Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., & Yang, C. C.

Tourism Management 36 (2013) 454e468
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman
Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the

perspective of community-based tourists
Tsung Hung Lee a, *, Fen-Hauh Jan b, c, Chung-Cheng Yang d
a
Graduate School of Leisure and Exercise Studies, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, 123, Section 3, University Road, Touliu, Yunlin 640, Taiwan
b
Department of Tourism and Hospitality, Transworld University, Taiwan
c
Graduate Institute of Management, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Taiwan
d
Department of Accounting, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Taiwan
h i g h l i g h t s
< We develop a reliable and valid measurement to assess ERB of tourists.

< We conceptualize and measure both general and site-specific ERBs.
< Three studies are conducted in this study.
< This paper exhibits cross-validation by the tight replication strategy.
< We provide management implications for sustainable community-based tourism.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This study aims to develop a reliable and valid measurement to assess the general and site-specific
Received 9 April 2012 environmentally responsible behavior of community-based tourists. Three studies are conducted:
Accepted 19 September 2012 study 1 generates an initial pool of scale items, study 2 develops a measurement scale, and study 3
examines the cross-validation of this measurement scale. A generic measure for environmentally
Keywords: responsible behavior is developed using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Analytical
Environmentally responsible behavior
results demonstrate the effectiveness of a 24-item scale with a first-order, seven-factor model that
Community-based tourists
further elucidates the general and site-specific environmentally responsible behavior of community-
Cross-validation
Taiwan
based tourists. This research instrument is tested for its reliability, content validity, convergent val-
idity, and discriminant validity. While exhibiting cross-validation by a tight replication strategy, this
study offers researchers an invaluable instrument to better conceptualize and measure the environ-
mentally responsible behavior of community-based tourists. Finally, managerial implications of this
study are discussed, along with recommendations for future research.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction (Alessa, Bennett, & Kliskey, 2003; Kim, Airey, & Szivas, 2011), dis-
turbing the wildlife habitats (Alessa et al., 2003; Ballantyne, Packer,
Tourism significantly contributes to adverse environmental & Falk, 2011; Ballantyne, Packer, & Sutherland, 2011; Chen, 2011),
impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions associated with trav- polluting (Logar, 2010; Teh & Cabanban, 2007), and overcrowding
eling, accommodations, and recreational activities (Dwyer et al., (Dickinson & Robbins, 2008; Poitras & Getz, 2006). Clearly, inap-
2010; Gössling & Schumacher, 2010). Among the intentional and propriate recreation/tourism activity and recreational behavior
unintentional behaviors of tourists that have damaged the may impact the tourist destination environment directly or indi-
ecosystems of many tourist destinations include picking flowers rectly. In addition to further exacerbating global warming, these
(Chang, 2010), carrying seeds on clothes, equipment, animals, and adverse tourism-related impacts lead to the environmental or
vehicles (Pickering & Mount, 2010; Törn, Tolvanen, Norokorpi, ecological degradation of a destination (Dawson, Stewart, Lemelinc,
Tervo, & Siikamäki, 2009), collecting flora and fauna specimens & Scott, 2010). Reducing the extent to which tourism adversely
impacts the environment is thus of priority concern.
* Corresponding author. Fax: þ886 5 531 2183. To provide high quality recreation/tourism areas, tourism
E-mail address: thlee@yuntech.edu.tw (T.H. Lee). managers have strived to reduce the extent to which the intended
0261-5177/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.012
T.H. Lee et al. / Tourism Management 36 (2013) 454e468 455
and unintended behaviors of tourists adversely impact the envi- of priority concern to more thoroughly understand tourist
ronment (Atik, 2010). Various intervention strategies, including behavior. Additionally, several behaviors in the measurement scale,
interpretation services (Ballantyne, Packer, & Hughes, 2008; Kim such as buying recycled paper, may not significantly influence
et al., 2011) and recreational experiences (Ballantyne, Packer, & environmental problems (Gatersleben, Steg, & Vlek, 2002). Conse-
Falk, 2011; Ballantyne, Packer, & Hughes, 2009; Ballantyne, quently, measurement of ERB remains a highly contentious topic in
Packer, & Sutherland, 2011; Duerden & Witt, 2010), educate tour- the literature.
ists on how to raise their environmental concerns in order to Therefore, the aim of this study is to develop a reliable and valid
decrease their impact when visiting recreational areas. Moreover, research instrument to assess ERB of community-based tourists.
via the interpretation services, tourists acquire environmental Three studies have been conducted. In study 1, the measurement
knowledge to perform positive environmental behaviors, such as items are established using a literature review and the Delphi
abstaining from overturning rocks (Alessa et al., 2003), abstaining method. In study 2, a research instrument is developed and tested.
from collecting flora and fauna specimens (Alessa et al., 2003; Kim In study 3, the cross-validation of this research instrument is
et al., 2011), and staying in designated areas (Davis, Green, & Reed, examined to assess ERB. Finally, managerial implications of this
2009; Kaiser, Doka, Hofstetter, & Ranney, 2003) while engaging in study are discussed, along with recommendations for further study.
tourism/recreational activities. Several scholars have indicated that
for sustainable tourism development, fostering the environmen- 2. Literature review
tally responsible behavior (ERB) of tourists seems to be the best
practice in destination management for sustainable tourism (Alessa 2.1. The background
et al., 2003; Kafyri, Hovardas, & Poirazidis, 2012).
The extensive use of ERB to assess site-specific behaviors While attempting to reduce environmental impacts, scholars
includes selecting green hotels (Han, Hsu, & Sheu, 2010), protecting have adopted various terminologies to describe behavior that
cliffs (Kim et al., 2011), addressing ERB of tourists in national parks protects the environment. As shown in Table 1, various terminolo-
(Halpenny, 2010; Lee, 2007; Walker & Chapman, 2003) and gies and definitions have been proposed. Borden and Schettino
wetlands (Lee, 2011), selecting eco-label tourism (Chen, 2011), and (1979) pioneered the study of ERB by assessing the relationship
preserving wild lands (Vaske & Donnelly, 1999). Based on the above between attitude and behavior. To educate individuals and improve
studies, the ways in which to develop and maintain sustainable their ERB, Sivek and Hungerford (1990) explored the factors influ-
tourism by assessing the ERB of tourists has received considerable encing personal ERB, indicating that ERB represents the actions that
attention. Unfortunately, the above assessments of ERB of tourists an individual or group to solve environmental problems and address
fail to incorporate holistic and systematic methods. Therefore, this environmental issues. Axelrod and Lehman (1993) examined what
study demonstrates the feasibility of developing an ERB scale in factors guide individual action and defined environmentally-
community-based tourism. concern behavior as individuals engaging in environmental
Previous studies have attempted to further elucidate the envi- conservation efforts. Moreover, Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002)
ronmental behavior of tourists by focusing on the factors that affect regarded pro-environmental behavior as individuals acting to
ERB of tourists. For example, Miller, Rathouse, Scarles, Holmes, and minimize environmental impact. Additionally, Stern (2000) devel-
Tribe (2010) indicated that information on environmental degra- oped the concept of environmentally significant behavior, which
dation raises the environmental awareness of tourists. Similarly, refers to individuals acting to improve the environment. Recently,
factors influencing the ERB of tourists include environment-related Meijers and Stapel (2011) proposed the sustainable behavior
knowledge (Alessa et al., 2003; Ballantyne, Packer, & Sutherland, concept, indicating that individuals act or make choices with more
2011) and environmental education (Bruyere, Nash, & Mbogella, sustainable considerations. Therefore, based on findings of the
2011). Therefore, this study indicates the role of environmental above studies (Axelrod & Lehman, 1993; Borden & Schettino, 1979;
knowledge in educating individuals to change their behavior and Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002; Meijers & Stapel, 2011; Sivek &
reduce environmental impact. Meanwhile, by assessing psycho- Hungerford, 1990; Stern, 2000), this study defines ERB as tourists
logical variables, several scholars suggested that tourists with who strive to reduce environmental impacts, contribute to envi-
greater sensibility in terms of environmental attitudes, environ- ronmental preservation and/or conservation efforts, and not disturb
mental values, and place attachment have a greater likelihood of the ecosystem and biosphere of a destination during recreation/
displaying increased ERB (e.g., Duerden & Witt, 2010; Lee, 2011; tourism activities. Several studies have suggested that human
Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano, & Kalof, 1999). activities may cause environmental problems (Halpenny, 2010;
Moreover, based on studies that examine precedent variables Ramkissoon, Smith, & Weiler, in press). These environmental prob-
such as recreation experience (Ballantyne, Packer, & Falk, 2011), lems may come from daily lifestyle activities and tourism. To more
conservation commitment (Lee, 2011), and interpretation educa- thoroughly understand tourists’ ERB from a holistic perspective,
tion (Ballantyne et al., 2008, 2009) of ERB, this study further assessing ERB should include both general and site-specific ERBs.
suggests that tourism settings can provide an ideal setting for Although previous studies have assessed and developed the
environmental education to help tourists increase their site- measure of ERB while focusing on general ERB using samples of
specific ERB. undergraduate students (Smith-Sebasto & D’Costa, 1995), Swiss
However, exactly how the above precedent variables predict drivers (Kaiser, 1998), and U.S. residents (Stern et al., 1999), the
ERB remains contentious in the literature because of several feasibility of using the tourist respondents to develop a scale for
reasons (Ballantyne, Packer, & Falk, 2011; Beaumont, 2001; Cottrell, assessing ERB of tourists has seldom been explored. While
2003; Kim et al., 2011; Scott, 1994). First, research instruments attempting to understand the environmental behavior of tourists,
measure ERB of tourists on a general basis rather than specifically this study develops a general measure of ERB of tourists.
or by destination (Lee, 2011). ERB may be a viable instrument in ERB has received considerable attention to more thoroughly
helping individuals to reduce environmental degradation in their understand how human behavior impacts the sustainable devel-
daily lifestyle and also in a specific tourism destination because opment of ecological environments. Many scholars have adopted
environmental degradation is regarded as human-driven the attitude-behavior model to predict ERBs in different fields
(Halpenny, 2010; Ramkissoon, Weiler, & Smith, 2012). Conceptu- (Ballantyne, Packer, & Sutherland, 2011; Bamberg & Schmidt, 2003;
alizing and measuring both general and site-specific ERBs are thus Brown, Ham, & Hughes, 2010; Chang, 2010; Cottrell, 2003; Davis
456 T.H. Lee et al. / Tourism Management 36 (2013) 454e468
Table 1
Terminology of environmentally responsible behavior.
Terminology Sources Definitions References

