The Mediating Roles of the Overall Perceived Value of the Ecotourism Site and Attitudes Towards Ecotourism in Sustainability Through the Key Relationship Ecotourism Knowledge-Ecotourist Satisfaction

Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ “This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Oviedo-García, M. Á., Castellanos-Verdugo, M., Vega-Vázquez, M., and Orgaz-Agüera, F. (2017) The Mediating Roles of the Overall Perceived Value of the Ecotourism Site and Attitudes Towards Ecotourism in Sustainability Through the Key Relationship Ecotourism Knowledge-Ecotourist Satisfaction. Int. J. Tourism Res., 19: 203–213. doi: 10.1002/jtr.2097 , which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2097. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. This article may not be enhanced, enriched or otherwise transformed into a derivative work, without express permission from Wiley or by statutory rights under applicable legislation. Copyright notices must not be removed, obscured or modified. The article must be linked to Wiley’s version of record on Wiley Online Library and any embedding, framing or otherwise making available the article or pages thereof by third parties from platforms, services and websites other than Wiley Online Library must be prohibited." 1 The mediating roles of the overall perceived value of the ecotourism site and attitudes towards ecotourism in sustainability through the key relationship ecotourism knowledge-ecotourist satisfaction. Abstract Tourist satisfaction is a key factor in tourism sustainability. A multiple mediation model is proposed to analyze the relationship between ecotourism knowledge and ecotourist satisfaction, assisting our understanding of the generative mechanism by which ecotourism knowledge influences ecotourist satisfaction. Ecotourists at the Natural Park Saltos de la Damajagua (Dominican Republic) were administered a questionnaire. The results (PLSSEM) show that ecotourism site perceived value and attitudes towards ecotourism fully mediate the influence of ecotourism knowledge on ecotourist satisfaction. Ecotourism knowledge will therefore only have positive effects on ecotourist satisfaction when the ecotourism site is of high perceived value and there are positive attitudes towards ecotourism. Keywords: ecotourist satisfaction, ecotourism knowledge, attitudes towards ecotourism, ecotourist site perceived value; mediators 2 INTRODUCTION Tourism is an industry that has experienced a period of accelerated growth since the mid-20th c., at present representing 9.5% of global GNP and 9% of global employment (World Travel and Tourism Council, 2015). However, this growth has not gone unnoticed, contributing to undesirable socio-economic and environmental changes (Hall, Scott & Gössling, 2013). Thus, in some cases the tourist industry can neither be considered environmentally clean nor neutral to local populations (Simão & Partidário, 2012); hence the priority to base tourism development on sustainability principles. In accordance with the World Tourism Organization (2004), the principles of sustainable tourism may be applied to all types of destinations, through the following strategies: a) optimal use of environmental resources that preserve ecological processes, natural heritage and biodiversity; b) respect for the sociocultural authenticity of host communities; while, c) providing fairly distributed socio-economic benefits to all. To do so, the informed participation of all stakeholders involved in sustainable tourism development is required as well as constant impact monitoring to introduce corrective actions when needed and, finally, but no less importantly, to maintain a high level of tourist satisfaction through a significant experience that raises awareness of the importance and the need for sustainability. Ecotourism, a particular kind of tourism, closely related with environmentally and culturally sensitive areas, contributes to environmental conservation and ecological sustainability (Reimer & Walter, 2013), as well as to the economy. Ecotourism stresses features such as sustainability (ecological, socio-cultural and economic), distribution of benefits and ethics, responsibility, and awareness, while travelers experience and learn about the natural areas. 3 Ecotourism takes up between 5% to 10% of the global travel market place (Hultman, Kazeminia & Ghasemi, 2015) and has become one of the fastest-growing sectors in the tourism industry (Das and Chatterjee, 2015), with an annual growth rate of 5% worldwide, almost three times faster than general tourism (Hultman et al., 2015). Previous research on ecotourism has focused on consumer preferences, market segmentation, travel behavior patterns, ecotourism benefits, travel motivations, and ecotourism activities (Hultman et al., 2015). Nevertheless, studies on ecotourist satisfaction have surprisingly been neglected (Chan & Baum, 2007a; 2007b). This neglect is striking, as not only does the World Tourism Organization establish the importance of achieving sustainable tourism development, but, in addition, sustainable tourism development is a key factor in the longterm success of ecotourism products and destinations. Ecotourism is a holistic, experiential product, where the experiences of the ecotourists will shape their perceptions of the ecotourism site (Chan & Baum, 2007b). The tourist experience at the destination is a powerful driver of future behavior, because it is a key factor in the determination of customer satisfaction (Kim, 2014). Greater comprehension of ecotourist satisfaction is a previous step to establishing a relationship with