WORKING PAPER SERIES
Visitor expectations and
perceptions of sustainability in
a mass tourism destination
AUTHORS
Cristina Bernini, Emilio Urbinati, Laura Vici
TITLE
Visitor expectations and perceptions of sustainability in a mass
tourism destination
ABSTRACT
01/2015
Recently, the role of tourism sustainability has increased, especially for mature
and mass tourism destinations. While the literature has largely focused on
residents’ evaluations of tourism sustainability, little attention has been devoted to
investigate the extent to which tourists either recognize the presence or evaluate
the importance and quality of tourism sustainable policies at the destination.
Purpose – This study tries to fill this gap and to improve the knowledge of
tourism sustainability in mature destinations, investigating tourists’ perceptions of
sustainability experienced during their holiday and the consequent level of
satisfaction.
Methodology – A sample of tourists (domestic and foreigners) who have chosen
the District of Rimini (Italy) as a destination for their holidays in 2014 were
interviewed. A mapping analysis is carried out to evaluate the features of the
destination.
Findings – In appraising how visitors assess their tourism experience, their
expectations on the sustainable behaviour of the destination are not met. Even if
Italian and foreign tourists ascribe, on average, the same level of importance in
assessing several aspects concerning sustainability, inbound tourists are less
satisfied with the solutions adopted by the tourism destination.
Contribution – Tourists in mass destinations consider sustainability a less relevant
factor of the holiday and a less satisfactory aspect than others. Sustainability
is
1
still a feature that comes after the main and classical ones such as the sea, beach,
sun, relax, entertainment. Several managerial implications of this study are drawn
and recommendations for future research are presented.
www.turismo.unibo.it
VISITOR EXPECTATIONS AND PERCEPTIONS OF
SUSTAINABILITY IN A MASS TOURISM DESTINATION
Cristina Bernini*, Emilio Urbinati**, Laura Vici***
Abstract
Recently, the role of tourism sustainability has increased, especially for mature and
mass tourism destinations. While the literature has largely focused on residents’
evaluations of tourism sustainability, little attention has been devoted to investigate the
extent to which tourists either recognize the presence or evaluate the importance and
quality of tourism sustainable policies at the destination.
Purpose – This study tries to fill this gap and to improve the knowledge of tourism
sustainability in mature destinations, investigating tourists’ perceptions of
sustainability experienced during their holiday and the consequent level of
satisfaction.
Methodology – A sample of tourists (domestic and foreigners) who have chosen the
District of Rimini (Italy) as a destination for their holidays in 2014 were interviewed.
A mapping analysis is carried out to evaluate the features of the destination.
Findings – In appraising how visitors assess their tourism experience, their
expectations on the sustainable behaviour of the destination are not met. Even if Italian
and foreign tourists ascribe, on average, the same level of importance in assessing
several aspects concerning sustainability, inbound tourists are less satisfied with the
solutions adopted by the tourism destination.
Contribution – Tourists in mass destinations consider sustainability a less relevant
factor of the holiday and a less satisfactory aspect than others. Sustainability is still a
feature that comes after the main and classical ones such as the sea, beach, sun, relax,
entertainment. Several managerial implications of this study are drawn and
recommendations for future research are presented.
Keywords: sustainable tourism; mass tourism destinations; tourist evaluation;
environmental impact; Rimini (Italy)
JEL classification:
* Department of Statistical Sciences Center for Advanced Studies in Tourism, Via
Belle Arti 41, Bologna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
** Province of Rimini, Via Dario Campana 64, Rimini, Italy. E-mail:
[email protected]
*** Department of Economics, Center for Advanced Studies in Tourism
Strada Maggiore 45, Bologna, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
2
1. INTRODUCTION
Tourism management is giving more and more importance to the sustainability
issue, especially when mature and mass tourism destinations are involved (GSTC,
2013). Sustainability leads to consider as priorities the responsible use of natural
resources, the environmental impact of activities, the production of waste, the pressure
on water, land and biodiversity, the use of “green” energy, the protection of heritage
and the preservation of natural and cultural integrity of destinations. As stated by the
EU GD Enterprise and Industry, “long term sustainability requires a balance between
sustainability in economic, socio-cultural and environmental terms. The need to
reconcile economic growth and sustainable development also brings in an ethical
dimension”. The government and industry players are getting aware that sustainable
tourism is necessary and maybe the only possible tourism model in medium-to-long
term (Hassan, 2000). On the other hand, tourists are becoming more aware of
sustainability and they demand for eco-friendly services and products. In order to meet
this request, tourism operators are investing in carbon emission reduction, use of
alternative sources of energy, improvements of efficiency in waste management,
sensitizing guests to conserve energy and recycle.
In Italy, the initiatives activated in order to improve the tourism supply are
mainly focused on preservation of rural cultures and tradition, promotion of lesserknown areas around the country, preservation of local fauna and flora, protection of
geographic denominations of food types.
