Original Scientific Article
Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s
Perspective: A Hotel Context
Petra Zabukovec Baruca
University of Primorska, Slovenia
petra.zabukovec@fts.upr.si
Zlatko Jančič
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
zlatko.jancic@fdv.uni-lj.si
Aleksandra Brezovec
University of Primorska, Slovenia
aleksandra.brezovec@fts.upr.si
Understanding responsible tourist behaviour is critical for tourism operators if they
expect both economic and environmental benefits. Despite decades of academic and
practical study of responsibility for the natural and social environment, it is still un-
clear who is responsible for improving the situation in terms of sustainable develop-
ment. This requires a deeper understanding of the concept of individual responsi-
bility, which has a behavioural, ethical, and response basis, that will be addressed in
this paper. In a hotel context, we explore the concept of individual responsibility in
the role of tourists’ ability to improve the state of the environment through changes
in awareness and behaviour. Based on the relevant theories presented, we defined
individual responsibility as a construct divided into four dimensions: personal re-
sponsibility or norms (ethics and morals), awareness and knowledge, preference,
and action-based responsible behaviour. Significant results on tourist responsibil-
ity were obtained by factor analysis and a hierarchical clustering method to identify
three different types of responsible tourists. We labelled them as actively responsi-
ble, pragmatically responsible, and irresponsible tourists. The identified differences
among the three types of (ir)responsible tourists allow for a better understanding of
their motives and expectations, as well as better design of sustainable practices by
tourism providers.
Keywords: individual responsibility, tourist behaviour, hotel, sustainable tourism
https://doi.org/10.26493/2335-4194.15.187-202
Introduction
As an international organization committed to the
development of responsible and sustainable tourism,
unwto has recently developed a Global Code of
Ethics for Tourism, which is intended to promote
tolerance and respect and encourage the industry to
adopt ethical values. The concept of ethical and re-
sponsible tourism remains largely unexplained. Re-
sponsible Tourism was defined as ‘making better pla-
ces for people to live in and better places for people
to visit’ at the 2002 Cape Town Conference. Respon-
sible Tourism requires that operators, hoteliers, gov-
ernments, local people and tourists take responsibility
and action to make tourism more sustainable (Euro-
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 187
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
peanCommission, 2012).While unwto believes that
the code serves as a guide for all stakeholders involved
in tourism development, it remains rather bland and
unclear as to what exactly is meant by an ethical and
responsible approach.Goodwin andPender (2005) ex-
plain responsible and ethical tourism as a business and
consumer response to some of the major economic,
social and environmental issues affecting our world.
It is about travelling in a better way and taking re-
sponsibility for the impact that our activities have on
other people and their social, cultural and natural en-
vironment (p. 303). This statement shifts the debate
from a general discussion of responsible production
to responsible consumption. Today, the understanding
of mutual responsibility for sustainable development
is also included in the un Sustainable Development
Goals. Goal 12, entitled ‘Responsible Consumption
and Production,’ is one of the 17 Sustainable Devel-
opment Goals established by the United Nations in
2015 (The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development).
In postmodern marketing theory, the discourse on
the new consumer is defined by characteristics that ex-
pose the consumer as an increasingly complex individ-
ual who, in pursuit of products, also reflects their at-
titude to the world and wider social problems (Jančič,
1999). In the sociology of tourism, Urry (1995) defines
the tourist as a postmodern consumer associated with
an aesthetic cosmopolitanism characterized by a gen-
eral interest in places, people, cultures and openness,
as well as the ability to positively evaluate and accept
differences, which is the basis for the sense of respon-
sibility in tourism. The trend toward greater respon-
sibility is reflected in increasingly socially and envi-
ronmentally aware tourists who also generally take re-
sponsibility (Mihalič, 1993; Urry, 1995; Shaw & Clarke,
1999; Harrison et al., 2005).
There is growing concern about the negative im-
pacts of tourism and sustainability, with more atten-
tion paid to the responsibility of tourists (Del Chi-
appa et al., 2019). Moreover, most of the negative im-
pacts of tourism result from inappropriate behaviour
of tourists who do not behave in an environmen-
tally friendly way. Juvan and Dolnicar (2014) argue
that tourists are the most promising target when it
comes to improving the environmental sustainability
of tourism. Tourists can help reduce the negative im-
pacts of tourism by making environmentally friendly
tourism decisions and behaving in an environmen-
tally responsible manner. However, despite empirical
evidence of tourists’ good intentions to purchase envi-
ronmentally friendly and socially responsible prod-
ucts, this pressure is slow to develop (Font, 2007).
Tourists often have limited understanding of the social
and environmental impacts of tourism, but have some
idea of how their behaviour could change things for
the better (Miller et al., 2010). It is difficult to under-
stand what motivates a responsible tourist or what the
main barriers are for the tourist to choose responsi-
ble behaviour (Budeanu, 2007). From the perspective
of the tourist’s responsibility and moral judgment, the
attributes of a particular product or service may be ac-
ceptable or unacceptable and as such may be a trigger
for the consumer’s behaviour, response, and influence
(Isaacs, 2011).
Based on these premises, we focus our study on
consumer responsibility in tourism. The aim is to pro-
pose a measure of a tourist’s individual responsibility
as a driver of their behaviour in sustainable tourism
consumption and practices. In addition to theoretic
interest in this topic, the study is also of practical im-
portance to tourism experience providers, as it helps
themunderstand the factors that are critical to the sus-
tainable development andmarketing of their products.
We based our study on the hotel industry because
it is an important component of the tourism experi-
ence and provides a complex tourism product (World
Travel and Tourism Council, 2011). New trends in the
way travellers use tourism and hospitality services are
leading hotels to evolve from mere accommodation
providers to meaningful experience creators, result-
ing in a need for responsible and sustainable customer
relationships at all stages of the guest’s journey. Ho-
tels included in our study allow us to study responsi-
bility from the tourist’s perspective at all stages, from
their choice of hotel prior to arrival, to their experi-
ence during their stay, to their satisfaction and actions
after leaving the hotel in the post-purchase phase.
In this paper, we first introduce the conceptual
aspects of responsibility from the tourist’s perspec-
tive and discuss the determinants of responsible be-
188 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
haviour. In the second part, we present an empiri-
cal study conducted in the hotel industry, in which
we identified the types of responsible consumers in
tourism. In the last part, we discuss the obtained re-
sults and provide suggestions for sustainable tourism
management.
Conceptual Framework
The concept of responsibility can be a component of
existing tourism segments, such as nature, cultural,
community, volunteer, and educational travel; back-
packing and youth tourism; adventure tourism; and
high-end tourism (Krantz & Chong, 2009). Respon-
sible tourism, however, is not a type of tourism per
se, but a paradigm. It is a way of doing tourism that
emphasizes responsibility to the ecology, culture, and
communities of the destination. Harrison et al. (2005)
point out that responsible consumption is a field that
goes beyond an understanding of a narrow ecolog-
ical environment to include human rights, equality,
justice, charity, and solidarity. The concept of respon-
sibility is central to many psychological, social, eco-
nomic, legal, and political phenomena. The goal of
responsibility research, from moral responsibility in
Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (1820 in Alznauer, 2008)
to studies of responsible prosocial behaviour during
the covid-19 pandemic (Hellmann et al., 2021), is to
understand the origins of responsibility, support re-
sponsible behaviour, and bridge the gap between indi-
vidualistic and collective responsibility. Highlighting
the attributes of responsibility from a tourist’s perspec-
tive and identifying factors for responsible tourist be-
haviour are the main objectives of this section.
Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
The behavioural aspect is considered the dominant as-
pect in responsible tourism studies. There are several
authors that address responsibility from the tourist’s
perspective. Wheller (2012) states that the tourist’s
awareness before arriving at the destination is funda-
mental, and based on this understanding, their edu-
cation takes place. The tourist’s responsibility goes be-
yond conscious and responsible thinking, both in re-
lation to the environment and ethical issues (Mihalic,
2016). For Krippendorf (1987), responsible tourists are
willing to invest adequate time and resources and to
educate themselves before travelling in order to be
conscious and ethical about their local experiences.
Responsible tourism is based on fundamental princi-
ples such as respect for others and their environment
and acting responsibly in relation to one’s own actions
and, moreover, in relation to the management and op-
eration of businesses. It is based on appropriate strate-
gies and policies that are underpinned by sustainabil-
ity, accompanied by appropriate behaviour, and capa-
ble of (re)sustainable actions that respond to and are
supported by an environmental and ethical tourism
awareness (Fennell, 2018; Leslie, 2012). However, these
committed, responsible tourism stakeholders, even
if well-intentioned, are not a homogeneous group.
Other studies looking at consumer perceptions, at-
titudes, and behaviours related to responsible tourism
show discrepancies between attitudes demanding that
tourists engage in their activities responsibly and their
actual behaviours (Budeanu, 2007; Juvan and Dol-
nicar, 2014; Weeden, 2014). In Wang et al.’s (2018)
study, they mention that in tourism activities, tourists’
responsible environmental behaviour is the result of
positive human interaction with the environment.
Their study uses the theory of planned behaviour and
was conducted in a case study on Huangshan Moun-
tain inChina. The results show that tourists’ intentions
toward environmentally friendly behaviours positively
influence their attitudes toward environmental pro-
tection. Moreover, Dias et al. (2021) respond to this
challenge in their study focusing on more sustainable
segments and seeking more responsible tourists by
developing a measure to assess tourists’ responsibil-
ity. The results show two dimensions: civic responsi-
bility and philanthropic responsibility, which provide
an understanding of how tourists can act responsibly
in destinations without compromising the environ-
mental footprint on the planet. Moreover, responsi-
ble tourist behaviour is not limited to environmen-
tal concerns. Culturally responsible behaviour should
also be considered, as tourism can have negative im-
pacts on social aspects. Pennington-Gray et al. (2005)
stated that culturally responsible behaviour means
being aware of and taking into account the cultural
values, traditions, and customs of a foreign society
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 189
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
in order to meet the expectations of the host society.
Several theories and models have been developed
in the context of consumer behaviour. The theoret-
ical model of personal norms (normative influences
on altruism, Schwartz, 1977) explains our behaviour
as influenced by the sense of moral obligation to act
on one’s personally held norms. Research support-
ing this model has shown associations between per-
sonal norms and behaviour rather than causal rela-
tions. Studies show that variations in situational con-
ditions also influence the relationship between per-
sonal norms and responsible behaviour. The studies
of how personal norms are related to responsible be-
haviour are part of a larger research field of attitude
and behaviour relations in general. Together with the
normative theories, motivational theories provide a
broad framework for the study of behaviour in gen-
eral and responsible behaviour in particular. Accord-
ing to these theories, behavioural motivation depends
on the personal evaluation of the desired outcome.
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (tpb), originally
proposed by Ajzen (1985), is a well-known approach
from social psychology that focuses on how to moti-
vate people to perform a particular behaviour (Ajzen,
1991). According to this theory, people behave ratio-
nally in their decision-making. tpb has been success-
fully applied in determining human behaviour in a
number of domains, including tourists’ environmen-
tally conscious behaviour, and it has been used to pre-
dict behaviour in various domains, including tourism
behaviour (Han & Kim, 2010). tpb has also been ap-
plied to the field of environmental behaviour research,
such as e-waste recycling (Wang et al., 2017), energy
conservation and emission reduction (Chen, 2016),
environmental innovation (Long et al., 2017), and sus-
tainable consumption behaviour (Joshi & Rahman,
2019). Han’s (2015) findings suggest that moral com-
mitment has a greater influence on guests’ behavioural
intentions to stay in environmentally friendly hotels,
while Chen and Tung (2014) claimed that tpb vari-
ables have higher explanatory power than variables
reflecting morality.
All of these theoretical frameworks agree that the
evaluation of a behaviour is an important antecedent
to the actual behaviour.
Determining Factors for Responsible Tourist Behaviour
In order to approach the concept of a responsible
tourist, it is necessary to identify the basic condi-
tions and factors. The factors associated with respon-
sible behaviour are still poorly understood. To gain
a deeper insight, this study analyses some individ-
ual and situational factors based on tourists’ personal
responsibility, awareness and knowledge, preferences
and environmental behaviour. Several studies have ex-
amined the factors that influence environmental be-
haviour. Various theoretical models have been used in
an attempt to explain and predict tourist behaviour.
Tourism researchers operationalize responsible be-
haviour in different ways depending on the study con-
text. Responsible behaviour usually depends on indi-
vidual factors, external and situational factors, and de-
mographic background factors, which are often used
to improve the accessibility of segments for subse-
quent profiling and targeting strategies (Wedel & Ka-
makura, 2000).
Monitoring the behaviour of tourists illustrates the
manifestations of behaviour, the individual behaviour
factors, and the consequences or effects of tourist be-
haviour. In this context, it is necessary to explore, in
an extensive literature review, numerous factors that
influence responsible consumer behaviour which can
be identified. At this point, we have explained the
most important determinants of responsible buying
behaviour.
Individual Factors
This category of individual factors includes variables
that relate specifically to an individual decisionmaker.
These variables are usually the result of individual life
experiences (attitudes, values, personality, etc.) and
influence a person’s decision-making process. A con-
sumer’s value system is essential to understanding
responsible consumer behaviour. Many studies have
found a positive correlation between consumers’ en-
vironmental, social, and ethical values and their green
product purchasing behaviour (Chen & Chang, 2012;
Wang et al., 2014). Consumers’ environmental and
ethical values, specifically personal values, were found
to positively influence ethical commitments and per-
sonal norms (Chen & Chang, 2012). Responsible be-
190 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
haviour is a complex form of ethical decision-making
behaviour. Researchers studying responsible tourism
seek to understand the ethical values and behaviours
of both the so-called ‘ethical consumer’ (Weeden,
2008). The common element of these concepts related
to tourist behaviour is responsibility, which is often
associated with the term’s ethics and morality (Strong,
1997; Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Weeden, 2008). Stud-
ies attempt to understand the motivations of respon-
sible tourists, as there are many different labels for
people who are aware of the ethical and moral issues
in tourism and want to make their holiday decisions
responsibly. Fennell (2008) was one of the first to ad-
dress ethics in tourism. He emphasized the impor-
tance of sacrifice when moving towards responsibil-
ity and challenged the notion of ‘tourism as freedom’
by arguing that any chance of freedom is taken away
when travellers deny responsibility (Fennell, 2008).