future behavioral intentions which are key factors in the work of destination managers. Thanks to their knowledge of ecotourist satisfaction, these managers will use their resources more effectively and will have more instruments to design an attractive image of the destination. While there is abundant literature on tourist satisfaction and its impact on desirable outcomes such as word-of-mouth recommendations and revisit intentions (e.g., Chen & Tsai 2007; Prayag, Hosany & Odeh, 2013; Yüksel & Yüksel, 2007), to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the analysis of a key cognitive element -ecotourism knowledgeon the 4 satisfaction of the ecotourist is non-existent, even though individual cognition and feelings about the experience are significant determinants of its quality, much more so than sociological factors (such as income and socioeconomic status) (Chan & Baum, 2007b; Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991). Clearly, the feelings and the attitudes of tourists towards their visit shape their experiences (Chan & Baum, 2007b). Additionally, although perceived value is useful for explaining consumer opinions and their subsequent reactions (Moliner Velázquez, Gil Saura & Ruiz Molina, 2011), there is a lack of knowledge about its drivers (Prebensen, Woo, Chen & Uysal, 2012) and its effects on satisfaction in the case of an ecotourism destination. Therefore, to shed light on what shapes the ecotourism experience of the tourist is crucial. There are no previous studies testing the joint impact of ecotourism knowledge on ecotourist satisfaction, the overall perceived value of the ecotourism resource, and attitudes towards ecotourism on satisfaction. These last two might be mediating variables between ecotourism knowledge and ecotourist satisfaction. The research question that this paper addresses is how the perceived value of an ecotourism site and attitudes towards ecotourism influence the relationship between ecotourism knowledge and ecotourist satisfaction. Hence, the mediating role of the two former variables in the effect of ecotourism knowledge on ecotourist satisfaction. LINKING ECOTOURISM KNOWLEDGE AND ECOTOURIST SATISFACTION Ecotourism knowledge and tourist satisfaction Knowledge is the body of facts and the principles accumulated by humankind about a domain which contains declarative and procedural knowledge. Knowing about things, facts, concepts 5 and interrelations that can be verbally communicated or held in mental models is declarative knowledge; while procedural knowledge refers to the skills of knowing how to perform (Tsaur, Yen & Chen, 2010). Knowledge can be either objective or subjective (also called perceived). Objective knowledge refers to the information actually stored in a person’s brain, that is, how much a person really knows about a product, issue or object, while subjective knowledge is a self-assessment of the individual’s own knowledge (Barber, 2012; Huang, Gursoy & Xu, 2014; Vicente-Molina et al., 2013) which can therefore be assessed using self-reporting measures, as is done in this research. Knowledge as a buying behavior construct includes familiarity and expertise (Prebensen, Woo & Uysal, 2014). Familiarity, the early stages of learning, is subjective knowledge of a matter, as it refers to what consumers think they know about a product. Expertise, at advanced stages of learning, represents objective knowledge of a product, in that it refers to the ability to perform product-related tasks (Gursoy & McCleary, 2004; Prebensen et al., 2014). The prior knowledge sources of a tourist are diverse and include: their experiences with the destination, other visual, verbal and sensory stimuli (such as advertisements, articles and television programming) experiences, and the ongoing search of each tourist for satisfaction (Gursoy & McCleary, 2004). Even though previous research on environmental knowledge shows that it has no generally accepted definition –ranging from specific factual information and conceptual understanding, to self-definition by the visitor (Ardoin, Wheaton, Bowers, Hunt & Durham, 2015)- it may be said that environmental knowledge is the ability to identify symbols, concepts and behavior 6 patterns related to environmental protection (Laroche, Bergeron& Barbaro-Forleo, 2001). These aspects are knowledge and awareness of environmental problems and their possible solutions (Zsóka, Szerényi, Széchy & Kocsis, 2013), showing a degree of concern with regard to natural environments (Cheng & Wu, 2015). The relation between environmental and pro-environmental knowledge has been studied in the context of ecotourism, as the ecotourism concept highlights the natural conservation of a tourist site, and it therefore builds up the environmental awareness of tourists (Chiu, Lee& Chen, 2014). Nevertheless, empirical evidence has not been able to arrive at an unequivocal definition of the direct relation between environmental knowledge and pro-environmental or environmentally responsible behavior (Cheng & Wu, 2015; Laroche et al., 2001; Zsóka et al., 2013). In a more concrete way, the specific investigation of ecotourism knowledge is very scarce. We are only aware of two investigations in this field. Wurzinger and Johansson (2006), regardless of the type of tourist (ecotourists, nature tourists and city tourists), detected a limited knowledge of ecotourism in a sample of Swedish tourists in Sweden, which was evaluated by means of two open questions, to establish whether tourists knew the term and how they would describe it. Moreover, although Moghimehfar, Halpenny, and Ziaee (2014) recently found higher levels