an exploration of the correlational relationship between...
TRANSCRIPT
Master Thesis
An exploration of the correlational
relationship between nature-based
tourists’ environmental knowldege and
environmental attitude
Author: Lujing Lin Supervisor: Martin Gren Examiner: Stefan Gössling Level : Master‘s degree Date: 2016-5-22 Subject: Tourism and Sustainablity Course code: 4TR50E , 15 hp Department of Business and Economics
i
Abstract
With the rapid development of nature-based tourism, the sustainable development of
natuer-based sites are rasing the awareness of the researchers and destination planners.
Although natuer-based tourists are closely assciated with the environmnetal
concervation of nature-based sites, little research is conducted to investigate their
demographical charactersitics, environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
The long term development of nature-based sites require nature-basd tourists to show
concern for the natural environmnetal and hold pro-environmnetal attitude. The
possible relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmnetal knowledge and
environmental attitude is still under discussed. The cosiderations for the sustainable
development of nature-based sites is the main motivation of this thesis. In order to
provide new insights for the tourism studies, this research will explore the
demographical charateristics, environmnetal knowldege and environmental attitude of
nature-based tourists at Oland where is regarded as a natuer-based site in Sweden. In
addition, the correlational relationship between natuer-based tourists‘ environmnetal
knowldege and evironmenttal attitude is also explored in this study.
This thesis has conducted a quantitative method by means of on-site questionnaire to
collect empirical data from nature-based tourists. The empirical results indicated that
most of natuer-based tourists were well-educated youg and middle-age adults who
had high level of environmental knowledge and environmnetal attitude. Nature-based
tourists‘ demographic charactersistics played a minor role in influencing their
environmental knowledge and environmnetal attitude. Only nature-based tourists‘ age
and past nature-based experience were found to be closely related to their
environnmnetal knnowledge and environmental attiutde respectively. In addition, the
result indicated that there was a correlational relationship between nature -based
tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Moreover, nature-
based tourists‘ environmental knowledge was found positively related to their
environmental attitude. It is hoped that this research will offer useful information for
the destination planners who intend to consider nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude in the paradigm of sustainable nature-based
tourism.
Keywords: Nature-based tourist, environmental knowledge, environmental attitude,
demographical characteristics, sustainable nature-based tourism.
ii
Table of Contents
Abstract _____________________________________________________ I
Contents ____________________________________________________ II
Tables _______________________________________________________ i
1. Introduction ______________________________________________ 1\]]
1.1. The structure of the thesis ....................................................................... 3
1.2. Research questions .................................................................................. 3
1.3. Aim and Objectives................................................................................. 4
2. Literature review____________________________________________ 6
2.1. Sourcing, Searching and Accessing the Literature ................................. 6
2.2. Defining a nature-based tourist ............................................................... 8
2.3. Environmental knowledge ...................................................................... 9
2.4. Environmental attitude .......................................................................... 11
2.5. Demographic characteristics ................................................................. 13
2.6. Environmental knowledge associated with environmental attitudes .... 14
2.7. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 15
3. Conceptual Framework _____________________________________ 17
3.1. Nature-based tourists............................................................................. 18
3.2. Environmental knowledge .................................................................... 18
3.3. Environmental attitude .......................................................................... 19
3.4. Demographic characteristics ................................................................. 20
3.5. Environmental knowledge associated with environmental attitudes .... 21
4. Methodology ______________________________________________ 23
4.1. Study Area............................................................................................. 23
4.2. Theory and philosophy of social science .............................................. 24
4.3. Quantitative method .............................................................................. 26
4.4. Ethical consideration............................................................................. 28
4.5. Limitations of method ........................................................................... 29
4.6. Sampling and Data Collection .............................................................. 29
4.7. Data Analysis ........................................................................................ 30
5. Results ___________________________________________________ 32
5.1. Respondents‘ demographic characteristics ........................................... 32
5.2. Descriptive findings .............................................................................. 33
5.3. Demographic charactersistcs differences in environmental knowledge...35
5.4. Demographic charactersistcs differences in environmental attitude ..... 38
5.5. Relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude.................................................................................. 42
iii
6. Conclusions _______________________________________________ 44
6.1. Suggestions ........................................................................................... 45
5.2. Limitations and future directions .......................................................... 47
References __________________________________________________ 49
Appendix ___________________________________________________ 56
iv
Tables
Table 1. Literature review search terms ........................................................................ 7
Table 2. Demographic characteristic of the respondents ............................................ 32
Table 3. Mean value, standard deviation and Cronbach‘s Alpha ............................... 34
Table 4. Environmental knowledge by gender group and age group ......................... 36
Table 5. Environmental knowledge by education level and past experience group ... 37
Table 6. Environmental attitude by gender group and age group. .............................. 39
Table 7. Environmental attitude by education level and past experience group ......... 41
Table 8. Correlation between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude ................................................................................................. 43
Figure 1. A conceptual framework of natural-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge
and attitude ................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 2. Scatter plot graph of environmental knowledge and environmental attitude
...................................................................................................................................... 43
1
1.Introduction
The introduction part provides a background of the topic for the readers to have a
brief understanding of the current related research and my motivation for writing this
thesis. This chapter starts with an introduction of nature-based tourism and its
relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. After the
explanation of the structure of the thesis, the research question and the main aim, the
objectives of this research will be declared at the end of this chapter.
Natural-based tourism, also known as ecotourism or natural tourism, has shown rapid
growth in the destinations worldwide during the last two decades, and it is expected to
keep increasing from estimated 7% of the world‘s travel market in 2007 to
approximately 25% by 2020 (Honey, 2008). It is widely described as an important
ecosystem service which is capable of providing tourists with enjoyable natural
experiences and generating extensive resources for the natural conservation
(Balmford et al., 2009; Ardoin, 2015). The definition of nature-based tourism hasn‘t
been commonly agreed since it is based on a wide range of educational, cultural,
recreational activities and experiences (Fredman et al., 2012). Contemporary literature
associates it with protected natural areas and destinations (Acquah, Dearden & Rick
Rollins, 2015), relatively undisturbed areas (Luzar et all, 1995), recreation and
adventure (Tirasattayapitak, Chaiyasain & Beeton, 2015), wildlife tourism (Beaumon,
2001; Ballantyne et al., 2001a) and activities that directly dependent on the natural
resources, such as marine mammals (Garla et al., 2015).
The increased number of tourists in natural-based destinations highlights the
importance of taking sustainable development into consideration. Several scholars
pointed out that the environmental knowledge and attitude of tourists should be
considered in the paradigm of sustainable tourism since they could critically influence
the sustainable development of destination (Puhakka, 2010, Weaver & Lawton, 2004;
Chen & Wu, 2014). Especially nature-based tourists who are more likely to travel to
sensitive nature-based destinations and thus given the responsibility to prevent
negative impacts on natural environment (Puhakka, 2010). For the sustainable
development of tourism, a market consisting of tourists who born to be nature lover or
tourists who can be transformed to ecotourists should exist (Luo & Deng, 2008, pp.
394). Such self-transformation can be obtained through environmental learning during
the process of participating in natural-based trip, which will let tourists form positive
attitudes towards natural environment (Weaver, 2005).
Studies in recent year indicated that nature-based tourism was closely associated with
tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude (Beaumont, 2001;
Ballantyne, Packer and Falk 2011; Dolnicar & Leisch, 2008). On the one hand,
2
natural-based tourism experience provides nature-based tourists with more
environmental knowledge and improves their environmental attitude. On the other
hand, the environmental knowledge and attitude of tourists are important for the
sustainable development and conservation of nature-based tourism. The past
experience of natural-based tourism (include ecotourism and wildlife tourism)
provides tourists with environmental interpretation concerning natural history of
protected areas and facilitates tourists with deeper understanding and interaction with
the natural environment (Powell, 2009). Thus, natural-based tourists are believed to
possess pro-environmental attitudes and show sympathy to the environmental issues
(Luzar et al., 1998; Wight, 2001). Similarly, Ballantyne et al (2011) contended that
tourists felt concern for the animal and environmental issues when they observed the
wildlife. However, a growing body of researches had demonstrated that the natural-
based tourists did not necessarily have pro-environmental attitudes (Dolnicar &
Leisch, 2008; Luzar, Diagne, Gan, & Henning, 1995). More research is needed to
further explore the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of nature-
based tourists.
In addition, researchers indicated that environmental knowledge played an essential
role in shaping environmental attitude (Duerden and Witt, 2010; Garla et al., 2015;
Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002；Kellert，1996；Kuhlemeier et al., 1999). The
increase of knowledge about natural environment will lead to ―the changing of
attitudes to those that are more environmentally and ecologically sound‖ (Orams
1997, p. 298). Moreover, nature-based tourists with increased pro-environmental
attitude may reduce negative impacts at nature-based sites, thus contributing to
sustainable development of tourism (Lee & Jan, 2015). However, there is lack of
empirical studies to investigate the relationship between environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude of nature-based tourists in the tourism context.
With the rapid growth of nature-based tourism worldwide, the sustainable
development issue becomes a critical concern for the nature-based tourism
destinations. Since nature sites are vulnerable to the negative external factors, nature-
based tourists play an essential role to prevent negative impacts during the process of
travel (Puhakka, 2010). For the long term development of nature-based tourist sites,
more empirical researches are needed to explore the relationship between
environmental knowledge and environment attitude of nature -based tourists.
Moreover, the influences of demographic characteristics needed to be considered in
studies to explore whether nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge will
influence their environmental attitude. In addition to natural-based tourism related
past experience, demographic characteristics (such as gender, age and education level)
may also influence the environmental knowledge and attitudes of tourists (Lee and
Moscardo, 2005; Kim and Weiler, 2013; Castellanos-Verdugo et al., 2016). Although
a number of researches have investigated gender differences in tourism (Harvey et al.,
3
1995), limited studies have been conducted with respect to the influence of age and
other demographic characteristics on nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge
and environmental attitudes. Considering the growing awareness of sustainable
nature-based tourism, this research investigated the correlation relationship between
nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. It is
hoped that this research will provide insights for nature -based destination promoters
who consider environmental knowledge and environment attitude of tourists in the
paradigm of sustainable tourism.
1.1 The structure of the thesis
This thesis was divided into six chapters with recommendation and conclusion. The
first chapter provided readers with general introduction about the background
information about the thesis, the aim and main objective of the research study and the
structure of the thesis. In the second chapter, I conducted a literature review to
investigate the background research. The definition, main themes and current state
literature concerning environmental knowledge and environmental attitude were
examined in the field of tourism studies. In addition, I investigated previous studies to
explore the influence of nature-based tourists‘ demographic characteristics (such as
gender, past experience and education background) on their environmental knowledge
and attitude. At last, I reviewed the relationship between nature-based tourists‘
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Based on the literature review
and the aim of this thesis, a conceptual framework was designed in chapter three to
examine the possible correlational relationship between nature-based tourists‘
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude and produce hypothesis of this
research. In addition, the influence of tourists‘ demographic characteristics (age,
gender, education level and past experience‖ on environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude was also considered in this conceptual framework. Three
hypotheses were derived from the conceptual framework. The fourth chapter
introduced the research methodology including research site, the philosophy of social
science, the methods of data collection, the limitation and the ethical consideration
during the process of data collection. In addition, this chapter explained the reliability
test and data analysis of the research. The fifth chapter demonstrated the research
findings, analysed the empirical data and tested the hyphothesis of this study. The
sixth chapater summrized the main conclusion, discussed the findings of this thesis,
the limitations of the research including methodology and the recommendations that
can be addressed for the future srudy.
1.2 Research questions
With the rapid growth of nature-based destinations, sustainable development of
nature-based tourism is raising the awareness of the destination planners in the past
4
decades (Meng & Uysal, 2008). The paradigm of sustainable tourism is based on the
idea that tourists‘ environmental attitude will critically influence the sustainability
(Weaver & Lawton, 2004). Scholars pointed out that a market consisted of nature-
based tourists with more knowledge about nature environment, positive
environmental attitudes and wiliness to protect the natural environmental is needed to
achieve environmental and economically sustainability (Luo & Deng, 2008).
Although previous researches indicated environmental knowledge plays an essential
role in the shaping of tourists environmental attitude and changes tourists‘ attitudes to
those that are more positive and environmental friendly, little empirical research have
been conducted in nature-based tourism studies (Duerden and Witt, 2010; Garla et al.,
2015; Orams 1997). The increasing demand of nature-tourism experience makes it is
necessary to investigate the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of
nature-based tourists. The considerations for the sustainable nature -based tourism
motivated me to conduct this study.
While keeping in mind the need to conducted a focused and purposeful research, the
main research questions have been addressed:
- Whether there is a correlational relationship between nature-based
tourists’ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude?
1.3 Aim and Objectives
The main aim of this research is to explore the environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude and demographic characteristics of nature -based tourists, and
investigate the correlational relationship between their environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude.
To determine the steps and tasks required to achieve the aim of this research,
following objectives are established:
- To explore the background research and knowledge gaps by conducting a
comprehensive literature review concerning environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude in tourism studies
- To determine the factors that influence environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude and the relationship between these two things.
- To develop a conceptual framework of nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude based on the literature review and
produce associated hypothesis
- To collect demographic characteristics and empirical data from nature -based
tourists
- To analyze the data and test the study‘s hypothesis
- To analyze the limitations and shortcomings existed in the research
5
- To produce conclusions and suggestions for the future study concerning
nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
6
2. Literature review
This chapter provides a comprehensive and critical review of the current state of
knowledge relating to my research question. I first investigate on the definition, main
themes and current literature concerning nature-based tourists, environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude in the field of tourism studies. Afterwards, the
influence of demographic characteristics (such as gender, past experience and
education background) on tourists’ environmental knowledge and attitude was
investigated. Finally, I review the literature concerning the relationship between
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of natural-based tourists.
2.1 Sourcing, Searching and Accessing the Literature
A comprehensive literature review concerning nature -based tourists, environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude was conducted at the beginning of research. As
noted by Brotherton (2015), a critical review of the existing body of literature on this
topic helped me to be aware of what have already been known and where the research
should go in order to add new things to this knowledge in the future
The literature searches of this paper used both electronic databases and the Internet.
According to the research of Younger (2004), electronic databases offer access to a
great deal of information which can be obtained more quickly than the manual
research. The peer review papers of this literature review were selected from the
following online databases: Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, Taylor & Francis
Online and Linnaeus University online library. Linnaeus University online library has
an enormous number of academic articles for free and provided support for searching
for articles within a certain subject area. To expend the scope of the research, I also
chose Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, Taylor & Francis Online as electronic
databases because (1) all of these three electronic databases could search for terms in
the title, keywords and abstract; (2) Linnaeus University subscribed to the electronic
database of Science Direct, Wiley Online Library and Taylor & Francis Online, so I
could use my student password to gain access to these three electronic databases.