In the last decade, a growing attention has been paid to residents’ evaluations
of tourism sustainability, while little attention has been devoted to investigate the
extent to which tourists either recognize the presence or evaluate the importance and
quality of tourism sustainable policies at the destination. Indeed, developing
sustainable tourism policies is a useful tool for encouraging new forms of tourism,
business, increasing employment and promoting the preservation of tourism
destinations. Moreover, sustainable investments in tourism may affect the
development of customers’ loyalty and attract new niches of tourists.
The present study represents an innovative attempt to evaluate tourists’
perception of sustainability at a mature and mass destination, as Rimini (Italy). In
particular, the main aim of this study is twofold: i) to analyse tourists’ evaluation of
sustainability during the holiday; ii) to focus on a mature and mass destination, as
Rimini (Italy). Several managerial implications of this study are therefore drawn and
recommendations for future research are presented.
3
2. LITERARY REVIEW AND MOTIVATIONS
In the recent decades, competition among tourism destinations and, in
particular, among mass and mature destinations is getting more and more intensive
and fiercer. New destinations appear in maps, travel guides and tour operator
catalogues. Moreover, tourists tend to “taste” a larger number of destinations,
comparing their characteristics and becoming more demanding. Thus, nowadays
identifying those factors that influence tourist satisfaction is considered as a major
challenge for mature tourism destinations. The knowledge of tourist decision-making
process patterns may lead to the development of proper policies and strategic
resources.
The main features, relevant to individual experience, that lead to choose a
destination are usually considered attractions, natural and cultural resources,
accommodation, infrastructure and tourism facilities (Ritchie and Crouch, 2003). The
improvement of service quality is also recognised as one of the major strategies in
consolidating destination competitiveness. Within this specific feature is acquiring
more and more space the sustainability effort made by tourism enterprises and
destinations. A sustainable destination is asked to maintain a high level of tourist
satisfaction and to ensure a meaningful experience to the tourists, while preserving its
resources and features. At the same time, a sustainable destination should raise
tourists’ awareness about sustainability issues and promote sustainable tourism
practices among them (Swarbrooke 2005).
As it was suggested by recent studies, the receipt of excellent services
reinforces the loyalty of current customers and increases the potential for attracting
new ones (Baker & Crompton, 2000; Chen, Chen, & Lee, 2009; Chen & Tsai, 2007;
Hui, Wan, & Ho, 2007; Kozak, 2001; Lee, Graefe, & Burns, 2007; Murphy, Pritchard,
& Smith, 2000; Nowacki, 2009; Oppermann, 2000; Um, Chon, & Ro, 2006;
Vassiliadis, 2008; Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Zabkar, Brencic, & Dmitrovic, 2010). As a
consequence, to understand the factors affecting tourist satisfaction, tourism market
analyses can be used to enhance destination supply strategies (Kim, 1998; Kozak &
Rimmington, 1999, 2000). As mature and multi-product destinations have to compete
with new tourism destinations and new tourism demands, then it is relevant to have a
deep knowledge of needs and perceptions of tourist segments. A growing attention has
been paid to the relationship between destination attributes and the overall tourist
satisfaction. Conversely, there are few studies investigating the relationship between
destination competitiveness and sustainable tourism development through tourists’
perceptions (for a review see Chen et al., 2011; Lin and Lin, 2011). At our knowledge,
4
no empirical study has explored yet how important are perceived sustainable strategies
in affecting tourists’ holiday decision process and how they impact on the overall level
of satisfaction.
Economic performance, investment and competitiveness is actually the second
pillar of WTO’s Sustainable tourism for development guidelines book. The relation
between destination’s competitiveness and performance depends “on the
implementation of the strategy resulting in a set of actual achievements that can be
compared with the established goals” (Ritchie & Crouch, 2003). Thus, monitoring
satisfaction over time becomes a key issue for destination managers, in order to
provide continuously strategies which meet tourists’ needs and preferences (Le´gare´
& Haifer, 2008; Rodriguez, Parra-Lpeza, & Yanes-Estveza, 2008; Zhong, Deng, &
Xiang, 2008), and to avoid “strategic drift” (Dwyer & Edwards, 2009). In mature and
multi-product destinations like Rimini, where the percentage of repeat visitors is high,
the benefits of this approach are even clearer. In this context, sustainability may play a
crucial role in rejuvenating old products and in promoting new ones.
This paper focuses on the sustainability as part of new tourism perspective
within mature destinations. The WTO produced the most comprehensive definition of
tourism sustainability that “tourism is sustainable when takes full account of its current
and future economic, social and environmental impacts, addressing the needs of
visitors, the industry, the environment and host communities” (WTO 2013). Again,
WTO emphasizes that sustainable tourism is quoted in the final outcome document of
Rio+20 as both a thematic area and a cross-sectorial issue. In the articles 130 and 131,
the role committed to sustainable tourism is clearly stated: “well-designed and
managed tourism can make a significant contribution to the three dimensions of
sustainable development, has close linkages to other sectors, and can create decent
jobs and generate trade opportunities” (130); “we encourage the promotion of
investment in sustainable tourism, including eco-tourism and cultural tourism, which
may include creating small and medium sized enterprises and facilitating access to
finance, including through microcredit initiatives for the poor, indigenous peoples and
local communities in areas with high eco-tourism potential” (131).
In order to explain its implementation, three main objectives are focused: i)
make optimal use of environmental resources that constitute a key element in tourism
development, maintaining essential ecological processes and helping to conserve
natural heritage and biodiversity; ii) respect the socio-cultural authenticity of host
communities, conserve their built and living cultural heritage and traditional values,
and contribute to inter-cultural understanding and tolerance; iii) ensure viable, longterm economic operations, providing socio-economic benefits to all stakeholders that
are fairly distributed, including stable employment and income-earning opportunities
5
and social services to host communities, and contributing to poverty alleviation. Two
other main features of sustainable development highlighted by the WTO are the
information and satisfaction of tourists. The informed participation of all relevant
stakeholders is strongly required in order to ensure wide participation and consensus
building. Another need is the constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the
necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary.
In the wider perspective of European Union policy, tourism is more a crosscutting sector than an economic activity. It contributes to the fulfilment of a wide
range of key EU objectives: sustainable development, economic growth, job creation,
social and regional cohesion, protection of natural and cultural heritage, EU
citizenship, peaceful relationships etc. Therefore, sustainability has emerged as a
critical concern that must be addressed in any viable tourism development strategy.
Tourism is considered as an important sector of the European Union's
economy. Currently it is the 3rd largest economic activity in the EU after distribution
and construction. Its features are the involvement of a big diversity of services and
professions, the domination of SMEs and its resiliency despite uncertain economic
outlook. The direct contribution of tourism to GDP and employment is, respectively of
5% of the EU GDP, and of 5.2% of the total labour force (9.7 million jobs). The
overall contribution of tourism to the economy (which includes direct, indirect and
induced effects) is even bigger: 10% of the EU GDP and 12% of the total labour force
(24 million jobs) (WTO 2014). At global level, tourism is a major contributor to world
trade, accounting for 5% of direct global GDP and over 30% of the world’s exports of
services (52% for LDCs). Europe is considered the first tourism destination in the
world, taking into account the number of international tourist arrivals. Its success is
based on cultural and historical heritage, natural assets, diversity of sceneries, quality
services, good connectivity. Because of the crucial role played by tourism, EU
competence aims at complementing, supporting and coordinating the actions of the
Member States in the tourism sector (the Lisbon Treaty art. 195). The goal of EU
strategy in tourism sector is to facilitate the responsible competitiveness of
destinations, the sustainable growth and job creation. The mentioned activities are in
line with the Europe 2020 strategy and its flagships initiatives: smart, sustainable and
inclusive growth. Finally, the main challenge of EU is to develop the sustainability
feature of tourism industry in order to ensure its long-term competitiveness.
From these premises took place the customer satisfaction research focused on
the sustainability. Within the EU territorial cooperation funded Project SEE –
InTourAct, the Province of Rimini implemented the research with the support of the
University of Bologna and Instituto Piepoli. A survey was conducted having as sample
the tourists (Italians and foreigners) who chose the province of Rimini as a destination
6
for their holidays; a total of 705 auto-fill interviews were carried out in 2014.
Therefore, the main aim of the paper is to provide an analysis of the tourists’
assessment of Rimini, as a case study of a mature and multi-product destination, and
of their overall satisfaction towards sustainability aspects of the tourism offer.
3. THE RESEARCH METODH
3.1 The case study
Rimini is a beach tourism destination located in the Adriatic Coast. Despite its
rich cultural heritage (Rimini was founded by the Romans and magnificent Roman and
Renaissance monuments are located within its Medieval wall), the District of Rimini is
one of the most famous mass tourism seaside resorts in Europe and mainly host
seaside tourists. The District offers many services and facilities to vacationers who
spend most of their time on the beach, allowing them to live the coast at any hour of
the day and night. However, in its life cycle the destination has reached the phase of
maturity and, thus, needs a rejuvenation strategy and new vital lymph for attracting
new tourist segments and preserving the loyal tourists, while respecting the
environment, the local community and its tradition. Then, the District of Rimini is an
interesting setting for studying the relevance and perception of tourists towards
sustainability.
3.2 The data
For this complex purpose, a novel dataset based on a survey conducted on
tourists arrived in the District of Rimini during the summer of 2014 has been used.
Specifically, the coastal municipalities (included in the District) covered by the survey
were Bellaria-Igea Marina, Cattolica, Misano Adriatico, Riccione and Rimini. The
survey was conducted having as target the tourists (Italians and foreigners) who have
chosen the District of Rimini as a destination for their holidays. The sampling plan
was based on 2 stages: the units of first stage, i.e. hotels, were segmented by
municipality and star rating; while the units of second stage, i.e. tourist arrivals in
hotels, was segmented by month of arrival (August/September) and place of origin
(Italy/Abroad). A total of 705 interviews were carried out within the different stratum
7
to respect the natural proportion among Italian and foreign tourists, and among tourists
who visited the District of Rimini in high or low seasons. 1
Table 1. Sample characteristics
18-24
25-44
45-64
65 and above
Male
Female
No qualification or primary school
Middle school
High school
Degree
Employed
Worker
Retired
Freelancer
Student
Self employed
Housewife
Manager
Entrepreneur
Other
Freq.
87
312
239
67
334
371
4
111
442
148
233
85
81
78
71
56
40
25
18
18
%
12.34
44.26
33.9
9.5
47.38
52.62
0.57
15.74
62.7
20.99
33.05
12.06
11.49
11.06
10.07
7.94
5.67
3.55
2.55
2.55
The largest share of tourists are adults (Tables 1), between 25 and 64 years old
(78.16%) and come from medium-size cities (51.49%). The tourist sample contains a
high percentage of married and unmarried individuals (77.52%) who often travel with
their partners (25.25% of the whole sample) or with their families (40.85%). An
important percentage of tourists travel with friends (24.96%). A large share of young
people, in particular, spend their holidays with friends (63.22% of tourists under 25).
Only almost 21% of respondents has a degree whereas a large share of the sample
received a high school diploma (62.70%).
1
Reflecting the tourist flows at the destinations, the largest percentage of interviews (83.12%) was conducted in high
season (August) and in the municipality of Rimini (46.10%, the largest municipality in terms of arrivals and tourism
accommodation structures). The sampling plan also considered the distribution of tourists among hotel categories: most of
interviews have been administrated in three-star hotels (59.86%), the most popular and common accommodation category
throughout the District of Rimini.
8
3.3 The questionnaire
The questionnaire was composed of three main sections: i) motivation and
behaviour; ii) evaluation; iii) personal data. The first section of the questionnaire
concerned some aspect of the choice of the vacation. In details, this section elicited
information about the characteristics of trip transport, hotel typology, number of days
of vacation, number of previous visits and with whom the holiday was spent. The
second part of the questionnaire included several items regarding the evaluations of
services offered at the destination and, in particular, accommodation, leisure services,
environment, tourism information and sustainability. Tourists were required to give a
score (Likert scale 1–10) to each item related to each single aspect of the destination,
expressed in terms of satisfaction and importance. Furthermore, global satisfaction
evaluations related to infrastructure, welcome and sustainability were requested. The
respondent was also asked to express judgement on items’ expectation. In the personal
data section, information on age, gender, nationality, residence place and occupation
are collected.
3.4 The importance/satisfaction map construction
In order to implement a smart and effective destination rejuvenation strategy, a
customer satisfaction analysis is needed and the key drivers of tourists’ satisfaction
have to be identified. Understanding the visitor, comparing tourists’ expectations with
their post-consumption satisfaction level, recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of
the destination and identifying the aspects to be enhanced are crucial tools to improve
the tourism supply, to attract new tourists and to retain visitors over time.
In this study, an importance/satisfaction map has been used to simultaneously
analyse tourists’ assessment of the importance and level of satisfaction with specific
services and their attributes provided at the destination. The method defines a two
dimensional grid with the horizontal axis indicating tourists’ perceptions of a given
attribute. The vertical axis indicates the importance of the attribute to the tourists.
Tourists’ assessment of importance and satisfaction values are plotted on the grid (the
so-called importance-satisfaction map), which is divided into four quadrants. The
point where axes cross corresponds to the coordinates of the mean scores of the
importance and satisfaction attribute ratings, respectively. Each point, therefore,
defines the level of importance and satisfaction of any attribute of the services
analysed. These values are then assessed according to their quadrant on the grid.
Elements in Grid I are rated very important, and the level of satisfaction is above
average. Elements in Grid II are rated very important, but the level of satisfaction is
9
rated below average. Elements in Grid III are considered less important, and
satisfaction level is below average. Elements in Grid IV are rated above average on
satisfaction, but are rated below average on importance.
Each quadrant suggests a different strategy. Attributes that are perceived high
both in importance and satisfaction suggest that the feature is a successful aspect of the
destination, namely it is provided with high quality level and well responding to
tourists’ needs. In contrast, attributes having a low importance rating and a low
satisfaction rating suggest that investing scarce resources on these attributes may have
little strategic advantage. Attributes that are rated high in importance and low in
satisfaction are the attributes that a destination should pay particular attention to,
improving their performance. Lastly, attributes rated low in importance and high in
satisfaction are attributes that an organization should continue to maintain but not
necessarily allocate any additional resources (Ryan, 1995).
The main purpose of importance-satisfaction analysis is to determine which
attributes the tourists consider most important, to measure how well the destination
performs in delivering these attributes, and to make recommendations to destination
management about what they should concentrate upon and what strategies they should
follow. The importance-satisfaction analysis can be effectively used to point out
destinations’ strengths and weaknesses. The use of this method has significant
management implications for decision-makers at tourism destinations. A quality
tourism destination should focus on identifying and acting on customers’ needs and
expectations, where quality is defined as satisfying customers’ requirements.
Strategically, quality is the source for strengthening and differentiating the offering
and the destination from what is offered by the competitors (Bernini and Cagnone,
2014).
4.
RESULTS
4.1
Who are the tourists arrived in the Rimini district?
Some information on the type of holiday (Table 2) of tourists who spent their
vacation in the summer 2014 may help to interpret the analysis results. Differently
from the past decades, only 26.67% of the sample “consumes” only one holiday per
year. Above 70% of the sample distributes part of their days-off among different
periods of holidays. People visiting the Riviera Romagnola often self-organize their
10
holiday (87.52%) and choose a full-board service (65.96%). Moreover, tourists’
loyalty characterizes the District of Rimini: nearly 60% of respondents have already
spent their holidays in Rimini in the past (the average number of vacation periods
spent in the District is 5.28).
Table 2. Type of holiday
Average no.
Holidays per
year
Max 1
From 1 to 2
From 2 to 4
Above 4
Total
Freq.
Percentage
Travel group
Freq.
percentage
188
425
81
11
705
26.67
60.28
11.49
1.56
Alone
With family
Couple
With friends
Other
(colleagues, tour
gruop, etc.)
42
288
178
176
21
5.96
40.85
25.25
24.96
2.98
Package tour
Self-organized
Tour organized
Total
Freq.
617
88
705
percentage
87.52
12.48
Loyalty
First time in
Rimini
Already been in
Rimini
(average no.
holidays 5.28)
Freq.
287
percentage
40.71
Board type
Full board
Half board
B&B
Just overnight
Freq.
465
113
114
13
Percentage
65.96
16.03
16.17
1.84
418
59.29
4.2 Satisfaction, Importance and Expectations: some insights
Some preliminary results have evidenced that in this mass tourism destination,
in appraising how visitors assess their tourism experience, their expectations on the
sustainable behaviour of the destination are not met. Even if Italian and foreign
tourists ascribe, on average, the same level of importance in assessing several aspects
concerning sustainability, inbound tourists are less satisfied with the solutions adopted
by the tourism destination.
In this study, the distinctive characteristics of services offered to tourists (such
as, accommodation facilities, urban environment, the services of the city, the sea, the
beach services and the tourist information) are analysed. Almost all the characteristics
investigated obtain very high judgments (more than 7.5). The overall satisfaction of
the tourists recorded an average score of 8.4. This result clearly shows how the area of
the District of Rimini is able to respond very well to the expectations of the tourists.
This good result is also confirmed by the propensity to prompt a holiday in the District
11
of Rimini (above 87% of respondents confirmed their intention to spend other future
holidays in the destination).
The main reasons why tourists choose the District as the place of their holidays
are, among many other less important motivations, its beach, the sun, the possibility to
relax, its entertainment offer, its food and wine (particularly for foreigners). However,
the final decision of the place where spending holidays is also affected by aspects
often disregarded. In particular, the quality of accommodation, resort services, urban
environment, tourist and commercial services, and the availability of tourist
information significantly affect tourists’ level of satisfaction. Tourists, in choosing the
accommodation, judge important the cleanliness of rooms, the quality of the hotel
restaurant (if any), the services offered, sport/recreation facilities and the care for the
environment. On a 10-point Likert scale, all these aspects range from 8.1 to 9.3 in
terms of importance (Table 3). Analogous attention is paid to the urban environment.
Tourists rank and rate similarly (the rating in terms of importance ranges from 8.1 to
8.9) the level of safety, the air quality, cleanliness and open space available, noise
level, traffic and congestion of roads, availability of parking, public transport,
conservation of natural and cultural heritage, care for the environment and
accessibility. No significant difference emerges between the scale of importance
assigned by foreign or Italian tourists. For the greatest part of tourists visiting the
District, the beach is the main attraction. Each aspect concerning the beach is judged
as really important (the importance assessment of each aspect ranges from 8.3 to 9.2).
Even recreational and commercial services are important for tourists, in particular
those connected with food and entertainment. Moreover, tourist information is
considered as crucial (range from 8.3 to 8.6). In short, the ingredients for a satisfactory
recipe are the holiday, the hospitality, the city and the level of sustainability.
Tourism is an experience good and therefore its utility can be assessed only
once it has been consumed (Candela and Figini, 2012). A comparison between exante expectation and ex-post appraisal allows to identify those factors to be enhanced
or those aspects which positively enrich the tourism supply. Whereas the ex-ante level
of importance attached to single attributes (described above) is similar for Italian and
foreign tourists, the level of satisfaction differs among these segments. The level of
satisfaction of the single characteristics composing the tourism products exceeds
expectations in some cases, whereas the expectations are unfulfilled in other
circumstances. The balance between expectations and satisfaction is, in general, more
positive for Italians than for foreigners, except for specific aspects (safety, public
transport, overcrowding, restaurants, entertainment facilities, shopping, beach services
and cleanliness).
12
Table 3. Satisfaction, importance and expectation (Italians vs Foreigners)
Importance
Italians Foreigners
Accommodation
Room
9,3
Hotel restaurants
8,9
Hotel services
8,9
Additional hotel
services
8,3
Sports/recreation
services
8,3
Sustanaibility
8,1
Urban environemnet
Safety / peace and quiet
in the city
8,9
Air quality
8,7
Open space, street
furniture
8,7
Pedestrian areas and
cycle paths
8,6
Noise level
8,6
Road conditions and
traffic
8,6
Parking
8,5
Public transport
8,4
Heritage conservation
8,4
Overcrowding
8,4
Sustanaibility
8,2
Accessibility for
disables
8,1
Recreational and commercial services
Dining out
8,7
Entertainment
8,5
Sustanaibility
8,2
Shopping
8,0
Sun and beach services
Quality of water and
sea
9,2
Safety on the beach and
in the sea
9,1
Beach services
9,1
Beach cleanliness
9,0
Entertainment
amenities
8,7
Overcrowding on the
beach
8,7
Sustanaibility
8,3
Accessibility for
travellers with
disabilities
8,3
Satisfaction
Italians Foreigners
Δ =%Better-%Worse
Italians
Foreigners
9,2
8,9
9,0
8,5
8,4
8,3
8,4
8,3
8,1
7%
10%
2%
1%
7%
-1%
8,5
7,8
7,7
-1%
-5%
8,6
8,1
7,6
7,6
7,7
7,4
-6%
-1%
-9%
-13%
8,9
8,9
8,2
8,1
8,3
8,1
4%
-2%
9%
-1%
8,7
8,1
8,0
5%
-6%
8,8
8,8
8,2
8,0
8,0
8,1
7%
-1%
-1%
-2%
8,7
8,7
8,7
8,5
8,5
8,3
7,9
7,5
7,8
8,0
7,9
7,7
7,9
8,0
8,1
8,0
8,0
7,6
-1%
-9%
1%
3%
-3%
-3%
-6%
-1%
4%
2%
2%
-7%
8,4
7,6
7,8
-4%
-6%
8,8
8,7
8,3
8,2
8,5
8,3
7,8
7,7
8,5
8,4
7,6
7,9
20%
17%
-1%
13%
22%
20%
-11%
24%
9,4
7,2
6,9
-38%
-45%
9,1
9,0
9,0
8,1
8,6
8,4
8,1
8,3
8,1
-11%
15%
6%
-6%
17%
11%
8,8
8,4
8,3
19%
22%
8,6
8,4
8,1
7,8
8,0
7,7
3%
-5%
4%
-8%
8,3
7,8
7,6
-4%
-5%
13
Table 3. Satisfaction, importance and expectation (Italians vs Foreigners)
(continued)
Tourist information
Information about the
city
Sustanaibility
Overall Satisfcation
Holiday
Hospitality
City's services and
infrastructure
Sustainability
Δ =%Better-%Worse
Italians
Foreigners
Importance
Italians Foreigners
Satisfaction
Italians Foreigners
8,6
8,3
8,6
8,4
8,6
8,3
8,6
8,4
-2%
-5%
-4%
-8%
9,0
9,0
9,1
8,9
8,4
8,7
8,2
8,5
5%
18%
6%
24%
8,8
8,5
9,0
8,6
8,2
8,0
8,1
7,9
0%
-1%
-5%
-7%
By cross-reading the data, even if sustainability is not considered as the most
important factor, it is assessed as critical. However, this aspect is the least satisfactory
for all tourists (-3%) and, in particular, for foreigners (-1% for Italians and -7% for
foreigners).
The care for the environment demonstrated by hotels (-3% on average; -1% for
Italians and -13% for foreigners), recreational and commercial services (-3% on
average; -1% for Italians and -11% for foreigners), resorts (-6% on average; -5% for
Italians and -8% for foreigners), urban environment (-4% on average; -3% for Italians
and -7% for foreigners), and tourist information offices (-6% on average; -5% for
Italians and -8% for foreigners), does not fulfil tourists’ expectations.
4.3 Importance and satisfaction maps
The average importance of the attributes analysed and their average level of
satisfaction are calculated separately for the different services considered
(accommodation, environment, city services, beach and sea, overall). As described in
Section 2.4, the placement of each item on the importance-satisfaction map is
accomplished by using the means of importance and satisfaction as coordinates. Each
element on the map can then be analysed by locating the appropriate quadrant in
which it falls. Figure 1 shows the overall ratings of tourists’ assessments (in terms of
importance and satisfaction) of the District of Rimini, mapping tourists perceptions
related to the services considered (overall importance and satisfaction towards the
holiday, welcome, city services and infrastructures, and sustainability).Sustainability is
the only aspect of the destination located in Grid III, with importance and satisfaction
14
rate below the average; tourists seem not considering this aspect as relevant for the
destination and the holiday. Conversely, welcome and holiday are the successful
aspects of the destination. As for services and infrastructures, tourists reveal to be
more critic, positing the global attribute on the neighbourhood between the
unsuccessful and indifferent area of the map.
In analysing the attributes of each service considered, as for the accommodation
service, tourists locate room, hotel services and restaurants in Grid I (High
Importance-High Satisfaction). These are the successful attributes of the
accommodation supply in the District of Rimini. All the others items (sport and
recreation services, additional hotel services and care for environment) are rated below
average for both importance and satisfaction (Grid III: Low Importance-Low
Satisfaction). In particular, tourists assign the lowest rate of both importance and
satisfaction to the environmental sustainability in hotels; this attribute of the
accommodation offer is thus not relevant and of low quality for tourists.
Regarding the urban environment, tourists judge as excellent features of the
destination the availability of open space and green areas, safety and quiet of the city,
pedestrian areas, as well as the noise and air quality; these issues also well meet
tourists’ necessities. Road condition and traffic, positioned in Grid II, are very
important aspects of the destination but actually unsatisfactory. Conversely, the
conservation of natural and cultural heritage obtains high satisfaction rate but is an
unimportant attribute of the destination, as evaluated by tourists. In the Grid III,
tourists locate items related to infrastructures as parking, urban transport, accessibility
for travellers with disabilities; overcrowding and sustainability are also placed in this
area of the map.
Sustainability is positioned in Grid III also when the map of city services is
considered. In this map, the entertainment and dining out are considered by tourists
very important as well as very satisfactory during their vacation.
Tourists rate safety on the beach and in the sea, beach cleanliness and services
as above average for both importance and satisfaction (Grid I), whereas visitors
perceive overcrowding and entertainments on the beach as below average for
importance, but very adequate in terms of quality. Quality of water and sea is the only
weakness, but is a feature out of destination managers’ control. Also among sea and
beach services, the accessibility for travellers with disabilities and the care for
environment are evaluated as issues of low importance and satisfaction.
15
Figure 1. The Map of the destination attributes
16
4.4 The knowledge of sustainability initiatives
As highlighted in the map, tourists do not consider sustainability neither as a
relevant factor of the holiday nor as a satisfactory aspect. Little attention is even paid
to the measures adopted to respect the environment. Only those initiatives more visible
have been noted. In particular, the separate waste collection, the creation of
infrastructures and events for cycling, together with public transport are the most
known sustainable initiatives (Table 4). Less attention has been devoted to the quality
of water, despite beach and sea are one of the main motivations of the holiday.
Tourists are marginally aware of energy and water saving initiatives, use of renewable
energy, availability of services for people with disability and noise reduction.
Table 4. Sustainability initiatives
Total
Waste Separation
Cycling
Public Transport
Energy Saving
Italians
Foreigns
52%
38%
17%
10%
52%
40%
19%
11%
52%
32%
10%
6%
Quality Of Sea Water
Renewable Energy (i.e. solar hot
water and pv panels)
Services For Travellers With
Disabilities
8%
9%
5%
8%
7%
9%
5%
6%
2%
Typical Local/Traditional Products
5%
5%
3%
Water Saving
Noise Reduction
4%
2%
4%
2%
4%
0%
5. CONCLUSIONS
Tourism and travel industry is still developing and increasing the
competitiveness among destinations. According to the literature, local management
has to develop tourism supply strategies in order to satisfy the needs of tourists. In this
context, tourism satisfaction has been stressed as the primary managerial criterion for
success. Higher levels of satisfaction are perceived as connected to loyalty and future
re-visitation, greater tolerance of price and an enhanced reputation. Sustainability is
still a new feature within the group that determines the success of the destination. In
17
this field of research, the novelty of this paper relies on understanding how much this
aspect is considered an important asset of the tourism product and how much it affects
the satisfaction of tourists in order to develop future strategies. The case study of
Rimini is an interesting case study since its destination managers’ attention was
recently devoted to tourist satisfaction regarding the sustainability initiatives
developed in latest years.
The customer satisfaction analysis resulted in a very high average score on the
overall product satisfaction (of 8.4 over 10). This result clearly shows how the District
of Rimini is able to fit the needs of the tourists. From this premise, it is even more
interesting highlight what emerged from the customer satisfaction analysis about
sustainability. Tourists consider sustainability a less relevant factor of the holiday and
a less satisfactory aspect than others. The sustainability is still a feature that comes
after the main and classical ones such as the sea, beach, sun, relax, entertainment.
Even if there is a small expectation about sustainability, this is only partially met,
especially in the perspective of foreigner tourists. On the other hand, it has to be
considered that Rimini has very high degrees of satisfaction in every indicator. As a
consequence, even if sustainability indicator comes after classical ones, still it has high
degree too.
It is worth noting that the most visible sustainable initiatives have not been
noticed by tourists. This leads to think that the destination should make a stronger
effort in order to increase the visibility of all its activities, otherwise, the investments
and work on renewable energy, waste management and water purification remain
unnoticed. Similar conclusions can be drawn with regard to hotels: tourists assign the
lowest rate of both importance and satisfaction to the environmental sustainability.
The efforts made by entrepreneurs to “greener” the structures may not directly affect
the tourist experience.
Finally, the research about tourist satisfaction towards sustainability initiatives
in Rimini is just at the beginning. This preliminary research will be deepened by the
implementation of complex models and by taking into consideration the multiple
relations between different indicators. We are actually working on a segmentation of
tourists based on their evaluation and expectation about sustainability. The estimation
of Lisrel models investigating relationships among sustainability and intention to
return is our final research goal.
18
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The customer satisfaction research was implemented by the Province of Rimini
within the EU South East Europe Project InTourAct. The University of Bologna –
Center for Advanced Studies in Tourism supported the research through the review of
the survey questionnaire. It also helped to define the whole research strategy and to
further analyse the collected data. The Istituto Piepoli realized the interviews and the
preliminary elaboration of data.
REFERENCES
Baker, D.A., & Crompton, J.L. (2000). Quality satisfaction and behavioural intentions. Annals of
Tourism Research, 27(3), 785–804.
Bernini, C. and Cagnone, S. (2014), “Analysing tourist satisfaction at a mature and multi-product
destination”. Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 17, pp: 1–20
Candela, G., Figini, P. (2012). The Economics of Tourism Destinations, Springer, Heidelberg.
Chen, C.F., & Tsai, D.C. (2007). How destination image and evaluation factors affect behavioural
intention. Tourism Management, 28, 1115–1122.
Chen, C.M., Chen, S.H., & Lee, H.T. (2009). The influence of service performance and destination
resources on consumer behaviour: A case study of Mainland Chinese tourist to Kinmen. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 11, 269–282.
M., Chen, S.H., & Lee, H.T. (2011). The destination competitiveness of Kinmen’s tourism industry:
exploring the interrelationships between tourist perceptions, service performance, customer
satisfaction and sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19, 247–264.
Dwyer, L., & Edwards, D. (2009). Tourism product and service innovation to avoid ‘strategic drift’.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 11, 321–335.
GSTC (2013). Sustainable tourism destination criteria. http://www.gstcouncil.org.
Hassan, S. S., (2000). Determinants of Market Competitiveness in an Environmentally Sustainable
Tourism Industry. Journal of Travel Research February, 38, 239-245.
Hui, T.K.,Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists’ satisfaction recommendation and revisiting Singapore.
Tourism Management, 28, 965–975.
Kim, H. (1998). Perceived attractiveness of Korean destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(2),
340–361.
Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters’ behaviour at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism Research,
28(3), 784–807.
Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (1999). Measuring tourist destination competitiveness: Conceptual
consideration and empirical findings. Hospitality Management, 18, 273–283.
Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca Spain as off-season holiday
destination. Journal of Travel Research, 28, 260–269.
Lee, J., Graefe, A.R., & Burns, R.C. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination loyalty in a forest
setting. Leisure Sciences, 29, 463–481.
19
Le´gare´, A.M., & Haider, W. (2008). Trend analysis of motivation-based clusters at the Chilkoot trail
national historic site of Canada. Leisure Sciences, 30, 158–176.
Lin, C.C. and Lin, Y.S. (2011), “Green consumption attitudes of the tourists lodging in the resort hotel:
the case of Alishan”, Wu Feng Institute of Technology Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 523-534.
Murphy, P., Pritchard, M.P., & Smith, B. (2000). The destination product and its impact on traveller
perceptions. Tourism Management, 21, 43–52.
Nowacki, M. (2009). Quality of visitor attractions satisfaction benefits and behavioural intentions of
visitors: Verification of a model. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11, 297–309.
Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 391, 78–84.
Ritchie, J. R.B., & Crouch, G.I. (2003). The Competitive Destination – A Sustainable Tourism
Perspective. Oxford: CABI Publishing.
Rodriguez, J.R.O., Parra-Lpeza, E., & Yanes-Estveza, V. (2008). The sustainability of island
destinations: Tourism area lifecycle and teleological perspectives. The case of Tenerife. Tourism
Management, 29, 53–65.
Ryan, C. (1995). Researching Tourist Satisfaction. London, Routledge
Swarbrooke, J. (2005). Sustainable tourism management. Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing.
Um, S., Chon, K., & Ro, Y. (2006). Antecedents of revisit intention. Annals of Tourism Research,
33(4), 1141–1158.
Vassiliadis, C. (2008). Destination product characteristics as useful predictors for repeating visiting and
recommendation segmentation variables in tourism: A CHAID exhaustive analysis. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 10, 439–452.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on
destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26, 45–56.
Zabkar, V., Brencic, M., & Dmitrovic, T. (2010). Modelling perceived quality visitor satisfaction and
behavioural intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management 31(4), 537–546.
Zhong, L., Deng, J., & Xiang, B. (2008). Tourism development and the tourism area life-cycle model: A
case study of Zhangjiajie National Forest Park China. Tourism Management, 29, 841–856.
WTO (2013). Sustainable Tourism for Development Guidebook.
WTO (2014). Tourism highlights.
-------------Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna
Centro Studi Avanzati sul Turismo
Via Angherà 22 – 47921 Rimini
www.turismo.unibo.it
e-mail: [email protected]
20