of ecotourism knowledge, their results showed that by no means would it lead to ideal ecotourism behavior at the destination. It is common to use synonyms in tourism literature. All the more so, even though there are nuances in the following three terms, knowledge, experience, and familiarity, those terms are often considered closely related (Tam, 2008; Ha & Perks, 2005). As the ability to perform product-related tasks depends on familiarity and expertise, individual satisfaction is a 7 function of personal knowledge. From a dynamic perspective, Tam (2008: 4) stated that, “as experience increases, not only [do] expectations become entrenched, but they may also coincide with perceived performance”, and be less likely to “result in disconfirmation” which suggests that satisfaction is influenced by accumulated experience. Additionally, familiarity may lead to positive evaluations of a service or object due to consumer feelings of intimacy (Tam, 2008). So, tourist knowledge may be expected to influence satisfaction (Tsaur et al., 2010). Along these lines, Ha, and Perks (2005) found a direct, positive relationship between brand familiarity and satisfaction and Tam (2008) found that restaurant customer satisfaction depends on the customer’s level of brand familiarity. From the standpoint of the sustainability of tourism activity, the achievement of a high level of tourist satisfaction is one of its essential requirements. In the literature on marketing and management, satisfaction is an important construct, due to its crucial role in the long-term survival of any type of business, including tourism activities, thanks to its effect on repeat purchase of the product/service and recommendations. Satisfaction, more specifically, overall post-purchase evaluation (Sun, Chi & Xu, 2013; Yoon, Lee & Lee, 2010), has empirically shown its capacity to predict loyalty, but also the consumption of products and services, the decision to return and, in a tourism context, destination choice (Chi, 2011, 2012; Chi & Qu, 2008; Prayag & Ryan, 2012). All of the above leads us to propose that: H1. Ecotourism knowledge has a positive relationship with ecotourist satisfaction. However, some authors have found a different relation to that which we propose between awareness and satisfaction. In two studies on the effects of quality and satisfaction upon awareness and behavioral intentions, at a wine festival and at a food and wine festival, direct, 8 positive relations between satisfaction and awareness were found (Mason & Nassivera, 2013; Yuan & Jang, 2008), in such a way that not only were the positive effects of satisfaction on behavioral intention directly noted, but they were also assessed in terms of customer awareness. Moreover, Lee and Back (2008) researched attendee behavior at a CHRIE (Council on Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Education) conference and, unexpectedly, found a direct negative influence of CHRIE conference brand awareness on brand satisfaction. This surprising relationship could be explained through contrast theory, which implies that customers tend to exaggerate the discrepancy between actual performance and product expectations when product performance generates dissatisfaction for them. These opposing results to hypothesis H1 that we propound lead us to think that the relation between knowledge and satisfaction may be measured by other variables, such as perception and attitudes. The mediating role of the perceived value of an ecotourism site and attitudes towards ecotourism Customer value is the result of customer evaluation of the benefits and costs related to tangible and intangible products, together with the combination of quality, service and price (Chiu et al., 2014). So, value is the subjective “overall assessment [of the consumers] of the utility of a product based on their perceptions of what is received and what is given” (Zeithaml, 1988: 14). Therefore, consumers evaluate products and services considering what they have invested (money, time and effort) against what they have achieved (results and desired benefits) (Moliner Velázquez et al., 2011). 15 show its effects. Reflective indicators constitute a representative set of all possible items within the conceptual domain of a construct (Diamantopoulos & Winklhofer, 2001). Reliability and validity have to be checked to assess reflective constructs. Reliability should be checked by means of composite reliability, a more appropriate measure of the internal consistency than Cronbach’s alpha (Hair, Sarstedt, Hopkins & Kuppelwieser, 2014). Validity assessment involves checking both convergent validity (when each item has outer loadings above 0.70 and when each construct’s average variance extracted –AVE- is 0.50 or higher) and discriminant validity (when the AVE of each construct should be higher than the highest squared correlation with any other construct) (Hair et al., 2014). The empirical assessment of formative constructs involves checking convergent validity, via a redundancy analysis, and collinearity and, finally, a bootstrapping (a resampling technique) routine is required in order to establish the level of significance of each indicator weight, using t-values (Hair et al., 2014). The reflective constructs in the model are ecotourism knowledge, overall perceived value and ecotourist satisfaction, while attitude towards ecotourism is a formative construct. In the proposed model the dependent variables are ecotourist satisfaction, ecotourist site perceived value and attitudes towards ecotourism, while ecotourism knowledge is the independent variable. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Data were processed using IBM SPSS 22 and Smart-PLS (version SmartPls 2.0.M3) software packages. In the social sciences, the structural equation modeling technique of PLS has been one of the most important recent developments in multivariant analysis and is now widely used (Richter, Cepeda, Roldán & Ringle, 2015). 16 Measurement model. Reliability and validity The evaluation of the reliability and the validity of the measurement model for the reflective constructs was done by analyzing the individual reliability of the item, the study of the internal consistency of the construct, its convergent validity and the analysis of discriminant validity (Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle & Mena, 2012). The analysis of the individual reliability of each item was done through a study of the factorial loads of each indicator and its respective construct. In general, the indicators with loads of over 0.707 were accepted. As may be seen from table 1, except for one indicator, they all presented values over the recommended minimum value. It was decided to maintain the same indicator as the deviation was not significant (Barclay, Higgins & Thompson, 1995). In addition, proposals such as those from Claver-Cortés, Pertusa-Ortega, and Molina- Azorín (2011) all lend support to that decision, by affirming that this circumstance can occur in causal models that employ items in different theoretical contexts and investigations. So, Chin (1988a) upheld that in exploratory research, as presented in this article, the rule of loads of over 0.707 should not be so rigid in the initial stages of the development of the scales. Finally, it is worth maintaining the indicator from the point of view of its content validity (Roldán & Sánchez-Franco, 2012). ---Insert Table 1 about here--- The internal consistency of the scales was evaluated through the index of composite reliability. In the proposed model in the research, the three reflective constructs exceeded the value of 0.07 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Convergent validity was examined through Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (Hair, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2011), which measures the amount of variance that a construct captures from its indicators in relation to the amount due 17 to measurement error (Chin, 1998a). The results show that the reflective constructs present convergent validity as their values are over 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 2 shows the results of the divergent validity study. The square root of the AVE for each latent variable should be higher than their corresponding correlations with other constructs. As may be seen, the figures on the diagonal line are higher than the rest of the values of its corresponding row and column (Barclay et al., 1995). ---Insert Table 2 about here--- With regard to the formative construct (attitude), the weights reveal information on the composition and relative importance of each indicator (Chin, 1998b). The Variance Inflation Factor was calculated to check for multi-collinearity. The maximum VIF was 2.03 (table 1), lower than the recommended threshold of 3.3 (Roldán & Sánchez-Franco, 2012). So, the results of the analysis of the reflective constructs and the formative construct of the measurement model guarantee their reliability and validity. Structural model The use of bootstrapping (5000 resamples) generates standard errors and t-statistics to evaluate the statistical significance of the path coefficients (Hair, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2011). The bootstrapping confidence intervals of standardized regression coefficients were also calculated. A percentile approach was used, as it has the advantage of being completely distribution free (Chin, 2010). In accordance with the results in table 3, the model has predictive validity for all the dependent variables. We evaluated the model with the crossvalidated redundancy index (Q2) for the reflective endogenous variables (Chin, 2010). The value of Q2 was higher than zero, implying that the model has predictive validity. 18 ---Insert Table 3 about here--- Ecotourism knowledge has a totally significant effect on satisfaction (c=0.44; t=5.36), as may be seen in figure 1A and in table 4. The proposal described by Hayes, Preacher and Myers (2011) was followed to test these hypotheses. Figure 1A only represents the total effect of knowledge on satisfaction and indicates that the greater the knowledge of visitors of the protected area, the greater their levels of satisfaction (R2 =0.20). Figure 1B represents the total effect of knowledge on satisfaction as the sum of the direct effect (c´) and indirect effects (a1b1 + a2b2). These indirect effects are expressed as the product of the coefficient path for each of the paths in the mediational chain. No support for hypothesis H1 is found in the results. The direct effect of ecotourism knowledge on satisfaction (c´) is not significant and its confidence interval includes zero. However, the effects of ecotourism knowledge on the overall perceived value of the tourism site as well as on attitudes towards ecotourism were significant (table 4). ---Insert Table 4 about here--- When considering the mediating variables (overall perceived value of ecotourism-site and attitude towards ecotourism), knowledge has no direct significant effect on satisfaction (H1: c´= 0.09; t= 1.52). In accordance with these results, both overall perceived value and attitude were seen to mediate the relation between knowledge and satisfaction in the context under analysis, confirming