Depending on the research aim and topic of my thesis, following search terms are
selected to limit the potential materia that is related to my research (see Table I for all
search terms). At first, I search for the terms ‖nature-based tourism‖ and ―nature-
based tourists‖ to narrow down the journal articles on nature-based tourism. Based on
Ardoin et al. (2015) and Beaumon (2001)‘s review of nature-based tourism, I also add
the term ―marine tourism‖, ―wildlife tourism‖, ―ecotourism‖ and ―nature tourism‖ in
to expend the searching of literature. Since the aim of this research was to investigate
the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of nature-based tourists,
7
search terms including ―environmental knowledge‖ or ―environmental attitude‖ or
―knowledge about environmental issues‖ or ―knowledge about ecosystem‖ or
―knowledge about environment protection‖ were also included. And the articles were
selected if they included at least one item of search term 1 and search term 2. In
addition, this research intended to examine the influence of demographic
characteristics on nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental
attitude. Search terms including ―demographic characteristics‖ or ―gender‖ or
―education level‖ or ―age‖ or ―nature-based tourism experience‖ were added to
investigate related articles. In order to find material associated with nature-based
tourists‘ demographic characteristics and their environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude, journal articles were selected if they contained at least one
term of each level. After I had searched for all the terms in the electronic databases, I
search for those terms in Google to find articles that might be left out and not belong
to the databases I chose. However, no new article was added in the progress of online
searching.
Table1. Literature review search terms
Search term 1: ―nature-based tourism‖ or ―wildlife tourism‖ or ―marine tourism‖ or
―ecotourism‖ or ―nature tourism‖ or ―nature-based tourist‖
Search term 2: ―environmental knowledge‖ or ―environmental attitude‖ or
―knowledge about environmental issues‖ or ― knowledge about ecosystem‖ or
― knowledge about environmental protection‖
Search term 3: ―demographic characteristics‖ or ―gender‖ or ―education level‖ or ―age‖
or ―nature-based tourism experience‖
After I downloaded all the articles recorded in the search result, I read the abstract
and content of each articles to separate the potential relevant articles to those articles
not within the subject area of nature-based tourists‘environmental knowldege and
environmental attitude. In order to find more resources, I read the reference lists of
articles that had been already identified as relevant to my thesis. However, this search
of the references did not add any new articles which meant that the coverage of
literature was comprehensive, so I finished the data collection progress and began to
further select collected articles.
The remaining articles were further filtered by the following criteria:
(1) The study must be primary research studies. Editorials, unpublished theses,
conference reports, book chapters from gray literature were excluded (Gallagher
et al., 2015);
(2) The study should solely investigate the environmental knowldeg and
environmental attitude of natuer-based tourists. Articles investigate environmental
8
knowldege and environmental attitude of local residents, community, local tourist
industry, students, operators and stakeholders will be excluded;
(3) The study must mainly focus on the tourists‘ environmental knowldege including
knowledge about environmental issues, knowldege about ecosystem . For example,
several articles investigae tourists knowlde on ecotourism or culture heritage will
be excluded;
(3) The publication date between 1990 and 2016;
(4) Articles written in English
The following section will explore the definition, main themes and current state
literature concerning environmental knowledge and environmental attitude in the field
of nature-based tourism studies. In addition, a review of demographic characteristics‘
influence on environmental knowledge and environmental attitude will also be
conducted in this section.
2.2 Defining a nature-based tourists
According to the International Ecotourism Society (2000), about 60% of the tourists
can be regarded as nature-based tourists. A growing number of scholars try to provide
definition for nature-based tourists. Lee & Jan (2015) defined nature-based tourists as
tourists who are seeking for nature-based experience including natural ecosystem,
community-based tourism and wildlife tourism. Similarly, Meng & Uysal (2008)
indicated that nature tourists were those ―travellers who are interested in nature-based
destinations and reside in the nearby areas to the particular research setting being
examined. Nature-based tourists can also be defined according to their length of
participating in day tour (Luo & Deng, 2016; Wurzinger and Johansson, 2006). For
example, Wurzinger and Johansson (2006) regarded tourists who participated in tour
lasting two to four hours at nature sites were nature-based tourists. Since nature-based
tourism covers a wide range of destinations, nature-based tourists may differ from
various aspects including tourism experience and recreational activities (Mehmetoglu,
2007). Considering the differences existed in nature-based tourists, Lindberg (1991)
divided nature-based tourists into four main groups: (1) hard-core nature-based
tourists who were scientists or members of tours that specially used for education,
removing litter or other similar purposes; (2) dedicated nature tourists were those who
travel especially for protected areas for a better understanding of local nature and
cultural history; (3) mainstream nature tourists who traveled to Amazon, national park
or other nature-based sites; (4) casual nature tourists were those who selected nature
as part of a trip. The numbers of tourists in each group differed significantly from the
lowest number in ―hard-core‖ to the most number in ―casual‖ (Holden & Fennell,
2012). In addition, Lindberg (1997) pointed out that the nature-based tourists also
varied from person to person with respect to their personal demographic
characteristics and the importance of nature in travel motivation.
9
Several scholars pointed out that tourist at nature destinations played an important
role in mitigating the negative environmental impacts (Uysal et al, 1994). Having a
better understanding of nature-based tourists was beneficial to the management and
planning of a nature-based destination, which in turn protected the natural
environment and ensured the continuous visitor satisfaction by providing appropriate
service and products (Priskin, 2003). Thus, nature-based visitors‘ characteristics and
attitude were useful input for the long-term management and planning of nature-based
tourism (Priskin, 2003).
2.3 Environmental knowledge
Environmental knowledge is the degree to which an individual become aware of and
show concerns for ecological issues (Amyx, DeJong, Lin, Chakraborty, &Wiener,
1994). In the hypothesis model of Calver and Page (2013: 31), knowledge of natural
environment was defined as ―A cognitive response originating from knowledge and
understanding of gardening, horticulture, wildlife, natural history, outdoor activities‖.
In addition to the understanding of natural environment and environmental issues,
environmental knowledge is associated with one‘s stronger responsibility for the
protection of environment (Huang and Shih, 2009). This means that individuals can
demonstrate environmental knowledge through their degree of comprehension over
environmental problems, the consequences of those problems and environmental-
related concepts (Haron, Paim and Yahaya, 2005). Environmental knowledge is
important since it helps individuals to acquire basic understanding to the
environment-related problems (Ramdas and Mohams, 2014).
Declarative knowledge (i.e. factual knowledge), and conceptual knowledge (i.e. the
understanding of general environmental concepts) are two converging types of
environmental knowledge in tourism studies (Ardoin et al., 2015; Beaumont, 2001;
Van der Linden, 2014). Many previous researches developed the conceptualization of
environmental knowledge from factual knowledge (Cheng and Wu, 2014; Amante-
Helweg, 1996; Hill, Woodland & Gough, 2007; Nilsson and Küller, 2000; Lucrezi et
al., 2013; Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer, 2005). For example, Cheng and Wu (2014) used
the factual knowledge of sustainable development knowledge and enviro nmental
protection knowledge to measure tourists‘ environmental knowledge. In addition,
Amante-Helweg investigated ecotoruists‘ factual knowledge concerning cetacean
natural history related to taxonomy and biological characteristics. Beaumont (2001)
used self-rating concepts to measure tourists‘ understanding for the general
environmental conceptual knowledge of rainforest ecology, conservation of natural
areas, biodiversity, national parks, and World Heritage. Thus, Thapa, Graefe, and
Meyer (2005) investigated the environmental knowledge of scuba divers based on the
10
measurement of conceptual knowledge, such as coral reef ecology and coral reef
ecosystem.
There have been a number of researchers try to explore nature-based tourists‘
environmental knowledge on natural environment and environmental issues (Chen,
2011; Lucrezi et al., 2013; Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer, 2005; Kafyri, Hovardas &
Poirazidis, 2012). Knowledge on environmental issues embraces the ―interrelationship
between the environment and the society, environmental effects of technological and
economic growth, air and water pollution, greenhouse effect, and global warming‖
(Ramdas and Mohams, 2014, pp. 383). For example, Chen (2011) explored nature-
based tourists‘ knowledge on marine environment and whale/dolphins through the
questionnaire and he claimed that those tourists with more knowledge about
environment related issues would be more likely to learn from their visit and have
stronger intention to change their behavior. Ramdas and Mohams (2014) investigated
knowledge on environmental issues including visible environmental degradation such
as water pollution that would directly affect people and abstract environmental issues
such as climate change were less visible problems that would not produce immediate
negative threat to people. Both Lucrezi et al. (2013) and Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer
(2005) measured nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge concerning coral
reefs ecology and the human impacts on coral reefs.
The results of some researches showed that the nature-based tourists were lack of
environmental knowledge and education programs were suggested as strategy to
increase ecological knowledge among tourists (Lucrezi et al, 2013; Thapa, Graefe,
and Meyer, 2005; Kafyri, Hovardas & Poirazidis, 2012). Lucrezi et al. (2013) noted
that there was a lack of environmental knowledge about the potential damage to coral
reefs resulting from using underwater cameras or gloves. Similarly, the research of
Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer (2005) revealed that the respondents expressed good
general marine-based knowledge but lack of specific knowledge on coral reefs. In
addition, Kafyri, Hovardas & Poirazidis (2012) explored tourists‘ environmental
knowledge concerning the awareness of being in protected area and the endangered
species and found that respondents reported low level self-reported environmental
knowledge. However, the survey of Garla et al., (2015) revealed that tourists had high
level of knowledge on shark species. The researchers stated that tourists had higher
knowledge since their interests to ―nature and sympathetic to conservation‖ lead them
to visit Noronha (Garla et al., 2015, pp. 131).
In addition to investigate the environmental knowledge of tourists, a growing body of
research focused on the factors influencing environmental knowledge. Several studies
pointed out that the experience of nature-based tourism could increase the
environmental knowledge of tourists (Beaumont, 2001；Ballantyne, Packer and Falk
2011; Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Coleman, D. and Lamond, 1993). For example, the
11
research of Ballantyne, Packer and Falk (2011) showed that the experience of wildlife
tourism positively impacted the short-term and long-term knowledge of tourists by
raising the awareness of environmental issues. At Mon Repos Conservation Park in
Bargara, Hughes (2013) found that interpretive nature-based tourism experiences
positively impacted visitors‘ conservation knowledge and environmental responsible
behavior intention. Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer (2005) noted that the environmental
knowledge and pro-environmental orientation are directly associated with the level of
experience. The research of Beaumont (2001) showed that the experience of
ecotourism would increase the environmental knowledge and understanding of the
natural environment. In addition, researches into recreation specialization showed that
increased specialization was constantly associated with high level of environment
knowledge and care in outdoor recreational activities (Dyck, Schneider, Thompson &
Virden, 2003; Mullins, 2014). Similarly, tourists with higher interest in natural-based
recreational activities are more likely to obtain knowledge concerning natural
environment rather than just relax in the sun.
2.4 Environmental attitude
Environmental attitude is recognized as a psychology tendency which is
characterized by the emotional and cognitive evaluation in relation to the nature and
environmental-related issues (Kim and Weiler, 2013; Beaumont, 1999).
Environmental attitude is also defined as a physiological tendency to assess the level
of favor or disfavor concerning environmental issues (Milfont and Duckitt, 2010).
Weaver and Lawton (2004) pointed out that tourist‘ environmental attitude should be
considered and identified in the paradigm of sustainable tourism since it could
critically influence the sustainable development of destination. In past decades, there
were a growing number of research try to investigate people ‘s attitudes towards the
environmental issues, such as continued gradually global warming, which symbolized
the growing awareness of the relationship between the modern industrialization and
the natural environment (Dunlap, 2000).
Environmental attitude can be measured by New Environmental Paradigm and the
New Ecological Paradigm (Lee and Jan, 2015; Kafyri, Hovardas & Poirazidis, 2012).
New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale which wasoriginally developed by Dunlap
and Van Liere (1978) had been extensively used to examine one‘s general
environmental attitudes (Wurzinger and Johansson, 2006; Uysal et al, 1994; Luzar et
al., 1998; Luzar et al., 1995; Fairweather, Maslin, and Simmons, 2005). It was also
used to examine the relationship between environmental knowledge and
environmental attitudes (Luzar et al., 1995). The NEP scale uses a 12-item scale
comprising three conceptual domains (i.e. the balance between human activity and
nature, limits to growth, and the dominant role of human in nature) (Dunlap and Van
Liere, 1978). However, the environmental problems have evolved significantly and
12
traditional measures of ―environmental concern‖ are replaced by new instruments to
measure ―ecological consciousness‖, ―anthropocentrism‖ and ―anthropocentrism
versus ecocentrism‖ (Dunlap et al., 2000, pp.426). Developed on the base of NEP,
The New Ecological Paradigm provides a wide range of ecological worldview
concept and offers a balance of pro- and anti- NEP items (Dunlap et al., 2000; Lee and
Jan, 2015). In addition, the research of Dunlap showed that the New Ecological
Paradigm compared with NEP was associated with more ecological attitudes and
possessed predictive validity (Dunlap et al., 2000). The New Ecological Paradigm, a
15-item scale, comprises five constructs (the limits to growth, antianthropocentrism,
the fragility of nature‘s balance, rejection of exemptionalism, and the possibility of an
eco-crisis).
Most previous studies involving environmental attitudes had mainly focused on (1)
investigating the differences and similarities between two groups of tourists‘ attitudes
on natural environment in natural-based destination (Packer, Ballantyne &Hughes,
2014; Xu & Fox, 2014), (2) the pro-environmental attitudes of tourists in the context
of tourism (Untaru, Epuran and Ispasn, 2014), (3) the attitudes of natural-based
tourists on the protection of animals, natural environment and environmental issues
(Garla et al., 2015; Weaver & Lawton, 2004), (4) the role of environmental attitudes
in tourists‘ willingness to pay for the environmental protection (Doran, Hanss &
Larsen, 2015), (5) the impact of natural-based tourism experience on tourists‘
environmental attitude (Lee and Moscardo, 2005) and (6) the relationship between
tourists‘ environmental attitude and environmental responsible behavior in nature-
based destination (Higham, Reis & Cohen, 2016; Ramkissoon, Weiler & Smith,
2012; Kil, Holland & Stein, 2014; Ong & Musa, 2012; Kim & Wealer, 2013;
Fairweather et al., 2005). Several study explored the effectiveness of on-site
interpretation on encouraging tourists‘ favorable attitudes towards natural protection
(Hughe & Saunders, 2005). Paudel & Nyaupane (2013) investigated the influence of
environmental interpretive tour guide on tourists‘ environmental attitude.
Recreation experience will positively impact the environmental attitudes of tourists in
natural-based tourist destinations (Ballantyne et al., 2011a; Collado et al., 2013; Lee
& Jan, 2015). Recreation offers tourists with a straightforward experience through
which they can learn about environmental knowledge and thus form environmental
attitude (Ballantyne et al., 2011a). Only several articles try to evaluate the relationship
between environmental knowledge and environment attitude. Tisdell & Wilson (2005)
noted that knowledge might impact tourists‘ environment attitude and those tourists
who had pro-environmental attitude were more likely to learn about knowledge
concerning natural environment.
