Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research

ISSN: 1094-1665 (Print) 1741-6507 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20

A model of destination loyalty: integrating

destination image and sustainable tourism

Say Wah Lee & Ke Xue

To cite this article: Say Wah Lee & Ke Xue (2020) A model of destination loyalty: integrating
destination image and sustainable tourism, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25:4,
393-408, DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2020.1713185

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1713185

Published online: 17 Jan 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 19

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rapt20
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH
2020, VOL. 25, NO. 4, 393–408
https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1713185

A model of destination loyalty: integrating destination image and

sustainable tourism
Say Wah Lee and Ke Xue
School of Media and Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Sustainable tourism has been a popular topic in tourism research. However, there are Sustainable development;
limited studies on tourists’ perspectives from the angle of sustainable tourism. This urban tourism; responsible
research intends to develop and test a destination loyalty model which introduces tourism; destination
destination image in the form of the pillars of sustainability. Questionnaires were management; destination
marketing; brand image;
distributed to tourists at five tourist destinations in Shanghai. The analysis showed sustainable tourism
that tourist satisfaction fully mediated the effect of cultural image and partially indicators; structural
mediated the effects of socioeconomic and environmental images on destination equation modeling (SEM);
loyalty. Implications were derived from the findings and future research analysis of variance (ANOVA);
recommendations were proposed. China

Introduction
In pursuit of global sustainable development, the
United Nations (UN) developed the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development in 2015 with 17 Sustainable
Development Goals, which have been adopted by
over 150 countries (United Nations Development Pro-
gramme, 2015), including China. The goals assist
nations to address problems pertaining to their econ-
omic, social, and environmental situations. As much as
68% of the world population is projected to live in the
cities by 2050, mainly due to urbanization and popu-
lation growth in developing countries (United
Nations, 2018). China, India, and Nigeria collectively
are projected to constitute to 35% of growth in
urban population from 2018 to 2050, with China
alone adding 255 million urban dwellers (United
Nations, 2018). Shanghai is already the most popu-
lated city in China; it is the world’s third largest city
by population (United Nations, 2016). Therefore, it is
crucial to ensure the sustainability of Shanghai in
order to keep up with further population growth.
Sustainable development involves a balanced
development in the economic, social, environmental,
and cultural dimensions of a system or a territory. Sus-
tainable developments are necessary for the fulfill-
ment of the needs of the present as well as the
future generations (World Commission on Environ-
ment and Development, 1987). Sustainable tourism,
a subset of sustainable development, is “tourism that
takes full account of its current and future economic,
social and environmental impacts, addressing the
needs of visitors, the industry, the environment and
host communities” (United Nations Environment Pro-
gramme & United Nations World Tourism Organiz-
ation, 2012, p. 12).
There has been a growth in research on sustainable
tourism (Hall, 2011). Güzeller and Çelİker (2018) ana-
lyzed over 4400 research papers published between
2007 and 2016 in top five tourism journals, and found
that sustainable tourism and destinations were two of
the most popular topics being studied. A lot of existing
sustainable tourism studies investigate the perspectives
of the residents of the destinations (Andereck & Nyau-
pane, 2011; Boley, McGehee, & Hammett, 2017; Chen,
2000; Choi & Murray, 2010; Cole, 2006; Fong, Lo,
Songan, & Nair, 2017; Gursoy, Jurowski, & Uysal, 2002;
Yoon, Gursoy, & Chen, 2001). Extant sustainable
tourism research that examine the tourists mostly
assess their pro-environmental attitude or behavior (Bal-
lantyne, Packer, & Hughes, 2009; Juvan & Dolnicar, 2016;
Miller, Merrilees, & Coghlan, 2015; Puczkó & Rátz, 2000);
none has focused on destination image and loyalty.

CONTACT Ke Xue kxue@sjtu.edu.cn

© 2020 Asia Pacific Tourism Association
394 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
Tourist destinations in China have been adversely
affected by the increasing usage of tourism resources
following rapid tourism industry growth since the
1980s (Zhong, Deng, Song, & Ding, 2011). These nega-
tive impacts would in turn aggravate the destinations’
images. The tourism industry in Shanghai has been
growing in value with increasing contributions to
gross domestic product (GDP) as well as tourist arrivals
over the past decade (Shanghai Municipal Statistics
Bureau [SMSB], 2018). However, research on sustain-
able tourism in the city are limited or more specific
to cultural aspects, such as heritage tourism (Xiong,
Zhang, & Hu, 2016), marine cultural tourism (Zheng
et al., 2017), festival tourism (Tang, 2014), and one-off
event (Ye, Scott, Ding, & Huang, 2012). Shanghai may
be well-known for its economic development, but in
order to become a sustainable tourism city, it needs
to satisfy the tourists in all aspects of developments,
whether economic, social, environmental, or cultural.
This research aims to develop and test a destina-
tion loyalty model that integrates the concept of sus-
tainable tourism. The objective of this research is to
investigate the profiles, destination (cultural, environ-
mental, and socioeconomic) image, satisfaction, and
loyalty intention of tourists in Shanghai. Survey data
were collected from tourists in five tourist destinations
of Shanghai, and analyzed using analysis of variance
(ANOVA) and structural equation modeling (SEM).
Based on the findings, recommendations for the
city’s sustainable tourism development and marketing
practices were provided.
Literature review
Destination image and tourist satisfaction
Brand image is “consumers’ perceptions about a brand,
as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer
memory" (Keller, 2013, p. 72). Destination image is the
totality of a person’s viewpoints, notions, and
impressions regarding a place/destination (Crompton,
1979). Destination image can simply be referred to as
people’s perceptions of a destination. “Perceptions
are more important than reality, because perceptions
affect consumers’ actual behavior” (Kotler & Keller,
2012, p. 161). Destination image has the power to
influence tourist behavior as well as the success (or
failure) of a destination (Tasci & Gartner, 2007).
Destination image is a commonly-studied concept
in tourism research (Beerli & Martín, 2004; Tasci &
Gartner, 2007; Zhang, Fu, Cai, & Lu, 2014). It is a
broad concept that can be measured in multiple
dimensions. Numerous studies examine destination
image based on manifest aspects of the destinations
such as natural attractions/environment, historical
and cultural attractions, reputation of the destination,
entertainment and events, outdoor/leisure activities,
nightlife, infrastructure, accessibility, accommodation,
and atmosphere (Chen & Phou, 2013; Chi & Qu, 2008;
Gartner & Ruzzier, 2011; Prayag & Ryan, 2011; Wu,
2016). Destination image has also been categorized
in terms of cognitive and affective images (Beerli &
Martín, 2004; Qu, Kim, & Im, 2011; Wang & Hsu,
2010). Boo, Busser, and Baloglu (2009) studied destina-
tion image as a reflection of the tourist’s self. However,
none has assessed destination image specifically in
terms of the pillars of sustainability.
Numerous studies have established the effects of
destination image on tourist satisfaction (Chen &
Phou, 2013; Chi & Qu, 2008; Prayag & Ryan, 2011;
Wang & Hsu, 2010). Customer satisfaction is a custo-
mer’s reaction to the evaluation of the difference
between his/her previous expectations and the
actual performance of a product (Tse & Wilton,
1988). A customer will be satisfied if a product/ser-
vice’s performance matches or exceeds his/her expec-
tations, and vice versa (Fornell, Johnson, Anderson,
Cha, & Bryant, 1996; Kotler & Keller, 2012). In the
context of this study, tourist satisfaction is a tourist’s
evaluation of a destination in comparison with his/
her expectations of the destination in terms of its
environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic aspects.
Cultural image
A destination’s cultural features can affect tourist sat-
isfaction (Beerli & Martín, 2004; Chi & Qu, 2008; Wu,
2016). Cultural brand assets, such as cultural and his-
torical attractions, festivals, arts, and traditions, are
substantial determinants of destination brand image
(Beerli & Martín, 2004; Kladou & Kehagias, 2014).
While tourism activities could bring about positive
impacts on a destination’s culture, e.g. the preser-
vation of cultural and historical sites, they could also
produce negative impacts, e.g. the loss of community
character (Choi & Murray, 2010; Fong et al., 2017).
Thus, the cultural image of a destination should be
preserved for the longevity of the community’s iden-
tity and values while attracting and retaining tourists.
For the Expo 2015 in Italy, the Information Office of
Shanghai Municipality and RTG Consulting developed
a slogan called “Shanghai. Let’s Meet!” to promote an
international identity of Shanghai being a place of rich