hypotheses H2 and H3. The effect of knowledge on satisfaction was only evident through the variables perception of the ecotourism-site (b1=0.57) and attitude towards ecotourism (b2=0.20). The presence of these two variables affected the relation between ecotourism knowledge and ecotourist satisfaction. Knowledge had a positive and significant effect on the perceptions of the value of the ecotourism-site (a1=0.41), which in 19 turn had a positive and significant effect on satisfaction. Besides, knowledge also had a positive and significant relation with attitude (a2=0.60) and attitude predicted the visitor satisfaction with the ecotourism site. The Variance Accounted for (VAF) factor was used, to measure the degree of mediation. This indicator evaluates the relation between the indirect effect (a1b1 + a2b2) and the total effect (c). When this indicator is below 20%, there is no mediating effect whatsoever. If situated between 20% and 80%, the effect is partial and when over 80% the mediating effect is total (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt 2014). In this work, the VAF factor was 80%. In summary, perceptions and attitude totally mediate the relation between the knowledge and the satisfaction of the visitor. The overall perceived value of the ecotourism site explains 39.90% of the variance of satisfaction, while attitude explains only 10.20% (R2 = 0.54). IMPLICATIONS Considering that perceived value is an evaluation of related sacrifices and benefits to tourism services, in this case, all the activities that contribute to increasing the benefits or to reducing the costs will improve perceived value. Accordingly, the value perceptions of ecotourists are influenced by their perceptions of the benefits that the ecotourism site offers them. Visitors can develop numerous ecotourism activities on walks along pathways, observation and photography of the flora and fauna, and other activities related with the river Damajagua; the higher the perceived benefits of the tourism product, the greater the perceived value. Moreover, the enlarged services are a fundamental source of differentiation and competitive advantage and can therefore contribute to increasing the perceived benefits. Through the improvement of the quality of the tourism services provided at the Natural Park, it is possible to increase the relative advantage in comparison with other competitors. For example, an easy 20 access was found to be valuable for nature-based tourists’ in Finnish Lappland (Tyrväinen et al., 2014). In this way, all those actions impacting in a positive way on the physical installations, the equipment (footwear, lifejackets, helmets...etc.) available at the Natural Park, will affect the perceived benefits. This is coherent with the work of Chan and Baum (2007a), who found services provided for ecoguests staying in ecolodges in Malaysia generated satisfaction. In fact, infrastructure, activities and special events at the destination together with infrastructure have been found to be determinant in memorable tourism experiences (Kim, 2014). Equally, training activities, both before and during the visit, on the characteristics of the protected area through a web-page, instructors, guides, etc. would increase perceived value. Knowledge of the staff of the protected area, as well as their friendliness and capability to serve the visitor in a rapid and effective way would also increase the perceived benefits, in line with the results of Chan and Baum (2007a). In addition, actions such as improvements in the atmosphere of the visitor centre, the shop selling artisanal products, and stimulation of visitor interaction with the ecotourism site and with other visitors can improve the perception of the ecotourist with regard to received benefits. The design of activities and special events has been recommended in the search for memorable tourism experiences at a destination, because they impact on the needs of tourists for hedonism and novelty (Kim, 2014). The third source of benefits for the ecotourist lies in the reputation of the protected area. The name, in itself, the “Parque Natural Saltos de la Damajagua” may be converted into a source of potential benefits for many ecotourists. The reputation of the ecotourism site as a Park committed to the environment and sustainable tourism may be positively experienced by 21 many visitors, thereby contributing to the creation of a different value to add to basic and enlarged tourism services. On the other hand, to reduce the costs in terms of money, time and/or effort will improve the perception of value. So, any action that manages to enhance the value of the ecotourism site that is perceived by tourists, will improve their level of satisfaction. Facilitating destination accessibility will clearly contribute to memorable tourism experiences (Kim, 2014) as it clearly reduces costs in terms of time and effort. Attitudes also mediate the effect of knowledge of ecotourism on ecotourism satisfaction, although to a lesser extent than perceived value. Thus, in a similar way, positive attitudes towards ecotourism will increase the satisfaction of the ecotourist. Given that attitude is a predisposition that is learnt to respond to an object in a consistently favorable or unfavorable way (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), the knowledge that is conveyed to ecotourists with a view to eliciting a favorable predisposition towards ecotourism will lead to greater ecotourist satisfaction. On a more practical note, training activities for local tour guides and interpreters, with underlying concepts such as environmental protection and sustainable development, will improve attitudes towards ecotourism. Equally, the design and implementation of activities and participative programs, adapted to the characteristics of tourists in accordance with their age, physical capability and, even gender, will contribute to improving attitudes towards ecotourism. As Ardoin et al (2015) affirmed, it is important to emphasize the message of conservation as well as to offer interpretative opportunities. 