A number of researches on tourist‘ attitude had shown that nature-based tourists were
in favor of pro-environmental attitudes and critical to environment-related issues
13
(Luzar et al., 1998, Weaver and Lawton, 2004). Pro-environmental attitude is defined
as one-dimensional scale that represents individual‘s ―concern over the quality of
environment‖ and ―reflects the attitude towards environmental Issues‖ (Untara,
Epuram & Ispas, 2014). A survey of tourists‘ attitudes on the hinterland‘s natural
environment by Weaver and Lawton (2004: 293) found that tourists were ―amenable
to tourism activity and put ―natural preservation‖ instead of ―tourism development‖ in
priority. In addition, many researchers suggested that nature-tourism destinations not
only promoted and enhanced the environmental knowledge of tourist but also
provided the tourists with opportunity to be close to nature, thus promoted the form of
pro-environmental attitude (Powell, Kellert and Ham, 2009; Collado, Staats and
Corraliza; 2013;；Kellert，1996). The research of Lee and Moscardo (2005) revealed
that past travel experience might promote tourists‘ favorable environmental attitude
and increase their interest in future nature-based tourism experience. Similarly, Lee
and Jan (2015) pointed out that natural- based experience would improve tourists‘
conception of nature and promote their knowledge and attitudes over environmental
issues and natural environment.
Several researchers compared different groups of nature-based tourists and found that
tourists who selected nature as the main focus of the trip had higher level of concern
to the environment (Hvenegaard and Dearden, 1998; Uysal et al, 1994). For example,
the research of Uysal et al (1994) revealed that the visitors who selected park as main
destination expressed showed more concern about the conservation of natural
environment than those visitors who visited park as part of a trip. However, a growing
body of researches had demonstrated that the environmental attitudes of tourists were
not predicable based on the selection of nature-based tourist destinations (Dolnicar &
Leisch, 2008; Luzar, Diagne, Gan, & Henning, 1995). The assumption that the tourists
who were interested in nature and environment were more pro-environmental in their
attitudes ignored the fact that nature-based tourists were more likely to travel to
sensitive natural areas than other types of tourist (Dolnicar & Leisch, 2008). Kim &
Weiler (2013) noted that not only natural-based tourists, the attitudes of the other type
of tourists might play out differently at different sites.
2.5 Demographic characteristics
Previous studies mainly investigated the influence of demographic characteristics on
travel motivation (Yoon & Uysal, 2005), on perceptions of destination attribute (Meng
& Uysal, 2008) and on trip expenditure of nature-based tourists (Veisten et al., 2013).
Demographic characteristics consist of age, gender, education level, marital status and
monthly household income, and tourists‘ gender difference has been mainly discussed
and explored in tourism studies. Agarwal (2000) pointed out that the neglecting of
gender during the process of research can result in potential inaccurate and
unsuccessful results. Similarly, Swain (1995) noted that since tourism was built on
14
human relations, it was important to consider differences between dynamic gender
demographics. In addition to gender, several researchers noted that past experience,
age and other demographic characteristics should also be considered in the future
study to explore the impact of nature-based tourists Luzar et al. (1995). The results of
demographic characteristics in nature-based tourism research showed that the
majority of nature-based tourists were well-educated young adults or middle-aged
people and possessed high level of income (Meng & Uysal, 2008; Cheng & Wu,
2014).
Although researchers suggested that the difference of demographic might influence
the perceived knowledge with respect to environmental degradation and
environmental issues (McKercher et al., 2010), there were only a few articles try to
investigate the relationship between demographic characteristics (i.e. gender,
education level) and nature-based tourist‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude in the field of tourism studies. Thus, these articles held
different views with respect to the influence of demographic characteristics on
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Several articles pointed out that
females were more likely to have favorable environmental attitudes and be aware of
environmental issues than males (Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Kim and Weiler, 2013;
Castellanos-Verdugo et al., 2016). For example, a survey of Kim and Weiler (2013)
showed that females were more aware of negative outcome of fossil collecting and
environmental issues. Thus, Castellanos-Verdugo et al (2016) noted that gender could
moderate proposed relations since previous researchers had found that woman held
different attitudes compared with man, and even, pro -environmental attitudes. In
addition to possess stronger pro-environmental attitude than men, females were found
more optimistic to the existing environmental issues (McKercher et al., 2010).
However, the test of Lee and Moscardo (2005) revealed that women compared with
men were more likely to hold pro-environmental attitude and to be aware of
environmental issues, but this difference was not significant. Similarly, Ghilardi-
Lopes et al., (2015) didn‘t find significantly difference by gender or income on factual
environmental knowledge of climate change. In regards to education level, the survey
revealed that the significant deference only observed in one specific question
(Ghilardi-Lopes et al., 2015). Similarly, a survey on Virgin Islands by Uysal et al.
(1994) revealed that the demographic characteristics (except gender) were found very
little influence on visitors‘ environmental attitude.
2.6 Environmental knowledge associated with environmental
attitudes
Many earlier studies suggested that environmental knowledge was a major factor that
could predict environmental attitude. For example, Kellert (1996) noted that formal
knowledge and informal knowledge had been identified as one of the main factors
that would influence attitude. In addition, Farmer, Knapp, and Benton (2007) claimed
15
that an individual‘s ―understanding of ecological knowledge was the foundation of
pro-environmental attitudes and behavior‖. Tourists‘ knowledge about natural
environment was believed to result in “the changing of attitudes to those that are
more environmentally and ecologically sound‖ (Orams 1997, p. 298). These
researches confirmed this finding and demonstrated that environmental knowledge
played an essential role in shaping environmental attitude (Duerden and Witt, 2010;
Garla et al., 2015; Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002；Kuhlemeier et al., 1999). A survey
of visitors to Fernando de Noronha Archipelago by Garla et al. (2015) found that
tourists‘ environmental knowledge concerning sharks was correlated to the attitudes
towards shark species and protecting sharks. Moreover, the research of Kuhlemeier et
al. (1999) noted that people with richer environmental knowledge usually obtained
more accurate and complete information to form their environmental attitude.
However, several researchers pointed out that the increase of tourists‘ general factual
knowledge about environment would not necessary positively correlate their attitude
in any particular direction (Wiles and Hall, 2003; Tubb, 2003). For example, a survey
by Beaumont (1998) in Lamington National Park showed that ecotourism experience
lead to the increase of environmental knowledge for all tourists, but tourists‘
environmental attitude didn‘t receive a corresponding increase.
2.7 Conclusion
The process of literature review helped me to summarize the existing literature
relating to my thesis topic and find the knowledge gap I wanted to fill in in my
research. Considering the rapid development of nature-based tourism, the issue with
respect to the sustainable development of nature-based sites is extremely urgent.
Several scholars of the reviewed paper pointed out that environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude should be considered in the paradigm of sustainable nature -
based tourism (Puhakka, 2010, Weaver & Lawton, 2004; Chen & Wu, 2014). A
market consists with tourists who have pro -environmental attitude, love nature and
willingness to protect environment is necessary for the long term development of
nature-based sites (Luo & Deng, Weaver 2005). In order to have a better
understanding of tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude, this
literature review investigated the main themes and current state literature concerning
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude in the field of tourism studies.
Nature-based tourists were found to hold pro-environmental attitude and concern
about the environmental issues (Luzar et al., 1998, Weaver and Lawton, 2004).
However, the result of some research indicated that nature-based tourists are lack of
environmental knowledge concerning mare-based knowledge and protected area.
What‘s more, the factors that could influence nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude were also examined. The result indicated that
past nature-based tourism experience was closely related to the environmental
16
knowledge and environmental attitude of tourists (Beaumont, 2001；Ballantyne,
Packer and Falk 2011; Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Coleman, D. and Lamond, 1993;
Powell, Kellert and Ham, 2009; Collado, Staats and Corraliza; 2013;；Kellert，
1996). In addition, several scholars suggested that demographich characteristics
including education level, age and gender should also be considered in the future
study about tourists (Agarwal, 2000; Swain, 1995; Luzar et al., 1995). However, only
a few articles investigated the influence of demographic characteristics (gender, past
experience and education level) on natural-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude in the field of tourism (Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Kim and
Weiler, 2013; Castellanos-Verdugo et al., 2016). Thus, these articles held different
views with respect to the influence of demographic characteristics. Since the impact
of demographic characteristics on tourists‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude respectively is still under explored, more empirical research is
required to obtain valuable information. In order to provide new insights into this
knowledge, this study examined nature-based tourists‘ demographic differences
relating to the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude
Many previous literatures suggested that environmental knowledge played an
essential role in predicting and shaping the environmental attitude (Duerden and Witt,
2010; Garla et al., 2015; Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002；Kuhlemeier et al., 1999).
However, there is still lack of empirical studies in the field of tourism to examine the
relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Inspired
by previous literature, this research would contribute to the knowledge gap
concerning the relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude and future explore whether those tourists with more
environmental knowledge would have stronger pro-environmental attitude.
17
3. Conceptual Framework This chapter presents the conceptual framework of this research based on the
literature review and the aim of this research. The conceptual framework will be explained at first. Then, the concepts of nature-based tourist, environmental knowledge, environmental attitude, demographic characteristics and the relationship
between concepts will be introduced. Finally, I will introduce the hypotheses of the research based on the conceptual framework.
A conceptual frame work explains the key concepts to be studied and the hypothesized relationship between these concepts (Veal, 2006). In a deductive
research, the conceptual framework is derived from the previous literature and used to guide the empirical part of the following research (Brotherton, 2015). It is suggested
from previous literature that demographic characteristics, such as age, gender, education level and past experience, may influence the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of nature-based tourists. However, little empirical researches
were conducted to explore whether nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude vary according to their demographic characteristics. More
research was required to further explore the environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of nature-based tourists. In addition, previous literature posited that environmental knowledge can impact and shape tourists‘ environmental attitudes
Duerden and Witt, 2010; Garla et al., 2015; Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). Tourists‘ knowledge about natural environment was believed to result in ―the changing of attitudes to those that are more environmentally and ecologically sound‖ (Orams
1997, p. 298). The potential relationship between these two variables was still under explored. As pointed out by Brotherton (2015), a correlational framework was
designed to suggest the possible connection between two factors. Depending on the main aim of this thesis, this conceptual framework was designed in a correlational form to explore the relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude.
Based on the literature review, main aim and the objectives of this research, a conceptual framework concerning the correlational relationship between natural-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude was formulated
in this thesis. This conceptual framework (see figure 1) demonstrated the correlational relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude and
indicated that if nature-based tourists had higher environmental knowledge, they would show pro-environmental attitudes. In addition, the conceptual framework also explored the possible influence of nature-based tourists‘ demographic characteristics
on their environmental attitude and environmental and intended to examine whether nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude vary
according to their demographic characteristic (age, gender, past experience and education level). The following section would clearly define the concepts involved in this conceptual framework and the hypothesized relationship between these concepts.
18
Figure 1：A conceptual framework of natural-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and attitude
3.1 Nature-based tourists
In this research, nature-based tourists are those people who are seeking for nature-
based experience and reside in the nearby areas to the particular research setting being examined.
3.2 Environmental knowledge
Environmental knowledge is a general knowledge, which includes the facts and
relationships in regard to the natural environment, environmental protection and
major ecosystems (Fryxell and Lo, 2013, pp. 48). According to the literature, most of
the research developed the conceptualization of environmental knowledge from
factual knowledge (Cheng and Wu, 2014; Amante-Helweg, 1996), and the
measurements of environmental knowledge were conducted from the perspective of
natural history, sustainable development, coral reef ecosystem and marine -animal
species (Chen, 2011; Lucrezi et al., 2013; Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer, 2005; Kafyri,
Hovardas & Poirazidis, 2012).
Compared with the knowledge about natural environment and ecosystems, I am more
interested in investigating nature-based tourist‘s factual knowledge about
environmental issues and sustainable development of nature-based sites in my
research. Since knowledge about global warming and sustainable nature-based
tourism have not been investigated much in terms of environmental knowledge, this
study will investigate two variables of factual knowledge (1) global warming and
carbon dioxide and (2) sustainable nature-based tourism and environment.
Global warming is acknowledged as a direct consequence of climate change which is
due to the increased amount of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide concentration has
19
dramatically increased in the past decades due to human activities, and the main
source of carbon dioxide was from the emissions of fossil carbon combustion and
cement production (IPCC, 2077). In addition, tourism is now regarded as a significant
contributor to carbon dioxide emissions primary from air transport which accounts for
nearly three-quarters of the entire amount (McKercher et al., 2010). An increasing
number of scholars, such as Simpson, Gössling, Scott, Hall and Gladin (2008),
encouraged tourists to travel less often and substitute air travel with ground vehicles
in order to reduce travel-related personal carbon dioxide emissions. For example, the
carbon emissions of per passenger kilometer train travel are about one-quarter of the
emissions produced by air travel (McKercher et al., 2010). This research will
investigate the factual knowledge concerning global warming and carbon dioxide.
The second variable of environmental knowledge is about sustainable nature -based
tourism and environment. The development of Nature-based tourism not only brings
benefits to local people but also cause adverse effects in the environment. Over-
consumption of natural resources by tourists will negatively impact the local
ecological ecosystem and lead to environmental deterioration (Chubchuwong at al.,
2015). Tourists‘ environmental knowledge should be considered in the paradigm of
sustainable tourism since they could critically influence the sustainable development
of destination (Puhakka, 2010, Weaver & Lawton, 2004; Chen & Wu, 2014). Taking
consideration of sustainable development of destinations, this study also covered the
knowledge about the negative environmental effects of economic growth in natural-
based sights.
3.3 Environmental attitude
Environmental attitude is consisted of complicated perceptions formed by the beliefs
of individual, emphasizing on ―verbal commitment, actual commitment, motivation
and intention‖ to act activity with respect to the protection of environment (Ramdas
and Mohamed, 2014, pp.383). There are different types of environmental caring
tourists and their environmental attitudes vary from the environmental knowledge
they are being asked about (Kim & Weiler, 2013; Weaver and Lawton 2004). With
respect to the measurements of environment attitude in the field of tourism studies,
the literature review revealed that environmental attitude of tourists could be
measured by New Environmental Paradigm or New Ecological Paradigm.
Both New Environmental Paradigm New Ecological Paradigm have the greatest
predictability for the dimension of general ecological worldview even when the scales
are used in a shorten version (Dunlap et al., 2000; Lee and Moscardo, 2005).
However, with the emergence of the problem, such as ozone depletion, climate
change and human induced global environmental change, there is an increasing need
for new items concerning the possibilities of ―catastrophic environmental changes‖ or
20
―ecocrises‖ (Dunlap et al, 2000). The traditional measures for the environmental
concern were being replacement for the new instruments enabling to measure the
―ecological consciousness‖ (Dunlap et al, 2000, pp. 426). Compared with the New
Environmental Paradigm which puts more emphasis on the sociopolitical problems,
New Ecological Paradigm was designed to measure the general ecological worldview
(Lee and Jan, 2015). In addition, the scale of New Environmental Paradigm was
obsolete since the items used in the measurement had become out-dated and it didn‘t
include the items focusing on ecocrisis and exemptionalism.