cultural heritage where multiple cultures and perspec-
tives converge (Chan, 2015). It is expected that a posi-
tive cultural image would lead to the satisfaction of
tourists. Therefore,
H1. There is a positive relationship between cultural
image and tourist satisfaction.
Environmental image
The environmental aspect of a destination also influ-
ences tourist satisfaction (Chen & Phou, 2013; Chi &
Qu, 2008; Wu, 2016; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The environ-
mental factors often studied as part of destination
image include, in general, travel environment, atmos-
phere, and natural attractions (Beerli & Martín, 2004;
Chen & Phou, 2013; Chi & Qu, 2008; Gartner &
Ruzzier, 2011; Qu et al., 2011). Pollutions and conges-
tions are examples of environmental problems in a
destination (Akis, Peristianis, & Warner, 1996; Puczkó
& Rátz, 2000). A well-preserved natural environment
could serve as a competitive advantage of a destina-
tion due to its authenticity and potential of providing
unique leisure experiences to tourists (Cánoves, Villar-
ino, Priestley, & Blanco, 2004; Fong et al., 2017; Fons,
Fierro, & Patiño, 2011). Over the years since 1990,
green spaces, parks, and roadside trees have been
increasing in Shanghai, and the government has
been injecting more investments on environmental
protection in the city (SMSB, 2018). As positive
environmental impacts on a place can lead to the resi-
dents’ support for tourism (Andereck & Nyaupane,
2011; Choi & Murray, 2010), it is assumed that favor-
able environmental image of a city would result in
tourist satisfaction too. Hence, it is hypothesized that:
H2. There is a positive relationship between environ-
mental image and tourist satisfaction.
Socioeconomic image
Sustainable tourism development goals in terms of
the economic and social dimensions are often inter-
related, for instance, increasing business and employ-
ment opportunities, developing local facilities/
infrastructure, improving the community’s standard
of living, and promoting local products and services.
Socioeconomic factors of a city, such as public infra-
structures, accessibility, tourism offerings and facilities,
and prices of goods and services, have been found to
have effects on tourist satisfaction and behavior (Chen
& Phou, 2013; Qu et al., 2011; Wu, 2016). While the
tourism industry contributes to the socioeconomic
growth of a destination (Andereck & Nyaupane,
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 395
2011; Fong et al., 2017; Hall, 2011), there are negative
impacts brought about by tourism, for instance,
increases in the prices of goods and services (Akis
et al., 1996; Cottrell, Van der Duim, Ankersmid, &
Kelder, 2004). With tourism growth, there is also the
potential complications of sustainable tourism man-
agement among stakeholders (Hall, 2011; Timur &
Getz, 2009). The numbers of domestic and inter-
national tourist arrivals in Shanghai have been increas-
ing since 2010 (SMSB, 2018). It is necessary to gauge
the city’s socioeconomic image as it could potentially
affect tourist satisfaction. The following hypothesis is
formulated:
H3. There is a positive relationship between socioeco-
nomic image and tourist satisfaction.
Tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty
Extant research has continually established the posi-
tive relationship between tourist satisfaction and des-
tination loyalty, i.e. intentions to recommend and to
revisit the destination or repurchase the trip (Chen &
Phou, 2013; Chi & Qu, 2008; Prayag & Ryan, 2011;
Wang & Hsu, 2010; Wu, 2016; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Des-
tination image itself has been directly linked to desti-
nation loyalty (Boo et al., 2009; Qu et al., 2011; Tasci &
Gartner, 2007; Wu, 2016; Zhang et al., 2014). While
studies on destination loyalty often innovate the ante-
cedents of tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty,
none has examined the effects of cultural, environ-
mental and socioeconomic images on destination
loyalty, with tourist satisfaction as the mediator. The
inclusion of the satisfaction dimension in the model
of this study is necessary as without satisfaction, there
can hardly be loyalty. It is assumed here that problems
with the cultural, environmental, and socioeconomic
aspects of a destination would cause the dissatisfaction
of tourists and subsequently, declines in tourist arrivals
and recommendations. Through an understanding of
the tourists’ perspectives, a destination can be
improved to remain sustainable in the long run.
Accordingly, the following hypotheses were developed,
and Figure 1 illustrates the proposed model.
H4a. Tourist satisfaction mediates the effect of cultural
image on destination loyalty.
H4b. Tourist satisfaction mediates the effect of environ-
mental image on destination loyalty.
H4c. Tourist satisfaction mediates the effect of socioeco-
nomic image on destination loyalty.
396 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
Figure 1. Proposed model.
Methods
Development of survey Instrument
For the operationalization of variables as suggested by
Churchill (1979), tourism literature were reviewed and
relevant measurement items were adapted to the
questionnaire of this study (see Table 1). A total of
35 destination image items that relate to the proposed
sustainability dimensions were adopted from previous
studies such as Calantone, Di Benedetto, Hakam, &
Bojanic, 1989, Choi and Sirakaya (2006), Echtner and
Ritchie (1993), Fakeye and Crompton (1991),
McKercher, Mei, and Tse (2006), Milman and Pizam
(1995), and more. Ten items for tourist satisfaction
and destination loyalty were adopted from Fornell
et al. (1996), Kotler and Keller (2012), Yoon and Uysal
(2005), Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman (1996), and
others. All questionnaire items were measured with
a 5-point Likert scale between 1 = strongly disagree
and 5 = strongly agree.
A draft questionnaire was prepared and presented
to a few experts in the field for their feedback, from
which some minor adjustments were made. Sub-
sequently, a pilot study was carried out among 30
tourists to determine the face validity and reliability
of the measures. The pilot study’s size was computed
based on Viechtbauer et al.’s (2015) formula which is
at 95% confidence interval with a 0.90 probability
that unanticipated problems would not occur. The
greatest lower bound (GLB) value of the findings
from the pilot study was 0.87. GLB was derived using
R and applied as a reliability measure in this study
instead of Cronbach’s alpha because the latter is con-
sidered as not reliable anymore (Chakraborty, 2017). A
question on the standard of living of Shanghai people
was removed after the pilot study as respondents
claimed that they had no idea about the local’s stan-
dard of living. After all, questions on standard of
living or quality of life as an impact of tourism are
often posed to the residents of the destination
instead (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011; Boley et al.,
2017; Choi & Murray, 2010; Yoon et al., 2001).
The English questionnaire was translated into the
Chinese language for the Chinese respondents. The
translated questionnaire was then translated back
into English and compared with the original version
for quality and accuracy assurance. To ensure the
robustness of the translation, the forward- and back-
translations were performed by two different bilingual
translators respectively. The translated version was
subjected to a pre-test among local Chinese respon-
dents, after which some minor corrections were made.
Survey on Shanghai tourists
A cross-sectional survey design was used, and the stra-
tified random sampling method was employed to dis-
tribute the questionnaires randomly to subsamples of
tourists at five of the top tourist destinations in Shang-
hai recommended by the Shanghai Municipal Admin-
istration of Culture and Tourism. Sample size for the
study was calculated using the confidence interval
formula, which was 385 at 95% confidence level
with 50% estimated population variance (Burns,
Veeck, & Bush, 2017). Both foreign and domestic tour-
ists who were not residents of Shanghai, who either
came from other countries or other Chinese provinces
were targeted. A total of 525 tourists in Shanghai was
approached and screened for participation in the
survey between 23 May and 3 July 2019, and 430 com-
pleted questionnaires were received, of which 23 were
excluded from the study due to multiple/missing
responses. As a result, the number of usable question-
naires for analysis was 407, yielding a response rate of
77.5%.
Data analysis
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed using
principal component analysis with an oblique rotation

