Tourism crowding and resident approach/avoidance reactions through sustainable tourism: moderating role of proenvironmental behavior

Abstract

Purpose

In line with the stimulus overload theory, this study seeks a comprehensive understanding of tourism crowding by examining residents’ perceived tourism crowding and their corresponding avoidance and approach reactions through sustainable tourism. In addition, the study aims to investigate whether residents’ proenvironmental behavior moderates’ tourism’s negative impacts on the local ecosystem, delving into its potential mitigating role.

Design/methodology/approach

Using purposive sampling, the authors engaged residents associated with government and nongovernment organizations, universities, colleges and schools, as well as individuals from the business sector encompassing hotels, restaurants and cafeterias, markets and dedicated social activists actively involved in community affairs.

Findings

The analysis, conducted on 920 questionnaires using structural equation modeling, demonstrates that tourism crowding exhibits a negative correlation with sustainable tourism and approach reactions but a positive correlation with avoidance reactions. Furthermore, the moderation analysis suggests that as residents’ proenvironmental behavior improves, the detrimental effect of tourism crowding on sustainable tourism diminishes.

Practical implications

The study presents numerous implications for policymakers and the tourism industry, emphasizing the need to comprehend residents’ perceptions of tourism crowding and sustainable tourism. It underscores the importance of engaging residents in the tourism process to achieve sustainability goals.

Originality/value

The novel theoretical contribution lies in applying the stimulus overload theory to examine tourism crowding and sustainable tourism, specifically from the residents’ perspectives.

目的

本研究根据刺激超负荷理论, 通过考察旅游地居民在整个可持续旅游过程中对旅游拥挤的感知以及他们的相应回避和接近反应, 寻求对旅游拥挤的全面了解。此外, 本研究旨在调查旅游地居民的环保行为是否可以缓和旅游对当地生态系统造成的负面影响, 并深入探讨潜在缓解作用。

方法

我们采用目的性抽样方法, 邀请了与政府和非政府组织、大学、学院和学校有关联的旅游地居民, 来自商业领域（包括HORECA“酒店、餐馆和自助餐厅”和市场）的个人, 以及积极参与社区事务的专职社会活动家。

结果

本研究采用结构方程模型（SEM）对920份调查问卷进行分析, 结果表明旅游拥挤与可持续旅游和接近反应呈负相关, 而与回避反应呈正相关。此外, 缓和分析表明, 随着旅游地居民环保行为的改善, 旅游拥挤对可持续旅游的不利影响呈现减弱。

实践启示

本研究为决策者和旅游业提供了许多启示, 强调需要了解旅游地居民对旅游拥挤和可持续旅游的感知, 亦强调了让旅游地居民参与旅游过程的重要性, 以确保实现可持续发展目标。

原创性

本研究贡献了新颖的理论, 应用刺激超负荷理论考察旅游拥挤和可持续旅游, 特别是从旅游地居民角度进行考察。

Propósito

Este estudio busca una comprensión global de la masificación turística mediante el examen de la masificación turística percibida por los residentes y sus correspondientes reacciones de aproximación y evitación a través del turismo sostenible, en el marco de la teoría de la sobrecarga de estímulos. Además, el estudio investiga si el comportamiento proambiental de los residentes modera los impactos negativos del turismo en el ecosistema local, profundizando en su potencial papel mitigador.

Metodología

Utilizando un muestreo intencional o por juicio, se recogieron datos de residentes vinculados a organizaciones gubernamentales y no gubernamentales, universidades, institutos y escuelas, así como a personas del sector empresarial que engloba hoteles, restaurantes y cafeterías, mercados y activistas sociales que participan activamente en asuntos comunitarios.

Hallazgos

El análisis de 920 cuestionarios mediante un modelo de ecuaciones estructurales demuestra que la masificación turística presenta una correlación negativa con el turismo sostenible y las reacciones de aproximación, pero una correlación positiva con las reacciones de evitación. Además, el análisis de moderación sugiere que a medida que mejora el comportamiento proambiental de los residentes, disminuye el impacto negativo de la masificación turística sobre el turismo sostenible.

Implicaciones prácticas

El estudio presenta numerosas implicaciones para los responsables políticos y la industria turística, destacando la necesidad de comprender las percepciones de los residentes sobre la masificación turística y el turismo sostenible. Se subraya la importancia de implicar a los residentes en el proceso turístico para alcanzar objetivos de sostenibilidad.