Considering to the growing ecological crises all over the world, this research will
adopt the New Ecological Paradigm scale which has been widely used as a single
scale to measure environmental attitude in tourism studies (Lee & Jan, 2015; Lee and
Moscardo, 2005; Packer et al., 2014). The New Ecological Paradigm is consisted of
five facets of ecological worldview: antianthropocentrism, the fragility of natural
balance, rejection of exemptionalism, the possibility of an ecocrisis, and the limits of
growth. In this scale, the agreement of the items indicate individual‘s pro-
environmental attitude (Dunlap et al, 2000) and a high mean score of scale reflects a
pro-environment orientation (Wurzinger and Johansson, 2006). In addition, Dunlap et
al. (2000) noted that the score of the New Ecological Paradigm scale reflected
respondents‘ perceived seriousness of environmental problem (the higher score, the
more likely problems are considered to be serious). Presently, the scale of New
Ecological Paradigm has become one of the most commonly used tools in tourism
studies and current study will use this well-established scale to investigate the general
environmental attitude.
3.4 Demographic characteristics
Demographic differences among tourists have been mainly identified in terms of age,
gender, education level, marital status and monthly household income (Kim and
Weiler, 2013; Luo and Deng, 2008; Lee and Jan, 2015). In this research, I will focus
on the demographic characteristics including age, gender and education level.
According to the previous literature, the relationships between demographic
characteristics (such as age, gender and education level) and visitors‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude are still under discussed. Lack of research
concerning demographic characteristics in tourism research leads to the questionable
conclusion that those tourists who earn more money and well-educated are more
likely to be environmental-friendly tourist (Dolnicar et al., 2008). Luzar et al. (1995)
suggested that gender was closely associated with natural-based tourism and it was an
important factor which should be critically considered in the future natural-based
tourism. Past experience of nature-based tourism is also an important factor that could
influence the environmental knowledge and attitude of tourists. Several studies
showed that past experience related to nature -based tourism resulted in increase of
21
tourists‘ knowledge and understanding of the natural environment (Ballantyne, Packer
and Falk 2011; Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Coleman, D. and Lamond, 1993). Thus,
self-transformation can be obtained through environmental learning during natural -
based experience, which will let tourists form positive attitudes towards natural
environment (Weaver, 2005). Although many scholars noted that demographic
characteristics such as gender, education level and age are significantly associated
with environmental attitudes, there is little literature trying to investigate the
relationship between demographic characteristics (i.e. age, gender, past experience,
education level) and tourist‘ environmental knowledge and attitude in the field of
tourism studies (Andereck, 2009; Dolnicar & Grün, 2009; Meng & Uysal, 2008; Kim
and Weiler, 2013). In order to address this knowledge gap, I will explore whether
natural-based tourists‘ demographic characteristics (such as gender, educational level
and past experience) will influence their knowledge on environmental issues and
environmental attitude. To address these knowledge gaps, I hypnosis the following
(see figure 1):
H1: Natural-based tourists‘ knowledge on environmental issues varies according to
their demographic characteristic (age, gender, past experience and education level).
H2: Natural-based tourists‘ environmental attitude varies according to their
demographic characteristic (age, gender, past experience and education level).
3.5 Environmental knowledge associated with environmental
attitudes
Previous studies have suggested that environmental knowledge is an important factor
that could predict environmental attitude (Farmer, Knapp, and Benton, 2007). People
with more environmental knowledge usually obtain more accurate and complete
information to form their environmental attitude (Kuhlemeier et al., 1999). The
research of Wurzinger and Johansson (2006) showed that those tourists with richer
knowledge with richer knowledge tend to be more concerned about environmental
issues of visited destinations. In addition, several scholars adopted the theory of
reasoned action to examine the relationship between environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude (Md Taff et al, 2010; Kaiser et al., 1999). The theory of
reasoned action stated that the level of knowledge will affect attitude and individuals
with increased knowledge on environmental issues will have increased awareness and
positively attitude towards the environment (Ramdas and Mohamed, 2014). Kaiser et
al., (1999) pointed out that knowledge will directly influence environmental attitude.
After conducting the literature review, I found only several articles have been
conducted to examine the correlational relationship between environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude, and the main aim of these articles is to
investigate sustainable tourists behavior in the field of tourism researches.
22
Based on the above statements, environmental knowledge is closely associated with
nature basted tourists‘ environmental attitude. However, as there is limited research
have been conducted to explore the relationship between environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude and use empirical data to test whether nature-based
tourists with richer environmental knowledge will hold pro -environmental attitude. As
a result, an examination on this relationship is needed. This research intends to put
new insights into the relationship of nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude by using quantitative research. In order to address these
knowledge gaps, I propose the following hypotheses (see figure 1):
H3: If nature-based tourists have higher level of environmental knowledge, they will
have stronger pro-environmental attitudes.
23
4. Methodology
This chapter aims to describe the methodology part of this research. It will begin with
a brief introduction of the research site. Then, it will present the philosophy of social
science, the quantitative method used for data collection and the ethical consideration
of the research. The way to process and analyze the empirical data will be presented
at the end of this chapter.
4.1 Study Area
Öland is the second largest island in Sweden and it is the smallest province of
Sweden. Abundant natural features, such as deciduous forests, beaches, coastal
meadows, coniferous forests and alvar, make this island become one of the most
famous natural-based tourist destinations in Sweden. Not only tourists, the unique
natural features of Öland have also attracted many botanists and naturalists from all
over the world for ages. One of the most well-known botanists who had visited Öland
was Carl Linnaeus, also known as Carl Von Linne who inspired people to discover
and enjoy the natural environment on Öland. One of reason why Öland is regarded as
nature-based tourist destination is because of its high forest coverage rate and varied
forests. Over 10% of Öland is covered with coniferous and deciduous forests,
especially on the northern part of the island where has the largest forest, Böda Crown
Park. Most of the agriculture is on the middle of the island where there were a wide
variety of meadows and leafy groves. The dominant environment feature on South
Öland is the Stora Alvaret where has many flora and fauna. Stora Alvarest is also a
biodiversity environment which is the habitat of various rare and endangered animals,
insects and plants. In addition, Öland also have many nature-based sights where
tourists can observe birdlife and insects. Beijershamn is one of the best and popular
bird and butterfly habitats on Öland where has plentiful butterfly species. For a long
time, natural reserve including preserving biological diversity and catering to the need
of recreational activities have been the main task of the County Administrative Board.
Fig. 2: Nature-based tourist sights on Öland
24
4.2 Theory and philosophy of social science
The theory and philosophy of social science reveals not only the methods used to
solve the research question but also represent the researcher ‘s view on ontology,
epistemology and philosophical standpoint (Arksey and Knight, 1999). What‘s more,
the understating process of theory and philosophy provides the researchers with a
knowledge base to evaluate their current practice and help them to find the right
research process (Phillimore & Goodson, 2004). In my thesis, I used a deductive
approach to develop the conceptual framework that will ―structure and guide‖ the
steps of my research project (Brotherton, 2015, pp. 18). Deduction is regarded as the
basis of knowledge in social science since it provides the direct routes for the
knowledge (Botterill and Platenkamp, 2012). It is d ifferent from the inductive
approach which aims to build new theory that the deductive approach is adopted by
the researchers who collect the existing theoretical knowledge being studied by
25
conducting a literature review to decide the theory that will be tested in the research
(Brotherton, 2015). Since the topic of my thesis is about the relationship between
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude which is not so new and unique,
there is a wide range of literature and research relating to the topic. A deductive
approach is more applicable in my thesis than inductive approach. Guided by the
deductive approach, the starting point of my research is to conduct a literature review
to explore the existing body of literature represents what is known and studied about
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
Post-positivism is normally connected with the work of Karl Popper who published
his research in 1957 regarding the logic of scientific research, in which he argued that
the true-value of theory can‘t be discerned from the amount of data or deductive
inferences (Lazar, 1998). Recognizing the problems and limitations of positivism,
post-positivism admits that the reality can‘t be fully apprehended and the observation
as the way of obtaining knowledge is fallible and imperfect (Botterill and Platenkamp,
2012). Phillips and Burbules (2000: 29) defined post-positivism as ―a
nonfoundationalist approach to human knowledge‖ that refuses to accept the view that
―knowledge is erected on absolutely secure foundation‖ and accept the existence of
―fallibilism as an unavoidable fact of life‖. Instead of rejecting all the ideas and
methodology of positivism, the essence of post-positivism is to improve and transcend
positivism (Adam, 2014).
In the view of positivism, knowledge can be built up from every source even when it
has not authoritative source (Phillips and Burbules, 2000). Thus, considering what
they know about the evidence and facts, researchers can question this knowledge and
verify the assertion or examine the tests that have already been carried out by other
researchers (Phillips and Burbules, 2000). In many ways, post-positivism still aligned
with the basic assumptions of positivism: the realist ontological viewpoint and ―the
possibility and desirability of objective truth‖ (Botterill and Platenkamp, 2012, pp.
177). Different from positivism which based on the belief that all the phenomenon
and events can be explained by cause-effect laws, post-positivism believe that the
reality can never be fully apprehended and the knowledge is both critical and fallible
(Botterill and Platenkam, 2012; Brotherton, 2015). Since the error and doubt is
unavoidable in the process of research, it is difficult for the researchers to fully be
convincing regarding the cause-effect relationship but the researchers can point out
the possible relations between the variable (Brotherton, 2015). In addition, most event
and phenomena in the real world are influenced by more than one factor, but we are
not able to completely control or isolate the influence of one factor from the othe rs
and accurately state the nature of the relationship between each of these factors
(Brotherton, 2015). The research tried to investigate the possible relationship between
nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. In these
circumstances, I can only say whether or not there appears to be a correlation between
26
nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
4.3 Quantitative method
The present research employed a quantitative research design. A quantitative approach
requires statistical analysis which depends on the numerical evidence to test the
hypothesis in the research (Veal, 2006). For the following reasons, this research would
only take quantitative method. Firstly, the design of quantitative methods usually take
more time and effort than those for qualitative methods, however, the time is revised
in the stage of data analysis. Secondly, this research intends to investigate nature-
based tourists‘ level of environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
Although qualitative method such as face-to-face interview might provide me with
more information and reflections from respondents, it is difficult for me to correctly
determine their level of agreement towards the factual knowledge. For example,
strongly degree is different from degree. My interpretation of respondents‘ answers
may lead to misunderstandings, so I think it‘s better to use quantitative method to test
nature-based tourist‘ level of environmental knowledge and quantify their
environmental attitude. Brotherton (2015) pointed out that both experimental and
survey are appropriate research design for quantitative studies. Compared with
experimental research method, I am more inclined to use survey in my thesis study.
Survey is one of the most common forms of empirical research design which is widely
used by tourism organizations and companies to gather the information from tourists
(Brotherton, 2015). Moreover, Priskin (2003) suggested that the systematic
understanding of tourists‘ information such as demographic characteristics and
attitude is best obtained from tourist survey.
In academic research, researchers can use analytic survey to test hypothesized
relationships and explore the knowledge gap that has been identified during the
process of doing literature review (Brotherton, 2015, pp. 114). Compared to other
empirical methods, surveys are relative quick and easy to implemented (Oppenheim,
1992). If the survey can be designed properly, the research can easily achieve reliable
results which are amenable to statistical manipulation and objective comparisons
(Brotherton, 2015). The sender of the questionnaire should make the meaning of the
research as clear and unambiguous as possible to make the respondents understand the
original meaning and respond appropriately (Brotherto, 2015).
This research will carry out survey by means of on-site questionnaire to collect the
demographic characteristics data and data concerning environmental knowledge and
environmental attitudes of the nature-based tourists, to further explore the relationship
between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Compared with online
questionnaire, on-site questionnaire enables me to have a more direct contact with the
target group of this research and ensure that all the respondents are nature-based
27
tourists. In addition, I think the mentality and feelings of nature-based tourists who
are being traveling in a natural environment are different from those tourists who just
sit at home. Conducting on-site questionnaire can help me obtain more real data from
the nature-based tourists and increase the reliability of this research. Questionnaire is
an important tool for the data collection and instrument for the measurement of issues
investigated in the research (Oppenheim, 1992). The questions in this questionnaire
were developed based on the literature review and they were modified to be closely
related to the theme of thesis. The questionnaire in my survey was subdivided into
three main parts to obtain the background information from the respondents.
The first section addressed nature-based tourists‘ demographic variables including
gender, age, educational level and past experience related to nature-based sights.
The second section was about tourists‘ environmental knowledge which is consisted
of (1) knowledge about global warming and carbon dioxide, and (2) sustainable
nature-based tourist destination and environment. I will adopt closed questions in my
questionnaire concerning knowledge on environmental issues. Compared with open
questions, closed questions are quicker and easier to answer and useful to test the
specific hypotheses of the research (Oppenheim, 1992). Thus, all the decisions
concerning how to design the questions of the questionnaire and conduct the process
of collecting data should be aligned with the aim the research. In this section,
respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement towards the knowledge
about global warming and sustainable nature-based tourism. The content of 4 items
about global warming and carbon dioxide was derived from the report of IPCC (1995)
and 4 items about the negative environmental effects of over-consumption in natural-
based sights and sustainable development of nature-basde destinations were modified
from previous literature.
The third section of the questionnaire addressed 9 items about visitors‘ environmental
attitudes, and the measurement of environmental attitude was modified based on the
New Ecological Paradigm (Dunlap et al., 2000). The New Ecological Paradigm has
been extensively used in previous studies as an instrument seeking to measure the
environmental attitudes of tourists. 9 items for environmental knowledge was
developed from the New Ecological Paradigm, including antianthropocentrism (3
items), the fragility of natural balance (2 items), rejection of exemptionalism (1
items), the possibility of an ecocrisis (2 items), and the limits of growth (1 items).
According to Dunlap et al., (2000), the agreement of the items in the scale indicated
respondent‘s pro-environmental attitude and a higher score reflects a stronger pro-
environment orientation. In this research, an individual was considered to have a
positive environmental attitude if the mean score was higher than 3.5.
The responses to environmental attitude and environmental knowledge were scored
on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 for ―strongly disagree‖, 2 for ―disagree‖, 3
28
for ―uncertain‖, 4 for ―agree‖, and 5 for ―strongly agree‖. Attitude scale consisted of a
pool of selected attitude statements with which researcher can measure respondents‘
level of agreement (Oppenheim, 1992). The main function of the attitude scale is to
divide the respondents into different groups and allow the researcher to investigate the
ways in which the attitude associated with the other variables in the survey
(Oppenheim, 1992). In this survey, the higher score reflects tourists with more
environmental knowledge and the agreement of the items indicate tourists‘ pro-
environmental attitude.