Table 1. Sources of measurement items for all constructs.
Construct
Cultural image
Interesting cultural attractions
Interesting historical attractions
Attractive cultural festivals/events*
Appealing local cuisine*
Interesting local arts and crafts
Quality cultural experiences
Unique cultural identity and traditions
Good preservation of cultural heritage
Abundance of cultural learning opportunities
Environmental image
Interesting natural attractions*
Clean and tidy environment
Good preservation of natural areas
Good maintenance of buildings
Low level of water pollution
Low level of air pollution
Low level of noise pollution
Pleasant weather and climate*
Restful and relaxing atmosphere
Good recreational/outdoor facilities and
activities*
Low traffic congestion issue
Not too crowded with people
Socioeconomic image
Safety in the city*
Friendliness and helpfulness of the locals*
Easiness to access places/areas in the city
Good public transportation system
Good public infrastructures
Strong local economy
Diverse locally-owned businesses
Good nightlife and entertainment centers
Good shopping facilities
Reasonable prices of goods and services*
Good reputation*
Availability of tourism facilities and information
Plenty of tourist attractions and activities
Quality tourism offerings
Tourist satisfaction
Overall satisfaction with the city
Enjoyment while traveling in the city
The meeting of expectations by the city
Worthiness of time and money to travel the city
Compared to other travel destinations, the city is
better
Destination loyalty
Willingness to revisit the city in the near future
The city is a preferred choice of travel destination
Willingness to recommend the city to others
Willingness to encourage friends and family to
visit the city
Willingness to say positive things about the city
*Item was excluded due to low factor loading.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 397
Authors
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Gartner (1989); Gearing,
Swart, and Var, (1974)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Gartner (1989); Gearing et al.
(1974)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Gearing et al. (1974); McKercher et al. (2006)
Baloglu and McCleary (1999); Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993)
Gearing et al. (1974); Liu and Var (1986); Simpson (2008)
Calantone et al. (1989); Kim and Ritchie (2013); McKercher et al. (2006)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Embacher and Buttle (1989); McKercher et al. (2006)
Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Manning (2004); McKercher et al. (2006)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); McKercher et al. (2006)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Gartner (1989)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Oppermann (1996); Schroeder (1996)
Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Manning (2004); Simpson (2008)
Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Miller (2001); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Miller (2001); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Miller (2001); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Milman and Pizam (1995)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Um and Crompton (1990)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Gearing et al. (1974)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Echtner and Ritchie (1993)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Milman and Pizam (1995)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991);
Milman and Pizam (1995)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Embacher and Buttle (1989); Faulkner and Tideswell (1997)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991); Puczkó and Rátz (2000)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Choi and Sirakaya (2006); Echtner and Ritchie (1993)
Ap and Crompton (1998); Liu and Var (1986); Simpson (2008)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Milman and Pizam (1995); Oppermann (1996)
Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fornell et al. (1996); Yoo, Donthu, and Lee (2000)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991);
Milman and Pizam (1995)
Calantone et al. (1989); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Fakeye and Crompton (1991)
Childress and Crompton (1997); Echtner and Ritchie (1993); Gearing et al. (1974)
Crosby and Stephens (1987); Fornell et al. (1996); Yoon and Uysal (2005)
Crosby and Stephens (1987); Oh, Fiore, and Jeoung (2007); Otto and Ritchie (1996)
Boulding, Kalra, Staelin, and Zeithaml (1993); Fornell et al. (1996); Yoon and Uysal
(2005)
Calantone et al. (1989); Milman and Pizam (1995); Yoon and Uysal (2005)
Kotler and Keller (2012); Manning (2004); Yoon and Uysal (2005)
Boulding et al. (1993); Fornell et al. (1996); Zeithaml et al. (1996)
Kotler and Keller (2012); Yoo et al. (2000); Zeithaml et al. (1996)
Boulding et al. (1993); Kotler and Keller (2012); Zeithaml et al. (1996)
Kotler and Keller (2012); Yoon and Uysal (2005); Zeithaml et al. (1996)
Kotler and Keller (2012); Wu (2016); Zeithaml et al. (1996)
398 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE

on the SPSS Statistics software to identify the under- Table 2. Descriptive statistics of tourist profile items.
lying items of the dimensions. An oblique rotation Profile item (N = 407) Frequency Percent (%)
allows the factors to be correlated (Hair, Black, Babin, Gender
& Anderson, 2014). One-way ANOVA and post hoc Male 244 60
Female 163 40
Tukey HSD test were conducted to compare the Age range
means of the tourist profile items pertaining to the 19 years old and below 45 11.1
dimensions. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and 20–29 years old 165 40.5
30–39 years old 77 18.9
SEM were performed on the SPSS Amos software to 40–49 years old 38 9.3
test the model of the research. 50 years old and above 82 20.2
Nationality region
China 100 24.6
Results Asia, excluding China 112 27.5
Europe 117 28.8
Table 2 shows that 60% of the tourists were males and Africa 14 3.4
North America 19 4.7
40% were females. Many of them were aged between South America 18 4.4
20 and 29 years old (40.5%). The tourists consisted of Australia, including New Zealand 27 6.6
58 different nationalities (see Appendix). A large per- and Fiji
Highest education level
centage of them were Asians (51.1%), including the High school certificate 101 24.8
Chinese. About a third of them had a Bachelor’s Diploma 59 14.5
degree as their highest level of education. Around Bachelor’s degree 147 36.1
Master’s degree 87 21.4
50% were first-time visitors to Shanghai. Most of the PhD 13 3.2
tourists visited Shanghai for a vacation or leisure Number of times visited Shanghai
(59.2%), followed by for business or work (29.7%). A 1 time 209 51.4
2–3 times 79 19.4
majority had been in more than 3 Chinese cities More than 3 times 119 29.2
(68.3%) and in at least one other continent besides Purpose of visiting Shanghaia
Asia (72.7%). Thirty-eight point three percent followed For a vacation/leisure 241 59.2
For business/work 121 29.7
official tourism sites on three or more media platforms. For an academic purpose 45 11.1
The most favorable images of Shanghai as per- To be with friends/family 63 15.5
ceived by the tourists were socioeconomic image (M Others 16 3.9
Number of Chinese cities visited besides
= 4.02, SD = 0.46) and cultural image (M = 3.80, SD = Shanghai
0.57), while environmental image was the least favor- None 42 10.3
able (M = 3.26, SD = 0.58). The tourists were fairly 1–2 cities 87 21.4
3 cities or more 278 68.3
satisfied with Shanghai (M = 4.08, SD = 0.60) and Number of continents visited besides
were somewhat loyal toward the city (M = 3.72, SD = Asia
0.60). Results from one-way ANOVA showed signifi- None 111 27.3
1–2 continents 164 40.3
cant mean differences within several profile items 3 continents or more 132 32.4
such as nationality region, travel experiences, and Number of media platforms used to
media usage pertaining to the variables of this study follow official tourism sites
None 67 16.5
(see Table 3). 1–2 media 184 45.2
3 media or more 156 38.3
N≠407 or 100% due to multiple responses.
a

Measurement model
The reliability or GLB value of the measurement model
was satisfactory at 0.85. The Keiser-Meyer-Olkin value
of the model was 0.88, and the Bartlett’s test of spheri-
city showed significance at p < 0.001, suggesting that
the sample was adequate for factor analysis. The EFA
outcomes showed that the factor loading of each
item was above 0.50 which was deemed significant
(see Table 4). As a result of the EFA, six exogenous vari-
ables (culture, upkeeping, ambience, infrastructure,
commerce, and tourism offerings), and three
endogenous variables (tourist satisfaction, intention
to revisit, and intention to recommend) were
derived. “Culture” represented cultural image,
“upkeeping” and “ambience” belonged to environ-
mental image, while “infrastructure”, “commerce” and
“tourism offerings” made up socioeconomic image.
The overall fit statistics from the CFA, such as Chi-
square (χ 2)/degrees of freedom (df) = 1.54, Goodness
 ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 399

Table 3. ANOVA for selected profile items.