Environmentally responsible Assessed the relationship between attitude Environmentally responsible behavior Sivek & Hungerford, 1990
behavior and behavior (Borden & Schettino, 1979). (ERB) is defined as any action, individual
or group, directed toward the
remediation of environmental
issues/problems.
Environmentally-concerned Examining what factors guide individual Actions which contribute towards Axelrod & Lehman, 1993
behavior action. environmental preservation and/or
conservation.
Pro-environmental Examining sociological and psychological Individual consciously seeks to Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002
behavior factors to explain pro-environmental minimize the negative impact of one’s
behavior based on the finding by Fietkau and actions on the natural and built world.
Kessel (1981).
Environmentally significant Developing a theoretical behavioral Environmentally significant behavior Stern, 2000
behavior framework of environmentally significant can reasonable be defined by its
individual behavior. impacts: the extent to which it changes
the availability of material or energy
from the environment or alters the
structure and dynamics of ecosystems
or the biosphere itself.
Sustainable behavior Examining a person is more likely to make People who are high in the consideration Meijers & Stapel, 2011
sustainable choices while exists a level fit of future consequences are more likely to
between time perspectives and person behave more sustainable and make
perspectives. sustainable choice.
et al., 2009; Schultz et al., 2005; Scott, 1994; Thapa, 2010; Vaske & Among the numerous benefits of community-based tourism
Donnelly, 1999). However, the value of this model remains ques- include improving income and agricultural markets, obtaining
tionable for several reasons, including the great complexity and random good fortune (Lepp, 2007), providing employment
multifaceted nature of attitude (Scott, 1994). Based on meta- (Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010), gaining tourism revenue multiplier
analysis, Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera (1987) developed effects (Lepp, 2007; Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010), increasing the living
a responsible environmental behavior model for understanding the standards and tax revenues of local government, improving the
factors that influence ERBs. Several scholars have suggested that educational environment, conserving the local culture (Lee & Back,
more predictive variables are required to explain variances because 2006), and improving the infrastructure and public services
cultural differences and involvement in environmental manage- (Perdue, Long, & Kang, 1999). However, among the negative effects
ment practices also influence ERB (Bamberg & Möser, 2007; Lee, of tourism include inflation (Yoon, Gursoy, & Chen, 2001), increased
2011; Lee & Moscardo, 2005). costs of living and tax burden (Lee & Back, 2006), lost authenticity
Stern et al. (1999) proposed the value-belief-norm theory (VBN) (Lynch, Duinker, Sheehan, & Chute, 2010), misunderstanding of
to predict environmental behaviors of individuals. By linking the local culture (Yoon et al., 2001), increased crime (Lee & Back, 2006),
norm activation theory, the theory of personal values, and the New negative effect on local lifestyle (Yoon et al., 2001), overcrowding
Ecological Paradigm hypothesis, VBN predicts trends in individual (Lee & Back, 2006), traffic congestion, and environmental pollution
attitudes toward the environment. Based on VBN, several scholars (Yoon et al., 2001). Such negative impacts may frustrate local
have assessed the environmental behaviors of employees, univer- residents, possibly leading to resistance toward tourism develop-
sity students, and Swedish citizens (Andersson, Shivarajan, & Blau, ment (Ap, 1992; Lee, 2013).
2005; Nordlund & Garvill, 2002). Community-based tourism can be developed to reduce poverty
in developing countries (Manyara & Jones, 2007). Before devel-
2.2. Community-based tourism oping community-based tourism, residents evaluate the benefits of
and costs incurred from tourism. According to social exchange
Taiwan witnessed the development of community development theory (Ap, 1992), residents support tourism only when tourism
in the mid-1990s as an approach to increase rural development in has a greater positive perception than a negative one. In other
Taiwan (Council for Cultural Affairs, 2011). Moreover, agriculture words, community-based tourism yields greater benefits than
products have lost their competitive advantage following the adverse impacts. The perception of local residents influences resi-
accession of Taiwan to the World Trade Organization in 2002. dents’ support of developing tourism (Lee, 2013). To reduce their
Community-based tourism is one of the best alternative develop- adverse impacts, tourists must be educated to respect local history
ment models for economically depressed rural areas (Wearing, and culture, as well as not to disturb local environment in order to
Wearing, & McDonald, 2010). Moreover, community-based further tourism development. The lack of adequate guidelines for
tourism is integrated in both sustainable tourism and environ- tourists warrants the development an effective instrument to
mental conservation (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2012). While measure ERB of tourists.
attempting to further understand community-based tourists, Lee
(2009) assessed Taiwan’s Taomi community-based tourists, indi- 2.3. Constructs of general ERB
cating that destination image and interpretation services are
important predictors of tourist satisfaction and the future behavior Defining the construct of ERB is particularly important when
of community-based tourists. However, ERB of community-based developing measurement research instruments for ERB. Previous
tourists remains to be studied. More closely examining ERB of studies have been developed methods for measuring ERB. These
community-based tourists can help tourism researchers and prac- research instruments were typically developed uni-dimensionally
titioners to further grasp the sustainable development of for a specific purpose, such as determining behaviors in intertidal
community-based tourism. zones (Alessa et al., 2003), determining the intention to pick
flowers (Chang, 2010), choosing eco-label products and protecting educational, physical, legal, and persuasive actions have not been
marine resources (Chen, 2011), determining the behaviors in measured with respect to environmentally significant behaviors.
dormitories (Chao & Lam, 2011), understanding wild land preser- Additionally, tourism scholars have extensively adopted the
vation voting intentions (Vaske & Donnelly, 1999), recycling constructs developed by Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995) to
(Carrus, Passafaro, & Bonnes, 2008; Castro, Garrido, Reis, & evaluate personal ERB (Table 2; Alessa et al., 2003; Ballantyne,
Menezes, 2009), and evaluating public transportation (Carrus Packer, & Falk, 2011; Chen, 2011; Halpenny, 2010; Kim et al.,
et al., 2008). Meanwhile, several scholars have developed scales 2011; Kim & Han, 2010; Lee, 2007, 2011; Lee & Lin, 2001; Thapa,
on a uni-dimension for general purposes (Beaumont, 2001; Becken, 2010; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). Consequently, this study adopts
2007; Han et al., 2010; Kim & Han, 2010; Lee, 2007; Park & Boo, these six constructs (i.e. educational action, civil action, financial
2010). action, legal action, physical action, and persuasive action) devel-
Above discussion reveals a wide range of ERB. Many studies oped by Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995) and the conceptualiza-
have introduced different constructs to measure ERB. Smith- tion of ERB seems to be more holistic than the findings of Kaiser
Sebasto and D’Costa (1995) divided ERB into six constructs (i.e. (1998) and Stern et al. (1999).
educational action, civil action, financial action, legal action, phys-
ical action, and persuasive action). Kaiser (1998) later developed an 2.4. ERB and tourism
ecological behavior scale, indicating that general ecological
behavior scale can be viewed as a uni-dimensional measure. Based In the tourism literature, how to increase the tourists’ ERB of
on the findings of Kaiser (1998), Kaiser and Wilson (2004) also tourists has been widely discussed. Also, ERB-related factors have
suggested that ecological behaviors should include energy conser- been explored quantitatively and qualitatively. By using focus
vation, mobility and transportation, waste avoidance, consum- groups, several scholars have explored the perceptions of New
erism, recycling, vicariousness, and social behaviors related to Zealand outbound tourists regarding how international air travel
conservation. However, the ecological behavior concepts proposed impacts the global climate, its role in potential climate change
by Kaiser (1998) and Kaiser and Wilson (2004) lack the constructs policies (Becken, 2007), and the public understanding of sustain-
of education action, persuasive action, and legal action. Moreover, able tourism (Miller et al., 2010). As defined by the Taiwan
Stern et al. (1999) suggested that environmentally significant Ecotourism Association (2011), responsible behaviors of tourists
behavior includes consumer behavior, willingness to sacrifice, and at a destination should include appreciating the life-styles and
environmental citizenship. Because the theoretical framework of cultures of host residents, improving the welfare of residents,
that study came from environmentalism, environmentally signifi- conserving the natural environment, and being environmentally
cant behaviors proposed by Stern et al. (1999) focused mainly on responsible for the destination. Meanwhile, Lee and Lin (2001)
civil and financial actions. Meanwhile, to our knowledge, suggested that ERB for a specific destination should include
Table 2
Constructs of environmentally responsible behaviors.
Construct Definition Referencesa