4.4 Ethical consideration
Ethical consideration is one of the key concepts in the research of tourism at any
level, which seeks to protect both researcher and respondents from harm (Botterill, &
Platenkamp, 2012). As the participant and shaper of the research, the researcher have
to take the for the selection of research method, the respondents who participant in the
research and the truth of the research (Ritchie et al., 2004). Because of the complexity
of research, the researcher should consider ethical questions throughout all stages of
the research to protect the dignity, rights and benefit of all the respondents and to
ensure the research is conducted in an honest attitude (Brotherton, 2015). Ritchie et al.
(2004: 18) pointed out that ―care and nurturance might be the ethical stance‖ which
help researcher to deal with the ―research complexities of contemporary tourism
experience‖.
The respondents have the right to refuse to participate in the research. I will not force
any respondent to respond to my questionnaire. In addition, the research will not
involve people who are vulnerable or unable to be informed the content of the
research (children, mentally disabled people).
All the respondents must be fully informed about the purpose of the research, the
methods and possible use of the research and the potential risk they are involved
(Brotherton, 2015). The unsuccessful communication between the respondents and the
researchers will lead to ―the potential for both manipulation and/or error‖ (Brotherton,
2015, pp. 113). In order to mitigate the potential error and misunderstanding, I will
fully introduce my research before the respondents begin to conduct the questionnaire
and make sure respondents have clearly understood what the research is about, why I
am conducting this research and the possible use of the questionnaire.
With respect to the respondents‘ privacy, all the data collected in the survey will be
treated as confidential, which means only the researcher will have access to the data. I
promise the privacy of the respondents will be ensured throughout all the stages of
research and no information about identifiable person will be published without their
permission. Since this research mainly aims to investigate environmental knowledge
29
and environmental attitude of tourists, personal information such as name is not
required in this research. A statement will be displayed on the front of my
questionnaire: the information collected in this survey will be used to complete
requirement of this thesis paper.
4.5 Limitations of methods
There are several limitations of my chosen perspective in my research study. First of
all, since I will use surveys to record the data from the tourists and find out the
relationship between environmental knowledge and tourists‘ environmental attitudes,
it is important to control the factors that could cause or influence effect. However, it is
difficult for me separate environmental knowledge from other facts, such as
educational background and past experiences, that may potentially effect and
influence the environmental attitude. This research examined the possible connections
between tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Secondly,
since I need the empirical data that can accurately reflect tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and attitude, the questions concerning the knowledge of environmental
issues in surveys and interviews need to be representative and refined. Brotherton
(2015) points out systematic errors usually exist in the questionnaires since a single
question can be interpreted differently by different respondents and it is difficult to
tell which interpretation will be used by the respondent. Since the questionnaire is
written in English version, the questions may be interpreted differently by foreign
tourists who are non-English native speaker. In order to mitigate the systematic errors,
I stayed beside the respondents during the process of data collection and explained to
them those words they felt unfamiliar or uncertain.
4.6 Sampling and Data Collection
Sampling is commonly used in the research of social science since it takes less time
and money than surveying the entire population (Bailey, 1987). The first step of
choosing sample is to choose a population of interest in the research, and then ―select
a subset of some predetermined size from this population‖ (Bailey, 1987, pp. 80). This
study selected natural-based tourists who were traveling in Borgholm where was
surrounded by many nature-based tourist sights. Since the buses on Öland were very
few and the distances among different destinations are far away, Borgholm became
the only ideal place for me to do the research. The data was collected from April 2rd
to April 16th in 2016. Random sample techniques were adopted to obtain the data from
tourists. The main obstacle for the data collection is that the planned period of data
collection (early April in 2016) is still in the pre-season. Most of tourists in Sweden
are more likely to go to Öland from June to August when the tourist destinations are
all open to the public. In order to meet with tourists as much as possible, I walked
around the tourist destinations, nearby forests, hotels and bus stops in Borghom from
30
12:00 to 4:00 when tourist numbers were at maximum in survey location.
Approximately 9 questionnaires were distributed per day. In order to mitigate the
potential error and misunderstanding, I briefly introduced my thesis before the
respondents begin to conduct the research and make sure they have clearly understood
and the aim of the research. The whole process of each survey took about 10-15
minutes to complete. A total of 134 valid questionnaires were obtained. About 27
people refused to participate in the survey, which resulted in a high response rate of
about 83%. The high response rate reflected the efficiency of on-site questionnaire
methodology, the importance of brief introduction before the beginning of the survey
and the willingness of nature-based tourists to participate in environment-oriented
research.
4.7 Data Analysis
Descriptive analysis can help researchers to better understand and summarize the
collected data (Adams, 2007). In this research, the descriptive analysis was performed
by using SPSS 22.0 for Windows. Reliability tests could assess the internal
consistency of variables. Baggio & Klobas (2011) noted that Cronbch‘s Alpha was
the most common indicator for testing the internal consistency. In order to measure
the reliability of the returned questionnaire, the Cronbach‘s Alpha coefficient was
used on the category of ―environmental knowledge‖, ―knowledge of global warming
and carbon dioxide‖, ―knowledge of nature-based tourism and environment‖ and
―environmental attitude‖. When the reliability of a scale was less than 0.65, it meant
that the error component was more than one-third and such a measure needed to be
rebuilt and discard (Vaske, 2008). In social survey, demographic variables such as age,
gender, past experience and education level were internal-type data (Oppenheim,
1992). The statistical techniques that could be applied to them are means, t-test and F-
test, regression analyses, standard variance and so on (Oppenheim, 1992). In this
research, nature-based tourists were divided into different groups according to their
demographical differences and the mean values of different groups‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude were examined and compared by using t-test
and one-way ANOVA. The t-test was used to examine the differences between two
variables and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was adopted to examine the
mean difference of more than two variables at the same time (Veal, 2011). This study
conducted t-test to explore whether natural-based tourists‘ knowledge on
environmental issues and environmental attitude vary according to gender. One-way
ANOVA was used to investigate the impact of age, past experience and education
level on the environmental knowledge and environmental attitudes of natural-based
tourists. In addition, as suggested by Wurzinger & Johansson (2006), the Scheffé post
hoc test, one of the most conserve post hoc tests, was also performed as the tool to
assess whether the mean values of nature-based tourists with different demographic
characteristics differ significantly. Bivariate correlation was used in this research to
31
test the relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude. In addition, the correlational relationship between tourists‘
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude were tested by correlation
coefficient and linear regression analysis to explore whether tourists with higher
knowledge will have stronger pro-environmental attitudes. As explained by Brotheron
(2015), correlation coefficient was a straightforward way to assess the possible
correlational relationship between two variables in SPSS。
32
5. Results
This chapter demonstrates the result and empirical findings of this research through
data analyses. The influence of nature-based tourists’ demographic characteristics
(age, gender, education level and past experience) on their environmental knowledge
and environmental attitude will first investigate. Next, the correlational relationship
between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude will be examined by
using bivariate correlation and linear regression analysis.
5.1 Respondents’ demographic characteristics
Table 2 listed the demographic characteristics of the respondents. There were more
females than males (64.9 % against 35.1%) in this survey. About 85 % of the total
respondents were from the ages of 19 and 39. Ony 1.5% of the respondents were over
60 in the survy. The result revealed that the responts were well-educated since 56.7%
of the total sample reported having university or college degree, 30.6 % had master
degree and 12.7% had graduated from high school. A majority respondents (76.9%)
reported that they had traveled more than one natural based sight other than Öland.
13.9 % of the repondents reported that they had traveled one nature-based sight other
than Öland and only 9.7% of the respodents had only traveled to Öland as nature-
based sights. The demographic characteristics of this research were consistent with
the results in other nature-based tourism researches that nature-based tourists were
well-educated (college or higher degree) young or middle-aged adults (Meng &
Uysal, 2008; Lee & Jan, 2015; Cheng & Wu, 2014).
Table 2 Demographic characteristic of the respondents
Variable n %
Gender
Female 87 64.9
Male 47 35.1
Age (years)
19-39 112 85.1
40-59 18 13.4
Over 60 4 1.5
Education Level
High school or below 17 12.7
University or college degree 76 56.7
Master Degree 41 30.6
Doctorate Degree 0 0
Past experience (nature-based sights)(exclude Öland)
33
No 13 9.7
One time 18 13.4
More than one time 103 76.9
5.2 Descriptive findings
The Cronbach‘s alpha values of the variables were calculated in this research, ranging
from 0.71 (Knowledge of global warming and climate change) to 0.83 (environmental
attitude). All the value exceeds 0.7, which indicated that the measurement used in this
study had achieved acceptable internal consistency (Vaske, 2008). As suggested by
Cheng & Wu (2015), the mean value of each item related to environmental
knowledge was computed as shown in Table 3, ranging from 3.49 to 4.27. The three
items under the category of environmental knowledge with the highest scores were
―Carbon dioxide emissions from cars and motorcycles will lead to air pollution‖,
―Global warming and climate change refer to an increase in average global
temperature‖ and ―The maintenance of ecological balance will enhance the
sustainable development of nature-based sites‖. The item with the lowest score was
―Travelling by train or by car is more environmental friendly than by airplane ‖. The
result indicated that nature-based tourists were lack of knowledge concerning
sustainable modes of public transportation and the carbon emissions of air travel. In
addition, although the mean value of nature-based tourists‘ knowledge about global
warming and carbon dioxide was higher than the knowledge about nature-based
tourism and environment, no significant difference was found.
The mean scores of each item under the category of environmental attitude were
computed as shown in Table 3, ranging from 3.3 to 4.32. The three items under the
category of environmental attitude with the highest score were ―Plants and animals
have as much right as humans to exist‖, ―Humans are severely abusing the
environment‖ and ―the earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and
resources‖. Nature-based tourists were in general more concern about the limits of
growth, human over nature and the possibility of ecological crisis. The two items that
―When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences‖ and
―The so-called ―ecological crisis‖ facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated‖
had the lowest scores. The result indicated that the respondents were less approval of
the exaggeration of ecological crisis and the fragile of natural balance. In this scale of
New Ecological Paradigm, the agreement of the items indicated individual‘s pro-
environmental attitude (Dunlap et al, 2000). Since the mean value of the NEP scale
was 3.95 which was close to 4.00 (agreement), nature-based tourists in this research
showed pro-environmental attitude. Moreover, the mean value of environmental
knowledge was 4.02 and the two variables were 3.98 and 4.03 respectively, indicating
that the nature-based tourists had high levels of environmental knowledge.
34
Table 3 Mean value, standard deviation and Cronbach‘s Alpha
Dimensions and items Mean value (SD) standard deviation Cronbach’s Alpha
Environmental knowledge
Knowledge of Global warming and
climate change
4.02
3.98
0.58
0.72
0.79
0.71
Carbon dioxide emissions from cars
and motorcycles will lead to air
pollution
4.27 0.98
The main source of Carbon dioxide is from the emissions of fossil carbon
combustion and cement production
3.99 0.91
Travelling by train or by car is more
environmental friendly than by
airplane
3.49 1.22
Global warming and climate change
refer to an increase in average global
temperatures
Knowledge of nature-based tourism
and environment
4.16
4.03
0.83
0.59
0.73
Excessive underwater recreational
activities (such as scuba diving) will
damage oceanic environments of
islands.
3.69 1.02
Nature-based sites can be negatively
Influenced by littering and
inappropriate physical infrastructure
4.13 0.77
Extensive use of natural resources
will consume natural-based tourist
destinations.
4.08 0.77
The maintenance of ecological
balance will enhance the sustainable
development of nature-based sites
4.19 0.74
Environmental attitude
3.95
0.66
0.83
Plants and animals have as much right
as humans to exist (Anthro)
4.10 0.99
Humans have no right to modify the
natural environment to suit their needs
(Anthro)
3.74 1.21
When humans interfere with nature it
often produces disastrous consequences
(Balance)
3.73 1.05
The balance of nature is very delicate
and easily upset (Balance)
3.76 1.07
Despite our special abilities humans are
still subject to the laws of nature
( rejection of exemptionalism)
4.06 0.92
35
5.3 Demographic charactersistcs differences in environmental knowledge
The mean value of environmental knowledge was examined in relation to gender, age,
education level and past experience related to nature -based tourism. The result of t-
test indicated that although male respondents had higher mean score across all the
items in knowledge of global warming and climate change than did female
respondents. However, there was no significant difference between this two groups.
And the gender difference in knowledge of nature-based tourism was also non-
significant.
One-way ANOVA test and the Scheffr post hoc test were used to investigate the mean
score of environmental knowledge by age, past experience and education level. Table
4 demonstrated nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge by gender group and
age group. With respect to age difference, there were significant differences among
three groups of tourists in their environmental knowledge. The Scheffr post hoc test
indicated that the difference in environmental knowledge was significant between
middle-aged people (40-59) and younger adults (19-39). As indicated in table 4,
middle-aged people (40-59) were found had statistically significantly higher mean
score on knowledge of nature-based tourism and environment than younger adults
(19-39). In addition, ANOVA test and the Scheffr post hoc test were calculated for
each item under the category of ―environmental knowledge‖. The Middle-age people
had significant higher mean score on specific one item (―The maintenance of
ecological balance will enhance the sustainable development of nature-based sites‖)
than did younger adults (19-39). Compared with younger tourists, senior tourists were
more concerned about the maintenance of ecological balance at nature-based tourist
destinations.
The so-called ―ecological crisis‖ facing
humankind has been greatly
exaggerated (ecocrisis)
3.73 1.09
Humans are severely abusing the
environment (ecocrisis)
4.18 0.86
Humans were not meant to rule over
the rest of nature (Anthro)
3.93 1.00
The earth is like a spaceship with very
limited room and resources. (Limits to
growth)
4.32 0.84
36
Table 4 Environmental knowledge by gender group and age group
Note: Bold numbers indicate difference were found between groups: *significance at
p<0.05;** significance at p < 0.01.
(a) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.873, p=0.023; Scheffe post hoc tests: Age (40-59)—
Age (19 -39) p=0.048.
(b) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.82, p=0.024; Scheffe post hoc tests: Age (40-59)—Age
(19 -39) p=0.047.
(c) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.69, p=0.027; Scheffe post hoc tests: Age (40-59)—Age
(19 -39) p=0.033.
Dimensions and items Gender
Female Male
Mean Mean
Age
19-39 40-59 Over 60
Environmental knowledge (a)
Knowledge of Global warming and
climate change
3.97 4.06
3.93 4.05
3.95 4.31* 4.50
3.92 4.28 4.50
Carbon dioxide emissions from
cars and motorcycles will lead to
air pollution
4.26 4.28 4.23 4.45 4.51
The main source of Carbon
dioxide is the burning of fossil
fuels and the production of cement
3.95 4.06 3.93 4.45 3.50
Travelling by train or by car is
more environmental friendly than
by airplane
3.36 3.70 3.41 3.78 4.50
Global warming and climate
change refer to an increase in
average global temperatures
Knowledge of nature-based tourism
and environment (b)
4.16 4.17
4.00 4.06
4.41 4.5 5
3.97 4.3* 4.5
Excessive underwater recreational
activities (such as scuba diving)
will damage oceanic environments
of islands.