Mean
Infrastruc- Tourism Intention Intention to
Profile item (N = 407) Upkeeping Ambience ture Commerce offerings Satisfaction to revisit recommend
Nationality region
China 3.94 3.09a,b 4.12 4.28a,b,c 3.89 3.90a,b 3.45 3.83a,b,c,d
Asia, excluding China 3.90 3.15c,d 4.04 4.03a 3.88 4.01c 3.57a,b 4.00e,f
Europe 3.74a 2.75a,c 4.16 3.92b 3.76 4.17a 3.17a 4.10a
Africa 3.93 2.95 4.05 4.16 4.05 4.34 3.76 4.60b,e
North America 3.58b 2.44b,d 4.18 4.07 3.91 4.25 3.04b 4.12
South America 3.94 2.93 3.96 4.11 3.98 4.14 3.63 4.50c,f
Australia (+ New Zealand & Fiji) 4.21a,b 2.93 4.01 3.94c 4.15 4.43b,c 3.40 4.27d
p-value 0.004** 0.001*** 0.643 0.001*** 0.097 0.001*** 0.001*** 0.001***
Number of times visited Shanghai
1 time 3.92 2.99 4.02a 3.97a 3.87 4.12 3.28a 4.08
2–3 times 3.73 2.88 4.12 4.03b 3.86 4.08 3.44 4.04
More than 3 times 3.88 2.95 4.21a 4.24a,b 3.91 4.02 3.57a 4.01
p-value 0.082 0.439 0.021* 0.001*** 0.825 0.299 0.002** 0.624
Number of media platforms used to
follow official tourism sites
None 3.86 2.70a,b 4.06 3.91a 3.73 4.03 3.16a,b 3.88a
1–2 media 3.81 3.03a 4.09 4.06 3.89 4.04 3.41a 4.01b
3 media or more 3.95 2.97b 4.12 4.14a 3.92 4.16 3.49b 4.17a,b
p-value 0.120 0.004** 0.725 0.016* 0.105 0.128 0.009** 0.004**
Common subscripts next to means indicate significant mean differences at p < 0.05 from the post hoc Tukey HSD test.
a/b/c/d/e/f

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.90, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) =
0.95, Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) = 0.04, Standardized Root Mean Square
Residual (SRMR) = 0.05, and Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) =
0.95, indicated satisfactory fit (Hair et al., 2014).
Several items were removed due to low factor loadings.
As reflected in Table 5, the average variance
extracted (AVE) and composite reliability of each con-
struct were above the acceptable convergent validity
levels of 0.50 and 0.70, respectively, implying that
the scales were measuring what they were intended
to measure (Hair et al., 2014). All constructs’ square
roots of AVE were also greater than their inter-con-
struct correlations, thus confirming discriminant val-
idity. Furthermore, the bivariate correlations between
variables were all below 0.70, signifying that there
was no redundant variable (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2014).
Structural model
The structural model was assessed, and the overall fit
indices showed that the model fitted the observed
data well (χ 2/df = 1.55, GFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.95, RMSEA
= 0.04, SRMR = 0.05, and TLI = 0.95). The model
explained 65% of the variations in intention to
revisit and intention to recommend, respectively,
further suggesting a good model fit (Hair et al.,
2014). The structural model was also highly reliable
with a GLB value of 0.92. Referring to Table 6, cultural
image had a positive relationship with tourist satisfac-
tion, whereas only parts of environmental image
(“upkeeping”) and socioeconomic image (“infrastruc-
ture” and “tourism offerings”) positively influenced
satisfaction. Hence, H1 is supported, while H2 and
H3 are partially supported. Outcomes of the boot-
strap method showed that the existing indirect
effects were all significant (see Table 7). Thus, H4a
is supported, while H4b and H4c are partially sup-
ported. Figure 2 illustrates an overview of the struc-
tural model.
Discussion and conclusions
The higher percentage of male than female tourists
recorded in this study is in line with the report by
the National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC,
2018), in which males made up as much as over
60% of annual tourist arrivals in the entire country
in 2016 and 2017. Similar to Wu’s (2016) sample of
tourists in Taiwan, a majority of the tourists in this
study were from Asia, including China itself. The
purpose of visiting Shanghai among most of the
tourists was for a vacation or leisure. Similarly, the
main purpose of visiting China among overseas
visitors in 2016 and 2017 was sightseeing and leisure
(NBSC, 2018).
400 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE

Table 4. Descriptive statistics and factor loadings of variables.

Variable (N = 407) Mean Standard deviation EFA factor loading
Cultural image 3.80 0.57
Interesting cultural attractions 3.97 0.76 0.789
Interesting historical attractions 3.81 0.79 0.889
Interesting local arts and crafts 3.77 0.72 0.659
Quality cultural experiences 3.87 0.76 0.677
Unique cultural identity and traditions 3.77 0.80 0.585
Good preservation of cultural heritage 3.70 0.83 0.599
Abundance of cultural learning opportunities 3.69 0.82 0.719
Environmental image 3.26 0.58
• Upkeeping 3.87 0.63
Clean and tidy environment 3.88 0.85 0.827
Good preservation of natural areas 3.74 0.77 0.766
Good maintenance of buildings 4.00 0.72 0.756
• Ambience 2.95 0.68
Low level of water pollution 3.10 0.88 0.594
Low level of air pollution 2.99 0.96 0.615
Low level of noise pollution 2.98 0.97 0.760
Restful and relaxing atmosphere 3.26 0.94 0.661
Low traffic congestion issue 2.92 0.99 0.840
Not too crowded with people 2.49 0.96 0.764
Socioeconomic image 4.02 0.46
• Infrastructure 4.10 0.59
Easiness to access places/areas 3.98 0.74 0.818
Good public transportation system 4.19 0.75 0.816
Good public infrastructures 4.12 0.70 0.641
• Commerce 4.06 0.54
Strong local economy 4.12 0.75 0.767
Diverse locally-owned businesses 3.87 0.70 0.822
Good nightlife and entertainment centers 3.92 0.74 0.707
Good shopping facilities 4.33 0.66 0.579
• Tourism offerings 3.88 0.62
Availability of tourism facilities and information 3.82 0.75 0.638
Plenty of tourist attractions and activities 3.96 0.72 0.805
Quality tourism offerings 3.86 0.74 0.777
Tourist satisfaction 4.08 0.60
Overall satisfaction with the city 4.08 0.68 0.814
Enjoyment while traveling in the city 4.22 0.67 0.730
The meeting of expectations by the city 4.08 0.72 0.730
Worthiness of time and money to travel the city 3.95 0.85 0.835
Destination loyalty 3.72 0.60
• Intention to revisit 3.39 0.74
Compared to other travel destinations, the city is better* 3.38 0.80 0.829
Willingness to revisit the city in the near future 3.67 0.93 0.579
The city is a preferred choice of travel destination 3.13 1.00 0.913
• Intention to recommend 4.05 0.64
Willingness to recommend the city to others 4.05 0.73 0.865
Willingness to encourage friends & family to visit the city 3.99 0.74 0.900
Willingness to say positive things about the city 4.13 0.67 0.694
Note: EFA for exogenous variables was run separately from endogenous variables.
*Item was originally identified under tourist satisfaction.

The most favorable destination image of Shanghai
was socioeconomic image, while environmental
image was the least favorable. Similarly, Bhuiyan,
Siwar, and Ismail (2016) surveyed the locals and tour-
ists at Lake Kenyir, Malaysia, and found perceived
economic and social aspects to have higher mean
scores on average than the environmental aspect.
Tourists in Shanghai perceived the infrastructure and
commercial image of the city most favorably under
socioeconomic image. Among the items rated highly
were good shopping facilities, good public transpor-
tation system, strong local economy, and good
public infrastructures. The government spent
RMB170.52 billion on urban infrastructure, including
transportation, in Shanghai in 2017 alone, and the
city’s total retail sales of consumer goods, which had
been increasing year on year, was recorded at a whop-
ping RMB11.74 trillion in 2017 (SMSB, 2018). Both
 ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 401

Table 5. Measures for correlation, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Variable AVE CR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Culture 0.503 0.874 0.709
Upkeeping 0.614 0.827 0.415** 0.784
Ambience 0.506 0.858 0.289** 0.430** 0.711
Infrastructure 0.582 0.805 0.330** 0.278** 0.143** 0.763
Commerce 0.525 0.813 0.294** 0.330** 0.169** 0.480** 0.724
Tourism offerings 0.553 0.786 0.570** 0.384** 0.210** 0.434** 0.427** 0.744
Satisfaction 0.576 0.803 0.501** 0.388** 0.181** 0.455** 0.392** 0.526** 0.759
Intention to revisit 0.619 0.825 0.417** 0.277** 0.426** 0.235** 0.276** 0.435** 0.428** 0.787
Intention to recommend 0.680 0.863 0.440** 0.325** 0.229** 0.314** 0.325** 0.481** 0.668** 0.529** 0.825
Diagonal numbers in bold are √AVE; **p < 0.01.