22 CONCLUSIONS Sustainable management of protected areas not only entails the protection of their ecology and the consideration of the particular characteristics of the host communities and the interests of other stakeholders, but it also stimulates socio-economic benefits for those groups. Tourism activity, when properly managed, can contribute to achieving those objectives. In a more particular way, and given the importance of a high degree of satisfaction of the tourist in the long-term sustainability of tourism activity - as the World Tourism Organization (2004) has affirmedthis work has approached the analysis of that satisfaction in the framework of a protected natural resource, to establish the extent to which and the way in which ecotourism knowledge affects ecotourist satisfaction. Establishing the antecedents to ecotourist satisfaction will assist management bodies of protected spaces, Destination Marketing Organizations and the tourist firms themselves to organize their activities, so as to contribute to the sustainable tourism development of the protected area. The current research has sought to probe deeper into the relationship between ecotourism knowledge and ecotourist satisfaction, by means of mediation analysis considering attitudes towards ecotourism and the perceived value of the ecotourism site. In addition, Wilcox, Howell, and Breivik (2008) underlined the value of using formative constructs as mediating variables. Thus, another contribution of this work is the evaluation of the mediating role of the variable attitudes towards ecotourism, a formative variable. A high degree of tourist satisfaction has been empirically related to positive recommendations. This positive word of mouth, first-hand or through the social media, is a 23 source of information for other potential tourists that will contribute to improvements in their attitudes towards ecotourism and the perceived value of the tourism site. This investigation, conducted at the Natural Park Saltos de la Damajagua (Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic), is an excellent example of co-management that serves as a reference for other ecotourism sites. Caution is advised when generalizing the results (Hultman et al., 2015), both from the perspective of management bodies of the protected area, as well as from the perspective of DMOs and the tourism industry. Nevertheless, the results of this investigation have proved useful, in that they are able to increase the satisfaction of the ecotourist and to contribute in this way to the sustainability of the protected area. Tourist satisfaction has also been empirically related to a higher level of loyalty through the decision to make a return visit to the destination, which is related to the success of the tourism destination (Chi, 2011, 2012; Prayag & Ryan, 2012). However, although the positive economic impacts of tourism activity in a protected area are important, because of their contribution to the economic development of the area, through their effect on all stakeholders, this positive impact should quite logically not be oblivious to the need to guarantee that a minimum impact is achieved in the natural area without causing it irreparable damage. Future investigations should approach the relation between ecotourist satisfaction and environmentally responsible behavior. The promising results of Cheng and Wu (2015) showed that the effect of environmental knowledge on environmentally responsible behavior is achieved through environmental sensitiveness, both in a direct way and in an indirect way through place attachment. Other investigations should look at whether environmental sensitiveness is a consequence of ecotourism satisfaction or whether it plays either a mediating or a moderating role in the 24 relation between ecotourist satisfaction and environmentally responsible behavior. The contradictory results that were found in previous studies between environmental attitude and pro-environmental behavior (Vicente-Molina et al., 2013) could be explained by either a mediating or a moderating role of ecotourist satisfaction in that relation. Furthermore, this investigation has offered a means of measurement of the ecotourism knowledge construct that has barely been studied in the previous literature on ecotourism knowledge. The measurement of this construct has been demonstrated to be viability and reliability in the case of ecotourists who visited the Natural Park Saltos de la Damajagua. Future investigations should test whether this scale is useful in other geographical contexts. The limitations of this work should also be pointed out: 1) the statistical technique which is based on predictability is not intended to demonstrate causality (Roldán & Sánchez-Franco 2012); 2) only the direct relationships have been evaluated, without examining the mediating or the moderating roles of other variables. REFERENCES Ardoin NM, Wheaton M, Bowers AW, Hunt CA, Durham WH. 2015. Nature-based tourism’s impact on environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior: A review and analysis of the literature and potential future research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 23(6): 838-858. Barber N. 2012. Consumers' intention to purchase environmentally friendly wines: a segmentation approach, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 13(1): 26-47. 