General environmentally responsible behavior
Civil action A person (or a group) takes actions to promote preservation 26, 30
of the environment through political avenue without any
donation or persuasive strategies, such as protest, voting, and
participating public hearings.
Educational action A person (or a group) helps to acquire knowledge 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25,
and/or information about environmental issues and 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35
problems, such as reading articles or books, watching
television programs, and taking academic course-works.
Financial action Any action to express promoting or protesting of the 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12, 18, 19, 22, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 35
natural environment through financial measures, such
as purchasing or boycotting commodities because of
the degree of their environmental friendliness, donating
to environmental organization, companies, and campaigns.
Legal action A person (a group) takes legal (or judiciary) action to 11, 26
protect environment.
Physical action A person (a group) takes any action for environment without 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 20, 23, 24, 26, 29,
involving monetary, such as picking up litter, participating 30, 31, 33, 35
in community clean-up programs, classifying garbage, and
installing resource-conserving devices.
Persuasive action A person (a group) motivates others to promote 18,26
preservation of the natural environment without
nonmonetary action, such as writing letters, making speech,
discoursing information, and lobbying.
Site-specific environmentally responsible behavior
Sustainable behavior A person respects to local culture, conserves natural 15, 17, 18, 28
environment, and reduces interference of local environment.
Pro-environmental behavior A person voluntarily visits a destination less or none while 5, 34
the spot needs to recover because of environmental damage.
Environmentally friendly behavior A person takes action to reduce the damage of a specific destination. 1
a
1: Alessa et al., 2003, 2: Ballantyne, Packer, & Falk, 2011, 3: Chen, 2011, 4: Dono, Webb, & Richardson, 2010, 5: Halpenny, 2010, 6: Homburg & Stolberg, 2006, 7: Kaiser,
1998, 8: Kaiser & Biel, 2000, 9: Kaiser & Keller, 2001, 10: Kaiser et al., 2003, 11: Kaiser & Gutscher, 2003, 12: Kaiser & Wilson, 2004, 13: Kaiser, Wölfing, & Fuhrer, 1999, 14:
Kilbourne & Pickett, 2008, 15: Kim et al., 2011, 16: Kim & Han, 2010, 17: Lee, 2007, 18: Lee & Lin, 2001, 19: Mainieri et al., 1997, 20: McKenzie-Mohr, Nemiroff, Beers, &
Desmarais, 1995, 21: Miller et al., 2010, 22: Mobley, Vagias, & DeWard, 2010, 23: Orams, 1997, 24: Rice, 2006, 25: Scott, 1994, 26: Smith-Sebasto & D’Costa, 1995, 27:
Stern et al., 1999, 28: Taiwan Ecotourism Association, 2011, 29: Tarrant & Green, 1999, 30: Thapa, 2010, 31: Thøgersen, 2009, 32: Vaske & Donnelly, 1999, 33: Vaske & Kobrin,
2001, 34: Walker & Chapman, 2003, 35: Whitmarsh & O’Neill, 2011.
respecting the local culture, conserving the natural environment, Google scholar. Related papers were obtained using keywords such
and reducing interference with the local environment. These as ERB, educational action, civil action, financial action, legal action,
indicators represent sustainable behaviors of tourists for specific physical action, persuasion action, pro-environmental behavior,
destinations. sustainable behavior, environmental behavior, and ecological
Pro-environmental behavior is regarded as individuals taking to behavior. The measurement items from survey instruments origi-
preventative action to protect their surrounding environment by nally that were written in English were translated into Chinese by
empathizing with nature and addressing environmental issues the authors. Subsequently, to minimize translation bias and the
(Schultz, 2000; Stern, 2000). Halpenny (2010) and Walker and effects of language nuance, two native English-speaking individuals
Chapman (2003) indicated that pro-environmental behavior familiar with Chinese were invited to participate in this study to
ranges from volunteer behavior to site-specific best practices. back-translate these items into English. The authors then devel-
According to empathy with a tourism destination, tourists protect oped the Chinese version of the questionnaire by comparing the
the environment to avert damage. These behaviors include volun- two translations in the original language. No major discrepancies
tarily visiting a destination less or not at all when the area is were found among the back-translations. Minor discrepancies
recovering from environmental damage. between original and back-translated versions were resolved by
Alessa et al. (2003) indicated that tourist behaviors damage repeating the process until the final wording was adopted.
ecosystems to varying extents, depending on the personal attri- Next, based on the Delphi technique, opinions were generated
butes, environmental knowledge, and perception of ecosystem and a consensus achieved on specific issues (Miller, 2001). Eight
health. Tourists may damage ecosystems by disturbing creatures experts (including five scholars, an ecological interpreter, and two
and vegetation, overturning rocks, and feeding wildlife while community leaders) were chosen to conduct the fuzzy Delphi
visiting the destination. To reduce such damages, environmentally survey in August 2011. The maximum, minimum, and geometric
friendly behaviors must be practiced more aggressively. mean were calculated, and the consensus values were determined
Consequently, sustainable behavior, pro-environmental using two triangular fuzzy numbers (Jeng, 2001).
behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior are critical
factors for assessing and promoting sustainable development of 3.1.2. Results
community-based tourism. Based on the findings of the Taiwan For consideration of item saturation, 171 items were obtained
Ecotourism Association (2011), Halpenny (2010), Walker and from 54 articles. Following removals of items that were similar in
Chapman (2003), Schultz (2000), and Alessa et al. (2003), this meaning, not frequently cited (using the scree method), or related
study conceptualized site-specific ERB as sustainable behavior, pro- to cultural factors, 72 items were determined (Table 3).
environmental behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior. The 72 items were classified into two categories. The two
However, a conceptualization and scale for measuring site-specific categories were general and site-specific ERB. General ERB repre-
ERB has not yet been developed. Clearly, examining the three sents individuals’ ERB in their daily lives (Hines et al., 1987), and
constructs and developing a scale to measure site-specific ERB site-specific ERB implies that tourist behaviors benefit the envi-
based on this conceptualization will potentially contribute to ronment of a specific place (Vaske & Kobrin, 2001).
academic literature. Based on the analytical results of the fuzzy Delphi method, the
Additionally, several scholars assessed how general and site- 18 items could not achieve consensus. Additionally, by considering
specific ERBs are related (Barr, Shaw, & Coles, 2011; Halpenny, cultural factors in Taiwan and due to the attributes of community-
2010; Mehmetoglu, 2010; Ramkissoon et al., 2012). While assess- based tourism, these 18 items (Table 3) seemed to be irrelevant and
ing sustainable lifestyles, Barr et al. (2011) indicated that an indi- had been dropped in this process. Because Taiwanese residents are
vidual engages in ERB at home rather during a journey and holiday. generally unwilling to boycott companies and attend community
Bem’s (1972) spill-over effect refers to individuals engaging in ERB meetings to protect the environment, these items were dropped in
in a specific area, leading to their support ERB in other areas. While this study. Additionally, some items unfamiliar to Taiwanese resi-
using the spill-over effect (Bem, 1972) to examine how general and dents were also dropped, including carpooling, idle cars with their
site-specific ERBs are related, several scholars argued that site- engines turned on, purchase of an energy-auditor, and letting their
specific ERB positively affects general ERB (Halpenny, 2010; dogs wander without a leash. Moreover, the dimension of legal
Ramkissoon et al., 2012; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001; Whitmarsh & action was dropped by the fuzzy Delphi method due to cultural
O’Neill, 2011). This study thus demonstrates that developing factors because Taiwanese residents seldom report to relevant
a general measure to examine general and site-specific ERBs is authorities on individuals who violate laws. Following evaluation of
required for thoroughly understanding the behavior of tourists. the clarity, readability, and meanings of the items, six items were
Based on the above literature review, ERB has been classified deleted based on the suggestions of experts. Therefore, 48
into nine constructs as shown in Table 2. Also this study included measurement items (Table 4) were adopted as the research
the construct of tourism-related behaviors to evaluate the general instrument for study 2.
and site-specific ERBs of tourists. Thus, the constructs of ERB were
educational action, civil action, financial action, legal action, phys- 3.2. Study 2
ical action, persuasive action, sustainable behavior, pro-
environmental behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior. 3.2.1. Methods
3.2.1.1. Study sites. To assess the research instrument, Taomi was
3. The empirical survey chosen as the area to conduct the questionnaire survey. Originally
a rural community, Taomi is located in central Taiwan (120 550 3000
3.1. Study 1 E, 23 560 4000 N; elevation 420e800 m a.s.l.). With its biodiversity
and highly diverse species, Taomi has developed as a community-
3.1.1. Development of measurement items based tourism destination. To develop sustainable tourism, host
A multi-stage study was conducted to develop a research residents established the Taomi Community Development Associ-
instrument for ERB among community-based tourists. According to ation (TCDA) for nature-based tourism planning. All TCDA members
the above constructs of ERB, the measurement items were collected were trained for conservation awareness, catering and hospitality
from the literature using databases, including SDOL, EBSCO, and management, as well as ecological interpretation (Lee, 2009).
Table 3 Table 3 (continued)