3.61 3.85 3.64 4.0 4.0
Nature-based sites can be
negatively Influenced by littering
and inappropriate physical
infrastructure
4.16 4.08 4.08 4.33 5.0
Extensive use of natural resources
will consume natural-based tourist
destinations.
3.95 3.87 4.03 4.39 4.5
The maintenance of ecological
balance will enhance the
sustainable development of nature-
based sites (c)
4.32 4.32 4.12 4.5* 4.61
37
The results of environmental knowledge by education level and past experience were
presented in Table 5. The ANOVA test indicated that there was no significant
difference among nature-based tourists with different education level. The finding of
the Scheffr post hoc test revealed that tourists travelling more than one nature -based
tourist destinations (exclude Öland) had significantly higher mean score on
knowledge of nature-based tourism and environment than those tourists had no
nature-based tourism experience except Öland. Significant differences were found in
two item that ―nature-based sites can be negatively Influenced by littering and
inappropriate physical infrastructure‖ (p=0.004) and ―Nature-based sites can be
negatively influenced by littering and inappropriate physical infrastructure‖
(p=0.004).
The finding showed that there was no significant difference between females and
males with respect to their knowledge of global warming and knowledge of nature-
based tourism. Similarly, no significant difference was found when education level
was considered. However, when comparing the nature -based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge according to their age, significant difference was observed in tourists‘
environmental knowledge, especially knowledge of nature-based tourism and
environment. In addition, the result showed that past nature -based tourism experience
was closely related to knowledge of nature-based tourism and environment since
tourists with more past nature-based tourism experiences had higher level of
knowledge than those with less nature-based tourism experience. Therefore, middle-
aged nature-based tourists and tourists with more nature-based tourism experience
showed more concern about the sustainable development, nature conservation and
ecological balance of nature-based tourist destination than other tourists.
Hypothesis 1 is rejected in this section and the result showed that social-demographic
including gender, education level and past experience played a minor role in
influencing environmental knowledge. Only age significantly influenced nature-based
tourists‘ environmental knowledge.
Table 5 Environmental knowledge by education level and past experience group
Dimensions and items Education level
High University or master
School college degree degree
Past experiencce
No One time More than
One time
Environmental knowledge
Knowledge of Global warming
and climate change
4.02 3.96 3.97
4.01 3.88 3.94
3.70 3.93 4.05
3.79 3.88 4.02
38
Note: Bold numbers indicate difference were found between groups: *significance at
p<0.05;** significance at p < 0.01
(a) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.92, p=0.022; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience
(more than one time)—Past experience (no)=0.023
(b) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =5.85, p=0.004; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience (one
time)—Past experience (no)=0.022; Past experience (more than one time)—Past
experience (no)=0.004
(c) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.98, p=0.021; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience
(more than one time)—Past experience (no)=0.022
5.4 Demographic charactersistcs differences in environmental
attitude
The mean values of respondents‘ environmental attitude were examined according to
their demographic characteristics including gender, age, education level and past
Carbon dioxide emissions from
cars and motorcycles will lead to
air pollution
4.24 4.17 4.32 3.85 4.06 4.36
The main source of Carbon
dioxide is the burning of fossil
fuels and the production of
cement
3.95 3.91 3.98 4.08 3.72 4.03
Travelling by train or by car is
more environmental friendly
than by airplane
3.45 3.33 3.41 3.23 3.39 3.54
Global warming and climate
change refer to an increase in
average global temperatures
Knowledge of nature-based
tourism and environment (a)
4.08 4.13 4.05
4.03 4.04 3.99
4.00 4.33 4.16
3.62 3.99 4.09*
Excessive underwater
recreational activities (such as
scuba diving) will damage
oceanic environments of islands.
3.90 3.78 3.49 3.38 3.67 3.74
Nature-based sites can be
negatively Influenced by
littering and inappropriate
physical infrastructure (b)
4.00 4.16 4.15 3.46 4.22* 4.20**
Extensive use of natural
resources will consume natural-
based tourist destinations.
3.94 4.07 4.17 3.77 4.08 4.16
The maintenance of ecological
balance will enhance the
sustainable development of
nature-based sites (c)
4.35 4.17 4.17 3.85 4.11 4.25*
39
nature-based tourism experience. T-test was used to explore gendered similarities and
differences with regard to nature-based tourists‘ environmental attitude. As shown in
the Table 4, the mean value of both females and males were nearly 4 (agreement)
which means that thay have positive environmental attitudes. Although female
respondents have higher mean value of score on environmental attitude than male
respondetnts, no significant difference was found between this two group. This result
was consistent with Lee and Moscardo‘s finding (2005) that female compared with
men were more likely to hold pro-environmental attitude but this difference was not
significant.
The age goup differences of mean value of revised NEP scale were tested by One-way
ANOVA and the Scheffr post hoc test (see Table 6). The result showed that nature-
based tourists in middle-aged group had stronger pro-environmental attitude.
Although the mean score of middle-aged group was higher than the other two groups
throughout the items in the questionnaire, no significant difference was found after
statically analyzes. In addition, ANOVA test and the Scheffr post hoc test were
calculated for each item under the category of ―environmental attitude‖, which
yielded significant differences among age group . Three groups of nature-based
tourists were found differ significantly in their answer to two items (―Humans have no
right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs‖ and ―the so-called
―ecological crisis‖ facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated‖). In the first item,
the Scheffr post hoc test revealed that middle-age respondents had significantly higher
score than younger respondents. In the second item, middle-age respondents had
significantly higher score than elder respondents. These findings revealed that middle-
aged people are stronger disapproval of humanity‘s right modify the nature than
younger people. Thus, middle-aged people are more agreeable with the possibility of
eco-crisis than elder people.
Table 6. Environmental attitude by gender group and age group.
Dimensions and items Gender
Female Male
Mean Mean
Age
19-39 40-59 Over 60
Environmental attitude
3.97
3.91
3.91 4.23 3.86
Plants and animals have as much right
as humans to exist (Anthro)
4.16 4.00 4.09 4.33 3.25
Humans have no right to modify the
natural environment to suit their needs
(Anthro)
3.83 3.57 3.64 4.50** 3.25
When humans interfere with nature it
often produces disastrous consequences
(Balance)
3.77 3.66 3.67 4.06 4.50
40
Note: Bold numbers indicate difference were found between groups: *significance at
p<0.05;** significance at p < 0.01
(a) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =5.34, p=0.006; Scheffe post hoc tests: Age (40-59)—Age
(19 -39) p=0.017.
(b) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =4.47, p=0.013; Scheffe post hoc tests: Age (40-59)—Age
(19 -39) p=0.018.
As shown in Table 7, nature-based tourists‘ environmental attitudes were examined by
education level. The result of ANOVA test indicated that there is no significant
difference when education level was considered. With respect to past nature-based
tourism experience, there were significant differences among three groups of tourists
in their environmental attitude. The Scheffr post hoc test showed that the mean values
of tourists with one and more than one time nature-based tourism experience (exclude
Öland) had statistically significantly higher mean score on environmental attitude than
those tourists who had no nature-based tourism experience except Öland (p=0.011).
Although tourists with more than one time experience had higher mean value on
environmental attitude than tourists with only one time experience, no significant
difference was found after test. In addition, ANOVA test and the Scheffr post hoc test
were calculated for each items under the category of ―environmental attitude‖, which
three significant differences among past experience group. Tourists with past nature-
based tourism experience had significantly higher score on three items (including the
balance of nature and ecological crisis) than tourists with no nature-based tourism
experience except Öland (see table 7).
The result indicated that gender and education level played a minor role in influencing
the environmental attitude of nature-based tourists. Although no significant difference
was found on general environmental attitude when age was considered, age was
significant related to the attitude concerning humanity‘s right modify the nature and
ecological crisis. Middle-aged people were found more concern about ecological
The balance of nature is very delicate
and easily upset (Balance)
3.86 3.57 3.71 4.06 4.00
Despite our special abilities humans are
still subject to the laws of nature
( rejection of exemptionalism)
4.06 4.09 4.03 4.28 4.50
The so-called ―ecological crisis‖ facing
humankind has been greatly
exaggerated (ecocrisis)
703. 3.79 3.58 3.78* 3.25
Humans are severely abusing the
environment (ecocrisis)
4.10 4.32 4.14 4.45 4.00
Humans were not meant to rule over
the rest of nature (Anthro)
3.95 3.87 3.87 4.28 4.00
The earth is like a spaceship with very
limited room and resources. (Limits to
growth)
4.32 4.32 4.32 4.39 4.25
41
crisis and less supportive of human over nature. As shown in table 7, tourists had
travelled to one and more than one nature-based destination had significant higher
score on environmental attitude than those tourists had no nature-based tourism
experience except Öland. It meant that past experience was closely related to tourists‘
environmental attitude and tourists who had past nature-based tourism experience had
stronger pro-environmental attitude. In addition, the result indicated that nature-based
tourists with past nature-based tourism experience were more concern about the
balance of nature and the possibility of ecological crisis.
Hypothesis 2 is rejected since the result showed that there is no significant difference
among nature-based tourist by age, gender and education level group. Only past
nature-based tourism experience was found significantly influenced tourists‘
environmental attitude. Those tourists with at least once past nature-based tourism
experience had stronger pro-environmental attitude than those tourist with no nature-
based tourism experience except Öland.
Table 7. Environmental attitude by education level and past experience group.
Dimensions and items Education level
High University or master
School college degree degree
Past experiencce
No One time More than
One time
Environmental attitude (a)
3.95
3.87 3.93
3.45 4.08* 4.02*
Plants and animals have as much
right as humans to exist (Anthro)
4.10 4.04 4.07 4.00 4.11 4.12
Humans have no right to modify the
natural environment to suit their
needs
(Anthro)
3.67 3.57 3.80 3.15 4.00 3.77
When humans interfere with nature
it often produces disastrous
consequences (Balance) (b)
3.74 3.70 3.66 2.70 3.78* 3.85**
The balance of nature is very
delicate and easily upset (Balance)
3.69 3.62 3.76 3.85 4.22 4.07*
Despite our special abilities humans
are still subject to the laws of nature
( rejection of exemptionalism)
4.06 4.03 3.98 2.85 3.67 3.89
The so-called ―ecological crisis‖
facing humankind has been greatly
exaggerated (ecocrisis)
3.80 3.63 3.78 3.31 3.95 3.75
Humans are severely abusing the
environment (ecocrisis)
4.19 4.16 4.15 3.77 4.56* 4.17
Humans were not meant to rule over
the rest of nature (Anthro)
3.83 3.87 3.90 3.62 4.00 3.95
42
Note: Bold numbers indicate difference were found between groups: *significance at
p<0.05;** significance at p < 0.01
(a) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =4.67, p=0.011; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience (one
time)—Past experience (no)=0.026; Past experience (more than one time)—Past
experience (no)=0.016
(b) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =7.83, p=0.001; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience (one
time)—Past experience (no)=0.013; Past experience (more than one time)—Past
experience (no)=0.001
(c) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =6.03, p=0.003; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience
(more than one time)—Past experience (no)=0.003
(d) One-way ANOVA: F(2, 133) =3.35, p=0.038; Scheffe post hoc tests: Past experience (one
time)—Past experience (no)=0.038
5.5 Relationship between nature-based tourists’ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude
Scatter plot graph was first used to visualize whether there nature-based tourists‘
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude might be related to each other.
The distribution of data points seemed to be clustered together in a positive way and a
simple linear relationship was found (see figure 2). A perfect relationship that all the
points lie in a straight line was not observed from scatter plot graph. In order to
further explore the relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude, this study adopted correlational measurement
to investigate the correlation between these two constructs. Brotherton (2015) noted
that when the value of correlation coefficient was between plus 0.5 and plus 1, it
indicated a strong positive association. The result of Pearson correlation coefficients
(r) indicated that the of environmental knowledge and its two variables (knowledge of
global warming and carbon dioxide, and knowledge of nature -based tourism and
environment) were all statistically significantly positively associated with
environmental attitude. The significant positive relationship between nature -based
tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude indicated that if nature -
based tourists had more environmental knowledge, they would have stronger pro-
environmental attitudes, which confirmed H3. In addition, the finding revealed that
nature-based tourists knowledge of global warming and nature -based tourism are both
positively related to their environmental attitude (see table 8), which indicated that if
nature-based tourists had more knowledge about global warming and nature-based
tourism, they would also have stronger pro-environmental attitude.
Linear regression analysis in SPSS was employed to explore the influence and
The earth is like a spaceship with
very limited room and resources.
(Limits to growth)
4.28 4.26 4.29 3.77 4.45 4.37
43
strength of relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge on
environmental attitude. The result also confirmed H 3, which supported a significantly
positive relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude (β=0.634, P=0.000). The influence of environmental
knowledge on the perceived value of environmental attitude explained 40.3% of the
variance. The finding revealed that the knowledge of global warming and carbon
dioxide are more positively related to environmental attitude (β=0.573, P=0.000) and
explained 32.3% of the variance of environmental attitude.
The result of data analysis demonstrated that nature -based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge was related to their environmental attitude. Moreover, there was a
significantly positive relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude. In this research, nature-based tourists who had
higher level of environmental knowledge showed stronger pro-environmental attitude,
which confirmed the H3.
Figure 2. Scatter plot graph of environmental knowledge and environmental attitude
Table 8. Correlation between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental
attitude
**. Coefficient was significant at the 0.01 level (two tailed)
y = 0.7154x + 1.0864
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Envi
ron
me
nta
l at
titu
de
Environmental knowledge
Environmental
knowledge, r
Knowledge of global
warming and carbon
dioxide, r
Knowledge of nature-
based tourism and
environment, r
Environmental
attitude
0.635** 0.573** 0.563**
44
6. Conclusions
This chapter provides an overview of the whole thesis and highlights the main
conclusions I have developed by analyzing the empirical data from the respondents.
The main findings in this research will be discussed in combination with previous
literature. After the discussion, a critical review of the limitation and recommendation
for future research will be addressed to gather more depth information concerning
nature-based tourists’ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
With the rapid growth of nature-based tourism, the sustainable development issue
becomes a critical concern for the nature-based tourism destinations. A better
understanding of nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental
attitude is required for the sustainable development of nature-based sites (Puhakka,
2010, Weaver & Lawton, 2004; Chen & Wu, 2014). Compared with other tourists,
nature-based tourists are more likely to travel to sensitive nature -based destinations
and thus are given the responsibility to prevent native impacts (Puhakka, 2010).The
main aim of this research is to investigate the environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude and demographic characteristics of nature-based tourists and
explore the correlational connection between their environmental knowledge and
environmental attitude. By conducting a quantitative method, this research confirmed
that there was a correlational relationship between nature-based tourists‘
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. Moreover, tourists‘
environmental knowledge was found positively related to their environmental attitude.
