Preprint
Article
Regional Tourism Ecosystem as a Tool for Sustainable Development during the Economic Crisis
Altmetrics
Downloads
139
Views
31
Comments
0
A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.
This version is not peer-reviewed
Submitted:
29 September 2023
Posted:
30 September 2023
You are already at the latest version
Alerts
Abstract
In order to ensure sustainable tourism development, it is currently becoming crucial to look into promotion of popular tourist destinations in Russia. This is due to a number of factors, including the acceptance of the credibility and importance of the concept of sustainable tourism, as well as the awareness of the necessity of taking into account a wide range of short- and long-term effects, external factors, and interdisciplinary aspects of the development of the Russian tourism industry. In the context of a local tourist destination during the economic crisis, the study aims to highlight some of the key economic elements of sustainable tourism.
The decision to adopt a regional perspective is necessitated by the fact that many of the most crucial elements for the long-term sustainable development of the tourist complex are established at this level, including decision-making by businesses and authorities that are economically viable. The research focuses on the economic aspects to be considered while designing an overall strategy for the long-term development of regional tourist destinations in Russia. The authors define sustainable tourism from the viewpoint of economics. This understanding extends beyond the relatively limited framework of environmental and socioeconomic consequences of tourism development, affecting some less obvious economic aspects of a regional destination that directly relate to sustainable development.
Keywords:
Subject: Business, Economics and Management - Business and Management
1. Introduction.
Despite its high practical
importance and academic productivity, sustainable tourism has been understudied
in Russia. The environmental aspects of sustainable tourism and sustainable
development have sufficient coverage in the mainstream of domestic science.
However, there has not been enough conceptual and applied research carried out
on the social and economic elements of sustainable tourism. Few publications
addressing specific elements and facets of sustainable tourism, or sustainable
development of the area based on the evolution of the tourist complex, have
only recently been published. The national academic community has recently
developed a thorough understanding of what tourist sustainability implies. The ability
of a system i.e., a tourist complex, a destination, or even a tourist object,
to withstand adverse loads, negative impacts, and even shocks, to return to an
equilibrium, to evolve on the basis of the most productive principles, to be
viable, and to avoid excessive risks and conflicts is what is meant by
sustainability, which is often understood as stability, or as some sort of
equilibrium.
In the context of this study,
sustainable tourism and its economic components are understood broadly. The
notion encompasses not only the ideal balance between the economic impact of
tourism development and the level of environmental degradation within a narrow
approach (for example, in accordance with the weak and strong principles of
sustainable development based on the maximum flow of total income by
Hicks-Lindahl). In our understanding the notion involves establishment of a
substantial foundation for a balanced long-term development of the tourist
complex, taking into account not only environmental, but also a wide range of
socio-economic externalities, including investment, public finance, sectoral
and intersectoral organisations.
The complexity and diversity of
such a statement is complemented by the fact that the measurability, evaluation
and operationalisation of economic effects are not high enough. Therefore, in
most cases, we merely need to discuss better options that are presumably the
most appropriate from the perspective of the average long-term interests of all
parties in the destination. We claim that a different, narrower approach to
sustainable tourism's economic issues, with its higher degree of certainty and
easier-to-understand coverage of issues (which typically include concerns with
balancing the budget, attracting investment, providing employment, increasing
value added and gross regional product, as well as assessing environmental
damage), does not adequately reveal all of the industry's economic issues.
Sustainable development is a
deliberately supported development, which is why the role of management,
self–government and self-organisation is increasing. The government's
regulatory functions should be activated by defining development parameters and
ensuring that they are being complied with [1].
A regulated systemic change of society, the economy, and the state, which
results in a transition to a higher level of development, is the primary
strategy for achieving a transition to sustainable development. The Russian
Federation's systemic transformation of tourism should enable the quick growth
of domestic tourism based on its own natural and cultural resources, as well as
official support for entrepreneurship and innovation in the tourism industry.
Experience on a national and
worldwide scale demonstrates that tourist and recreational clusters help to
create a unique environment for innovation and raise the investment
attractiveness of the regions that are actively promoting tourism. The construction
of a tourist and recreational complex is a top priority for the government
since it will contribute to the sustainable development of both domestic and
international travel, boost Russian tourism's competitiveness abroad, and raise
the standard of tourist products. The process of developing and implementing
tourism projects in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation involves
addressing infrastructural issues and the development of a communication
network between businesses engaged in tourism and recreation, local government,
the general public, and the academic community[1].
At present, researchers describe
sustainable development as the interaction and coherence of economic, social,
environmental, institutional, and innovation-technological elements to maximise
human well-being without interfering with future generations to satisfy their
needs. The cross-cutting nature of sustainable development, which manifests
itself in every area of human activity, is an important strategy for the progress
of contemporary civilization.
The implementation of criteria and
principles of sustainable development, which specify the requirements of
harmonious relationship of all subjects of the tourism business with the
environment, prioritises tourism as an integrated system covering all facets of
life and a wide range of adjacent economic activities to meet the needs of
tourists. Sustainable tourism should be viewed as an approach to resource
management that balances meeting economic, social, and aesthetic needs while
protecting cultural identity, fundamental ecological processes, biodiversity,
and life support systems.
Therefore, the paper emphasises a
number of crucial factors of the sustainability of the region's development
from the viewpoint of tourism. Yet, however, from the viewpoint of sustainable
development, the aforementioned factors are insufficient for a genuinely
comprehensive coverage. In the context of sustainable tourism development, the
following elements should also be considered: investment mechanisms, funding,
tax incentives, import-related issues, leaks, injections, and the multiplier
effect of the tourism industry, extension of the tourist season, mitigation of
“bubbles” in the market of real assets, and production factors emerging as a
result of successful development of the destination, risk management, staff
training, and well-coordinated interaction between the industry and
education.
Since it is a component of the
regulatory matrix governing economic contacts, the institution, as it is known,
progressively and methodologically shapes the nature of these relationships
and, inevitably, has an impact on their efficacy [4].
It may also be questioned as to why sustainable tourism and its economic
components are being discussed rather than an efficient institutional framework
for tourism. This is due to the fact that institutional theories are more
focused on the regulation and development of standards and institutions, while
the concept of sustainable development in tourism, or so called sustainable
tourism entails taking into account the organisational and economic mechanisms
of the sector as well as the actions of all destination stakeholders, including
their unique choices, views, and strategies, in addition to the development of
an ideal regulatory framework on which institutional strategy is centred.