permanent and temporary businesses contribute to
the local economy. Temporary businesses encoun-
tered during the tourists’ visits could turn into sustain-
able, long-term businesses if they continued to meet
customer demands and generate profits over time.
The “ambience” factor under environmental image
had the lowest mean score of all variables, with items
such as crowdedness, traffic congestion, noise pol-
lution, and air pollution rated poorly below the
neutral level. Similarly, Sörensson and Von Friedrichs
(2013) found that the city of Bologna in Italy per-
formed poorly in terms of atmospheric pollution and
quietness in the minds of both national and inter-
national tourists. Crowdedness of a destination is
also a problem for tourists, who need the space and
freedom to travel around. Shanghai is the world’s
third most populated city with a high number of
tourist arrivals annually. Population densities are very
high at certain tourism-oriented districts in the city,
for instance, Huangpu with 32,004 people per square
kilometers as recorded in 2017 by SMSB (2018).
Results from the post hoc test revealed that the
Asian tourists, including the Chinese, viewed pollution
and congestion levels (“ambience”) in Shanghai as
more tolerable compared to the European and North
Table 6. Standardized regression weights for direct effects.
Relationship β SE t-value p-value
Culture → Satisfaction 0.240 0.080 2.873 0.004**
Upkeeping → Satisfaction 0.177 0.098 2.136 0.033*
Ambience → Satisfaction −0.064 0.074 −0.986 0.324
Infrastructure → Satisfaction 0.259 0.089 3.254 0.001***
Commerce → Satisfaction 0.083 0.087 1.048 0.295
Tourism offerings → 0.202 0.096 2.399 0.016*
Satisfaction
Satisfaction → Intention to 0.432 0.095 5.240 0.001***
revisit
Satisfaction → Intention to 0.774 0.082 9.405 0.001***
recommend
Note: β: Standardized regression coefficient; SE: Standard error.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
American tourists. In fact, besides the Asians, tourists
from all other regions rated “ambience” unfavorably
below the neutral point. Air pollution has been an
ongoing issue in Asia (Hicks, 2019), which is also the
most populous continent in the world (United
Nations, 2019). The Asians might have been
immuned to these living conditions. The Chinese tour-
ists perceived significantly better commercial image of
Shanghai compared to the European, Australian, and
other Asian tourists. Shanghai is known as the most
developed metropolis in China, and since 70% of the
Chinese tourists in this study had not been outside
of Asia, their respectable view of Shanghai’s commer-
cial image can be understood. In contrast, the Euro-
pean and Australian tourists recorded higher
satisfaction with Shanghai compared to the Chinese
tourists as well as other Asian tourists. Higher purchas-
ing power of tourists from the European and Austra-
lian regions owing to stronger national/regional
currency rates might have led them to have more
satisfying travel experiences (Jaapar, Musa, Moghav-
vemi, & Saub, 2017). The Asians, though, had higher
intentions than the Europeans and North Americans
to revisit the city. This could be due to the closer dis-
tances between Shanghai and the Asian countries.
The more the tourists visited Shanghai, the better
they viewed the city’s development status and the
more loyal they were toward the city. It could be
because tourists who paid more visits to Shanghai
Table 7. Standardized regression weights for indirect effects.
Intention to Intention to
revisit recommend
Variable β p-value β p-value
Culture 0.104 0.008** 0.186 0.012*
Upkeeping 0.076 0.030* 0.137 0.038*
Infrastructure 0.112 0.009** 0.201 0.009**
Tourism offerings 0.087 0.047* 0.156 0.046*
Note: β: Standardized regression coefficient. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
402 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
Figure 2. Structural model. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
developed a higher level of place attachment with the
city, a factor which relates to destination image and
results in tourist loyalty (Chen & Phou, 2013; Prayag
& Ryan, 2011). Also, tourists with favorable previous
experiences at the same place are more loyal toward
the destination (Wu, 2016).
The ANOVA and post hoc test results also indicated
that tourists with more exposure to travel- or destina-
tion-related information on the Internet had better
perceptions of Shanghai and were more loyal
toward the city. Internet platforms, particularly social
media, are great tools for marketing and communi-
cation activities adopted by tourism organizations
because tourists largely search for travel information
online prior to making travel decisions nowadays
(Leung, Law, Van Hoof, & Buhalis, 2013; Zeng & Gerrit-
sen, 2014). While online marketing could generate
great returns, destination marketers of Shanghai
could continue to invest in promoting the city offline
to target tourists who are not active online in order
to improve their perceptions and loyalty intentions
toward the city.
Based on the SEM, “infrastructure,” which is a part
of socioeconomic image, strongly influenced tourist
satisfaction. Urban development in Shanghai has
been the focus of the Chinese government in order
to turn Shanghai into a global financial hub (Wu &
Barnes, 2008) by 2020 (Yiyao, 2016). The gross regional
product (GRP) of Shanghai had been increasing every
year from 1978 to 2017 (SMSB, 2018). Following the
growth of the city, more efforts and investments
should be put into sustainable tourism development.
Suggested areas for development include providing
more employment and business opportunities to the
locals in the tourism industry, promoting local pro-
ducts and services to the tourists, and further enhan-
cing public infrastructures and facilities for the
benefits of both the tourists and the local community.
Although the commercial factor had no effect on sat-
isfaction, ensuring a destination’s economic sustain-
ability is imperative in support of sustainable tourism.
“Tourism offerings” also has an effect on satisfac-
tion. The qualities of a destination’s tourism offerings
constitute the destination’s brand quality (Boo et al.,

2009), which leads to tourist satisfaction (Žabkar,
Brenčič, & Dmitrović, 2010). Shanghai is one of the
top urban tourism competitors in the Asia Pacific
region (Enright & Newton, 2004) as well as within
China (NBSC, 2018; Zhang, Gu, Gu, & Zhang, 2011).
However, as noted by Zhang et al. (2011), tourism
resources in Shanghai are not as high as in other
neighboring cities, particularly those with world heri-
tage sites and scenic spots. Emphasis should be put
on other types of attractions in Shanghai, such as
the Huangpu riverfront and the skyscrapers, to dis-
tinguish the city from the others.
Cultural image had a positive relationship with
tourist satisfaction. Shanghai has numerous cultural
and historical attractions such as the Bund, Yu
Garden, Zhujiajiao Water Town, and more. The city
also has close to 30 national intangible cultural heri-
tages as released by the Ministry of Culture of China
in 2014 (ChinaDragonTours, 2015). Nevertheless,
unlike other more culturally- or historically-based
cities like Xi’an and Suzhou, Shanghai is mostly
known as a modern metropolitan, with a fair share
of modern attractions (Hsu, Dehuang, & Woodside,
2009; Zhang et al., 2011). Modernity may be con-
sidered as a part of Shanghai’s culture. Future research
could study whether modern culture in a modernized
city would lead to tourist satisfaction.
Pertaining to environmental image, “ambience”
had a negative beta but did not have any relationship
with satisfaction, whereas “upkeeping” positively led
to tourist satisfaction. Fortunately, while the tourists
perceived unfavorable ambience in Shanghai due to
pollutions and congestions, they largely agreed that
the natural and built environments in the city had
been preserved well. The conservation of buildings,
particularly the historical ones, is important to main-
tain the brand image of a place (Hankinson, 2004).
Tourists’ perceptions of a destination’s natural areas,
such as parks, lakes, and rivers, could positively
influence their satisfaction (Beerli & Martín, 2004;
Chen & Phou, 2013; Chi & Qu, 2008), so they should
be well-kept. The government should continue to
invest in urban development for the benefits of both
the tourists and the residents of the city.
Similar to the findings by multiple tourism
researches as mentioned earlier, tourist satisfaction
positively influenced destination loyalty. Satisfied
tourists would not only intend to return to Shanghai,
but also to spread positive word-of-mouth about the
city, which could influence other tourists’ intentions
to visit it. Since tourist satisfaction was significantly
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 403
influenced by “culture”, “upkeeping”, “infrastructure”
and “tourism offerings,” and it mediated their effects
on destination loyalty, the satisfaction of tourists
with the city as a result of those image components
has to be ensured.
Nevertheless, the tourists had a higher intention to
recommend Shanghai than to revisit it. Tourists, even
though satisfied, are less likely to return to the same
destination especially if most of their travel goals at
the destination can be accomplished within a few
days, as found by Hui, Wan, and Ho (2007) among
tourists in Singapore. The average number of days a
tourist spent in Shanghai as recorded in 2017 was
merely 3.3 days (SMSB, 2018). Besides that, satisfac-
tions with different attributes of a destination could
have different effects on revisit intention (Correia,
Zins, & Silva, 2015). Future research could assess the
relationships between intention to revisit and satisfac-
tion with each destination attribute separately.
Contributions and Implications
Theoretically, this paper contributes to the tourism lit-
erature by introducing a new method to measure des-
tination image that is based on the sustainability
concept. This study has shown that the manifest attri-
butes of a destination, such as tourist attractions,
environmental conditions, and infrastructures, can
be analyzed in a latent manner in the form of the sus-
tainability dimensions. The findings of this paper con-
tribute to an understanding of tourists’ satisfaction
and destination loyalty as a result of their perceptions
of the destination in the context of sustainable
tourism. Additionally, this study demonstrates the
differences in perceptions and loyalty intentions
between tourists of different nationality, travel experi-
ence, and online behavior. Since many sustainable
tourism studies investigate the residents’ perspectives,
this study’s take on the tourists’ perspectives in terms
of destination image is a fresh approach that adds to
extant sustainable tourism research. Beyond that, the
measurement items used in this study could act as
indicators of sustainable urban tourism for the
benefit of future research.
On the practical side, this paper has established a
method to assess and monitor the sustainability of
tourism in urban destinations which can be adopted
by governments and destination organizations. It is
recommended that the authorities survey the tourists
from time to time to ascertain the sustainability of a
destination from the tourists’ standpoint in order to
404 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
implement measures to ensure sustainable tourism.
Specifically, the findings of this study are applicable
to the government, destination organizations, and
tourism players of Shanghai. The research shows
that Shanghai projects great socioeconomic image
and fairly good cultural image, but it does not
perform so well in the environmental aspect. The
city is thought to be very crowded and polluted by
the tourists. Shanghai is set to be a global financial
center; it is important for this city to develop in a sus-
tainable manner, which means none of the sustain-
ability dimensions should be compromised.
The authorities have to work on reducing negative
environmental impacts in the city for the wellbeing of
the tourists and the residents. To manage the traffic,
Shanghai could take a cue from its neighboring city,
Hangzhou, which uses cloud computing and artificial
intelligence to reduce traffic congestions (Li, 2018).
Shanghai could also implement methods to redirect
tourists to other less crowded districts in the city
during peak holiday seasons through creative market-
ing campaigns (refer to Baskas, 2019). Real-time
crowd-tracking application like the Disney Resort
app could be invented and rolled out for tourists to
use while traveling in the city. Minimizing tourists’
stress and inconveniences by ensuring seamless tra-
veling experiences should be the objectives of all seg-
ments in the industry (Jaapar et al., 2017). Most
importantly, reductions in people and traffic could
facilitate efficient environmental management, bring-
ing about positive environmental impacts.
On another note, due to increasing competition in
the tourism industry, the government and tourism
players in Shanghai should work toward developing
quality and differentiated/unique tourism offerings in
the city to establish tourist satisfaction and loyalty. A
destination should be positioned based on the expec-
tations of tourists that it can satisfy in a superior
manner so that its distinctive images can be well
communicated (Kotler & Keller, 2012). Destination
marketers should promote Shanghai’s competitive
advantages, particularly its socioeconomic strengths,
to create impactful images of the city in the minds
of the tourists.
Limitations and future research
recommendations
The dimensions and items for the survey of this study
were developed from literature review and conceptual
framework, and tested using a pilot study. Future
research may conduct a Delphi study with qualified
experts to validate the intended concepts. A question
on the standard of living of the locals was removed
from the survey due to inability of the respondents
to answer it. Future research could study the possible
effects of residents’ quality of life on tourist satisfac-
tion and loyalty toward a destination. The sample of
this research included tourists from multiple countries
around the world. Future research could assess tour-
ists from a specific country to yield a more accurate
understanding of the tourists. Future research could
also study tourists’ motivations to engage in sustain-
able tourism activities and their associations with sat-
isfaction and destination loyalty.
This research investigated the satisfaction and
loyalty intentions of the tourists toward Shanghai
cross-sectionally. However, since there are many com-
petitors in the global tourism market, tourists would
likely not remain loyal to a particular destination in
the long run. Haumann, Quaiser, Wieseke, and Rese
(2014) established that the positive effect of satisfac-
tion on loyalty decreases over time. Customers who
are not highly satisfied will easily switch when better
offers come along (Kotler & Keller, 2012). Future
study could use the longitudinal approach to find
out if the tourists actually recommend or return to
the destination in question. Aside from examining
the tourists, future research may investigate whether
the residents’ perceived impacts of tourism on their
community or the destination they live in influence
their intention to recommend the destination.
In conclusion, Shanghai has the capacity to satisfy
and retain tourists from multiple countries worldwide.
This study has established associations between
tourist profiles, destination image, satisfaction, and
destination loyalty within the concept of sustainable
tourism. The government, destination marketers, and
tourism providers in Shanghai could make use of the
findings of this study for the city’s tourism develop-
ment and marketing purposes. Since the tourism
industry plays a major part in ensuring the sustainable
development of a destination, ongoing efforts by all
stakeholders, including researchers, to achieve sus-
tainable urban tourism should be strongly encour-
aged, whether in Shanghai or in other places around
the world.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the experts involved in this study
for their valuable suggestions and feedback.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
ORCID
Say Wah Lee http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6561-2030
References
Akis, S., Peristianis, N., & Warner, J. (1996). Residents’ attitudes to
tourism development: The case of Cyprus. Tourism
Management, 17(7), 481–494. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177
(96)00066-0.
Andereck, K., & Nyaupane, G. (2011). Exploring the nature of
tourism and quality of life perceptions among residents.
Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 248–260. doi:10.1177/
0047287510362918.
Ap, J., & Crompton, J. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism
impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 120–130.
doi:10.1177/004728759803700203
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Hughes, K. (2009). Tourists’ support for
conservation messages and sustainable management prac-
tices in wildlife tourism experiences. Tourism Management,
30(5), 658–664. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.11.003.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. (1999). A model of destination image
formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897.
doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4
Baskas, H. (2019, June 16). From Amsterdam to Venice, the impact
of too many tourists sparks outrage and action. Retrieved from
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/14/too-many-tourists-from-
amsterdam-to-venice-tourism-sparks-outrage.html
Beerli, A., & Martín, J. (2004). Factors influencing destination
image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 657–681. doi:10.
1016/j.annals.2004.01.010.
Bhuiyan, M., Siwar, C., & Ismail, S. (2016). Sustainability measure-
ment for ecotourism destination in Malaysia: A study on Lake
Kenyir, Terengganu. Social Indicators Research, 128, 1029–
1045. doi:10.1007/s11205-015-1068-5.
Boley, B., McGehee, N., & Hammett, A. (2017). Importance-per-
formance analysis (IPA) of sustainable tourism initiatives:
The resident perspective. Tourism Management, 58, 66–77.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.002.
Boo, S., Busser, J., & Baloglu, S. (2009). A model of customer-based
brand equity and its application to multiple destinations.
Tourism Management, 30(2), 219–231. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.
2008.06.003.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., & Zeithaml, V. (1993). A dynamic
process model of service quality: From expectations to behav-
ioral intentions. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), 7–27.
doi:10.1177/002224379303000102
Burns, A., Veeck, A., & Bush, R. (2017). Marketing research (8th ed.).
Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
Calantone, R., Di Benedetto, C., Hakam, A., & Bojanic, D. (1989).
Multiple multinational tourism positioning using correspon-
dence analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 28(2), 25–32.
doi:10.1177/004728758902800207.
Cánoves, G., Villarino, M., Priestley, G., & Blanco, A. (2004). Rural
tourism in Spain: An analysis of recent evolution. Geoforum,
35(6), 755–769. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.03.005.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 405
Chakraborty, R. (2017). Estimation of greatest lower bound
reliability of academic delay of gratification scale. IOSR
Journal of Research & Method in Education, 7(2), 75–79.
doi:10.9790/7388-0702017579.
Chan, J. (2015, June 18). Shanghai seizes chance to enhance ‘soft
power’ with Expo Milano. Retrieved from https://www.
campaignasia.com/article/shanghai-seizes-chance-to-
enhance-soft-power-with-expo-milano/398812
Chen, J. (2000). An investigation of urban residents’ loyalty to
tourism. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(1), 5–
19. doi:10.1177/109634800002400101.
Chen, C. F., & Phou, S. (2013). A closer look at destination:
Image, personality, relationship and loyalty. Tourism
Management, 36, 269–278. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.11.
015.
Chi, C. G., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships
of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination
loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism Management, 29(4),
624–636. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2007.06.007.
Childress, R., & Crompton, J. (1997). A comparison of alternative
direct and discrepancy approaches to measuring quality of
performance at a festival. Journal of Travel Research, 36(2),
43–57. doi:10.1177/004728759703600207
ChinaDragonTours. (2015). National intangible cultural heritages
list. Retrieved from https://www.chinadragontours.com/
category/china-guide/china-intangible-cultural-heritage/
national-intangible-cultural-heritages-list
Choi, H., & Murray, I. (2010). Resident attitudes toward sustain-
able community tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18
(4), 575–594. doi:10.1080/09669580903524852.
Choi, H., & Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability indicators for mana-
ging community tourism. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1274–
1289.
Churchill, G. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures
of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1),
64–73. doi:10.1177/002224377901600110.
Cole, S. (2006). Information and empowerment: The keys to
achieving sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 14(6), 629–644. doi:10.2167/jost607.0.
Correia, A., Zins, A., & Silva, F. (2015). Why do tourists persist in
visiting the same destination? Tourism Economics, 21(1),
205–221. doi:10.5367/te.2014.0443.
Cottrell, S., Van der Duim, R., Ankersmid, P., & Kelder, L. (2004).
Measuring the sustainability of tourism in Manuei Antonio
and Texel: A tourist perspective. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 12(5), 409–431. doi:10.1080/09669580408667247.
Crompton, J. (1979). An assessment of the image of Mexico as a
vacation destination and the influence of geographical
location upon that image. Journal of Travel Research, 17(4),
18–23. doi:10.1177/004728757901700404.
Crosby, L., & Stephens, N. (1987). Effects of relationship marketing
on satisfaction, retention, and prices in the life insurance
industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(4), 404–411.
doi:10.1177/002224378702400408
Echtner, C., & Ritchie, J. (1993). The measurement of destination
image: An empirical assessment. Journal of Travel Research, 31
(4), 3–13. doi:10.1177/004728759303100402.
Embacher, J., & Buttle, F. (1989). A repertory grid analysis of
Austria’s image as a summer vacation destination. Journal
of Travel Research, 27(3), 3–7. doi:10.1177/0047287589027
00302
406 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
Enright, M., & Newton, J. (2004). Tourism destination competitive-
ness: A quantitative approach. Tourism Management, 25(6),
777–788. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2004.06.008.
Fakeye, P., & Crompton, J. (1991). Image differences between pro-
spective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the Lower Rio
Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research, 30(2), 10–16.
doi:10.1177/004728759103000202.
Faulkner, B., & Tideswell, C. (1997). A framework for monitoring
community impacts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5(1), 3–
28. doi:10.1080/09669589708667273
Fong, S. F., Lo, M. C., Songan, P., & Nair, V. (2017). Self-efficacy and
sustainable rural tourism development: Local communities’
perspectives from Kuching, Sarawak. Asia Pacific Journal of
Tourism Research, 22(2), 147–159. doi:10.1080/10941665.
2016.1208668.
Fons, M., Fierro, J., & Patiño, M. (2011). Rural tourism: A sustain-
able alternative. Applied Energy, 88(2), 551–557. doi:10.1016/
j.apenergy.2010.08.031.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M., Anderson, E., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. (1996).
The American customer satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose,
and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 7–18. doi:10.1177/
002224299606000403.
Gartner, W. (1989). Tourism image: Attribute measurement of
state tourism products using multidimensional scaling.
Journal of Travel Research, 28(2), 16–20. doi:10.1177/
004728758902800205
Gartner, W., & Ruzzier, M. (2011). Tourism destination brand
equity dimensions: Renewal versus repeat market. Journal of
Travel Research, 50(5), 471–481. doi:10.1177/004728751037
9157.
Gearing, C., Swart, W., & Var, T. (1974). Establishing a measure of
touristic attractiveness. Journal of Travel Research, 12(4), 1–8.
doi:10.1177/004728757401200401.
Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident attitudes: A
structural modeling approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29
(1), 79–105. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00028-7.
Güzeller, C., & Çelİker, N. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of
tourism research for the period 2007–2016. Advances in
Hospitality and Tourism Research, 6(1), 1–22. doi:10.30519/
ahtr.446248.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2014). Multivariate
data analysis (7th ed.). Essex: Pearson.
Hall, C. (2011). Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable
tourism governance: From first- and second-order to third-
order change? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 649–
671. doi:10.1080/09669582.2011.555555.
Hankinson, G. (2004). Relational network brands: Towards a con-
ceptual model of place brands. Journal of Vacation Marketing,
10(2), 109–121. doi:10.1177/135676670401000202.
Haumann, T., Quaiser, B., Wieseke, J., & Rese, M. (2014). Footprints
in the sands of time: A comparative analysis of the effective-
ness of customer satisfaction and customer–company
identification over time. Journal of Marketing, 78(6), 78–102.
doi:10.1509/jm.13.0509.
Hicks, R. (2019, March 7). Of the world’s 100 most polluted cities, 99
are in Asia. Retrieved from https://www.eco-business.com/
news/of-the-worlds-100-most-polluted-cities-99-are-in-asia
Hsu, S. Y., Dehuang, N., & Woodside, A. G. (2009). Storytelling
research of consumers’ self-reports of urban tourism experi-
ences in China. Journal of Business Research, 62(12), 1223–
1254. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.11.006.
Hui, T., Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists’ satisfaction, recommen-
dation and revisiting Singapore. Tourism Management, 28(4),
965–975. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2006.08.008.
Jaapar, M., Musa, G., Moghavvemi, S., & Saub, R. (2017). Dental
tourism: Examining tourist profiles, motivation and satisfac-
tion. Tourism Management, 61, 538–552. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2017.02.023.
Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2016). Measuring environmentally sus-
tainable tourist behaviour. Annals of Tourism Research, 59,
30–44. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.03.006.
Keller, K. (2013). Strategic brand management: Building, measur-
ing, and managing brand equity (4th ed.). Essex: Pearson.
Kim, J. H., & Ritchie, J. R. (2013). Cross-cultural validation of a
memorable tourism experience scale (MTES). Journal of
Travel Research, 53(3), 323–335. doi:10.1177/
0047287513496468
Kladou, S., & Kehagias, J. (2014). Assessing destination brand equity:
An integrated approach. Journal of Destination Marketing &
Management, 3(1), 2–10. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2013.11.002.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2012). Marketing management (14th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Leung, D., Law, R., Van Hoof, H., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Social media
in tourism and hospitality: A literature review. Journal of Travel
& Tourism Marketing, 30(1–2), 3–22. doi:10.1080/10548408.
2013.750919.
Li, Y. (2018, December 10). Tech-savvy Hangzhou tries out new
‘City Brain’. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/
cndy/2018-12/10/content_37378664.htm
Liu, J. C., & Var, T. (1986). Resident attitudes toward tourism
impacts in Hawaii. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(2), 193–
214. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(86)90037-X
Manning, E. (2004). Indicators of sustainable development for
tourism destinations: A guidebook. Madrid: World Tourism
Organization.
McKercher, B., Mei, W., & Tse, T. (2006). Are short duration cultural
festivals tourist attractions? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14
(1), 55–66. doi:10.1080/09669580608668591.
Miller, G. (2001). The development of indicators for sustainable
tourism: Results of a Delphi survey of tourism researchers.
Tourism Management, 22(4), 351–362. doi:10.1016/S0261-
5177(00)00067-4.
Miller, D., Merrilees, B., & Coghlan, A. (2015). Sustainable urban
tourism: Understanding and developing visitor pro-environ-
mental behaviours. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(1), 26–
46. doi:10.1080/09669582.2014.912219.
Milman, A., & Pizam, A. (1995). The role of awareness and famili-
arity with a destination: The Central Florida case. Journal of
Travel Research, 33(3), 21–27. doi:10.1177/
004728759503300304
National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2018). China statistical
Yearbook 2018. Beijing: China Statistics Press.
Oh, H., Fiore, A., & Jeoung, M. (2007). Measuring experience
economy concepts: Tourism applications. Journal of Travel
Research, 46(2), 119–132. doi:10.1177/0047287507304039
Oppermann, M. (1996). Convention destination images: Analysis
of association meeting planners’ perceptions. Tourism
Management, 17(3), 175–182. doi:10.1016/0261-5177
(96)00004-0
Otto, J., & Ritchie, J. (1996). The service experience in tourism.
Tourism Management, 17(3), 165–174. doi:10.1016/0261-5177
(96)00003-9

Prayag, G., & Ryan, C. (2011). Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to
Mauritius: The role and influence of destination image,
place attachment, personal involvement, and satisfaction.
Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 342–356. doi:10.1177/
0047287511410321.
Puczkó, L., & Rátz, T. (2000). Tourist and resident perceptions of
the physical impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary:
Issues for sustainable tourism management. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 8(6), 458–477. doi:10.1080/
09669580008667380.
Qu, H., Kim, L., & Im, H. (2011). A model of destination branding:
Integrating the concepts of the branding and destination
image. Tourism Management, 32(3), 465–476. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2010.03.014.
Schroeder, T. (1996). The relationship of residents’ image of their
state as a tourist destination and their support for tourism.
Journal of Travel Research, 34(4), 71–73. doi:10.1177/
004728759603400411
Shanghai Municipal Statistics Bureau. (2018). Shanghai statistical
Yearbook 2018. Beijing: China Statistics Press.
Simpson, M. (2008). Community benefit tourism initiatives—A
conceptual oxymoron? Tourism Management, 29(1), 1–18.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2007.06.005
Sörensson, A., & Von Friedrichs, Y. (2013). An importance–per-
formance analysis of sustainable tourism: A comparison
between international and national tourists. Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management, 2(1), 14–21. doi:10.
1016/j.jdmm.2012.11.002.
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2014). Using multivariate statistics (6th
ed.). Essex: Pearson.
Tang, C. (2014). The study of festival tourism development of
Shanghai. International Journal of Business and Social Science,
5(4), 52–58. Retrieved from http://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/
Vol_5_No_4_Special_Issue_March_2014/6.pdf
Tasci, A. D., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Destination image and its
functional relationships. Journal of Travel Research, 45(4),
413–425. doi:10.1177/0047287507299569.
Timur, S., & Getz, D. (2009). Sustainable tourism development:
How do destination stakeholders perceive sustainable urban
tourism? Sustainable Development, 17(4), 220–232. doi:10.
1002/sd.384.
Tse, D., & Wilton, P. (1988). Models of consumer satisfaction for-
mation: An extension. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2),
204–212. doi:10.1177/002224378802500209.
Um, S., & Crompton, J. L. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism
destination choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3), 432–448.
doi:10.1016/0160-7383(90)90008-F
United Nations. (2016). The world’s cities in 2016. Retrieved
from https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/
publications/pdf/urbanization/the_worlds_cities_in_2016_data_
booklet.pdf
United Nations. (2018). World urbanization prospects: The 2018
revision. Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wup
United Nations. (2019). World population prospects 2019.
Retrieved from https://population.un.org/wpp
United Nations Development Programme. (2015, September 25).
World leaders adopt Sustainable Development Goals.
Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/
home/presscenter/pressreleases/2015/09/24/undp-welcomes-
adoption-of-sustainable-development-goals-by-world-leaders.
html
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 407
United Nations Environment Programme & United Nations World
Tourism Organization. (2012). Tourism in the green economy –
Background report. Madrid: United Nations World Tourism
Organization. doi:10.18111/9789284414529.
Viechtbauer, W., Smits, L., Kotz, D., Budé, L., Spigt, M.,
Serroyen, J., & Crutzen, R. (2015). A simple formula for the cal-
culation of sample size in pilot studies. Journal of Clinical
Epidemiology, 68(11), 1375–1379. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.
04.014.
Wang, C. Y., & Hsu, M. K. (2010). The relationships of destination
image, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: An integrated
model. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(8), 829–843.
doi:10.1080/10548408.2010.527249.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987).
Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wu, C. W. (2016). Destination loyalty modeling of the global
tourism. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2213–2219.
doi10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.032.
Wu, J., & Barnes, T. (2008). Local planning and global implemen-
tation: Foreign investment and urban development of
Pudong, Shanghai. Habitat International, 32(3), 364–374.
doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.11.003.
Xiong, L., Zhang, X., & Hu, C. (2016). Sustainable development for
Chinese urban heritage tourism: Insights from travelers in
Shanghai. Travel and tourism research Association:
Advancing tourism research Globally, 32. Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.umass.edu/ttra/2012/Oral/32
Ye, X., Scott, N., Ding, P., & Huang, Y. (2012). Residents’ attitudes
toward the 2010 world Expo in Shanghai prior to and during
the event. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(8), 1087–1105.
doi:10.1080/09669582.2012.673620.
Yiyao, W. (2016, March 28). Shanghai aims to become world’s top
financial center by 2020. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.
com.cn/business/2016-03/28/content_24141194.htm
Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected
marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195–211. doi:10.1177/
0092070300282002
Yoon, Y., Gursoy, D., & Chen, J. (2001). Validating a tourism devel-
opment theory with structural equation modeling. Tourism
Management, 22(4), 363–372. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177
(00)00062-5.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of
motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural
model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45–56. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2003.08.016.
Žabkar, V., Brenčič, M., & Dmitrović, T. (2010). Modelling per-
ceived quality, visitor satisfaction and behavioural intentions
at the destination level. Tourism Management, 31(4), 537–
546. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.06.005.
Zeithaml, V., Berry, L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral
consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2),
31–46. doi:10.1177/002224299606000203.
Zeng, B., & Gerritsen, R. (2014). What do we know about social
media in tourism? A review. Tourism Management
Perspectives, 10, 27–36. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2014.01.001.
Zhang, H., Fu, X., Cai, L., & Lu, L. (2014). Destination image and
tourist loyalty: A meta-analysis. Tourism Management, 40,
213–223. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.006.
Zhang, H., Gu, C. L., Gu, L. W., & Zhang, Y. (2011). The evaluation of
tourism destination competitiveness by TOPSIS & information
408 S. W. LEE AND K. XUE
entropy – a case in the Yangtze River Delta of China. Tourism
Management, 32(2), 443–451. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.02.
007.
Zheng, Y., Wang, J., Tsai, S. B., Li, G., Wang, J., & Zhou, J. (2017).
Research on customer satisfaction in marine cultural and sus-
tainable tourism—a case study of Shanghai. Sustainability, 9
(6), 921. doi:10.3390/su9060921.
Zhong, L., Deng, J., Song, Z., & Ding, P. (2011). Research on
environmental impacts of tourism in China: Progress and pro-
spect. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(11), 2972–
2983. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.07.011.
Appendix
Algerian, American, Armenian, Australian, Austrian, Bangladeshi,
Belarusian, Belgian, Brazilian, Bulgarian, British, Canadian,
Chilean, Chinese, Congolese, Czech, Dutch, Estonian, Fijian, Fili-
pino, French, German, Indian, Indonesian, Iranian, Israeli, Italian,
Japanese, Kazakh, Kenyan, Lithuanian, Macedonian, Malaysian,
Mexican, Mongolian, Moroccan, Nepali, New Zealander, Nigerian,
Norwegian, Pakistani, Peruvian, Polish, Romanian, Russian, Saudi
Arabian, Serbian, South African, South Korean, Spanish, Sri
Lankan, Swedish, Swiss, Thai, Tunisian, Turkish, Ukrainian, and
Vietnamese.