, Y.F. Environmental protection and sustainable development of ski tourism. Ice Snow Sport. 2014, 36, 93–96. [Google Scholar]
  38. Han, W.; McCabe, S.; Wang, Y.; Chong, A.Y.L. Evaluating user-generated content in social media: An effective approach to encourage greater pro-environmental behavior in tourism? J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 600–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tkaczynski, A.; Rundle-Thiele, S.; Truong, V.D. Influencing tourists’ pro-environmental behaviours: A social marketing application. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2020, 36, 100740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Needham, M.D.; Little, M.C. Voluntary environmental programs at an alpine ski area: Visitor perceptions, attachment, value orientations, and specialization. Tour. Manag. 2013, 35, 70–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Gössling, S. Carbon neutral destinations: A conceptual analysis. J. Sustain. Tour. 2009, 17, 17–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Gholamrezai, S.; Aliabadi, V.; Ataei, P. Understanding the pro-environmental behavior among green poultry farmers: Application of behavioral theories. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 16100–16118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cooper, C.; Larson, L.; Dayer, A.; Stedman, R.; Decker, D. Are wildlife recreationists conservationists? Linking hunting, birdwatching, and pro-environmental behavior. J. Wildl. Manag. 2015, 79, 446–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Loureiro, S.M.C.; Guerreiro, J.; Han, H. Past, present, and future of pro-environmental behavior in tourism and hospitality: A text-mining approach. J. Sustain. Tour. 2022, 30, 258–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Havitz, M.E.; Dimanche, F. Propositions for testing the involvement construct in recreational and tourism contexts. Leis. Sci. 1990, 12, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gross, M.J.; Brown, G. An empirical structural model of tourists and places: Progressing involvement and place attachment into tourism. Tour. Manag. 2008, 29, 1141–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Han, H.; Moon, H.; Kim, W. The influence of international tourists’ self-image congruity with a shopping place on their shopping experiences. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2019, 40, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sheppard, S.R.J. Landscape visualization and climate change: The potential for influencing perceptions and behaviour. Environ. Sci. Policy 2005, 8, 637–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wang, J.M.; He, A.Z. Psychological Attribution of Consumers’ Low-Carbon Consumption Behavior and Policy Intervention Path: An Exploratory Study Based on Grounded Theory. Nankai Manag. Rev. 2011, 14, 80–89+99. [Google Scholar]
  50. Beaton, A.A.; Funk, D.C.; Ridinger, L.; Jordan, J. Sport involvement: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Sport Manag. Rev. 2010, 14, 126–140. [Google Scholar]
  51. Beaton, A.A.; Funk, D.C. An Evaluation of Theoretical Frameworks for Studying Physically Active Leisure. Leis. Sci. 2008, 30, 53–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lv, X.; Lu, R.; Xu, S.; Sun, J.; Yang, Y. Exploring Visual Embodiment Effect in Dark Tourism: The Influence of Visual Darkness on Dark Experience. Tour. Manag. 2022, 89, 104438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Jia, Y.J.; Lin, D.R. Tourists’ perception of urban service, place attachment and loyal behaviors: A case study of Xiamen. Geogr. Res. 2016, 35, 390–400. [Google Scholar]
  54. Gosling, E.; Williams, K.J.H. Connectedness to nature, place attachment and conservation behaviour: Testing connectedness theory among farmers. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 298–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1999, 6, 81–97. [Google Scholar]
  56. Wurzinger, S.; Johansson, M. Environmental concern and knowledge of eco-tourism among three groups of Swedish tourists. J. Travel Res. 2006, 45, 217–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Robert, G.; Andreas, N. Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behavior. Int. J. Psychol. 2014, 49, 141–157. [Google Scholar]
  58. Stone, G.; Barnes, J.H.; Montgomery, C. Ecoscale: A Scale for the Measurement of Environmentally Responsible Consumers. Psychol. Mark. 1995, 12, 595–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Vaske, J.J.; Kobrin, K.C. Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior. J. Environ. Educ. 2001, 32, 16–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Hines, J.D.; Hungerford, H.R.; Tomera, A.T. Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. J. Environ. Educ. 2010, 18, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cao, J.H. Ski Tourism Management; Heilongjiang University Press: Harbin, China, 2017; pp. 120–122. [Google Scholar]