Firstly, tourism, as is known, is
an industry with a high multiplier effect. Because both positive and negative
effects of tourism development are simultaneously "scaled" to the
entire economy, the long-term and sustainable development of a number of
Russian regions depends on the naturalness, balance, and long-term economic
viability of the development of their tourist complexes. Secondly, the regional
tourist complexes themselves are still in the process of establishment and new
factors of their development are constantly emerging. For instance, the
process of converting nature reserves into national parks is currently
underway, with subsequent environmental, financial, tax, marketing, investment,
and other consequences.
One of the responsibilities is
bringing the need for comprehensive consideration of the economic elements of
sustainable tourism to the attention of researchers as well as regional
authorities. When it comes to national literature, economic programmes, some of
the relatively important aspects are only sometimes and insufficiently taken
into account. [5].
It could be helpful to structure
the economic elements of sustainable tourism in the two broad categories
suggested in the article. The first of these components includes financial,
credit, and investment elements that serve as the fundamental motivators and
incentives for economic players in the travel and hospitality sectors. The
second component contains elements that contribute to the industry's
development of a strong and synergistic structure as well as its ideal
connection with related and supporting industries as well as with the outside
world.
2. Literature review
It is important to highlight a
number of Russian publications that discuss the issues related to the financial
context of sustainable tourist development. For example, L. V. Larchenko and D.
T. Abokhadze consider tourism as a factor of sustainable development and
diversification of the economy in the Russian North, taking into account the
international experience of sustainable tourism strategies. The effort of E.N.
Bogdanova to conceptualise the sustainable development of tourism in the
Russian regions with a partial disclosure of the economic issues is
particularly noteworthy.
We assume that V. A. Uvarov and E.
O. Kiriyenko were successful in formulating the fundamental ideas for the
development of regional tourism in the context of establishing a strong
organisational and financial framework for the sector. But the problem is that
the coverage of the problems of sustainable tourism in the economic context in
Russia is scarcely presented elsewhere in other studies. This is demonstrated
by a recent in-depth research of tourist destinations as a factor in the
sustainable development of the regional economy conducted by O. V. Saidasheva,
who formulates the problem in the economic context: "With an increase in
the number of tourists the region's economic stability is expanding with
investments in permanent assets, and increase in revenue from the sanatorium
recreation service"[2]. The author
emphasises the significance of infrastructural elements, cluster approaches,
strategic territorial marketing, diversification of tourism goods, and
infrastructure of industry intermediaries.
W. D. Ruckelhaus defines
sustainable development as an emerging doctrine stating that economic growth
and development should take place within a strict framework established by the
natural needs of the environment in the broadest sense, during the interaction
between men and the byproducts of their actions, the biosphere and the laws of
nature governing it. According to this doctrine, environmental protection and
economic development are complementary, and by no means antagonistic processes.
According to V.A. Koptiug, the
idea of sustainable development involves achieving an equitable balance between
human socio-economic advancement and environmental preservation, as well as a
significant reduction of the economic gap between developed and developing
nations through technological advancement and consumption rationalisation. N.N.
Moiseev asserts that the term "sustainable development" refers to the
formulation and implementation of a society's strategy for achieving balance.
The future of humanity can be guaranteed only in conditions of a more or less
stable circulation of matter (stable biochemical cycles). Cycle stability is
the inevitable condition for the biosphere's balance. According to A.D. Ursula,
it is reasonable to think of sustainable equilibrium as the continuation of
civilization and the development of the nation within the context of
environment protection, particularly the biosphere. The model of public-private
organisation in the tourism industry, according to M.N. Dmitriev [4], has nine key qualities. Given that the author
highlights a number of significant factors, these qualities appear to be very
helpful in the context of building a strategy for the development of a
destination based on the principles of sustainability.
T.A. Rassokhina defined
sustainable tourism development as "long-term tourism development, in
which a balance is achieved in the implementation of economic, environmental,
social, and cultural development goals, and the interests of all stakeholders (tourists,
hosting and forwarding destinations, local population) are taken into
consideration on the basis of rational management of tourist resources and
comprehensive partnerships." According to an analysis of the
aforementioned definitions of sustainable development, socioeconomic and
environmental sustainability in the present and the future are important
considerations for researchers.
3. Materials and methods.
The article employs a variety of
specific methods to obtain the research result. Analysing expert views using
the Delphi method is a common way to carry out the process of weighting
indicators. This method is applied when conducting quantitative analyses of how
tourism and recreational resources are implemented. In order to go from a set
of initial indicators to a single one, a technique for merging them must be
carried out in order to establish evaluation classes made up of a set of
indicators. This single indicator usually ranges from the "bad"
condition at the smallest value to the "good" condition at the
greatest value. Integral estimates for various categories that are acquired in
certain units allow for further procedures to be carried out thus obtaining
more complicated indicators. In order to create a comprehensive indicator of
the tourism and recreational potential of the regions, the aggregate
evaluations of natural, cultural, and historical potentials, as well as
socioeconomic situation, can be considered. It is feasible to turn to an expert
survey (such as a survey of top tour operators) in situations when it is
objectively difficult to gather statistical data when analysing the current
state of tourism in addition to an optimised set of statistical indicators.
The evaluation of the area's
tourism and recreational potential is broken down into numerous steps.
Initially we defined the object of evaluation, and then we focused on the
subject of evaluation. In addition, the evaluation criteria (factors and
circumstances) of the object have been established, which are crucial in
determining the object's value keeping in mind the purpose of evaluation. The
list of criteria is often determined by expert opinion. Groups of indications
that define the territory's unique potential make up the evaluation criteria.
The evaluation parameters are then established, which are indicators
representing the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the larger
groups.
Rankings, which are a holistic
evaluation of a set of indicators and criteria, are being employed to analyse
geographical difference in regional tourist development. The degree of tourist
development in various regions of Russia may be comprehensively evaluated by
correlating the evaluation findings, which have undergone mathematical and
statistical processing, with expert surveys.
Separate evaluations are then
aggregated and converted into a single integral index at the final stage [9]. A set of criteria that either activate or
restrict the increase in the number of tourist and leisure activities make up
each block of parameter indicators. Various mathematical classification methods
are used to evaluate different quantitative indicators, to get the final
integral indicator, and, as a consequence, to build a ranking. The term
"classification" refers to the division of the items under study into
aggregates (or "classes") that differ primarily in their quantitative
features and in their qualitative features, while, generally speaking,
reflecting the dynamics of the evolution of the objects or their hierarchical
order.
Further, static and expert-based
correlations of the rankings collected are conducted. If the positions
coincide, it is assumed that the statistical analysis was accurate. In case of
discrepancies, the results of statistical analysis require additional
consideration. By analysing the aforementioned calculation techniques, we
determine which integral assessment of tourist and recreational potential for a
wide range of assessed components affecting the tourism sector, using
increasing coefficients for certain components designated by experts as having
more weight in the study, is the most effective comprehensive, and reliable.
Studying the local ecosystems and
natural resources is part of the study's initial stage. The examination of
historical and cultural resources is the second stage. Studying the
socioeconomic resources of the areas is the focus of the third stage. The
fourth stage entails judging the skill level of local tourism offices.
The practise of regional tourism
development attests to the key role that administrative authorities play in
establishing the parameters for sustainable tourism development, which must be
included in a thorough evaluation of the potential for tourism and recreation.
The development of a methodology and a ranking system for areas based on an
examination of the principles of sustainable tourism development is a crucial
stage in research [13].
The method entails several
successive steps:
1) selection of mechanisms for
sustainable tourism development and determination of their weight values based
on independent expert evaluations using the Delphi method;
2) identification of quantitative
and qualitative indicators describing the selected strategies for the
development of sustainable tourism in the region.
3) calculation of indicators
characterising the mechanisms of sustainable tourism development for each
region (Figure 1)
Mechanism of public-private
partnership 40%
Regional tourism development
programmes 5%
Investments in tourism 35%
Preferences for small businesses,
mid-market and large enterprises 20%
4) computation of integral
indicators describing the regional tourist industry's development processes. On
the basis of information already acquired, the integral indicator is computed.
5) the following rule governs the
ranking of regions based on the values of integral indicators: the higher the
value of the integral indicator, the higher the position of the region in the
rating.
For an overall evaluation of the
sustainable development of tourism in the regions, it is necessary to not only
conduct a thorough assessment of the tourism and recreational potential while
taking into account the expertise of regional tourism agencies, but also to
establish the level of sustainable tourism development based on the analysis of
the identified mechanisms and presented in the form of a ranking. A matrix
analysis is suggested as a basis for such an evaluation, allowing comparison of
the diverse tourist and recreational potential of areas and ranking of regions
according to the degree of sustainable tourism
development.
Figure 2.
The scheme of interaction of the integrated tourism and recreational. potential and the level of sustainable tourism development to determine the scenarios of opportunities for sustainable tourism development in the region.
Figure 2.
The scheme of interaction of the integrated tourism and recreational. potential and the level of sustainable tourism development to determine the scenarios of opportunities for sustainable tourism development in the region.
4. Research outcomes
4.1. Rationale and classification of techniques for developing sustainable tourism in various Russian regions
Strategic sustainability is
crucial for the region's diverse and harmonious development. It is important to
guarantee that sustainable development processes may be used in a variety of
internal and external economic, social, and geopolitical contexts. The primary
economic activity types that underpin the region's diversification are those
that have the greatest synergistic impact and encourage the development of a
large number of related businesses.
The number of strategies that help
increase the multiplier impact of sustainable tourism development include the
following:
- -
- attractive tourist image of the territory;
- -
- effective marketing strategy;
- -
- availability of highly attractive, affordable and environmentally friendly tourist resources;
- -
- well-developed tourist infrastructure;
- -
- reasonable pricing policy;
- -
- high level of security in tourist accommodations;
- -
- effective support of tourism on behalf of legislative and executive authorities at all levels;
- -
- availability of highly qualified personnel, etc.
Thus, a set of actions designed to
improve the socio-economic and environmental well-being of the region include
the processes of sustainable tourism development.
The processes that enable the
sustainable tourism development have been classified into three categories
based on global experience: economic, social, and environmental. Each mechanism
from one of the chosen categories is given a particular percentage. The
mechanism's weights added together equal 100%. In turn, each type receives a
specific weight, and the totality of all 3 types is 100% (Table 1). They are each given the following
particular weights in percent, depending on how important they are to the
long-term development of tourism: 40%, 5%, 20%, 25%, and 10%. These mechanisms
were evaluated based on the study of various sources against a set of
indicators.
In Russia, specific federal and
state development programmes are primarily used to build the country's tourism
infrastructure. The amount of funding for targeted programmes has significantly
decreased under the current financial and economic crisis, but the impact on
the long-term growth of tourism in the regions is now evident and contributes
to strengthening regional governments and the tourism sector. The economic
success of projects utilising the public-private partnership (PPP) mechanism
has confirmed its relevance in the context of sustainable tourism development
in regions establishing special economic zones of the tourist and recreational
type and tourist and recreational clusters. For example, special economic zones
of the tourist and recreational type "Turquoise Katun" in Altai
Territory, "Baikal Harbour" in Buryatia, and tourist and recreational
clusters "Belokuri", Sheregesh, etc. This established the
public-private partnership mechanism's maximum share (40%) in our analysis.
The cultural and historical
centres of Russia's European part are excellent examples of regions with the
resources and potential to build and grow tourism clusters. These include
Moscow, St. Petersburg, the cities making up the so called “Golden Ring of
Russia”, tourist and recreational areas on the Black Sea coast (resorts of the
Krasnodar Territory and the Republic of Crimea), Lake Baikal, and also the
territory of the regions of Western Siberia (Novosibirsk, Kemerovo, and Tomsk
regions, Altai Krai, Altai Republic).
As a result, the Vologda region's
tourist and recreation hub "Nason-Gorod" is an outstanding example of
successful public-private partnership-based development, in which the regional
government and the city administration foster the growth of small businesses
and mid-market enterprises while tackling a number of crucial social issues.
Similar to other business risks in
the economy, risks in public-private partnership initiatives may also be
evaluated and managed. These include the following: study of the variables
affecting risk level, evaluation of potential losses and effects, optimisation
of risk level, choice of strategies and techniques for risk mitigation, etc.
Both benefits and drawbacks can be associated with the establishment of
public-private partnerships, which help to create the conditions for mutually
beneficial cooperation between the government and private businesses. (Table 2).
Table 2.
Advantages and disadvantages of public-private partnership.
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Competitive selection procedures for private companies | Complicated implementation procedure |
| Increasing business transparency | High transaction costs |
| Adequate distribution of risks between the parties involved | Risks of establishing a corporate governance structure |
| Consideration of the balance of interests of all the parties involved | Insufficient experience in managinginfrastructure facilities |
| The use of effective and innovative approaches of the private sector in state property management | Ambiguous attitude of the public |
The development of public-private
partnership in the field of tourism in Russia can become an effective mechanism
for establishing constructive interaction between public authorities and
business representatives. The implementation of public-private partnership
projects results in the creation of favourable conditions for the growth of
entrepreneurship in the sphere of tourism, resort, and leisure, as well as
hotel, industries. It also enhances the existing tourism legislation and
encourages the adoption of efficient regulatory legal acts aimed at the
development of the country's tourist complex.
