Content uploaded by Md Shihab Shakur
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Md Shihab Shakur on Apr 17, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Investigating the Inuence of the Push and Pull Factors in Eco-Resort
Selection to Promote Sustainable Tourism in Bangladesh
Bipasha Sukrana
a
, Sanjida Hassan
b
, Farjana Islam Jui
a
, Md Shihab Shakur
b
, Binoy Debnath
b
,
A. B. M. Mainul Bari
b,*
a
Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management, European University of Bangladesh, Dhaka, 1216, Bangladesh
b
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, 1000, Bangladesh
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Eco-resort selection
Sustainability
Sustainable tourism
Push-Pull Theory
Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling
ABSTRACT
In this era of environmental awareness, individuals have become more aware of their ecological inuence and
the consequences of their decisions on the environment. Therefore, there has been a remarkable increase in
tourists’ desire to gain tourism experiences that are both environmentally friendly and sustainable. Since travel
behavior is commonly conceptualized as a function of both push and pull factors, they need to be investigated to
understand how they can inuence tourists to select an eco-resort for sustainable accommodation. This study,
therefore, investigates the push and pull factors that motivate people to select eco-resorts to promote sustainable
tourism services in an emerging economy like Bangladesh. For this purpose, a second-order hierarchical
component model was conceptualized and evaluated using partial least square-based structural equation
modeling (PLS-SEM). The study investigates the indirect effect of eco-resort selection in enhancing overall
sustainability. The constructs and measurement factors were determined through a literature review and expert
feedback from the tourism sector of Bangladesh. A survey was conducted to collect data from the stakeholders in
the Bangladeshi tourism industry. This data was then analyzed using PLS-SEM to investigate the relationships
between the identied push and pull drivers and their inuence on eco-resort selection. The ndings indicate
that both push and pull drivers have a signicant and positive impact on eco-resort selection, which in turn
promotes sustainable tourism. This study is one of the few that examines the effect of the push-pull theory on
improving sustainable tourism services, especially in the context of the Bangladeshi tourism sector, through an
indirect inuence of eco-resort selection. Eco-resort owners, managers, and relevant policymakers can utilize the
knowledge acquired from this research to understand tourist motivations better and devise strategies accordingly
to promote sustainable tourism practices in the region.
1. Introduction
In this era of unprecedented global connectivity and cultural ex-
change, tourism has emerged as a pivotal driver of economic growth and
cross-cultural interaction. Bangladesh, in particular as an emerging
economy, has witnessed a transformative surge in tourism. Recent sta-
tistics from the Bangladesh Tourism Board (2023) reveal that about
0.529 million international tourists have arrived in Bangladesh, repre-
senting a year-over-year increase of almost 292% [1]. Mahbub Ali, state
minister of the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism (MoCAT), stated
that the number of domestic tourists has crossed almost 20 million in
2022 [2]. Despite the periodic push of the pandemic, political instability
[3], and economic uctuation [4], the tourism industry has been sus-
tainably increasing, utilizing the available physical, environmental, and
cultural resources. However, in this era of environmental concerns and
an increasing awareness of the need for sustainable practices [5], the
tourism industry stands at a pivotal crossroads. As travelers become
more conscious of their ecological footprint and the impact of their
choices on the planet, the demand for eco-friendly and sustainable
tourism experiences has witnessed an unprecedented surge [6]. This
transformation in tourist preferences has created a burgeoning market
for environment-friendly accommodation. Proper accommodations
have been viewed as a signicant tourist motivation for selecting a
tourist destination [7]. Many new types of accommodation, such as
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: bipasha.sukrana13@gmail.com (B. Sukrana), sanjidahassan123@gmail.com (S. Hassan), farjanaj2808@gmail.com (F.I. Jui),
shihabshakur2016@gmail.com (M.S. Shakur), binoydebnath15@gmail.com (B. Debnath), mainul.ipe@gmail.com (A.B.M.M. Bari).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Sustainable Futures
journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/sustainable-futures
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100619
Received 5 September 2024; Received in revised form 30 November 2024; Accepted 10 April 2025
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
Available online 11 April 2025
2666-1888/© 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/ ).
resorts, boutique hotels, homestays, and houseboats, have expanded in
Bangladesh as one of the most inuential elements of tourism [8].
Travel behavior is commonly conceptualized as a function of both
pull and push factors, collectively inuencing accommodation selection
[9]. Previous research has extensively examined these two sets of de-
terminants, often referred to as push and pull factors, as key motivators
of travel. For example, Zhao & Agyeiwaah [10] point out that push
motivations narrate the needs and aspirations behind travel. Yousaf
et al. [11] noted that pull motivations delineate the choice of a specic
travel destination. In an emerging economy, where tourism is often a
crucial driver of economic growth, exploring motivators inuencing
eco-resort selection has a unique signicance [12]. An eco-resort is a
sustainable and environmentally friendly lodging facility that prioritizes
eco-friendly practices and minimizes its impact on the natural envi-
ronment [13]. Eco-resorts could be a signicant facility for eco-tourism
that provides an all-inclusive eco-tourism experience. Eco-tourists are
categorized as a niche market of visitors who always try to consume
eco-friendly products and services [14].
Eco-tourists are primarily drawn to a destination’s qualities and a
desire to break away from everyday life, which can be effectively tar-
geted through marketing methods [15]. The push factors compel tourists
to consider eco-resorts, such as environmental consciousness, ethical
considerations, and the desire to experience pristine nature [16]. On the
other hand, the pull factors encompass the features and services offered
by eco-resorts that attract tourists, such as eco-friendly infrastructure,
renewable energy sources, and immersive nature-based experiences.
Tourists’ emotional needs push tourists, and emotional benets pull
tourists toward eco-resort selection [17]. Some studies have examined
the sustainable factors and theoretical framework for achieving sus-
tainable tourism through eco-tourism [18]. Meanwhile, only a few
studies focused on tourists’ considerations, although factors that attract
tourists should be identied for eco-resort management. Therefore, this
study highlights that knowledge of the push and pull factors in travel
decisions can be used to analyze environmentally friendly tourist
behavior in the accommodation industry, specically in eco-resorts.
The market size of global eco-tourism is valued at US$ 172.4 billion
in 2022 as well as is expected to grow to US$ 374.2 billion by 2028, with
a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.9 from 2023 to 2028 [19].
The primary directions for sustainable and ecological tourism growth
include the preservation of the environment and the cultural legacy of
the local population, as well as the construction of eco-friendly routes
and accommodations for tourists. Furthermore, robust sovereign envi-
ronmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance can signify a
dedication to sustainable practices and draw environmentally conscious
tourists [20,21]. Kamal et al. [22] stated that, in Bangladesh, tourism
generates almost US$1,853.00 million in revenue. The rapid growth of
the tourism industry contributes to both domestic and foreign tourist
revenue. Currently, the resort industry has been trending in Bangladesh.
After the year 2000, most of the well-known resorts in this country, such
as Sarah Resort, Dusai Resort, Grand Sultan Resort, Novem Eco Resort,
etc., were constructed. The resorts are built around the theme of nature.
Travelers prefer to go to a resort to participate in weekend leisure ac-
tivities to pass out their stressful, monotonous lives [23]. People are now
getting educated about the benets of healthy lifestyles and fresh, nat-
ural environments, which will positively impact the future generation
[24]. The dynamics that motivate individuals to opt for eco-resorts in
emerging economies are multifaceted and complex. This paper explores
these intricacies by examining the interplay of "push" and "pull" factors
inuencing eco-resort selection. The long-term effectiveness of
eco-tourism management will be enhanced by better-comprehending
eco-tourists’ motivations [25,26]. According to Kim et al. [26], natu-
ral tourist attractions, including eco-friendly accommodations, are vital
to promoting sustainability in the eco-tourism sector. Exploring the push
and pull factors motivating eco-resort selection enhances the under-
standing of sustainable tourism and offers valuable guidance for
uplifting and promoting eco-resorts as a catalyst for balanced economic
and environmental growth.
The eco-resort sector in Bangladesh still faces challenges in attracting
a consistent ow of both local and international tourists, limiting its
ability to contribute effectively to sustainable development goals. Hav-
ing a clear understanding of what drives tourists (both the "push" mo-
tivations, such as the desire to escape routine, and "pull" motivations,
such as eco-friendly facilities or natural beauty) is very important.
Previous studies have often focused on general tourism motivation but
have rarely explored these motivational dimensions, specically in the
tourism sector of Bangladesh [27]. This leaves a gap in understanding
how eco-resorts can better meet potential visitors’ needs and increase
their appeal. Additionally, while sustainable tourism is a global goal,
there is limited empirical research on the factors inuencing eco-resort
choice in the context of Bangladesh’s unique environmental and
socio-economic landscape. Existing studies primarily focus on the gen-
eral environmental awareness of tourists but lack depth in assessing how
this awareness impacts the decision to choose eco-resorts over conven-
tional options.
Based on the opinion of tourism practitioners and observers, many
potential tourists have chosen an eco-resort as a tourist accommodation.
The pull and push motivators of tourists are unrecognized at this time. If
these factors are identied, tourists will be educated to visit eco-friendly
resorts as a prime priority. While push and pull variables have been
employed in several studies concerning the driving forces for destination
[28–30]. Through a comprehensive exploration of these factors, this
paper seeks to contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding sustain-
able tourism and the future of the hospitality industry in economies on
the brink of transformation. As a result, it is critical to determine the
aspects and attributes that lead to tourists motivation. This paper seeks
to ll the gap by investigating the underlying motivators of tourists at
eco-resorts. So, the current study will investigate the result of the
following research question (RQ) in light of the discussion above:
RQ1. Do the push and pull factors motivate tourists to select eco-
resorts to promote sustainable tourism in emerging economies?
RQ2. Is there any complex and functional relationship between push
and pull factors for selecting eco-resorts to promote sustainable
development?
RQ3. What benets do these pull and push factors offer the tourism
stakeholders in terms of accomplishing the SDGs?
To address these RQs, the study aims to achieve the following
research objectives (ROs):
RO1. To investigate the functional relationship among the push and
pull factors that motivate tourists to select eco-resorts to promote sus-
tainable tourism in emerging economies.
RO2. To provide signicant insights to the managers, resort owners,
and policymakers so that they may successfully utilize the push and pull
driving factors to achieve sustainability in the tourism sector.
To achieve the abovementioned ROs, the Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) has been utilized in this study.
Through the analysis, this study is expected to provide important in-
sights into the elements that motivate visitors to make environmentally
conscious travel decisions by analyzing the particular push and pull
factors that affect eco-resort selection. By being aware of these moti-
vations, eco-resort managers may better customize their offerings to
satisfy environmentally aware tourists, increasing guest satisfaction and
fostering business growth. This study also highlighted the role of indi-
vidual characteristics in inuencing travel behavior towards sustainable
destinations. These insights can help tourism operators create targeted
marketing strategies that resonate with diverse tourist groups, thus
fostering sustainable tourism practices that align with Bangladesh’s
developmental and environmental goals. Overall, this research aims to
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
2
provide actionable recommendations to promote sustainable tourism in
Bangladesh’s eco-resort sector by bridging existing knowledge gaps.
The rest of the paper has been structured as follows: Section 2 de-
velops the theoretical framework and formulates the study’s hypotheses;
Section 3 discusses the research methodology, including data collection,
measurement constructs, and the study framework; Section 4 presents
the obtained results; Section 5 discusses the study ndings and explores
their implications; and nally, Section 6 concludes the paper.
2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses formulation
A widely recognized theory in tourism motivation is the push-pull
theory. This theory explains the forces driving travelers’ choices by
dividing them into internal and external inuences [31]. The concept
holds that internal psychological motivations initiate a desire to travel,
while external destination attributes inuence the selection of specic
locations. There are some previous studies that have focused on this
idea, highlighting that push factors create the urge to travel, while pull
factors attract travelers to particular destinations that meet their needs
[32–34]. The push factor usually precedes the pull factor in a tourist’s
decision-making process. However, both factors function together to
inuence an individual’s decision to visit a particular place [35].
In recent years, a noticeable shift in tourist preferences toward eco-
friendly destinations has been driven by a growing global interest in
sustainability [36]. The busy and stressful lifestyle of modern society
often motivates individuals to seek destinations that offer a relaxing,
nature-oriented, and tranquil environment, as well as amenities like
good food and safety—all in one place [37]. Eventually, eco-resorts have
become an ideal response to these motivational factors, meeting the
needs of travelers by providing both environmental responsibility and a
serene experience [38].