  62. Salim, E.; Ravanel, L.; Deline, P. Does witnessing the effects of climate change on glacial landscapes increase pro-environmental behaviour intentions? An empirical study of a last chance destination. Curr. Issues Tour. 2022, 26, 922–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zatori, A.; Smith, M.K.; Puczko, L. Experience-involvement, memorability and authenticity: The service provider’s effect on tourist experience. Tour. Manag. 2018, 67, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Campos, A.C.; Mendes, J.; do Valle, P.O.; Scott, N. Co-creating animal-based tourist experiences: Attention, involvement and memorability. Tour. Manag. 2017, 63, 100–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Brown, G.; Raymond, C. The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: Toward mapping place attachment. Appl. Geogr. 2007, 27, 89–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hallak, R.; Assaker, G.; Lee, C. Tourism entrepreneurship performance: The effects of place identity, self-efficacy, and gender. J. Travel Res. 2015, 54, 36–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Punzo, G.; Panarello, D.; Pagliuca, M.M.; Castellano, R.; Aprile, M.C. Assessing the role of perceived values and felt responsibility on pro-environmental behaviours: A comparison across four EU countries. Energy Ecol. 2019, 101, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Saleem, M.A.; Eagle, L.; Low, D. Market segmentation based on eco-socially conscious consumers’ behavioral intentions: Evidence from an emerging economy. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 193, 14–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Gössling, S.; Balas, M.; Mayer, M.; Sun, Y.Y. A review of tourism and climate change mitigation: The scales, scopes, stakeholders and strategies of carbon management. Tour. Manag. 2023, 95, 104681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wang, J.; Wang, J.H. Influencing factors model of public low carbon consumption model and government regulation policy: An exploratory study based on the grounded theory. Manag. World 2011, 4, 58–68. [Google Scholar]
  71. Dlamini, S.; Tesfamichael, S.G.; Mokhele, T. Socio-demographic determinants of environmental attitudes, perceptions, place attachment, and environmentally responsible behaviour in Gauteng province, South Africa. Sci. Afr. 2021, 12, e00772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Song, Z.N.; Ahmad, D.; Didier, S. Place Attachment, Trust and Mobility: Three-way Interaction Effect on Urban Residents’ Environmental Citizenship Behaviour. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 105, 168–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Stedman, R.C. Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environ. Behav. 2002, 34, 561–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Gu, D.; Jiang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Y.; Jiang, W.; Du, X. Concern for the future and saving the earth: When does ecological resource scarcity promote pro-environmental behavior? J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 72, 101501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Scott, D.; Steiger, R.; Rutty, M.; Pons, M.; Johnson, P. The differential futures of ski tourism in Ontario (Canada) under climate change: The limits of snowmaking adaptation. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 1327–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 10277 g001 550
Figure 1. Research framework.
Figure 1. Research framework.
Sustainability 15 10277 g001
Sustainability 15 10277 g002 550
Figure 2. Results of the theoretical model and path coefficient. Note: LTB: low-carbon tourism behavior; LEB: low-carbon everyday behavior; *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2. Results of the theoretical model and path coefficient. Note: LTB: low-carbon tourism behavior; LEB: low-carbon everyday behavior; *** p < 0.001.
Sustainability 15 10277 g002
Table
Table 1. Sample characterization statistics (N = 422).
Table 1. Sample characterization statistics (N = 422).
Items FrequencyPercentage
GenderMale17341.0%
Female24959.0%
AgeUnder 1861.4%
18–2513732.5%
26–3014133.4%
31–408921.1%
41–60378.8%
Above 60122.8%
EducationCollege and below7217.1%
Bachelor’s degree29469.7%
Postgraduate and above5613.3%
Monthly income
(CNY)		Less than 500010224.2%
5001–800019345.7%
8001–17,0009522.5%
17,001–30,000286.6%
30,000+40.9%
Ski facility settingOutdoor25861.1%
Indoor16438.9%
Table
Table 2. Statistical analysis results (mean, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient).