For Fennell (2008), a basic understanding of one’s
self-awareness of being or becoming responsible is
essential to the performance of responsible individ-
ual actions. Consumers readily justify their travel by
claiming that everyone else is behaving the same way,
or by using moral license as an excuse (Barr et al.,
2010; McKercher et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2010; Font
& McCabe, 2017), by accusing others of not acting
sustainably or responsibly (Juvan et al., 2016), or by
pretending to be unaware of the link between travel
and sustainability (McKercher et al., 2014; Miller et
al., 2010). Thus, the profound notion that ‘a holiday is
a holiday’ permeates even the minds of those who are
strongly committed to and openly address environ-
mental concerns and actions (Barr et al., 2010). At the
same time, consumers exhibit a distinct trait of entity
thinking, in that they do not take personal responsibil-
ity for changing their behaviour towards greater sus-
tainability until other individuals and, interestingly,
developing countries change their behaviour accord-
ingly (Miller et al., 2010; McKercher et al., 2014). It can
be said that consumers’ environmental, social and eth-
ical values, together with their individualistic values,
have a positive influence on responsible behaviour.
Other factors that influence and promote responsi-
ble consumer behaviour are based on informing, rais-
ing awareness, and educating the public about the pos-
itive and beneficial effects of behaviour on the environ-
ment and society (Wright, 2004; Dolnicar et al., 2008).
Most consumer theories that examine the influence
of individual factors on responsible purchasing be-
haviour assume that environmental knowledge, infor-
mation, and awareness have an impact on responsible
purchasing behaviour by influencing consumers’ en-
vironmental attitudes (Zhang & Dong, 2020). Amen-
dah and Park (2008) argue that knowledge growth
can change consumption behaviour, while Lee and
Moscardo (2005) find that environmentally conscious
consumers are more likely to have environmentally
friendly intentions than other consumers. Moreover,
it appears that even in areas where consumers are po-
tentially willing to accept a range of responsibilities,
their willingness to respond depends on the availabil-
ity of relevant information (Williams, 2004; Barnett et
al., 2005; Becken, 2007). However, information is not
synonymous with consumer response. Too much in-
formation can create a sense of information overload
that prevents the consumer from responding (Jacoby,
1984; Hahn et al., 1992). Environmental knowledge is
an important prerequisite for customer behaviour in
relation to a hospitality product and indicates that a
guest is able to understand the concepts, issues and
problems of the environment and model its activities
(Chan et al., 2014).
Situational Factors
According to Ajzen (1991), a situational variable or
situational factor refers to people’s perception of how
easy or difficult it is to perform a behaviour. In con-
trast, Barr (2007) and Barr et al. (2010) defined situ-
ational variable as a given personal situation in terms
of behavioural context, individual characteristics, and
individual knowledge and experience of the behaviour.
Situationism in psychology refers to an approach to
personality that assumes that people are more influ-
enced by external situational factors than by internal
characteristics (Krahe, 1993).
External situational factors in travel behaviour are
preferences that are part of a personal lifestyle and can
influence both how and why people travel (Chen et al.,
2009). Preferences are associated with the consumer’s
lifestyle, which also influences the choice of vacation
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 191
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
type, destination, accommodation, mode of trans-
portation, and personal travel experience. Environ-
mental considerations rarely play an important role
when choosing a hotel, and tourists usually prioritize
price, quality, brands, amenities, and pleasure when
choosing accommodation (Manaktola & Jauhari,
2007). In addition, several studies examined the rela-
tionship between price and the choice of environmen-
tally friendly hotels and whether guests should pay
a premium to stay in such hotels (Han & Kim, 2010;
Manaktola & Jauhari, 2007). However, the empirical
results are contradictory and the willingness to pay a
surcharge may be influenced by consumers’ environ-
mental awareness (Kang et al., 2012). In this context of
responsibility, preferences can be considered as part of
a sustainable lifestyle, as many of the current environ-
mental problems are related to people’s unsustainable
lifestyles (Gössling, 2018).
Consumer preferences are also related to product
attributes and are determined by individual consumer
values such as health and safety concerns and hedo-
nistic values of enjoyment and pleasure in using a
product (Chen et al., 2012). In many studies, it was
found that product attributes positively influenced the
responsible purchase of green products (Chen et al.,
2012; Young et al., 2010). Moreover, consumers pre-
ferred functional attributes of the product that meet
their personal needs and desires over ethical attributes
(Chen & Lobo, 2012). Another important situational
factor is the availability of tourism services and prod-
ucts. Consumers generally do not like to spend a lot of
time searching for environmentally friendly products;
they prefer products that are easily accessible (Young
et al., 2010). Limited availability and inconvenience in
obtaining products act as barriers and increase the gap
between consumers’ positive attitude and their actual
behaviour towards sustainable products. Therefore,
easily accessible services and products with beneficial
functional and ethical attributes and high quality are
a strong motive and have a positive influence on con-
sumers’ responsible purchasing behaviour.
Action-Based Responsible Behaviour
From the above discussion, it is clear that various in-
dividual and situational factors motivate or hinder re-
sponsible behaviour and influence the translation of a
positive attitude into actual responsible action.
Goodwin (2011) clearly links responsible tourism
to actions thatmake tourismmore sustainable.His un-
derstanding of the concept of responsibility is based on
three aspects: accountability, actionability and respon-
siveness. The third aspect, responsiveness, relates di-
rectly to tourism behaviour and involves dialogue, de-
veloping solutions and taking action to make tourism
more sustainable. Leslie (2012) argues that responsi-
ble tourism is a behavioural characteristic based on the
fundamental principles of respect for others and their
environment. He assumes that when faced with the
dilemma of a conceptual basis for assessing respon-
sibility, the tourist refers to the ethical and environ-
mental principles of tourism and proposes to behave
in an environmentally friendly and ethically responsi-
ble manner.
On the other hand, there is evidence that environ-
mental knowledge and environmental activism do not
influence holiday behaviour (Juvan & Dolnicar, 2014),
which means that it might be useful to look for alter-
native explanatory models for the influence of envi-
ronmental awareness on consumer behaviour. When
people are aware of the environmental impact of their
actions, we talk about so-called intentional environ-
mental behaviour or directly about environmentally
relevant behaviour. Most cases of environmentally rel-
evant behaviour can be judged on the basis of environ-
mental knowledge according to their impact on the
environment and can be labelled as environmentally
friendly or environmentally unfriendly. Consumers
often make trade-offs between environmental con-
cerns and product attributes. For example, they eval-
uate the various environmental, social, and individual
consequences of purchasing environmentally friendly
products. Consumers who give more importance to
environmental and social consequences look for the
characteristics of responsible consumption in prod-
ucts, such as local, green, organic. On the other hand,
consumers who place more importance on individual
consequences look for functional features of a product
and their individual considerations overshadow their
positive environmental and social attitudes (Follows
& Jobber, 2000).
192 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
Our study addresses consumer responsibility in re-
lation to hotel service attributes in tourism purchase
decisions. We rely on the basic concept of individual
responsibility, which is defined as an ethical evaluation
that depends onwhether relationships with other peo-
ple, society and nature are permissible or impermis-
sible, acceptable or unacceptable, right or wrong. Ev-
ery action of an individual has consequences for other
people and the environment, and therefore the ability
to act brings with it a certain responsibility.