A 72-item scale of environmentally responsible behavior.
47 I convince someone to conserve water by not running the water while
Educational action brushing his/her teeth or shaving and/or installing a water saving device in
1 I learn about the recycling facilities in my area the tank of his/her toilet(s)
2 I watch TV programs about environmental issues 48a I convince someone to avoid idling his/her car unnecessarily
3a I read books, publications, and other material about environmental problems 49 I convince someone to reduce the amount he/she drive his/her car by
Civil action carpooling instead of driving alone and/or driving only when necessary
4a I attend a community meeting that involves concern over a local Tourism specific & specific ERB in destination
a
environmental issue 50 I get the travel information and plan the travel program before travel
5 I donate money or give time to support an environmental organization 51a I listen and pay attention to the interpretation
(include specific destinations) 52a When I do outdoor sports (e.g., hiking, jogging, horseback riding, skiing,
6 I sign a petition supporting the protection of the environment biking) I stay within the allowed area
7 I am a member of an environmental organization 53a In nature preserves, I let my dog off the leash
8 I subscribe to environmental publications 54 I tell my companions not to feed the animals
9a I talk with friends (parents) about problems related to the environment 55 I do not intend to disturb any creature and vegetation
(include specific issue) 56a I intend to behave in a way that will not harm plants and animals
10a I boycott (protest) companies with an un-ecological background 57 I observe the nature and wildlife detailed
11 I would be willing to pay much higher taxes in order to protect the 58 I wear the clothes that coincided with forest ecosystem
environment 59 I pick up (encourage others) litter left by other people
12 I write a letter or call the member of Congress or another government official 60 After a picnic, I leave the place as clean as it was originally
to support strong environmental protection (include specific destinations) 61 I observe the history and culture heritage detailed
13a I vote for a candidate in an election at least in part because he or she was in 62 I understand residents’ life-styles
favor of strong environmental protection 63 I voluntarily visit a favorite spot less if it needed to recover from
14 I do volunteer work for a group that helps the environment (more involve environmental damage
environment issue) 64 I voluntarily stop visiting a favorite spot if it needed to recover from
15 I join in community cleanup efforts environmental damage
Financial action 65a I agree to expand the amount of land to be retained as road-less area
16 I buy resource conservation devices, such as low-flow faucet aerators for my 66a I stay at lodging (bed and breakfast)
sinks and low-flow shower heads 67a I bring my personal cleaning products in this tour
17 I buy products packaged in containers that either can be reused or recycled or 68 I choose products or services with eco-labels first in this tour
are made of recycled materials 69 I buy (or use) local products and services in this tour
18 I refrain from buying a product because it had potentially harmful 70a I don’t collect flora and fauna specimens without permission
environmental effects 71 I don’t overturn rock and dried wood arbitrarily
19 I buy products in refillable packages 72 I don’t drop litter arbitrarily
20 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables grown without pesticides a
Deleted by fuzzy Delphi and experts opinions.
or chemicals; also known as organic fruits and vegetables
21 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables from local
22 I buy environmentally friendly products
Legal action
23a I report someone who violates a law or laws that protect our natural
Caonan wetland is the most popular attraction, which is renowned
resources (e.g., illegal fishing, hunting or trapping or illegal tree cutting) to for its natural resources. Traveling time to Taomi from Taichung by
the proper authorities car is approximately one hour.
24a I report someone who tampers with the anti-pollution devices on a car to
the proper authorities
3.2.1.2. Research instrument. By using the 48 measurement items
Physical action
25 I set my home appliances, such as the refrigerator, dishwasher, water heater, obtained in study 1, a pretest was conducted at Taomi in August
etc. to “energy-saver” levels (e.g., efficient bulbs, reduce energy consumption) 2011. One hundred and sixty one usable questionnaires were
26 I reuse my shopping bags collected using the convenient sampling method. Meanwhile, eight
27 I use biologically degradable laundry detergent tourists visiting Taomi were invited to comment on the item
28 In the winter, I keep the heat on so that I do not have to wear a sweater
29a I prefer to shower rather than to take a bath
comprehensibility. An item analysis was conducted to improve the
30 I would be willing to accept cuts in my standard of living to protect the instructions and assessments of these Likert scales.
environment Based on the item analysis, comments made by two academic
31 I conserve water by turning off the tap while washing dishes (brushing teeth) scholars, and feedback from the comments of eight tourists, 14
32 I turn off lights if I am leaving a room for more than 10 min
items were removed. Thirty four items were thus obtained in the
33 I reduce the amount of my household trash by reusing or recycling items to
the fullest extent possible final questionnaire. The final questionnaire included three sections
34a I bring empty bottles to a recycling bin (general ERB, site-specific ERB, and demographic variables), as
35 I use public transportation and carpool instead of driving alone described below (Table 5).
36 I open windows for ventilation rather than using a fan or air conditioner Based on the findings of Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995),
Persuasive action
a general ERB consists of educational action (two items), civil action
37a I convince someone to boycott a store that sells products that damage the
environment (four items), financial action (six items), physical action (seven
38 I convince someone to sign a petition regarding an environmental issue items), and persuasive action (three items). The item responses
a
39 I convince someone to learn about the recycling facilities in their area were scored on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 for
40a I convince someone to have a home “energy audit” to find the cool air leaks
‘strongly disagree’ to 7 for ‘strongly agree’. The general ERB of
in his/her house or apartment
41a I convince someone to buy household cleaning and/or laundry products that community-based tourists was assessed using a 22-item general
don’t harm the environment ERB scale.
42 I convince someone to buy fruits and vegetables loose rather than in plastic bags Based on the findings of Lee and Lin (2001), Halpenny (2010),
43 I convince someone to buy products packaged in containers that either can and Alessa et al. (2003), the section on site-specific ERB was based
be reused or recycled or are made of recycled materials
on the findings of sustainable behavior (five items), pro-
44 I convince someone to report someone who violates a law or laws that
protect our natural resources (e.g., illegal fishing, hunting, or trapping or environmental behavior (three items), and environmentally
illegal tree cutting) to the proper authorities friendly behavior (four items). The item responses were scored on
45 I convince someone to reuse envelopes by putting a label over the old address a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 for ‘strongly disagree’ to 7
46a I convince someone to set their household appliances, such as the
for ‘strongly agree’. The site-specific ERB of tourists was assessed
refrigerator, dishwasher, water heater, etc. to “energy-saver” levels
based on a 12-item site-specific ERB scale.
Table 5
Table 4 A 34-item scale of environmentally responsible behavior.
A 48-item scale of environmentally responsible behavior.
Educational action
Educational action 1 I learn about the recycling facilities in my area
1 I learn about the recycling facilities in my area 2 I watch TV programs about environmental issues
2 I watch TV programs about environmental issues Civil action
Civil action 3 I donate money or give time to support an environmental organization
3 I donate money or give time to support an environmental organization (include specific destinations)
(include specific destinations) 4 I would be willing to pay much higher taxes in order to protect the
4 I sign a petition supporting the protection of the environment environment
5 I am a member of an environmental organization 5 I do volunteer work for a group that helps the environment (more involve
6 I subscribe to environmental publications environment issue)
7 I would be willing to pay much higher taxes in order to protect the 6 I join in community cleanup efforts
environment Financial action
8 I write a letter or call the member of Congress or another government official 7 I buy resource conservation devices, such as low-flow faucet aerators for my
to support strong environmental (include specific destinations) sinks and low-flow shower heads
9 I do volunteer work for a group that helps the environment (more involve 8 I buy products packaged in containers that either can be reused or recycled or
environment issue) are made of recycled materials
10 I join in community cleanup efforts 9 I buy products in refillable packages
Financial action 10 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables grown without pesticides
11 I buy resource conservation devices, such as low-flow faucet aerators for my or chemicals; also known as organic fruits and vegetables
sinks and low-flow shower heads 11 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables from local
12 I buy products packaged in containers that either can be reused or recycled or 12 I buy environmentally friendly products
are made of recycled materials Physical action
13 I refrain from buying a product because it had potentially harmful 13 I set my home appliances, such as the refrigerator, dishwasher, water heater,
environmental effects etc. to “energy-saver” levels (e.g., efficient bulbs, reduce energy consumption)
14 I buy products in refillable packages 14 I reuse my shopping bags
15 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables grown without pesticides 15 I use biologically degradable laundry detergent
or chemicals; also known as organic fruits and vegetables 16 I conserve water by turning off the tap while washing dishes (brushing teeth)
16 I make a special effort to buy fruits and vegetables from local 17 I turn off lights if I am leaving a room for more than 10 min
17 I buy environmentally friendly products 18 I reduce the amount of my household trash by reusing or recycling items to
Physical action the fullest extent possible
18 I set my home appliances, such as the refrigerator, dishwasher, water heater, 19 I open windows for ventilation rather than using a fan or air conditioner
etc. to “energy-saver” levels (e.g., efficient bulbs, reduce energy consumption) Persuasive action
19 I reuse my shopping bags 20 I convince someone to buy fruits and vegetables loose rather than in plastic
20 I use biologically degradable laundry detergent bags
21 In the winter, I keep the heat on so that I do not have to wear a sweater 21 I convince someone to buy products packaged in containers that either can
22 I would be willing to accept cuts in my standard of living to protect the be reused or recycled or are made of recycled materials
environment 22 I convince someone to conserve water by not running the water while
23 I conserve water by turning off the tap while washing dishes (brushing teeth) brushing his/her teeth or shaving and/or installing a water saving device in
24 I turn off lights if I am leaving a room for more than 10 min the tank of his/her toilet(s)
25 I reduce the amount of my household trash by reusing or recycling items to Sustainable behavior
the fullest extent possible 23 I understand residents’ life-styles
26 I use public transportation and carpool instead of driving alone 24 I observe the history and culture heritage detailed
27 I open windows for ventilation rather than using a fan or air conditioner 25 I observe the nature and wildlife detailed
Persuasive action 26 I pick up (encourage others) litter left by other people
28 I convince someone to sign a petition regarding an environmental issue 27 I buy (or use) local products and services in this tour
29 I convince someone to buy fruits and vegetables loose rather than in plastic Pro-environmental behavior
bags 28 I voluntarily visit a favorite spot less if it needed to recover from
30 I convince someone to buy products packaged in containers that either can environmental damage
be reused or recycled or are made of materials 29 I voluntarily stop visiting a favorite spot if it needed to recover from
31 I convince someone to report someone who violates a law or laws that environmental damage
protect our natural resources (e.g., illegal hunting, or trapping or illegal tree 30 I choose products or services with eco-labels first in this tour
cutting) to the proper authorities Environmentally friendly behavior
32 I convince someone to reuse envelopes by putting a label over the old address 31 I do not intend to disturb any creature and vegetation
33 I convince someone to conserve water by not running the water while 32 I tell my companions not to feed the animals
brushing his/her teeth or shaving and/or installing a water saving device in 33 After a picnic, I leave the place as clean as it was originally
the tank of his/her toilet(s) 34 I don’t overturn rock and dried wood arbitrarily
34 I convince someone to reduce the amount he/she drive his/her car by
carpooling instead of driving alone and/or driving only when necessary
Tourism specific & specific ERB in destination
35 I tell my companions not to feed the animals
Demographic variables included gender, marital status, age,
36 I do not intend to disturb any creature and vegetation educational level, occupation, residential region, and monthly
37 I observe the nature and wildlife detailed income.
38 I wear the clothes that coincided with forest ecosystem
39 I pick up (encourage others) litter left by other people
3.2.1.3. Sampling and surveying. The target population of this study
40 After a picnic, I leave the place as clean as it was originally
41 I observe the history and culture heritage detailed was community-based tourists who had listened to an interpreta-
42 I understand residents’ life-styles tion service offered by a guide of TCDA. The questionnaires were
43 I voluntarily visit a favorite spot less if it needed to recover from conducted from early September to late December 2011. Data were
environmental damage collected using a systematic sampling method (one out of every 10
44 I voluntarily stop visiting a favorite spot if it needed to recover from
environmental damage
tourists was sampled). Six trained assistants administered the
45 I choose products or services with eco-labels first in this tour survey. A total of 497 questionnaires were administered, and three
46 I buy (or use) local products and services in this tour refusals and four incomplete questionnaires were received; 490
47 I don’t overturn rock and dried wood arbitrarily useable questionnaires were thus collected. The response rate
48 I don’t drop litter arbitrarily
likely reflected use of the on-site questionnaires, friendly assistants,
and questionnaire verification after completion.
3.2.1.4. Quality of the research instrument. Based on a sample size index (NFI) of 0.96, comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.97, root mean
of 490, survey results of this study are accurate within a 4.4% square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.076, and standardized
sampling error with a confidence level of 95%. Cronbach’s alpha root mean square residual (SRMR) of 0.063. Based on these
scores for the latent variables of the general ERB and the site- descriptive fit indices, the measurement model appeared to fit the
specific ERB were 0.92 and 0.90, respectively. All of the scores sample data well (Hair et al., 2006).
exceeded the benchmark of 0.70 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), Table 6 lists the t-values, AVE values, and composite reliability
indicating that the research instrument had an acceptable internal for the variables. These values were necessary to assess the
consistency for measuring items in the same construct. measurement model fits of this study. All of the composite
3.2.1.5. Data analysis. Data were analyzed in three stages. First, the
corrected item-total correlation (CITC) for each construct (i.e. Table 6
general ERB, and site-specific ERB) was introduced to verify that the Factor loadings, t-values, AVEa and CR.b
items measured each construct appropriately (Lee, Agarwal, & Kim,
Factor t-value AVEa CRb
2012; Lu, Lai, & Cheng, 2007). Second, exploratory factor analysis loading
(EFA) is a highly effective statistical technique for reducing a large
G1: Ctvil action 0.58 0.84
set of variables (i.e. measurement items) and identifying under- I donate money or give time to support an 0.63 14.70
lying dimensions in a group of variables (Hair, Black, Babin, environmental organization (include
Anderson, & Tatham, 2006). Hence, for developing an effective specific destinations)
I would be willing to pay much higher taxes 0.64 15.09
scale, EFA is an effective means of deleting items in the early stage
in order to protect the environment
of scale development (Min, 2012; Yu, Chancellor, & Cole, 2011). In I do volunteer work for a group that helps 0.88 23.41
this study, EFA using a principal component analysis with a varimax the environment (more involve
rotation was performed to identify the constructs using SPSS 17.0 environment issue)
for Windows. Finally, based on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), I join in community cleanup efforts 0.85 22.26
G2: Financial action 0.54 0.82
effectiveness of the measurement model was assessed using LISREL
I buy products packaged in containers that 0.76 18.48
8.80 for Windows. In particular, the measurement model was either can be reused or recycled or are
assessed by testing the model fit, composite reliability, convergent made of recycled materials
validity, and discriminant validity of the general and site-specific I buy products in refillable packages 0.72 17.47
ERBs. I make a special effort to buy fruits and 0.67 25.56
vegetables from local
I buy environmentally friendly products 0.78 19.49
3.2.2. Results G3: Physical action 0.56 0.79
3.2.2.1. Descriptive findings. Briefly, 63.1% of the respondents were I conserve water by turning off the tap while 0.72 16.98
female and 36.9% were male; 56.9% were married and 43.1% were washing dishes (brushing teeth)
I turn off lights if I am leaving a room for more 0.73 17.37
unmarried; 29.2% were between 31 and 40 years old and 26.9%
than 10 min
were between 21 and 30 years old; 59.2% had a university educa- I reduce the amount of my household trash 0.79 19.26
tion and 20.4% had only a high school education; 25.7% worked in by reusing or recycling items to the fullest
the service industry, 24.7% were laborers and 11.8% were students; extent possible
37.3% lived in the Taichung region and 25.7% lived in the Taipei G4: Persuasive action 0.68 0.87
I convince someone to buy fruits and vegetables 0.80 20.39
region; and 38.4% had a monthly income ranging from NT$20,001 loose rather than in plastic bags
to NT$40,000 and 24.7% had a monthly income of less than I convince someone to buy products 0.91 24.40
NT$20,000 (1 US$ ¼ 30.105NT$ as of 24 July 2012). packaged in containers that either can be
reused or recycled or are made of recycled
materials
3.2.2.2. Measurement purification. CITC analysis was performed for
I convince someone to conserve water by not 0.77 19.35
each construct. By using a cut-off value of below 0.5 (Lu et al., running the water while brushing his/her
2007), three items (i.e. recycling facilities in my area, watch TV teeth or shaving and/or installing a water
programs, and open windows for ventilation) were removed. saving device in the tank of his/her toilet(s)
Analytical results of EFA demonstrated seven constructs (i.e. D1: Sustainable behavior 0.55 0.83
I understand residents’ life-styles 0.73 17.86
civil action, financial action, physical action, and persuasive action I observe the history and culture heritage 0.80 20.27
for general ERB; sustainable behavior, pro-environmental behavior, detailed
and environmentally friendly behavior for site-specific ERB) of ERB. I observe the nature and wildlife detailed 0.77 19.14
Three physical action items (i.e. set energy-saver levels, reuse shop- I pick up (encourage others) litter left by 0.65 15.25
other people
ping bags, and biodegradable laundry detergent) were eliminated
D2: Pro-environmental behavior 0.59 0.81
because they were in the financial action construct by EFA. I voluntarily visit a favorite spot less if it 0.81 19.90
Moreover, a CFA with maximum likelihood estimation was needed to recover from environmental
introduced to evaluate the reliability and validity of the overall damage
measurement model. Because the average variance extracted (AVE) I voluntarily stop visiting a favorite spot if it 0.80 19.56
needed to recover from environmental
for financial action and environmentally friendly behavior were damage
lower than 0.5, four items (i.e. buy conservation devices, buy organic I choose products or services with eco-labels 0.69 16.12
products, buy local products, and overturn rocks) were removed to first in this tour
obtain an acceptable AVE. Finally, according to results of the D3: Environmentally friendly behavior 0.53 0.77
measurement model, the Chi-square (c2) value of the model was I do not intend to disturb any creature and 0.76 18.40
vegetation
884.54 with 231 degrees of freedom (p < 0.05), implying that the I tell my companions not to feed the animals 0.70 17.01
measurement did not fit the data well. However, the sample size After a picnic, I leave the place as clean as it 0.72 16.57
can affect the value of c2; a large sample size could thus have made was originally
this test an inadequate measure of the model’s fitness (McDonald & P P P
a
AVE: Average variance extracted ¼ ( l2)/[ l2 þ (q)].
P P P
Ho, 2002). The other model fit indices included the normed fit b
CR: Composite reliability ¼ ( l)2/[( l)2 þ (q)] (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1996).
Table 7
Correlation matrix of the latent variables.
Latent variable Civil action Financial Physical Persuasive Sustainable Pro-environmental Environmentally
action action action behavior behavior friendly behavior
Civil action 1.00
Financial action 0.64 1.00
Physical action 0.46 0.70 1.00
Persuasive action 0.44 0.56 0.63 1.00
Sustainable behavior 0.56 0.56 0.55 0.59 1.00
Pro-environmental behavior 0.41 0.53 0.52 0.53 0.64 1.00
Environmentally friendly behavior 0.48 0.69 0.79 0.59 0.78 0.63 1.00
reliability values exceeded 0.6, demonstrating a high internal Kline, 2005), providing evidence of discriminant validity. Conver-
consistency of the latent variables. The measurement reached gent and discriminant validity were evaluated using AVE. The test
convergent validity at the item level because all factor loadings that criterion was that AVE should exceed 0.5 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). In this
exceeded 0.5 were significant (t > 1.96, p < 0.05), which is evidence study, all AVEs exceeded the threshold of 0.5, indicating that this
of convergent validity (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Moreover, study had an adequate convergent and discriminant validity.
intercorrelations among the seven latent variables were assessed to
test discriminant validity. All intercorrelations, which ranged from 3.2.2.3. Competitive models. Fig. 1 schematically depicts the first-
0.41 to 0.79, were below the suggested threshold of 0.85 (Table 7; order, second-order, and higher-order CFAs. According to Table 8,
ERB1 ERB24 GERB1 GERB14 SERB15 SERB24
General Site-specific
ERB
ERB ERB
Model 1 Model 2
CIV1 CIV4 FIN1 FIN4 PHY1 PHY3 PER1 PER3 SUS1 SUS4 PRO1 PRO3 FRI1 FRI3
CIV FIN PHY PER SUS PRO FRI
Model 3
SERB
GERB
Mode 4
ERB
Model 5
GERB SERB
ERB Model 6
Fig. 1. Competitive models of ERBs. The measurement items of Model 4, Model 5, and Model 6 did not display.
Table 8
Fit indices for the six competing models of confirmatory factor analysis.
Model Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6