Originalidad/valor

La novedosa aportación teórica radica en la aplicación de la teoría de la sobrecarga de estímulos para examinar la masificación turística y el turismo sostenible, específicamente desde la perspectiva de los residentes.

Citation

Ud Din, N., Nazneen, S. and Jamil, B. (2024), "Tourism crowding and resident approach/avoidance reactions through sustainable tourism: moderating role of proenvironmental behavior", Tourism Review, Vol. 79 No. 9, pp. 1509-1524. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-10-2023-0678

Introduction

Tourism crowding, as observed in destinations experiencing a surge in travelers, markedly elevates social density and emerges as a prominent concern in the tourism landscape (Gonzalez et al., 2018). This phenomenon of perceived crowding occurs when individuals perceive limited physical space, surpassing their tolerance levels for environmental stimuli (Shi et al., 2017) and when sociocultural resources exceed the available physical environment (Lee and Graefe, 2003).

In the early 1970s, academic forecasts highlighted the potentially detrimental impact of tourism expansion on natural resources, potentially overwhelming destinations’ management capacities. Concurrently, the influx of tourists has demonstrated varying effects on residents’ attitudes, ranging from welcoming gestures to increased hostility (Doxey, 1975). Consequently, sustainable development emerged as a response to address and mitigate these adverse impacts. Based on the triple-bottom-line approach, sustainable tourism seeks to economic, environmental and social effects by maximizing benefits and minimizing costs (Walas et al., 2023). Resource degradation surpassing a destination’s carrying capacity, spanning economic, sociocultural and environmental facets, intensifies residents’ sense of congestion and emerges as a significant source of tension and social disparities among residents (Butler, 2020).

Taking the consequences of tourism crowding into account, recent studies widely focused on tourist perceptions of crowding and tolerance (Jacobsen et al., 2019), tourists’ satisfaction (Zehrer and Raich, 2016) and the fall of famous destinations (Seraphin et al., 2018). Despite much research, subjective analysis of rural residents’ perceptions of tourism crowding is overlooked. In addition, the significant role of residents’ proenvironmental behaviors in achieving sustainable tourism was overlooked in prior research. Consequently, the current study addresses the extant research gap and makes multiple theoretical contributions to the field. First, applying stimulus overload theory to the subjective investigation of residents’ perceptions of tourism congestion, focusing on their approach and avoidance reactions within the context of sustainable tourism, constitutes an essential addition to the existing body of knowledge.

Second, residents, as permanent consumers, are the most important stakeholders of tourism development activity; their perception, involvement and cooperation in tourism development make tourism sustainable (Nazneen et al., 2021). Residents observe that the influx of tourism generates economic benefits but also distinct ecological concerns, such as the overexploitation and depletion of natural resources and the deterioration of environmental conditions. Their awareness of environmental concerns is a significant motivator for engaging in environmentally beneficial behaviors as they strive to mitigate negative impacts. Individuals’ proenvironmental conduct depends on their commitment to preserving and protecting the natural environment (Hofenk et al., 2019). Conservation of natural resources and achieving sustainability objectives are significantly influenced by residents’ proenvironmental behaviors. However, a dearth of studies objectively examines how rural communities feel about tourist congestion and how their attitudes toward the industry change. In addition, previous research has not adequately addressed the crucial role of locals’ proenvironmental actions in developing sustainable tourism. Therefore, investigating the moderating impact of residents’ proenvironmental behavior on the correlation between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism seeks to ascertain whether residents’ involvement in proenvironmental actions eliminates the adverse impacts of tourism on the local ecosystem.

In addition, previous studies have highlighted the significant influence of demographic characteristics on individuals’ perceptions of congestion (Zehrer and Raich, 2016). For gender, studies suggest that women have a lower tolerance for crowding than men (Zehrer and Raich, 2016). Similarly, younger individuals tend to have a lower tolerance than older individuals (Jacobsen et al., 2019). Likely, educated individuals perceive crowding impacts more favorably (García et al., 2015). In addition, individuals involved in tourism-related activities tend to view tourism crowding positively in certain destinations (Jia et al., 2023). Based on this literature, the current study aims to evaluate the proposed model using a multigroup analysis (MGA) to understand the influence of demographic characteristics.

Literature review

Stimulus overload theory

Stimulus overload theory (SOT) states that the high density of diverse and heterogeneous individuals in a given region might result in psychological pressure that induces behavioral changes (Schmidt and Keating, 1979). Residents often perceive tourism crowding when there is an overwhelming presence of tourists or related activities, leading to feelings of congestion, noise and limited personal space, causing a sense of overload. This perception can result in cognitive fatigue and stress due to constant tourist presence and associated demands. As a result, residents establish a protective boundary, feeling uneasy and anxious when disrupted or witnessing difficulties caused by outsiders (Algassim et al., 2023). This mental strain alters their interaction with the environment, generating avoidance responses to perceived crowding (Algassim et al., 2023). Such cognitive fatigue might foster negative views of the tourism industry (Nazneen et al., 2019).

The SOT application to residents’ perceptions of tourism crowding and their responses involves grasping how an excessive influx of tourists or tourism-related stimuli influences locals’ views, attitudes and behaviors toward tourism in their region, including their strategies to manage adverse effects through eco-friendly actions. It suggests that, due to economic benefits, residents might react positively to tourism crowding in some cases. Conversely, they might adopt avoidance behaviors when feeling overwhelmed, leading to decreased support for tourism, resentment toward visitors and a tendency to avoid tourist spots. Residents’ proenvironmental behavior encompasses various actions and attitudes supporting environmental conservation and sustainability, such as community clean-ups and advocating for eco-friendly policies. See Figure 1 for the conceptual model.

Tourism crowding and sustainable tourism

Tourism crowding pertains to the carrying capacities of destinations across economic, sociocultural and environmental dimensions. The economic carrying capacity is maintained when land assets and resources are priced reasonably, ensuring residents can manage associated costs (Pedrazzini and Akiyama, 2011). The sociocultural carrying capacity refers to the ability of residents to withstand the sociocultural impacts of tourism (Saveriades, 2000). In addition, the environmental carrying capacity signifies the maximum number of visitors a site can sustain without surpassing a specified limit (Saveriades, 2000). Achieving a delicate equilibrium between fostering tourism and preserving a destination’s natural and cultural assets necessitates consideration of both tourism crowding and sustainable tourism. Crowding, often precipitated by an excessive influx of visitors concentrated in one area or during peak travel periods, can significantly impair the environment, local communities and the overall tourism experience (Li et al., 2017). This surpassing of thresholds diminishes the quality of life for both local inhabitants and visitors, compromising environmental conservation efforts and the location’s attractiveness (Yin et al., 2020). Sustainable tourism endeavors to alleviate these adverse effects, ensuring the industry’s long-term viability and enhancing the capacity of the destination and its stakeholders (Butler, 2020). Achieving sustainability becomes an obstacle when a destination’s capacity to accommodate numerous tourists exceeds its limits. Locations with lower carrying capacities are more prone to becoming unsustainable.

Thus, drawing from prior literature, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1a.

Tourism crowding has a negative relation with sustainable tourism.

Tourism crowding and approach and avoidance reaction

Destinations using diverse marketing strategies to enhance their economic gains often attract a larger number of tourists (Fichter and Román, 2023). The tourism influx enhances socioeconomic circumstances, raises living standards and elicits an approach reaction; nevertheless, losing control over assets influences the avoidance mindset (Algassim et al., 2023). The cognitive assessment of perceived crowding has substantial influence over behavioral inclinations, leading to approaches or avoidant reactions (Clancy, 2019). Empirical evidence from various tourist destinations like Barcelona (Hughes, 2018), Venice (Coldwell, 2017) and Amsterdam (Boztas, 2017) highlights the hesitance of locals toward tourism. Conversely, tourism’s beneficial economic effects alleviate the potential annoyance stemming from its adverse impact on nature, thereby lessening residents’ perception of over tourism and its resulting negative influence on their quality of life (Mihalic and Kuščer, 2022). Following SOT and previous study findings, the hypothesis was formulated as follows:

H1b.

Tourism crowding is negatively related to approach reaction.

H1c.

Tourism crowding is positively related to avoidance reaction.

Sustainable tourism and approach and avoidance reaction

Sustainable tourism prioritizes preserving economic, sociocultural and environmental resources while expanding chances to cater to the immediate and long-term needs of visitors and locals. Research since the 1960s has extensively examined the impacts of tourism, recognizing its dual nature of bringing both positive and negative effects (Walas et al., 2023). While tourism crowding, synonymous with an increased number of visitors, can yield economic benefits, but concurrently poses an environmental strain on both physical and social aspects (Algassim et al., 2023). Consequently, the depletion of resources stands as a primary driver behind residents’ unfavorable attitudes toward tourism (Nazneen et al., 2021). These alterations in the destination’s social, economic and environmental aspects can prompt emotional shifts in individuals, leading to either approach or avoidance behaviors (Jacobsen et al., 2019). Academics have established a connection between tourism’s economic, sociocultural and environmental impacts and how residents perceive these effects (García et al., 2015). As these impacts reach the tolerance threshold of residents, they may induce stimulus overload, resulting in negative perceptions and subsequently triggering avoidance reactions (Gössling et al., 2020). Sustainable tourism can induce behavioral shifts, leading to either approach or avoidance reactions (Jacobsen et al., 2019). Consequently, the proposed hypothesis is as follows:

H2a.

