IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i1p472-d716203.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Tourism Development Make Cities More Livable? Investigating 40 Cities in China

Author

Listed:
  • Lei Kang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Zhaoping Yang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Yunxiao Dang

    (College of Land and Urban-Rural Development, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310023, China)

  • Wenzhong Zhang

    (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Caicai Liu

    (Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730030, China)

Abstract

The field of rapid urbanization has recently paid more attention to the relationship between tourism development and liveable city construction. Previous studies have mainly focused on the experiences of tourists in tourist cities and seldom paid attention to the perceptions of local residents. Based on survey data of nearly 10,000 permanent residents in 40 key tourist cities in China, this study uses a multilevel model to quantitatively analyse the natural environment characteristics, sociocultural environment characteristics and comprehensive attraction of tourism in different tourist cities to explore their impact on urban liveability satisfaction. Results show that the developed tourist cities do not exactly correspond to the cities with a high liveability evaluation. The objective evaluation of both the natural environment and the sociocultural environment has an important influence on the liveability of cities, but the influence of the natural environment is stronger than that of the sociocultural environment. An intermediary effect exists in the subjective evaluation of the natural environment and environments for liveability perception. Simultaneously, residents’ liveability satisfaction varies according to their age, education level, annual household income and other social and economic conditions. These findings provide insights for developing countries to further improve residents’ living quality and urban construction under the condition of the rapid development of tourism.

Suggested Citation

  • Lei Kang & Zhaoping Yang & Yunxiao Dang & Wenzhong Zhang & Caicai Liu, 2022. "Can Tourism Development Make Cities More Livable? Investigating 40 Cities in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:472-:d:716203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/472/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/472/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elena Rytova & Svetlana Gutman & Cristina Sousa, 2021. "Regional Inclusive Development: An Assessment of Russian Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    2. Phillips, David R. & Siu, Oi-ling & Yeh, Anthony G.O. & Cheng, Kevin H.C., 2005. "The impacts of dwelling conditions on older persons' psychological well-being in Hong Kong: the mediating role of residential satisfaction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(12), pages 2785-2797, June.
    3. LEE, Chew Ging, 2008. "Tourism And Economic Growth: The Case Of Singapore," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 8(1), pages 89-98.
    4. John V Winters & Yu Li, 2017. "Urbanisation, natural amenities and subjective well-being: Evidence from US counties," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(8), pages 1956-1973, June.
    5. Kim, Kyungmi & Uysal, Muzaffer & Sirgy, M. Joseph, 2013. "How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents?," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 527-540.
    6. Cao, Jason & Ettema, Dick, 2014. "Satisfaction with travel and residential self-selection: How do preferences moderate the impact of the Hiawatha Light Rail Transit line?," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 7(3), pages 93-108.
    7. Michael Shields & Stephen Wheatley Price & Mark Wooden, 2009. "Life satisfaction and the economic and social characteristics of neighbourhoods," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 22(2), pages 421-443, April.
    8. Seetaram, Neelu, 2012. "Immigration and international inbound tourism: Empirical evidence from Australia," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1535-1543.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jianxiong Tang & Chaoyue Cai & Yujing Liu & Jiaxiang Sun, 2022. "Can Tourism Development Help Improve Urban Liveability? An Examination of the Chinese Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-27, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lei Kang & Zhaoping Yang & Fang Han, 2021. "The Impact of Urban Recreation Environment on Residents’ Happiness—Based on a Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Fluhrer, Svenja & Kraehnert, Kati, 2022. "Sitting in the same boat: Subjective well-being and social comparison after an extreme weather event," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Francesca Cornaglia & Naomi E. Feldman & Andrew Leigh, 2014. "Crime and Mental Well-Being," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(1), pages 110-140.
    4. Giovanni Perucca, 2019. "Residents’ Satisfaction with Cultural City Life: Evidence from EU Cities," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 461-478, April.
    5. Thi Truong An Hoang & Andreas Knabe, 2021. "Time Use, Unemployment, and Well-Being: An Empirical Analysis Using British Time-Use Data," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 2525-2548, August.
    6. Salvatore Bimonte & Antonella D’Agostino, 2021. "Tourism development and residents’ well-being: Comparing two seaside destinations in Italy," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(7), pages 1508-1525, November.
    7. Shi Chen & Yi Sun & Bo Kyong Seo, 2022. "The Effects of Public Open Space on Older People’s Well-Being: From Neighborhood Social Cohesion to Place Dependence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Dorota Ciołek & Anna Golejewska & Adriana Zabłocka‐Abi Yaghi, 2022. "Innovation drivers in regions. Does urbanization matter?," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 1933-1960, December.
    9. Hetschko, Clemens & Schöb, Ronnie & Wolf, Tobias, 2020. "Income support, employment transitions and well-being," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    10. Meryem Hayir-Kanat & Jürgen Breuste, 2019. "Which Natural Areas are Preferred for Recreation? An Investigation of the Most Popular Natural Resting Types for Istanbul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-14, November.
    11. Paul Downward & Simona Rasciute, 2011. "An Economic Analysis of the Subjective Health and Well-being of Physical Activity," Chapters, in: Plácido Rodríguez & Stefan Késenne & Brad R. Humphreys (ed.), The Economics of Sport, Health and Happiness, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Suwan Lu & Guobin Fang & Mingtao Zhao, 2023. "Towards Inclusive Growth: Perspective of Regional Spatial Correlation Network in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Tomas Hanell, 2022. "Unmet Aspirations and Urban Malaise," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 83-103, November.
    14. Eda BALIKÇIOĞLU & Kutay OKTAY, 2015. "Türkiye’de Turizm Gelirleri ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisinin Kamu Politikaları Doğrultusunda Değerlendirilmesi," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 23(25).
    15. Pawlowski, Tim & Downward, Paul & Rasciute, Simona, 2014. "Does national pride from international sporting success contribute to well-being? An international investigation," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 121-132.
    16. Gao, Yanan & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry & Wang, Yuanqing, 2018. "Trip stage satisfaction of public transport users: A reference-based model incorporating trip attributes, perceived service quality, psychological disposition and difference tolerance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 759-775.
    17. Andrew Clark & Andreas Knabe & Steffen Rätzel, 2009. "Unemployment as a Social Norm in Germany," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 129(2), pages 251-260.
    18. Tie Wang & Wei Wang & Zhongjun Wu & Ching-Hui Su & Ming-Hsiang Chen, 2019. "Understanding Farm Households’ Participation in Nong Jia Le in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, February.
    19. Chia-Yueh Hsu & Shu-Sen Chang & Paul Yip, 2017. "Individual-, household- and neighbourhood-level characteristics associated with life satisfaction: A multilevel analysis of a population-based sample from Hong Kong," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(16), pages 3700-3717, December.
    20. Eiji Yamamura, 2012. "The Effects of Information Asymmetry and Government Size on Happiness: A Case Study from Japan," The IUP Journal of Governance and Public Policy, IUP Publications, vol. 0(1), pages 7-20, March.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:472-:d:716203. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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 (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.