Chi-square 2746.13 2474.48 884.54 972.20 984.23 972.21
d.f. ¼ 252, p < 0.05 d.f. ¼ 251, p < 0.05 d.f. ¼ 231, p < 0.05 d.f. ¼ 244, p < 0.05 d.f. ¼ 245, p < 0.05 d.f. ¼ 243, p < 0.05
Chi-square/d.f. 10.90 9.86 3.83 3.98 4.02 4.00
GFI 0.68 0.70 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86
AGFI 0.62 0.65 0.83 0.83 0.82 0.82
NFI 0.88 0.89 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95
NNFI 0.88 0.89 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
CFI 0.89 0.90 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.96
IFI 0.89 0.90 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.96
ECVI 5.81 5.26 2.09 2.22 2.24 2.22
RMSEA 0.142 0.135 0.076 0.078 0.079 0.078
SRMR 0.088 0.081 0.063 0.071 0.073 0.071
Model 1 ¼ First-order one-factor model, Model 2 ¼ First-order correlated two-factor model, Model 3 ¼ First-order seven-factor model, Model 4 ¼ Second-order correlated
two-factor model with seven first-order factors, Model 5 ¼ Second-order model with seven first-order factors, Model 6 ¼ Third-order model that was two-factor correlated
with seven first-order.
model fit indices of these models are provided. Model 1 (i.e. first- Located in northern Taiwan, Smangus (121200 5100 E, 24 350 000 N;
order one-factor model) represents a situation in which all ERB elevation 1500e1720 m a.s.l.) is a community consisting mainly of
items (24 items) were in the same construct (ERB). Model 2 (i.e. Tayal aboriginal tribe members. Smangus is the only place that
first-order correlated two-factor model) represents a situation in practices common ownership of land and property in Taiwan.
which all ERB items were classified into two constructs: general Smangus attracts many community-based tourists seeking to
ERB (14 items) and site-specific ERB (10 items). Model 3 (i.e. first- experience the aboriginal lifestyle, alpine landscape and rural
order seven-factor model) shows that all ERB items were grouped tourism. To date, Smangus is a well-known community-based
into seven constructs (i.e. civil action, financial action, physical tourism destination. In particular, the Old Tree Area is renowned for
action, persuasive action, sustainable behavior, pro-environmental its natural resources. Smangus can be reached via from Taichung in
behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior). Model 4 (i.e. approximately five hours.
second-order correlated two-factor model with seven first-order These two community-based destinations were chosen based
factors) represents a general ERB (i.e. civil action, financial action, on several considerations. First, these communities are renowned
physical action, and persuasive action) and a site-specific ERB (i.e. for their natural resources. Next, community residents have
sustainable behavior, pro-environmental behavior, and environ- actively promoted tourism development. Additionally, the two
mentally friendly behavior). Model 5 (i.e. second-order model with communities were transitioning from a traditional agriculture-
seven first-order factors), represents the first-order construct (ERB) based economy to a tourism-based one. Therefore, this study
and the second-order construct (i.e. civil action, financial action, selected Taomi and Smangus as the study sites.
physical action, persuasive action, sustainable behavior, pro- Questionnaires surveys were conducted from mid-January to
environmental behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior). early March 2012. Data were collected using a convenient sampling
Model 6 (i.e. third-order model that was two-factor correlated with method. Six trained assistants administered the survey. The
seven first-order) represents the first-order construct (ERB) with respondents took approximately three minutes to finish the ques-
the second-order constructs, including a general ERB (i.e. third- tionnaire. Totally, 403 usable questionnaires were collected in
order constructs: civil action, financial action, physical action, and Taomi, and 343 usable questionnaires were collected in Smangus.
persuasive action) and a site-specific ERB (i.e. third-order
constructs: sustainable behavior, pro-environmental behavior, 3.3.2. Results
and environmentally friendly behavior). 3.3.2.1. Respondents’ profile. Table 9 lists the profiles of the
Following Jöreskog and Sörbom (1996), the abilities of the two respondents in the two study sites. Briefly, 57.3% were female in
competing nested models significantly differed from each other Taomi, and 51.9% were female in Smangus; 71.7% were married in
was assessed using differences in the c2 values to explain the Taomi, and 54.0% were unmarried in Smangus; 33.1% were between
estimated construct covariance. The Dc2 value for Model 3 41 and 50 years old in Taomi, while 39.0% were between 21 and 30
(c2 ¼ 884.54, d.f. ¼ 231) and Model 1 (c2 ¼ 2746.13, d.f. ¼ 252), years old in Smangus; 49.1% in Taomi and 51.0% in Smangus had
Model 2 (c2 ¼ 2474.48, d.f. ¼ 251), Model 4 (c2 ¼ 972.2, d.f. ¼ 244), attained university or college educational levels; 23.4% were
Model 5 (c2 ¼ 984.23, d.f. ¼ 245), and Model 6 (c2 ¼ 972.21, laborers in Taomi and 30.8% were laborers in Smangus; 31.5% had
d.f. ¼ 243) was 1861.59 (with 21 d.f., p < 0.001), 1589.94 (with 20 monthly incomes ranging from NT$20,000 to NT$40,000 in Taomi
d.f., p < 0.001), 87.66 (with 13 d.f., p < 0.001), 99.69 (with 14 d.f., and 31.0% had monthly incomes below NT$20,000 in Smangus; and
p < 0.001), and 87.67 (with 12 d.f., p < 0.001), indicating that the fits 26.6% lived in Taichung, Chunghwa, and Nantou in Taomi and 34.6%
of Model 3 significantly differ from those of the other competing lived in Taoyuan, Hsinchu, and Miaoli in Smangus. According to the
models. Moreover, comparing the other five competing models Chi-square test, these two study sites significantly differed in
revealed that Model 3 was the best-fitting model. Model 3 was thus marital status, age, occupation, monthly income, and residence.
adopted by comparing the model fits. Taomi attracted tourists whom were married couples, middle-aged,
and living in central Taiwan. Meanwhile, Smangus attracted tour-
3.3. Study 3 ists whom were young adults and living in northern Taiwan.
3.3.1. Methods 3.3.2.2. Cross-validation. Replicability of the proposed model was

