Journal of Resources and Ecology >
The Moderating Effect of the Ski Resort Environment on the Skier’s Travel Radius under the Restriction of Skill Consumption
Received date: 2021-10-12
Accepted date: 2022-01-20
Online published: 2022-06-07
Supported by
The National Natural Science Foundation of China(42071199)
The General Project of Scientific Research Program of Beijing Municipal Education Commission(SM202110031002)
The Key Project of National Key Research and Development Plan(2019YFB1405600)
Starting from the skill characteristics of ski tourism, this paper discusses the impact of consumer skill on travel decisions, and the moderating effect of the ski resort’s comprehensive leisure environment (including the ski resort sports environment and the regional cultural tourism environment), in order to both understand their impacts on the travel distance characteristics of skiers and attempt to provide necessary research support for the development of China’s ski industry and the construction of destinations. Based on the data from multi-period visitor surveys, this paper constructs the consumption skill-travel radius decision-making influence model under the moderating effect of the ski resort comprehensive leisure environment. The results show three main characteristics. (1) The travel radius obviously differs among skiers with different skill levels. The skill level of skiers has a significant positive effect on the larger travel radius, and a significant negative effect on the smaller travel radius. That is, skiers with a higher skill level are more inclined to undertake long-distance skiing travel, while skiers with a lower skill level are more inclined to undertake short-distance skiing travel. (2) The comprehensive leisure environment has a significant moderating effect on the skiers’ travel radius, with a significant positive impact on enlarging the travel radius, while the influences on high-skill and low-skill skiers are significantly higher than on middle-skill skiers. (3) In the comprehensive leisure environment, there are differences in the moderating effect of the ski resort sports environment and the regional cultural tourism environment on the skiers travel radius, and the positive moderating effect of the ski resort sports environment on the high-skill skiers’ travel radius is more obvious. While the regional cultural tourism environment has a more obvious positive moderating effect on the travel radius of non-skiers and junior skiers, it is more conducive to promoting domestic travel. In general, the skier skill level in China was generally lower, and the ski resort comprehensive leisure environment optimization is conducive to overcoming the limitation of the travel radius caused by the disadvantageous skill level of consumers. However, to promote the development of China’s ski industry in the long run, it is necessary to focus on improving the consumer’s ski skill level, but prevent the risk of losing high-skill consumers overseas. In the course of improving the level of domestic ski sports facilities, we should also focus on the domestic leisure cultural tourism environment to better enhance the attractiveness of domestic ski destinations.
LIU Xiaoquan , YOU Lixin , DONG Shaoxuan , GENG Jing . The Moderating Effect of the Ski Resort Environment on the Skier’s Travel Radius under the Restriction of Skill Consumption[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2022 , 13(4) : 667 -678 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2022.04.012
Fig. 1 Conceptual model diagram of this research |
Table 1 Explanation on the assignments of the Likert 5-score scale for ski age and skiing time |
Score | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ski age (years) | 0≤X≤1 | 1<X≤3 | 3<X≤5 | 5<X≤6 | X>6 |
Average annual skiing time (days) | 0≤Y≤3 | 3<Y≤6 | 6<Y≤9 | 9<Y≤24 | Y>24 |
Table 2 Exploratory factor analysis results |
Factor/item | Factor loading | The eigenvalue | Explanatory variance percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Skill level (α = 0.633) | 1.82 | 15.168 | |
X1. I have more than five years of ski experience | 0.822 | ||
X2. I can ski at different trails levels | 0.838 | ||
X3. My average annual skiing time is longer | 0.575 | ||
Comprehensive environment (α=0.933) | 6.129 | 51.074 | |
W1. Ski trails conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.509 | ||
W2. Ski facilities have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.851 | ||
W3. Coaching service has an important influence on my destination choice | 0.803 | ||
W4. Other travel activities in the ski resort have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.857 | ||
W5. The parent-child service of ski resort has an important influence on my destination choice | 0.817 | ||
W6. Other tourism attractions in the region have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.848 | ||
W7. Regional accommodation and food conditions have an important impact on my destination decision | 0.871 | ||
W8. Regional shopping conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.806 | ||
W9. Regional traffic conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.849 |
Table 3 Results of confirmatory factor analysis |
Factor/item | Std. factor loading | Composite reliability (CR) | Average variance extracted (AVE) |
---|---|---|---|
Skill level (α = 0.633) | 0.778 | 0.544 | |
X1. I have more than five years of ski experience | 0.832*** | ||
X2. I can ski at different trails levels | 0.771*** | ||
X3. My average annual skiing time is longer | 0.587*** | ||
Comprehensive environment (α=0.933) | 0.947 | 0.666 | |
W1. Ski trails conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.627*** | ||
W2. Ski facilities have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.807*** | ||
W3. Coaching service has an important influence on my destination choice | 0.834*** | ||
W4. Other travel activities in the ski resort have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.851*** | ||
W5. The Parent-child service of ski resort has an important influence on my destination choice | 0.822*** | ||
W6. Other tourism attractions in the region have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.837*** | ||
W7. Regional accommodation and food conditions have an important impact on my destination decision | 0.859*** | ||
W8. Regional shopping conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.827*** | ||
W9. Regional traffic conditions have an important influence on my destination decision | 0.853*** |
Note: *** means significance level is P<0.001. |
Table 4 Hypothesis testing results of the model |
Hypothesis | Research path | Standardized path coefficient β | Sig. | Results | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1a | Skill level | → | Urban area | -0.736 | < 0.001*** | Significant negative effect |
H1b | Skill level | → | Province area | -0.157 | 0.04* | Significant negative effect |
H2a | Skill level | → | National area | 0.762 | < 0.001*** | Significant positive effect |
H2b | Skill level | → | Overseas | 0.780 | < 0.001*** | Significant positive effect |
Note: Significance levels: *means 0.01<P<0.05, and *** means P<0.001. |
Table 5 Test results of the ski resort sports environmental moderating effect |
Hypothesis | Path | Standardized path coefficient β | P-Value | t-Value | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H3a | Ski resort sports environment | → | Urban area | -0.259 | 0.010** | -2.576 | Significant negative effect |
H3b | Ski resort sports environment | → | Province area | -0.173 | 0.222 | -1.222 | Rejected |
H3c | Ski resort sports environment | → | National area | 0.207 | 0.045* | 2.001 | Significant positive effect |
H3d | Ski resort sports environment | → | Overseas | 0.308 | 0.000*** | 3.185 | Significant positive effect |
Note: Significance levels: *means 0.01<P<0.05, ** means 0.001<P<0.01, and *** means P<0.001. |
Table 6 Test results of the regional cultural tourism environment moderating effect |
Hypothesis | Path | Standardized path coefficient β | P-Value | t-Value | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H4a | Regional cultural tourism environment | → | Urban area | -0.324 | 0.013* | -2.483 | Significant negative effect |
H4b | Regional cultural tourism environment | → | Province area | 0.100 | 0.582 | 0.550 | Rejected |
H4c | Regional cultural tourism environment | → | National area | 0.441 | 0.000*** | 3.315 | Significant positive effect |
H4d | Regional cultural tourism environment | → | Overseas | 0.316 | 0.011* | 2.546 | Significant positive effect |
Note: Significance levels: *means 0.01<P<0.05, and *** means P<0.001. |
Table 7 Test results of total moderating effect |
Hypothesis | Path | Standardized path coefficient β | P-Value | t-Value | Result | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H5a | Comprehensive leisure environment | → | Urban area | ‒0.385 | 0.000*** | ‒8.15 | Significant negative effect |
H5b | Comprehensive leisure environment | → | Province area | ‒0.099 | 0.035* | ‒2.103 | Significant negative effect |
H5c t | Comprehensive leisure environmen | → | National area | 0.401 | 0.000*** | 8.429 | Significant positive effect |
H5d | Comprehensive leisure environment | → | Overseas | 0.415 | 0.000*** | 8.753 | Significant positive effect |
Note: Significance levels: *means 0.01<P<0.05, and *** means P<0.001. |
[1] |
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] |
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
|
/
〈 | 〉 |