The trend towards environmentally conscious travel is particularly
signicant in relation to eco-resorts, which appeal to tourists by show-
casing their dedication to environmental responsibility [39]. The
growing worldwide concern for sustainable practices has driven the
popularity of eco-resorts, providing environmentally aware travelers
with the chance to make tourism choices that align with sustainability
objectives [40]. Consequently, it is crucial to comprehend all the moti-
vations behind individuals’ decisions to choose eco-resorts, as these
preferences directly inuence the tourism sector’s transition towards
more sustainable operations. In light of the previous literature, the
following hypotheses are developed to examine the inuence of push
and pull factors on eco-resort selection and their contribution to sus-
tainable tourism.
2.1. Push factors and Eco-resort selection
As more people look for environmentally responsible and sustainable
vacation options, eco-tourism has attracted much attention recently
[41]. As a part of the more signicant eco-tourism sector, eco-resorts are
essential in meeting the needs of travelers who care about the envi-
ronment [42]. The "push factors" or "pull factors" are the factors that
inuence tourists to choose and explore a particular attraction or loca-
tion [28]. Crompton (1979) proposed that push factors assist not only in
explaining the original motive for vacationing but also in directing
visitors to specic locations. These characteristics mainly include
intrinsic and intangible qualities that encourage individuals to travel
[43]. Therefore, several push factors inuence a tourist’s decision to
stay or visit an eco-resort [44].
The desire to protect the environment among travelers is one of the
main push factors for choosing eco-resorts [45]. Travelers with a high
environmental awareness are more inclined to select eco-resorts because
their beliefs correspond with sustainable practices [46]. Tourists’ desire
to visit an eco-resort can be connected with several reasons. Moreover,
Klenosky [47] found that "push" factors are connected to visitors’ needs
and demands, which include their desire to escape from their
environment, the demand to rest and relax, the demand to go on an
adventure, the desire to stay active and the desire to interact with a
variety of people. The research found that novelty, social connection,
escape from the ordinary, and prestige were prominent push factors for
visiting an eco-resort [48]. In addition, the desire for relaxation, stress
relief, and an escape from the demands of daily life might be signicant
psychological factors that inuence travel [49].
An intrinsic desire to journey beyond urban landscapes acts as an
internal impetus. When contemplating this urge, individuals predomi-
nantly opt for environments that embrace nature while seamlessly
catering to their lodging necessities [42]. In pursuit of such experiences,
the preference often leans towards eco-resorts, where the charm of
eco-friendly surroundings converges with a comprehensive array of
essential amenities [50]. The need for a short-term respite from job
pressures is a signicant motivator for choosing eco-resorts [51]. These
resorts provide guests with a tranquil haven to unwind and refresh after
being away from work [52]. Eco resorts are also well known for
providing unique and memorable experiences. The promise of a unique
and immersive eco-friendly vacation entices visitors, who are motivated
by the desire to create lifelong memories [53].
Tourists select eco-resorts as a getaway to escape their mundane
daily routines and gain fresh life perspectives [54]. Eco resorts draw
guests looking for peace and stress relief because of their serene natural
settings and eco-friendly architecture, which promotes both physical
and emotional renewal [50]. For many vacationers, having fun and
having entertainment are top priorities [49]. Eco resorts provide a va-
riety of experiences, such as campres, cultural performances, and
eco-friendly spa treatments, striking a balance between relaxation and
fun [54]. Through workshops, nature programs, and sustainability
projects, eco-resorts usually provide educational chances for individual
growth, appealing to tourists desiring to learn new things and sharpen
their skills [55]. This is in line with transformative travel trends.
Consequently, it is possible to formulate the following hypothesis:
H1. Push factors positively motivate Eco-resort selection.
2.2. Pull factors and Eco-resort selection
Pull factors in tourism are a place’s distinctive and alluring features
that draw in potential visitors and affect their decision to pick that site
for their travel experiences [28]. Pull-driving factors are the distinctive
attractions of a location that match tourists’ motivations to go there
[56]. Klenosky [47] classied some qualities as the enticing traits, at-
tractions, or attributes of a desirable place. They drive people to certain
locations, believing that these aspects would meet their wants and de-
mands. Several factors make resort travel an alluring option for tourists
looking for leisure, entertainment, and a memorable gateway [49]. The
resort’s amenities, entertainment options, value, and opportunity to
participate in various sports are the things that draw people in the most
[33]. These elements effectively operate as a magnet, drawing tourists in
and convincing them to choose one tourist site over another [48].
A basic attritional pull driver for travelers to eco-resorts is clean and
pleasant lodging, which is necessary for a pleasurable stay [57]. Positive
ratings and word-of-mouth recommendations are given to eco-resorts
that stress eco-friendly operations while guaranteeing top-notch hotel
experiences [42]. Eco-resorts draw guests looking for a change from
standard hotel experiences by differentiating themselves through inti-
mate and distinctive themes [50]. Another pull factor for tourists to
select eco-resorts is the culinary experience, which is crucial for their
satisfaction. Eco-resorts succeed at this by offering a variety of locally
sourced, eco-friendly, and tasty food options, which increases their
attractiveness [58]. People tend to ock to eco-resorts in large part due
to the quality of the infrastructure. Tourists favor eco-resorts with
contemporary amenities, elegant lodgings, and environmentally
friendly design [51]. Another signicant factor in why consumers select
eco-resorts is entertainment and recreation. According to Lu [50],
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
3
eco-resorts offering exciting activities like nature tours, rural life expe-
riences, tasting local food items, wildlife encounters, rafting through
parks, cycling, and cultural events draw more visitors. Travelers who
enjoy adventure and unique experiences enjoy these enjoyable activ-
ities. Furthermore, tourists who care about the environment are pulled
to eco-resorts because of their beautiful natural surroundings, environ-
mentally responsible infrastructure, entertainment options that focus on
the outdoors, and accessibility to various sports facilities [50]. Conse-
quently, it is possible to formulate the following hypothesis:
H2. Pull factors positively motivate Eco-resort selection.
2.3. Push and pull factors
In tourism, motivation is essential in determining people’s decisions
to travel and discover new places [49]. A thorough understanding of
tourist motives enables researchers and marketers to properly predict
tourist behavior [59]. In the tourist industry, motivation is frequently
divided into two major groups, each of which is driven by a unique
collection of elements known as "push" and "pull" drivers [60,44].
Push-pull forces were rst established in 1977 to investigate distinct
tourist motivations [61]. "Push" factors originate from within the indi-
vidual. It is comparable to when someone truly wants to go because they
have fantasized about it or need a break from their routine [48]. The
other are "pull" factors that originate outside the system. These include
things like stunning locations, thrilling attractions, and fun activities to
do while traveling [62]. According to He and Luo [49], an inner urge to
travel outside of one’s home serves as the intrinsic or driving force. The
extrinsic motivation, often called the pull factor, is the external attrac-
tiveness that pushes people to travel. People are compelled to travel by
push drives, and pull drivers are what entice them to visit a particular
location [63].
It is widely accepted that psychological elements such as the need for
social interaction, the desire for escape, adventure, relaxation, and self-
discovery are push factors in the context of travel reasons [63]. On the
other side, pull factors include the environmental elements that entice
people to particular locations, such as a lot of sunshine, famous monu-
ments, recreational opportunities, and affordable air travel [44]. People
use ’pull’ variables to select a specic destination for their vacation, but
’push’ elements are the ones that inuence whether they want to travel
at all [49]. Push factors are things that encourage people to want to
travel or make them want to travel [48]. So, the sequence of travel
decision-making typically includes push factors before pull factors. In
other words, tourists often feel the desire to leave their homes or current
locations (push factor) before they become interested in the attractions
and amenities offered at a specic tourism destination (referred to as a
pull factor) [64]. This natural progression allows travelers to make
informed decisions and plan their trips. Therefore, it is possible to
formulate the following hypothesis:
H3. Push factors positively drive pull factors.
2.4. Eco-resort selection and sustainable tourism
Due to the increasing awareness of tourism’s socio-cultural and
environmental impacts, sustainable tourism and eco-resorts are
becoming more popular nowadays [52]. Sustainable tourism emerged in
response to mass tourism’s negative effects on the environment, local
communities, and cultural heritage [65]. It involves the responsible and
ethical management of tourism activities to minimize negative conse-
quences and maximize economic, environmental, and social benets
[66]. It is anticipated that it will result in managing all resources to
satisfy nancial, social, and aesthetic demands while preserving cultural
integrity, crucial ecological processes, ecosystem diversity, and
life-sustaining systems [67]. The demands of current visitors and host
communities are met through sustainable tourism development, which
also safeguards and expands prospects for the future [68]. With its
ultimate goal of achieving long-term sustainability, sustainable tourism
involves balancing the interests of tourists, local communities, and the
natural environment [68].
Upon closer examination, eco-resorts are promising avenues for
developing successful and sustainable tourism [45]. Multiple studies
show that eco-resorts may provide an environmentally responsible
product by minimizing environmental consequences while maintaining
visitor satisfaction [67]. This can produce a new generation of resorts
prioritizing ecological, social, and cultural sustainability [51]. Choosing
an eco-resort is considered a key component of sustainable tourism,
which requires careful consideration of elements, including location,
sustainability practices, community involvement, and eco-friendly fa-
cilities [51]. Eco Resorts are places of accommodation that are envi-
ronmentally friendly and have signicantly improved their structure to
minimize the negative impact on the natural environment by following
green practices associated with sustainable living [42]. The resorts are
designed to blend in with the surrounding natural environment and
often employ eco-friendly practices, such as saving energy, protecting
the environment, reducing waste, and conserving water [69]. Usually,
this includes using energy-efcient lighting in their restaurants, hiring
local workers, installing solar panels, using green cleaning products, and
purchasing local food [70]. As it directly affects the overall sustain-
ability of the travel experience, nding the right eco-resort is essential to
sustainable tourism [50]. Eco-resorts often include various environ-
mentally friendly services and pursuits, including eco-friendly lodging,
wildlife safaris, sustainable dining alternatives, nature hikes, etc. [51].
When choosing an eco-resort, travelers’ decisions may be signicantly
inuenced by the availability of these options [33].
By deliberately deciding to stay in an eco-resort, people contribute
signicantly to promoting ecologically friendly and ethical travel habits
that strive to reduce adverse effects on the environment and commu-
nities nearby, concisely the growth of sustainable tourism [67]. So,
travelers who choose eco resorts get to enjoy their vacation and actively
contribute to the preservation and protection of the locations they visit.
Therefore, it is possible to formulate the following hypothesis:
H4. Motivating Eco-resort selection positively affects sustainable
tourism.
2.5. SEM Model Development
The global travel industry continues to grow, and sustainable
tourism is becoming increasingly important [71]. A key component of
sustainable tourism is selecting eco-friendly resorts that preserve the
environment and contribute to local community development [72]. As
stated in the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism conceptualized by
UNWTO in 1999, some indicators of sustainable tourism development
include local products, local community empowerment and wealth,
environmental protection, local culture sustainability, and economic
growth. An eco-resort is crucial in achieving sustainable tourism and
protecting the environment and local communities (Barmelgy & Ibra-
him, 2014). Eco-resorts provide tourists with a complete eco-experience
[57]. The visit is environmentally friendly, as are their lodgings, trans-
portation, and culinary procedures. Using solar energy for heating,
adopting bio-toilets, and using modes of transportation more effectively
can all be eco-friendly examples of how individuals may lessen their
environmental impact [46]. Eco-resorts are committed to protecting the
environment, fostering local cultures, and supporting the local economy
[50]. With growing awareness of travel’s environmental and social
impacts, eco-conscious consumers are showing a greater interest in
eco-friendly resorts [54]. So, the management should prioritize
best-practice environmental management, an instructional and infor-
mative element with direct and indirect advantages to cultural and
natural environment conservation [46].
A complicated mix of push and pull variables inuences travel de-
cisions. Many tourists are attracted to eco-resorts because they believe
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
4
this visit gives them guilt-free trips that benet nature, culture, and local
communities. Additionally, these choices contribute to the sustainability
of the tourism industry (Barmelgy & Ibrahim, 2014). Sensible tourists
want to lessen their environmental imprint on vacation, and eco-resorts
offer the opportunity to do so, serving as a push factor for their leisure
choices. Furthermore, travelers’ ethical values often encourage them to
choose eco-resorts. Also, eco-resorts appeal to guests who want to
engage with nature, connect with like-minded people, explore different
lifestyles, or embark on adventurous activities. Local communities must
protect natural ecosystems and cultural assets in response to visitor in-
terest [51]. As well as travelers are also motivated by things that include
pure air, peaceful surroundings, and outdoor activities offered by
eco-resorts [54].
On the contrary, the pull factors of eco-resorts encompass natural
attractions, wildlife observations, learning and experiencing the native
culture, and a range of eco-friendly activities [67]. These elements draw
tourists to these eco-resorts and signicantly advance sustainable
tourism [50]. Travelers looking for a pleasant and environmentally
friendly stay are drawn to the eco resorts’ sustainable features, including
using perishable products, renewable energy sources, water conserva-
tion approaches, and responsible waste disposal [69].
So, a signicant driving force for sustainable tourism is the selection
of eco-resorts. An interplay of push and pull factors aligns travelers’
values and preferences with travel decisions. Consequently, it is possible
to formulate the following hypotheses:
H5. Eco-resort selection positively drives the relationship between
push factors and sustainable tourism.
H6. Eco-resort selection positively drives the relationship between pull
factors and sustainable tourism.
2.6. Push and Pull factors, eco-resort selection, and sustainable tourism
The Push-Pull Theory offers a comprehensive framework for
analyzing how intrinsic (push) and extrinsic (pull) motivations directly
impact sustainable tourism by inuencing tourist behaviors and pref-
erences [63]. Push factors, including environmental consciousness,
ethical travel intentions [73], and the desire to escape routine [74],
encourage tourists to seek eco-friendly destinations [75] that align with
their personal values [76]. These intrinsic drivers promote responsible
travel behaviors that reduce environmental impact and support local
communities [77]. On the other hand, pull factors such as eco-friendly
infrastructure [78], cultural heritage preservation [79], and
nature-based immersive activities [64] enhance the attractiveness of
destinations by offering unique, sustainability-oriented experiences
[80]. Together, the interplay between push and pull motivations fosters
alignment between tourist behavior and sustainable practices, deliv-
ering economic benets to local communities, mitigating environmental
degradation, and enhancing the resilience of tourism systems. This dy-
namic is particularly signicant in the context of post-COVID-19 re-
covery and emerging economies [81,82]. Consequently, these
interactions underpin the growth of sustainable tourism by encouraging
eco-conscious choices and enabling the development of destinations that
meet both tourist expectations and sustainability objectives. These
ndings emphasize the direct inuence of push-pull motivations in
shaping eco-friendly and sustainable tourism services.
Push factors have a favorable effect on pull factors in the context of
eco-resort selection for fostering sustainable tourism. This is based on
the concept that visitors’ inner motives (push factors) increase their
admiration and desire for certain qualities supplied by eco-resorts (Pull
factors) (Arowosafe et al., 2021). This dynamic interaction can have a
considerable impact on the growth of sustainable tourism. Travelers
seeking leisure, comfort, recreation, and well-being are likely inclined
toward eco-resorts that sustainably provide all of their needs [83]. These
visitors are driven by a desire to unwind and experience an enjoyable
stay (push factor). The eco-resorts use natural materials like bamboo,
reclaimed wood, and palm fronds for thatched rooves, as well as provide
high-end amenities like organic bedding, locally sourced meals, and
wellness spas, which appeal to guests and meet their comfort needs also
serving as environmental protection [84].
Tourists often select eco-resorts because of their clean environment
and commitment to sustainability [85]. Eco-resorts utilize
energy-efcient technologies such as solar panels and LED lighting, as
well as sustainable recycling facilities and products [86]. These mea-
sures signicantly cut greenhouse gas emissions when compared to
regular hotels. By opting for these eco-friendly resorts, tourists actively
contribute to sustainable tourism [87]. Their choice supports environ-
mental conservation efforts and promotes a greener, more sustainable
tourism sector. Thus, the study focuses only on the indirect effect of
eco-resort selection and formulates the following hypothesis:
H7. Push factors positively affect the pull factors that motivate eco-
resort selection to promote sustainable tourism.
Fig. 1 depicts the comprehensive research model, including all the
hypotheses.
3. Methodology
PLS-SEM is a powerful statistical technique that has gained popu-
larity in various social science domains, including tourism research, due
to its ability to model complex relationships between observed and
latent variables [88]. There are signicant benets to using the PLS-SEM
method, such as it allows for the modeling of complex relationships
between multiple dependent and independent variables, including
direct and indirect effects. Additionally, it can handle both formative
and reective measurement models, providing more exibility in
dening constructs [89]. The push and pull factors represent different
motivations (e.g., intrinsic motivations like escape and relaxation and
extrinsic motivations like destination attributes and activities) that can,
directly and indirectly, affect eco-resort selection [90]. Constructs like
"push factors" and "pull factors" can be modeled formatively, where in-
dicators cause the construct rather than reect it. PLS-SEM is well-suited
for such formative constructs. Several authors have stated that PLS-SEM
focuses on prediction and the maximization of explained variance in the
dependent constructs, making it valuable for practical applications like
predicting tourist behavior and preferences in sustainable tourism [91,
92]. This part contains a synopsis regarding the idea, measurement
items categorized under the construct, data collection techniques, and
information about the suggested tools for analysis.
3.1. Measurement of the constructs
A hierarchical component model with major and sub-constructs is
presented in the study. The selection of sub-constructs and measurement
items for the push and pull factors was determined by the opinions of the
eld experts and the support of relevant literature [93–96]. The
Push-pull factor approach can be employed to examine the underlying
motive that compels visitors to visit a specic tourism destination, with
a particular emphasis on aspects such as the anticipated unique expe-
rience and the desired activities they want to participate [48]. The
recent surge in attention towards environmental concerns and the con-
sequences of climate change has prompted tourists to choose eco-resorts
for their recreational activities increasingly. The hospitality and tourism
sectors in Bangladesh emphasize eco-friendliness. While most tourists in
this region show little concern for the environmental impact, there is a
vocal minority that actively seeks out destinations that manage to be
both sustainable and environmentally friendly. Eco resorts are quickly
becoming a popular alternative for this environmentally conscious
traveler. Consequently, this is propelling the nation towards adopting
sustainable tourism practices. The indicator items for selecting an
eco-resort are derived from the research conducted by Sharinia [97],
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
5
Khan et al. [87], Faerber et al. [98], and expert feedback. Finally, the
sub-constructs and measurement items for sustainable tourism activities
were developed by incorporating suggestions from experts and existing
literature [83,99,100].
Table A1–A4 of Appendix A lists the sub-constructs and measure-
ment items under supplementary materials. As a measure of push and pull
factors motivating eco-resort selection of tourists and environmental
sustainability, the study adopted a ve-point Likert scale. The scale
ranges from "urgent/mandatory" at the highest to "not necessary" at the
lowest. A sample questionnaire with all constructs, survey items, and
appropriate references is provided in Table A5 of the supplementary
materials. The study framework illustrated in Fig. 2 makes its research
goal quite evident.
3.2. Sampling and data collection
A survey was conducted online to collect information from various
tourists who visited different eco-resorts in Bangladesh. There are
several reasons to explore why individuals choose eco-resorts and how
these decisions affect sustainability. It involves two fundamental moti-
vational factors: push and pull factors. Researchers are trying to gure
out what motivates people to pick eco-resorts and contribute to sus-
tainable tourism development in Bangladesh. Sustainable tourism pro-
motes the ethical use of natural resources, preventing overexploitation
and damage. Climate change and natural catastrophes are among the
environmental concerns that the country faces. Implementing sustain-
able tourism strategies reduces the industry’s carbon impact and pro-
motes environmental conservation. Furthermore, it generates jobs for
local populations, protects the pure character of tourist locations, and
contributes substantially to preserving the natural culture of a destina-
tion. Bangladesh is home to rich ora and wildlife. Sustainable tourism
supports responsible wildlife watching and habitat protection, which
helps conserve biodiversity. The worldwide tourism industry is moving
more towards sustainable and ethical travel. By harmonizing with global
trends, Bangladesh portrays itself as a responsible tourist destination,
attracting people who value sustainability.
A Google form was rigorously designed to explore the determinants
inuencing the choice of eco-resorts, which has implications for sus-
tainable tourism in emerging economies. The survey link (which also
contained a consent question at the beginning) was initially sent to 260
adults (aged from 18 to 65) tourists who had visited an eco-resort at least
once. Convenience sampling and snowball sampling techniques were
implemented in this study for the online survey to efciently access
broader populations of interest [101,102]. The form was distributed
between June 2023 and November 2023. This study included many
legitimate verication procedures, including background checks,
pre-screening questionnaires, and pilot testing. While collecting survey
data, only relevant respondents who satised the inclusion criteria were
considered to send the survey link, and respondents were also asked to
complete specic mandatory questions. If the participants met all the
prerequisites, they were permitted to participate in the online survey,
assuring that the ndings were legitimate. In addition, a pilot test was
carried out to ensure trustworthy analysis results, which is discussed in
detail below. For determining the minimum sample size, a priori power
analysis was conducted using G*Power 3.1.9.4 software [103] with a
medium effect size of 0.15, power of 0.80 and a signicance level of 0.05
[104,105]. The minimum sample size was estimated to be 109. In this
study, however, a total of 151 questionnaires were completed properly
(responded back with informed consent), yielding a 58.07% response
rate. The responses were then consolidated into an Excel le, and the
dataset was checked for any missing values and straight liners through
descriptive statistics analysis in SPSS. Data duplication was also evalu-
ated with SPSS, and no anomalies were detected in the dataset.
3.3. The pre-testing procedure
To determine whether the content was valid and reliable, a pilot
study was conducted before the completion of the full survey. The
measurement items were assessed for content validity using feedback
from academic researchers and industry participants [106]. The aca-
demic researchers and industry participants were chosen using a pur-
posive sample approach that targeted certain industry (tourism sector in
the present study) practitioners, which is crucial for obtaining sufcient
answers in a given category [107–109]. First, six academics with
expertise in tourism and sustainable development offered feedback on
the relevance and clarity of the assessment scales. Second, 40 re-
spondents participated in a pilot test to examine the questionnaire’s
reliability [110]. Responders were asked to complete a pilot test to
determine whether they correctly comprehended each question item.
The phrasing of numerous question items was changed in response to
their suggestions and subsequent ndings. Furthermore, numerous
redundant and ambiguous items were removed. Moreover, the construct
validity and reliability were evaluated based on their responses. The
partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) results are
within acceptable limits regarding validity and reliability. In light of the
ndings of the pilot test, a comprehensive sample survey was also
conducted.
3.4. Analytical approach
PLS-SEM was used to evaluate the suggested hierarchical component
model and hypotheses. The hierarchical component model was inves-
tigated using a two-stage approach, which produced signicantly better
results than repeated indicators [111]. Initially, we examined mea-
surement models for higher-order and lower-order constructs. With the
variance ination factor (VIF), outer weights, and outer loadings, we
evaluated the formative measurement model regarding its reliability
and validity (convergent and discriminant). After ensuring item
Fig. 1. The proposed hypotheses model of the research.
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
6
reliability and validity for the higher and lower-order models, we
evaluated the structural model using Smart PLS 3.2.9 software and
bootstrapped with 10,000 subsamples. The suggested model’s tness
was validated by estimating Stone Geisser’s Q2 and R-square.
3.5. Keeping the results reliable and valid by minimizing threats
During the development of the questionnaire and the execution of
the study, potential biases that may jeopardize the reliability and
Fig. 2. Proposed framework of the study.
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
7
validity of the ndings have been considered. Consequently, precautions
have been taken in the questionnaire design and data collection pro-
cesses to ensure that replies and resulting outcomes are impartial. We
specically sought to avoid misleading correlations and incorrect out-
comes by addressing cases where experts may respond remarkably
similarly to most question items [112]. Experts may exhibit’ social
desirability’ by providing attractive responses. The study has considered
the possibility of common method bias (CMB), which can lead to sys-
tematic bias and either inate or deate correlations between variables
[112]. Podsakoff et al. [113] suggest that CMB may arise when sampling
neglects extreme responses to questions. CMB may undermine data
validity if raters answer items for independent and dependent variables
in one session.
Acknowledging the probability of such bias-related concerns, the
study has developed operational safeguards before data collection by
carefully planning the research and using statistical treatments to
mitigate the biases following data analysis. For instance, to prevent CMB
from obtaining data, the present study has separated the measurement
items into independent and dependent variables. In addition, periodical
segregation has been produced by comparing the outcomes of the in-
dependent and dependent variables in various time frames and keeping
a temporal difference between them [112,114]. Furthermore, to elimi-
nate item vagueness, the present study has constructed
easy-to-understand, explicit, and straightforward questions that include
demonstrations while eliminating unfamiliar and confusing issues
whenever possible. After data collection, statistical remedies have been
used to investigate whether or not CMB exists, ensuring unbiased results.
To ensure that the study is impartial, a well-known technique known
as Harman’s Single-Factor Test has been employed in this study. It is the
most commonly used method for detecting common method bias in this
eld [115,116]. This test entails looking at the ndings of a certain
investigation and determining if a single component explains more than
half of the variability. If this happens, the data may include a consid-
erable degree of common method variance [117]. The results reveal that
the total variance extracted by one component is 28.379%, which is less
than 50%. Hence, the data has no risk of common method bias [118].
Table C1 of Appendix C in the supplementary materials represents the
results.
Furthermore, the study has examined whether non-response bias
might have affected results and reduced generalizability. For this pur-
pose, SPSS has been used to conduct a paired sample t-test on the initial
(75 samples) and late replies (remaining 75 samples) to determine
whether there are any differences in their responses. Table 1 demon-
strates that each construct has a signicance value above 0.05 (p
>0.05). Consequently, late samples do not differ signicantly from
early samples in terms of response rates, suggesting that non-response
bias is not present in our study.
4. Results
This portion details the assessment of the correctness of the mea-
surement and structural model in the hierarchical component model
using the appropriate criteria. This also offers the ndings from the
study’s indirect effects.
4.1. Assessing the PLS-SEM Measurement Model
Hair et al. [119] contend that the evaluation standards for formative
measures in PLS-SEM differ from those for the evolution of reective
measurement models. The initial step in assessing a formative mea-
surement model is determining whether the formatively measured
construct strongly correlates with a reective measure of the same
construct. This is referred to as redundancy analysis or the assessment of
the formative measurement model’s convergent validity [120]. In this
context, a formatively measured construct is employed as an exogenous
latent variable to predict an endogenous latent variable that is expressed
through one or more reective indicators. However, the inclusion of sets
of reective multi-item measures can occasionally lead to respondent
fatigue, decreased response rates, and an increase in missing values. As
an alternative, a global item that summarizes the essence of the
formatively measured construct can be used, which needs to be specied
in the research design phase and included in data collection for the
research [121]. Subsequently, the correlation between the formative
latent variable and its reective global item is assessed, where the path
coefcient’s value should be at least 0.70 between the two variables,
resulting in the R
2
value being at least 0.50 for the endogenous construct
[122]. In this study, the global items for the respective formatively
measured constructs, which represent the essence of those constructs,
are presented in Tables A1, A2, A3, and A4 of the supplementary ma-
terials. These global items are named after the respective formative
constructs, followed by an underscore (_) G. The ndings depicted in
Fig. 3 indicate that the path coefcient and R
2
values for all the latent
variables are above the threshold values. This implies that the forma-
tively measured constructs correlate positively with their reective
global items. Therefore, all the formatively measured constructs exhibit
convergent validity.
For the further evaluation of this formative measurement model,
collinearity concerns are assessed using the variance ination factor
(VIF) values. The values in Table B1, B2, B3, and B4 of Appendix B of
the supplementary materials are all lower than the threshold value of 5
(Ab [123]). The signicance of the outer weights was then determined
by bootstrapping. It is noteworthy that Hair et al. [89] argue that the
absence of importance in the indicator weights does not necessarily
imply substandard quality in the measurement model. In this situation,
the outer loadings of the indicators must be examined. When the outer
loading of an indicator exceeds 0.50 and approaches statistical signi-
cance, it is deemed important in constructing a formative construct and
is subsequently retained. However, it is also mentioned that in the
instance that the loading is below 0.50 and the weight is not statistically
signicant, researchers ought to assess the indicator’s theoretical rele-
vance and decide regarding its retention or deletion. Cenfetelli and
Bassellier [124] further stated that if the outer loading is less than 0.10
and not statistically signicant, there is no empirical substantiation for
the indicator’s utility in contributing content to the formative index.
Consequently, the indicator should be excluded from subsequent
analyses.
In this study, the outer weights are assessed in accordance with the
aforementioned principles. The item "Closer connection to nature
(TEM1)" is eliminated due to its failure to meet the specied criteria.
Table 1
Measuring non-response bias through paired samples t-test.
Constructs Number of samples Mean Std. Deviation t-value Signicance (Two-Sided p)
Push Factors Early 75 4.156 0.411 1.170 0.246
Late 75 4.078 0.487
Pull Factors Early 75 4.210 0.430 0.713 0.478
Late 75 4.154 0.493
Eco-resort Selection Early 75 4.189 0.424 0.146 0.884
Late 75 4.178 0.446
Sustainable Tourism Early 75 4.207 0.488 0.911 0.365
Late 75 4.135 0.439
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
8
However, the indicators "Optimistic word-of-mouth advertising (EP3)",
"To have fun without endangering the environment (TEM2)" and "To
take a break from routine activities (TQ1)" are retained despite having
loadings of 0.116, 0.163 and 0.147, respectively. An analysis of their
theoretical relevance reveals that Arachchi [125] pointed out the sig-
nicance of favorable word-of-mouth promotion in the process of
selecting eco-resorts, as it contributes to revenue growth. In addition,
individuals’ heightened consciousness of environmental issues moti-
vates them to choose an eco-resort as a recreational destination for
spending time with their loved ones and escaping the monotony of
everyday life [54]. Consequently, these items can surely be retained. The
ndings of the signicance test for outer weights are presented in
Tables B1, B2, B3, and B4 of Appendix B of the supplementary materials.
In this instance, all the results indicate that the model is prepared for
structural evaluation.
4.2. Analyzing the structural model
Analysis of the structural model ndings mostly depends on the ideas
and properties of multiple regression analysis. Thus, the initial stage is to
assess the structural model components to ascertain whether high
multicollinearity is a concern. As a consequence, the VIF values are
calculated by running the PLS-SEM algorithm, employing the path
weighting scheme, 300 iterations, and a 1.0E-7 stop criterion. The
Fig. 3. Convergent validity assessment.
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
9
ndings are displayed in Tables B1, B2, B3, and B4 of Appendix B,
which indicate the absence of multicollinearity concerns in the study
due to the fact that all VIF values are less than 5. The next thing to
consider is the structural model’s explanatory power. The most
commonly used measure to evaluate it is the coefcient of determination
(R
2
) value, which represents the amount of variance in endogenous
constructs explained by all exogenous constructs linked to it, indicating
the combined effects of exogenous latent variables. R
2
values exceeding
0.67 indicate a high degree of predictive accuracy, while values ranging
from 0.33 to 0.67 indicate a moderate impact, 0.19 to 0.33 indicate a
low impact, and R
2
values below 0.19 are considered unacceptable. In
this study, the R
2
values of eco-resort selection, pull factors, and sus-
tainable tourism are 0.712, 0.788, and 0.744, respectively, which indi-
cate a high level of accuracy and satisfaction.
The presented hypotheses are subsequently assessed using boot-
strapping, employing 10000 sub-samples, to ascertain t values, p values,
and path coefcients. Here, Fig. 4 displays the β-coefcients, t-values,
and p-values of the structural path model generated in SmartPLS.
The result clearly indicates that H1 is supported, meaning that push
factors have a positive and signicant inuence on the selection of eco-
resorts (β=0.268,t=2.645,p<0.05). The study examines if pull
factors inuence the selection of eco-resorts. The ndings indicate that
pull factors have a signicant impact on the Eco-resort’s selection (β =
0.597,t=6.053,p<0.05). Thus, H2 is deemed acceptable. H3
examines the impact of push factors on pull factors. The ndings indi-
cate that push factors have a signicant inuence on pull factors (β =
0.888,t=46.675,p<0.05). Therefore, H3 is considered admissi-
ble. H4 explores whether Eco-resort selection affects Sustainable
Tourism. The ndings indicate a signicant correlation between sus-
tainable tourism and eco-resort selection. (β=0.863,t =47.078,p
<0.05). Therefore, H4 is also accepted. The hypothesis test results are
presented in Table 2.
Fig. 4. Structural path model.
Table 2
Results of hypotheses tests.
Paths Coefcients
(β)
t
values
p
values
Hypotheses Status
Direct effect
Push Factors ->
Eco-resort
Selection
0.268 2.645 0.008 H1 Accepted
Pull Factors ->
Eco-resort
Selection
0.597 6.053 0.000 H2 Accepted
Push Factors ->
Pull Factors
0.888 46.675 0.000 H3 Accepted
Eco-resort
Selection ->
Sustainable
Tourism
0.863 47.078 0.000 H4 Accepted
Indirect effect
Push Factors ->
Eco-resort
Selection ->
Sustainable
Tourism
0.231 2.634 0.008 H5 Accepted
Pull Factors ->
Eco-resort
Selection ->
Sustainable
Tourism
0.515 5.864 0.000 H6 Accepted
Push Factors ->
Pull Factors ->
Eco-resort
Selection ->
Sustainable
Tourism
0.457 5.631 0.000 H7 Accepted
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
10
4.3. Indirect effects analysis
Finally, the hypotheses H5, H6, and H7 with indirect effects are
assessed. As stated by Hayes [126], a variable can have a causal rela-
tionship with both independent and dependent variables, even if there is
no association between the independent and dependent variables. Some
choose to refrain from using the term "mediator" in this case and instead
describe the indirect impact of the independent variable on the depen-
dent variable through that variable [127]. The results displayed in
Table 2 indicate that the indirect effects of push and pull factors on
sustainable tourism through eco-resort selection are all positive and
statistically signicant (Push Factors ->Eco-resort Selection ->Sus-
tainable Tourism: β=0.231,t=2.634,p=0.008; Pull Factors ->
Eco-resort Selection ->Sustainable Tourism: β=0.515,t =5.864,p
=0.000 and Push Factors ->Pull Factors ->Eco-resort Selection ->
Sustainable Tourism: β=0.457,t=5.631,p=0.000). Thus, the
results support the acceptance of both the indirect effect of push factors
on sustainable tourism through eco-resort selection (H5) and the com-
bined effect of pull factors and eco-resort selection (H7). Consequently,
the signicance of the indirect impact of pull factors on sustainable
tourism through eco-resort selection is equally noteworthy. Therefore,
this lends credence to hypothesis H6.
4.4. Correlation analysis
This study follows Tehseen et al. [112] and Bagozzi et al. [128]
recommendations for correlation analysis of latent variables. The cor-
relations between latent variables are evaluated using the PLS algo-
rithm, and constructs with a high correlation (r>0.9) are identied. A
high correlation between latent variables indicates common method
bias (CMB). Table 3 presents that all correlations are under 0.9, which
denotes the absence of CMB.
4.5. Modeling the effect of control variables
For the purpose of assessing the impact of control variables on the
research model, the age and gender of the respondents are examined in
conjunction with the ndings of the hypothesis testing. Table C2 in
Appendix C displays the comparative outcomes beforehand and sub-
sequent to the incorporation of control variables.
Table C2 demonstrates that the addition of control variables has no
valuable inuence on the endogenous variables. Adding control vari-
ables resulted in slightly higher beta values across all hypothesized
paths. However, both age and gender have an insignicant impact on
eco-resort selection and sustainable tourism (Age- >Eco-resort selec-
tion: t=0.124,p=0.902; Gender->Eco-resort selection: t =1.350,p
=0.177; Age- >Sustainable tourism: t=0.244,p=0.807; Gender-
>Sustainable tourism: t=0.507,p=0.612). As a consequence, neither
of these control variables plays a signicant role in the proposed model.
4.6. Model validation
In order to evaluate the validity of the model, Stone Geisser’s Q2
value is determined by the blindfolding procedure. The standard Q2
values of the model are greater than zero and positive [129], which
denotes good prediction and well-constructed dependent variables. The
analysis reveals that Pull Factors, Eco-resort Selection, and Sustainable
Tourism have Q2 values of 0.522, 0.508, and 0.505, respectively. The Q2
outcomes can be found in Table C3 in Appendix C of Supplementary
materials.
4.7. Endogeneity-based bias testing
When a predictor construct in PLS-SEM exhibits a correlation with
the dependent construct’s error term, it is referred to as endogeneity.
This suggests that the error term of the dependent construct is likewise
explained by the predictor construct. Endogeneity may have several
causes, but in a partial regression of the PLS path model, it often results
from removed constructs that correlate with one or more predictor
constructs and the dependent construct [130]. Endogeneity may result
in inaccurate coefcients and deceptive causal connections between
constructs. Based on the Gaussian copula approach of Park and Gupta
[131], Hult et al. [132] have devised a systematic strategy for detecting
and handling endogeneity in PLS-SEM, which models the connection
between the endogenous variable and the error term. The endogeneity
in this study is managed using the SmartPLS Gaussian copula technique,
as suggested by Sarstedt et al. [88]. The analysis is done in SmartPLS 4.
The ndings from Table C4 in Appendix C of the supplementary mate-
rials indicate that all Gaussian copulas and copula constructs, including
the combinations examined in the PLS model, produced statistically
insignicant outcomes (where p values are not less than 0.05). There-
fore, it can be inferred that endogeneity is absent in this study.
5. Discussion
The rst hypothesis indicates that push factors inuence eco-resort
selection in a positive way. (β=0.268,p=0.008)demonstrates that
the assumption is accepted. As a consequence, our ndings show that the
Push factors can expedite the choice of eco-resorts. This theory also goes
with the previous research of Kim Lian Chan and Baum [133].
Eco-resorts are a relatively new idea in Bangladesh, but they are gaining
popularity quickly. People are increasingly interested in spending their
holidays in calm, tranquil, and family-friendly locations, seeking a break
from the rush and bustle of daily life. Furthermore, Bangladeshis’
growing knowledge of environmentally friendly activities inuences
their desire for eco-resorts. They want to immerse themselves in nature,
looking for an experience that will bring them closer to the natural
environment and allow them to build cherished memories with friends
and family. Visiting desirable sites with loved ones is a way to build
familial relationships and improve one’s social status (Arowosafe et al.,
2021). Moreover, visitors also seek fresh experiences that allow them to
encounter different cultures while immersed in nature’s grandeur.
Eco-resorts are becoming increasingly popular in Bangladesh because
they provide both cultural immersion and beautiful scenery.
The second hypothesis nding (β=0.597 and p=0.000) supports
that pull factors play a positive and inuential role in motivating in-
dividuals to select eco-resorts. In the context of Bangladesh, the provi-
sion of safe and pleasurable recreational locations, together with
entertainment amenities, is limited. Eco-resorts bridge this gap by
providing a holistic experience in a scenic and environmentally friendly
location. These resorts are one-of-a-kind locations where people can stay
safely, immerse themselves in natural beauty, and have access to
entertainment options [50]. The attractiveness of having all of these
components perfectly blended into one area sparks people’s attention,
leading to a steady and rising preference for eco-resorts as vacation
destinations. Thus, the ndings of this study align with the research
conducted by Yiamjanya and Wongleedee [134], who concluded that
eco-resort pull factors are highly effective in attracting visitors to
eco-resorts.
The third hypothesis concerns that push factors positively drive pull
Table 3
Correlation among latent variables.
Eco-resort
Selection
Pull
Factors
Push
Factors
Sustainable
Tourism
Eco-resort
Selection
1
Pull Factors 0.835 1
Push Factors 0.798 0.888 1
Sustainable
Tourism
0.863 0.748 0.725 1
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
11
factors. The nding (β=0.888,p=0.000) indicates a positive corre-
lation between them. Push and pull drivers are linked components that
inuence people’s travel decisions [135]. The interaction of these
components creates a complete trip experience. Push factors motivate
people to travel, but pull factors make a place appealing once they have
decided to visit [61]. Besides that, push factors begin with desire,
whereas pull factors specify the goal or activities corresponding to
human desire [33]. When choosing an eco-resort, tourists are motivated
by the push element of wanting eco-friendly lodgings and pull factors
such as natural beauty, perceived affordability, and the eco-friendly
infrastructure of this particular lodging.
The fourth hypothesis indicates that motivating eco-resort selection
positively affects sustainable tourism. The outcomes (β =0.863,p =
0.000) indicate a positive association between them. Sushchenko et al.
[136] highlighted the need for visitors to adopt environmentally
friendly actions as a catalyst for promoting the establishment of sus-
tainable tourism. Tourists can reduce their environmental impact by
adopting ecologically responsible behaviors, such as choosing an
eco-resort. This, in turn, opens the door to establishing sustainable
tourism activities that promote long-term environmental, social, and
economic sustainability. Citizens in Bangladesh who choose to visit
eco-resorts are certain that their decision actively encourages sustain-
able tourism in the nation. By selecting an eco-resort, people can be
assured that they are directly contributing to the aims of conservation,
community development, socio-cultural development, and responsible
tourism.
The fth and sixth hypotheses examine the indirect impact of push
and pull factors on sustainable tourism through eco-resort selection. The
results (H5: β=0.231,p=0.008 and H6: β=0.515,p=0.000)
signify that push and pull factors positively affect sustainable tourism
through eco-resort selection. The mediation results show that Bangla-
deshi tourists, inuenced by push and pull factors, signicantly inu-
ence eco-resort selections and sustainable tourism. If Bangladeshi
tourists willingly select eco-friendly resorts based on both push and pull
factors, the tourism sector may become more sustainable. This choice
will prompt a shift among tourism stakeholders towards developing
nature-friendly infrastructure. This commitment entails avoiding harm
and environmental degradation, fostering a focus on making all aspects
of tourism nature-friendly. As a result, wildlife, ora, and fauna in these
areas will not be compromised, promoting sustainable tourism practices.
The seventh hypothesis reveals that push factors have a favorable
effect on pull factors that stimulate eco-resort selection to promote
sustainable tourism. The observation (β=0.457,p=0.000) shows a
strong relationship between them. From the perspective of Bangladeshi
tourists, this hypothesis underlines recognizing and matching push and
pull drivers to bring in and visit tourists to eco-resorts that promote
sustainable tourism in Bangladesh. Many Bangladeshi visitors prefer to
escape the chaotic pace of city life, particularly in crowded towns like
Dhaka city [137]. The need for quiet surroundings, breathing in some
natural environment, and some relief from everyday pressure are strong
push drives that t with the pull factors of eco-resorts since eco-resorts
tend to be remote from city areas and located in attractive settings such
as the Sundarbans, the Bandarbans, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, or the
Sylhet encircled by mountains and greenery, which appeal to in-
dividuals seeking natural beauty and serenity [138]. Hence, the out-
comes of this study are consistent with the research done by Prasad et al.
[43].
Other than that, most city areas in Bangladesh are so congested that
children, youths, and adults lack suitable locations for physical activity,
play, hiking, boating, or shing [139]. This scarcity encourages people
to seek out nature-friendly environments where they may indulge in
these activities. So, ultimately, the people who visit eco-resorts, whether
deliberately or subconsciously, contribute to promoting sustainable
tourism in developing countries such as Bangladesh. Also, these visits
stimulate eco-friendly practices and contribute to the preservation of
natural environments. This viewpoint is also highlighted by [140] who
said tourism destinations have been developed based on visitors’ per-
spectives. If they want to visit eco-friendly destinations, stakeholders
must plan accordingly. Therefore, as more people seek out these
nature-friendly areas, the demand for eco-resorts rises, making the
Bangladeshi tourism sector more sustainable.
Some recent studies have investigated the signicance of eco-resorts
for a sustainable tourism sector, but no study has yet examined the push
and pull factors that inuence eco-resort selection from the perspective
of an emerging economy. For example, Lee et al. [140] concluded that
sustainability indicators are effective strategies for creating more sus-
tainable resort development. Similarly, Chandran & Bhattacharya [141]
proposed a variety of sustainability metrics as useful tools for achieving
more sustainable resort construction. However, the ndings of these
studies do not fully capture people’s motivational drivers behind
eco-resort selection in emerging economies. Our study, on the contrary,
digs into the important push and pull factors that encourage people to
visit eco-resorts in these areas. By recognizing and assessing these in-
dividual factors, our study gives an expanded view of what drives visi-
tors’ decisions in emerging countries, providing signicant information
for eco-resort owners and policymakers attempting to promote sus-
tainable tourism.
To promote sustainable development in the coming years, several
critical strategies are suggested for eco-resort stakeholders to imple-
ment. The primary focus should be on adopting environmentally
responsible infrastructure and sustainable tourism practices, including
integrating energy-efcient facilities, effective waste management so-
lutions, and state-of-the-art green technologies. Another essential aspect
is the inclusion of local communities in eco-resort development, as this
approach stimulates economic growth, maintains cultural heritage, and
aligns with the principles of sustainable tourism. Furthermore, promo-
tional campaigns should emphasize each resort’s eco-friendly initiatives
and distinctive environmental attributes, as these factors signicantly
attract environmentally conscious visitors.
Beyond individual resort efforts, guests should be prompted to
reduce their environmental impact and participate in responsible
exploration. It is important to ensure that eco-resort visitors respect the
local environment, refrain from interfering with wildlife, and adopt eco-
friendly practices. These actions support conservation initiatives and
enhance the sustainable effects of eco-resorts. Policymakers can
contribute signicantly by crafting supportive legislation, offering in-
centives, and developing collaborative frameworks that amplify sus-
tainable tourism initiatives’ environmental and economic advantages.
5.1. Theoretical implication
This study is expected to contribute to the renement of existing
tourism decision-making models by integrating push and pull factors
specically to eco-resort selection in emerging economies. This can
enhance the theoretical understanding of how sustainability consider-
ations inuence eco-resort choices.
The study may advance theories related to consumer behavior in
terms of sustainability. Henceforth, understanding the factors that
attract eco-resorts can deepen the theoretical understanding of how
environmental consciousness inuences consumer choices in the
tourism sector. The study can contribute to the theoretical foundation of
tourism dynamics in emerging economies. By focusing on sustainable
tourism preferences, the study may offer insights into the unique factors
shaping travel decisions in this region, contributing to the broader
discourse on tourism development and management there. Moreover,
the study can further contribute to the development of frameworks for
adopting sustainability practices using PLS-SEM within the tourism in-
dustry. Theoretical implications may include insights into how eco-
resorts can strategically implement and market sustainable practices,
inuencing both consumer perceptions and industry trends.
Again, this study examines how internal (push) and external (pull)
factors uniquely inuence eco-conscious travel choices that broaden
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
12
motivation theory’s applicability to include sustainable tourism desti-
nations, highlighting new dimensions. Moreover, this study introduces
and tests additional variables—such as environmental awareness,
perceived sustainability, and demographic factors—as potential
moderating inuences on the push and pull motivations for eco-resort
selection. Additionally, this study’s ndings on the signicance of de-
mographic factors (e.g., age, gender, and education) in eco-resort se-
lection contribute to a deeper theoretical understanding of how
individual characteristics intersect with sustainable tourism motiva-
tions. This can encourage future researchers to consider these factors in
other eco-tourism contexts, contributing to a more comprehensive
theoretical model for sustainable tourism behavior.
The study may also contribute to theoretical discussions in envi-
ronmental psychology within the context of tourism. Understanding the
psychological drivers behind eco-resort selection can enrich the theo-
retical foundation of how individuals connect with and perceive envi-
ronmentally conscious travel options. In summary, this research applies
and expands the push-pull motivation theory by testing new variables
and contextualizing them within sustainable tourism, providing a robust
framework for future studies on eco-resort selection and sustainable
tourism motivations.
5.2. Managerial and policy implication
The study provides actionable insights for practitioners, decision-
makers, and policymakers in the tourism industry. Managers of eco-
resorts in emerging economies can use the insights from this study to
strategically promote their sustainable practices. Emphasizing the fac-
tors that stimulate tourists to choose eco-resorts will enable effective
positioning in the market, attracting environmentally conscious trav-
elers. Understanding the push and pull factors can guide product
development, ensuring that the resorts align with the target market’s
preferences and stay competitive in the industry. The study can help
managers implement training programs to ensure employees are well-
informed about eco-friendly practices, enhancing the overall customer
experience and contributing to the resort’s sustainability image. Hence,
the study allows managers to start focusing especially on regular envi-
ronmental audits. Moreover, the study can enable managers to make
impactful plans to contribute to productivity and customer satisfaction.
The study suggests that government bodies and spokespersons must
set regular environmental audits and offer recognized sustainability
certications, which can enhance eco-resorts’ credibility. So, there must
be some regulation to achieve the certication of sustainability practice.
Therefore, the study can directly guide policymakers in building a sus-
tainable tourism ecosystem in emerging economies, beneting both in-
dividual eco-resorts and the industry.
5.3. Implications for SDGs
The study can stimulate industry experts and policymakers to ach-
ieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
For instance,
•Promoting eco-resorts can contribute to sustainable tourism growth,
creating employment opportunities in the emerging economy.
Emphasizing the role of eco-resorts in generating decent work aligns
with SDG 8 (Economic growth through decent work)
•Investigating the factors that motivate individuals to choose eco-
resorts supports responsible consumption patterns. Identifying sus-
tainable tourism factors can inform eco-resort management to
enhance their services in line with SDG 12 (Responsible Consump-
tion and Production).
•Analyzing the push and pull factors in eco-resort selection allows for
identifying climate-friendly practices within the tourism industry.
Promoting eco-resorts that adopt sustainable energy sources and eco-
friendly products and reduce carbon footprints aligns with SDG 13
(Climate Action).
•Exploring the motivations behind eco-resort choices may reveal op-
portunities for innovation in sustainable tourism infrastructure.
Encouraging eco-friendly practices can contribute to advancements
in the industry, which is in line with SDG 9 (Industry Innovation and
Infrastructure).
6. Conclusion
This study explores the driving factors, both push and pull, that in-
uence the selection of eco-resorts and their impact on encouraging
sustainable tourism in a developing country like Bangladesh. The study
develops hypotheses based on existing literature and tourism industry
experts, intending to investigate the impacts of push and pull forces on
eco-resort selection and their subsequent impact on the advancement of
sustainable tourism practices. The study applies a Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) technique and extensive sta-
tistical studies to validate the suggested model. The ndings demon-
strate a signicant association, showing that eco-resort selection is
impacted by both push and pull factors. Furthermore, the study em-
phasizes the critical importance of eco-resort selection in promoting
sustainable tourism practices in the area under consideration.
In the current global context, tourists and new tourism enterprises
must consider sustainable practices, particularly by picking eco-resorts
and tourism stakeholders who are contributing to a thriving tourism
industry by building eco-resorts. This study focuses on a variety of
reasons, both internal (push factors) and external (pull factors), why
individuals prefer eco-friendly accommodation, including eco-resorts. It
demonstrates how this decision promotes sustainable tourism and a
sustainable economy. By actively marketing eco-friendly tourism des-
tinations, such eco-resorts, and promoting sustainable practices, the
tourism sector may strengthen its resilience and positively impact so-
ciety and the environment. With rising demand for sustainable tourist
destinations such as eco-resorts, tourism stakeholders are expected to
build more eco-friendly locations, paving the path for a sustainable
tourism sector. The study provides critical policy and decision-making
insights to help tourism sector stakeholders establish effective strate-
gies aligned with the present global landscape.
Like others, this study also has some limitations that should be
addressed in future research attempts. The investigation focuses on a
particular setting, namely emerging economies such as Bangladesh.
Cultural, economic, and geographical differences can all substantially
inuence eco-resort choices and sustainable tourism practices, making it
challenging to generalize the ndings to various global contexts.
Furthermore, this research included industry experts, academics with
extensive knowledge in relevant sectors, and people from the middle to
upper-income group who had the opportunity to visit eco-resorts. While
their expertise and experience are valuable, there is a possibility that
some biases have evolved, obscuring the genuine image of the scenario
under investigation. Though the correctness of our proposed model is
statistically veried by soliciting feedback from specialists in the Ban-
gladeshi tourism industry, there is a potential that people’s opinions
would impact the ndings. This might restrict the ndings’ widespread
relevance. Another thing to note is that owing to time and budget re-
strictions, the research used an online Google form survey inside the
network to collect data. However, for future research aimed at
improving representation, it is recommended to investigate the research
using the random sample data gathering approach. This strategy can
help to create a more diversied and thorough dataset, resulting in a
larger and more inclusive perspective on the study ndings.
Despite the study’s current limitations, this work provides future
researchers with a number of scopes. From the result, this study revealed
that push factors have a favorable effect on pull factors that stimulate
eco-resort selection to promote sustainable tourism. Therefore, future
studies can explore the ranking and co-relationship among the factors to
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
13
achieve sustainability in tourism services. The current research frame-
work can also be applied to explore the contextual relationship of
emerging technology to provide both sustainable and resiliency services.
Moreover, many other new constructs can be considered in the shed of
sustainable tourism services, and the effects of these mediations on
performance can be evaluated. Future studies can also apply
Covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM), Fuzzy Set
Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), and generalized structured
component analysis (GSCA) for in-depth analysis.
Funding acknowledgment
This research did not receive any specic grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-prot sectors.
Survey consent statement
All survey participants were informed and consenting adults (aged
from 18 to 65). No minor took part in this survey. No personal, medical,
condential, sensitive, or identifying information was collected.
All participants gave their informed consent for inclusion before they
participated in the study.
Ethics Statement
The study did not involve any minors, medical specimens, animals,
or medical information. The willing and informed participants provided
their opinions/feedback (which contained no medical information) via
online survey forms. The collected data from the participants were
processed anonymously to ensure an unbiased study.
No ethical regulations were violated during this research.
Generative AI usage statement
The authors utilized a licensed grammar-checking software (Gram-
marly) to improve their writing quality. No other assistance (AI or not)
was taken from any source or tool.
Data availability
Data on the PLS-SEM model will be made available on request. Other
data are available in the supplementary materials le.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Bipasha Sukrana: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investi-
gation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Sanjida
Hassan: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal
analysis, Data curation. Farjana Islam Jui: Writing – original draft,
Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Md
Shihab Shakur: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation,
Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Binoy Debnath: Writing – review
& editing, Visualization, Validation. A. B. M. Mainul Bari: Writing –
review & editing, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Project
administration, Investigation, Conceptualization.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing nancial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to inuence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the experts/participants who took
their valuable time to provide feedback for this study.
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in
the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100619.
References
[1] M.H. Rahman, T. Tanchangya, J. Rahman, M.A. Aktar, S.C. Majumder, Corporate
social responsibility and green nancing behavior in Bangladesh: Towards
sustainable tourism, Innovation and Green Development 3 (3) (2024) 100133.
[2] R. Deb, Revival of Urban Tourism amid COVID-19 Pandemic: A Descriptive
Perspective in the Indian Context. COVID-19, Tourist Destinations and Prospects
for Recovery: Volume One: A Global Perspective, Springer International
Publishing, Cham, 2023, pp. 325–335.
[3] S.A. Athari, U.V. Alola, M. Ghasemi, A.A. Alola, The (Un) sticky role of exchange
and ination rate in tourism development: insight from the low and high political
risk destinations, Current Issues in Tourism 24 (12) (2021) 1670–1685.
[4] S.A. Athari, U.V. Alola, A.A. Alola, A global perspective of the role of domestic
economic, nancial and political risks in inbound tourism, International Journal
of Emerging Markets 18 (10) (2023) 4191–4213.
[5] S. Hussain, M. Reza, Environmental Damage and Global Health: Understanding
the Impacts and Proposing Mitigation Strategies, Journal of Big-Data Analytics
and Cloud Computing 8 (2) (2023) 1–21.
[6] M. Nowacki, J. Kowalczyk-Anioł, Y. Chawla, Gen Z’s Attitude towards Green
Image Destinations, Green Tourism and Behavioural Intention Regarding Green
Holiday Destination Choice: A Study in Poland and India, Sustainability 15 (10)
(2023) 7860.
[7] D. Guttentag, S. Smith, L. Potwarka, M. Havitz, Why tourists choose Airbnb: A
motivation-based segmentation study, Journal of Travel Research 57 (3) (2018)
342–359.
[8] S.S.S. Huda, T. Islam, High degree of informality in tourismscape: a threat to
tourism service sustainability, International Journal of Services, Economics and
Management 15 (1) (2024) 51–62.
[9] V. Hajra, A. Aggarwal, Unveiling the antecedents of senior citizens
′
behavioural
intentions to travel: A mixed-method approach, Tourism and Hospitality
Research 23 (3) (2023) 312–331.
[10] Y. Zhao, E. Agyeiwaah, Exploring value-based motivations for culture and
heritage tourism using the means-end chain and laddering approach, Journal of
Heritage Tourism (2023) 1–23.
[11] S. Yousaf, Y. Liu, L. Feite, Dark personality traits and sensation-seeking tourist
behaviors. Is there a link? A preliminary investigation of Chinese tourists,
Tourism Management Perspectives 47 (2023) 101119.
[12] M. Axhami, V. Ndou, V. Milo, P. Scorrano, Creating Value via the Circular
Economy: Practices in the Tourism Sector, Administrative Sciences 13 (7) (2023)
166.
[13] M. Afrin, A. Sifat, Preserving The Shoreline: A Potential Approach of Eco-
Architecture on The Seacoast of Bay of Bengal, in: Proceedings of the
International Conference of Contemporary Affairs in Architecture and Urbanism-
ICCAUA 6, 2023, pp. 742–748.
[14] C.C. Huang, S.P. Li, Y.K. Chan, M.Y. Hsieh, J.C.M. Lai, Empirical Research on the
Sustainable Development of Eco-tourism with Environmental Education
Concepts, Sustainability 15 (13) (2023) 10307.
[15] J. Chan, T. Baum, Motivation Factors of Eco-tourists in Ecolodge Accommodation:
The Push and Pull Factors, Asia Pacic Journal of Tourism Research 12 (2007)
349–364.
[16] M. Weber, M. Groulx, C.J. Lemieux, D. Scott, J. Dawson, Balancing the dual
mandate of conservation and visitor use at a Canadian world heritage site in an
era of rapid climate change, Journal of Sustainable Tourism (2019).
[17] C. Goossens, Tourism information and pleasure motivation, Annals of Tourism
Research 27 (2000) 301–321.
[18] T. Loulanski, V. Loulanski, The sustainable integration of cultural heritage and
tourism: A meta-study, Journal of sustainable tourism 19 (7) (2011) 837–862.
[19] H. Kumar, M.K. Singh, M. Gupta, Eco-tourism as a driving force of sustainable
development, in: 3rd International Students Conference on Academic
Multidisciplinary Research 2023, 2023, p. 25.
[20] S.A. Athari, Does the sovereign environmental, social, and governance
sustainability activities jeopardize the banking sector’s stability: Evidence from
the Arab economies, Sustainable Futures 7 (2024) 100204.
[21] S.A. Athari, C. Saliba, E. Abboud, N. El-Bayaa, Examining the Quadratic Impact of
Sovereign Environmental, Social, and Governance Practices on Firms’
Protability: New Insights from the Financial Industry in Gulf Cooperation
Council Countries, Sustainability 16 (7) (2024) 2783.
[22] M.B. Kamal, et al., Reasons why elite- & middle class citizens are shunning
domestic tourism in Bangladesh, International Journal of Research Publication
and Reviews 4 (6) (2023) 2102–2111.
[23] H. Zheng, Y. Zheng, Daily links between leisure activities, stress, and well-being
during the transition to university, Applied Developmental Science (2023) 1–16.
[24] G.D. Boca, S. Saraçlı, Environmental education and student’s perception, for
sustainability, Sustainability 11 (6) (2019) 1553.
[25] C. Chandran, P. Bhattacharya, Tourist’s level of awareness and attitude about
destination eco-tourism development: a case study of Munnar, Environment,
Development and Sustainability, Kerala, India, 2023, pp. 1–16.
[26] K. Kim, Y. Wang, J. Shi, W. Guo, Z. Zhou, Z. Liu, Structural Relationship between
Eco-tourism Motivation, Satisfaction, Place Attachment, and Environmentally
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
14
Responsible Behavior Intention in Nature-Based Camping, Sustainability 15 (11)
(2023) 8668.
[27] M.W. Islam, S. Ahmed, R.T. Mahin, Motivation in Community-Based Tourism:
Linking Locals to Internationals in Promoting Community Development and
Conservation of Natural Resources. Strategic Tourism Planning for Communities:
Restructuring and Rebranding, Emerald Publishing Limited, 2024, pp. 221–245.
[28] M. Antara, Y.A. Prameswari, Push and pull factors of tourists visit the tourism
destination of Bali, Indonesia, Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management 6
(1) (2018) 112–120.
[29] M. Carvache-Franco, W. Carvache-Franco, O. Carvache-Franco, A.B. Hern´
andez-
Lara, Analysis of push and pull motivations and the intentions to return and
recommend a coastal or marine destination, Journal of Coastal Research 36 (6)
(2020) 1313–1322.
[30] I.N. Subadra, Investigating push and pull factors of tourists visiting Bali as a world
tourism destination, International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational
Research 8 (8) (2019).
[31] A. Godlewska, A. Mazurek-Kusiak, A. Soroka, Push and pull factors inuencing
the choice of a health resort by Polish treatment-seekers 23 (1) (2023) 2192.
[32] N. Carvalho, H. Rodrigues, A. Brochado, Double or nothing: push and pull factors
of casinos in Europe, GeoJournal 88 (2) (2023) 2233–2246.
[33] D. Soldatenko, E. Zentveld, D. Morgan, An examination of tourists’ pre-trip
motivational model using push–pull theory: Melbourne as a case study,
International Journal of Tourism Cities 9 (3) (2023) 572–597.
[34] H.M. Tu, Sustainable heritage management: Exploring dimensions of pull and
push factors, Sustainability 12 (19) (2020) 8219.
[35] L. Pattanayak, L.K. Jena, K. Sahoo, Interpreting emotional insights and behavioral
intentions of travelers based on push and pull motivations during Covid-19,
International Journal of Social Economics 49 (10) (2022) 1442–1457.
[36] M. Kocoglu, A. Jahanger, A. Awan, D. Barak, D. Balsalobre-Lorente, Examining
the nonlinear impact of human capital on environmental degradation in N-11
countries: an application of the PSTR approach, Environmental Science and
Pollution Research 30 (29) (2023) 74265–74279.
[37] J. Wang, S. Wang, Y. Wang, J. Chen, Work and leisure: negative cross-contextual
spillover of individuals’ pro-environmental behaviours from workplace to hotel,
Journal of Sustainable Tourism 32 (4) (2024) 737–752.
[38] I. Confente, D. Scarpi, Achieving environmentally responsible behavior for
tourists and residents: A norm activation theory perspective, Journal of Travel
Research 60 (6) (2021) 1196–1212.
[39] T. Hansen, S. Olk, T.U. Thomsen, A meta-analysis of sustainable tourist
behavioral intention and the moderating effects of national culture, Journal of
Sustainable Tourism 32 (5) (2024) 883–903.
[40] M. Atzeni, S. Kim, G. Del Chiappa, P. Wassler, Ecotourists’ intentions,
worldviews, environmental values: Does climate change matter? Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management 25 (2022) 100723.
[41] Q.B. Baloch, S.N. Shah, N. Iqbal, M. Sheeraz, M. Asadullah, S. Mahar, A.U. Khan,
Impact of tourism development upon environmental sustainability: a suggested
framework for sustainable ecotourism, Environmental Science and Pollution
Research 30 (3) (2023) 5917–5930.
[42] S. Subagya, C. Trimarianto, Application of Ecological Architecture Principles in
Eco Resort Design at Pemenang, Lombok, Journal of A Sustainable Global South 1
(2) (2017) 5.
[43] S. Prasad, K. Nair, H. Purohit, Tourist satisfaction: an analysis of push and pull
factors-a case of Qatar tourism, Journal of Management (JOM) 6 (2) (2019)
187–199.
[44] A.H. Nikjoo, M. Ketabi, The role of push and pull factors in the way tourists
choose their destination, Anatolia 26 (4) (2015) 588–597.
[45] N. Yuniati, Green hotel concept and practices in Indonesia, E-Journal of Tourism
8 (2) (2021) 184–196.
[46] A.K. Patwary, Examining environmentally responsible behaviour, environmental
beliefs and conservation commitment of tourists: a path towards responsible
consumption and production in tourism, Environmental Science and Pollution
Research 30 (3) (2023) 5815–5824.
[47] D.B. Klenosky, The "pull" of tourism destinations: A means-end investigation,
Journal of travel research 40 (4) (2002) 396–403.
[48] F. Arowosafe, O. Akinwotu, O. Tunde-Ajayi, O. Omosehin, E. Osabuohien, Push
and pull motivation factors: A panacea for tourism development challenges in
Oluminrin waterfalls, Nigeria, Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and
Events 14 (1) (2022) 63–74.
[49] X. He, J.M. Luo, Relationship among travel motivation, satisfaction and revisit
intention of skiers: A case study on the tourists of urumqi silk road ski resort,
Administrative Sciences 10 (3) (2020) 56.
[50] D. Lu, Understanding the relationship between tourist motives and intention to
stay at an eco–resort, Wagenigen Library, 2017.
[51] H.S. Chen, The study of the relationship among environmental cognition,
attitude, sensitivity, and behavior: The case of an eco-resort island, International
Journal of Safety and Security Engineering 5 (4) (2015) 352–358.
[52] R.S.S.W. Arachchi, M.S. Yajid, A. Khatibi, Eco-Tourism Practices in Sri Lankan
Eco Resorts: An Analysis of Satisfaction and Behavioral Intention of Eco-Tourists,
International Journal of Business and Social Science 6 (10) (2015) 211–226.
[53] M. Ma, S. Pratt, A. Trupp, Determining eco-tourism satisfaction attributes–a case
study of an ecolodge in Fiji, Journal of Ecotourism 19 (4) (2020) 304–326.
[54] A.S. Shimul, A.R. Faroque, K. Teah, S.M.F. Azim, M. Teah, Enhancing consumers’
intention to stay in an eco-resort via climate change anxiety and connectedness to
nature, Journal of Cleaner Production 442 (2024) 141096.
[55] G.P. Moli, Community based eco cultural heritage tourism for sustainable
development in the Asian Region: a conceptual framework, International Journal
of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD) 2 (2) (2011) 66–80.
[56] M.G. Salimon, O. Kareem, S.S.M. Mokhtar, R.Z.B. Yusoff, A.H. Gorondutse,
Tourism intention: the empirical investigations of pull, push and perceived
security factors in Nigeria, Geo Journal of Tourism and Geosites 25 (2) (2019)
358–374.
[57] M. Hanjayani, N.M. Siahaan, Hatinggian Eco-Park Hotel Resort (ecological
architecture), International Journal of Architecture and Urbanism (4) (2020) 3.
[58] L.M. Grifth, Local but Not Traditional: Farm-to-Table Dining at a Belizean Resort
(2020).
[59] A.D. Cengizci, G. Bas¸ er, S. Karasakal, Exploring push and pull motivations of
Russian tourists to Turkey, Tourism Review International 24 (2) (2020) 127–141.
[60] A. Correia, M. Kozak, J. Ferradeira, From tourist motivations to tourist
satisfaction, International journal of culture, tourism and hospitality research 7
(4) (2013) 411–424.
[61] N. Salsabila, Y. Alversia, Examining push-pull motivation and travel intention for
potential travelers in Indonesia using theory of planned behaviour, in:
Proceedings of Tourism Development Centre International Conference, 2020,
pp. 38–48.
[62] G. Prayag, S. Hosany, When Middle East meets West: Understanding the motives
and perceptions of young tourists from United Arab Emirates, Tourism
Management 40 (2014) 35–45.
[63] D.N. Su, L.W. Johnson, B. O’Mahony, Analysis of push and pull factors in food
travel motivation, Current Issues in Tourism 23 (5) (2020) 572–586.
[64] A.T. Tun, S. Sungkatavat, Push and Pull Factors Inuencing Western Travelers to
Inle Lake, Copyright Notice, Myanmar, 2024, p. 408.
[65] U. Jamrozy, Sustainable tourism development: ingenuity in marketing strategy, .
WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment (2008) 115.
[66] L. Teh, A.S. Cabanban, Planning for sustainable tourism in southern Pulau Banggi:
An assessment of biophysical conditions and their implications for future tourism
development, Journal of environmental management 85 (4) (2007) 999–1008.
[67] Olorunsola, V. O. (2020). Green Practices: The Experiences of Guests in EcoCentric
Hotels in the UK (Master’s thesis, Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU)-Do˘
gu
Akdeniz Üniversitesi (DAÜ)).
[68] F. Raq, S.K. Chishty, M. Adil, Explanatory or dispositional optimism: which trait
predicts eco-friendly tourist behavior? Sustainability 14 (5) (2022) 2994.
[69] C. Widjaja, B. Deliyanto, A.I. Widyani, Eco Resort of Meridian Adventure Marina
Club & Resort Hotel in Waisai, Raja Ampat, in: International Conference on
Economics, Business, Social, and Humanities (ICEBSH 2021), Atlantis Press,
2021, pp. 1359–1364.
[70] M. Abdullah, J. Syed, T. Koburtay, A structure and agency perspective of
sustainable tourism, Current Issues in Tourism (2024) 1–18.
[71] F. Higgins-Desbiolles, Sustainable tourism: Sustaining tourism or something
more? Tourism management perspectives 25 (2018) 157–160.
[72] Burton-Tairu, Z. O. (2020). Eco-tourism potential in a developing nation–An
integrated assessment of prospects for a sustainable eco-tourism industry in
Papua New Guinea.
[73] Y. Liu, Impact of push and pull motivations on outbound tourists’ intentions to
visit sustainable tourism destinations, Doctoral dissertation, Vilniaus
universitetas, 2019.
[74] I. Paul, G. Roy, How do personal values drive tourist engagement in eco-tourism:
analysis with SEM-ANN approach, Journal of Ecotourism 23 (3) (2024) 454–479.
[75] M.F.M. Yusof, L.M. Kamarudin, A.K. Patwary, A.E. Mohamed, Measuring revisit
intention of domestic tourists in Langkawi UNESCO Global Geopark, Malaysia: a
road to sustainable tourism, Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism
12 (4) (2021) 1052–1063.
[76] D. Dean, D. Suhartanto, The formation of visitor behavioral intention to creative
tourism: the role of push–Pull motivation, Asia Pacic Journal of Tourism
Research 24 (5) (2019) 393–403.
[77] J.M. L´
opez-Sanz, A. Penelas-Leguía, P. Guti´
errez-Rodríguez, P. Cuesta-Vali˜
no,
Rural tourism and the sustainable development goals. A study of the variables
that most inuence the behavior of the tourist, Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021)
722973.
[78] F. Yang, R. Ayavoo, N. Ab Aziz, Exploring Students’ Push and Pull Motivations to
Visit Rural Educational Tourism Sites in China, Sustainability 15 (20) (2023)
14739.
[79] I.A. Elshaer, A.M. Azazz, S. Fayyad, Residents’ Environmentally Responsible
Behavior and Tourists’ Sustainable Use of Cultural Heritage: Mediation of
Destination Identication and Self-Congruity as a Moderator, Heritage 7 (3)
(2024) 1174–1187.
[80] Y. Yao, R. Zheng, M. Parmak, Why would you choose yachting tourism? Exploring
the push-pull motivations and constraints in China, International Journal of
Sports Marketing and Sponsorship 25 (5) (2024) 1240–1263.
[81] S.T. Liu, Urban tourist proles during the pandemic in Taiwan: A multigroup
analysis, Heliyon 9 (3) (2023).
[82] B. Palacios-Florencio, L. Santos-Rold´
an, J.M. Berbel-Pineda, A.M. Castillo-
Canalejo, Sustainable Tourism as a Driving force of the Tourism Industry in a
Post-COVID-19 Scenario, Social indicators research 158 (3) (2021) 991–1011.
[83] V. Raj Sharma, S. Kumar Sanu, K. Verma, S. Rajput, Dimensions of Sustainable
Tourism Management: a Case Study of Alwar City, Rajasthan, India, Geo Journal
of Tourism and Geosites 41 (2) (2022) 335–342.