Sustainable tourism has a positive relationship with approach reaction.

H2b.

Sustainable tourism is negatively related to avoidance reaction.

Mediating role of sustainable tourism

The substantial arrival of tourists at a destination triggers issues like overcrowding and sociocultural deterioration, prompting deliberate avoidance behaviors among residents (Seraphin et al., 2018). As these impacts reach the tolerance threshold of residents, they may induce negative perceptions and subsequently trigger avoidance reactions (Gössling et al., 2020). This recognition further highlights the direct negative relationship between tourism crowding and tourism sustainability, influencing avoidance reactions (Hughes, 2018). On the contrary, when tourism crowding contributes positively to sustainable tourism by fostering economic benefits, environmental conservation and cultural preservation, and often triggers a spectrum of approach behaviors among residents (Jacobsen et al., 2019). In light of the previous literature, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H3a.

Sustainable tourism mediates between tourism crowding and approach reaction.

H3b.

Sustainable tourism mediates between tourism crowding and avoidance reaction.

Proenvironmental behavior as a moderating variable

Proenvironmental behavior reflects an individual’s acknowledgment of personal responsibility toward environmental conservation, contributing to sustainability (Ruepert et al., 2016). This behavior, termed environmentally friendly or civilized has been recognized in prior studies for its positive impact on achieving sustainable tourism, as it reduces environmental harm caused by tourists (Liu et al., 2020). Studies highlight the significance of behavioral intentions in influencing and shaping environmentally conscious behaviors (Yuriev et al., 2020). Similarly, residents’ proenvironmental actions significantly aid in safeguarding the natural environment, lessening adverse effects and promoting sustainability (Hofenk et al., 2019). Research has consistently demonstrated that individuals’ understanding of these issues drives them to adopt eco-friendly behaviors, aiming to minimize negative consequences and support the concept of sustainable tourism (Dolnicar et al., 2017). Considering earlier studies, it is expected that proenvironmental behavior driven by environmental concerns will strongly predict its contribution to sustainable tourism (Liu et al., 2020). Consequently, the proposed hypothesis is as follows:

H4.

Proenvironmental behavior moderates between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism.

Research methodology

Study site

This study focuses on Hunza, a renowned tourist destination situated in Pakistan’s Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) region. GB, as depicted in Figure 2, boasts rich cultural diversity and abundant tourism potential, nestled amidst some of the world’s highest mountain ranges – the Himalayas, the Karakoram and the Hindukush. Notably, it houses iconic peaks like K2 and Nanga Parbat, drawing attention for skiing, hiking, camping and polo sports. Furthermore, the area is celebrated for its scenic vistas, diverse flora and fauna and its pristine, eco-friendly environment. Historically, limited access to GB hindered its tourism progress; however, the infrastructural development has catalyzed tourism development and facilitated sports tourism events like the “Tour de Khunjerab” and the “Sarfarang Cold Desert Rally” (Nazneen et al., 2020). Displayed in Figure 3 is a noticeable surge in tourist numbers, supported by data from the GB tourism department. After a year’s break due to the COVID-19 pandemic, tourism rebounded in 2021, attracting a total of 700,000 foreign and local tourists to the region (GeoNews, 2021). Prior studies conducted in GB revealed that residents perceived an economic upturn, yet tourism failed to contribute to environmental protection (Nazneen et al., 2021). Illustrated in Figure 4 is a transformation of the once clean and green environment into a landscape marred by widespread solid waste. These environmental issues have notably heightened residents’ concerns and prompted proenvironmental behavior among them.