Study 3 tests the cross-validation of this research instrument. examined using Model 3 (First-order seven-factor model), which
Two study sites (i.e. Taomi and Smangus) were chosen, Taomi is was obtained in study 2. The cross-validation test was conducted
described in study 2, while Smangus is described in the following. using two samples (i.e. Taomi and Smangus), with Taomi as
Table 9 Table 10
Profiles of the respondents at Taomi and Smangus. Model fits of the cross-validation model.
Variable Taomi Smangus Chi-square Strategy Overall model fit Contribution to chi- %

square
N % N % c2 p
Gender 1.97 0.16 MFFc2 (df) WLSc2 (df) ECVI MFFc2
Male 172 42.7 164 48.1 Loose replication 1517.51 (462) 1554.35 2.46 807.77 (462) 53.23
Female 231 57.3 177 51.9 (462)
Marital status 49.24 0.00 Moderate 1530.62 (486) 1568.5 2.41 814.42 (486) 53.21
Unmarried 113 28.3 184 54.0 replication (486)
Married 286 71.7 157 46.0 Dc ¼ 13.11,
2
Dc ¼ 6.65,
2
Age (years old) 94.58 0.00 Dd.f. ¼ 24, Dd.f. ¼ 24,

16e20 years old 24 6.0 13 3.8 p > 0.05 p > 0.05
21e30 years old 55 13.7 133 39.0 Tight replication 1590.12(531) 1624.85 2.37 848.52 (531) 53.36
31e40 years old 114 28.4 46 13.5 (531)
41e50 years old 133 33.1 57 16.7 Dc2 ¼ 59.50, Dc2 ¼ 34.10,
51e60 years old 56 13.8 71 20.8 Dd.f. ¼ 45, Dd.f. ¼ 45,
Over 61 years 20 5.0 21 6.2 p > 0.05 p > 0.05
Educational 0.61 0.89
level
Junior high school 27 6.7 19 5.6
and below model has the lowest value of ECVI. The cross-validation process
High school 90 22.3 77 22.6 thus also supports our conclusion that the model of tight replica-
University or college 198 49.1 174 51.0
Graduate school 88 21.9 71 20.8
tion is the best fit to our data. Empirical analytical results thus
Occupation 72.14 0.00 suggest that the ERB model with the fullest form of tight replication
Office or teacher 71 17.7 27 7.9 cross-validation works well under strict conditions (MacCallum
Agriculturist, farmer, 8 2.0 4 1.2 et al., 1994).
fisherman
Laborer 94 23.4 105 30.8
Service industry 79 19.7 63 18.5 4. Discussion
Housewife 51 12.7 20 5.9
Retired 15 3.7 15 4.4
Student 33 8.2 88 25.7
Several scholars have conceptualized ERB differently using
Others 51 12.6 19 5.6 different populations. For instance, Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa
Monthly income 11.81 0.04 (1995) developed an ERB scale from locus of control of reinforce-
(NT$a) ment (LOCR), and also examined the relationship between LOCR
&20,000 88 22.6 102 31.0
and ERB. Kaiser and Wilson (2004) developed an ecological
20,001e40,000 123 31.5 93 28.3
40,001e60,000 99 25.4 91 27.7 behavior scale by using a multi-dimensional concept rather than
60,001e80,000 45 11.5 23 7.0 a uni-dimension one. Stern et al. (1999) developed an environ-
80,001e100,000 16 4.1 8 2.4 mentally significant behavior scale based on VBN. Although the
S100,001 19 4.9 12 3.6 above mentioned ERB scales were developed based on different
Residential 93.15 0.00
region
perspectives, these scales were developed for a general ERB rather
Taipei, New Taipei 85 21.3 107 31.7 than a site-specific one. Additionally, while the ERB concept has
City, Ilan been developed using the samples of undergraduate students
Taoyuan, Hsinchu, 57 14.3 117 34.6 (Smith-Sebasto & D’Costa, 1995), automobile drivers (Kaiser, 1998),
Miaoli
and U.S. residents (Stern et al., 1999), conceptualized and developed
Taichung, Chunghwa, 106 26.6 37 10.9
Nantou a general measure of tourists’ ERB has not yet been examined.
Yunlin, Chiayi, Tainan 94 23.6 27 8.0 Moreover, an integrated approach has not been developed to assess
Kaohsiung, Pingtung 57 14.2 47 13.9 both general and on-site specific ERBs of tourist. While attempting
Hualien, Taitung 0 0.0 3 0.9 to fill these research gaps, this study used tourists to conceptualize
a
1US$ ¼ 30.105NT$ (Jul 24 of 2012). and develop an instrument of ERB.
This study examined a first-order seven-factor model (i.e. civil
action, financial action, physical action, persuasive action, sustain-
a calibration sample and Smangus as a validation sample. The able behavior, pro-environmental behavior, and environmentally
cross-validation was tested using the strategies of loose replication, friendly behavior) with a theoretical framework of tourists’ ERB.
moderate replication, and tight replication (Cudeck & Browne, This research instrument indicates how tourists act in terms of ERB,
1983; MacCallum, Roznowski, Mar, & Reith, 1994). Table 10 indi- based on the behaviors of visiting a community-based destination.
cates that the contributions to the Chi-square test results for the By developing this theoretical framework, three studies were
validation sample were 53.23%, 53.21%, and 53.36% in the loose, undertaken to conceptualize and measure ERB. This research
moderate, and tight strategies, respectively, indicating the repli- instrument appears to be rigorously developed and validated
cation of the calibration and validation models. because the study applied several approaches (i.e. literature review,
The loose replication strategy posits that calibration and vali- fuzzy Delphi method, EFA, CFA, and cross-validation) to conduct the
dation have the same factor structure for these two models. The surveys. The sample sizes (i.e. study 2: 490, study 3: 403 in Taomi
Dc2 value for models between loose and moderate replication was and 343 in Smangus) in the empirical survey seem to be adequate
13.11 (with 24 d.f., p > 0.05), indicating that the two samples were for performing CFA analysis based on studies by Marsh, Hau, Balla,
equivalent to the factor loadings across the samples. The Dc2 value and Grayson (1998) and Westland (2010). Moreover, the research
for models between moderate and tight was 59.50 (with 45 d.f., instrument has been tested by the composite reliability, content
p > 0.05), indicating that all of the model parameters were fixed as validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Addition-
constants when the calibration sample solution is refit to the vali- ally, this study displays the cross-samples validity based on the
dation sample’s covariation matrix. Moreover, the tight replication tight replication strategy by using two samples (MacCallum et al.,
1994). Therefore, this study provides a 24-item research instrument the measures and reflects a convenient instrument to collect survey
to assess the tourists’ ERB, thus providing further insight into data. By applying this scale, scholars can survey tourists’ ERB and
community-based tourist behavior by conceptualizing and other precedent or decedent latent variables while visiting
measuring tourists’ ERB. community-based destinations for their academic research.
Moreover, most instruments for conceptualizing and measuring ERB-related items can accurately reflect the behaviors of tourists
ERB of tourists were developed in western countries (Kaiser, 1998; visiting community-based destinations. Community-based desti-
Kaiser & Wilson, 2004; Smith-Sebasto & D’Costa, 1995; Stern et al., nations play an important role in educating tourists on how to
1999). Because of the cultural influences affecting personal ERB appreciate natural resources through interpretation services and
(Cordano, Welcomer, Scherer, Pradenas, & Parada, 2010; Schultz recreational experiences. To date, Taomi and Smangus both provide
et al., 2005), developing a scale for measuring ERB of community- interpretation services for tourists. Tourists can understand and
based tourists in Asian countries is of priority concern. This study appreciate local natural resources, history and culture through the
thus fills a research gap in the literature by more closely examining interpretation services. In particular, several items assess the
ERB of tourists and helping tourism management to prevent degree of the tourists’ behaviors for supporting the local economy,
negative environmental impact of community-based tourism culture, and environment. Meanwhile, these items provide valuable
development. information to manage community-based tourism. Based on the
ERB describes any action that alleviates the adverse environ- application of these items, the managers of community-based
mental impact of an individual or group. In this study, ERB was destinations can fully understand tourists’ perceptions with
conceptualized as the actions performed by tourists to alleviate the respect to the community and subsequently develop sustainable
environmental impact resulting from participation in community- community-based tourism.
based tourism. Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995) described Managers of community-based tourism destinations must
a general ERB as educational action, civil action, financial action, understand the visitors’ inclinations toward ERB and the possibility
legal action, physical action, and persuasive action. Previous studies of sustainable community-based tourism. Managers of community-
have used a general definition of ERB (Beaumont, 2001; Chao & based destinations could thus utilize the 24-item scale of ERB to
Lam, 2011; Chen, 2011; Cottrell, 2003; Halpenny, 2010; Lee, 2011; design and establish environmental education programs for the
Tarrant & Green, 1999; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001) or a site-specific interpretation services. The interpretation strategies use relevant
definition of ERB (Alessa et al., 2003; Chang, 2010; Halpenny, themes, interpretation brochures, pro-environmental corners and
2010; Kim et al., 2011; Vaske & Donnelly, 1999) to measure tour- eco-tours. An ecological-oriented homepage focuses on the
ists’ ERB. Unfortunately, studies with an ERB-related concept that constructs of civil action, financial action, physical action, and
consists of both general and site-specific behaviors are limited. This persuasive action, sustainable behavior, pro-environmental
study provided a 24-item research instrument (including the behavior, and environmentally friendly behavior to further
general and site-specific measurements) to measure the ERB, thus enhance ERB among community-based tourists (Ham & Weiler,
filling this research gap. 2002, chap. 3 ). Moreover, in promoting their pro-environmental
Additionally, although ERB has been assessed for tourists in tour, marketers can use the 24-item scale for assessment, plan-
national parks (Chang, 2010; Halpenny, 2010), nature-based ning, environmental management, and tracking purposes. Conse-
destinations (Alessa et al., 2003; Ballantyne, Packer, & Falk, 2011; quently, the 24-item scale for ERB facilitates the management of
Ballantyne, Packer, & Sutherland, 2011; Chen, 2011; Kim et al., 2011; communities for developing sustainable tourism in the future.
Lee, 2011), recreational areas (Cottrell, 2003; Thapa, 2010), and
protected areas (Brown et al., 2010; Vaske & Donnelly, 1999), the 6. Recommendations for future studies
assessment of ERB remains a relatively unknown subject for
community-based tourists. In this study, the survey was adminis- Despite its contributions, this study has certain limitations. First,
tered to two types of Taiwanese community-based tourists, thus similar to previous studies, because this scale is a self-report
shedding light on ERB of community-based tourists. measurement of tourists’ ERB, it may not accurately represent
actual behavior (Corral-Verdugo, 1997; Lee, 2011; Serenari, Leung,
5. Implications Attarian, & Franck, 2012). An important reason is the effect of
social desirability (Corral-Verdugo, 1997; Mainieri, Barnett,
In contrast to previous efforts to develop scale of ERB such as Valdero, Unipan, & Oskamp, 1997). Although several scholars
Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995), Kaiser (1998), and Stern et al. have observed actual behavior (Chao & Lam, 2011; Corral-Verdugo,
(1999), this study constitutes a potential contribution of signifi- 1997), their research focused only on a general ERB. Future research
cance to tourism literature. First, owing to the lack of the research on the assessment of tourists’ site-specific ERB is thus warranted.
instrument for measuring tourists’ ERB, this study first attempts to Second, the 24-item scale was examined through traditional
fill this research gap by using the rigorous steps involved qualitative agriculture and aboriginal communities in a cross-validation test.
and quantitative methods to develop a general measure of tourists’ We recommend evaluating our instrument to verify its predictive
ERB. This study also developed a 24-item scale to assess ERB of capability in a range of nature-based tourism destinations. There-
community-based tourists based on a Taomi community and used fore, future research should also examine this research instrument
a cross-validation test based on Taomi and Smangus communities. in different communities, such as in isolated small island commu-
By integrating concepts of general and site-specific ERB, this study nities, coastal communities or forest communities of Taiwan, to
develops a first-order, seven-factor measurement model, which is further verify and develop the research instrument for tourists’ ERB.
rarely discussed in community-based tourism literature. This Moreover, although the data of this study were collected rigor-
research instrument is useful not only for academic researchers, but ously in two community-based destinations, the theoretical
