Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Factors Affecting Tourist Satisfaction in Ecotourism: A Case Study of the Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, Vietnam Cover

Factors Affecting Tourist Satisfaction in Ecotourism: A Case Study of the Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, Vietnam

Quaestiones Geographicae
Volume 44 (2025): Issue 2 (June 2025)
By: ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Jul 2025
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Fig. 1.

The proposed model of the study.

Table 1.

Independent variables of the proposed model.

Independent variablesObserved variablesEncryptionSources
SightseeingNatural and cultural attractionsSS1Tarlow (2014), Toker, Emir (2023), Mbira (2024), Phung et al. (2024)
Convenience in travelling to locationsSS2
Safety at attractionsSS3
Ecotour guideLanguage proficiencyEG1Geva, Goldman (1991), Ap, Wong (2001), Huynh et al. (2024), Zhang, Fukami (2024)
Friendliness, professionalism and enthusiasmEG2
Presentation skillsEG3
Information and educational content providedEG4
TransportEasy access to transportTS1Iniesta-Bonillo et al. (2016), Rohini (2024)
Available means of transportTS2
Transport safetyTS3
Food and beverageAvailability of food and beverage servicesFB1Björk, Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016), Stone et al. (2018), Peng, Jiang (2022)
Standards of hygiene and quality of food servicesFB2
Variety of cuisine optionsFB3
Staff professionalism and service qualityFB4
AccommodationAvailability of accommodationAS1Oliver (2014), Carvache-Franco et al. (2022), Sugiama et al. (2022)
Accommodation qualityAS2
Staff professionalism and service qualityAS3
Entertainment and shoppingVarious recreational activitiesES1Hong, Saizen (2019), Cheraghzadeh et al. (2023), Shang et al. (2023)
Various souvenirsES2
Staff professionalism and service qualityES3
PriceEntrance ticketsPS1Rivera and Croes (2010), Hau (2014), Chua et al. (2015) and Giao et al. (2021)
TransportPS2
Food and beveragePS3
AccommodationPS4
Entertainment and shoppingPS5
Public facilitiesClean water availabilityPF1An et al. (2024), Baloch et al. (2023), Giao et al. (2021), Mandić et al. (2018) and Luo et al. (2022)
Communication systemsPF2
Garbage dumpsPF3
Parking areasPF4
Public signsPF5
Security facilitiesPF6
Health facilitiesPF7
Rest areasPF8
Interpretative facilitiesPF9
Table 2.

Sociodemographic aspects of respondents (N = 185).

DemographicsCategoriesNPercentage (%)
NationalityNational9853.0
Foreign8747.0
GenderMale7741.7
Female10858.3
Age (years)18–28126.7
29–487842
49–655228.2
>6552.6
Education levelPrimary31.6
Secondary4021.8
University11561.9
Postgraduate/Master/PhD2714.8
Professional activityStudent4624.9
Researcher/scientist84.1
Businessman168.5
Private employee5328.5
Public employee2614.2
Unemployed52.6
Retired42.1
Other158.3
Table 3.

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for each variable.

Independent variablesCronbach’s alphaNo. of items
Sightseeing0.8343
Ecotour guide0.8044
Transport0.8103
Food and beverage0.7344
Accommodation0.7333
Price0.8235
Public facilities0.8078
Table 4.

Exploratory factor analysis.

FactorsObserved variablesFactor loading
Factor 1SS10.772
SS20.706
SS30.710
TS30.688
FB30.606
Factor 2TS10.784
TS20.742
FB10.669
FB20.726
AS10.739
AS20.682
Factor 3ES10.830
ES20.771
ES30.770
EG40.769
FB40.703
AS30.687
Factor 4PS10.706
PS20.692
PS30.678
PS40.619
PS50.625
Factor 5PF20.620
PF30.721
PF40.671
PF50.676
PF60.673
PF70.687
PF80.541
PF90.645

1 Eigenvalue: 1.069.

1 TVE: 70.4%.

1 KMO measure of sampling adequacy: 0.872.

1 Bartlett’s test: Sig. = 0.000.

1 KMO – Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin; TVE – total variance explained

Table 5.

Factors affecting tourist satisfaction.

FactorsObserved variablesEncryption
Destination attractionNatural and cultural attractionsSS1
Convenience on travelling to locationSS2
Safety at attractionSS3
Transport safetyTS3
Variety of cuisine optionsFB3
Ecotourism servicesEasy access to transportTS1
Available means of transportTS2
Availability of food and beverage servicesFB1
Standards of hygiene and quality of food servicesFB2
Accommodation availabilityAS1
Accommodation qualityAS2
Staff qualityLanguage proficiencyES1
Friendliness, professionalism and enthusiasmES2
Presentation skillsES3
Information and educational content providedEG4
Staff professionalism and service quality of food servicesFB4
Staff professionalism and service quality of accommodationAS3
PriceEntrance ticketPS1
TransportPS2
Food and beveragePS3
AccommodationPS4
Entertainment and shoppingPS5
InfrastructureCommunication systemsPF2
Garbage dumpsPF3
Parking areasPF4
Public signsPF5
Security facilitiesPF6
Health facilitiesPF7
Rest areasPF8
Interpretative facilitiesPF9
Table 6.

