System Construction, Tourism Empowerment, and Community Participation: The Sustainable Way of Rural Tourism Development

Abstract

The development of rural tourism serves as a crucial strategy for achieving rural revitalization and common prosperity in China. However, the uneven distribution of interests caused by the imperfect tourism destination system is common, and its economic and social impacts have become a major problem and obstacle to the sustainable development of rural tourism. Tourism empowerment and community participation are important for balancing community interests and promoting the sustainable development of tourism. Therefore, from the perspective of tourism empowerment and community participation, this paper takes the Wuzhen scenic area as a case study and considers tourism empowerment as a mediating variable between system construction and community participation, with participation ability serving as a moderating variable. Employing a structural equation model, this paper investigates the interactions among system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability in a rural destination context. The results indicate that system construction significantly benefits tourism empowerment and community participation. Tourism empowerment exerts a significant positive impact on community participation while also serving as a partial mediator between system construction and community participation. Additionally, participation ability positively moderates the impact of system construction on tourism empowerment. This study recommends the creation of an interest linkage mechanism grounded in the property rights of tourism attractions, the introduction of oversight mechanisms for rural tourism enterprises, and the fortification of community participation through educational and informational support as strategies to ensure the sustainable development of rural tourism destinations.

1. Introduction

The development of rural tourism plays a crucial role in the fusion of culture and the tourism industry, facilitating rural revitalization. It also serves as an effective way to foster common prosperity. The progression of rural tourism contributes to the evolution of tourism destination formats and the shift in consumption patterns. Moreover, it helps to enhance human capital [1] and increase the income of community residents and practitioners [2,3,4]. This, in turn, diminishes the economic disparities within rural areas, integrates industrial growth, and expands non-agricultural employment opportunities [5]. Consequently, it plays a significant role in achieving the goals of economic, social, cultural, and ecological advancement, all contributing to the prosperity and sustainability of rural tourism [6]. Nevertheless, in the context of rural tourism development in China, persistent disparities in the economic and social interests among stakeholders are also widely evident. These issues are typically resolved through concessions made by governmental bodies and developers. The systemic challenges of tourism destinations remain unaddressed, with latent conflicts becoming formidable obstacles to the sustainable development of rural tourism [7].

Community participation theory is recognized as a vital approach for achieving inclusive and sustainable development of tourism [8]. This theory places humanistic principles at its core and advocates the alignment of the rights of the tourism community with the imperative of sustainable development, which is conducive to enhancing residents’ support for tourism [9], utilizing the management expertise of community residents [10], and facilitating the equitable distribution of interests [11]. It provides an essential framework for safeguarding the rights of community residents and solving the conflicts in development [12]. However, some scholars have noted that destination residents often experience difficulties in genuine or meaningful participation in community tourism development, raising questions about the effectiveness, motivations, and legal frameworks of community participation [13]. As for the reasons for the failure in community participation, Zuo [14] attributes the shortcomings in community participation to “rights issues, limited opportunities, and inadequate capabilities”. Hu and Zhang [12] further emphasize that the initial step in implementing the theory of community participation is addressing “why participate”, particularly from an institutional perspective. Wang [15] and Sun and Bao [16,17] advocate for the establishment of a comprehensive support system to safeguard participation rights and enhance community interests. Bao and Yang [18] successfully redefined property rights through social experiments, guided by “tourism attracting real rights”. This initiative has yielded continuous and precise results in poverty alleviation, rural revitalization, and heritage preservation.

All of the abovementioned studies underscore the pivotal role of institutional elements in promoting community participation. Therefore, commencing from the perspective of community participation and tourism empowerment, this paper employs a quantitative structural equation model to analyze the influence mechanism of system construction on community participation, along with community empowerment’s mediating role and participation ability’s regulating role in the model, which aims at unveiling the factors that enhance the level of involvement within rural tourism communities in China and exploring effective ways to promote the sustainable development of rural tourism.

This paper makes three noteworthy contributions: First, from a research perspective, the related studies on community empowerment and community participation, the measurements of tourism empowerment and community participation in different cases, the relationship between them, and the positive role they both play in sustainable tourism have been widely discussed. However, among these studies, individual empowerment is usually the considered research perspective, whereas this paper investigates the mechanism of collective community empowerment and individual empowerment through the lens of system construction, which enriches the application of community participation and tourism authorization theory in rural tourism research in China. Second, in terms of research methodology, while previous studies have explored rural tourism destination systems, tourism rights, and community participation, focusing on theoretical research and phenomenon analysis, quantitative studies examining the relationships among these elements have been relatively scarce. This paper empirically verifies the mechanism of rural tourism destination systems’ positive influence on tourism empowerment and community participation, while also proposing a regulatory model with community residents’ participation ability. Third, in terms of policy implications, the findings suggest that a fair and well-structured destination system plays a crucial role in safeguarding individual rights in the tourism development process. It enhances the perception of tourism empowerment, fosters tourism community participation, and ultimately contributes to the sustainable development of rural tourism destinations.

2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

2.1. Literature Review

2.1.1. Construction of the Rural Tourism Destination System

In institutional economics, the construction of a system includes two fundamental aspects: arrangement and structure. System arrangements comprise a variety of rules that govern specific actions, constituting the essence of systems. These behavioral rules are “the societal game rules, often highly standardized, that define the interactions among individuals” [19]. Categorized broadly, these rules are typically divided into formal and informal systems, internal and external systems, and personal rules and social rules, and the classification of formal and informal methods is widely accepted. The concept of system structure, on the other hand, refers to a particular scope or specific collection of formal and informal systems [19]. During spontaneous evolution and deliberate design, the interplay between different types of systems gives rise to a distinct institutional environment [19].

Against the backdrop of China’s collective rural land ownership system, the property rights system exerts a profound influence on and constrains the behaviors of relevant stakeholders involved in the governance of natural tourism resources. The tourism development modeled by the Chinese government presents a dual structure of modern and efficient management at the urban scale. Still, it presents a backward and unsustainable situation at the rural community scale [20]. It profoundly influences the management and utilization of tourism resources and the development of rural tourism [21]. Since tourist attractions often involve land, housing, and immovable physical assets, their property rights become intertwined with physical property rights. As the cornerstone of a series of systems, land property rights and the market economy place the government and capital-owning developers in a dominant position in controlling land resources, while community residents, who own attractive resources, find themselves in a comparatively weaker position [18]. In China, the fundamental objective of rural tourism development is the enhancement of people’s wellbeing [22]. Consequently, some scholars have proposed the concept of “land differential income rights and rights derived from the tourism attraction value of land and its adjuncts” and established the notion of “tourism attraction real rights” [23]. This approach serves to safeguard the legal rights of destination residents.

Over the past four decades of reform and opening up, China’s economy has transitioned through three stages: the planned economy, the planned commodity economy, and the market economy. Concurrently, the property rights associated with tourism resources have also undergone a market-oriented transformation at the practical level [24]. Notably, provincial governments such as Sichuan and Hunan initiated a trend by selling management rights to local tourism resources. This triggered a wave of transfers and buyouts of management rights for scenic spots within the industry [25]. The innovation of relevant policies has further propelled the separation of property rights associated with tourism resources from capital development [21]. Influenced by formal systems such as property rights differentiation, diverse organizational development models emerged following negotiations among destination stakeholders. These models encompass government-led initiatives, enterprise-driven approaches, community residents’ autonomous efforts, and a comprehensive governance framework involving government, enterprise, and community residents [26]. Moreover, under the influence of informal systems, such as cultural customs, distinct models have given rise to new destination systems, including the point system in Langde Miao Village and the rotation system in Yubeng Tibetan Village. In a tourism market dominated by government and capital owners, these laws and systems serve as assurances of the rights and legitimacy of resident communities’ participation in tourist destinations [12].

2.1.2. Community Participation in Rural Tourism Destinations

In 1985, Murphy introduced the concept of community participation in Tourism: Community Methods, emphasizing that community residents should express their ideas by engaging in planning and decision-making processes to mitigate conflicts during tourism development [27]. As a pivotal factor in destination management, communities should be as involved as possible in actual development and tourism management to maximize social and economic benefits [16]. Within the context of community-based participatory tourism development, stakeholders are encouraged to utilize their resources for participation, voice their needs, make decisions about their involvement [28], and exert a degree of control through ongoing interactions with governmental bodies and developers [29]. However, an alternative perspective suggests that the government or developers primarily control the core interests in community tourism, rather than the community residents, and that community participation merely serves as a symbolic gesture by the authorities [30]. When the government’s utility function does not align with residents’ interests, community participation may prove ineffective [31].

From the perspective of tourism management planning, some studies propose that community participation represents the advanced stage of tourism development [32]. Nevertheless, practical difficulties hinder the realization of community participation in rural tourism development in China. Related research indicates that the factors that impede community participation primarily fall into three categories: systemic issues, market-related factors and the capacity for community participation. First, community participation is significantly influenced or constrained by various systems, including management systems, support structures, property rights systems, and benefit distribution systems. The legal framework determines the legitimacy of community participation, and the misalignment between the institutional context and the stage of tourism development is a primary cause of unsuccessful community participation in many developing countries [33,34,35]. Second, constraints in local financial resources, tourism business awareness, awareness of rights, tourism experience, knowledge, and opportunities contribute to the lack of community residents’ participation capacity [36,37]. Third, heavy reliance on international tourism operators, a highly market-driven tourism industry, or government-controlled tourism markets can also impede the involvement of local community residents in tourism development to some extent [38,39]. Thus, residents’ community participation often remains a formality because they are essentially “powerless”. To enable genuine participation in tourism development, it is essential to address residents’ initial resource constraints, information asymmetry, lack of awareness of their rights, and management skill deficiencies [40].

2.1.3. Tourism Empowerment in Rural Tourism Destinations

Tourism empowerment, also called tourism community empowerment, represents a process that enhances an individual’s sense of agency through external influences, thereby reducing feelings of powerlessness [41]. This process holds significant importance in improving community participation and achieving sustainable development of tourism [42].

In 1999, Scheyvens [43] pioneered the application of community empowerment to tourism research and proposed that community participation should include political, economic, psychological, and social dimensions. On the basis of previous achievements, some researchers have proposed the empowerment of organization, culture, and the environment [37,44,45], but others have pointed out that its applicability still needs to be further verified. From the perspective of psychological, social, and political empowerment, scholars such as Boley and Woosnam have conducted in-depth discussions on the empowerment of several heritage tourism communities, rural tourism communities, and multi-ethnic tourism communities, finding that local attachment and identity promote tourism empowerment [46]. Meanwhile, tourism empowerment contributes to sustainable development by enhancing residents’ support and wellbeing through participation in tourism, and by improving community tourism competitiveness [9]. Additionally, concerns have been expressed about the general lack of political empowerment in these communities [47]. Building on Scheyvens’ power theory framework, Chinese scholars such as Sun [48] and Chen et al. [49] have analyzed the levels of tourism community empowerment in several minority villages in southeast China. They emphasized how these local villages have achieved economic, psychological, social, and political empowerment through tourism development. This empowerment has led to various positive outcomes, including poverty alleviation, the reinforcement of national identity and cultural confidence, enhanced community cohesion, greater democratic consciousness, increased participation of women in social labor, and improved conditions for vulnerable groups. Conversely, in some tourist destinations, inequitable empowerment and disempowerment have harmed the legitimate rights and interests of residents who provide tourist attractions. This has led to negative consequences such as persistent poverty, the tragedy of the commons, loss of original authenticity, and property rights disputes, making it challenging to achieve genuine community participation [18,34,50,51].

The introduction of empowerment theory has enabled tourism researchers to elevate community participation from the economic and technical levels to the political sphere. This approach aims at enhancing welfare and generating social capital within the community by integrating marginalized or vulnerable groups into tourism development [44], realizing the inclusive development of rural tourism [8], and establishing a legal framework that facilitates stakeholder participation in tourism development decisions [52]. Chinese scholars have built upon Western theories of tourism power and proposed the legitimacy of supporting and granting community tourism power legally or politically. This explanation addresses “why residents participate” at the institutional level. In essence, institutional empowerment provides the groundwork for community participation and the sustainable development of tourism [15,31,53].

In conclusion, the development of community-participatory rural tourism plays a vital role in balancing the distribution of interests during the development process. It ultimately promotes the sustainable development of local tourism. The key to achieving community participation lies in empowering residents through well-structured systems, enhancing residents’ participation capabilities, and overcoming the state of powerlessness. Consequently, this paper aims at exploring the relationship between the construction of a rural tourism system and community participation development, analyzing the pathways and influencing factors for realizing community participation development, and provides recommendations and insights to advance the sustainable development of rural tourism.

2.2. Hypothesis Development

2.2.1. System Construction and Tourism Empowerment

At the community tourism empowerment level, Rapaport’s approach [54] is widely accepted for achieving collective community tourism rights. This empowerment spans the individual, organizational, and community levels. On a personal level, the assignment entails fostering community residents’ engagement in community organizations and eliminating the sense of “disempowerment” and “powerlessness”. On the organizational front, community organizations achieve empowerment by engaging in decision-making, management, and sharing leadership responsibilities with governmental and corporate entities. On the community front, empowerment involves engaging the community and government in a dynamic interplay that catalyzes social actions and changes. These three tiers of empowerment are also categorized as individual power, administrative power, and policy power [55]. Hu and Zhang [12] subdivide the contents of these three tiers from the perspectives of interests, rights, and power, further elevating tourism empowerment as the legal, systematic, and individual enhancement of rural communities for realizing the community participation interests and the legitimate interests of residents, along with the sustainable development of tourism destinations.

Therefore, the path of empowerment within the community is from the community to the organization and, finally, to the individual. In order to actualize the empowerment at the individual level, it is first necessary to increase the power on the community and the collective levels and answer the problem of “why residents participate”, so as to effectively guarantee the residents’ right to community participation. Consequently, this paper posits the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

The system construction has a significant positive impact on increasing tourism rights.

2.2.2. Tourism Empowerment and Community Participation

The overarching objective of tourism empowerment is to attain influence through social action, thereby instigating societal transformation [41]. Neglecting the roles of power renders so-called community participation, at best, a plea for humanistic consideration. This oversight largely accounts for the shortcomings of community participation in practical applications [56].

As for the research on the significance of tourism empowerment for residents, in the early stages of community participation in tourism development, some scholars propose that community residents should have more control so as to reduce the negative impact of community tourism development [57,58]. Other scholars exhibit a strong consensus: tourism empowerment fosters a balance of interests among all stakeholders and stimulates community residents’ enthusiasm to participate, thereby facilitating the sustainable development of community tourism. Pan and Liang [59] expound on tourism empowerment across four dimensions: economic, societal, informational, and educational. They propose that any form of empowerment, including financial support, infrastructure development, organizational reinforcement, decision-making support, and capacity enhancement, contributes to varying degrees of support for community decision-making and development. Li and Zhao [13] argue that effective resolution of the alignment between individual incentives and community interests in community participation can promote the development of local tourism to a certain extent. Therefore, this paper advances the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

Tourism empowerment has a significant positive impact on community participation.

2.2.3. System Construction and Community Participation

Community participation constitutes a political process wherein community residents gradually secure a measure of influence through ongoing negotiations with government bodies and developers. To initiate this complex process, ensuring the systemic rights and legitimacy of community participation is essential [12].

It has been noted in some research that, in less-developed ethnic regions of developing countries, government and developer control over tourism development has been notably extensive. In this context, most community residents often find themselves marginalized from the power nexus created by various stakeholders. Even if the community asserts some degree of influence, it typically remains in the grip of established elite groups. To achieve genuine power sharing, community participation necessitates reshaping the environment and the system to eradicate the community’s powerlessness within the power structure [57].

Within the domain of China’s tourism development, a fundamental contradiction arises between legal clarity and the nebulous nature of resource ownership. This property rights issue engenders inherent deficiencies in the initial allocation of resources to communities, emerging as a substantial impediment to community participation in tourism. It is only through the establishment of a support system framework based on a comprehensive property system that the rights and interests of community participation in tourism can be effectively safeguarded [40]. Hence, this paper presents the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

System construction has a significant positive impact on community participation.

2.2.4. The Mediating Role of Tourism Empowerment

In this study, tourism empowerment is the mediating variable in the context of developing the cultural tourism system and community participation. A review of previous research on tourism empowerment reveals that several scholars have considered it as an explanatory variable for constructing the community participation and the sustainable development of tourism [60,61], and fewer have used it as a mediating variable to establish a structural model. Li et al. [62] previously postulated that community empowerment could be an explanatory variable affecting residents’ satisfaction and proposed that community empowerment and community disempowerment play an intermediary role between residents’ local attachment, national identity, development expectations, and residents’ satisfaction. Meanwhile, He et al. [63] employed tourism empowerment as the mediating variable between the management performance of heritage sites and economic growth. They suggested that the management performance of heritage sites has no direct effect on the economic development of these sites; instead, economic growth is fostered through the mediating role of community empowerment. Given these precedents, this paper cautiously introduces the following assumption:

Hypothesis 4 (H4).

Tourism empowerment plays a significant intermediary role in the influence of system construction on community participation.

2.2.5. The Moderating Role of Participation Capacity

Participation ability includes the skills and comprehensive qualities needed for community residents to engage in tourism development activities, such as planning, decision-making, management, and operation [64]. Scholars such as Hung et al. [36] and Mostafa et al. [65] have employed the MOA model to identify factors influencing community participation. Their work consistently underscores that motivation, opportunity, and ability play pivotal roles in shaping the occurrence and extent of community participation.

Given the context of rural tourism communities in China, Yang et al. [66], Yang et al. [67], and Lu and Lu [68] have highlighted several factors that positively affect the promotion of community participation. These factors include government support, individual vision, family economic income, geographical location, cultural knowledge, and skills. Additionally, Xu Chen et al. [69] investigated the antecedent factors of community participation ability. They proposed that information, education, and systemic empowerment can alter villagers’ motivation to participate, enhance individual learning, and facilitate collective action, ultimately deepening community participation.

Hence, building upon existing research, this paper seeks to explore the moderating influence of participation ability on system construction with respect to community participation. In light of this, the following assumptions are proposed:

Hypothesis 5a (H5a).

Participation capacity will play a significant role in regulating system construction and tourism empowerment.

Hypothesis 5b (H5b).

Participation capacity will play a significant regulatory role between system construction and community participation.

Hypothesis 5c (H5c).

Participation capacity will play a significant role in regulating tourism empowerment and community participation.

Based on the above hypotheses, this is the theoretical model (Figure 1).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Questionnaire Design and Data Collection

3.1.1. Outline of the Case Study

This paper focuses on the case of Wuzhen, a 5A-rated national tourist attraction in Zhejiang Province, China. Often referred to as “the last water-bound town in China”, Wuzhen is a prominent exemplar of successful rural tourism development in China. In terms of its development strategy, Wuzhen has adopted the “protection and development, partial migration” approach. Consequently, many residents still reside within and around the scenic area, contributing significantly to preserving the local Jiangnan water town’s ambiance. Before the 2019 epidemic, Wuzhen town’s annual GDP had reached CNY 6.83 billion, with the revenue of the Wuzhen scenic area amounting to CNY 2.144 billion, underscoring the transformation of rural tourism into a cornerstone industry for Wuzhen’s economy.

The evolution of Wuzhen’s tourism development model exhibits distinct Chinese characteristics. Within the framework of unaltered land resource ownership, the transformation of property rights regarding tourism resources has shaped Wuzhen’s tourism governance model. It transitioned from a government-led governance model in its early stages to a “management committee-enterprise”-led governance model, before ultimately shifting toward an enterprise-led one. In this process, the local tourist destination system changed from an early disorder to later effective operation, where it can be seen that the tourism governance mode with enterprises’ participation can improve the operation efficiency of the Wuzhen scenic area. However, driven by the pursuit of profit, enterprises inevitably encounter interest disputes and conflicts with local community residents during the practical implementation phase.

Given the backdrop of rural tourism’s substantial contribution to the overall economic development of the region, the actual benefit accrued by destination community residents has become a pivotal factor influencing the sustainable development of local tourism. It also serves as a crucial criterion for comprehensively evaluating the advantages of ancient town-style rural tourism. In light of this practical concern, this paper investigates the system construction of tourism destination, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability in Wuzhen. It scrutinizes the influence mechanisms of rural tourism destination system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability to present insightful conclusions and implications.

3.1.2. Evaluation Index and Questionnaire Design

This paper investigates the interrelationships among four key variables: system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability, all examined through the lens of tourism community residents.

The first section of the questionnaire includes inquiries about system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability (

Table 1. Measurement scales of system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability.

Variable	Measure Item
System construction (SC)	Employment training system: There is vocational training in tourism providing which offers ways for residents to participate in tourism development.
	Behavioral restraint system: There are fair and reasonable constraints to behaviors of tourism companies, foreign operators, community residents and other stakeholders.
	Rights protection system: There are standardized and effective ways for every subject to protect their rights when rights and interests are infringed.
	Income distribution system: By participating in tourism activities, such as working, managing and operating, people can reap reasonable rewards.
	Attraction property right system: There are appropriate property arrangements for affairs involving expropriation or lease of land, housing and other tourism assets in process of tourism development.
Tourism empowerment (TET)	Economic empowerment: Tourism development created more employment opportunities; tourism development improved my living standard; tourism income became a vital part of my income.
	Psychological empowerment: The high visibility of local tourism enhances my cultural identity; I am proud to be a resident; I want to tell visitors about stories related to local cultural heritage.
	Social empowerment: Tourism development has strengthened me with other communities; it has enhanced my collectivism; and it has provided me the opportunities and occasion to participate in collective community affairs.
	Political empowerment: I can participate in the development of local tourism development; I have ways to comment on local tourism development; I have a voice in local tourism development; my opinions have an impact on the development of local tourism.
Community participation (CP)	I am (or have been) involved in the development and decision-making of tourism projects.
	I am (or have been) involved in the daily management of scenic spots.
	I am (or have been) involved in tourism policy-making.
	I am (or have been) involved in tourism planning.
	I am (or have been) involved in tourism education and training.
Participation ability (PA)	I have sufficient funds to participate in tourism development.
	I have technical expertise related to tourism.
	I have ample time to participate in tourism development.
	I know the benefits of tourism development.

). Drawing from Ma’s system empowerment evaluation index [56], the questionnaire extracts test statements related to system construction to gauge residents’ perceptions of the local system in the context of tourism development. The design of the tourism empowerment scale adopts the four-dimensional framework of economic, psychological, social, and political empowerment, as proposed by Wang et al. [37]. The community participation and participation ability scales adhere to the evaluation index system of farmer participation in tourism development outlined by Yang et al. [66]. Each item on the scale employs a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from “very inconsistent” to “very consistent”, providing a graded assessment of responses from low to high agreement.

The second section of the questionnaire collects personal information from the respondents, including gender, age, education, household income, and other information about residence.

3.1.3. Questionnaire Distribution and Data Collection

The research participants consisted of residents residing near major scenic spots in Wuzhen. The survey included various locations, including the core scenic areas of Dongzha, Xizha, Nanzha, and the surrounding areas where other residents reside, and the surveys were conducted from 7 August 2022 to 15 August 2022. Residents from these five different areas were selected through random sampling, and the questionnaires were administered and collected on-site.

A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed; after eliminating incorrect or incomplete responses, 275 valid questionnaires were retained, resulting in a valid recovery rate of 91.6%. Descriptive statistics regarding the essential characteristics of the samples were conducted using SPSS 26.0 and are summarized in

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of basic sample information.

Sample Characteristics		Number of Samples	Percentage
Gender	Male	120	43.6%
	Female	155	56.4%
Age	18–24 years old	38	13.8%
	25–34 years old	66	24.0%
	35–44 years old	54	19.6%
	45–54 years old	58	21.0%
	55–64 years old	38	13.8%
	Over 65 years old	21	76.0%
Local resident?	Yes	177	64.4%
	No	98	35.6%
Length of residency	Under 5 years	44	16.0%
	5–10 years	41	14.9%
	10–20 years	37	13.5%
	20–30 years	40	14.5%
	More than 30 years	113	41.1%
Education	Junior high school and below	112	40.7%
	High school	86	31.3%
	Bachelor’s degree	76	27.6%
	Master’s degree or above	1	0.4%
Household income	Below CNY 1000	25	9.1%
	CNY 1000–3000	59	21.5%
	CNY 3001–5000	78	28.4%
	More than CNY 5000	113	41.1%

.

3.2. Structural Equation Model Analysis and Regression Analysis

According to the relevant research progress, employing structural equation modeling and the application of AMOS 24.0 software, this paper explores the interplay among system construction, tourism empowerment, and community participation in a rural destination context. Moreover, to further examine the moderating effect of participation capacity in this model, a regression analysis was performed in this study using SPSS 26.0.

4. Results

4.1. Variable Reliability Analysis

Initially, the reliability of each dimension and its associated variables was assessed using SPSS 26.0. The results demonstrated that all variables met the criterion of Cronbach’s alpha exceeding 0.7, signifying that the scale exhibits strong stability and internal consistency (

Table 3. Results of reliability testing of system construction, tourism empowerment, community participation, and participation ability.

Question Item	Cronbach’s Alpha
System construction (SC)	0.800
Tourism empowerment (ET)	0.839
Community participation (CP)	0.830
Participation ability (PA)	0.701

).

4.2. Model Testing

4.2.1. Goodness-of-Fit Test

The questionnaire data underwent modeling and analysis using AMOS 24.0. The examination of the initial model, denoted as M1, revealed that AGFI = 0.868, NFI = 0.854, RFI = 0.821, and TLI = 0.879. However, the model fit did not meet the desired standards, necessitating further adjustments.

4.2.2. Model Modification

In this study, the model was refined and adjusted based on fitting data, modification indices, and the logical connections between variables. Covariation relationships were established between error terms, specifically e1 and e6, e2 and e6, e3 and e11, e4 and e6, e9 and e11, and e10 and e15, resulting in the modified model denoted as M2. The revised model exhibited a favorable fit and met the standard adaptation criteria (

Table 4. Goodness-of-fit results of the hypothesis models.

Adaptation Index	χ2	χ2/df	GFI	AGFI	RMSEA	NFI	RFI	IFI	TLI	CFI
Recommended value	The smaller the better	1–3	>0.9	>0.9	<0.08	>0.9	>0.9	>0.9	>0.9	>0.9
Initial model M1	199.567	2.697	0.907	0.868	0.079	0.854	0.821	0.903	0.879	0.902
Modified model M2	102.337	1.505	0.950	0.923	0.043	0.925	0.900	0.974	0.964	0.973

).

4.3. Validity Tests of the Model

The validity of the final modified model was assessed through convergent and discriminant validity tests. Convergent validity, primarily examined using standardized factor loading (SFL), composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE), should meet the following criteria for robust construct validity: first, all items should have SFL values exceeding 0.5; second, AVE should be greater than 0.36; third, CR should be higher than 0.6. An analysis of the validity test for the final modified model (

Table 5. Results of the confirmatory factor analysis.

Latent Variables	Observable Variable	SFL	S.E.	C.R. (t-Value)	CR	AVE
SC	SC1	0.677			0.801	0.448
	SC2	0.682 ***	0.096	9.111
	SC3	0.713 ***	0.108	9.537
	SC4	0.558 ***	0.096	7.939
	SC5	0.706 ***	0.098	9.691
TET	EET	0.565			0.755	0.442
	PSET	0.74 ***	0.138	8.013
	SET	0.783 ***	0.177	7.467
	POET	0.537 ***	0.161	6.017
CP	CP1	0.728			0.838	0.509
	CP2	0.716 ***	0.088	11.118
	CP3	0.694 ***	0.102	10.568
	CP4	0.745 ***	0.089	11.355
	CP5	0.684 ***	0.104	10.395

Note: *** p < 0.001.

) revealed that each item had an SFL exceeding 0.5. The AVE ranged from 0.442 to 0.509, while the CR ranged from 0.755 to 0.838. Thus, the convergent validity of the model was deemed to be satisfactory.

To assess discriminant validity, the criterion involves comparing the square root of the AVE of each variable to the correlation coefficients between variables. It is considered to be achieved when the square root of the AVE for each measured variable exceeds the correlation coefficients between variables [46]. As indicated in

Table 6. The correlation coefficients between the latent variables.

	$\sqrt{\mathbf{AVE}}$	SC	TET	CP
SC	0.665	1
TET	0.714	0.493	1
CP	0.670	0.331	0.331	1

, the minimum square root of the AVE value was 0.665, and all square root values of AVE for the measured variables surpassed the correlation coefficients, ensuring robust discriminant validity among the variables.

4.4. Hypothesis Test

4.4.1. Direct Effect Analysis

The results from confirmatory factor analysis indicate a good fit for this model. A structural equation model test was conducted using AMOS 24, and a visual path analysis is presented in Figure 2. The path analysis results are summarized in

Table 7. Pathway coefficient and hypothesis testing results.

Hypothesis Path	Standardized Path Coefficient	Non-Standardized Path Coefficients	S.E.	C.R. (t-Value)	p-Value
TET ← SC	0.493 ***	0.311	0.059	5.278	0.000
CP ← SC	0.221 **	0.218	0.079	2.774	0.006
CP ← TET	0.221 *	0.346	0.137	2.531	0.011

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

: the standardized path coefficients for system construction affecting tourism empowerment, tourism empowerment influencing community participation, and system construction impacting community participation are 0.493, 0.221, and 0.221, respectively, all statistically significant. Hence, the empirical data support hypotheses H1, H2, and H3.

4.4.2. Mediation Effect Analysis

To further investigate the mechanism of influence among tourism system construction, tourism empowerment, and community participation, a theoretical model was constructed with tourism empowerment as an intermediary variable affecting community participation. The mediating effect of tourism empowerment was tested using bootstrapping with 5000 repeated samples, as proposed by Preacher and Hayes [70]. A mediation effect is considered to be significant if the 95% confidence interval does not include zero [71]. The empirical results are presented in

Table 8. Mediation effect testing of tourism empowerment.

Path	Coefficient	Two-Sided Test p-Values	95% Confidence Interval		Mediation Effect
			Lower Bound	Upper Bound
SC—CP	0.218 *	0.014	0.047	0.398	-
SC—TET	0.311 **	0.000	0.175	0.484	-
TET—CP	0.346 **	0.008	0.103	0.691	-
SC—TET—CP	0.108 **	0.006	0.031	0.262	Support

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

. At a 95% confidence level, H4 is assumed to be [0.150–0.458], indicating that H4 is supported and tourism empowerment partially mediates the relationship between institutional development and community participation.

4.4.3. Moderating Effect Test

This study uses the process compiled by Hayes and selects Model 59 for regression analysis. This model takes the system construction as the independent variable and participation ability as the regulatory variable; meanwhile, gender, age, education, household income, length of residency, and residential area are introduced as control variables [72]. It tests the effect of the regulatory variable on the mediating variable tourism empowerment and the dependent variable community participation; the results of the moderating effect tests are shown in

Table 9. Results of the moderating effect tests.

Project	Variable	TET			CP
		β	se	t	β	se	t
Control variables	Gender	0.102	0.054	1.892	0.013	0.018	0.717
	Age	0.000	0.027	0.002	0.009	0.009	0.971
	Education	0.004	0.042	0.106	0.012	0.014	0.871
	Household income	−0.028	0.030	−0.929	0.012	0.010	1.171
	Length of residency	0.053	0.085	0.617	−0.024	0.029	−0.841
	Residential area	0.028	0.030	0.918	−0.013	0.010	−1.234
Main effect variables	SC	0.220 ***	0.041	5.460	−0.009	0.015	−0.624
	TET				−0.036	0.021	−1.742
	PA	0.267 ***	0.039	6.793	1.026 ***	0.014	71.630
Interaction term	Int 1 _ SC × PA	0.120 *	0.050	2.396	−0.002	0.020	−0.093
	Int 2 _ TET × PA				0.028	0.026	1.072
Model summary	F value	13.052 *			209.440
	R2	0.331			0.906

Note: * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

.

As indicated in Table 9, the interaction term of system construction and participation ability significantly and positively impacts tourism empowerment (β = 0.120, p < 0.05). This suggests that participation ability moderates the association between system construction and community participation, thus supporting H5a. However, the interaction terms of system construction and participation ability, and of tourism empowerment and participation ability, do not significantly influence community participation (p > 0.05), indicating that H5b and H5c are unsupported. As shown in Figure 3, compared to residents with low participation ability, system construction has a more pronounced positive effect on residents with high participation ability. This suggests that higher participation ability amplifies the positive influence of system construction on tourism empowerment, further supporting H5a.

5. Discussion

Based on the interplay between collective and individual rights, this paper employs individual-level tourism empowerment as a mediating variable between system construction and community participation. Through the establishment of a structural equation model, it examines the relationships among system construction, tourism empowerment, and community participation while exploring the mechanism through which participation ability impacts system construction. The empirical results confirm hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5a, leading to the following conclusions:

Firstly, system construction significantly and positively influences tourism empowerment. The results reveal that collective-level community empowerment contributes to enhancing individual-level empowerment. Therefore, considering the comprehensive system design during the tourism development process is more conducive to the universality and equity of internal interest distribution. In constructing the rural tourism destination system, factors such as employment training systems, income distribution systems, rights protection systems, behavior restraint systems, and attraction property rights systems exhibit substantial influence, emphasizing the significance of rights protection and property rights within the community system. Given the context of public land property rights, there often exists a power and benefit distribution dominance held by the government, enterprises, or community elites. Addressing the clashes arising from the unfair distribution of power and benefit mechanisms between residents and the government or developers is crucial for overcoming challenges in tourism development. Hence, the design process must ensure channels for the voices of vulnerable groups and enforce the government’s role in market supervision.

Secondly, tourism empowerment significantly and positively impacts community participation, aligning with prior research findings. This underscores that individual tourism empowerment is a pivotal avenue for achieving sustainable and harmonious rural tourism development. Elevating community residents’ perceptions of their rights during tourism development and enhancing their sense of accomplishment derived from tourism progress not only fosters a “master” consciousness and community participation among rural residents but also helps address conflicts between the government, tourism developers, and the community. This, in turn, contributes to the growth of economic, cultural, social, and ecological benefits for the community and lays the groundwork for overall community development.

Thirdly, tourism empowerment serves as a partial mediator between system construction and community participation. Our findings suggest that a well-structured system is of great significance in improving residents’ perceptions of their economic, psychological, social, and political rights during the process of tourism development. The fair and reasonable system construction for the development of rural community tourism provides an objective premise and effective guarantee, which helps community residents to more actively participate in the development of rural tourism. This enables community residents to more effectively share the benefits of tourism development while also continuously achieving comprehensive individual development, promoting community growth, and fostering sustainable rural tourism development.

Finally, participation ability does not directly moderate the influence of system construction on community participation. Instead, it indirectly mediates the effect of system construction on tourism empowerment, thus reinforcing the promotive role of system construction in advancing community participation. Therefore, when formulating policies and systems for tourism development, it is crucial to consider not only the protection of tourism resources but also the strengthening of local community residents’ participation ability through methods such as information and education empowerment. This helps enhance their self-worth and further promotes the sustainable development of local tourism. However, some studies have suggested that enhancing information capacity may lead to higher energy consumption and population migration, potentially resulting in a negative impact on the environment and the sustainable development of rural tourism [73]. Therefore, it is also necessary to consider the dual impact of education and information empowerment.

6. Managerial Recommendations

According to our conclusions, the following three suggestions are put forward as to how to promote the reform of the tourism destination system, strengthen the community’s collective and individual empowerment, increase the participation of residents in tourism development, and achieve the sustainable development of rural tourism:

First, establish and improve the benefit linkage mechanism of rural, development-based tourism attraction property rights. The unequal distribution of tourism development’s benefits is the main source of relative deprivation among vulnerable interest groups, such as community residents, which can lead to social conflicts. The composition, distribution, and transaction of land resource property rights determine the tourism development mode of rural tourism destinations. Still, the property rights system ignores the economic and cultural value provided by tourism attractions attached to the land, which leads to a strong perception among community residents of the uneven distribution of interests in rural tourism development. The government should promptly establish a tourism resource management mechanism with clearly defined property rights as soon as possible, constantly adjust the initial distribution mechanism of interests, make up for the gap in the system that residents cannot (or struggle to) participate in the community under the enterprise-led mode, protect the reasonable rights and interests of community residents as providers of tourism attractions, and improve the income levels of vulnerable groups. Additionally, it is crucial to consider not only the protection of tourism resources but also the strengthening of local community residents’ participation ability through avenues such as information and education empowerment. At the same time, state-owned enterprises, as an essential part of China’s economy and society, should play a socially responsible role, guiding community residents to participate in the whole process of decisions, from development to protection, supervising tourism development, setting up development organizations such as community groups, arousing enthusiasm for community self-management, and improving the democracy of the process of rural tourism development.

Second, enhance and implement a rural tourism oversight mechanism for tourism enterprises. The root cause of all contradictions in rural tourism development lies in the inequality of power. To ensure the healthy and sustainable development of rural tourism, it is essential to adhere to fair and just management principles and disciplines. The enterprise-led mode can improve the operation efficiency of scenic spots and promote the development of the local tourism economy. Still, operating with the ultimate goal of profit is bound to infringe on the practical interests of local community residents. Therefore, the local government should not simply take the economic indicators as its utility function, but should fully consider the demands of all stakeholders, increase the supervision of the development and management of enterprises, and ensure the reasonable use of power. At the same time, relevant departments need to regularly monitor and evaluate the impact of rural tourism projects on the community’s economy, society, and environment to ensure that the projects comply with the Sustainable Development Goals. Moreover, the local government departments should also promote the reform of the management system of tourist attractions in an orderly manner and further clarify the roles and functions of relevant administrative departments, so as to prevent the phenomenon whereby functional departments “focus on tourism, regardless of residents”. Moreover, the supervision and balance of rights also need the power distribution system as their basis. In the design and implementation of rural tourism projects, local communities need full participation and decision-making rights to ensure that their voices are heard and to influence the decision-making process.

Third, consolidate and strengthen the mechanisms for sustainable development in rural tourism destinations, with a focus on cultural sensitivity. Policymakers should recognize the significance of cultural diversity in the economic development of rural tourism and should fully incorporate respect for local cultural values and traditions into their policies. This involves not only formulating and implementing policies to protect and preserve local culture, but also fully utilizing the development of these valuable cultural resources to promote sustainable tourism. In order to protect and preserve local culture, development enterprises must create and execute sustainable tourism management plans to ensure that tourism activities do not have a detrimental impact on the cultural environment. Government departments should establish a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism to regularly assess the impact of tourism activities on the local cultural environment. They should then make necessary adjustments based on the evaluation results. Additionally, they should enhance financial support for the restoration of cultural monuments, inheriting intangible cultural heritage, and cultivating local cultural inheritors, as well as encouraging local residents to participate in cultural protection work and enhancing their cultural confidence and sense of belonging. In terms of utilization and development, local governments should encourage the implementation of culture-sensitive tourism, support the integration of local cultural activities and traditions into tourism products, and ensure that the tourist experience genuinely reflects local culture, while avoiding cultural exploitation, misunderstanding, and excessive commercialization. Tourism operators need to emphasize the importance of cultural sensitivity and sustainability in their tourism publicity materials, strengthen the education of tourists, make these ideas deeply popular, raise awareness of cultural diversity, and guide tourists to hold a sensitive and respectful attitude towards local culture and the environment. The implementation of these measures will help to promote residents’ autonomy and improve the economic wellbeing and sustainable development of local communities.

Finally, establish an auxiliary mechanism for community participation through education and information empowerment. With the development of urbanization, many young people in Wuzhen have moved out. The local population is predominantly composed of older individuals and those with lower levels of education, resulting in uneven participation in tourism development and an overall low level of engagement. Therefore, the community management department could strengthen the guidance and training of the residents, provide more tourism-related knowledge to the residents, cultivate the community residents’ perceptions and awareness of self-efficacy, participation utility, and participation responsibility in tourism development, and improve the villagers’ participation skills and collective action ability. In addition, due to the asymmetry of information resources, community residents lack an understanding of relevant laws and national policies. Local government departments and community organizations can enhance the capacity of community residents to protect their rights and interests through information empowerment initiatives, such as promoting legal awareness and conducting public opinion interviews. Furthermore, it is important to establish an effective feedback mechanism to allow tourists, local communities, and stakeholders to participate in evaluating tourism development and collaboratively make suggestions for the sustainable development of rural tourism.

7. Future Research

The results of relevant research indicate that the application of community participation theory in the tourism market of developing countries often encounters challenges in adapting to the environment. The primary causes are the mismatch of the tourism system, limited participation capacity, weak awareness of participation, and other factors that result in long-term powerlessness among community residents. This paper uses a structural equation model to explore the relationships among system construction, tourism empowerment, and community participation. Also, it verifies the intermediary effect of individual tourism empowerment and the positive significance of system empowerment for solving this problem. The community participation model of tourism development is important to achieve common prosperity in rural areas in China. The implementation of local tourism system reform, with a focus on the property rights of tourism resources, the strengthening of collective and individual empowerment, and the enhancement of community participation and resident satisfaction in the tourism development process, still requires further exploration.

Based on this, this paper puts forward two research prospects:

First, from the perspective of system construction, this study discusses the positive effects of collective empowerment on individual tourism empowerment and community participation. Formal and informal systems are the usual classification methods of system-related research. The evaluation indicators of system construction in this paper focus on explicit and clear formal system fields, and they do not involve informal systems such as culture, customs, and history. Relevant studies show that culture plays an important role in shaping the concept of environmental protection, forming community power structures, strengthening community cohesion, and supporting tourism development. Therefore, further study is needed to understand the impact of the informal system on tourism empowerment and community participation.

Second, this study takes Wuzhen as a case study to explore the system construction, tourism empowerment, and community participation in a relatively developed rural tourism community in East China. China has a vast territory with numerous ethnicities and various population structures, and the differences in the basic situation between different rural regions are complex. Therefore, further study on the contrast between communities and exploration of the influence of population differences could contribute to empowerment and community participation in terms of research applicability and universality, as well as putting the experience of Wuzhen within a larger rural tourism development framework.