also for a greater understanding of tourist behaviors when visiting measures may be limited to the Taiwanese population. Because
community-based destinations. Furthermore, the measurement cultural and racial differences influence outdoor recreational
scale benefits environmental management, tourism management, experiences and personal ERB (Carr & Williams, 1993; Cordano
and community-based tourism development. et al., 2010; Schultz et al., 2005), the lack of surveys using
This research instrument, which comprises a 24-item scale for samples that reflect other racial and international perspectives
a first-order, seven-factor model requires only 2e3 min to complete leaves numerous undetermined questions, such as cross-validation.
We thus recommend that future studies develop a general scale for Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Sutherland, L. A. (2011). Visitors’ memories of wildlife
tourism: implications for the design of powerful interpretive experiences.
further testing of the measurement scale developed in this study to
Tourism Management, 32(4), 770e779.
examine its applicability to other countries. Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera:
Finally, future research should examine how precedent vari- a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental
ables such as recreation experiences, environmental attitude, and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14e25.
Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Incentives, morality, or habit? Predicting
the effects of interpretation education influence tourists’ ERB by students’ car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and
applying this 24-items scale. Additionally, future research should Triandis. Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 264e285.
also examine exactly how the tourists’ ERB contributes to sustain- Barr, S., Shaw, G., & Coles, T. (2011). Sustainable lifestyles: sites, practices, and policy.
Environment and Planning A, 43(12), 3011e3029.
able tourism by assessing ecological footprints or carbon footprints Beaumont, N. (2001). Ecotourism and the conservation ethic: recruiting the
(Dwyer, Forsyth, Spurr, & Hoque, 2010; Gössling & Schumacher, uninitiated or preaching to the converted? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(4),
2010). 317e341.
Becken, S. (2007). Tourists’ perception of international air travel’s impact on the
global climate and potential climate change policies. Journal of Sustainable
7. Conclusions Tourism, 15(4), 351e368.
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experi-
mental social psychology, Vol. 6 (pp. 1e62). New York: Academic Press.
Reducing global warming effects and climate change is of Borden, R. J., & Schettino, A. P. (1979). Determinants of environmentally responsible
priority concern. In tourism, tourists must be educated on ERB behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 10(4), 35e39.
practices. Different cultures affect individual behaviors (Cordano Brown, T. J., Ham, S. H., & Hughes, M. (2010). Picking up litter: an application of
theory-based communication to influence tourist behaviour in protected areas.
et al., 2010; Schultz et al., 2005). Nevertheless, a scale has seldom Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(7), 879e900.
been developed to measure ERB of community-based tourists in Bruyere, B., Nash, P. E., & Mbogella, F. (2011). Predicting participation in environ-
Asian countries, necessitating the development of a related scale. mental education by teachers in coastal regions of Tanzania. The Journal of
Environmental Education, 42(3), 168e180.
Conceptualizing and measuring ERB with a multi-dimensional Carr, D. S., & Williams, D. R. (1993). Understanding the role of ethnicity in outdoor
approach is essential for tourism management. This study thor- recreation experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 25, 22e38.
oughly examines ERB among community-based tourists by using Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., & Bonnes, M. (2008). Emotions, habits and rational choices
in ecological behaviours: the case of recycling and use of public transportation.
three surveys to establish a reliable and valid 24-item scale with Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 51e62.
a first-order, seven-factor model. These seven constructs included Castro, P., Garrido, M., Reis, E., & Menezes, J. (2009). Ambivalence and conservation
civil action, financial action, physical action, persuasive action, behaviour: an exploratory study on the recycling of metal cans. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 29, 24e33.
sustainable behavior, pro-environmental behavior, and environ-
Chang, L. C. (2010). The effects of moral emotions and justifications on visitors’
mentally friendly behavior for conceptualizing and measuring ERB intention to pick flowers in a forest recreation area in Taiwan. Journal of
of community-based tourists. Developing this research instrument Sustainable Tourism, 18(1), 137e150.
Chao, Y. L., & Lam, S. P. (2011). Measuring responsible environmental behavior: self-
is of great value to future research, thus serving as an environ-
reported and other-reported measures and their differences in testing
mental educational material to educate tourists and providing a behavioral model. Environment and Behavior, 43, 53e71.
management implications for sustainable community-based Chen, C. L. (2011). From catching to watching: moving towards quality assurance of
tourism. Finally, based on the theoretical results of this study, this whale/dolphin watching tourism in Taiwan. Marine Policy, 35, 10e17.
Cordano, M., Welcomer, S., Scherer, R., Pradenas, L., & Parada, V. (2010). Under-
research instrument also performs well in terms of testing and standing cultural differences in the antecedents of pro-environmental
examining significant behavioral implications for international and behavior: a comparative analysis of business students in the United States
multicultural perspectives. and Chile. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(4), 224e238.
Corral-Verdugo, V. (1997). Dual “realities” of conservation behavior: self-reports vs.
observations of reuse and recycling behavior. Journal of Environmental
Appendix A. Supplementary data Psychology, 17, 135e145.
Cottrell, S. P. (2003). Influence of socio-demographics and environmental attitudes
on general responsible environmental behavior among recreational boaters.
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http:// Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 347e375.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.012. Council for Cultural Affairs. (2011). Introduction of community development. Retrieved
from. http://www.cca.gov.tw/business.do?method¼list&id¼5 Accessed 23.05.11.
Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures.
References Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 147e167.
Davis, J. L., Green, J. D., & Reed, A. (2009). Interdependence with the environment:
Alessa, L., Bennett, S. M., & Kliskey, A. D. (2003). Effects of knowledge, personal commitment, interconnectedness, and environmental behavior. Journal of
attribution and perception of ecosystem health on depreciative behaviors in the Environmental Psychology, 29, 173e180.
intertidal zone of Pacific Rim National Park and Reserve. Journal of Environ- Dawson, J., Stewart, E. J., Lemelinc, H., & Scott, D. (2010). The carbon cost of
mental Management, 68(2), 207e218. polarbear viewing tourism in Churchill, Canada. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: 18(3), 319e336.
a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411e Dickinson, J. E., & Robbins, D. (2008). Representations of tourism transport prob-
423. lems in a rural destination. Tourism Management, 29, 1110e1121.
Andersson, L., Shivarajan, S., & Blau, G. (2005). Enacting ecological sustainability in Dono, J., Webb, J., & Richardson, B. (2010). The relationship between environmental
the MNC: a test of an adapted value-belief-norm framework. Journal of Business activism, pro-environmental behaviour and social identity. Journal of Environ-
Ethics, 59(3), 295e305. mental Psychology, 30, 178e186.
Ap, J. (1992). Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, Duerden, M. D., & Witt, P. A. (2010). The impact of direct and indirect experiences on
19(4), 665e690. the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. Journal
Atik, M. (2010). Environmental protection in coastal recreation sites in Antalya, of Environmental Psychology, 30, 379e392.
Turkey. Coastal Management, 38(6), 598e616. Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., Spurr, R., & Hoque, S. (2010). Estimating the carbon footprint
Axelrod, L. J., & Lehman, D. R. (1993). Responding to environmental concerns: what of Australian tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 355e376.
factors guide individual action? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(2),149e159. Fietkau, H. J., & Kessel, H. (1981). Umweltlernen: Veraenderungsmoeglichkeite n des
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structure equation models. Umweltbewusstseins. Modell-Erfahrungen (Koenigstein, Hain).
Academic of Marketing Science, 16(1), 76e94. Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2002). Measurement and determinants of
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J. (2011). Visitors’ learning for environmental environmentally significant consumer behavior. Environment and Behavior,
sustainability: testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism expe- 34(3), 335e362.
riences. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1243e1252. Gössling, S., & Schumacher, K. P. (2010). Implementing carbon neutral destination
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Hughes, K. (2008). Environmental awareness, interests policies: issues from the Seychelles. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3),
and motives of botanic gardens visitors: implications for interpretive practice. 377e391.
Tourism Management, 29, 439e444. Hair, J. J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Hughes, K. (2009). Tourists’ support for conservation data analysis (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
messages and sustainable management practices in wildlife tourism experi- Halpenny, E. A. (2010). Pro-environmental behaviours and park visitors: the effect
ences. Tourism Management, 30(5), 658e664. of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 409e421.
Ham, S., & Weiler, B. (2002). Interpretation as the centrepiece in sustainable wildlife tourist and Mi’kmaw perspectives. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(4), 539e
tourism. In R. Harris, T. Griffin, & P. Williams (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A global 556.
perspective. London: Butterworth-Heinneman. MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., Mar, C. M., & Reith, J. V. (1994). Alternative
Han, H., Hsu, L. T. J., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior strategies for cross-validation of covariance structure models. Multivariate
to green hotel choice: testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Behavioral Research, 29, 1e32.
Tourism Management, 31, 325e334. Mainieri, T., Barnett, E. G., Valdero, T. R., Unipan, J. B., & Oskamp, S. (1997). Green
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of buying: the influence of environmental concern on consumer behavior. Journal
research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. The Journal of of Social Psychology, 137(2), 189e204.
Environmental Education, 18(2), 1e8. Manyara, G., & Jones, E. (2007). Community-based tourism enterprises develop-
Homburg, A., & Stolberg, A. (2006). Explaining pro-environmental behavior with ment in Kenya: an exploration of their potential as avenues of poverty reduc-
a cognitive theory of stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 1e14. tion. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 628e644.
Jeng, T. B. (2001). Fuzzy assessment model for maturity of software organization in Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Balla, J. R., & Grayson, D. (1998). Is more ever too much? The
improving its staff’s capability. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University of number of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis. Multivariate
Science and Technology. Behavioral Research, 33(2), 181e220.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago, IL: Mbaiwa, J. E., & Stronza, A. L. (2010). The effects of tourism development on rural
Scientific Software International. livelihoods in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
Kafyri, A., Hovardas, T., & Poirazidis, K. (2012). Determinants of visitor pro- 18(5), 635e656.
environmental intentions on two small Greek islands: is ecotourism possible McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural
at coastal protected areas? Environmental Management, 50(1), 64e76. equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64e82.
Kaiser, F. G. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied McKenzie-Mohr, D., Nemiroff, L. S., Beers, L., & Desmarais, S. (1995). Determinants of
Social Psychology, 28(5), 395e422. responsible environmental behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 51(4), 139e156.