Instrument development and data collection

We developed a selfadministered questionnaire using a quantitative research methodology. The questionnaire encompasses five variables: tourism crowding, sustainable tourism development, approach reaction, avoidance reaction and proenvironmental behavior. The initial segment of the questionnaire delves into respondents’ demographic details, encompassing gender, age, education, occupation and their economic engagement in tourism. The subsequent section assessed tourism crowding, using items adapted from a previous study (Li et al., 2017). The third section evaluated sustainable tourism, using items sourced from Choi and Sirakaya (2005). Following that, the fourth segment investigated approach and avoidance reactions by drawing items from studies (Jacobsen et al., 2019). The final section focused on measuring proenvironmental behavior, using items sourced from studies conducted by Lee et al. (2021) and Ruepert et al. (2016). We used a five-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree) for rating the items. To ensure internal consistency of the questionnaire’s, a pilot test was conducted, yielding a Cronbach’s α score of 0.842, indicating robust reliability for further investigation.

The research targeted permanent residents of Hunza, representing diverse occupational backgrounds. In February 2022, we engaged tourism students from Karakoram International University to collect data for this study. Initially, using purposive sampling, we approached individuals across various professions, including government and nongovernmental institutions, universities, colleges and schools, entrepreneurs involved in hotels, restaurants and cafeterias, marketplace representatives and community-engaged social activists. Subsequently, using a structured selfadministered questionnaire, students visited the aforementioned sample group and, using simple random sampling methods, approached individuals aged 18 and above, inviting their participation in the study. Upon agreement, students provided a concise overview of the research and ensured the confidentiality of respondents’ data to encourage truthful opinions. To boost response rates, students waited on-site for 15 to 20 min while respondents completed the questionnaire. In addition, the questionnaire was presented in English, and students assisted with translation whenever necessary. Out of the 1,000 surveys distributed, 938 were returned, yielding a response rate of 93%. For analysis, 920 completed questionnaires were used.

Findings and discussions

Demographic profile

The demographic breakdown encompassed gender, age, employment status, educational background and engagement in tourism-related activities. Analysis revealed that 57% of the respondents were male, whereas 43% were female. Among the age groups, 58% fell within the range of 20–40 years old, whereas 42% were 40 years old or above. In terms of employment, 40% identified as selfemployed, 29% held positions in the private or public sectors and 26% were students. Concerning involvement in tourism-related economic activities, 41% of respondents were engaged, whereas 59% were not. Detailed findings are presented in Table 1.

Common method bias

Concerns about potential bias from using the same respondent for all selfadministered surveys led us to consider a common method issue. We followed Podsakoff et al. (2003) recommendation to assess common method variance to tackle this. Our analysis in SPSS revealed that the main factor explained 25.9% of the overall variance. These results imply that any existing common method bias might not significantly affect the outcomes.

Measurement model

The study evaluated the measurement and structural models (Hair et al., 2011) based on the two-step approach (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that composite reliability values meet the suggested threshold of 0.70 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). In addition to this, for the convergent validity, the factor loading (λ) and average variance extracted (AVE) values were higher than 0.5 (Hair et al., 2011). Similarly, we assessed the discriminant validity by comparing the AVE values to the squared correlation between latent variables. Based on the comparison findings, it was determined that the AVE values are higher than the squared correlation (Hair et al., 2011). The CR, λ and AVE values are given in Table 2, and the DV value is presented in Table 3.

The measurement model fit indices χ² = 1273.481, df = 554, p < 0.000, χ²/df = 2.298, CFI = 0.966, IFI = 0.966, NFI = 0.943, RFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.962 and RMSEA = 0.053, showed that the measurement model is statistically reliable, valid and fit. The R-squared value for approach reactions is 0.656 and for avoidance reactions is 0.471.

Structural model

Using the maximum likelihood method verified and validated the hypothesized relationships. The structural model fit indices χ² = 1617.419, df = 475, p < 0.000, χ²/df = 3.40, NFI = 0.921, IFI = 0.943, TLI = 0.936, CFI = 0.942 and RMSEA = 0.072 indicated that a structural model is statistically fit.