31 Petrick, JF. 2002. Development of a multi-dimensional scale for measuring the perceived value of a service. Journal of Leisure Research 34(2): 119-134. Phillips W, Wolfe K, Hodur N, Leistritz FL. 2013. Tourist word of mouth and revisit intentions to rural tourism destinations: A case of North Dakota, USA. International Journal of Tourism Research 15(1): 93-104. Prayag G, Hosany S, Odeh K. 2013. The role of tourists' emotional experiences and satisfaction in understanding behavioral intentions. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management 2(2):118-127. Prayag G, Ryan R. 2012. Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to Mauritius: The role and influence of destination image, place attachment, personal involvement, and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research 51(3): 342–356. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. 2008. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods 40(3): 879-891. Prebensen N, Woo E, Chen J, Uysal M. 2012. Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience. Journal of Travel Research 52(2): 253-264. Prebensen NK, Vittersø J, Dahl TI. 2013. Value co-creation significance of tourist resources. Annals of Tourism Research 42(July): 240-261. Prebensen NK, Woo E, Uysal M. 2014. Experience value: Antecedents and consequences. Current Issues in Tourism 17(10): 910-928. 32 Rasoolimanesh SM, Dahalan N, Jaafar M. 2016. Tourists’ perceived value and satisfaction in a community-based homestay in the Lenggong Valley World Heritage Site. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 2(March): 72-81. Reimer JK, Walter P. 2013. How do you know it when you see it? Community-based ecotourism in the Cardamom Mountains of southwestern Cambodia. Tourism Management 34(February): 122-132. Richter NF, Cepeda G, Roldán JL, Ringle CM. 2015. European management research using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). European Journal Management 33(1): 1-3. Roldán JL, Sánchez-Franco MJ. 2012. Variance-based structural equation modeling: guidelines for using Partial Least Squares in information systems research. In Research Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems, Mora M, Gelman O, Steenkamp A, Raisinghani MS (eds.). IGI Group: Hershey, PA: 193–221. Ross EL, Iso-Ahola SE. 1991. Sightseeing tourists’ motivation and satisfaction. Annals of Tourism Research 18(2): 226-237. Ryu K, Lee H, Kim WG. 2012. The influence of the quality of the physical environment, food, and service on restaurant image, customer perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 24(2): 200–223. Sabiote-Ortiz C, Frías-Jamilena DM, Castañeda-García JA. 2012. The moderating effect of uncertainty-avoidance on overall perceived value of a service purchased online. Internet Research 22(2): 180-198. 33 Sabiote-Ortiz C, Frías-Jamilena DM, Castañeda-García JA. 2014. Overall perceived value of a tourism service delivered via different media: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Travel Research 55(1): 34-51. Sabiote-Ortiz C, Frías-Jamilena DM, Castañeda-García JA. 2015. Overall perceived value of a tourism service: Analysing the spillover effect between electronic channel and consumption of the hotel service. Tourism and Hospitality Research http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1467358415613410 Sánchez J, Callarisa L, Rodríguez RM, Moliner, MA. 2006. Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product. Tourism Management 27(3): 394-409. Simão JN, Partidário MR. 2012. How does tourism planning contribute to sustainable development. Sustainable Development 20(6) 372-385. Sun X, Chi CG, Xu H. 2013. Developing destination loyalty: the case of Hainan island. Annals of Tourism Research 43(October): 547-577. Tam JLM (2008) Brand familiarity: Its effects on satisfaction evaluations. Journal of Services Marketing 22(1): 3-12. Tsaur S, Yen C, Chen C. 2010. Independent tourist knowledge and skills. Annals of Tourism Research 37(4): 1035-1054. Tyrväinen L, Uusitalo M, Silvennoinen H, Hasu E. 2014. Towards sustainable growth in nature-based tourism destinations: Clients’ view of land use options in Finnish Lapland. Landscape and Urban Planning 122(February): 1-15. Vicente-Molina MA, Fernández-Sáinz A, Izagirre-Olaizola J. 2013. Environmental knowledge and other variables affecting pro-environmental behavior: Comparison of 34 university students from emerging and advanced countries. Journal of Cleaner Production 61(December): 130-138. Wilcox JB, Howell RD, Breivik E. 2008. Questions about formative measurement. Journal of Business Research 61(12): 1219-1228. Williams J., Ashill N., Thirkell P. 2016. How is value perceived by children? Journal of Business Research http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.103 Williams P, Soutar GN. (2009). Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in an adventure tourism context. Annals of Tourism Research 36(3): 413-438. Woo E, Kim H, Uysal M. 2015. Life satisfaction and support for tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research 50(January): 84-97. Word Travel and Tourism Council. (2015). Travel and Tourism Economic Impact 2014 World. . http://www.wttc.org/- /media/files/reports/economic%20impact%20research/regional%20reports/world2014.pdf (accessed March 13, 2015) World Tourism Organization. 2004. Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations: A Guidebook. World Tourism Organization: Madrid. Wurzinger S, Johansson M. 2006. Environmental concern and knowledge of ecotourism among three groups of Swedish tourists. Journal of Travel Research 45(November): 217-226. Yoon Y, Lee J, Lee C. 2010. Measuring festival quality and value affecting visitors’ satisfaction and loyalty using structural approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29(2): 335-342. 35 Yuan J, Jang S. 2008. The effects of quality and satisfaction on awareness and behavioral intentions: exploring the role of a wine festival. Journal of Travel Research 46(3): 279-288. Yüksel A, Yüksel F. 2007. Shopping risk perceptions: effects on tourists’ emotions, satisfaction and expressed loyalty intentions. Tourism Management 28(3): 703–713. Zeithaml VA. 1988. Consumer perceptions of price quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing 52(1): 2-22. Zsóka A, Szerényi ZM, Széchy A, Kocsis T. 2013. Greening due to environmental education? Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday proenvironmental activities of Hungarian high school and university students. Journal of Cleaner Production 48(June): 126-138. 36 Table 1. Reliability measures Construct/indicator Loading Composite reliability AVE Weight VIF ECOTOURISM KNOWLEDGE (reflective construct) 0.80 0.57 Ecotourism is an environmentally responsible form of tourism 0.67 Ecotourism involves traveling and visiting natural areas encourages active involvement, and socioeconomic benefits the local population 0.81 Ecotourism is a form of sustainable tourism, which in turn is inserted into the overall framework of sustainable development 0.77 ATTITUDE TOWARDS ECOTOURISM (formative construct) Ecotourism should be based to enjoy and appreciate nature or cultural features (natural or cultural features) 0.31 1.59 Tourism in protected areas should avoid interfering with the habitat of local flora and wildlife (avoiding interference) -0.05 1.45 The role of conservation of protected areas beyond their economic function -0.02 1.66 Ecotourism development should focus on environmental education -0.04 1.71 Ecotourism promotes public environmental awareness 0.37 1.84 Ecotourism promotes public participation in conservation actions -0.06 2.03 Tourism in protected areas should be carried out in small groups 0.08 1.53 The low-impact transportation, such as bicycling and walking, is suitable for tourism in protected areas 0.21 1.46 Use of recreational facilities such as disused buildings is a priority to avoid overbuilding 0.00 1.65 Visiting protected areas should take prior appointment and should be subject to a payment for tourists 0.04 1.94 Tourism in protected areas should restrict visits during important periods such as breeding seasons -0.07 1.80 Part of the income from tourism in protected areas should fund the promotion of environmental conservation 0.32 1.92 Ecological monitoring should be carried out continuously to develop appropriate management measures 0.24 2.02 Tourism in protected areas should implement a pay per visitor 0.09 1.77 OVERALL ECOTOURIST SITE PERCEIVED VALUE (reflective construct) 0.86 0.68 The visit was great (money, time, effort) 0.84 The visit offers more value than expected 0.87 Visiting this protected area offers more value than other protected areas 0.76 ECOTOURIST SATISFACTION (reflective construct) 0.94 0.69 Overall, I am satisfied with this visit 0.87 Overall I am happy with this visit 0.83 I think I did the right thing in choosing to visit this protected area 0.79 I'm glad I decided to visit this protected area 0.83 I am delighted to have visited this area protected 0.83 This visit has exceeded my expectations 0.84 I feel happy for deciding to come to this protected area 0.85 37 Table 2. Discriminant validity (1) (2) (3) (4) (1) Attitude towards ecotourism n.a. (2) Ecotourism knowledge 0.60 0.76 (3) Overall ecotourist site perceived value 0.45 0.41 0.83 (4) Ecotourist satisfaction 0.51 0.44 0.70 0.83 Diagonal elements (bold) are the square root of variance shared between the constructs and their measures (AVE). Off-diagonal elements are the correlations among constructs. For discriminant validity, the diagonal elements should be larger than the off-diagonal elements. Note: n.a.: not applicable. 38 Table 3. Effect on the endogenous variables Effect on the endogenous variables Direct effect t-Value (bootstrap) Percentile 95% confidence interval Explained variance Overall ecotourist site perceived value (R2=0.17/Q2=0.11) -Knowledge (a1) 0.41*** 5.40 (0.26;0.55) Sig. 16.81% Attitude towards ecotourism (R2=0.36/ Q2=0.12) -Knowledge (a2) 0.60*** 12.53 (0.53;0.71) Sig. 36.00% Ecotourist satisfaction (R2=0.54/Q2=0.11) H1: Knowledge (c´) -Ecotourist site perceived value (b1) -Attitude towards ecotourism (b2) 0.09n.s. 0.57*** 0.20*** 1.52 12.53 3.36 (-0.04; 0.18) n.s. (0.48;0.66) Sig. (0.09;0.33) Sig. 3.96% 39.90% 10.20% *** p < 0.001 (based on t(4999), one-tailed test), t(0.001, 4999) = 3.09; Sig. denotes a significant direct effect at 0.05. n.s: not significant 39 Table 4. Summary of mediating effect tests Total effect of Ecotourism knowledge on Satisfaction (c) Direct effect of Ecotourism knowledge on Satisfaction (c´) Indirect effects of Ecotourism knowledge on Satisfaction Coefficient t value Coefficient t value Point estimate Percentile bootstrapa Lower Upper 0.44*** 5.36 H1= c´ 0.09 n.s. 1.52 Total = a1b1+a2b2 0.35 0.24 0.49 H2= a1b1 (via Ecotouristsite perceived value) 0.23 0.14 0.33 H3= a2b2 (via attitude) 0.12 0.06 0.20 a 5000 bootstrap samples. 95% confidence interval. *** p < 0.001, (based on t(4999), one-tailed test) t(0.001, 4999)=3.09. n.s: not significant 40 Figure 1: Proposed model