Kaiser, F. G., & Biel, A. (2000). Assessing general ecological behavior: a cross-cultural Mehmetoglu, M. (2010). Factors influencing the willingness to behave environ-
comparison between Switzerland and Sweden. European Journal of Psycholog- mentally friendly at home and holiday settings. Scandinavian Journal of Hospi-
ical Assessment, 16, 44e52. tality and Tourism, 10(4), 430e447.
Kaiser, F. G., Doka, G., Hofstetter, P., & Ranney, M. A. (2003). Ecological behavior and Meijers, M. H. C., & Stapel, D. A. (2011). Me tomorrow, the others later: how
its environmental consequences: a life cycle assessment of a self-report perspective fit increases sustainable behavior. Journal of Environmental
measure. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(1), 11e20. Psychology, 31, 14e20.
Kaiser, F. G., & Gutscher, H. (2003). The proposition of a general version of the Miller, G. (2001). The development of indicators for sustainable tourism: results of
theory of planned behavior: predicting ecological behavior. Journal of Applied a Delphi survey of tourism researchers. Tourism Management, 22(4), 351e362.
Social Psychology, 33, 586e603. Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K., & Tribe, J. (2010). Public under-
Kaiser, F. G., & Keller, C. (2001). Disclosing situational constraints to ecological standing of sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(3), 627e645.
behavior: a confirmatory application of the mixed Rasch model. European Min, J. C. H. (2012). A short-form measure for assessment of emotional intelligence
Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 212e221. for tour guides: development and evaluation. Tourism Management, 33, 155e167.
Kaiser, F. G., & Wilson, M. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: the specific Mobley, C., Vagias, W. M., & DeWard, S. L. (2010). Exploring additional determinants
composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, of environmentally responsible behavior: the influence of environmental liter-
1531e1544. ature and environmental attitudes. Environment and Behavior, 42(4), 420e447.
Kaiser, F. G., Wölfing, S., & Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental attitude and ecological Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2002). Value structures behind proenvironmental
behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 1e19. behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34(6), 740e756.
Kilbourne, W., & Pickett, G. (2008). How materialism affects environmental beliefs, Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
concern, and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Business McGraw-Hill.
Research, 61, 885e893. Orams, M. B. (1997). The effectiveness of environmental education: can we turn
Kim, A. K., Airey, D., & Szivas, E. (2011). The multiple assessment of interpretation tourists into ‘Greenies’? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3, 295e
effectiveness: promoting visitors’ environmental attitudes and behavior. Journal 306.
of Travel Research, 50(3), 321e334. Park, E., & Boo, S. (2010). An assessment of convention tourism’s potential contri-
Kim, Y., & Han, H. (2010). Intention to pay conventional-hotel prices at a green hotel bution to environmentally sustainable growth. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
e a modification of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Sustainable 18(1), 95e113.
Tourism, 18(8), 997e1014. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Kang, Y. S. (1999). Boomtown tourism and resident
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). quality of life: the marketing of gaming to host community residents. Journal of
New York, NY: Guilford Press. Business Research, 44(3), 165e177.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environ- Pickering, C., & Mount, A. (2010). Do tourists disperse weed seed? A global review of
mentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ- unintentional human-mediated terrestrial seed dispersal on clothing, vehicles
mental Education Research, 8(3), 239e260. and horses. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(2), 239e256.
Lee, B. K., Agarwal, S., & Kim, H. J. (2012). Influences of travel constraints on the Poitras, L., & Getz, D. (2006). Sustainable wine tourism: the host community
people with disabilities’ intention to travel: an application of Seligman’s help- perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(5), 425e448.
lessness theory. Tourism Management, 33(3), 569e579. Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L. D. G., & Weiler, B. Relationships between place attach-
Lee, C. K., & Back, K. J. (2006). Examining structural relationships among perceived ment, place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviour in an Australian
impact, benefit, and support for casino development based on 4 year longitu- national park. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, in press.
dinal data. Tourism Management, 27, 466e480. Ramkissoon, H., Weiler, B., & Smith, L. D. G. (2012). Place attachment and pro-
Lee, S. P., & Lin, Y. J. (2001). The relationship between environmental attitudes and environmental behaviour in national parks: the development of a conceptual
behavior of ecotourism: a case study of Guandu Natural Park. Journal of Outdoor framework. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(2), 257e276.
Recreation Study, 14(3), 15e36, (in Chinese with English summary). Rice, G. (2006). Pro-environmental behavior in Egypt: is there a role for Islamic
Lee, T. H. (2007). Ecotourism behavioural model of national forest recreation areas environmental ethics? Journal of Business Ethics, 65, 373e390.
in Taiwan. International Forestry Review, 9(3), 771e785. Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: the effects of perspective taking on
Lee, T. H. (2009). A structural model for examining how destination image and concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 391e406.
interpretation service affect future behavior: a case study of Taiwan’s Taomi Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P., & Franek, M.
eco-village. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(6), 727e745. (2005). Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conserva-
Lee, T. H. (2011). How recreation involvement, place attachment, and conservation tion behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 457e475.
commitment affect environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Sustainable Scott, D. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behavior: a Pennsylvania survey.
Tourism, 19(7), 895e915. Environment and Behavior, 26(2), 239e260.
Lee, T. H. (2013). Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable Serenari, C., Leung, Y. F., Attarian, A., & Franck, C. (2012). Understanding environ-
tourism development. Tourism Management, 34(1), 37e46. mentally significant behavior among whitewater rafting and trekking guides in
Lee, W. H., & Moscardo, G. (2005). Understanding the impact of ecotourism resort the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(5), 757e772.
experiences on tourists’ environmental attitudes and behavioural intentions. Sivek, D. J., & Hungerford, H. (1990). Predictors of responsible behavior in members
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 546e565. of three Wisconsin conservation organizations. The Journal of Environmental
Lepp, A. (2007). Residents’ attitudes towards tourism in Bigodi village, Uganda. Education, 21(2), 35e40.
Tourism Management, 28, 876e885. Smith-Sebasto, N. J., & D’Costa, A. (1995). Designing a Likert-type scale to predict
Logar, I. (2010). Sustainable tourism management in Crikvenica, Croatia: an environmentally responsible behavior in undergraduate students: a multistep
assessment of policy instruments. Tourism Management, 31, 125e135. process. The Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 14e20.
Lu, C. S., Lai, K. H., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2007). Application of structural equation Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant
modeling to evaluate the intention of shippers to use Internet services in liner behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407e424.
shipping. European Journal of Operational Research, 180, 845e867. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm
Lynch, M. F., Duinker, P., Sheehan, L., & Chute, J. (2010). Sustainable Mi’kmaw theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Human
cultural tourism development in Nova Scotia, Canada: examining cultural Ecology Review, 6(2), 81e97.
Taiwan Ecotourism Association. (2011). Introduction for Taiwan Ecotourism Associ- Tsung Hung Lee (PhD, 1999) is Professor in the Graduate
ation. Retrieved from. http://www.ecotour.org.tw/p/blog-page_04.html. School of Leisure and Exercise Studies at National Yunlin
Taiwan Tourism Bureau. (2012). Tourism policy. Retrieved from. http://admin. University of Science & Technology, Taiwan. His research
taiwan.net.tw/public/public_en.aspx?no¼6. interests are in the areas of ecotourism, recreational
Tarrant, M. A., & Green, G. T. (1999). Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity behavior, and sustainable tourism. He has authored or co-
of environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences, 21, 17e30. authored journal articles on leisure, recreation, and
Teh, L., & Cabanban, A. S. (2007). Planning for sustainable tourism in southern tourism studies in Taiwan and internationally.
Pulau Banggi: an assessment of biophysical conditions and their implications
for future tourism development. Journal of Environmental Management, 85,
999e1008.
Thapa, B. (2010). The mediation effect of outdoor recreation participation on
environmental attitude-behavior correspondence. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 41(3), 133e150.
Thøgersen, J. (2009). The motivational roots of norms for environmentally
responsible behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31, 348e362. Fen Hauh Jan is an instructor in the Department of
Törn, A., Tolvanen, A., Norokorpi, Y., Tervo, R., & Siikamäki, P. (2009). Comparing the Tourism and Hospitality at Transworld University, Taiwan.
impacts of hiking, skiing and horse riding on trail and vegetation in different She is also a Ph. D. candidate in the Graduate Institute of
types of forest. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1427e1434. Management at National Yunlin University of Science &
Vaske, J. J., & Donnelly, M. P. (1999). A value-attitude-behavior model predicting Technology, Taiwan. Her research interests are in the areas
wildland preservation voting intentions. Society & Natural Resources, 12(6), of community-based tourism, tourists’ behavior, and
523e537. sustainable tourism.
Vaske, J. J., & Kobrin, K. C. (2001). Place attachment and environmentally
responsible behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 16e21.
Walker, G. J., & Chapman, R. (2003). Thinking like a park: the effects of sense of
place, perspective-taking, and empathy on pro-environmental intentions.
Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 21(4), 71e86.
Wearing, S. L., Wearing, M., & McDonald, M. (2010). Understanding local power and
interactional processes in sustainable tourism: exploring village-tour operator
relations on the Kokoda Track, Papua New Guinea. Journal of Sustainable Chung Cheng Yang (PhD, 2000) is an assistant professor in
Tourism, 18(1), 61e76. the Accounting Department at National Yunlin University
Westland, J. C. (2010). Lower bounds on sample size in structural equation of Science & Technology, Taiwan. His research interests are
modeling. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(6), 476e487. in the areas of economic analysis, economic model, and
Whitmarsh, L., & O’Neill, S. (2011). Green identity, green living? The role corporate governance.
of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency cross diverse
pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 305e314.
Yoon, Y., Gursoy, D., & Chen, J. S. (2001). Validating a tourism development theory
with structural equation modeling. Tourism Management, 22, 363e372.
Yu, C. P. S., Chancellor, H. C., & Cole, S. T. (2011). Measuring residents’ attitudes
toward sustainable tourism: a reexamination of the sustainable tourism atti-
tude scale. Journal of Travel Research, 50(1), 57e63.

Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., & Yang, C. C.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., & Yang, C. C.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., & Yang, C. C.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tourism Management 36 (2013) 454e468

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the

< We develop a reliable and valid measurement to assess ERB of tourists.

Terminology Sources Deﬁnitions References

Construct Deﬁnition Referencesa

Table 3 Table 3 (continued)

ERB1 ERB24 GERB1 GERB14 SERB15 SERB24

CIV FIN PHY PER SUS PRO FRI

CIV FIN PHY PER SUS PRO FRI

CIV FIN PHY PER SUS PRO FRI

CIV FIN PHY PER SUS PRO FRI

Model Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6

3.3.1. Methods 3.3.2.2. Cross-validation. Replicability of the proposed model was

Variable Taomi Smangus Chi-square Strategy Overall model ﬁt Contribution to chi- %

Age (years old) 94.58 0.00 Dd.f. ¼ 24, Dd.f. ¼ 24,

You might also like