4.2. Ranking of Russian regions by the level of sustainable tourism development
A grading system was established
based on the chosen methods to determine the level of sustainable tourism
development in various regions of Russia. The concept is built on the primary
mechanisms of sustainable tourism development, depending on their
weight and importance (Section 3.1).
Several stages are involved in the
ranking process:
Stage 1. Selection of management
mechanisms that define the level of the region's sustainable tourism
development and calculation of their weighted averages based on independent
expert evaluations by top tourism experts;
Stage 2. identifying the metrics
that best describe the growth of sustainable tourism.
Each of the described processes
had quantitative or qualitative markers. The following criteria were used to
evaluate them in the economic component: the availability of PPPs; scope,
duration, and funding amounts of regional tourism development programmes in relation
to regional budgets; the availability of preferential taxes and subsidies for
tourism development; and the amount of investments in the service sector in
comparison to total investments.
The following indicators were used
in the compilation of evaluation indices for the formation and implementation
of targeted environmental programmes:
Environmental index indicators:
1) Atmosphere, air – an indicator
that shows how polluted the air is in the regions of the Russian
Federation. Its computation is based on the ISA, i.e. the index of atmospheric
pollution, which considers both the danger class of contaminants and the volume
indicators of pollution. This indicator additionally takes into account urgent
circumstances involving pollution emissions, as well as the modernisation of
gas treatment facilities;
2) Water resources, water – an
indication of the condition of the Russian Federation's natural waterways
(including oceans, rivers, lakes, groundwater, etc.) and the level of drinking
water quality. This indicator also depicts the development and modernisation of
sewage treatment facilities, as well as the quantity and quality of wastewater
treatment released into reservoirs;
3) Land resources, soil – the
indicator of the ground shows the condition of the Russian Federation's land
resources, as well as the processes of soil degradation and reclamation,
desertification, and the application of environmentally friendly land use
technologies, among other things.;
4) Specially protected natural
areas - a measure of the number and size of these areas, as well as their
state, any recent events involving their protection, the amount of funding
available;
Indicators of the
socio-environmental index:
1) Habitat represents a
comprehensive indicator of the comfort of life for people, animals, and
plants in a given area of the Russian Federation. This indicator takes into
consideration all of the aforementioned indications collectively as well as
regional characteristics;
2) Power is an indicator of the
efficacy of the work carried out by state executive and legislative authorities
in the field of nature protection and habitat improvement in a particular
entity of the Russian Federation;
3) Civil society serves as an
indicator of the level of civic engagement in a variety of activities in a
particular entity of the Russian Federation, taking into account the number and
degree of activity of local environmental NGOs, the presence of active citizens
and associations;
4) The informational and
psychological climate is an indicator which serves as a proxy of the processes
of openness, freedom of speech and assembly on environmental issues, the independence
of regional media, and other factors, guaranteed by the Constitution of the
Russian Federation;
5) Education and culture is an
indicator showing the level of environmental education in the region, taking
into account the programmes of environmental education of the population. This
indicator also highlights examples of a high (or low) degree of environmental
culture of the local governmental authorities and the general public.
6) Housing and communal services -
This indicator is based on developments in the housing and communal services
sector. A strong indication of the poor quality of services offered, for
instance, would be the numerous accidents or repeated forced shutoffs of the
drinking water supply in a given area.
Industrial and environmental index
indicators:
1) Solid household waste is an
indicator of how much waste is produced in a certain area, how much of it is
processed or disposed of, how many illegal garbage damps there are, how well
solid waste management is being implemented, and any difficulties that have
arisen.;
2) Science and innovation is an
indicator of the country's regional environmental technology development,
experimental use of such technologies, and information exchange in the
environmental innovations sector;
3) Industrial waste is a defining
indication of the development and accumulation of industrial waste in the area,
representing industrial waste management policy and practise, including trash
accumulated over the span of time;
4) Environmental modernisation
evaluates how well new eco-friendly technologies are being integrated into
industrial processes. Technologies that adhere to strict guidelines for
appropriate environmental effect, minimise the degree to which human activity
has an influence on the environment;
5) Business responsibility is an
indicator that shows what the business climate in a particular region of the
Russian Federation is in terms of new environmental business projects being
implemented voluntarily, and how environmental damage caused by business operations,
charitable business projects is made up for.
Stage 3. Analysis of indicators
characterizing the mechanisms of sustainable tourism development for every
region.
At this point, the accessibility
of chosen mechanisms for the development of sustainable tourism for each of the
three mechanisms types was evaluated for each location. Additionally, a point
evaluation of the state of development of each chosen mechanism was carried
out. According to the assessment scale, each indication was given a score between
0 (no mechanism present) and 4 points, from which the integral regional
indicator was derived.
Stage 4. Analysis of integral
indicators characterizing the mechanisms of sustainable tourism development in
the region. For each region, integral indicators that describe the region's
level of sustainable tourist development were determined. The total of the
mechanisms within each type is also 100%, as are the weight coefficients added
together for all three kinds. Using the formula, the integral indicator was
calculated using the information from the previous stage:
where:
N1 N2 N3
I=(SK1* ∑ O1n *K1n +SK2* ∑ O2n *K2n + SK3* ∑ O3n *K3n), with:
n=1 n=2 n=3
I – integral indicator of sustainable tourism development in the region;
O1n – average assessment of economic mechanisms;
K1n – weighting coefficient of the economic mechanism;
SK1 – weighting coefficient of economic mechanisms
N1 –number of economic mechanisms;
O2n – average assessment of social mechanisms;
K2n –weighting coefficient of the social mechanism;
SK2 – weighting coefficient of the block of social mechanisms
N2 – number of social mechanisms;
O3n – average assessment of environmental mechanisms;
K3n – weighting coefficient of the environmental mechanism;
SK3 – weighting coefficient of environmental mechanisms
N3 – number of environmental mechanisms.
Stage 5. Ranking of regions. At this stage, the regions were ranked depending on the values of the integral indicators of the regions according to the following principle: the greater the value of the integral indicator, the higher the position of the region. In order to categorise areas according to their level of sustainable tourism development, a set of integral indicators was broken down into 4 categories.
The first group with a high level of sustainable tourism development included four regions of Russia: Krasnodar and Altai Territories, the Republic of Buryatia and the Yaroslavl region.