[84] M. Ma-Stephens, M. Kuilamu, A. Trupp, Evidence from an eco-resort and a
marine park, Routledge Handbook on Tourism and Small Island States in the
Pacic, 2022, p. 232.
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
15
[85] J. Lowe, J.F.C. Tejada, M.G. Meekan, Linking livelihoods to improved
biodiversity conservation through sustainable integrated coastal management
and community based dive tourism: Oslob Whale Sharks, 108, Marine Policy,
2019 103630.
[86] C.J. Whitman, G. Armijo, L.N. Schiappacasse, Methodology for informed design
of sustainable tourism accommodation in Chile’s 9th Region the Gateway to
Patagonia, Energy Procedia 78 (2015) 267–272.
[87] S. Khan, R. Nambiar, S.P. Kumar, Sustainability Certications for Tourism, Travel
and Hospitality (TTH) and the Indian industry response, International Journal of
Engineering Technology and Management Sciences 7 (1) (2023) 390–410.
[88] M. Sarstedt, C.M. Ringle, J.H. Cheah, H. Ting, O.I. Moisescu, L. Radomir,
Structural model robustness checks in PLS-SEM, Tourism Economics 26 (4)
(2020) 531–554.
[89] J.F. Hair Jr, M.C. Howard, C. Nitzl, Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-
SEM using conrmatory composite analysis, Journal of business research 109
(2020) 101–110.
[90] J. Costa, L.O.M. Honorina, A study of tourist’s motivation, intention and
willingness to pay premium for eco-tourism, Turizam 27 (2) (2023) 136–147.
[91] J. Qian, X. Li, Perceived Value, Place Identity, and Behavioral Intention: An
Investigation on the Inuence Mechanism of Sustainable Development in Rural
Tourism, Sustainability 16 (4) (2024) 1583.
[92] X. Rao, H. Qiu, A.M. Morrison, W. Wei, X. Zhang, Predicting private and public
pro-Environmental behaviors in rural tourism contexts using SEM and fsQCA: The
role of destination image and relationship quality, Land 11 (3) (2022) 448.
[93] I. Giannoukou, E. Fafouti, C. Halkiopoulos, Behavior analysis of glamping as a
novel tourism marketing trend, in: International Conference of the International
Association of Cultural and Digital Tourism, Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland,
2022, pp. 537–562.
[94] Giao, H. N. K., Vuong, B. N., Phuong, N. N. D., & Dat, N. T. (2021). A model of
factors affecting domestic tourist satisfaction on eco-tourism service quality in the
Mekong Delta, Vietnam.
[95] J. Said, M. Maryono, Motivation and perception of tourists as push and pull
factors to visit national park, in: E3S Web of Conferences 31, EDP Sciences, 2018
08022.
[96] A.H. Viljoen, M. Saayman, M. Kruger, Satisfying visitors’ needs: What to resort to,
South African Journal of Business Management 50 (1) (2019) 1–12.
[97] Z. Sharinia, Spatial Analysis of the Indicators of Rural Eco-resorts (Case Study:
Sari County, Iran), Journal of Research and Rural Planning 9 (4) (2020) 41–57.
[98] L.S. Faerber, J. Hofmann, D. Ahrholdt, O. Schnittka, When are visitors actually
satised at visitor attractions? What we know from more than 30 years of
research, Tourism Management 84 (2021) 104284.
[99] S.N. Abeyratne, R.S.S.W. Arachchi, Eco-tourism or green washing? A study on the
link between green practices and behavioral intention of eco tourists, Future of
tourism in Asia (2021) 51–63.
[100] S. Obradovi´
c, V. Stojanovi´
c, Measuring residents’ attitude toward sustainable
tourism development: a case study of the Gradac River gorge, Valjevo (Serbia),
Tourism Recreation Research 47 (5-6) (2022) 499–511.
[101] M. Azhar, S. Nafees, Sujood, S. Hamid, Understanding post-pandemic travel
intention toward rural destinations by expanding the theory of planned behavior
(TPB), Future Business Journal 9 (1) (2023) 36.
[102] M.N.U. Nabi, S.M. Khan, S.M. Misbauddin, K. Fatema, Why is India a popular
destination for Bangladeshi medical tourists? A study based on perceived justice
by Bangladeshi patients, International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare
Marketing 17 (3) (2023) 265–287.
[103] F. Faul, E. Erdfelder, A.G. Lang, A. Buchner, G* Power 3: A exible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences,
Behavior research methods 39 (2) (2007) 175–191.
[104] F.G. D¨
onmez, M. Gürlek, O.M. Karatepe, Does work-family conict mediate the
effect of psychological resilience on tour guides’ happiness? International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management 36 (9) (2024) 2932–2954.
[105] M.A. Memon, H. Ting, J.H. Cheah, R. Thurasamy, F. Chuah, T.H. Cham, Sample
size for survey research: Review and recommendations, Journal of Applied
Structural Equation Modeling 4 (2) (2020) 1–20.
[106] J. Bokrantz, et al., Smart Maintenance: Instrument Development, content
validation and an empirical pilot’, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management 40 (4) (2020) 481–506.
[107] M. Hossain, R. Al Aziz, C.L. Karmaker, B. Debnath, A.M. Bari, A.R.M.T. Islam,
Exploring the Barriers to Implement Industrial Symbiosis in the Apparel
Manufacturing Industry: Implications for Sustainable Development, Heliyon 10
(13) (2024) e34156.
[108] E. Pramudita, H. Achmadi, H. Nurhaida, Determinants of behavioral intention
toward telemedicine services among Indonesian Gen-Z and Millenials: a PLS–SEM
study on Alodokter application, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 12
(1) (2023) 68.
[109] S.R. Tushar, M.S.A. Imtiazh, R.B. Noor, M.F.B. Alam, A.M. Bari, A.R.M.T. Islam,
M.M. Kabir, An Intuitionistic fuzzy approach to modeling the drivers to promote
Energy-Efcient textile Manufacturing: Implications for sustainable development,
Journal of King Saud University-Science 36 (6) (2024) 103214.
[110] R. Srinivasan, C.P. Lohith, Strategic marketing and innovation for Indian MSMEs,
Springer Singapore, 2017, pp. 69–92.
[111] W.W. Chin, How to write up and report PLS analyses. Handbook of partial least
squares: Concepts, methods and applications, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin
Heidelberg, 2009, pp. 655–690.
[112] S. Tehseen, T. Ramayah, S. Sajilan, Testing and controlling for common method
variance: A review of available methods, Journal of management sciences 4 (2)
(2017) 142–168.
[113] P.M. Podsakoff, S.B. MacKenzie, N.P. Podsakoff, Sources of method bias in social
science research and recommendations on how to control it, Annual Review of
Psychology 63 (1) (2012) 539–569.
[114] M. Jakobsen, R. Jensen, Common method bias in public management studies,
International public management journal 18 (1) (2015) 3–30.
[115] C.M. Fuller, et al., Common methods variance detection in Business Research,
Journal of Business Research 69 (8) (2016) 3192–3198.
[116] F. Kock, A. Berbekova, A.G. Assaf, Understanding and managing the threat of
common method bias: Detection, prevention and control, Tourism Management
86 (2021) 104330.
[117] M.F. Islam, M.M. Moz Uddin, M.M. Rahman, Factors affecting retailer social
responsibility: a PLS-SEM approach in the context of Bangladesh, Social
Responsibility Journal 20 (3) (2024) 605–625.
[118] M.I. Aguirre-Urreta, J. Hu, Detecting common method bias: Performance of the
Harman’s single-factor test, ACM SIGMIS database: the DATABASE for Advances
in Information Systems 50 (2) (2019) 45–70.
[119] J.F. Hair, M. Sarstedt, T.M. Pieper, C.M. Ringle, The use of partial least squares
structural equation modeling in strategic management research: a review of past
practices and recommendations for future applications, Long range planning 45
(5-6) (2012) 320–340.
[120] W.W. Chin, The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling,
Modern methods for business research 295 (2) (1998) 295–336.
[121] M. Sarstedt, J.F. Hair, C.M. Ringle, K.O. Thiele, S.P. Gudergan, Estimation issues
with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies!, Journal of business research 69 (10)
(2016) 3998–4010.
[122] J.F. Hair Jr, G.T.M. Hult, C. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, A primer on partial least squares
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage Publications, 2017.
[123] M.R. Ab Hamid, W. Sami, M.M Sidek, Discriminant validity assessment: Use of
Fornell & Larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion, in: Journal of physics:
Conference series 890, IOP Publishing, 2017 012163.
[124] R.T. Cenfetelli, G. Bassellier, Interpretation of formative measurement in
information systems research, MIS quarterly (2009) 689–707.
[125] R.S.S.W. Arachchi, The Effect of Green Practices on Tourists’ Behavioral
Intention: A Study of Hoteliers in Central Province of Sri Lanka, Peradeniya
Management Review 1 (2) (2019).
[126] A.F. Hayes, Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new
millennium, Communication monographs 76 (4) (2009) 408–420.
[127] J.E. Mathieu, S.R. Taylor, Clarifying conditions and decision points for
mediational type inferences in organizational behavior, Journal of Organizational
Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and
Organizational Psychology and Behavior 27 (8) (2006) 1031–1056.
[128] R.P. Bagozzi, Y. Yi, L.W. Phillips, Assessing construct validity in organizational
research, Administrative science quarterly (1991) 421–458.
[129] G. Shmueli, M. Sarstedt, J.F. Hair, J.H. Cheah, H. Ting, S. Vaithilingam, C.
M. Ringle, Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using
PLSpredict, European journal of marketing 53 (11) (2019) 2322–2347.
[130] P. Ebbes, D. Papies, H.J. van Heerde, Dealing with endogeneity: A nontechnical
guide for marketing researchers. Handbook of market research, Springer
International Publishing, Cham, 2021, pp. 181–217.
[131] S. Park, S. Gupta, Handling endogenous regressors by joint estimation using
copulas, Marketing Science 31 (4) (2012) 567–586.
[132] G.T.M. Hult, J.F. Hair Jr, D. Proksch, M. Sarstedt, A. Pinkwart, C.M. Ringle,
Addressing endogeneity in international marketing applications of partial least
squares structural equation modeling, Journal of International Marketing 26 (3)
(2018) 1–21.
[133] J. Kim Lian Chan, T. Baum, Motivation factors of eco-tourists in Ecolodge
accommodation: The push and pull factors, Asia Pacic Journal of Tourism
Research 12 (4) (2007) 349–364.
[134] S. Yiamjanya, K. Wongleedee, International tourists’ travel motivation by push-
pull factors and the decision making for selecting Thailand as destination choice,
International Journal of Social, Education, Economics and Management
Engineering 8 (5) (2014) 1326–1331.
[135] M. Uysal, X. Li, E. Sirakaya-Turk, Push–pull dynamics in travel decisions.
Handbook of hospitality marketing management, Routledge, 2009, pp. 412–439.
[136] O. Sushchenko, O. Prokopishyna, N. Kozubova, Eco-friendly behavior of local
population, tourists and companies as a factor of sustainable tourism
development, International Journal of Engineering & Technology 7 (4.3) (2018)
514.
[137] M.R.H.K. Rakib, S.A.K. Pramanik, A. Hassan, Consumer Behavior in the Tourism
Industry of Bangladesh, Tourism Products and Services in Bangladesh: Concept
Analysis and Development Suggestions (2021) 289–310.
[138] M.K. Hossain, S. Islam, An analysis of destination attributes to enhance tourism
competitiveness in Bangladesh, African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and
Leisure 8 (2) (2019) 1–17.
[139] M.A. Rahaman, A. Kalam, M. Al-Mamun, Unplanned urbanization and health
risks of Dhaka City in Bangladesh: uncovering the associations between urban
environment and public health, Frontiers in Public Health 11 (2023) 1269362.
[140] T.H. Lee, F.H. Jan, J.T. Liu, Developing an indicator framework for assessing
sustainable tourism: Evidence from a Taiwan ecological resort, Ecological
indicators 125 (2021) 107596.
[141] C. Chandran, P. Bhattacharya, Development and implementation of sustainability
criteria and indicators for eco-lodges and resorts in ecotourism destinations: Case
studies from India, Turizam 26 (3) (2022) 161–175.
B. Sukrana et al.
Sustainable Futures 9 (2025) 100619
16