Since this research was an exploration of nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude, many other factors that might influence the
relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude were not
considered. More future researches are required to put new insights into the study
about nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
In addition, three hypothesizes were produced in the conceptual framework of this
study: (1) natural-based tourists‘ knowledge on environmental issues varies according
to their demographic characteristic (age, gender, past experience and education level);
(2) natural-based tourists‘ environmental attitude varies according to their
demographic characteristic (age, gender, past experience and education level); (3) if
nature-based tourists have higher level of environmental knowledge, they will have
stronger pro-environmental attitudes. This study rejected H1 and H2 by conducting a
quantitative research at nature-based destination. The results indicated that
demographic characteristics except age were found little influence on nature -based
tourists‘ environmental knowledge. Different from tradition view that that those
tourists who earn more money and well-educated are more likely to be environmental-
friendly tourist (Dolnicar et al., 2008). This study revealed that tourists with high
45
levels of education are not necessarily to have more knowledge concerning global
warming and carbon dioxide emissions than those tourists with high school degree.
However, tourists‘ age was found positively associated with their environmental
knowledge. One possible explanation is that environmental knowledge acquisition is
dependent on individual‘s concern for the environmental issues and their environment
knowledge can be accumulated through age growing. In addition, nature-based
tourists‘ age and past experience were found to be significantly related to their
environmental attitude. However, H3 was confirmed in this research. The result of
correlation coefficient test and linear regression analysis proved that those nature-
based tourists with higher knowledge would show stronger pro-environmental
attitudes.
6.1 Discussion
The findings of this study showed both similarities and differences compared with
previous research, which required to be further discussed. With respect to the
environmental knowledge, the result indicated that nature-based tourists had high
level of knowledge concerning global warming and sustainable nature -based tourism.
This result was different from previous research which pointed out that the nature-
based tourists were lack of environmental knowledge (Lucrezi et al, 2013; Thapa,
Graefe, and Meyer, 2005). One possible reason might because previous research
mainly investigated marine-related environmental knowledge and this research
focused on more common environmental problem involving global warming and the
relationship between nature and tourism. Moreover, since nature-based tourism
covered a wide variety of types of destinations and tourism, the result of tourists‘
environmental knowledge might be different. To my surprise, the item with the lowest
score was ―Travelling by train or by car is more environmental friendly than by
airplane‖. Since tourism is now regarded as a significant contributor to carbon dioxide
emissions primary from air transport, encouraging tourists to travel less and in a
sustainable way become an important part of sustainable tourism. The respondents in
this research showed lack of knowledge concerning sustainable modes of
transportation, which Consistent with the researches of Beaumont (2001), Ballantyne,
Packer and Falk (2011) and Lee and Moscardo (2005), this study confirmed that
nature-based tourism experience positively influenced nature-based tourists‘
knowledge about nature-based tourism and environment. It is suggested that tourists
who had traveled more than one nature-based tourist destinations (exclude Öland) had
significantly higher mean score on knowledge of nature -based tourism and
environment than those tourists who had no nature-based tourism experience except
Öland As noted by Thapa, Graefe, and Meyer (2005), environmental knowledge and
pro-environmental orientation were directly associated with the level of experience. In
addition, nature-based tourists‘ age was found significantly related to their
environmental knowledge. Those middle-aged nature-based tourists showed more
46
concern about the sustainable development, nature conservation and ecological
balance of nature-based tourist destination than younger tourists.
In line with the finding of Luzar et al. (1998A) and Weaver & Lawton (2004), nature-
based tourists in this research were found to be in favor of pro-environmental attitudes
and critical to environment-related issues. Previous literature pointed out that females
compared with males more likely to have stronger pro-environmental attitudes and
awareness of environmental issues than males (Lee and Moscardo, 2005; Kim and
Weiler, 2013; Castellanos-Verdugo et al., 2016). However, no significant difference
was found between females and males on environmental knowledge in this research.
The result was consistent with the finding of Uysal et al. (1994) and Luo & Deng
(2008) that nature-based tourists‘ age and education played a minor role in
influencing environmental attitude. This study found that age was only significantly
related to the dimension of human over nature and ecological crisis. Those middle-age
tourists showed stronger disapproval of humanity‘s right modify the nature than
younger tourists. Only past nature-based tourism experience was found significantly
related the environmental attitude of nature-based tourists. Consistent with the finding
of Lee & Moscardo (2005) that nature-based tourism experience promoted tourists‘
awareness of natural awareness and conservation attitude, the result of this study
indicated that tourists with past nature-based tourism experience showed stronger
concern about the balance of nature and the possibility of future ecocrisis than those
who had no nature-based tourism past experience. In addition, many researchers
pointed out that since nature-based tourism provide tourist with opportunity to be
close to nature, tourists‘ environmental attitude were promoted during this process.
Previous literature has suggested that environmental knowledge can shape and
influence the environmental attitude of tourists (Duerden and Witt, 2010; Garla et al.,
2015; Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002；Kuhlemeier et al., 1999). However, there are
only a few empirical studies in the field of tourism have tried to investigate
relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. This
research contributed to this knowledge gap by examining the correlational
relationship between nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and the result
supported the hypothesis that tourists with more environmental knowledge would
have stronger pro-environmental attitude. One explanation could be that tourists with
more environmental knowledge can obtain more accurate and complete information,
which in turn forms their environmental attitude. The result emphasized the role of
environmental knowledge as a major factor that could predict the environmental
attitude of nature-based tourists.
The exploration of nature-based tourist‘ environmental knowledge and environmental
attitude provides new insights for the future management and planning of sustainable
nature-based destinations. Luo & Deng (2008) pointed out that a market consisting of
47
tourists who had high level of concern for the natural environment was necessary for
the sustainable development of nature-based tourism. Thus, those tourists who had
pro-environmental attitude are more likely to have a desire to learn about natural
environment and have nature-based tourism experience (Tisdell & Wilson, 2005; Luo
& Deng, 2008). Therefore, it is important to know what factors contribute to tourists‘
environmental attitude. The finding of this research indicated that past nature-based
tourism experience was closely associated with nature-based tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and environmental attitude. In order to meet the needs of growing market,
destination planner should converse the natural resources that attract the tourists and
provide quality nature-based tourism experience. It can be argued that quality nature-
based tourism experience is an important factor relating to tourists‘ environmental
knowledge and pro-environmental attitude. For example, the result of Lee &
Moscardo‘s (2005) research indicated that satisfying nature tour experience could
reinforce tourists‘ positive environmental attitude and increase tourists‘ interest for
future nature-based tourism experience. Through the cumulative effects, nature-based
destination can balance the need for economic development with the protection of
nature environment. In addition, since the increase of environmental knowledge will
promote natural-based tourists‘ awareness to the environmental conservation and
result in ―the changing of attitudes to those that are more environmentally and
ecologically sound‖ (Orams 1997, p. 298), environmental education such as on-site
interpretation can be a good way to encourage tourists‘ favorable attitudes towards
natural protection. On-site interpretation is installed at nature-based destinations in
order to influence tourists‘ knowledge and environmental attitude (Hughe &
Saunders, 2005). It is usually used as a delivery method to communicate the
importance of nature sites and raise tourists‘ awareness for the environmental
protection (Hughe & Saunders, 2005). The management planner can use interpretation
to reinforce nature-based tourists‘ awareness of environmental protection and increase
their environmental knowledge concerning ecosystems, wildlife, natural history, or
outdoor activities at natural sites.
6.2. Limitations and future directions
Several limitations occurred during the process of the data collection in this thesis.
Recognizing the difficulties and limitations of this research, suggestions were
provided to for further research in order to gather more in depth information regarding
nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmnetal attitude. The main
obstacle of this research is limit of time. Since planned period of data collection was
limited and April was still in the pre-season, the number of tourists on Öland was less
than expected. As a result, this research only collected 134 questionnaires and most of
respondents were between the ages of 18 to 39. Since this research intended to
investigate the influence of demographic characteristics (age, gender, past experience
and education level), the number of tourists in different age group should be as equal
48
as possible. If the research time is set in June or July when Öland is most visited, this
study can reach more target group. Considering that many tourists on Öland are
Swedish tourists, language could be seen as a limitation during the process of data
collection. The questionnaire of this study was only designed in English version,
which was difficult for some elder people to read and answer. It might be possible that
the contents of the questionnaire were misunderstood because the limitation of
language, and the misinterpretation might result in reduced reliability of the empirical
data. It is suggested that future research prepare both Swedish and English version of
questionnaire, and the Swedish version should be examined by native speaker to
avoid misinterpretation.
On the other hand, this research regarded the tourists on Öland as nature-based
tourists who are interested in nature. Although Öland is famous for its natural
environment and attracting many nature-based tourists, it is still possible that some
tourists may come to Öland for other recreational purposes. As noted by Puhakka
(2010), tourists‘ desire to experience the nature environment is different from simply
spending holidays in a natural destination. Previous literature noted that nature-based
tourists may differ in their travel motivation or the importance of nature in trip
motivation (Uysal et al, 1994; Mehmetoglu, 2007; Lindberg, 1997). The differences
of travel motivation and the importance of nature in trip may influence nature -based
tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental attitude. The research of
Hvenegaard and Dearden (1998) revealed that tourists select nature as the main focus
of the trip have higher level of concern to the environment In order to have a better
understanding of nature-based tourists‘ environmental knowledge and environmental
attitude, the future research should take nature-based tourism motivations into
consideration.
Finally, the application of this research should be treated with caution due to limited
period of data collection. Öland is a nature-based destination which mainly attracts
families and sports enthusiasts, the findings of this research might not be applicable to
other nature-based destination whose target market and recreational actives are
different. This research only chooses one research site to obtain the necessary data.
Since nature-based tourism covers a wide range of destinations, nature-based tourists
may differ from various aspects including tourism experience and recreational
activities, choosing only one research site may not be enough to represent the whole
group of nature-based tourists. To avoid this limitation, the future research should
choose more nature-based research sites to collect data from more highly
differentiated sample and find out the similarities and differences among their
environmental knowledge and environmental attitude.
49
Reference
Acquah, E., Dearden, P., & Rollins, R. (2015). Nature-based tourism in Mole National
Park, Ghana. African Geographical Review, 2016, Vol. 35, No. 1, 53–69.
Adelman, L., Falk, J., & James, S. (2000). Impact of national aquarium in Baltimore
on visitors‘ conservation attitudes, behavior, and knowledge. Curator: The
Museum Journal, 43(1), 33-61.
Adam, F. (2014): Measuring National Innovation Performance, SpringerBriefs in
Economics.
Adams, J. (2007). Research Methods for Graduate Business and Social Science
Students. New Delhi : SAGE Publications India Pvt., Ltd. 2007.
Amyx, D.A., DeJong, P.F., Lin, X.L., Chakraborty, G., & Wiener, J.L. (1994).
Influencers of purchase intentions for ecologically safe products: An exploratory
study. In C.W. Park & D.L. Smith (Eds.), AMA winter educators‘ conference
proceedings (pp. 341347). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association
Amante-Helweg, M. (1996). Ecotourists‘ beliefs and knowledge about dolphins and
the development of cetacean ecotourism. Aquatic Mammals, 1996, 22.2, 131-
140.
Ardoin, N. M., Wheaton, M., Bowers, A. W., Hunt, C. A., & Durham, W. H. (2015)
Nature-based tourism's impact on environmental knowledge, attitudes, and
behavior: a review and analysis of the literature and potential future research.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23:6, 838-858.
Arksey, H. & Knight, P. (1999): Interviewing for social scientists. London: Sage.
PP.119-130, 170-180.
Bailey, R. D., (1987). Methods of social research. New York : Free Press, cop. 1987.
PP.3-424
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J. (2011a). Visitors‘ learning for environmental
sustainability: testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism
experiences. Tour Manage, 32(6), 1243–1252.
Balmford, A., Beresford, J., Green, J., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M., & Manica, A. (2009).
A global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biology, 7(6),
e1000144.
Beaumont, N. (1999). How do ecotourism experiences contribute to environmental
knowledge, attitudes and behaviour? In M. Newson (ed.) Australian Ecotourism
Guide, 2000 (pp. 16–17). Brisbane: Ecotourism Association of Australia
Beaumont, M. (2001). Ecotourism and the Conservation Ethic: Recruiting the
Uninitiated or Preaching to the Converted? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9:4,
317-341.
Botterill, D. and Platenkamp, V. (2012): Key Concepts in Tourism Research. SAGE.
Brotherton, B. (2015): Researching hospitality and tourism. SAGE Publications Ltd.
pp.105-214.
50
Calver, S. J. & Page, S. J. (2013). Enlightened hedonism: Exploring the relationship
of service value, visitor knowledge and interest, to visitor enjoyment at heritage
attractions. Tourism Management, 39 (2013), 23-36.
Castellanos-Verdugo, M., Vega-Vázquez, M., Oviedo-García MÁ, Orgaz-Agüera, F.
(2016). The relevance of pscyhological factors in the ecotourist experience
satisfaction through ecotourist site perceived value. Journal of Cleaner
Production, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.126.
Chen, C. L. (2011). From catching to watching: Moving towards quality assurance of
whale/dolphin watching tourism in Taiwan. Marine Policy, 35 (2011), 10–17.
Cheng, T. M. & Wu, H. C. (2015). How do environmental knowledge, environmental
sensitivity, and place attachment affect environmentally responsible behavior?
An integrated approach for sustainable island tourism, Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 23:4,557-576.
Chubchuwong, M. (2015). The Effect of Nature-based Tourism, Destination
Attachment and Property Ownership on Environmental-friendliness of Visitors:
A Study in Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Jun2015, Vol. 20
Issue 6, p656-679, 24p.
Collado S, Staats H, Corraliza JA (2013) Experiencing nature in children‘s summer
camps: affective, cognitive and behavioral consequences. J Environ Psychol,
33:37–44.
Coleman, D. and Lamond, C. (1993). Burleigh Heads Information Centre Evaluation.
Report for the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage. Brisbane:
Griffith University, Centre for Leisure Research.
Daudi, S. S. (2008). Environmental Literacy: A System of Best-Fit for Promoting
Environmental Awareness in Low Literate Communities. Applied Environmental
Education & Communication, 7(3), 76–82.
Dolnicar, S., & Grün, B. (2009). Environmentally friendly behavioure can
heterogeneity among individuals and contexts/environments be harvested for
improved sustainable management? Environment and Behaviour, 41, 693-714.
Dolnicar, S., Crouch, G. I., & Long, P. (2008). Environment-friendly tourists: what
dowe really know about them? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(2), 197e210.
Duerden MD, Witt PA (2010). The impact of direct and indirect experiences on the
development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. J Environ
Psychol, 30:379–39.
Dunlap, R.E., & Van Liere, K.D. (1978). The new environmental paradigm. The
Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10-19.
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., & Jones, R.E. (2000). Measuring
endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of
Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
Dyck, C., Schneider, I., Thompson, M., & Virden, R. (2003). Specialization among
mountaineers and its relationship to environmental attitudes. Journal of Park and
Recreation Administration, 21(2), 44-62.
51
Fairweather, J. R., Maslin, C., & Simmons, D. G. (2005). Environmental values and
response to ecolabels among international visitors to New Zealand. Journal of
Tourism. 2005, Vol. 13 Issue 1, p82-98.
