ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 2021 61 2 0 1 0 1 6 6 1 8 5 1 7 7 9 ISSN 1581-6613 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA • GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK • 61-2 • 2021 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 61-2 • 2021 Contents Đorđije V a sil je Vić , Milica Be g a n , Miroslav Vu jič ić , Thomas Ho se , u glješa sTa n k o V Does geosite interpretation lead to conservation? A case study of the Sićevo Gorge (Serbia) 7 g abrijela Po Po Vić , Dragiša sTa n u jk ić , Predrag MiMo Vić , g oran Mil o V a n o Vić , Darjan k a r a Ba š e Vić , Pavle Br z a k o Vić , a leksandar Br z a k o Vić An integrated SWOT – extended PIPRECIA model for identifying key determinants of tourism development: The case of Serbia 23 r obert k a l Ba r c z y k , e liza k a l Ba r c z y k Precipitation variability, trends and regions in Poland: Temporal and spatial distribution in the years 1951–2018 41 ivana c r l je n k o , Matjaž g e r š ič A comparison of the beginnings of exonym standardization in Croatian and Slovenian 73 Tadej Br e z in a , jernej Tir a n , Matej o g r in , Barbara l a a COVID-19 impact on daily mobility in Slovenia 91 Maruša g o l u Ža , Maruška šu Bic -k o V a č , Drago k o s , David Bo l e How the state legitimizes national development projects: The Third Development Axis case study, Slovenia 109 Tin l u k ić , Tanja Mic ić Po n jig e r , Biljana Ba s a r in , Dušan s a k u l s k i, Milivoj g a Vr il o V , s lobodan Ma r k o Vić , Matija z o r n , Blaž k o Ma c , Miško Mil a n o Vić , Dragoslav P a Vić , Minučer Me s a r o š , n emanja Ma r k o Vić , u roš Du r l e Vić , c ezar Mo r a r , a leksandar Pe Tr o Vić Application of Angot precipitation index in the assessment of rainfall erosivity: Vojvodina Region case study (North Serbia) 123 janij o Bl a k , Mira k o Bo l D, Mojca š r a j The influence of climate change on discharge fluctuations in Slovenian rivers 155 Vladimir s To ja n o Vić , Dubravka Mil ić , s anja o Br a Do Vić , jovana V a n o V a c , Dimitrije r a Diš ić The role of ecotourism in community development: The case of the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve, Serbia 171 Marko V . Mil o š e Vić , Dragoljub š Tr Ba c , jelena ć a l ić , Milan r a Do V a n o Vić Detection of earthflow dynamics using medium-resolution digital terrain models: Diachronic perspective of the Jovac earthflow, Southern Serbia 187 naslovnica 61-2_naslovnica 49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:58 Page 1 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 2021 61 2 0 1 0 1 6 6 1 8 5 1 7 7 9 ISSN 1581-6613 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA • GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK • 61-2 • 2021 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 61-2 • 2021 Contents Đorđije V a sil je Vić , Milica Be g a n , Miroslav Vu jič ić , Thomas Ho se , u glješa sTa n k o V Does geosite interpretation lead to conservation? A case study of the Sićevo Gorge (Serbia) 7 g abrijela Po Po Vić , Dragiša sTa n u jk ić , Predrag MiMo Vić , g oran Mil o V a n o Vić , Darjan k a r a Ba š e Vić , Pavle Br z a k o Vić , a leksandar Br z a k o Vić An integrated SWOT – extended PIPRECIA model for identifying key determinants of tourism development: The case of Serbia 23 r obert k a l Ba r c z y k , e liza k a l Ba r c z y k Precipitation variability, trends and regions in Poland: Temporal and spatial distribution in the years 1951–2018 41 ivana c r l je n k o , Matjaž g e r š ič A comparison of the beginnings of exonym standardization in Croatian and Slovenian 73 Tadej Br e z in a , jernej Tir a n , Matej o g r in , Barbara l a a COVID-19 impact on daily mobility in Slovenia 91 Maruša g o l u Ža , Maruška šu Bic -k o V a č , Drago k o s , David Bo l e How the state legitimizes national development projects: The Third Development Axis case study, Slovenia 109 Tin l u k ić , Tanja Mic ić Po n jig e r , Biljana Ba s a r in , Dušan s a k u l s k i, Milivoj g a Vr il o V , s lobodan Ma r k o Vić , Matija z o r n , Blaž k o Ma c , Miško Mil a n o Vić , Dragoslav P a Vić , Minučer Me s a r o š , n emanja Ma r k o Vić , u roš Du r l e Vić , c ezar Mo r a r , a leksandar Pe Tr o Vić Application of Angot precipitation index in the assessment of rainfall erosivity: Vojvodina Region case study (North Serbia) 123 janij o Bl a k , Mira k o Bo l D, Mojca š r a j The influence of climate change on discharge fluctuations in Slovenian rivers 155 Vladimir s To ja n o Vić , Dubravka Mil ić , s anja o Br a Do Vić , jovana V a n o V a c , Dimitrije r a Diš ić The role of ecotourism in community development: The case of the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve, Serbia 171 Marko V . Mil o š e Vić , Dragoljub š Tr Ba c , jelena ć a l ić , Milan r a Do V a n o Vić Detection of earthflow dynamics using medium-resolution digital terrain models: Diachronic perspective of the Jovac earthflow, Southern Serbia 187 naslovnica 61-2_naslovnica 49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:58 Page 1 Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021, 171–186 THE ROLE OF ECOTOURISM IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: THE CASE OF THE ZASAVICA SPECIAL NATURE RESERVE, SERBIA Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić Visitor center in the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve. V L A D IM IR D O B R E T IĆ 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 171 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.9411 UDC: 91:338.48-6:502/504(497.11) COBISS: 1.01 Vladimir Stojanović 1 , Dubravka Milić 2 , Sanja Obradović 1 , Jovana Vanovac 2 , Dimitrije Radišić 1,2 The role of ecotourism in community development: The case of the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve, Serbia ABSTRACT: This study explores local community attitudes toward ecotourism as a form of sustainable tourism in the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve in Serbia using the Sustainable Tourism Attitude Scale (SUS- TAS). Residents of the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve acknowledge the sociocultural and economic benefits of ecotourism development while recognizing the negative impacts of development on the natural envi- ronment. Low awareness of non-charismatic species among residents contrasts with strong awareness of them among large communities of scientists and naturalists in Serbia. This study shows the importance of local community support for ecotourism and conservation development. Moreover, the study revealed that the SUS-TAS scale can be successfully applied in ecotourism research. KEY WORDS: ecotourism, sustainable development, local community, local residents, attitude, protected areas, Sustainable Tourism Attitude Scale Vloga ekoturizma pri razvoju skupnosti: Primer posebnega naravnega rezervata Zasavica, Srbija POVZETEK: V članku raziskujemo odnos lokalne skupnosti do ekoturizma kot oblike trajnostnega turiz- ma v posebnem naravnem rezervatu Zasavica v Srbiji z lestvico odnosa trajnostnega turizma. Prebivalci posebnega naravnega rezervata Zasavica priznavajo družbeno-kulturne in gospodarske koristi razvoja eko- turizma, hkrati pa prepoznavajo negativne vplive razvoja na naravno okolje. Med prebivalci zaznavamo nizko ozaveščenost o pomenu nekarizmatičnih rastlinskih vrst, kar je v nasprotju s stališči velike skup- nosti znanstvenikov in naravoslovcev v Srbiji. Članek kaže na pomen podpore lokalne skupnosti za razvoj ekoturizma in ohranjanja narave. Poleg tega je študija pokazala, da je mogoče lestvico SUS-TAS uspešno uporabiti pri raziskavah ekoturizma. KLJUČNE BESEDE: ekoturizem, trajnostni razvoj, lokalna skupnost, lokalni prebivalci, odnos, zaščitena območja, Lestvica odnosa do trajnostnega turizma The article was submitted for publication on March 17 th , 2021. Uredništvo je prejelo prispevek 17. marca 2021. 172 1 University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Novi Sad, Serbia vladimir.stojanovic@dgt.uns.ac.rs (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6792-2841), sanjaobradovic992@gmail.com (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9339-1570), dimitrije.radisic@dbe.uns.ac.rs (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2716-9829) 2 University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Biology and Ecology, Novi Sad, Serbia Novi Sad, Serbia dubravka.milic@dbe.uns.ac.rs (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8828-1489), jovanavanovac@yahoo.com, dimitrije.radisic@dbe.uns.ac.rs (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2716-9829) 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 172 1 Introduction Sustainable development and sustainable tourism are complementary (Stojanović et al. 2014; Espiner, Orchiston and Higham 2017). Sustainable development is a development concept that emphasizes the balance of eco- nomic, environmental, and social approaches. The main assumption is that preserving the environment will lead to an increase in tourist visits. Accordingly, it can be argued that a protected nature resort can prove to be a popular tourist destination and eventually develop toward ecotourism (Diamantis 1999; Hermon 2016; Putra et al. 2018). Ecotourism is growing rapidly worldwide and is predicted to be one of the main growth areas in the coming years (Arlym and Hermon 2019). Using the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve (SNR) in Serbia as an example, this article identifies local residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism development. We applied the Sustainable T ourism Attitude Scale (SUS-TAS) developed by Choi and Sirakaya (2005) to assess local perceptions of conservation. It is important to emphasize that ecotourism differs from other forms of tourism by its objectives. It aims to form close links between natural and cultural environments, which makes it the most valuable form of sustainable tourism (Stefanica and Vlavian-Gurmeza 2010; Burgoyne and Mearns 2020). Education and awareness raising among residents about the importance of ecosystems is crucial and can help local communities better appreciate the importance of protected areas. One way in which pro- tected areas can have a positive social impact is by ensuring that the costs and benefits of conservation are shared equitably. If this is achieved, local communities can more readily recognize protected areas as important resources that can improve their livelihoods and contribute to the development of their com- munities – for example, through the development of ecotourism (Abukari and Mwalyosi 2020). This article analyzes 1) local residents’ attitudes about the importance of involving residents in eco- tourism development, 2) whether respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics influence their attitudes toward ecotourism as a form of sustainable tourism development, and 3) the extent to which the com- munity has a positive attitude toward ecotourism development and residents’ willingness to be involved in tourism planning and decision-making processes. 2 Theoretical background Many researchers claim that ecotourism seems to meet most of the objectives set out in the definition of sustainable tourism because it is a tool for both social empowerment and long-term economic development of local communities (Weaver and Lawton 2007; Carić 2018; Ramón-Hidalgo et al. 2018; Graci et al. 2019). The involvement of local communities in ecotourism is one of its core rules (Senko et al. 2011; Kihima and Musila 2019; Albu 2020). There is an ethical dimension to the collaboration of these communities in ecotourism projects because local communities should benefit from such a relationship (Abdullah, Weng and Som 2011; Eshun and Tichaawa 2020). Local residents need to be involved in the planning and devel- opment of ecotourism projects from the early stages to maximize the positive effects of ecotourism. To fully participate in the planning process, they need to be aware of the impacts and supportive of the devel- opment. It is also important that the local community have »a basic level of awareness of the potential benefits and costs of tourism« to successfully participate in the planning process (Khoalenyane and Ezeuduji 2016; Thetsane 2019). Assessment of ecotourism awareness can be measured by understanding the host community’ s attitudes toward the positive and negative environmental, economic, and social impacts of ecotourism (Adetola and Adediran 2014; Milheiras 2019). Community involvement is a process of working together (McCloskey et al. 2013). It has been found that the involvement and active participation of local residents plays a vital role in implementing conser- vation programs and helps conserve national heritage and take good care of protected areas (Jaafar, Noor and Rasoolimanesh 2015). Moreover, lack of resident participation reduces the value of heritage sites and protected areas (Buta, Holland and Kaplanidou 2014; Majid et al. 2019). During the last decade, studies on residents’ attitudes toward tourism development have increased (McGehee and Andereck 2004; Diedrich and García-Buades 2009; Soldić Frleta and Smolčić Jurdana 2020), and conceptual models and theories have sought to explain the relationship between residents’ attitudes toward tourism development (Mohammadi and Khalifah 2014; Hsu, Chen and Y ang 2019; Biju and Biju 2020). Protected areas managed as ecotourism sites play an important role in generating much-needed Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 173 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 173 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … revenue to finance biodiversity conservation and improve the income of local communities (Belete and Assefa 2005; Abeli 2017). When it comes to ecotourism planning and management, because local residents that interact directly with tourists are indirectly the most important stakeholders, it is essential to ensure their positive perceptions and attitudes toward tourism (Lee 2013; Bhat and Mishra 2020). Previous studies on this topic have suggested that ecotourism and other types of sustainable tourism development initiatives would not succeed without the cooperation, support, goodwill, and participation of local residents (Chen, Li and Li 2017; Eusébio, Vieira and Lima 2018; McCaughey, Mao and Dowling 2018). In light of this, the involvement of local residents in decision-making and their positive attitude toward tourism is essential for tourism sustainability (Canalejo et al. 2015; Panyik 2015). Empowered com- munities are able to benefit more from tourism development opportunities and use these opportunities more constructively (Chen, Li and Li 2017; Bittar Rodrigues and Prideaux 2018). 3 Methods 3.1 Case study area The Zasavica Special Nature Reserve (SNR) is located in the southern part of the province of Vojvodina, Serbia. It extends across the territories of the municipalities of Sremska Mitrovica and Bogatić and cov- ers an area of 671 hectares, and the protected zone covers an area of 1,150 hectares (Decree … 1997). The Zasavica area is a remnant of a once large wetland area in the Sava and Drina basins (Stanković 2014). In 2012, wider boundaries of the reserve were proposed, toward a total area of 1,128 hectares, with a pro- tected zone of 3,462 hectares (Dobretić et al. 2012). The Zasavica SNR is also an area of international importance, considering that it has the following listings: a Ramsar site (wetland of international importance), an IBA (Important Bird Area) as a patch- work and the best-preserved habitat of marsh birds in northwestern Serbia, an IPA (Important Plant Area) due to its floristic and vegetation value and its inclusion in the botanically important areas of central and eastern Europe (Stevanović 2005), a PBA (Prime Butterfly Area) as one of four in Vojvodina (Jakšić and Nahiranić 2011), an Emerald Network Area of Special Conservation Importance (ASCI) due to the pres- ence of wetland, forest, and meadow habitats of the Pannonian landscape that are a priority for conservation, and a proposed NATURA 2000 area with twenty-three types of habitat priority for conservation recorded (Lazić et al. 2008). The Zasavica SNR is also part of the international networks Sava Parks and Dinarides Parks (Puzović et al. 2015). Finally, due to its good conservation and accessibility, it offers excellent con- ditions for the development of ecotourism. 3.2 Research design, instrument, and data collection To achieve the objectives of the research, a survey in a form of a questionnaire was developed. It explores local residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism development. The questionnaire consists of three parts. The first part contains demographic data about the participants. In the second part, participants were asked to respond to 42 statements about sustainable tourism devel- opment using the SUS-TAS scale (Choi and Sirakaya 2005). Choi and Sirakaya (2005) developed the Sustainable Tourism Development Scale (SUS-TAS) to measure residents’ attitudes toward the current sustainability status of tourism development and the expected level of sustainability. This study adopts the SUS-TAS with only minor modification in wording. For the questionnaire, the SUS-TAS scale was translated into Serbian. Responses in the second part were measured using a five-point Likert scale (1 = absolutely disagree, 2 = partially disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = partially agree, and 5 = absolutely agree) as in several previous studies on sustainable tourism development (Choi and Sirakaya 2005; Gidebo 2019; Rathnayake and Darshi 2020). In the third part, participants were asked about nature conservation in the area studied. We asked par- ticipants the following questions: • Do you know any plant species in the Zasavica SNR? • Do you know any animal species in the Zasavica SNR? 174 Figure 1: Map of the Zasavica SNR.p 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 174 Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 175 Sremska Mitrovica Ma vanska č Mitrovica Zasavica II Zasavica I Salaš No ajski ć No aj ć Radenković Banovo Polje Ravnje Crna Bara Sava Scale: 1:100.000 Content by: Institute for nature conservation of Vojvodina Province Map by: Vladimir Stojanovi , Marija Cimbaljevi Source: Institute for nature conservation of Vojvodina Province; d-maps.com ćć 0 123 4 05 . km Legend Protection zone border I degree of the protection regime II degree of the protection regime III degree of the protection regime ± Novi Sad Subotica Zrenjanin Pančevo Smederevo Belgrade Šabac 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 175 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … • In your opinion, are there any problems related to nature protection in the Zasavica SNR? • Are you involved in any programs connected with nature protection in the Zasavica SNR? • Would you like to contribute as a volunteer to nature protection in the Zasavica SNR? The data were collected in August 2020. The study sample consisted of 399 respondents. Part of the respondents (seventy-six participants) were surveyed through an online questionnaire (at Google Forms), which was distributed through social media (Facebook). The rest of the responses were collected through a face-to-face interview. For this portion, a pen-and-paper questionnaire was conducted by giving paper questionnaires to individuals in person and asking them to complete them by hand and return them to the researcher. Respondents were informed that the survey was anonymous, that participation was vol- untary, and that the results of the survey would be used for research purposes only. 3.3 Sampling procedure The sample includes residents from towns and villages surrounding the Zasavica SNR. Data were collected in eight cadastral municipalities (total population 14,437). A representative targeted sampling was used to select respondents in each cadastral municipality: Ravnje (population 1,142), Radenković (946), Zasavica Ravnje (1,142), Radenković (946), Zasavica (1,330), Noćaj (1,866), Salaš Noćajski (1,751), Mačvanska Mitrovica (4,116), Crna Bara (1,924), and Banovo Polje (1,362). The total sample numbered 399, which is 2.76% of the total population. 3.4 Data analysis techniques For data analyses, IBM SPSS 25.0. Statistics was used. The statistical methods used in this research include descriptive statistical analysis to determine the sociodemographic profiles of the respondents, principal component analysis (PCA) to determine the dimensions of the SUS-TAS, Cronbach’s alpha to test the inter- nal consistency of the items measuring each factor, and correlation to determine associations between the responses of respondents belonging to different age groups based on the SUS-TAS factors. An ANOV A test was conducted to determine the differences in the respondents’ answers in terms of their employment, education, type of settlement, and nationality, and a t-test was performed to compare the data reported by respondents of different sexes in terms of sustainable tourism development factors. 4 Results 4.1 Respondents’ sociodemographic profiles A total of 399 questionnaires were submitted. A descriptive summary of the respondents (Table 1) shows that females (55.39%) slightly outnumbered males (44.61%). The majority of the respondents were under 30 (age ≤ 19: 26.06%; 20–29 years: 29.57%) and had a high-school education (55.39%) or above (universi- ty education: 37.09%). The household size in the area studied is above the Serbian average, 2.88 (according to the 2019 census). About half of the respondents (49.37%) earn more than the average monthly income in Serbia (€450). In terms of duration of residence, the majority of respondents had lived locally between 10 and 19 years (38.34%) and between 20 and 29 years (20.81%). 4.2 Factor analysis of local communities’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism development Fist, a principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted with a varimax rotation on forty-two items to delineate the dimensions of the SUS-TAS, and it loaded within seven domains. Almost all communalities were above 0.300, further confirming that each item shares some common variance with other items. Only the statements »Sometimes it is acceptable to exclude a residents of a community from tourism develop- ment« and »Residents of a community should have an opportunity to participate in tourism development and management« were 0.120 and 0.285, respectively, and they were not included in further analysis. Given these overall indicators, the factor analysis was considered appropriate for 40 out of the 42 items. 176 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 176 Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 177 Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents (n = 399). Category n % Sex: Male 178 44.61 Female 221 55.39 Age (years): ≤ 19 104 26.06 20–29 118 29.57 30–39 79 19.80 40–49 57 14.29 50–59 22 5.52 ≥ 60 19 4.76 Education: Elementary school 30 7.52 High school 221 55.39 University and above 148 37.09 Household size: < 3 78 19.55 3–5 258 64.66 >5 61 15.29 Monthly income (€): < 250 67 16.80 250–450 132 33.08 > 450 197 49.37 No response 3 0.75 Residence (years): ≤ 9 40 10.02 10–19 153 38.34 20–29 83 20.81 30–39 49 12.28 40–49 26 6.52 ≥ 50 48 12.03 The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.87, above the generally recommended value of 0.6 required for valid factor analysis (Kaiser 1970; 1974; Tabachnick and Fidell 1989; 2007), and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (χ² (780) = 10,582.367, p = 0.000). Using the eigenvalue crite- rion (greater than 1), we confirmed seven significant factors totaling 65.68% of the explained variance (Table 2). In this study, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for each SUS-TAS domain ranged from 0.603 to 0.884 with an overall scale reliability of 0.871, indicating that the variables had strong to moderate correlation with their factor grouping and were internally consistent. The highest level of agreement was for environmental sustainability (90%), followed by visitor satisfaction (85.8%) and community-centered economy (85.2%), and the lowest level of agreement was for perceived social cost (42.2%). 4.3 ANOV A test: respondents’ age, education status, and correlation analysis Respondents over 19 (Table 4) are more likely to consider environmental sustainability than the youngest respondents (F = 5.813; p = 0.000), whereas the youngest respondents are more concerned about perceived social costs than other groups (F = 4.956; p = 0.000). Significant differences were found based on the edu- cational status of the respondents regarding six factors of sustainable tourism development, except in the case of community participation. Educational status correlated significantly (mostly positively) with almost all SUS-TAS factors except community participation (Table 5). Residents’ age and length of residence also showed a significant posi- tive correlation with environmental sustainability as well as community-oriented management. Furthermore, a significantly negative correlation was found between perceived social costs and age, educational status, and length of residence. 