The second group with a relatively high level of sustainable tourism development included 39 regions: Moscow, St. Petersburg, the Republic of Tatarstan, the Kaluga region, Kamchatka Krai and other regions that are scattered over the country's territory and have effectively implemented sustainable tourist development strategies.
The third group with an average level of sustainable tourism development included 33 regions of the country: from the Pskov region in the west to the Magadan region in the east.
The fourth group of regions with a low level of sustainable tourism development included 7 regions (Krasnoyarsk Territory, Chelyabinsk, Kirov Regions, Komi Republic, Nenets and Chukotka Autonomous Districts, Jewish Autonomous District).
Not only must the tourism and recreational potential be thoroughly evaluated, but also the level of sustainable tourism development in the regions must be assessed based on the analysis of mechanisms, which is reflected in the generated rating, in order to make an accurate assessment of the sustainable development of tourism.
4.3. Determining the scenario of sustainable tourism opportunities in the regions of the Russian Federation
The scenario of potential for sustainable tourism development is a projection of the region's tourism growth over a certain time period documented in the programmes for development, based on the achievement of the set indicators and parameters. In Russian regions the management mechanisms often include scenarios with prospects for sustainable tourism development. Because of the current geopolitical situation, the Russian economy is geared towards promoting domestic and inbound tourism, making better use of the available resources, as well as examining and putting into practise cutting-edge, contemporary mechanisms for sustainable development.
Table 3.
Matrix for developing scenarios of prospective tourism development in the regions of Russia.
Table 3.
Matrix for developing scenarios of prospective tourism development in the regions of Russia.
| Ranking of regions of the Russian Federation depending on the level of sustainable tourism development |
Leading regions | Regions with high potential | Regions with average potential | Regions with low potential |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High level | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Relatively high level | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Average level | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Low level | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
According to the results of the research, the Republics of Buryatia, Krasnodar, and the Altai Territories are in the first group of areas that are especially favourable to the development of tourism as well as Moscow and St.Petersburg which provide a wide variety of tourism services and are steadily attracting large numbers of visitors. Fifteen regions make up the second group that are favourable for the development of the tourist industry: the Yaroslavl region, the Republic of Tatarstan, the Kaluga Region, Altai Republic, Leningrad Oblast, Moscow Oblast, Lipetsk Oblast, Sverdlovsk Oblast, the Kaliningrad Region, Perm Krai, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous District – Yugra, Rostov Oblast, Tyumen Oblast, Samara Oblast, and Irkutsk Oblast.
In the third group of regions, relatively favorable for the development of tourism, there are 27 entities, which is primarily due to the high level of administrative and legal activity of tourist and recreational management bodies.
There are 29 regions in the fourth group that are not promising for tourism development. This group includes the regions that have a sufficiently high tourist and recreational potential, but need more active involvement of the administration and representatives of the tourism industry in order to ensure more active use of the mechanisms of sustainable tourism development.
There are seven regions in the fifth group with a stagnant scenario of tourism development: the Magadan Region, the Krasnoyarsk Territory, the Komi Republic, the Jewish Autonomous Region, the Kirov Region, the Nenets and Chukotka Autonomous Districts. These regions are characterized by a fairly low level of integrated tourist and recreational potential and medium or low potential for sustainable tourism development. Figure 25 displays scenarios of potential prospects for sustainable tourism development in every region.
The Altai Territory, which was included in the first category of areas that were especially favourable for the development of tourism, may be used as a concrete example of how the system of implementing sustainable development methods can be effectively organised. The government of the Altai Territory has made the development of tourism their top priority. Public-private partnerships are being used to undertake significant investment projects in the area. For example, the "Turquoise Katun" is being developed, which has been hosting visitors since 2007. By 2023 that number has risen to more than 7 million. The only gambling zone of the Russian Federation located beyond the Urals called the "Siberian Coin" is functioning. The tourism clusters "Belokurikha" and "The Golden Gate" are developing in the framework of governmentally supported funding programmes.
More than 30 new tourist products, including the "Big Golden Ring of Altai," "Small Golden Ring of Altai," "Cossack Horseshoe of Altai," "Altai Gourmet," and "Rural Green Trail of the Altai Territory," have been developed and certified in the area between 2011 and 2022.
The Republic of Buryatia is yet another remarkable example of a regional tourism administration's efficiency. The number of tourists from the Asia-Pacific region has significantly increased, according to the statistics provided by the Republic's Tourism Administration. In this regard, it has been decided what has to be done to provide a welcoming information environment and guarantee visitor safety. Hotels in Ulan-Ude have started implementing "China Friendly" programmes to create a comfortable environment for tourists from China.
There are 10 educational institutions in the Republic of Buryatia, including 4 higher education institutions that provide training, retraining and advanced training of personnel in the field of tourism and hospitality.
Guidebooks and brochures are regularly published in the media in an effort to promote the Republic's tourism resources and attract potential investors. Participation in television programmes on tourist resources is also organised.
The Ryazan Region and the Republic of Tatarstan are included in the second category of regions that are favourable for the development of tourism. The areas stand out for having highly qualified regional tourism governments that actively employ PPP and other sustainable development approaches. The Republic of Tatarstan shows consistent positive trends in the primary indicators of the development of the tourism sector. The annual increase in the number of tourists is 14.8%.
In 2022, more than 8.5 million tourists visited Tatarstan, which is 16.3% higher than in 2021. In 2022, more over 15 billion rubles in services were generated by the tourist sector, and 24 billion rubles were generated by the tourism-related sectors.
Tatarstan pays special attention to the development of tourist destinations in the region. With the support of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the government of the republic has been working to revitalise the old city of Bolgar and the island-city of Sviyazhsk and to develop new tourist routes.
Indicators of the Ryazan region, characterising the development of tourism, demonstrate a consistent increasing trend. More than 8.5 billion rubles were invested in the tourism sector between 2010 and 2022, 1,000 jobs were created, the increase in the number of tourists is estimated to be 88%, and the number of recreation and tourism-related services increased by 60%. The Ryazan Region's involvement in the Federal Target Programme with the initiative to establish the Ryazansky tourism and recreation cluster is crucial for the achievement of these results. The cluster will invest more than 11 billion rubles overall through the end of 2023, 77% of which will come from private investors and 23% from federal and regional governments. Large infrastructure facilities, such as hotel, restaurant, and spa complexes, an all season water park, beach and park areas, outdoor recreation areas, multipurpose sports facilities, and craft studios, have been launched within the project. The Federal Target Program's financial support meant for building transport and engineering infrastructure allowed the investor to speed up the process of building the facilities and put them into practice.
