Silvia Wurzinger Department of Environmental Psychology Lund Institute of Technology

1. Comparing ecotourist‘s general environ-mental beliefs and general ecological behaviour to other groups of tourists Silvia Wurzinger Department of Environmental Psychology Lund Institute of Technology Box 118, 221 00 Lund, Sweden E-mail: Silvia.Wurzinger@gmx.at

2. Ecotourism contrarynature tourism Ecotourism … • is related to a natural area • is sustainable • supports local people • includes a learning element • admiring of nature and culture • considers ethical aspects • is small-scale (WTO und UNEP, 2002) Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

3. Ecotourism contrarynature tourism Nature tourism … • is related to a natural area • has not to include further elements (e.g., sustainability) (Weaver, 2001) Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

4. Aim • Are ecotourists really more „eco“? A comparison of general environmental beliefs and general ecological behaviour between ecotourists, nature tourists and a group of city and spa tourists Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

5. Sample(N = 245, mean age 47, 53% females) • Ecotourists (N = 43): • 2-4 days „package-holiday“ including • ecotourism label „Nature‘s Best“ Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

6. Sample(N = 245, mean age 47, 53% females) 2. Nature tourists (N = 124): Participants of 2-4 hours long lasting guided tours in a nature reserve Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

7. Sample(N = 245, mean age 47, 53% females) 3. City and spa tourists (N = 78): Trips for 2 to 4 days to Stockholm or Gothenburg or to a spa Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

8. General Environmental beliefsRevised New Environmental Paradigm Scale(Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000) • Reality of limits to growth • Anti-Anthropocentrism • Fragility of nature‘s balance • Rejection of exemptionalism • Possibility of an ecocrisis Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

9. ResultRevised New Environmental Paradigm Scale (Dunlap, et al., 2000) Cronbach’s Alpha = .72 Mean Difference between the groups and linearity significant, F(2, 240) = 7.73, p = .001 and F(1, 240) = 15.46, p = .000 resp. Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

10. General ecological behaviourGeneral Ecological Behaviour Scale(Kaiser, 1998) • Garbage removal • Garbage inhibition • Water and power conservation • Consumer behaviour • Nature protection activities • Automobile use Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

11. ResultGeneral Ecological Behaviour Scale(Kaiser, 1998) Cronbach’s Alpha = .72 Mean Difference between the groups significant, F(2, 241) = 21.86, p = .000; However, ecotourists and nature tourists do not differ! Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

12. Conclusions • Compared to city and spa tourists ecotourists seem to be really more „eco“! • However, compared to nature tourists the difference seems to be not so clear in general ecological behaviour Introduction Method and Results Conclusions

13. Thank you very much for your attention!