Methodology
The aimof our studywas to gain insight into consumer
responsibility, to develop a detailed understanding of
their concerns about the impact of their holidays and
to further academic knowledge about their motiva-
tion in the context of responsible behaviour. The re-
search was conducted in the hotel industry as it pro-
vides a complex tourism experience (World Travel and
Tourism Council, 2011).
A tool has been developed that relates directly to
the hotel context. During a hotel stay on vacation,
tourists are exposed to a variety of services, activi-
ties, movement, and excitement that shape the over-
all experience. Since travel and tourism should be
planned and practiced in a sustainable manner, all
stakeholders, including tourists, should take respon-
sibility. The hotel context provides an opportunity to
observe tourists’ behaviour throughout the purchase
process, from hotel and accommodation selection to
post-purchase experience evaluation, which is valu-
able for understanding tourists’ responsible behaviour.
The research design is based on theoretical find-
ings to determine individual and situational factors in
the four dimensions of ethics, awareness and knowl-
edge, preference, and action-oriented responsible be-
haviour. A questionnaire was developed to measure
the four dimensions. The questionnaire is primar-
ily based on the methodology of the International
Hotels Environment Initiative (Consumer Attitudes
towards the Role of Hotels in Environmental Sus-
tainability, 2002), which was conducted among ihei
members (Accor hotel chains, Carlson hotels around
the world, Fairmont Hotels & Resorts, Hilton Inter-
national, Marco Polo Hotels, Marriott International,
Radisson Hotels & Resorts on six continents, Star-
wood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, tui, and others.)
The questionnaire was tailored to evaluate the dimen-
sions in different purchase process phases (Budeanu,
2006).
The quantitative research approach of data collec-
tionwas carried out in six hotels on the Slovenian coast
during the summer season. The surveywas carried out
with an online questionnaire for data collection. The
questionnaire is partly tailor-made for this research
and comprises five relevant content sets of indicators
measuring the responsible tourist dimensions. The
first set of questions relates to the dimension of con-
sumer responsibility and includes the variables aware-
ness and ethical attitude, preferences, environmental
behaviour, and moral responsibility; the second set of
questions covers the purchasing process: assessment
of importance of and satisfaction with the hotel’s en-
vironmental attributes; the third group of questions
relates to the characteristics of the environmental fac-
tors of the hotel offer in relation to the social environ-
mental indicators; the fourth set of questions relates to
information about the guest’s visit, such as the motive
for the visit, the category of the hotel and the length of
the guest’s stay in the hotel; the fifth set of questions
covers the basic socio-demographic characteristics of
the respondents (Table 1).
Several studies examined and discussed the appli-
cation of factor analysis to reduce the large set of data
and to identify the factors extracted from the analysis
(Pett et al., 2003; Shrestha, 2021). This study has fol-
lowed threemajor steps for factor analysis: assessment
of the suitability of the data, factor extraction, and fac-
tor rotation and interpretation.
Sampling and Data Collection
The research sample was based on proportionally
stratified, partly earmarked and partly convenience
samples. The combination of the purpose and con-
venience sample is a result of the sampling approach,
where we used a known guest structure based on their
nationality, which is typical for the selected months
of the survey. The sample of respondents was based
on domestic and foreign guests who were willing to
complete the questionnaire after leaving the hotel. The
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 193
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
Table 1 Questionnaire Content Sets of Indicators
Set Dimension Number of indicators
Responsible
consumer
Awareness 
Behaviour in rel. to the environment 
Ethics 
Preference 
Purchasing
process
Pre-purchase phase
Expected well-being 
Hotel selection 
Information 
Stay
Hotel environmental factors 
Employee relationship 
Consumer behaviour 
Overall phase
Guest response 
Hotel and
envir. attrib.
Environmental factors 
Social factors 
Guest visit
information
Motive 
Hotel category 
Length of stay 
Socio-
demographic
data
Gender, age, nationality, education 
Status 
Economic position 
limitation of the sampling refers to the technique of
electronic survey, which we could only carry out with
a population that included those people who had left
their contact details and a notification authorization
and were willing to participate in the survey, which
also influences the characteristics of the sample col-
lected. The sample comprised 886 respondents from
Slovenia, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and
other countries. Of these, 45.5 filled in the question-
naire completely. This included 35.6 of respondents
from Slovenia, 42.8 from Italy, 12.9 from Austria,
5 fromGermany and 1.5 from other countries. The
largest proportion of respondents (60.1) stayed in
a four-star hotel, 21 in a three-star hotel, 16.3 in
a five-star hotel and 2.5 in other accommodation,
which includes apartments and hotel annexes.
Reliability and Validity of the Measurement
We used principal component analysis to test the con-
tent validity of the measurement instrument. In the
first phase, we conducted principal component analy-
sis by including all empirical variables in the measure-
ment instrument (Table 2).
Separate analyses were conducted for each mea-
sured set of variables to check the substantive reliabil-
ity of the measurement instrument. In addition, prin-
cipal components analysis of the estimate of common-
ality or common space for each measured dimension
was performed using the most common method of
factor analysis, i.e. principal axis factoring. In addi-
tion, principal axis factoring was used with the extrac-
tionmethod, in which we performed orthogonal rota-
tion, extracting from the analysis those variables that
had values less than 0.2 after extraction. Separate fac-
tor analyses were performed for each dimension. For
each dimension, we performed seven replicates. The
results of the factor analysis for each of the four di-
mensions are shown in Table 2. Regarding the loading
of each of the five dimensions, all 54 variables have val-
ues higher than 0.59. The Cronbach’s alpha used to test
the reliability of each of the five dimensions shows the
validity of the convergence of the created scale, which
also indicates good measurement reliability.
For each dimension, we performed principal com-
ponents analysis and factor analysis separately to test
the dimensions of consumer environmental respon-
sibility: (1) awareness and knowledge; (2) preference
(general and environmental); (3) ethics; (4) action-
oriented responsible behaviour. We were interested in
whether there was evidence of some latent variables
in a particular dimension. Based on the principal axis
factorization and principal component analysis, we
concluded that there were six factors.
Data Analysis
In the factor analysis, we used 54 variables that mea-
sure the four dimensions of the construct of respon-
sibility and are recorded in the five sets of the ques-
tionnaire, i.e. A, B, C, D and E (Table 1). Significant
results on consumer responsibility were obtained by
six separate factor analyses and hierarchical group-
ing. The underlying concept of consumer responsi-
194 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
Table 2 Reliability Statistics of Measured Variables by Questionnaire Sets
() () () () () () ()
 a Awareness and knowledge  Dichotomous scale – .
 b Environmental factors of hotel choice  Likert scale from  to  – importance . .
 c Preferences of hotel choice  Scale of priority from  to  . .
 d Environmental practices of the hotel  Likert scale from  to  – importance and satisfaction . .
 e Behaviour in relation to the environment  Frequency from  to  . .
e Ethics  Rate from  to  . .
Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) number, (2) label, (3) dimension, (4) number of variables, (5) measurement scale,
(6) Cronbach’s Alpha, (7) explained variance (method of principal components, in percent).
bility was examined from the perspective of the buy-
ing process through which we identified the types
of (ir)responsible consumers. The standard statisti-
cal program spss 21.00 was used for data analysis.
The hierarchical cluster method of Ward was used
for grouping units. To validate the measurement of
the research objectives, we operationalized both the
discussed research area of consumer responsibility
and the concept based on theoretical starting points,
based on the key elements of the definition of a re-
sponsible consumer in terms of individual responsi-
bility and moral judgement, as well as awareness and
knowledge, preference, andmotives for action regard-
ing the natural and socio-cultural environment. We
have highlighted four key dimensions of responsibility
with measurement variables that measure individual
dimensions.
Results
Descriptive Statistic
Descriptive statistical analyses of the socio-demo-
graphic characteristics of respondents data obtained
show that 51.6of respondentswerewomen and 48.4
were men; the average age structure was between 50
and 60 years. According to the national structure,
most respondents were from Italy (42.8), followed by
Slovenians (35.6), respondents from Germany, Aus-
tria and Switzerland (18.9) and others (2.7). Re-
garding the educational structure, respondents with
a level of education predominated (53.7), followed
by respondents with a secondary or vocational school
leaving certificate (33.3) and then by respondents
with a master’s degree or higher (10.2). By status,
salaried employees (71.3) dominate, followed by pen-
sioners (24.4). The majority, 56.5, described their
economic situation as average, 20.5 as above average
and 16.8 as below average.
Regarding information about the stay in the hotel
visit, respondents indicated that 60 stayed in a four-
star hotel, 21 in a three-star hotel and 16.3 in a five-
star hotel. On average, they stayed 5.8 days in a ho-
tel. The reason for the visit was given by the major-
ity (30.1) of re-spondents as rest, 12.5 wellness and
well-being, 9.6 travel and excursions, 9.3 entertain-
ment and fun, and the remaining 4.5 with sports and
recreation, or 2.8 with business or education.
Identification of Responsible Groups of Consumers
With factor analysis we obtained six factors, which
we used to identify groups of responsible consumers
through the method of classifying units into clus-
ters. Based on hierarchical cluster analysis, we used a
method of stepwise integration based on a successive
grouping of two groups into a new group. When clas-
sifying, it is important that the units within the group
are as similar as possible, and the groups are as diverse
as possible. In our case, we used Ward’s method of
hierarchical cluster analysis, which is based on succes-
sive grouping. TheWard’smethod tends to groups that
have comparable variability. The determined number
of groups was then used for further statistical analy-
sis. The defined number of clusters was then used for
further statistical analysis. After examining individual
solutions, we decided on three main groups because
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 195
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
Table 3 Variance Analysis
Factors () () () () ()
 Actively aware Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
 Generally aware Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
 Environmental dimension Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
 Choice preference Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
 Ethics Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
 Responsible behaviour Between groups .  . . .
Total . 
Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) Sum of squares, (2) degrees of freedom, (3) average, (4) F, (5) significance.
this resulted in amore transparent and content-related
classification.
The descriptive statistics were reviewed after the
identification of three groups. Using the analysis of
variance (Table 3), we identified the differences be-
tween individual groups and factors. The differences
between the groups were statistically significant. To
better define and describe the groups, we found the
differences between the three groups according to
individual factors: active awareness, general aware-
ness, environmental practices, preference, ethics, and
action-based responsible behaviour (Table 4).
There were 271 units in total. The first cluster rep-
resents 39.9 of all units, while the second group rep-
resents 44.6 and the third group represents 15.5 of
all units.
Description of the Different Types of Consumers
If the assumption is correct that some consumers are
more environmentally responsible than others, then it
is necessary to describe the group of consumers who
demonstrate responsible behaviours in tourism.
Group 1: Irresponsible Consumers
The first group includes more people with a lower av-
erage in terms of the environmental responsibility fac-
tor and the responsible behaviour factor, which is why
we consider them to be environmentally irresponsible
consumers. They show a predominant general aware-
ness and are not prepared to pay higher prices for ho-
tels with environmentally conscious practices or lower
comfort levels in order to contribute to environmental
protection, i.e. their purchasing decisions are not in-
fluenced by environmental concerns. The hotel’s envi-
ronmental practices do not matter to them, and they
do not behave responsibly towards the environment,
for which they also do not feel morally responsible.
This group is dominated by personal preferenceswhen
choosing a hotel, with the emphasis on safety, quality
of service, reasonable price, previous experience, and
ambience.
The results show that this group is represented in
39.9 of all units, so it is important to understand the
reason for their indifference to environmentally re-
sponsible behaviour. Among the existing findings, the
reason is that when the consequences of behaviour
are far from its implementation, and too little, too late
or too unlikely to affect it immediately and directly,
oral rules can act as discriminatory stimuli describ-
ing probable outcomes of behaviour or inaction. The
second reason is related to the comfort expected by
tourists on vacation and often occurs in the formof be-
196 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
Table 4 Clustering and Differences in Averages
Groups () () () () () ()
Group  Average –. . –. –. –. –.
Percentage . . . . . .
Standard deviation . . . . . .
Group  Average . –. . –. . .
Percentage . . . . . .
Standard deviation . . . . . .
Group  Average . –. . . . –.
Percentage . . . . . .
Standard deviation . . . . . .
Total Average –. . . . . –.
Percentage      
Standard deviation . . . . . .
Notes Factors: (1) actively aware, (2) generally aware, (3) environmental dimension, (4) choice preference, (5) ethics, (6)
responsible behaviour.
haviour in the search for greater pleasures of achieve-
ments that bring hedonic rewards and indicate the sta-
tus of the individual; in addition, the search for plea-
sures can have a detrimental effect on the environment
due to permissive energy consumption.
Group 2: Active Responsible Consumers
The second group consists of those better informed
and more aware of the environmental impact of con-
sumer products, with a higher average in the environ-
mental dimension, ethics and responsible behaviour
factors. Therefore, those who are actively responsi-
ble for the environment are included in the second
group because they have a high level of awareness
and, when choosing a hotel, the hotel’s environmen-
tally conscious practices are important to them, with
great emphasis on the relationship with the environ-
ment and society. Among the preferences, the pri-
orities are safety, an environmentally friendly hotel
and quality of services. They often behave in an envi-
ronmentally responsible manner and more often ex-
press their opinion about the quality of the services
and the environmental practices of the hotel, and they
feel more morally responsible for their environmental
behaviour. This group of consumers was the largest
of the three groups and is defined as the most en-
vironmentally responsible in terms of factor values.
The results show that this group is represented in
44.6 of all units, which indicates an increase in re-
sponsible behaviour in tourism. This group of con-
sumers is the most desirable, so many researchers are
working to gain an in-depth understanding of the key
drivers of responsible behaviour in tourism in various
fields. Environmentally concerned individuals may be
very effective in reducing their environmental impact,
as they are well informed about the impact of con-
sumption on the environment (Bord et al., 2000).
Group 3: Pragmatic Responsible Consumers
In the third group, represented in 42 of all units, the
choice preference factor has the highest average value,
deviates from the average factor values. This group
also has a pronounced active awareness which is lower
than that of the members of the second group. They
also differ in the fact that their decisions are less in-
fluenced by environmental concerns than those of the
second group. They adapt their behaviour primarily
to their well-being and are pragmatic in their envi-
ronmental behaviour. They express an attitude of im-
portance towards the environmental practices of the
hotel, but not as clearly as the second group, where
they consider the attitude towards nature to be more
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 197
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
important than the attitude towards society. They do
not have a common priority when choosing a hotel.
They rarely behave in an environmentally responsi-
ble manner and have a moderate moral responsibility
for environmental behaviour. This group is numeri-
cally smaller so that conclusions can be discussed. The
fact is that the welfare of this group of consumers is
paramount, and this could also be linked to responsi-
bility towards themselves.
Many researchers note inconsistencies between
what consumers say about the importance of ethi-
cal consumption and actual purchases. Environmen-
tal concerns are not always reflected in pro-environ-
mental consumer behaviour, which is influenced by
routine, preferences, lifestyle, economic motives, and
so on. In these cases, consumers base their behaviour
only on personal preferences and advantages over en-
vironmental protection and respond pragmatically. In
view of this, ethical concerns seem to have limited
influence on reducing environmental impact when
lifestyle effects prevail. This is because environmen-
tally responsible consumption is characterised as a
highly complex form of consumer behaviour where
there is a gap between consumers’ positive attitudes
towards the environment and actual purchasing be-
haviour.
The questionnaire also included socio-demograph-
ic variables, but these were generally found to be poor
indicators of responsible behaviour and also in our
study there are no significant differences between the
identified groups. Stronger attitudes are observed anly
among older people or people with higher education.
Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that responsible
decisions and actions depend not only on individual
characteristics, but also on the characteristics of the
whole family on holiday. Often, the decision-making
process can be considered in terms of the entire house-
hold rather than individual members (Kubicek et al.,
2010).
Discussion and Conclusions
Tourists rarelymake environmentally responsible choi-
ces of holiday with the specific intention of keeping
their environmental impact low (McKercher et al.,
2014 Juvan &Dolnicar, 2014), but there are still groups
that behave responsibly. Responsible tourists want to
act in accordance with their sense of responsibility for
the impact of their holiday, but they also want to en-
joy themselves, have fun and relax. They make com-
promises, some focus on the environmental impact
of their holiday and therefore do not fly, others pro-
mote the economic benefits of their holiday by staying
in locally owned accommodation or using local cur-
rency, while still others work hard to complywith local
cultural norms. Responsible behaviour in tourism is
maintained by high levels of hedonic reinforcement,
such as the effects of pleasure, entertainment, well-
being, unique experiences etc. In addition to these di-
rect resources of personal drivers, there are also other
influential factors that are variable in nature, such as
social confirmation, personal safety, simplification of
travel planning routines, comfort, and satisfaction,
which varies among situations. Tourism providers and
managers need to understand the motives that guide
environmentally (ir)responsible tourism consumers,
and they need guidance on how to increase environ-
mentally conscious tourism behaviour.
The analysis of tourist behaviour indicates the be-
haviour of current and future tourists. The central
contribution of the present study is that it provides
empirical evidence that different specific responsible
behaviours of tourists depend on various specific in-
dividual and situational factors. This study confirms
the importance of individual responsibility as a rel-
evant value for environmentally sustainable tourism
experiences in diversity within the broader category
of nature and socially responsible tourists. Based on
consumer characteristics, we identified different types
of (ir)responsible consumers who assign a different
value to the importance of environmental attributes
of hotel services, preferences, and moral responsibil-
ity with respect to environmental responsibility. The
segmentation results revealed three types of respon-
sible consumers. We named them actively responsi-
ble, pragmatically responsible, and irresponsible con-
sumers. Actively responsible and pragmatic responsi-
ble consumers are aware of the impact of tourism on
the environment in a broader sense (natural and so-
cial) and differ in their behavioural and moral dimen-
sions. Actively responsible tourism consumers take
198 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
responsibility and feelmorally responsible for their ac-
tions, while pragmatic consumers adapt their actions
to their preferences and circumstances during the hol-
iday, while the unaware and irresponsible tourist re-
mains a challenge for providers. Each of the identified
consumer groups provides opportunities for further
research.
Researching tourist behaviour is a key factor in
planning tourism services, following the argument
that analysing behaviour reveals strengths, weaknes-
ses, and opportunities in developing, marketing, and
implementing tourism products (Cohen et al., 2014).
In addition, each identified type will allow manage-
ment to better understand and develop, implement,
and adapt effective interventions that will have an im-
pact on their environmentally responsible behaviour.
These different types of consumers are thus of great
importancewhen hotelmanagement is planning oper-
ational improvements, marketing strategies, and other
sustainable development initiatives. For example, ac-
tively responsible tourists are a valuable segment be-
cause their opinions, impressions, and responses are a
useful source of information for improving the offer-
ing. They are more critical in their responses, so their
impressions should be monitored through various in-
ternal channels and public platforms to conduct fur-
ther research that benefits tourism providers. To bring
about systemic quality change, tourismproviders need
to incorporate consumer collaboration and commu-
nication into their sustainable development program-
mes.
The managers of the tourism sector should de-
velop marketing practices for tourism that priori-
tize the aspect of sustainability, manifested in respect
for others, society and nature, by adopting the seg-
mentation strategy based on tourists’ responsibility.
Tourismmarketingmanagers should therefore launch
promotional campaigns that adapt to each segment.
Other practical recommendations can be derived from
this study for the development of measures to recog-
nize and encourage more environmentally conscious
behaviour among tourists. For example, hotel and
destination managers could offer collaborative pro-
grammes that help co-create greener services and ex-
periences or implement measures that introduce a
sense of responsibility that could be developed as a
direct reminder during their travel or stay. Such ex-
posed approaches include providing information that
demonstrates sustainable alternatives can have the
same qualities as other vacations, while highlighting
the benefits of social platforms or traditional forms of
communication to educate and raise awareness (Juvan
et al., 2016). The measures could be implemented in
all purchasing processes, before arrival at the destina-
tion, during the hotel stay, and after departure. The
efficient initiative would have a positive economic im-
pact, but also bring other benefits in terms of environ-
mental sustainability, social responsibility, and brand
recognition. Consequently, it is important to provide
tourists with a sense of personal responsibility for the
impact of their vacation (Miller et al., 2010).
There are several limitations to this study, particu-
larly in relation to a closed-ended questionnaire that
does not provide interpretations of individual under-
standing of environmentally responsible behaviour
in tourism to gain a deeper insight into perceptions
and the relationship between the underlying factors of
moral values, awareness, preferences, and behaviour.
Moreover, the behavioural aspect of values is difficult
to measure as it often shows that the individual’s per-
ception leads to a bias regarding social desirability.
External barriers are stronger than internal knowledge
and motivations in hindering tourism environmental
behaviours (Tanner et al., 2004). Moreover, most con-
sumers continue to rank other aspects such as price
and quality higher than environmental and social at-
tributes in their travel decisions (Miller et al., 2010).
Indeed, there is much evidence of a disconnect be-
tween the attitudes of responsible consumers and their
actual behaviours; this disconnect is often referred to
as the relationship-behaviour gap (Juvan & Dolnicar,
2014; Hall et al., 2016).