The Ryazan region was one of the first to sign up for the national "Russian Manor" initiative. Several private museums have been established on cultural heritage sites, and a project of the center for folk arts and crafts has been implemented.
The market for cultural and educational tourism accounts for over 60% of total visitor demand. The main sites to see are the Ryazan Kremlin, the museum-reserve of S.A. Esenin, and the museum-estate of Academician I.P. Pavlov. The settlement of Konstantinovo, where S. A. Esenin was born, is currently being restored. The Ryazan region makes a lot of advertising efforts to promote the local tourism resources. In Ryazan, a regional tourist information office opened to the public in 2014.
Large-scale efforts to establish a network of tourist and recreational clusters at the municipal, intermunicipal, and regional levels would enable the growth of the tourism sector in Russian regions.
4.4. Conducting a sociological study aimed at identifying promising tourist destinations in Russian regions.
Let's start by taking a look at some of the findings of a survey done by the Yandex portal in June 2020 with the intention of examining Russians' demands for "Tourism and Recreation".
The first important indicator: the number of requests coming from mobile devices has increased dramatically over the past three years, from 2017 to 2020.
At the same time, Figure 3 shows the number of requests for booking individual accommodation facilities (other than hotels) has also increased.
Figure 3.
The number of requests for booking accommodation facilities. (data from Yandex research "Tourism in 2020").
Figure 3.
The number of requests for booking accommodation facilities. (data from Yandex research "Tourism in 2020").
| First quarter of 2020 | April-May 2020 | |
| Sanatoriums | 41% | 28% |
| Recreation centers | 14% | 21% |
| Apartments | 10% | 13% |
| Resort Houses | 8% | 7% |
| Hostels | 6% | 6% |
| Houses | 2% | 5% |
| Guest houses | 6% | 4% |
| Cottages | 1% | 4% |
The data presented here support the assertion that individual lodging facilities were particularly in demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that demand for individual travel in general is still on the increase.
Let us now refer to the findings of the research carried out by the National Agency for Financial Research Centre in September 2020 [2]. 1,600 participants from 53 Russian regions, aged 18 or older, participated in the study. The study's findings revealed that 61% of travellers choose their destination using online services, and 78% create a list of destinations to visit while on vacation using the internet. Notably, around 60% of respondents claimed they have a pre-made itinerary of sight-seeing visits, which they prepare using the Internet and social networks (Table 4).
The survey's findings indicate that when it comes to any tourism-related guidance, search engines Yandex and Google are the most common sources of information (Table 5).
NAFI conducted a poll in the summer of 2021 to learn more about Russians' preferences for summer vacations. Ultimately, approximately two thirds of Russians chose not to take summer vacation mostly because of the constraints brought on by the pandemic. On the other hand, those who decided to spend their holidays in the summer of 2021 intended to use in the order of priority, car, plane, and train, which means that individual tourism is preferred over other types (Table 6).
A research of the prospects of independent tourism development in the Republic of Mari El was carried out as part of the research project of the Department of Service and Tourism at Volga State University of Technology in June 2021. The poll included 102 participants. Let us examine the collected data.
The first important indicator is the age factor of those who prefer to organize their own vacation. It is clear from Figure 5 that people between the ages of 25 and 34 predominated in the poll. Along with the respondents aged between 35 and 55 years we argue that this group was mostly adapted to this kind of tourism.
Figure 4.
Distribution of respondents by age. People aged from 18 to 24 years old, 25-34 years old, 35-55 years old, above 56 years old.
Figure 4.
Distribution of respondents by age. People aged from 18 to 24 years old, 25-34 years old, 35-55 years old, above 56 years old.
Respondents definitely favoured Altai when asked to name the most popular tourist destinations within the Russian Federation; St. Petersburg, the nation's cultural centre, came in second. Given that respondents could choose more than one option, the total number of replies exceeded 100%. It's important to note that respondents could provide their own responses to this question, and the top choices are displayed in Figure 5.
The Crimea and the whole Black Sea coast ranked as the most popular of the tourist destinations chosen by the respondents themselves. Ways to find accommodation while on vacation are presented in Table 7.
Given the opportunity to select from a variety of options, which is a crucial criterion, given that modern technology allows us to switch between the options and select various methods of accommodation for various trips, the total number of responses to this question exceeds the total number of respondents. The majority of respondents (80% altogether) preferred to make their own accommodation arrangements by selecting either a hotel (44%) or renting privately owned property (36% of responses). The fact that 15% of respondents only apply for this service to a travel agency is noteworthy. Table 8 shows what tourists rely on when selecting destinations for their vacation.
In terms of leisure and vacation, social media and celebrities have a significant influence on the general public and their decision-making. We looked at the issue of how much a popular and personally attractive blogger's suggestion of a hotel, a destination to visit, an excursion, an attraction, etc., induces in a modern traveler a desire to visit that place (Table 9)
We will try to summarize the aforesaid research findings. The first conclusion, which is evident, may be stated as follows: independent tourism has been encouraged by the steady advancement of information systems and technology. The perception of the travel and hospitality industry is shifting, and this fact is quite significant. Travel agencies and tour operators, who produce and sell tourist goods, will progressively lose clients, which will have an impact on their sources of revenue. This aspect, in our opinion, represents a drawback in the development of the tourist sector. The second fact is that there is no intermediary in the supply and demand chains for tourist goods (a typical illustration of the joint consumption economy at work), which should undoubtedly be viewed as a positive development for the entire digital economy.
The fourth point is that planning a trip on one's own, especially when it involves travel overseas, might put one in danger from crises, unanticipated medical expenses (in the absence of medical insurance), difficulties securing a visa, etc. In this scenario, the tourist bears full responsibility for all hazards.
The development of independent tourism does not pose any significant threat to the restaurant industry or to private accommodation providers. The problem arises at the level of hotels, sanatoriums, and resorts dealing mainly with group applications. However, the problem is particularly acute for tour operators and travel agents.
On the one hand, tour operators and travel agents should do more to draw in individual travellers while, if at all possible, keeping the price of a single trip reasonable, or to increase the amount of lump-sum tour sales (standardised tours) in order to make up for their losses. In any case, both intermediary travel agencies and individual tourists should have their own niche in the tourism industry. At the same time, we emphasise that attempts to artificially reduce the price of holiday packages in order to boost sales should be avoided since doing so would result in the bankruptcy of tour operators and a decline in customer trust. According to experts' estimates, we anticipate that in 2023–2024, as global tourism recovers from the COVID–19 pandemic crisis, more people in our country will book trips through travel agents. This is primarily because, given Russia's current economic condition, only a very small number of tourists can afford individual tourism abroad.