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 177 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … 178 Table 2: Factor analysis for host community attitudes toward sustainable tourism development. Factors and statements Value Environmental sustainability (α = 0.869) 1. The community’s environment should be protected now and for the future 0.825 2. The diversity of nature must be valued and protected 0.819 3. The development of tourism should increase efforts to protect the environment 0.744 4. Tourism must protect the community environment 0.732 5. Tourism must be developed in harmony with the natural and cultural environment 0.709 6. Appropriate tourism development requires wildlife and natural habitat protection at all times 0.642 7. Tourism development must promote positive environmental ethics for all tourism stakeholders 0.562 8. Regulatory environmental standards are needed to reduce impacts of tourism development 0.301 9. Tourism must improve the environment for future generations 0.312 Perceived social costs (α = 0.884) 10. Tourists in my community are disrupting my quality of life 0.831 11. My quality of life has deteriorated because of tourism 0.820 12. I often feel irritated because of tourism in the community 0.818 13. The community’s recreational resources are overused by tourists 0.739 14. My community is overcrowded because of tourism development 0.734 15. I do not feel comfortable or welcome in local tourism businesses 0.664 16. Tourism is growing too fast 0.651 17. The quality of social interaction in my community has deteriorated because of tourism 0.551 Perceived economic benefits (α = 0.884) 18. I like tourism because it brings new income into our community 0.760 19. Tourism makes a strong economic contribution to the community 0.721 20. Tourism generates significant tax revenue for local government 0.681 21. Tourism is good for our economy 0.666 22. Tourism creates new markets for local products 0.626 23. Tourism diversifies the local economy 0.554 24. Tourism is beneficial to other industries in the community 0.512 Community participation (α = 0.603) 25. Tourism decisions need to be made by everyone in my community regardless of background 0.864 26. The whole community must participate in decisions for successful tourism development 0.837 Long-term planning (α = 0.703) 29. The tourism industry must plan for the future 0.616 30. Successful management of tourism requires an advanced planning strategy 0.839 31. We need to take a long-term perspective when planning tourism development 0.811 32. Residents must be encouraged to take a leadership role on tourism planning committees 0.686 33. Tourism development needs well-coordinated planning 0.641 34. Tourism development plans should be continuously improved 0.601 Visitor satisfaction (α = 0.782) 35. Tourism businesses have a responsibility to provide for visitors’ needs 0.777 36. Community attractiveness is the core element of environmental attractiveness to visitors 0.750 37. Tourism enterprises need to monitor visitor satisfaction 0.614 38. The tourism industry must ensure high-quality tourism experiences for future visitors 0.604 Community-centered economy (α = 0.837) 39. The tourism industry should obtain at least half its goods and services locally 0.749 40. Tourism should hire at least half its employees from the local community 0.687 41. Local community residents should receive a fair share of the benefits from tourism 0.686 42. The tourism industry must contribute to community improvement funds 0.467 Table 3: Respondents’ attitudes to sustainable tourism development. Sustainable tourism development factors Mean SD Agreement level (%) Environmental sustainability 4.50 0.54 90 Perceived social cost 2.11 0.84 42.2 Perceived economic benefits 3.97 0.74 79.6 Community participation 3.77 0.66 75.4 Long-term planning 4.07 0.72 81.4 Visitor satisfaction 4.29 0.65 85.8 Community-centered economy 4.26 0.68 85.2 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 178 4.4 Respondents’ attitudes toward nature protection In general, respondents expressed a very positive attitude toward nature protection in the study area. Two- thirds of the respondents (68%) stated that they knew some plant species, and similar responses were found for respondents’ knowledge of animal species. Although managers of the nature reserves informed the pub- lic about the importance of the presence of endangered plant species, locals mainly recognized yellow and white water lilies and reeds. Unfortunately, 91% of the respondents indicated that the most popular ani- mal species in the study area was the domestic donkey, and only 0.5% of the respondents knew about the European mudminnow (Umbra krameri), an endangered fish species. Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 179 Table 5. Correlation analysis: age of respondents, educational status, household size, and sustainable tourism development factors. Pearson correlation coefficient (r) Factors Age Education status Length of residence Environmental sustainability 0.202** 0.240** 0.163** Perceived social costs −1.810** −0.126* −0.147** Perceived economic benefits 0.048 0.218** 0.006 Community participation −0.013 −0.009 −0.062 Long-term planning 0.046 0.219** −0.070 Visitor satisfaction 0.052 0.150** 0.015 Community-centered economy 0.101** 0.140** 0.023 *Correlation significant at p = 0.05, **Correlation significant at p = 0.01 Table 3: Respondents’ attitudes to sustainable tourism development. Sustainable tourism development factors Mean SD Agreement level (%) Environmental sustainability 4.50 0.54 90 Perceived social cost 2.11 0.84 42.2 Perceived economic benefits 3.97 0.74 79.6 Community participation 3.77 0.66 75.4 Long-term planning 4.07 0.72 81.4 Visitor satisfaction 4.29 0.65 85.8 Community-centered economy 4.26 0.68 85.2 Table 4: ANOVA test: Factors of sustainable tourism development by respondents’ age and education. Factors F-value LSD post-hoc test By age Environmental sustainability 5.813* 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 > 1 Perceived social cost 4.956* 1 > 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Perceived economic benefits 3.042 / Community participation 0.241 / Long-term planning 2.675 / Visitor satisfaction 1.691 / Community-centered economy 4.225* 3 > 1, 2, 5; 4 > 1 By education Environmental sustainability 12.295* 3 > 1, 2; 2 > 1 Perceived social cost 3.955* 1 > 3 Perceived economic benefits 10.400* 3 > 1, 2; 2 > 1 Community participation 0.105 / Long-term planning 10.403* 3 > 1, 2; 2 > 1 Visitor satisfaction 5.274* 3 > 1, 2; Community-centered economy 4.000* *p < 0.01; F > 3.32 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 179 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … A significant number (75%) of the respondents are aware that there are problems related to nature pro- tection, but no one named them. Also, only 8.5% of the respondents answered that they have been involved in some programs related to nature protection – but, again, without specific answers regarding the capac- ity to which they are involved in such programs. Fortunately, half of the people surveyed (55%) would be happy to contribute to nature protection and tourism development in the Zasavica SNR without receiv- ing any compensation. 5 Discussion The results obtained show that inhabitants of the Zasavica SNR have a positive attitude toward sustainable tourism development, ecotourism, sociocultural and economic impacts of ecotourism, and nature conser- vation in the area studied. Furthermore, our findings reinforce previous research and support the position that SUS-TAS is also a reliable and valid instrument for measuring residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism development in ecotourism research (Nunnally and Bernstein 1994; Gidebo 2019). In this study, the SUS-TAS scale was applied in the Zasavica SNR, where tourism is underdeveloped, whereas previous studies were conducted in tourist destinations and in countries where tourism is one of the most impor- tant economic sectors; for example, in Izmir, Turkey (Sirakaya-Turk, Ekinci and Kaya 2007; Sirakaya-Turk, Ingram and Harill 2008), Cyprus (Kvasova 2011), and the United States (Hawaii, Indiana, South Carolina, Texas, and rural counties in the Midwest; Choi and Sirakaya 2005; Yu et al. 2011; Assante, Wen and Lottig 2012; Sirakaya-Turk and Gursoy 2013; Zhang, Cole and Chancellor 2015). SUS-TAS has also been applied to hotels (Prayag, Dookhony-Ramphul and Maryeven 2010), and some studies have been conducted in national parks (Gidebo 2019) and outstanding natural landscapes (Obradović and Stojanović 2021), which are also protected natural areas. In the study by Obradović and Stojanović (2021), it was confirmed that this scale can be used in different cross-cultural settings (con- firmatory factor analysis, or CFA, was used) and in municipalities and protected areas where tourism has not yet emerged as a significant economic area of activity. This study seeks to promote the development of ecotourism in communities and raise awareness of the need to create programs that engage local communities. So far, educational programs have mostly been periodic and related to specific projects, but there is a need to ensure their continuity. Their goal should be continuous education and promotion of awareness of the potential of the Zasavica SNR to protect and preserve it through ecotourism as a form of sustainable tourism development. The development of such a form of tourism requires the participation of three groups of stakeholders: the local community, the man- agement of the protected area, and the tourism industry. If the local community is informed and educated, this will lead to increased investment in the tourism industry. This approach can increase the involvement of local residents as entrepreneurs and employees in tourism development and encourage young people to remain in the area. This can in turn lead to the creation of employment opportunities for local people, reduce unemployment, and improve living standards, making the residents much more supportive of tourism development. In general, community members show agreement with seven factors of sustainable tourism develop- ment, with the exception of perceived social costs, which is consistent with previous studies (Gidebo 2019; Rathnayake and Darshi 2020). Our presumption is that the community in the study area has experienced lower social costs associated with tourism development at this time, which mitigates the negative impacts on the local community. This would explain the lowest level of agreement in the case of perceived social costs. Furthermore, the results obtained show a predominantly positive correlation between residents’ edu- cational status and almost all SUS-TAS factors. The positive correlation of high education level with support for tourism development is consistent with the literature consulted (Teye, Sirakaya and Sönmez 2002; Chen and Qui 2017). The group of respondents with completed high school education is more likely to con- sider environmental sustainability, perceived economic benefits, and long-term planning than the group with only primary school education. Perceived social costs as a factor of sustainable tourism development are more thoroughly considered by locals with completed primary school. Older respondents with high- er levels of education were found to have more positive attitudes toward environmental sustainability and a community-based economy. The results of this study are consistent with previous research (Teye, Sirakaya and Sönmez 2002; Chen and Qui 2017), which suggests that people with higher levels of education are 180 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 180 more aware of the potential benefits of tourism than people with lower levels of education. Furthermore, the survey results show that respondents with higher levels of education strongly believe that tourism develop- ment needs well-coordinated planning, similar to a study conducted in Sri Lanka (Rathnayake and Darshi 2020). On the other hand, younger respondents with lower educational status were more likely to perceive social costs than older ones, which is associated with a critical attitude toward the negative environmental impact caused by tourism development, which was confirmed in a study conducted by Kuvan and Akan (2005). According to a number of researchers, length of residence in a geographic location may be a better predictor of residents’ attitudes toward tourism impacts (Walpole and Goodwin 2001; Gu and Ryan 2008). In this study, length of residence was positively correlated with attitudes toward environmental sustain- ability, which is consistent with similar research (Khoshkam, Marzuki and Al-Mulal 2016). Furthermore, some previous studies confirmed that length of residency was positively correlated with attitudes toward the economic impacts of tourism development (Liu and Var 1986; Haralambopoulos and Pizam1996; Khoshkam, Marzuki and Al-Mulal 2016). General public awareness about nature and environmental protection is still insufficient in Serbia (Tomićević, Shannon and Milovanović 2010). To our knowledge, this is the first time that this type of sur- vey has been used in nature protection to investigate the level of knowledge of the local population. Although respondents expressed a very positive attitude toward nature protection, key species for conservation of the Zasavica SNR are poorly recognized by the local population. For the globally threatened aquatic water- wheel plant (Aldrovanda vesiculosa), Zasavica is the only remaining habitat in Serbia (Tomović et al. 2009). This species has the status of a globally threatened species (EN; Cross and Adamec 2020), and in Serbia it is designated as critically endangered (IUCN 2001). Extant populations of A. vesiculosa are rare in Europe, and only a few sites remain in the Balkans. A. vesiculosa was promoted as one of the »flagship species« of the reserve (Stanković 2014). However, only the staff of the Zasavica SNR knew about the existence of this species. The low level of knowledge about non-charismatic plant species among residents contrasts with the awareness of large communities of scientists and naturalists from Serbia, who recognize A. vesiculosa as one of the most important species in the reserve. Moreover, only 0.5% of respondents knew about the endangered European mudminnow (Umbra krameri). This species is a relict, and it is the only native species in the genus Umbra in Europe. In particular, the Zasavica SNR is one of two remaining habitats in Serbia (Sekulić et al. 2013). Previous studies show that the most attractive and secure species receive the highest public support com- pared to less attractive and more threatening ones (de Pinho et al. 2014; Liordos et al. 2017). Furthermore, physical size (Metrick and W eitzman 1998) and phylogenetic similarity to humans (Tisdell, Wilson and Swarna Nantha 2006) also increase support in efforts to save threatened species. In our study, A. vesiculosa and U. krameri do not meet these parameters, and this is probably why they are not recognized by the locals. One of the solutions could be found, for example, in Greece, where campaigns to increase public interest in the less charismatic species, conducted by the WWF and NGOs have so far promoted successful management and conservation of the black vulture for more than twenty-five years (Liordos et al. 2017). Moreover, in the area studied, one of the famous attractions is donkeys, together with liqueur and soap made from donkey milk. This is the only place in the region where people can see and buy such products. This is probably why the respondents said that the most popular animal in the reserve is the domestic don- key. The Zasavica SNR is involved in a genetic resources conservation program, and the donkeys are part of the breeding stock of a special native Balkan breed. The Zasavica SNR hosts a population of a few hun- dred Balkan donkeys, Podolian cattle, and Mangalitsa pigs, which roam freely in large pastures in the central part of the reserve, and they contribute to the management of grasslands and wetlands. Although kept as domestic animals, these are perceived as valuable representatives of local biodiversity and part of native ecosystems. On the other hand, the examples of U. krameri and A. vesiculosa show that, despite intensive promo- tion and education campaigns (e.g., the tourist boat on the Zasavica River is named Umbra after the endangered fish), managers have not succeeded in raising awareness of non-charismatic wildlife among local people, most of whom recognize the Zasavica SNR as a preserved natural habitat with traditional livestock management. Similar results on local perception toward conservation have been found in other parts of the world (de Albuquerque and de Albuquerque 2005; Abukari and Mwalyosi 2020). Therefore, it would be good to investigate how locals learn about biodiversity and conservation in other protected areas. The results of the survey suggest that long-term educational programs on conservation should be Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 181 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 181 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … devised for locals. Over time, their knowledge will accumulate, multiply, and spread to eventually achieve a better balance with nature. The large number of respondents that want to contribute to nature protection and sustainable devel- opment is important because of the scope of tourism development in the Zasavica SNR. This protected area is one of the most frequently visited in northern Serbia. The Zasavica SNR stands out for its level of tourism development and tourist services (a visitors’ center, educational and eco-trails, restaurants, and a camp), and it has strategies and plans according to which it is developing as a destination (Stojanović, Lazić and Dunjić 2018). Revenue from tourist visits from tickets alone is about €21,000 a year. The prof- it from catering services is also significant, and from the sale of souvenirs and ethnic food: goat milk, cheeses, and processed meat from Mangalitsa pigs (Jovanović et al. 2019). On the whole, the residents are aware of the importance of nature and protecting it even if they dif- fer in material status or education level. Interestingly, Tomićević, Shannon and Milovanović (2010) came to a similar conclusion in Tara National Park in Serbia. Moreover, our results show that a significant num- ber of respondents would like to contribute to nature conservation and tourism development in the Zasavica SNR. In conclusion, as indicated in a study conducted by Tomićević, Shannon, and Milovanović (2010), a comprehensive, participatory management program is undoubtedly necessary to reach people that already feel connected to a protected area to develop tailored plans and increase community participation in man- agement of the protected area. 6 Conclusion According to the literature in this area, sustainable tourism relies heavily on stakeholder participation, and efforts must be made to improve the links between conservation, local community development, and the tourism industry (Wearing and Neil 2009). This study emphasized the importance of local community support and participation. The results of this case study reinforce the findings of similar previous studies (Lundberg 2017; Wang 2019) and show that SUS-TAS can be used to measure residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism development in communities and protected areas where tourism has not yet emerged as a significant economic activity. According to the study by Jaafar, Noor, and Rasoolimanesh (2015), local residents’ involvement and active participation plays a vital role in implementing conservation programs that contribute to preserving heritage sites and protected areas. This study shows that half of those surveyed would like to contribute to nature conservation and tourism development in the Zasavica SNR. Lack of local participation diminishes the value of heritage sites and protected areas (Buta, Holland and Kaplanidou 2014; Majid et al. 2019), but this research has confirmed that community participation and active involvement are necessary for nature protection and tourism development. Attitudes toward tourism development and protecting nature vary among individuals in the Zasavica SNR. Moreover, the results of this study have a practical application for the local authorities in designing and planning future tourism development and nature protection in the Zasavica SNR as well as in other protected areas in Serbia and the wider region. Finally, it is impor- tant to emphasize that the residents of the area studied recognize the benefits of sociocultural and economic impacts of development, while acknowledging the negative impacts of development on the natural envi- ronment. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: We would like to thank dr. Marija Cimbaljević from University of Novi Sad for her helpful advice. This research was supported by the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science, and Technological Development (grant number 451-03-9/2021-14/ 200125 and project III 43005). 7 References Abdullah, A. R., W eng, C. N., Som, A. P . M. 2011: The potentials and perils of ecotourism in Belum T emengor forest complex. World Applied Sciences Journal 12. Abeli, S. R. 2017: Local communities’ perception of ecotourism and attitudes towards conservation of Lake Natron Ramsar site, Tanzania. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 7-1. 182 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 182 Abukari, H., Mwalyosi, R. B. 2020: Local communities’ perceptions about the impact of protected areas on livelihoods and community development. Global Ecology and Conservation 22. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/ 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00909 Adetola, B., Adediran, O. R. 2014: Attitudes of local residents towards sustainable ecotourism develop- ment in Olumirin Waterfall Southwestern Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management 7-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4314/ejesm.v7i5.9 Albu, R. G. 2020: Study on the effects of tourism development on the local community of Brasov. Series V: Economic Sciences 12-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31926/but.es.2019.12.61.2.5 Arlym, L., Hermon, D. 2019: Strategy of ecotourism development in Pariaman City. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/314/1/012039 Assante, L. M., Wen, H. I., Lottig, K. J. 2012: Conceptualization of modeling resident attitudes on the envi- ronmental impacts of tourism: A case study of Oahu, Hawaii. Tourism Planning and Development 9-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2011.631354 Belete, Z., Assefa, Y . 2005: Willingness-to-pay for protecting endangered environments. The case of Nechsar National Park. Internet: https://media.africaportal.org/documents/ssrr-series-31.pdf (15. 9. 2021) Bhat, A. A., Mishra, R. K. 2020: Demographic characteristics and residents’ attitude towards tourism devel- opment: A case of Kashmir region. Journal of Public Affairs 21-2. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.1002/pa.2179 Biju, G., Biju, T. 2020: Relation between residents’ attitudes and their support for tourism development. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation 24-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37200/IJPR/V24I8/ PR281399 Bittar Rodrigues, C., Prideaux, B. 2018: A management model to assist local communities developing com- munity-based tourism ventures: A case study from the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Ecotourism 17-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2017.1309045 Burgoyne, C., Mearns, K. 2020: Sustainable tourism/ecotourism. Responsible Consumption and Production. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 319-71062-4_22-1 Buta, N., Holland, S. M., Kaplanidou, K. 2014: Local communities and protected areas: The mediating role of place attachment for pro-environmental civic engagement. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and T ourism 5,6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2014.01.001 Canalejo, A. M. C.., Tabales, J. N., López, J. M. C., Fuentes-García, F. J. 2015: Resident perceptions of com- munity tourism in Cape V erde. T ourism Culture and Communication 15-2. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.3727/ 109830415X14401707765926 Carić, H. 2018: Perspectives of greening tourism development – The concepts, the policies, the implementation. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal 66-1. Chen, B., Qui, Z. 2017: Community attitudes toward ecotourism development and environmental conser- vation in nature reserve: A case of Fujian Wuyishan National Nature Reserve, China. Journal of Mountain Science 14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-016-3983-6 Chen, Z., Li, L., Li, T. 2017: The organizational evolution, systematic construction and empowerment of Langde Miao’s community tourism. Tourism Management 58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tour- man.2016.03.012 Choi, H. S., Sirakaya, E. 2005: Measuring residents’ attitude toward sustainable tourism: Development of sustainable tourism attitude scale. Journal of Travel Research 43-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0047287505274651 Cross, A., Adamec, L. 2020: Aldrovanda vesiculosa. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T162346A83998419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-1.RLTS.T162346A83998419.en de Albuquerque, C. A., de Albuquerque, U. P . 2005: Local perceptions towards biological conservation in the community of Vila Velha, Pernambuco, Brazil. Interciencia 30-8. de Pinho, J. R., Grilo, C., Boone, R. B., Galvin, K. A., Snodgrass, J. G. 2014: Influence of aesthetic appre- ciation of wildlife species on attitudes towards their conservation in Kenyan agropastoralist communities. PLoS One 9-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088842 Decree on the protection of the Special Nature Reserve »Zasavica«. Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 19/1997. Belgrade. Diamantis, D. 1999: The concept of ecotourism: Evolution and trends. Current Issues in Tourism 2-2,3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13683509908667847 Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 183 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 183 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … Diedrich, A., García-Buades, E. 2009: Local perceptions of tourism as indicators of destination decline. Tourism Management 30-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.10.009 Dobretić, V ., Delić, J., Perić, R., Stojšić, V ., Stanković, M., Pil, N., Stanišić, J. et al. 2012: Valorization of nat- ural values as a  basis for expanding the boundaries of the Special Nature Reserve »Zasavica«. Proceedings of the Scientific-professional conference dedicated to the fifteenth anniversary of the research of biodiversity of the Zasavica reserve »Zasavica 2012«. Sremska Mitrovica. Eshun, G., Tichaawa, T. M. 2020: Towards sustainable ecotourism development in Ghana: Contributions of the local communities. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal 68-3. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/ 10.37741/t.68.3.2 Espiner, S., Orchiston, C., Higham, J. 2017: Resilience and sustainability: A complementary relationship? Towards a practical conceptual model for the sustainability–resilience nexus in tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 25-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1281929 Eusébio, C., Vieira, A. L., Lima, S. 2018: Place attachment, host–tourist interactions, and residents’ attitudes towards tourism development: The case of Boa Vista Island in Cape V erde. Journal of Sustainable T ourism 26-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1425695 Gidebo, H. B. 2019: Attitude of local communities towards sustainable tourism development. The case of Nech Sar National Park, Ethiopia. International Journal of Advanced Research 7-3. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/ 10.21474/IJAR01/8684 Graci, S., Maher, P . T., Peterson, B., Hardy, A., Maher, P . T., Vaugeois, N. 2019: Thoughts from the think tank: Lessons learned from the sustainable Indigenous tourism symposium. Journal of Ecotourism 20-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2019.1583754 Gu, H., Ryan, C. 2008: Place attachment, identity and community impacts of tourism – The case of a Beijing hutong. Tourism Management 29-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.06.006 Haralambopoulos, N., Pizam, A. 1996: Perceived impacts of tourism: The case of Samos. Annals of Tourism Research 23-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00075-5 Hermon, D. 2016: The strategic model of tsunami based in coastal ecotourism development at Mandeh regions, West Sumatera, Indonesia. Journal of Environment and Earth Science 6-4. Hsu, C. Y ., Chen, M. Y ., Y ang, S. C. 2019: Residents’ attitudes toward support for island tourism development. Sustainability 11-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11185051 Jaafar, M., Noor, S. M., Rasoolimanesh, S. M. 2015: Perception of young local residents toward sustainable conservation programmes: A  case study of the Lenggong World Cultural Heritage Site. Tourism Management 48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.018 Jakšić, P ., Nahiranić, A. 2011: Dnevni Leptiri Zasavice (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea i Papilionoidea). Belgrade. Jovanović, L., Živković, D., Janković, M., Šiljak, V ., Toskić, D. 2019: Significance of sustainable eco-tourism for Serbia’s economic development. Collection of Papers – Faculty of Geography at the University of Belgrade 67-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/zrgfub1902053J Kaiser, H. 1970: A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika 35. Kaiser, H. 1974: An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39. Khoalenyane, N., Ezeuduji, I. O. 2016: Local community and Ts’ ehlanyane National Park in Lesotho: Perception of participation. African Journal for Physical Activity and Health Sciences 22-2,1. Khoshkam, M., Marzuki, A., Al-Mulal, U. 2016: Socio-demographic effects on Anzali wetland tourism development. Tourism Management 54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.10.012 Kihima, B. O., Musila, P . M. 2019: Extent of local community participation in tourism development in con- servation areas: A case study of Mwaluganje Conservancy. Parks 25-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2305/ IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-2BOK.en Kuvan Y ., Akan P . 2005: Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest related impacts of tourism: the case of Belek, Antalya. Tourism Management 26-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2004.02.019 Kvasova, O. 2011: Socio-demographic determinants of eco-friendly tourist attitudes and behavior. Tourism Today 11. Lazić, L., Pavić, D., Stojanović, V ., Tomić, P ., Romelić, J., Pivac, T., Košić, K. et al. 2008: Protected natural assets and ecotourism in Vojvodina. Novi Sad. Lee, T. H. 2013: Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tourism Management 34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.03.007 184 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 184 Liordos, V ., Kontsiotis, V . J., Anastasiadou, M., Karavasias, E. 2017: Effects of attitudes and demography on public support for endangered species conservation. Science of the Total Environment 595. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.241 Liu, J. C., Var, T. 1986: Resident attitudes toward tourism impacts in Hawaii. Annals of Tourism Research 13-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(86)90037-X Lundberg, E. 2017: The importance of tourism impacts for different local resident groups: A case study of a Swedish seaside destination. Journal of Destination and Management 6-1.DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.02.002 Majid, S., Tariq, S., Fiaz, M., Ikram, A. 2019: Perception and attachment of local residents toward sustainable conservation programs: A study of the metropolitan historic city. The Journal of Developing Areas 53-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2018.0066 McCaughey, R., Mao, I., Dowling, R. 2018: Residents’ perceptions towards cruise tourism development: The case of Esperance, Western Australia. Tourism Recreation Research 43-3. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/02508281.2018.1464098 McCloskey, D. J., McDonald, M. A., Cook, J., Heurtin-Roberts, S., Updegrove, S., Sampson, D., Gutter, S., Eder, M. 2013: Community engagement: definitions and organizing concepts from the literature. Internet: http:/ /www.atsdr.cdc.gov/communityengagement/pdf/PCE_Report_Chapter_1_SHEF .pdf (15. 9. 2021) McGehee, N. G., Andereck, K. L. 2004: Factors predicting rural residents’ support of tourism. Journal of Travel Research 43-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287504268234 Metrick, A., Weitzman, M. L. 1998: Conflicts and choices in biodiversity preservations. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.12.3.21 Milheiras, S. 2019: Does perception of the link between biodiversity and ecosystem services influence atti- tudes towards nature conservation? UCL Division of Biosciences: London. Mohammadi, M., Khalifah, Z. 2014: Residents’ attitudes and support for tourism development. Tourismos 9-2. Nunnally, J. C., Bernstein, I. H. 1994: The assessment of reliability. Psychometric Theory 3. Obradović, S., Stojanović, V . 2021: Measuring residents’ attitude toward sustainable tourism development: A  case study of the Gradac River gorge, Valjevo (Serbia). Tourism Recreation Research. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2020.1870073 Panyik, E. 2015: Rural tourism governance: Determinants of policy-makers’ support for tourism devel- opment. Tourism Planning and Development 12-1. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2014.960603 Prayag, G., Dookhony-Ramphul, K., Maryeven, M. 2010: Hotel development and tourism impacts in Mauritius: Hoteliers’ perspectives on sustainable tourism. Development Southern Africa 27-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2010.522832 Putra, A., Tanto, T. A., Pranowo, W . S, Ilham, I., Damanhuri, H., Suasti, Y ., Triyatno, T. 2018: Suitability of coastal ecotourism in Padang City – West Sumatera: Case study of beach recreation and mangrove. Journal Segara 14-2. Puzović, S., Panjković, B., Tucakov, M., Stojnić, N., Sabadoš, K., Stojanović, T ., Vig, L. et al. 2015: Management of natural heritage in Vojvodina. Novi Sad. Ramón-Hidalgo, A. E., Kozak, R. A., Harshaw, H. W ., Tindall, D. B. 2018: Differential effects of cognitive and structural social capital on empowerment in two community ecotourism projects in Ghana. Society and Natural Resources 31-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1364454 Rathnayake, C. V ., Darshi, G. A. N. 2020: An application of sustainable tourism attitude scale (sus-tas) in three coastal tourist destinations in the southern province of Sri Lanka. Proccedings of the Sixth International Conference on Business Management. Sri Jatewardenepura. Sekulić, N., Marić, S., Galambos, L., Radošević, D., Krpo-Ćetković, J. 2013: New distribution data and pop- ulation structure of the European mudminnow Umbra krameri in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Journal of Fish Biology 83-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.12183 Senko, J., Schneller, A. J., Solis, J., Ollervides, F ., Nichols, W . J. 2011: People helping turtles, turtles helping people: Understanding resident attitudes towards sea turtle conservation and opportunities for enhanced community participation in Bahia Magdalena, Mexico. Ocean and Coastal Management 54-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.10.030 Sirakaya-Turk, E., Ekinci, Y ., Kaya, A. G. 2007: An examination of the validity of SUS-TAS in cross-cultures. Journal of Travel Research 46-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507308328 Acta geographica Slovenica, 61-2, 2021 185 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 185 Vladimir Stojanović, Dubravka Milić, Sanja Obradović, Jovana Vanovac, Dimitrije Radišić, The role of ecotourism in … Sirakaya-Turk, E., Gursoy, D. 2013: Predictive validity of Sustas. Tourism Analysis 18-5. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/ 10.3727/108354213X13782245307957 Sirakaya-T urk, E., Ingram, L., Harill, R. 2008: Resident typologies within the integrative paradigm of sustaincentric tourism development. Tourism Analysis 13-5,6. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/10.3727/108354208788160405 Soldić Frleta, D., Smolčić Jurdana, D. 2020: Insights into differences in residents’ attitudes: Tourism impacts and support for future development. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal 68-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37741/t.68.2.5 Stanković, M. 2014: Guide through nature in the Zasavica Special Nature Reserve. Pokret gorana „Sremska Mitrovica». Sremska Mitrovica. Stefanica, M., Vlavian-Gurmeza, M. 2010: Ecotourism – Model of sustainable tourist development. Studies and Scientific Researches. Economic Edition 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29358/sceco.v0i15.161 Stevanović, V . 2005: Serbia and Montenegro - Serbia. Important Plant Areas in Central and Eastern Europe. Priority Sites for Plant Conservation. Internet: https://www.plantlife.org.uk/application/files/ 8214/8233/1761/IPAsinCEE-5mb.pdf (15. 9. 2021) Stojanović, V ., Đorđević, J., Lazić, L., Stamenković, I., Dragićević, V . 2014: The principles of sustainable development of tourism in the special nature reserve Gornje Podunavlje and their impact on the local communities. Acta geographica Slovenica 54-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS54407 Stojanović, V ., Lazić, L., Dunjić, J. 2018: Nature protection and sustainable tourism interaction in selected Ramsar sites in Vojvodina (Northern Serbia). Geographica Pannonica 22-3. Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S. 1989: Using multivariate statistics. New Y ork. Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S. 2007: Using multivariate statistics. Boston. T eye, V ., Sirakaya, E., Sönmez, S. F . 2002: Residents’ attitude toward tourism development. Annals of T ourism Research 29-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00074-3 Thetsane, R. M. 2019: Local community participation in tourism development: The case of Katse villages in Lesotho. Athens Journal of Tourism 6-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30958/ajt.6-2-4 Tisdell, C., Wilson, C., Swarna Nantha, H. 2006: Public choice of species for the ‘ Ark’: Phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. Journal for Nature Conservation 14-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2005.11.001 Tomićević, J., Shannon, M. A., Milovanović, M. 2010: Socio-economic impacts on the attitudes towards conservation of natural resources: Case study from Serbia. Forest Policy and Economics 12-3. Tomović, G., Zlatković, B., Niketić, M., Perić, R., Lazarević, P ., Duraki, Š., Stanković, M. et al. 2009: Threat status revision of some taxa from »The Red Data Book of Flora of Serbia 1«. Botanica Serbica 33-1. Walpole, M. J., Goodwin, H. J. 2001: Local attitudes towards conservation and tourism around Komodo National Park, Indonesia. Environmental Conservation 28-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0376892901000169 Wang, W . C. 2019: The effect of early-life outdoor experiences on residents’ attitudes towards sustainable tourism within an urban context. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 25. DOI: https:/ /doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jort.2018.10.002 Wearing, S., Neil, J. 2009: Ecotourism: Impacts, potentials and possibilities. Oxford. Weaver, D. B., Lawton, L. J. 2007: Twenty years on: The state of contemporary ecotourism research. Tourism Management 28-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.03.004 Yu, C. P , Chancellor, H. C., Cole. S. T. 2011: Measuring residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism: A  reexamination of the sustainable tourism attitude scale. Journal of Travel Research 50-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287509353189 Zhang, Y., Cole, S. T., Chancellor, C. H. 2015: Facilitation of the SUS-TAS application with parsimony, predictive validity, and global interpretation examination. Journal of Travel Research 54-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287514535848 186 61-2_acta49-1.qxd 30.11.2021 13:55 Page 186