Direct relationships

The current study examines the direct links between tourism crowding and various factors: sustainable tourism, approach reactions and avoidance reactions. First, the analysis confirmed a negative correlation between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism (β = –0.14, t = –2.36), supporting H1a. Residents perceive tourism crowding as detrimental to sustainable tourism, believing it exceeds thresholds for economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability in destinations, hindering its promotion. These findings are in line with earlier research findings (Seraphin et al., 2018). Second, the results highlighted a negative correlation between tourism crowding and approach reaction (β = –0.24, t = –5.54), thereby supporting H1b. This direct negative association underscores that tourism crowding, when accompanied by uncontrollable problems, social disparities and stress, adversely affects residents’ approach reactions. These findings align with earlier research and corroborate the stimulus overload theory, which posits that crowding induces psychological pressure, prompting behavioral shifts (Butler, 2020). Consequently, residents’ support for tourism diminishes in such scenarios. Third, the findings confirmed H1c, showing a notable positive link between tourism crowding and avoidance reactions (β = 0.23, t = 3.79). This association suggests that crowding leads to unwanted social interactions, anxiety and exceeds residents’ tolerance levels, prompting avoidance behaviors. Unexpected strains from physical, personal and social crowding intensify residents’ inclination to avoid tourism, aligning with the stimulus overload theory and prior research (Gössling et al., 2020). Furthermore, the study affirmed H2a, showing a direct positive link between sustainable tourism and approach reactions (β = 0.87, t = 19.62). This indicates that when sustainable tourism positively impacts economic, sociocultural and environmental aspects while easing destination pressures, it influences residents’ emotions, fostering approach reactions and backing tourism. These results support previous research emphasizing sustainable tourism’s positive influence on perceptions and approach reactions toward tourism (Jacobsen et al., 2019). Finally, the findings confirmed H2b, revealing a significant negative link between sustainable tourism and avoidance reactions (β = –0.84, t = –16.08). This association stems from sustainable tourism’s promotion of economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability, reducing communities’ inclination toward avoidance responses. These results align with earlier research highlighting sustainable tourism’s ability to mitigate adverse effects and prevent avoidance reactions (Nazneen et al., 2021). Table 4 provides the standardized estimates and corresponding t-values.

Mediation analysis

This research thoroughly investigates indirect connections between tourism crowding, approach and avoidance reactions via sustainable tourism. The mediation study uncovered significant negative impacts on approach reactions, revealing the partial mediation of sustainable tourism. High tourism crowding was directly and indirectly linked to residents’ unfavorable approach reactions, straining economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability. Another mediation analysis explored sustainable tourism’s role between tourism crowding and avoidance reactions, revealing significant positive impacts. The adverse effects of tourism crowding on destinations, exploiting their economic, sociocultural and environmental resources, heightened inhabitants’ tendencies toward avoidance reactions, as indicated by a statistically significant indirect association. The standardized estimates are reported in Table 5.

Moderation analysis

The study extends existing knowledge by exploring how residents’ proenvironmental behavior moderates the relationship between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism. As indicated in Table 4, the moderating effect of proenvironmental behavior amid tourism crowding and sustainable tourism is both positive and statistically significant (β = 1.12, t = 4.08). When residents exhibit greater proenvironmental behavior, the direct adverse impact of tourism crowding on sustainable tourism diminishes. These findings imply that residents’ proenvironmental actions signify their understanding of the negative consequences – economic, social and environmental – associated with tourism crowding. This behavior contributes significantly to the realization of sustainable tourism. Within the study area, residents strongly endorsed proenvironmental behaviors, as seen in their agreement with statements like “I adhere to environmental conservation policies,” “I strive to avoid disrupting flora and fauna” and “I actively encourage others to safeguard the natural environment.” This reflects their heightened environmental awareness and concern.

Multi-group analysis

The study extends current knowledge by using MGA to test a model based on demographic characteristics. Results showed that both genders share similar perceptions of crowding impacts, contrary to findings suggesting women have a lower tolerance for crowding compared to men (Zehrer and Raich, 2016). Similarly, all age groups hold the same views, opposing findings suggesting younger individuals have lower crowding tolerance (Jacobsen et al., 2019). Educational backgrounds also did not significantly alter perceptions, contradicting the idea that educated individuals favor impacts (García et al., 2015). Finally, regardless of tourism involvement or not involvement, respondents prioritized preserving social, cultural and environmental resources over tourism benefits, highlighting awareness of sustainability challenges. The outcomes of the MGA are detailed in Table 6.

Conclusion

This study fills a crucial gap by delving into residents’ subjective perceptions of tourism crowding, expanding the stimulus overload theory’s application. It aims to comprehensively grasp how tourism crowding affects approach and avoidance reactions via sustainable tourism. In addition, it explores the interplay between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism while investigating the moderating impact of proenvironmental behavior, introducing innovative perspectives in this field.

Residents experience tourism crowding in various forms – physical, personal and social – leading to increased stress within the destination. The influx of tourists causes congested roads, crowded public spaces, slower services, disrupted traffic flow and inconvenience in residents’ daily routines. These challenging conditions lead to unwanted social interactions, stress and anxiety, prompting behavioral changes. As a result, tourism crowding induces avoidance reactions, decreasing residents’ inclination to engage in tourist activities.

The notably high mean values related to sustainable tourism reflect residents’ consensus on the importance of economic, sociocultural and environmental sustainability. Economic sustainability involves job creation, support for local businesses and improving living standards. Achieving sociocultural sustainability includes social programs, heritage preservation and cultural awareness, while environmental sustainability demands robust waste management to reduce pollution. However, the negative correlation between tourism crowding and sustainable tourism suggests residents see crowding as detrimental. Figure 4 illustrates the shift from a clean environment to areas cluttered with solid waste. Similarly, increased land and asset prices and failing to strengthen sociocultural assets. These adverse effects lead to disappointment and avoidance reactions. Yet, residents believe that if tourism crowding actively promotes sustainability, it could encourage positive approaches and deter avoidance behaviors. Moreover, residents’ heightened awareness of environmental issues and resource depletion has led to increased mindfulness and understanding. This awareness prompts proactive environmental actions, including adhering to conservation policies, protecting flora and wildlife and advocating for natural habitat preservation. Residents’ concerted efforts play a pivotal role in lessening tourism crowding’s negative impacts and significantly contribute to achieving sustainable tourism.

Theoretical and practical implications

Based on the study’s findings, there are several practical implications for policymakers. First, the negative influence of residents’ perception of tourism crowding on their approach reactions emphasizes the importance of empowering residents in the decision-making processes related to tourism planning. Ensuring their active involvement in policy formulation can provide invaluable insights from the grassroots level (Huber and Gross, 2022). Second, understanding tourist thresholds and destinations’ carrying capacity is vital for effective crowd management, which serves as a crucial indicator of sustainable tourism (Yin et al., 2020). Finally, residents’ proenvironmental behavior plays a vital role in mitigating the adverse effects of tourism crowding on sustainable tourism. Thus, destination management should actively promote the preservation of resources, involve residents in sustainable tourism initiatives and engage them in identifying and addressing tourism-related issues to enhance their proenvironmental actions.

Future research prospects

The study is not without limitations; it also opens several opportunities for future research. First, the current findings highlight a negative relationship between residents’ subjective perceptions of tourism crowding and sustainable tourism. Subsequent studies could explore this model further by involving diverse tourism stakeholders, allowing for the illustration and comparison of alternative perspectives regarding this relationship. Second, conducting comparative studies across diverse geographical regions might unveil regional differences in perceptions and practices related to tourism crowding and sustainability. Third, longitudinal studies could offer valuable insights into the evolution of perceptions and attitudes over time regarding tourism crowding and sustainable tourism. Fourthly, incorporating qualitative approaches such as interviews and focus groups could provide deeper insights into residents’ perceptions. Finally, investigating the impact of resident engagement in formulating and implementing tourism policies on mitigating the adverse effects of tourism crowding presents an area worthy of exploration. This could provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of community involvement in addressing these issues.

Figures

Figure 1

The conceptual model

Figure 2

Destination

Figure 3

Year-wise tourist flows to Gilgit–Baltistan

Figure 4

Solid waste at destination

Table 1

Demographic characteristics of respondents

Variable	%
Gender
Male	57
Female	43
Age group
18–30	23
31–40	35
41–50	29
51-above	13
Involvement in tourism
Yes	41
No	59
Employment
Self-employed	40
Public/private job	34
Student	21
Retired	5
Education
Primary	21
Middle	18
Graduation	22
Masters or above	39

Source: By authors

Table 2

Measurement model

Items	Mean	SD	FL (λ)	CR	AVE	α
Tourism crowding (TC)
Physical crowding (PYC)	4.08			0.95	0.92	0.95
Roads are crowded in the tour area	4.06	0.911	0.88
Rest places are crowded in the tour area	4.08	0.923	0.89
Heavy traffic goes in and out of the tour area	4.08	0.927	0.97
Service is slow in the tour area	4.12	0.922	0.94
Personal crowding (PC)	3.96			0.95	0.91	0.95
Too many tourists disturb public order	4.06	1.05	0.87
Too many tourists pollute the environment	3.96	0.989	0.93
Too many tourists are a barrier to enjoy the scenery	3.92	0.972	0.94
Too many tourists are a barrier to using the facilities	3.90	0.991	0.92
Social crowding (SC)	3.86			0.93	0.88	0.95
Crowding disturbs my mood to enjoy the scenery	3.95	0.987	0.93
Crowding around the place makes me nervous	3.93	0.993	0.95
I feel disturbed contacting too many tourists	3.84	0.950	0.84
Crowding destroys the beauty of the place	3.78	0.932	0.84
Sustainable tourism (ST)
Economic sustainability (ES)	4.31			0.96	0.92	0.96
Tourism generates business and employment	4.31	0.717	0.92
Tourism increases income and living standards	4.32	0.745	0.94
Tourism promotes local enterprises	4.28	0.733	0.91
Tourism contributes to poverty alleviation	4.33	0.720	0.93
Sociocultural sustainability (SCS)	3.94			0.94	0.85	0.94
Tourism created social programs/schemes for locals	3.94	1.032	0.85
Tourism boosted community empowerment	3.98	1.129	0.84
Tourism improved safety system in the community	4.01	1.100	0.85
Tourism increased management and conservation of heritage sites	3.93	1.049	0.86
Tourism enhances cultural awareness in locals	3.86	1.054	0.82
Tourism helps in preserving rural landscapes	3.91	1.069	0.86
Environmental sustainability (ES)	3.27			0.93	0.90	0.93
Tourism provides a waste management system	3.16	1.260	0.91
Tourism conserves and protects natural areas	3.18	1.282	0.91
Tourism helps in decreasing waste and liter	3.16	1.308	0.89
Approach reaction (APR)	3.86			0.94	0.89	0.97
I like to have tourists at the destination	3.93	1.170	0.92
Tourists’ flow does not bother me	3.78	1.086	0.96
This place became more enjoyable because of the many tourists	3.86	1.128	0.96
Tourists enrich this destination	3.90	1.161	0.95
Avoidance reaction (AVR)	2.55			0.96	0.93	0.97
I do not feel safe here because of the crowding	2.54	1.256	0.95
I am worried about people here getting close to me	2.55	1.217	0.93
Many visitors make the place too noisy	2.55	1.237	0.95
Tourists do not behave properly	2.54	1.216	0.94
Proenvironmental behavior (PEB)	4.13			0.90	0.87	0.90
I comply with environmental conservation policies	4.18	0.77	0.93
I try not to disrupt the flora and fauna	4.11	0.76	0.78
I participate in community clean-up initiatives	4.11	0.75	0.91

Source: By authors

Table 3

Discriminant validity

Constructs	PYC	PC	SC	ES	SCS	ENS	APR	AVR	PEB
PYC	0.92a
PC	0.56b	0.91
SC	0.60	0.90	0.88
ES	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.92
SCS	0.01	0.05	0.01	0.72	0.85
ENS	0.04	0.03	0.04	0.23	0.20	0.90
APR	0.07	0.05	0.07	0.55	0.54	0.36	0.89
AVR	0.05	0.03	0.05	0.48	0.42	0.27	0.66	0.93
PEB	0.35	0.47	0.40	0.08	0.05	0.02	0.03	0.03	0.87

Notes:

^aNumbers in bold diagonally indicates the average variance extracted (AVE) values;

^bThe nonitalic values represent squared correlations between interconstruct

Source: By authors

Table 4

Hypothesized relationships results

Hypothesized relationships	β estimate	t-value
Direct relationships
H1a: TC → ST	–0.14*	–2.36
H1b: TC → APR	–0.24***	–5.54
H1c: TC → AVR	0.23***	3.79
H2a: ST → APR	0.87***	19.62
H2b: ST → AVR	–0.84***	–16.08
Moderation effect
H4: TC*PEB → ST	1.12***	4.08

Notes:

***p < 0.001; **p < 0.005; *p < 0.05

Source: By authors

Table 5

Mediation analysis results

Path relationships	Direct effect	Indirect effect	Total effect	Findings
Hm1: TC →ST→APR	–0.24**	–0.13**	–0.37**	Partial mediation
Hm2: TC →ST→AVR	0.22**	0.12**	0.34**	Partial mediation

Notes:

***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05

Source: By authors

Table 6

The multigroup analysis results

Demography	Constrained (chi sq)	Constrained (df)	Unconstrained (chi sq)	Unconstrained (df)	p-value for nested comparison	Result
Gender	2,252.57	963	2,250.71	958	0.86	no difference
Age	3,671.43	1,931	3,667.49	1,916	0.99	no difference
Education	3,611.072	1,931	3,595.99	1,916	0.44	no difference
occupation	2,958.10	1,447	2,950.06	1,437	0.62	no difference
Tourism involvement	2,299.09	963	2,290.68	958	0.14	no difference

Source: By authors