5. Discussion
In sustainable development, the interests of all parties involved in tourism activities are taken into consideration provided there is a wise use of tourist resources and comprehensive partnership among all stakeholders aimed at restoring physical, spiritual, and intellectual health of people. A vast range of resources, including environmental, are used by the tourism industry. With the development of tourism, the amount of resources consumed and waste produced are also increasing. The areas used for the development of tourism infrastructure are expanding.
The approach to infrastructure development that attracts low-use areas and reclaims abandoned industrial or depleted agricultural land is more preferable in this regard. An approach that involves clearing forests for infrastructure construction, using meadows and arable land, and altering the shoreline is unfavourable. The growth of the tourism industry can result in environmental and socioeconomic problems with varied degrees of complexity unless effective planning, management, and control are implemented. The current stage of tourism development is characterized by significant monopolization. Services and profits are concentrated in multinational corporations. Most of the tourist infrastructure belongs to foreign capital. The primary sources of labour are the locals who frequently hold linear jobs, while the managerial positions are taken by foreign professionals with vast work experience in compliance with worldwide corporate standards. In these issues, a fair balance is needed for sustainable development. It should be noted that developing countries that receive tourists from developed countries also receive a number of problems, usually in the socio-cultural sphere.
The host countries should actively promote initiatives that take into account the local population's cultural heritage and local traditions. Tourism revenues should be directed to the preservation and maintenance of historical and cultural monuments, customs and traditions of the local population. Most tourists, when choosing a holiday destination, prioritise the environmental well-being of the territory. As a benchmark, various national environmental standards and practises are used. But in reality, they could differ depending on a particular location.
It should be noted that this practice has recently become more common. Information catalogues include vital details on the nature, environment, culture, and daily life in numerous areas of the world. Based on this information, among other things, travellers may receive a more thorough understanding of the potential possibilities for recreation destinations. The success of environmental protection projects depends largely on the initiatives of the local government, as well as on all the companies involved in the organisation and provision of tourist services. Local citizens and the local economy should profit most from tourism-related activities in the region. The available resources should be used carefully and rationally, taking into account the specific character of the area. The government of the country should play a leading role in the development of tourism, both locally and at the state and international levels, acting as a regulatory force, through laws and taxes. Comprehensive solutions should be found for the difficult situations and problems that travellers, locals, and authorities must deal with as tourism develops.
This, in turn, implies a transition to sustainable development. Tourism, being one of the leading branches of the world economy, at the same time is the industry most closely integrated into environmental resources. The quality of the environment is actually part of the tourist product. In this regard, it is important to harmonize the relationship of the tourism industry with the environment, ensuring the sustainability of resource use.
The socioeconomic well-being of the local community, as well as its culture, customs, way of life, and many others, are all directly and indirectly impacted by tourism, since it stimulates the activity of related economic sectors.
Three main components of sustainable tourism development can be identified:
1) recreation and basic environmental processes;
2) economic sustainability, ensured by the development of tourism as an effective component of the local economy, provided balanced resource management;
3) socio-cultural sustainability, leading to an increase in the population's employment and income, as well as the preservation of historical and cultural landmarks, and maintenance of the national identity.
6. Conclusions
Changes in the structure of the tourism market are significantly influenced by the socioeconomic situation in Russia today as well as by internal and external impacts. This has led to an increase in domestic and inbound and a reduction in outbound tourism, the ratio of which is beginning to reach global proportions. However, noticeable imbalances in the development of tourism have been identified at the interregional level, which implies a more effective use of tourism and recreational potential and sustainable development mechanisms.
Based on the improvement of the methodology, an evaluation of integrated tourism and the recreational potential of sustainable tourism development was carried out. It included researching the availability of natural, cultural, historical, socioeconomic, and economic resources as well as the environmental situation in the area and the expertise of local tourist agencies. This research made it possible to classify the Russian Federation's entities into four groups, ranging from the most developed areas to those with the lowest level of integrated tourist and recreational potential.
Expert comparative analysis revealed fifteen mechanisms of sustainable tourism development combined into three types: economic, social and environmental. It has been established that public-private partnership is the most effective mechanism for attracting federal, regional and municipal budget funds and private investments to develop the tourist and recreational infrastructure. This approach is used to establish tourist and recreational special economic zones, tourist and recreational clusters, and areas with advanced socioeconomic development throughout Russia.
A ranking of the regions of the Russian Federation on the degree of sustainable tourist development has been suggested based on the development of the author's methodology for evaluating the mechanisms of sustainable development. As a result, 5 types of regions with varying levels of sustainable development have been identified.
The efficient approach to the management of Russian regions requires scenarios with prospects for sustainable tourism development. The scenarios were based on a combination of spatial interaction of the integrated tourist and recreational potential and were analysed using the matrix approach. The authors categorised areas depending on the level of sustainable tourism development using the identified mechanisms. As a result five groups with various scenarios, ranging from highly favourable to stagnant have been identified.
Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of…. and express their gratitude to reviewers for their useful and constructive comments, remarks and suggestions that significantly contributed to the quality of the paper.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.
References
- Avdonina, S.G. (2013). Quantitative methods for assessing the synergetic effect of an innovation cluster. Management of economic systems. http://uecs.ru/innovacii-investicii.
- Airapetov, V.S. (2012). Classification of the risks of the formation of tourist clusters. Organizational, legal and economic bases for improving the sanatorium-resort sphere and creating highly efficient tourist clusters. St. Petersburg. pp.5-8.
- Akitobi, B. , Hemming R., Schwartz G. (2017). Public investments and public-private partnerships. Economic issues. http://www.omf.org./external/russian/pubs/ft/issues/issue40/ei40r.pdf.
- Apokin, A. I u., Belousov D.R. (2009). Scenarios of the development of the world and Russian economy as a basis for scientific and technological forecasting. Foresight. 12–29.
- Baklanova, Iu.O. (2019) Innovative development initiatives: an integrated approach to reforming the region. Predicting the consequences. Management of economic systems, No. 4. pp. 132-139.
- Balina T.A., Ponomareva Z.V. (2013). Innovative processes as a factor of sustainable socio-economic development of the region // Bulletin of the Tambov University. Series: Natural and Technical Sciences. №2. http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/innovatsionnye- protsessy-kak-faktor-ustoychivogo-sotsialno-ekonomicheskogo-razvitiya-regiona;
- Vasiliev, A.V. (2012). Problems of designing tourist clusters and technologies of their modeling. Problems of the modern economy. No. 2. pp.30-38.
