IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v184y2026ics138993412600033x.html

Is expectation disconfirmation related to stakeholder satisfaction and willingness to engage in national parks? A case study of Shennongjia National Park in China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Yangyang
  • Fu, Zhen
  • Xiang, Yang
  • Peng, Chucai
  • Teng, Mingjun
  • Zeng, Lixiong
  • Yang, Wanji
  • Pan, Lei
  • Wang, Pengcheng

Abstract

As the construction of national parks progresses, core stakeholders evaluate the gap between their actual outcomes and their psychological expectations across economic, social, cultural, and ecological dimensions. Drawing on expectation disconfirmation theory, this study conceptualizes this cognitive gap as expectation disconfirmation, defined from a subjective perspective as the extent to which stakeholders' psychological expectations remain unmet, reflected in the degree of negative disconfirmation. This study, based on the pilot area of Shennongjia National Park in Hubei Province, China, employs structural equation modeling to systematically examine the direct and indirect pathways among three categories of core stakeholders (N = 605). The analysis focuses on economic expectation disconfirmation (EED), social expectation disconfirmation (SED), cultural expectation disconfirmation (CED), and ecological expectation disconfirmation (EcED), and their relationships with stakeholder satisfaction and participation intention. The results indicate that (1) During the construction of the national park, different types of stakeholders exhibit both shared and distinct patterns of expectation disconfirmation. Among these, EED and SED consistently merged as the primary dimensions prioritized across groups. (2) CED varied significantly among stakeholder groups, with notable differences in its influence on satisfaction and participation intention. Specifically, for land users, the pathway linking CED to satisfaction and participation intention was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). In contrast, for individual operators and government officials, CED showed a significant indirect pathway association with participation intention through satisfaction (p < 0.05). (3) For land users, ED, SED, and EcED all exhibited significant negative associations with lower levels of satisfaction and weaker participation intention. Among individual operators and government officials, the relationship between expectation disconfirmation and participation intention is primarily mediated by satisfaction, underscoring its crucial role in shaping stakeholder engagement. (4) Furthermore, there was a significant positive pathway association between satisfaction and participation intention (p < 0.01). Within the cross-sectional research framework, the findings indicate a systematic relationship among the levels of expectation disconfirmation of different stakeholders, satisfaction, and participation intention, providing empirical insights into exploring stakeholder participation mechanisms in national park community governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Yangyang & Fu, Zhen & Xiang, Yang & Peng, Chucai & Teng, Mingjun & Zeng, Lixiong & Yang, Wanji & Pan, Lei & Wang, Pengcheng, 2026. "Is expectation disconfirmation related to stakeholder satisfaction and willingness to engage in national parks? A case study of Shennongjia National Park in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:184:y:2026:i:c:s138993412600033x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2026.103728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993412600033X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2026.103728?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:184:y:2026:i:c:s138993412600033x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.