Finally, the main barrier to responsible tourism
consumption advocates seeking positive behaviour
change is the ‘attitude-behaviour gap,’ in which con-
sumers affirm that ethical standards are important
to them in their consumption practices, but few con-
sider these standards in their actual purchasing deci-
sions (Bray et al., 2011). Despite the importance of the
attitude-behaviour gap to prospects for responsible
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 199
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
or sustainable tourism consumption, it is important
to explore how and whether the gap can be bridged.
This topic deserves further attention, as do the situ-
ational factors that may hinder ethical consumption.
This represents a knowledge gap in tourism, but also
more generally (Bray et al., 2011).
This article contributes to the growing literature on
understanding responsible tourismbehaviour. It offers
insights into the differences between the various levels
of responsibility in tourism. Such an outcome should
encourage policy makers and tourism managers to be
responsive to active and pragmatic responsible tourists
and use their opinions to improve their offerings to
create greener and more sustainable activities as well
as behavioural changes among tourists (Font & Mc-
Cabe, 2017). Rather than focusing on environmentally
conscious messages in their practices and campaigns,
our findings should encourage them to promote and
support responsible values and behaviours. Respon-
sible behaviour is a powerful response, both on the
part of tourists and tourism management, that leads
to more responsible consumption and production in
tourism.
References
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of
planned behavior. In J. Kuhi & J. Beckmann (Eds.),
Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39).
Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organi-
zational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2),
179–211.
Amendah, E., & Park, J. (2008). Consumer involvement and
psychological antecedents on eco-friendly destinations:
Willingness to paymore. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure
Marketing, 17(3–4), 262–283.
Alznauer,M. (2008).Hegel on legal andmoral responsibility.
An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 51(4), 365–389.
Barnett, T. P., Adam J. C., & Lettenmaier D. (2005). Poten-
tial impacts of a warming climate on water availability in
snow-dominated regions. Nature, 438(7066), 303–309.
Barr, S. (2007). Factors influencing environmental attitudes
and behaviors: A U.K. case study of household waste
management. Environment and Behavior, 39(4), 435–473.
Barr, S., Shaw, G., Coles, T., & Prillwitz, J. (2010). A holiday is
a holiday: Practicing sustainability, home and away. Jour-
nal of Transport Geography, 18(3), 474–481.
Becken, S. (2007). Tourists’ perception of international air
travel’s impact on the global climate and potential cli-
mate change policies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
15(4), 351–368.
Bord, R. J., O’Connor, R. E., & Fisher, A. 2000. In what
sense does the public need to understand global climate
change? Public Understanding of Science, 9(3), 205–218.
Bray, J., Johns, N., &Kilburn, D. (2011). An exploratory study
into the factors impeding ethical consumption. Journal
of Business Ethics, 98(4), 597–608.
Budeanu, A. (2007). Sustainable tourist behavior? A discus-
sion of opportunities for change. International Journal of
Consumption Studies, 31(5), 499–508.
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical
consumer: Do ethics matter in purchase behavior? Jour-
nal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578.
Chan, E. S.W., Hon, A. H. Y., Chan,W., &Okumus, F. (2014).
What drives employees’ intentions to implement green
practices in hotels? The role of knowledge, awareness,
concern and ecological behavior. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 40, 20–28.
Chen, J. S., Huang, Y.-C., & Cheng, J.-S. (2009). Vacation
lifestyle and travel behaviors. Journal of Travel&Tourism
Marketing, 26(5/6), 494–506.
Chen, M. F. (2016). Extending the theory of planned behav-
ior model to explain people’s energy savings and car-
bon reduction behavioral intentions to mitigate climate
change in Taiwan: Moral obligation matters. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 112(2), 1746–1753.
Chen,M. F., &Tung P. J. (2014). Developing an extended the-
ory of planned behavior model to predict consumers’ in-
tention to visit green hotels. International Journal of Hos-
pitality Management, 36, 221–230.
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C.H. (2012). Enhance green purchase
intentions: The roles of green perceived value, green per-
ceived risk, and green trust.ManagementDecision, 50(3),
502–520.
Chen, J., & Lobo, A. (2012). Organic food products in China:
Determinants of consumers’ purchase intentions. The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Con-
sumer Research, 22(3), 293–314.
Cohen, S. A., Prayag, G., & Moital, M. (2014) Consumer be-
haviour in tourism: Concepts, influences and opportu-
nities. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(10), 872–909.
Consumer attitudes towards the role of hotels in environ-
mental sustainability: International Hotels Environment
Initiative (ihei) research. (2002, July 23). Hotel Online.
https://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2002_3rd/Jul02
_IHEI.html
Del Chiappa, G., Pinna, M., & Atzeni, M. (2019). Barriers
to responsible tourist behavior: A cluster analysis in the
200 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
context of Italy. In Sustainable tourism: Breakthroughs in
research and practice (pp. 314–332). igi Global.
Dias, Á., Aldana, I., Pereira, L., Costa, R., & Nelson, A.
(2021). Ameasure of tourist responsibility. Sustainability,
13(6), 3351. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063351
Dolnicar, S., Crouch, G. I., & Long, P. (2008). Environment-
friendly tourists: What do we really know about them?
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(2), 197–210.
European Commission. (2012, February 10). Charter for sus-
tainable and responsible tourism (Consultation docu-
ment).
Fennell, D. A. (2008). Responsible tourism: A Kierkegaar-
dian interpretation. Tourism Recreation Research, 33(1),
3–12.
Follows, S. B., & Jobber, D. (2000). Environmentally respon-
sible purchase behavior: A test of a consumermodel. Eu-
ropean Journal of Marketing, 34(5–6), 723–746.
Font, X. (2007). Ecotourism certification: Potential and chal-
lenges. In J. E. S. Higham (Ed.), Critical issues in eco-
tourism: Understanding a complex tourism phenomenon
(pp. 386–405). Butterworth Heineman.
Font, X., & McCabe, S. (2017). Sustainability and marketing
in tourism: Its contexts, paradoxes, approaches, chal-
lenges and potential. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
25(7), 869–883.
Goodwin, H. (2011). Taking responsibility for tourism.Good-
fellow Publishers.
Goodwin, H., & Pender, L. (2005). Ethics in tourism man-
agement. In L. Pender & R. Sharpley (Eds.), The man-
agement of tourism (pp. 288–304). Sage.
Gössling, S. (2018). Tourism, tourist learning and sustain-
ability: An exploratory discussion of complexities, prob-
lems and opportunities. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
26(2), 92–306.
Hahn,M., Lawson, R., & Lee, T. G. (1992). The effects of time
pressure and information load on decision quality. Psy-
chology & Marketing, 9(5), 365–378.
Hall, C., Dayal, N., Majstorović, D., Mills, H., Paul-Andrews,
L., Wallace, C., & Truong, V. (2016). Accommodation
consumers and providers’ attitudes, behaviors and prac-
tices for sustainability: A systematic review. Sustainabil-
ity, 8(7), 625. htpps://doi.org/10.3390/su8070625.
Han, H. (2015) Travelers’ pro-environmental behavior in a
green lodging context: Converging value-belief-norm
theory and the theory of planned behavior. Tourism
Management, 47(c), 164–177.
Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel
customers’ decision formation: Developing an extended
model of the theory of planned behavior. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(4), 659–668.
Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2005). The ethical
consumer. Sage.
Hegel, G.W. F. (1820).Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts.
Nicolaische Buchhandlung.
Hellmann, M., Dorrough, A., & Glöckner, A. (2021). Proso-
cial behavior during the covid-19 pandemic in Ger-
many: The role of responsibility and vulnerability. He-
liyon, 7(9), e08041. htpps://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021
Isaacs, T. (2011). Moral responsibility in collective contexts.
Oxford University Press.
Jacoby, J. (1984). Perspectives on information overload. Jour-
nal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 432–435.
Jančič, Z. (1999). Celostni marketing. Fakulteta za družbene
vede.
Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2019). Consumers’ sustainable pur-
chase behavior: Modeling the impact of psychological
factors. Ecological Economics, 159, 235–243.
Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2014). The attitude-behavior gap
in sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 48,
76–95.
Juvan, E., Ring, A., Leisch, F., & Dolnicar, S. (2016). Tourist
segments’ justifications for behaving in an environmen-
tally unsustainable way. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
24(11), 1506–1522.
Kang, K., Stein, L., Heo, C. Y., & Lee, S. (2012). Consumers’
willingness to pay for green initiatives of the hotel in-
dustry. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
31(2), 564–572.
Krahe, B. (1993). Personality and social psychology: Towards
a synthesis. Sage.
Krantz, D., & Chong, G. (2009). The market for responsible
tourism products: With a special focus on Latin America
and Nepal. https://www.responsibletravel.org/
Krippendorf, J. (1987). Ecological approach to tourism mar-
keting. Tourism Management, 8(2), 174–176.
Kubicek, B., Korunka, C., Hoonakker, P., & Raymo, J. M.
(2010). Work and family characteristics as predictors of
early retirement in married men and women. Research
on Aging, 32(4), 467–498.
Lee, W. H., & Moscardo, G. (2005). Understanding the im-
pact of ecotourism resort experiences on tourists’ envi-
ronmental attitudes and behavioral intentions. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 546–565.
Leslie, D. (2012). Responsible tourism: Concepts, theory and
practice. cabi.
Long, X. L., Chen, Y. Q., Du, G., Oh, Y., & Han, I. S. (2017).
The effect of environmental innovation behavior on eco-
nomic and environmental performance of 182 Chinese
firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 1274–1282.
Manaktola, K., & Jauhari, V. (2007). Exploring consumer at-
Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022 | 201
Petra Zabukovec Baruca et al. Understanding Responsibility from the Tourist’s Perspective
titude and behavior towards green practices in the lodg-
ing industry in India. International Journal of Contempo-
rary Hospitality Management, 19(5), 364–377.
McKercher, B., Barry, M., & Wong, S. (2014) Does climate
change matter to the travel trade? Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 22(5), 685–704.
McKercher, B., Mackenzie, M., Prideaux, B., & Pang, S.
(2014). Is the hospitality and tourism curriculum effec-
tive in teaching personal social responsibility? Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 38(4), 431–462.
Mihalic, T. (2016). Sustainable-responsible tourism discurse:
Towards ‘responsustable’ tourism. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 111, 461–470.
Mihalič, T. (2013). A green tourism barometer in the time of
economic crisis: The concept and case of Slovenia. In D.
Smolčić Jurdana (Ed.), Crisis – A challenge of sustainable
tourism development? 2nd International Scientific Confer-
ence Tourism in South East Europe 2013 (pp. 1–17). Uni-
versity of Rijeka, Fakulteta za menadžment u turizmu i
ugostiteljstvu.
Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K., & Tribe, J.
(2010). Public understanding of sustainable tourism.An-
nals of Tourism Research, 37(3), 627–645.
Pennington-Gray, L., Reisinger, Y., Kim, J. E., & Thapa, B.
(2005). Do us tour operators’ brochures educate the
tourist on culturally responsible behaviors? A case study
for Kenya. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(3), 265–283.
Pett, M. J., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003)Making sense
of factor analysis: The use of factor analysis for instrument
development in health care research. Sage.
Schwartz, S. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. Ad-
vances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 221–279.
Shaw, D., & Clarke, I. (1999). Belief formation in ethical con-
sumer groups: In an exploratory study. Marketing Intel-
ligence and Planning, 17(2), 109–119.
Shrestha, N. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analy-
sis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statis-
tics, 9(1), 4–11.
Strong, C. (1997). The problems of translating fair trade prin-
ciples into consumer purchase behavior.Marketing Intel-
ligence and Planning, 15(1), 32–37.
Tanner, C., Kaiser, F. G., & Wölfing Kast, S. (2004). Con-
textual conditions of ecological consumerism: A food-
purchasing survey. Environment and Behavior, 36(1), 94–
111.
United Nations General Assembly. (2015, September 18).
Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable
development (Draft resolution referred to theUnitedNa-
tions summit for the adoption of the post-2015 develop-
ment agenda by the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth
session). https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/9814
unwto. B. l. Global code of ethics for tourism. https://www
.unwto.org/global-code-of-ethics-for-tourism
Urry, J. (1995). Consuming places. Routledge.
Wang, C., Zhang, J., Yu, P., & Hu, H. (2018). The theory of
planned behavior as a model for understanding tourists’
responsible environmental behaviors: The moderating
role of environmental interpretations. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 194, 425–434.
Wang, J., Bao J., Wang C., & Wu L. (2017) The impact of dif-
ferent emotional appeals on the purchase intention for
green products: Themoderating effects of green involve-
ment and Confucian cultures. Sustainable Cities and So-
ciety, 34, 32–42.
Wang, P., Liu, Q., &Qi, Y. (2014). Factors influencing sustain-
able consumption behaviors: A survey of the rural resi-
dents in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 152–
165.
Wedel, M., & Kamakura,W. (2002). Introduction to the spe-
cial issue on market segmentation. International Journal
of Research in Marketing, 19(3), 181–183.
Weeden, C. (2008). The values of ethical and responsible
tourists [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University
of Glasgow.
Weeden, C. (2014). Marketing responsible tourism. In C.
Weeeden&K. Boluk (Eds.),Managing ethical consump-
tion in tourism (pp. 225–239). Routledge.
Wheeler, S. M. (2012). Climate change and social ecology: A
new perspective on the climate challenge. Routledge.
Williams, S. (2004).Tourism: Tourism, development and sus-
tainability. Routledge.
World Travel and Tourism Council. (2011, November 8).
wttc downgrades global T&T growth estimates for 2011
& 2012; maintains long-term confidence. Hospitalitynet.
https://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4053689.html
Wright, T. (2004). The evolution of sustainability declara-
tions in higher education. In P. Blaze Corcoran & A. E.
J. Wals (Eds.), Higher education and the challenge of sus-
tainability (pp. 7–19). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., & Oates, C.J. (2010).
Sustainable consumption: Green consumer behavior
when purchasing products. Sustainable Development,
18(1), 20–31.
Zhang, X., & Dong F. (2020). Why do consumers make
green purchase decisions? Insights from a systematic re-
view. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 17(18), 6607. https://doi.org/10.3390
/ijerph17186607
202 | Academica Turistica, Year 15, No. 2, August 2022