Farmer, J., Knapp, D., & Benton, G. M. (2008). Environmental Literacy: A System of
Best-Fit for Promoting Environmental Awareness in Low Literate Communities.
Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 7(3), 76–82.
Fredman, P., Wall-Reinius, S., & Grundén, A. (2012). The Nature of Nature in Nature-
based Tourism, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12:4, 289-309.
Fryxel, G., & Lo, C. W. (2003). The influence of environmental knowledge and
values on managerial behaviours on behalf of the environment: An empirical
examination of managers in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(1), 45-69
Garla, R. C., Freitas, R. H. A., Calado, J. F., Paterno, G. B. C. & Carvalho, A. R.
(2015). Public awareness of the economic potential and threats to sharks of a
tropical oceanic archipelago in the western South Atlantic. Marine Policy, 60
(2015) 128–133.
Ghilardi-Lopes, N. P., Turra, A., Buckeridge, M. S., Silva, A. C, Augusto de Souza
Berchez, F., & Marques de Oliveira, V. (2015). On the perceptions and
conceptions of tourists with regard to global environmental changes and their
consequences for coastal and marine environments: A case study of the northern
São Paulo State coast, Brazil. Marine Policy, 57 (2015) 85–92.
Guba, E. (1990): The Paradigm Dialogue. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In
N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-
117). London: Sage.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black W.C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis. London: Prentice Hall.
Haron, S., Paim, L., & Yahaya, N. (2005). Towards sustainable consumption: an
examination of environmental knowledge among Malaysian. International
Journal of Consumer Studies. Sep2005, Vol. 29 Issue 5, p426-436.
Hill, J., Woodland, W., & Gough, G. (2007). Can Visitor Satisfaction and Knowledge
About Tropical Rainforests be Enhanced Through Biodiversity Interpretation, and
Does this Promote a Positive Attitude Towards Ecosystem Conservation? Journal
of Ecotourism, 6:1, 75-85.
Holden, A., & Fennell, D. A. (2012). The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and the
Environment. London : Routledge. 2013.
Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism: Who owns paradise? (2nd ed.). Washington, DC:
Island Press.
Huang, P.S., & Shih, L.H. (2009). Effective environmental management through
environmental knowledge management. International Journal of Environmental
Science & Technology, 6(1), 35-50.
Hughes, K. (2013). Measuring the impact of viewing wildlife: do positive intentions
equate to long-term changes in conservation behaviour? Journal of Sustainable
52
Tourism. Jan2013, Vol. 21 Issue 1, pp.42-59.
Hughes, M., & Saunders, A. M. (2005). Interpretation, activity participation, and
environmental attitudes of visitors to Penguin Island, Western Australia. Society
and Natural Resources, 18, 611– 624.
Hvenegaard, G. T. and P. Dearden (1998). ―Ecotourism versus Tourism ina Thai
National Park.‖ Annals of Tourism Research, 25 (3): 700-20.
IPCC. (1995). In: Bolin, B., Houghton, J.T. (Eds.), Climate Change 1995—The
Science of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kafyri, A., Hovardas, T., & Poirazidis, K. (2012). Determinants of Visitor Pro-
Environmental Intentions on Two Small Greek Islands: Is Ecotourism Possible at
Coastal Protected Areas? Environmental Management, Vol. 50 Issue 1, PP.64-76.
Kaiser, F. G., Wolfing, S., & Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental attitude and ecological
behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Ž1999. 19, 1-19.
Kellert, S. R. (1996). The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society,
Island Press, Washington, DC.
Kil, N., Holland, S. M., & Stein, T. V. (2014). Structural relationships between
environmental attitudes, recreation motivations, and environmentally responsible
behaviors. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 7-8 (2014), 16–25.
Kim, A. K. and Weiler, B. (2013). Visitors‘ attitudes towards responsible fossil
collecting behaviour: An environmental attitude-based segmentation approach.
Tourism Management, 36, 602-612.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act
environmentally and what are the barriers to pro -environmental behaviour?
Environ. Educ. Res. 8 (2002) 239–260.
Kuhlemeier. H., Van Den Bergh, H. and Lagerweij, N. (1999). Environmental
knowledge, attitudes and behavior in Dutch secondary education. J Environ Educ，
30(2): 4–14.
Lazar, D. (1998): Selected issues in the philosophy of social science. In C. Seale (ed.)
Researching society and culture (pp. 7-22). London: Sage.
Lee, T. H., & Jan, F. H. (2015). The Effects of Recreation Experience, Environmental
Attitude, and Biospheric Value on the Environmentally Responsible Behavior of
Nature-Based Tourists. Environmental Management , 56, 193–208.
Lee, W. H., & Moscardo, G. (2005). Understanding the Impact of Ecotourism Resort
Experiences on Tourists' Environmental Attitudes and Behavioural Intentions.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 2005, Vol. 13 Issue 6, p546-565.
Lindberg, K. (1991) Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism‘s Ecological and
Economic Benefits, World Resources Institute.
Lindberg, K., Furze B., Staff M., Black R. (1997) Ecotourism and other services
derived from forests in the Asia-Pacific Region: Outlook to 2010, United States
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
Lucrezi, S., Saayman, M., & Van der Merwe, P. (2013). Perceived Diving Impacts and
Management Implications at a Popular South African Reef. Coastal
53
Management, 41:381–400.
Luo, Y., & Deng, J. (2008). The new environmental paradigm and nature -based
tourism motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 46, 392-402.
Luzar, E. J., Diagne, A., & Gan, C. (1995). Evaluating natural-based tourism using the
New Ecological Paradigm. J. Agr and Applied Econ, 27 (2), December,
1995:544-555.
Luzar, E. J., Diagne, A., Gan, C., & Henning, B. R. (1998). ―Profiling the Nature-
Based Tourist: A Multinominal Logit Approach.‖ Journal of Travel Research, 37
(1): 48-55.
McKercher, B., Pang, F. H., & Prideaux, B. (2011). Do Gender and Nationality Affect
Attitudes towards Tourism and the Environment? International journal of
tourism research, 13, 266–300.
McKercher, B., Prideaux, B., Cheung, C., & Law, R. (2010). Achieving voluntary
reductions in the carbon footprint of tourism and climate change. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 18, No. 3, April 2010, 297–317.
Mehmetoglu, M. (2007). Typologising nature-based tourists by activity—Theoretical
and practical implications. Tourism Management, 2007, 28(3):651-660.
Md Taff, Aziz, A., Nor, R., Raja, S., Rasyid, N. M., & Yasim, M. M. (2010).
Residential Outdoor Education and Environmental Attitudes : An Examination in
a Malaysian University, 2(3), 198–216.
Meng, F & Uysal, M. (2008). Effects of gender differences on perception of
destination attributes, motivations, and travel values: an examination of natural -
based resort destination. Journal of sustainable tourism, Vol.16, No.4, 2008.
Milfont, T. L., Duckitt, J. (2010). The environmental attitudes inventory: avalid and
reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. J Environ
Psychol, 30:80–94.
Mullins, P. M. (2014). A Socio-environmental Case for Skill in Outdoor Adventure.
Journal of Experiential Education. Jun2014, Vol. 37 Issue 2, p129-143
Nilsson, M. & Küller, R. (2000). Travel behaviour and environmental concern.
Transportation Research Part D 5 (2000) 211-234.
Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude
measurement. London : Pinter, cop. 1992. PP.5-38, 81-261.
Ong, T. F., & Musa, G. (2012). SCUBA divers' underwater responsible behaviour: can
environmental concern and divers' attitude make a difference? Current Issues in
Tourism, 15:4, 329-351
Orams, M. B. (1997). ―The Effectiveness of Environmental Education: Can We Turn
Tourists into ‗greenies‘?‖ Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3: 295–
306.
Packer, J., Ballantyne, R and Hughes, K. (2014). Chinese and Australian tourists‘
attitudes to nature, animals and environmental issues: Implications for the design
of nature-based tourism experiences. Tourism Management, 44, 101-107.
54
Phillimore, J. and Goodson, L. [eds.] (2004): Qualitative research in tourism:
ontologies, epistemologies and methodologies. Routledge
Phillips, D. C., & Burbules, N. C. (2000). Postpositivism and educational research.
New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Priskin, J. (2003). Characteristics and Perceptions of Coastal and Wildflower
Nature-based Tourists in the Central Coast Region of Western Australia.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol.11, No.6, 2003.
Paudel, S., & Nyaupane, G. P. (2013). The Role of Interpretative Tour Guiding in
Sustainable Destination Management: A Comparison between Guided and
Nonguided Tourists. Journal of Travel Research, 52(5), 659 –672.
Powell RB, Kellert SR, Ham SH (2009) Interactional theory and the sustainable
nature-based tourism experience. Soc Nat Resour 22(8):761–776.
Ramdas, R., & Mohamed, B. (2014). Impacts of tourism on environmental attributes,
environmental literacy and willingness to pay: A conceptual and theoretical
review. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144 ( 2014 ) 378 – 391.
Ramkissoon, H., Weiler, B., & Smith, L.D.G. (2012). Place attachment and pro-
environmental behaviour in national parks: the development of a conceptual
framework. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 20, No. 2, March 2012, 257–
276.
Ritchie, B, W., Burns, P., & Palmer, C. (2004). Tourism research methods: Integrating
theory with practice. Cambridge, MA : CABI Pub., c2004.
Simpson, M.C., Gössling, S., Scott, D., Hall, C.M., & Gladin, E. (2008). Climate
change adaptation and mitigation in the tourism sector: Frameworks, tools and
practices. Paris, France: UNEP, University of Oxford, UNWTO, WMO
Swain, M. B. (1995). Gender in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(2), 247-266.
Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2005). Moderator and Mediator Effects of
Scuba Diving Specialization on Marine-Based Environmental Knowledge-
Behavior Contingency. The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol 37(1), Fal
2005. pp. 53-67.
Tirasattayapitak, S., Chaiyasain, C., & Beeton, R.J.S. (2015). The impacts of nature-
based adventure tourism on children in a Thai village, Tourism Management
Perspectives 15 (2015) 122–127.
Tubb, K. (2003). An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Interpretation within
Dartmoor National Park in Reaching the Goals of Sustainable Tourism
Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6): 476-498.
Untara, E. N., Epuram, Gh., & Ispas, A. (2014). A conceptual Framework of
Consumers‘ pro-environmental Attitudes and behaviors in the tourism context.
Economic Sciences, Vol. 7 (56) No. 2 – 2014.
Uysal, M., C. Jurowski, F. P. Noe, and C. D. McDonald (1994). ―Environmental
Attitude by Trip and Visitor Characteristics.‖ Tourism Management, 15 (4): 284-
94
Van der Linden, S. (2014). Towards a new model for communicating climate change.
55
In. S. Cohen, J. Higham, P. Peeters and S. Gössling (Eds.). Under Weaver, D. B.,
and L. J. Lawton (2002). ―Overnight Ecotourist Market Segmentation in the
Gold Coast Hinterland of Australia.‖ Journal of Travel Research, 40 (3): 270-81.
Veal, A. J. (2011). Research methods for leisure and tourism: a practical guide.
Harlow, Essex, England: Prentice Hall, 2011.
Veisten, K., Lindberg, K., Grue, B., & Haukeland, J. V. (2014). The role of
psychographic factors in nature-based tourist expenditure. Tourism Economics,
2014, 20 (2), 301–321.
Weaver, D. B., & L. J. Lawton (2004). ―Visitor Attitudes toward Tourism
Development and Product Integration in an Australian Urban-Rural Fringe.‖
Journal of Travel Research, 42:286-96.
Weaver, D. B. (2005). ―Comprehensive and Minimalist Dimensions of Ecotourism.‖
Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (2): 439–55.
Wight, P.A. (2001). Ecotourists: Not a homogenous market segment. In D. Weaver
(Ed.), The encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 3762). New York, NY: CABI
Publishing.
Wiles, R. & T. Hall. (2003). Understanding Visitor Attitudes, Beliefs, and Motivations
about Feeding Wildlife―A Literature Synthesis and Recommendations for
Developing Signs to Deter Wildlife Feeding. Moscow, Idaho, USA: University
of Idaho, Department of Conservation Social Sciences.
Wurzinger, S., & Johansson, M. (2006). Environmental Concern and Knowledge of
Ecotourism among Three Groups of Swedish Tourists. Journal of Travel
Research, 45, 217-226.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and
satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management;
Feb2005, Vol. 26 Issue 1, p45-56.
56
Appendix
Appendix 1：Survey questions
Voluntary Survey
Postgraduate Thesis Project Research
Linnaeus University
Hello!
The following survey is part of a Linnaeus University postgraduate student‘s thesis
research focus on the knowledge on environmental issues and environmental attitude
of natural-based tourists. The information collected in this survey will be only used to
complete requirement of this thesis paper. Please not that this questionnaire is
completely anonymous. You are not required to give your name.
Thank you very much for your participation!
First, I need to know a bit about you…..
What is your gender? 1. Female □ 2. Male □
What is your age range?
1. 19-39 □ 2.40-59 □ 3.Over 60 □
Environment Knowledge Part Strongly
disagree
Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
agree
1 Excessive underwater recreational
activities (such as scuba diving) will damage oceanic environments of islands.
□ □ □ □ □
2 Carbon dioxide emissions from cars
and motorcycles will lead to air pollution
□ □ □ □ □
3 The main source of Carbon
dioxide is the burning of fossil fuels and the production of cement
□ □ □ □ □
4 Travelling by train or by car is more
environmental friendly than by airplane
□ □ □ □ □
5 Global warming and climate change refer to an increase in average global
temperatures
□ □ □ □ □
6 Nature-based sights can be negatively influenced by various
external factors
□ □ □ □ □
57
What level of education do you currently hold?
1. High School □ 2.University or College Degree □ 3. Master Degree □
4.Docorate Degree □
Have your travelled to other natural-based sights before?
1. No □ 2. Yes, one time □ 3.Yes, more than one time □
Following statement about environmental knowledge and environmental attitude:
Thank you very much!
Hope you have a nice day!
7 Extensive development of natural resources will consume natural-based tourist destinations.
□ □ □ □ □
8 the maintenance of ecological balance will enhance the sustainable development of
islands
□ □ □ □ □
Environmental Attitude Part Strongly
disagree
Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
agree
1 Plants and animals have as much
right as humans to exist □ □ □ □ □
2 Humans have no right to modify the natural environment to suit
their needs
□ □ □ □ □
3 When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences
□ □ □ □ □
4 The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset
□ □ □ □ □
5 Despite our special abilities humans are still subject to the
laws of nature
□ □ □ □ □
6 The so-called ―ecological crisis‖ facing humankind has been
greatly exaggerated
□ □ □ □ □
7 Humans are severely abusing the environment
□ □ □ □ □
8 Humans were not meant to rule
over the rest of nature □ □ □ □ □
9 The earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources.
□ □ □ □ □
Fakulteten för teknik 391 82 Kalmar | 351 95 Växjö Tel 0772-28 80 00 [email protected] Lnu.se/fakulteten-for-teknik