Research hypotheses.

OrderHypotheses
H1Destination attractions have a positive impact on tourist satisfaction at the PNKBNP.
H2Ecotourism services have a positive impact on tourist satisfaction at the PNKBNP.
H3Staff quality has a positive impact on tourist satisfaction at the PNKBNP.
H4Price has a positive impact on tourist satisfaction at the PNKBNP.
H5Infrastructure has a positive impact on tourist satisfaction at the PNKBNP.

1 PNKBNP – Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park.

Table 7.

Model summary.

ModelRR2Adjusted R2Std. error of the estimate
10.9250.8560.8400.28414
Table 8.

ANOVA table of regression model.

ModelSum of squaresdfMean squareFp-value
1Regression98.568234.28653.0820.00
Residual16.6322060.081
Total115.200229

1 ANOVA – analysis of variance

Table 9.

The variance inflation factor (VIF) of regression analysis.

ModelCollinearity statistics
ToleranceVIF
1Destination attraction0.7491.259
Ecotourism services0.7661.324
Staff quality0.7301.370
Price0.7931.421
Infrastructure0.7501.258
Table 10.

Coefficients of regression analysis.

HypothesesStandardised coefficients (β)p-valueDecision
Regression constant (β0)0.1970.003
H1Destination attraction → tourist satisfaction0.3220.000Supported
H2Ecotourism services → tourist satisfaction0.2130.005Supported
H3Staff quality → tourist satisfaction0.0090.000Supported
H4Price → tourist satisfaction0.0760.006Supported
H5Infrastructure → tourist satisfaction0.0960.027Supported
Fig. 2.

The final model of the study.

1.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following sightseeing services?

Factors12345
Natural attractions (flora and fauna)▯▯▯▯▯
Price of entrance tickets▯▯▯▯▯
Convenience on travelling to locations▯▯▯▯▯
Safety at attractions (presence of rescue teams)▯▯▯▯▯
2.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following ecotour guide?

Factors12345
Language proficiency▯▯▯▯▯
Friendliness, professionalism and enthusiasm▯▯▯▯▯
Presentation skills▯▯▯▯▯
Information and educational content provided▯▯▯▯▯
6.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following shopping and entertainment services?

Factors12345
Various recreational activities▯▯▯▯▯
Various souvenirs▯▯▯▯▯
Staff professionalism and service quality▯▯▯▯▯
7.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following price of services?

Factors12345
Entrance tickets▯▯▯▯▯
Transport▯▯▯▯▯
Food and beverage▯▯▯▯▯
Accommodation▯▯▯▯▯
Entertainment and shopping▯▯▯▯▯
8.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following public facilities?

Factors12345
Clean water availability▯▯▯▯▯
Communication systems▯▯▯▯▯
Garbage dumps▯▯▯▯▯
Parking areas▯▯▯▯▯
Public signs▯▯▯▯▯
Security facilities▯▯▯▯▯
Health facilities▯▯▯▯▯
Rest areas▯▯▯▯▯
Interpretative facilities▯▯▯▯▯
3.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following transport services?

Factors12345
Easy access to transport▯▯▯▯▯
Available means of transport▯▯▯▯▯
Transport cost▯▯▯▯▯
Transport safety▯▯▯▯▯
4.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following food and beverage services?

Factors12345
Food and beverage availability▯▯▯▯▯
Standards of hygiene and quality of food services▯▯▯▯▯
Variety of cuisine options▯▯▯▯▯
Staff professionalism and service quality▯▯▯▯▯
5.

In your opinion, what is your level of satisfaction with the following accommodation services?

Factors12345
Accommodation availability (e.g. homestay, hotel, camping)▯▯▯▯▯
Accommodation quality▯▯▯▯▯
Staff professionalism and service quality▯▯▯▯▯
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/quageo-2025-0018 | Journal eISSN: 2081-6383 | Journal ISSN: 2082-2103 (formerly 0137-477X)
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 77 - 94
Submitted on: Sep 22, 2024
Accepted on: Apr 8, 2025
Published on: Jul 2, 2025
Published by: Adam Mickiewicz University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
ecotourism,
satisfaction,
tourist,
SPSS,
Phong Nha-Ke Bang
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geography

© 2025 ANH TOAI LE, LESZEK BUTOWSKI, ŁUKASZ QUIRINI-POPŁAWSKI, HOANG SON NGUYEN, published by Adam Mickiewicz University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 44 (2025): Issue 2 (June 2025)
Previous article
Next article