Table 2. Statistical analysis results (mean, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient).
VariableCronbach’s αMeanStandard Deviation12345
1. Tourism Involvement0.9455.4670.9340.82
2. Place Attachment0.9295.5110.8970.670.81
3. Environmental Responsibility0.9445.6351.0950.480.450.88
4. Low-Carbon Tourism Behavior0.9435.4541.1370.620.560.470.86
5. Low-Carbon Everyday Behavior0.9315.5630.9820.590.580.570.580.84
Note: N = 422, values on the diagonal are the square root of the mean variance. All correlation coefficients were significant at the 0.001 level.
Table
Table 3. Results of the confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 3. Results of the confirmatory factor analysis.
VariableItemsMeanStandard
Deviation		Standard Factor LoadingAVECR
Tourism InvolvementSkiing is fun.5.5281.0310.6100.670.947
Skiing is one of the most satisfying things I have ever done.5.4291.0630.776
I really like skiing.5.411.0720.812
One of my leisure activities is skiing.5.361.2440.845
I am willing to spend time and energy skiing.5.4931.1090.834
I like to discuss things about skiing with others.5.4981.1070.847
Skiing can show my personality.5.5091.1380.846
Skiing can let me express myself.5.5281.1130.858
Skiing can let others know what kind of person I am.5.4501.1860.864
Place AttachmentI am very satisfied with the snow resources here.5.6181.0980.7970.6540.930
Snow has a special meaning for me.5.4811.0930.787
If possible, I would like to extend the skiing time.5.5831.0970.797
This is the best place for skiing.5.4481.1050.827
Compared with the surrounding areas, the snow here meets my play needs.5.5171.0050.837
I cannot get the present skiing feeling and experience in the surrounding areas.5.4691.0620.805
In my spare time, I would like to ski here.5.4601.0260.814
Environmental ResponsibilityI will try my best to shoulder the responsibility of saving resources and protecting the environment.5.7941.2920.8960.7750.945
I will take the initiative to learn about environmental protection.5.6281.2730.901
Although my own influence is very small, I also want to contribute to environmental protection.5.6261.1290.883
I think low-carbon consumption helps to improve the ecological environment.5.6041.1230.861
I think low-carbon consumption will reduce environmental pollution.5.5261.2300.853
Low-carbon Tourism BehaviorOn ski trips, I mostly use public transportation.5.5881.3920.7840.7420.945
On ski tours, I mostly choose green hotels.5.4721.1810.831
During ski tourism, I mostly choose tourism projects with low-carbon emissions.5.5711.3130.895
When skiing, I save energy and do not use disposable products.5.4341.2850.883
On ski tours, I tend to buy tourist souvenirs with simple packaging.5.4051.2480.862
During ski tourism, I always promote low-carbon tourism with my peers.5.2581.2870.914
Low-carbon Everyday BehaviorCompared with the past, I have encouraged more people to have low-carbon actions.5.7131.1290.8000.7000.933
Compared with the past, I have reduced the use or production of paper.5.5641.0010.801
I try more to use public transportation, carpooling, or bicycles instead of cars.5.5241.2590.828
Compared with the past, I am more willing to support environmentally friendly products.5.5471.1140.846
Compared with the past, I am more willing to contribute my money, energy, and time to support environmental protection.5.5051.1690.882
Compared with the past, I pay more attention to energy conservation.5.5241.1420.850
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, Y.; Sun, X.; Hu, L.; Ma, Y.; Bu, H. How Ski Tourism Involvement Promotes Tourists’ Low-Carbon Behavior? Sustainability 2023, 15, 10277. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su151310277

AMA Style

Yang Y, Sun X, Hu L, Ma Y, Bu H. How Ski Tourism Involvement Promotes Tourists’ Low-Carbon Behavior? Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10277. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su151310277

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Yang, Xiaodong Sun, Lingli Hu, Yuzhu Ma, and He Bu. 2023. "How Ski Tourism Involvement Promotes Tourists’ Low-Carbon Behavior?" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10277. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su151310277

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop