IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v16y2026i14p1485-d1985834.html

Determinants of Tourists’ Choice of Mountain Tourism Destinations

Author

Listed:
  • Iulia C. Mureșan

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Horticulture and Business in Rural Development, University of Agricultural Sciences, 400372 Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

  • Giorgi Gogitidze

    (School of Business and Management, Grigol Robakidze University, 0159 Tbilisi, Georgia)

  • Iulia Sorina Dan

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Horticulture and Business in Rural Development, University of Agricultural Sciences, 400372 Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

  • Marioara Ilea

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Horticulture and Business in Rural Development, University of Agricultural Sciences, 400372 Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

  • Garofița Loredana Ilieș

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Horticulture and Business in Rural Development, University of Agricultural Sciences, 400372 Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

  • Mădălina Maria Brezuleanu

    (Engineering and Management Department, Faculty of Industrial Design and Business Management, Gheorghe Asachi Technical University, 700050 Iasi, Romania)

  • Olivia Paula Oros

    (Department of Animal Husbandry and Agritourism, Faculty of Environmental Protection, University of Oradea, 410048 Oradea, Romania)

  • Diana E. Dumitras

    (Department of Economic Sciences, Faculty of Horticulture and Business in Rural Development, University of Agricultural Sciences, 400372 Cluj-Napoca, Romania)

Abstract

Mountain tourism plays an important role in sustainable rural development; it is closely linked to agrotourism practices, the use of methodological indicators for sustainability assessment, and the adoption of innovative and strategic management approaches. This study compares the key determinants that shape domestic mountain tourism destination choice among residents of Romania and Georgia. Based on 411 questionnaires in Romania and 440 in Georgia, principal component analysis (PCA) was employed, followed by ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests. Four factors emerged in Romania, namely basic services, cultural activities, adventure tourism, and natural beauty, while in Georgia, these dimensions consolidated into two broader factors: basic services and natural beauty, and cultural and adventure activities. The results highlight differences in how tourists from the two countries structure and prioritize mountain tourism attributes, reflecting specific local contexts. The study contributes to filling the research gap concerning the influence of local particularities on destination choice in mountain areas and provides comparative evidence that destination choice determinants may be structured differently across mountain destinations.

Suggested Citation

  • Iulia C. Mureșan & Giorgi Gogitidze & Iulia Sorina Dan & Marioara Ilea & Garofița Loredana Ilieș & Mădălina Maria Brezuleanu & Olivia Paula Oros & Diana E. Dumitras, 2026. "Determinants of Tourists’ Choice of Mountain Tourism Destinations," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:16:y:2026:i:14:p:1485-:d:1985834
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/16/14/1485/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/16/14/1485/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jagris:v:16:y:2026:i:14:p:1485-:d:1985834. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.