- Voronin, A.N. , Krylova I.V. (2012). Clusters as the basis for the formation of a variety of tourist products. Organizational, legal and economic bases for improving the sanatorium and resort sphere and creating highly efficient tourist clusters. pp. 65-72;
- Vysotskaya, O.A. (2012). Management of innovative development of the tourist and recreational cluster of the Altai Territory. Organizational, legal and economic bases for improving the sanatorium and resort sphere and creating highly efficient tourist clusters. pp. 71-75.
- Glevatskaya, N.V. (2017). The need for sustainable development. Bulletin of KrasGU, pp. 18-23.
- Gusev, I.S. , Fedorova U.A. (2019). Scientific and methodological approaches to assessing the effectiveness of investments in the infrastructure of a tourist destination. Bulletin of NAT. No. 3 (23). pp. 29-31.
- Dondokov B., B. (2018). The formation of a tourist and recreational cluster as a way to diversify the regional economy. Problems of the modern economy, No. 3. pp. 182-188.
- Zakorin, N.D. , Rizzi V.V. (2012). A model of a tourist cluster. Organizational, legal and economic bases for improving the sanatorium-resort sphere and creating highly efficient tourist clusters. pp. 112-119.
- Zueva, M.M. (2014). Innovative activity as a means of strengthening the economic potential of the tourism industry. Management of economic systems, No. 5. pp.34-38.
- Zueva, M.M. (2017). Cluster approach to tourism development in the region. Management of economic systems, No. 47. pp. 108-113.
- Kleiman, A.A. (2012). Problems of state support for the development of the sanatorium-resort complex of Russia in modern conditions. Organizational, legal and economic bases for improving the sanatorium-resort sphere and creating highly efficient tourist clusters. pp. 128-137.
- Kruzhalin, V.I. (2018). Technologies of management and self-regulation in the field of tourism. Rating approach in the management of tourism industry development in Russia. pp. 157-191.
- Bebah, A. (2017). Contribution of Tourism to the Sustainable Development of the Local Community. Case studies of Alanya and Dubrovnik, P.114.
- Bergman, M. , Charles, D. (2010). Innovative Clusters: Drivers of National Innovation Systems. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, pp. 78-90.
- Shafer, C.S. (2019). Operationalizing sustainability in regional tourism planning. An application of the limits of acceptable change framework, Vol. 23. pp. 1-15.
Figure 1.
Economic type of mechanisms for sustainable tourism development.
Figure 5.
Attractive tourist destinations based on the respondents’ opinions.
Table 1.
Characteristics of mechanisms for sustainable tourism development.
| No | Type | Weight of a type of a mechanism, % | Mechanism | Weight of a mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Economic |
50% |
Mechanism of public-private partnership | 40% |
| 1.2 | Regional tourism development programs | 5% | ||
| 1.3 | Preferences for small, medium, and large businesses | 20% | ||
| 1.4 | Investment in tourism | 25% | ||
| 1.5 | Marketing of tourism (event calendar, tourist and information centres, participation in national and international exhibitions) | 10% | ||
| 2.1 | Social |
30% |
Mechanism of ensuring the availability of tourist services for the population of the region | 20% |
| 2.2 | Staffing of the tourism industry | 20% | ||
| 2.3 | Security mechanism | 20% | ||
| 2.4 | Mechanism of providing tourists with accommodation facilities | 20% | ||
| 2.5 | Mechanism of involving the public to work in the field of tourism and recreation | 20% | ||
| 3.1 | Environmental |
20% |
Determination and rationing of permissible anthropogenic load | 20% |
| 3.2 | Mechanism of ensuring environmental quality through the creation of a system of protected areas | 20% | ||
| 3.3 | Environmental regulation mechanism (Environmental Index) | 20% | ||
| 3.4 | Mechanism of industrial and environmental regulation (Industrial and Environmental Index) |
20% |
||
| 3.5 | Mechanism of socio-ecological regulation (Socio-Ecological index) |
20% |
Table 4.
Ways to find an interesting place to visit.
| Choice of sights to visit | % |
|---|---|
| When I am on vacation, I already have a plan to visit interesting places | 60 |
| I will look for information about interesting places in electronic maps (Google, Yandex, with Masami) | 18 |
| I will ask for recommendations at the hotel reception what places to visit | 14 |
| I'll ask the locals for their advice | 11 |
| I will do an Internet search (specify where) | 9 |
| I will contact the local tour agancy | 8 |
| I'll consult the tourist brochure for details. | 7 |
Table 5.
Ways of selecting the place to relax.
| Beach | Ski | Sanatoriums | Recreation houses | Hiking, fishing, hunting | Culture and educaiton (museums, sightseeing tours) | Naturel sites (nature reserves, mountain, rivers, lakes) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I will look for options using search engines (Yandex, Google) | 63 | 54 | 58 | 56 | 60 | 62 | 72 |
| I will ask for help from relatives or friends | 25 | 35 | 27 | 32 | 27 | 24 | 26 |
| I will contact a travel agency and ask them to offer me vacation options | 21 | 12 | 18 | 23 | 7 | 21 | 15 |
| I will ask for advice in a thematic group on social networks | 13 | 23 | 8 | 14 | 11 | 10 | 13 |
Table 6.
Preferences of the types of transport.
| Type of transport | % |
|---|---|
| Car | 36 |
| Airplane | 35 |
| Train | 27 |
| Other | 2 |
Table 7.
Ways to find accommodation.
| Primary accommodation options | No of people |
|---|---|
| Self-booking of a hotel through booking aggregators (Booking, etc) | 44 |
| Booking of private houses, apartments via Airbnb, Avito, etc. | 37 |
| Buying a complete tour at a travel agency | 16 |
| Based on friends' recommendations | 10 |
| Camping | 2 |
Table 8.
Ways to choose sites to visit when traveling to a new place.
| Sources of sightseeing information | Number of people |
|---|---|
| Recommendation of friends | 20 |
| Reviews and ratings on online maps (Google map, Yandex map), recommendation of friends | 19 |
| Reviews and ratings on online maps (Google map, Yandex map) | 17 |
| Thematic forum | 11 |
| Thematic forum, reviews and rating on online maps (Google map, Yandex map), recommendation of friends | 8 |
Table 9.
The impact of a blogger's recommendation on the decision to purchase a tourism product.
| Impact of a leader’s opinion on the general public | Number of people |
|---|---|
| Yes, I make records or save an address, a link, or a location on a map | 43 |
| I do make records of the recommendations, but I don't do anything with them. | 42 |
| I rely on my own opinion | 11 |
| I don’t use social networks | 6 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated