The Residents’ Support in Promoting Sport Tourism for the Sustainable Development of Small Islands: The Case of La Réunion Island

Abstract

Over the past three decades, numerous publications have examined the critical importance of resident support in promoting tourism development, but few of them have focused specifically on residents’ support in promoting (or not) Sport Tourism (ST) for the Sustainable Development (SD) of small islands in a climate-related context. Therefore, the aim of this article is to fill this gap by creating a quantitative model focusing on the social exchange theory adapted to this scientific object. Four specific variables have been explored, namely, positive attitude toward ST, perceptions of SD, and positive and negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands to test their positive correlation with three varied sets of intentions to support ST for the SD of La Réunion island, which is development, limitation-restriction, and taxation. This exploratory research compares data obtained from 435 questionnaires collected by convenience and snowball sampling from November 2022 to February 2023 from residents of La Réunion island. The results demonstrate that residents are divided in their intention to support ST for the SD of their island. Results also revealed that the more residents shared a positive perception of the impacts of ST and held positive perceptions of these impacts of ST on the SD of the island, the more likely they were to support the development of ST for promoting SD. Additionally, it was noted that the more residents’ held higher perceptions of SD and negative perceptions of ST impacts on SD, they were more inclined towards supporting limitation, restriction, and taxation. The results of this exploratory research may hence provide insight to drive the planning of ST for La Réunion Island by specifically contributing to the formulation of policies and regulations governing tourist activities during the higher season.

1. Introduction

Confetti scattered across the oceans, the islands are territories characterized by institutional, economic, cultural, and ethnic singularities [1]. They offer a wealth of heritage with varied geophysical environments, exceptional heritage and mixed societies. At the same time, their vulnerabilities—whether due to their small size, isolation, limited resources or the effects of global warming—force them to embark on the path of SD. For the resident populations, this prospect of change is difficult to manage as it puts them in a delicate position, torn between a desire to maintain their environment while taking part in socio-economic developments, particularly through tourism opportunities.

In this context, small island developing states (SIDS) (https://www.unwto.org/sustainable-development/small-islands-developing-states (accessed on 27 January 2025)) have implemented several levers of development. Among these levers, ST appears as an attractive vector for the SD of their territories [2]. SIDS have the potential to produce a wide range of sporting activities, and they are often tempted to develop them to enhance their attractiveness, which has two consequences. On the one hand, investing in tourist specialization supports growth [3] by overcoming the disadvantages of size and remoteness. On the other hand, the temptation for sport tourism (ST) due to their natural assets raises concerns about their development process, as SIDS are subject to several constraints (small market size, transportation costs, the impact of climate change, etc.), and could see their situation deteriorate due to the negative externalities of tourism on their economies. This ambiguity is consistent with traditional analyses of the uncertain long-term consequences of tourism specialization on island destinations [4,5,6,7,8,9]. These concerns are all the more pressing as SIDS are exposed to numerous vulnerabilities [10]: economic, climatic, environmental, social, cultural, etc.

Over the past 30 years, a wealth of literature has explored the crucial importance of support for residents when it comes to encouraging the development of tourism [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Though it is acknowledged that residents’ perceptions and attitudes are fundamental to the success and SD of tourism [17], little quantitative research has highlighted residents’ attitudes and perceptions of ST and sustainable island development in the context of climate change. Analyzing the attitudes and perceptions of local populations is crucial to understanding the complex dynamics between tourism activities, the island environment and the well-being of communities. The importance of local people’s perception of the impact of ST lies in their ability to influence political and economic decision-making processes. The perceptions of the inhabitants play a central role in the social acceptability of ST as it critically steers the dynamics of SD on an island’s vulnerability to climate change. The analysis of local perceptions highlights a duality between economic opportunities and ecological impacts [18,19,20]. The tensions between the economic benefits of (sport) tourism, its effects on the environment and the living environment directly influence the choices of residents in terms of regulations and even taxation. Thus, an in-depth understanding of local perceptions becomes imperative to guide tourism policies that respect the aspirations and needs of island communities. Local perceptions also play an undeniable role in understanding the environmental impacts of ST. Local awareness can lead to potential conservation and preservation initiatives and foster balanced management involving residents in decision-making.

With this in mind, the objective of this article is to fill this gap in the literature and explore in greater depth the perceptions of local populations on the impacts of ST on the SD of their islands. By integrating environmental, social, and economic dimensions, the study aims to provide a more nuanced perspective on how ST can be shaped to contribute positively to the quality of life of island communities while preserving their vulnerable ecosystems. It also aims to contribute to a better understanding of local perceptions, which can be accurate barometers of the socio-economic impact of sports tourism.

Indeed, to what extent does resident support for ST influence the SD of small islands vulnerable to climate change? Are positive perceptions of the impacts of ST greater than negative perceptions for residents of small islands? How do perceptions of the positive and negative impacts of ST correlate with the intentions of the residents to support the SD of La Réunion Island? Finally, what levers for action can be mobilized to strengthen residents’ support for ST management policies with a view of sustainability?

This research applies to the case of La Réunion Island, a French outermost region and small island in the Indian Ocean. Over the last twenty-five years, thanks to its specific geographical features, several sporting events have enabled this territory to become one of the top destinations for sports tourism in certain specific activities, such as the Grand Raid (“Diagonale des fous”), mountain biking (“Mégavalanche”), the paragliding world championships (“Leu Air Festival”), and the world surfing championship (“Rip Curl Pro Saint-Leu”) among others. While these events are widely valued for their contribution to the island’s economic dynamism, they also raise questions about the perceptions of the inhabitants in terms of the contributions of ST and the SD of the island destination.

The article is organized into sections and consists of a review of the literature on ST, SD, and the perceptions of islanders. Following this review of the literature, a theoretical background is proposed. Methods, analyses, and discussions are then presented.

2. State of Knowledge on Sport Tourism, Sustainable Development, and Residents’ Perceptions in Islands

Numerous studies on residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts, whether positive or negative, on their territories [21,22,23,24,25] have been completed, and they have focused on understanding the dynamics between residents and the development of sustainable tourism. However, the state of knowledge on ST, SD, and residents’ perceptions in island contexts remains an emerging field of research, with limited consideration of social issues, particularly the consequences for residents, and an insufficient number of quantitative studies.

2.1. Islands and Sustainable Development

The theoretical and empirical literature on islands and SD has been abundant for over two decades. Several studies analyzed the impacts of climate change on small islands [26,27,28,29,30,31]. Climate change affects the SD of small islands, particularly due to rising sea levels, cyclones, droughts, and biodiversity loss, which could challenge the very existence of some islands [32,33,34,35]. These islands represent dynamic spaces characterized by natural resources, protected ecosystems, and unique territories [1]. Island inhabitants are often on the front line of climate change consequences [36]. This climatic transition imposes a forced adaptation of island economies, leading to substantial efforts and significantly affecting the most vulnerable groups of the population, thereby profoundly altering residents’ perceptions of SD [37].

The concept of SD is based on a triple articulation between economic, environmental, and social issues. However, this concept is layered with local issues and perceptions, becoming more complex due to the specific vulnerabilities of each island, linked to their socio-economic and socio-environmental constraints. These unique geographical ecosystems with political economies, sociocultural trajectories, and diverse actor strategies translate into “eco-territories” [38], where residents’ perceptions of tourism’s impact on SD vary depending on the diversity of island contexts. Although residents generally have a favorable attitude towards SD, their willingness to support it is nuanced and experienced differently. Some residents may, for example, feel torn between SD and the imposition of restrictions that impact their daily activities. SD is often perceived as a dilemma between environmental protection and real economic needs [16]. Due to their environmental fragility and reliance on natural resources, islands are particularly sensitive to tourism impacts [39]. The work of [40] provides an in-depth perspective on the ecological consequences of tourism and highlights the importance of finding a balance between tourism development and environmental preservation. Tourism (including ST) is an industry that directly affects people’s lives. Therefore, studying their perceptions has become crucial, especially as several island destinations—particularly in the Caribbean and the Mediterranean—have reached or exceeded their carrying capacities, leading to overtourism, which affects residents’ quality of life [41].

2.2. Islands and Sport Tourism

In 2023, the global ST market was valued at approximately 565 billion USD and is expected to grow at an annual rate of over 10% between 2024 and 2034 [42]. ST involves traveling to a destination to participate in a sports activity or attend a sports event [43]. It is recognized as a driver of economic growth, supported by local investment, the expansion of services, and the development of specialized tourism [44,45] activities and services. This activity has become a key factor in regional attractiveness, prompting local authorities to invest more in this sector. On the one hand, it is widely recognized that sustainable tourism plays a crucial role in the development of tourist destinations, particularly by promoting environmental conservation, local economic development, and social inclusion [18,19]. On the other hand, the development of sustainable tourism can also have negative effects on tourist destinations, including their communities. For example, in some regions, the promotion of ecological tourism has led to an increase in land prices, making access to housing more difficult for local populations [20].

Island territories, due to their geography [46] and unique tourism offerings, are among the most sought-after destinations for the ST segment. These activities include a wide range of land-based, water-based, and aerial sports. Due to their rich eco-territories, islands serve as study sites for ST, as evidenced by cases in Greece [47], Cyprus [48], the Maldives [49], Martinique [50], and Barbados [51]. More recently, Ref. [2] conducted an in-depth study on the contribution of ST to local SD through a comparative analysis of 21 islands. The authors demonstrated that ST is a niche market at the intersection of leisure, adventure, and tourism, acting as a catalyst for the diversification of a sustainable tourism industry beyond the well-known “3S” model of Sun, Sea, and Sand [52,53].

However, the limited resources and ecological fragility of island eco-territories make managing this tourism segment complex. The infrastructure needed for sports events (such as international competitions like the Grand Raid) can exacerbate environmental and anthropogenic pressures, increasing the vulnerabilities of ecosystems and the local populations. Overtourism is thus perceived by island residents as a double-edged phenomenon: while it can generate economic benefits, it also leads to negative perceptions due to declining living conditions (inflation in goods, services, and housing prices, degradation of natural resources like beaches, coral reefs, and biodiversity) [54] and impacts on local identity.

A sustainable tourism management approach that integrates residents’ concerns is essential to mitigate negative impacts and restore balance between tourism and island communities. While ST has gained popularity in recent years as a potential driver of SD for many small islands [55], a major research gap remains in understanding residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards this activity.

2.3. Islands, Sport Tourism, and Sustainable Development: Residents’ Perceptions

Previous research has primarily focused on the relationship between residents’ perceptions and ST in islands or on their perception of SD. However, few quantitative studies have jointly examined residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards ST and sustainable development in small island destinations, particularly in the context of climate change.

Studies suggest that residents generally recognize the positive impacts of tourism on their communities while remaining aware of the drawbacks. For instance, Ref. [56] found that residents’ perceptions play a key role in the development of ST in the Balearic Islands. While they appreciate the diversification and economic opportunities, concerns arise regarding environmental and sociocultural impacts, such as infrastructure saturation and local disturbances. These results are shared by the study of Ref. [57]. The authors highlight the major influence of residents’ perceptions on the impacts of ST and their support for the sector. Residents associate ST with benefits such as improved quality of life and inclusive economic growth. On the other hand, negative perceptions relate to the cohabitation of public spaces and inequalities in access to sports activities. These attitudes directly influence the degree of support from local communities for the development of ST.

For their part, Ref. [2] has shown that residents can also be upset by the uncontrolled influx of sports tourists to the islands. First of all, there are potential disadvantages associated with sports events. There are fewer spaces, more conflicts of use, and restrictions on moments of relaxation, whereas these island destinations often emphasize on the quality of tranquillity. Secondly, in terms of economic effects, because the demand from sports tourists lead to an increase in the price of housing or consumer products, this has an impact on the purchasing power and well-being of the local population. Finally, in terms of cultural developments, sporting events are often accompanied by the arrival of globalized industrial actors promoting their products, equipment, nutrition, etc. Such practices lead to changes in the consumption habits and behaviors of the local populations. Here again, these risks are accentuated by the small size of the islands.

A recent study by Ref. [58] offers a quantitative analysis related to our research topic. The authors highlight the influence of residents’ attitudes on the role of ST and social development in Gran Canaria. Residents perceive the benefits in terms of social cohesion, health promotion, and strengthening of local identity in a positive light. However, questions are emerging concerning possible social exclusion and inequalities due to limited access to certain sports facilities. Ultimately, previous studies conclude that residents recognize both the positive and negative impacts of ST on their community. Among the benefits, they highlight economic diversification, job creation, infrastructure improvement and even the strengthening of social cohesion, reducing dependence on traditional tourism. However, the concerns of the inhabitants relate to the environmental effects (overload of infrastructures, trampling of natural spaces, intrusion into habitats), sociocultural tensions (conflicts of use, privatization of public spaces), and economic imbalances (rise in the cost of living, inequalities of access to sports activities). These perceptions directly influence their support for tourism initiatives, underlining the importance of a sustainable approach to the development of the sector.

In order to improve the sustainability of any island tourism planning strategy, destination managers must prioritize the participation of all host communities [59]. More specifically, the role of residents then becomes decisive for the success of sustainable tourism policies. The aim of our study is to identify the type of support residents have on La Réunion Island for promoting ST for SD on their small island, in relation to their perceptions of the impacts of ST and SD.

3. Theoretical Background and Exploratory Model Research

The theoretical background explains the exploratory model used to understand the support of ST (development, limitation-restriction, taxation) by the residents of La Réunion island through their perceptions and attitudes towards ST for the SD of this island.

3.1. Social Exchange Theory to Explain Support ST for the SD of Islands and to Build an Exploratory Research Model

Social exchange theory has been extensively employed to elucidate residents’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism [57,58,60,61,62,63]. This theory serves as a significant sociological framework for examining the dynamics of tourism-community relationships, wherein the entities exchanged possess measurable value and entail reciprocal management of rewards and costs among the involved actors [64,65]. A notable advantage of this theoretical approach is its capacity to account for both positive and negative perceptions regarding the various impacts—be it economic, environmental, social, or culturally associated with tourism [57,58,66,67] and SD [11,68,69].

Consequently, ST, particularly in contexts where activities occur in natural settings, bears a significant responsibility for its interaction with the local environment. If not conducted in appropriate locations and without adequate measures to mitigate environmental harm, these activities can be detrimental to natural resources [69]. As noted by Ref. [70], sustainable design and management are imperative for successful tourism development, particularly in preserving natural resources and enhancing various environmental aspects [71,72]. However, other studies highlight the adverse effects of tourism, such as pollution [73] and the reduction in available natural habitats [74]. Ref. [70] emphasizes that, despite the exacerbation of negative impacts, tourism can enhance the quality of exchanges between residents and tourists if managed within appropriate limits, thereby safeguarding the environment, local culture, and the economic and social well-being of residents.

The present research adapts the social exchange theory to explain three kinds of intention to support ST (development, limitation-restriction, taxation) by the residents of small islands in an SD perspective. An exploratory model is proposed, and it incorporates four variables: positive attitude toward ST, positive perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands, negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands, and perceptions of SD (Figure 1).

With this exploratory research model, six correlational hypotheses were formulated in relation to the main contributions of the theory of social exchange applied to ST and SD:

H1a. 

There is a positive correlation between a positive attitude towards the impacts of ST and the intention to support the development of ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

H1b. 

There is a positive correlation between positive perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands on the intention to support the development of ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

H2a. 

There is a positive correlation between negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands on the intention to support the limitation (restriction) of ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

H2b. 

There is a positive correlation between negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands on the intention to support the taxation of ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

H3a. 

There is a positive correlation between perceptions of SD having a significant effect on the intention to support the limitation (restriction) of ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

H3b. 

There is a positive correlation between perceptions of SD on the intention to support the taxation impacts for the SD of La Réunion island.

3.2. Variables Used in the Exploratory Model Research

(1)

Intention to support ST for the SD of La Réunion island (adapted from Ref. [75])

–

The first dimension is the level of support (or rejection) to the development of ST to the SD of La Réunion island. The researchers seek to understand how residents perceive potential benefits such as job creation, improved infrastructure, and promotion of local culture. They also analyzed concerns about environmental impacts, the pressure on local resources, and potential degradation of quality of life.

–

The second dimension focuses on the degree to which residents support measures to restrict or limit ST as part of an SD approach for La Réunion island. We assess the motivations behind this support, whether to preserve the fragile ecosystem, protect local culture, or minimize negative effects on the quality of life of residents. This variable allowed the researchers to determine the extent to which residents are willing to sacrifice the potential expansion of ST for the long-term preservation of their island.

–

The third dimension examines residents’ support for tax ST as a means of financing SD initiatives in La Réunion Island. We assess perceptions of the economic feasibility of this approach, as well as residents’ willingness to participate financially in the preservation of their island. This variable helped to understand how residents view the shared responsibility between tourism stakeholders and the local community in promoting sustainable practices.

(2)

Positive attitude toward impacts of ST

Inspired by Ref. [76], this variable is adapted only to ST, and it is subdivided into four dimensions: economic, social, environmental, and cultural. This variable was selected to incorporate a robust methodology to capture the residents’ general attitudes toward the impacts of ST in the specific context of small islands like La Réunion.

(3)

Perceptions of SD

Several studies have highlighted that tourists’ level of environmental concern is an antecedent of cognition to explain the need-based motivations that guide and integrate their behaviors during the production process of nature-based experiences. However, there is no specific scale to evaluate the perception of SD by residents in relation to perceptions towards nature, its protection, the threats weighing on it, and the human behaviors to be prohibited or encouraged for its preservation. In this context, the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale [77] was used to measure the environmental concern with fifteen statements consisting of five dimensions: the reality of limits to growth, anti-anthropocentrism, the fragility of nature’s balance, rejection of exceptionalism, and the possibility of an ecocrisis or ecological catastrophe.

(4)

Perceptions (positive and negative) of ST impact on the SD of islands

Perceptions (positive and negative) of ST impacts on the SD of islands are measured by using specific constructs used in the scale of Ref. [76]; we could have used the scale of Refs. [57,58] apply to the residents of Gran Canaria (a small island) but at the beginning of this research (2019), we were not aware of these articles.

–

The third variable evaluates the residents’ positive perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands. We examine how residents estimate the positive economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts of ST by perceptions including local job creation, preservation of local culture, economic stimulation, and environmental conservation.

–

The fourth variable looks at residents’ negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands. We analyze how residents assess the negative economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts of ST by perceptions including environmental degradation, loss of local quality of life, and dilution of the island’s authentic culture.

4. Methodology Applied to the Residents of La Réunion Island

4.1. Measurements

For this exploratory study, a quantitative research design was used in the form of a questionnaire devised to measure the different constructs of our research model (Figure 1). Intention to support ST for the SD of islands (development-4 items, limitation-4 items, and taxation-4 items), positive attitude toward the impact of ST (4 items), positive (16 items), and negative (16 items) perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands were measured by a five-point Likert-type scale. This choice provided a quantitative measure enabling precise statistical analyses, while offering flexibility in participants’ responses. For classification purposes, the questionnaire included a set of demographic variables, such as gender, age, educational background, marital status, employment, and frequency of practicing outdoor activities. The questionnaire also included a series of questions relating to the main island of residence: if they were born here and whether they lived in town or in the countryside.

4.2. Data Collection and Analysis

Particular attention was paid to data collection and analysis. The following elements highlight the methodological choices made for this study. Prior to completing the questionnaire, each respondent was informed of the purpose of the study, and that the data completed would be completely anonymous. In addition, confidentiality was guaranteed by omitting any information that was not necessary for the purpose of the study. Respondents were also informed of the possibility of not answering any question that they felt might infringe their anonymity.

The researchers opted for a data collection based on convenience and snowball sampling. This approach enabled them to maximize the efficiency of data collection by targeting easily accessible participants. Convenience sampling guarantees rapid data collection, while snowball sampling broadens the scope of our survey by mobilizing participants to recruit others within their network. The data collection period from November 2022 to February 2023 was chosen to encompass the island’s peak summer tourist season. Seasonal variations can play a role in residents’ experiences and impact their attitudes towards tourist activities. A total of 435 usable questionnaires were collected online in our final analysis, which represents 0.04% of the population of La Réunion Island. For statistical analysis, we used JASP software 0.18.3.0, an open-source platform dedicated to statistical analysis, to present the descriptive, comparative (with Student t-test) and correlation statistics.

4.3. Sample Characteristics

When conducting our research, we collected a relative representativeness of the sample in relation to the constitution of the population of La Réunion Island to ensure the relevance and reliability of our results (Figure 2).

The demographic composition in terms of age suggests a diversified participation, with an average age of 29 for 73.8% of inhabitants born on the island. The gender balance in our sample reinforces the representativeness and diversity of viewpoints, minimizing any gender bias in our analysis. The strong representation of couples or married participants suggests a diversity of family perspectives in the results, rather than individual perspectives. The representation between full-time employees and unemployed/retired people shows a perspective on diversity, allowing us to explore how these different situations may influence their attitudes. The significant proportion of the residence duration of 50% with less than a year’s seniority allows us to explore the perceptions of new arrivals, who can provide a nuanced view of the impacts of ST. An equal share of graduate and post-graduate participants ensures a diversity of educational perspectives, enabling a more in-depth analysis of attitudes according to educational level. The residents surveyed have a very high frequency of outdoor activities for those taking place on land (87%), less for those in water (55%), and very low for those in the air (23%); they will likely have perceptions and intentions to support ST more closely related to activities taking place on land and in water. The proportion of urban/rural dwellers enables us to address the perceptions of both “Hauts” and “Bas” dwellers and is representative of the reality of Réunion’s inhabited areas.

5. Results and Discussions

5.1. Descriptive Analysis

Table 1. Mean scores, standard deviation, and Cronbach’s alpha of the positive attitude toward the impact of ST and perceptions of SD by the NEP scale for residents of La Réunion.

Positive attitude toward impact of ST: α = 0.73	3.54 (0.83)
Sport tourism has a positive economic impact	3.90 (1.08)
Sport tourism has a positive impact on the environment	2.75 (1.17)
Sport tourism has a positive social impact	3.83 (1.09)
Sport tourism has a positive cultural impact	3.70 (1.12)
Perceptions of SD (NEP scale): α = 0.74	3.26 (0.57)
The reality of limits to growth	3.57 (1.24)
We are approaching the limit of the number of people the Earth can support	3.54 (1.30)
The Earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them	3.70 (1.22)
The Earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources	3.65 (1.20)
Anti-anthropocentrism	2.78 (1.13)
Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs	2.28 (1.10)
Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist	4.15 (1.15)
Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature	1.92 (1.22)
The fragility of nature’s balance	3.25 (1.20)
When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences	3.79 (1.20)
The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations	2.09 (1.20)
The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset	3.85 (1.21)
Rejection of exceptionalism	3.11 (1.25)
Human ingenuity will insure that we do not make the Earth unlivable	2.97 (1.33)
Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature	3.85 (1.19)
Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to control it	2.50 (1.22)
The possibility of an ecocrisis or ecological catastrophe	3.59 (1.20)
Humans are seriously abusing the environment	3.94 (1.27)
The so-called “ecological crisis” facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated	2.26 (1.25)
If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe	3.85 (1.18)

presents findings on the positive attitude toward ST and the perceptions of SD by the NEP scale. First of all, the reliability of the variables was determined by Cronbach’s alpha analysis, being above the cut-off point set at 0.70.

Results show that residents of La Réunion Island have a rather positive attitude towards the impact of ST: 3.54 (SD = 0.83) out of 5 points, among which economic and social impact are highly important (3.90, SD = 1.08; 3.83, SD = 1.09) and environmental impact is the least important (2.75, SD = 1.17). These results could be explained by a lot of activities (hiking, cycling, climbing, canyoning, surfing, and paragliding...) or events (i.e., “Diagonale des Fous”) linked to ST in this island on land, water, and air, contrary to other small islands in the Indian Ocean more heavily focused only on water or beach activities with problems of overtourism. In addition, many respondents practice outdoor activities on land or water with tourists, which can explain their attitude towards the environmental impact when they have the feeling of overcrowding or disrespect for the places of practice.

Results in Table 1 also indicate that residents of La Réunion Island have a rather favorable population’s environmental worldview with perceptions of SD (with NEP scale) equal to 3.26 (SD = 0.57) out of 5 points. Dimensions related to the possibility of an ecocrisis or ecological catastrophe (3.59, SD = 1.20) and the reality of limits to growth (3.57, SD = 1.24) are the most important, and anti-anthropocentrism (2.78, SD = 1.13) is the least important. These findings reveal that residents have become aware of the ecological risks linked to the limits of the planet, and humans do not have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs, and plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist.

Findings in

Table 2. Mean scores, standard deviation, and Cronbach’s alpha of the residents’ positive perceptions of ST impact on the SD of La Réunion Island.

Positive perceptions of ST impacts: α = 0.90	3.15 (0.72)
Economic Impacts: α = 0.73	3.16 (0.80)
Sport tourism generates jobs in the island	3.47 (1.12)
Sport tourism helps many families financially in the island	2.54 (1.05)
Sport tourism revitalizes the island’s local economy	3.44 (1.07)
Sport tourism creates a lot of wealth for the development of the island	3.17 (1.05)
Social Impacts: α = 0.70	2.76 (0.82)
The benefits of sport tourism are shared with the island’s population	2.62 (1.17)
Benefits of sport tourism reach more places in the island	3.08 (1.09)
Sport tourism encourages the home construction and maintenance in the island	2.63 (1.16)
With sport tourism, the quality of life is improving in the island	2.70 (1.11)
Cultural Impacts: α = 0.77	3.65 (0.85)
Sport tourism promotes exchanges between the different cultures in the island	3.55 (1.15)
Sport tourism enhances to interact with other people	3.94 (1.06)
Sport tourism improves the island’s leisure offer	3.69 (1.04)
Sport tourism enhances the identity of the island and the authenticity of its culture	3.45 (1.19)
Environmental Impacts: α = 0.72	3.00 (0.83)
Sport tourism is more responsible than other forms of tourism in the island	2.82 (1.09)
Sport tourism enhances the value of the island’s protected natural areas	3.36 (1.18)
Sport tourism is more respectful towards the environment in the island	2.89 (1.10)
Sport tourism improves infrastructure in the island	2.96 (1.10)

show that residents of La Réunion Island have rather positive perceptions of impacts towards ST (3.15, SD = 0.72) for the SD of their island, knowing that the reliability of the scale was determined by Cronbach’s alpha analysis, being above the threshold set at 0.70. The strongest positive dimensions are cultural impacts (3.65, SD = 0.85) and economic impacts (3.16, SD = 0.80), and the lowest dimensions are social impacts (2.76, SD = 0.82) and environmental impacts (2.76, SD = 0.82).

On one hand, the highest positive perceptions of economic impacts are essentially linked to the jobs created (3.47, SD = 1.12) and the revitalization of the island’s local economy (3.44, SD = 1.07). The positive perceptions of cultural impacts are mainly associated with interactions with other people (3.94, SD = 1.06) and the improvement of the island’s leisure offer (3.69, SD = 1.04). On the other hand, the lowest positive perceptions of social and environmental impacts are principally linked to the fact that the benefits of ST reach more places on the island (3.08, SD = 1.09) and the value of the island’s protected natural areas (3.36, SD = 1.18).

These results could be explained by the number of local and natural resources linked to the ST in La Réunion Island, unlike other forms of tourism (luxury, cultural, urban...) or economic activities (automotive market, construction, retailing…) with the lowest positive impacts for the island’s SD.

Findings in

Table 3. Mean scores, standard deviation, and Cronbach’s alpha of the residents’ negative perceptions of ST impact on the SD of La Réunion island.

Negative perceptions of ST impacts: α = 0.91	2.53 (0.76)
Economic Impacts: α = 0.59	2.44 (0.73)
Sport tourism generates precarious jobs in the island	2.85 (1.07)
Sport tourism generates less tax for the island	2.19 (1.02)
Sport tourism destroys jobs in the island	1.92 (1.03)
Sport tourism increases the cost of living in the island (real estate, food...)	2.79 (1.25)
Social Impacts: α = 0.77	2.40 (0.91)
Sport tourism deteriorates the coexistence of the island’s citizens	2.14 (1.02)
Sport tourism drives residents away from the island or forces them to live in unchosen places	2.12 (1.12)
Sport tourism generates too much overcrowding in the island during the holidays	2.83 (1.33)
With sport tourism, the quality of life decreases and there is more noise in the island	2.51 (1.23)
Cultural Impacts: α = 0.74	2.61 (0.90)
With sport tourism, there is a loss of identity and local culture in the island	2.14 (1.15)
With sport tourism, residents feel like not belonging in the island	2.22 (1.18)
Sport tourism does not sufficiently benefit the island’s residents	3.10 (1.24)
Sport tourism benefits people from other countries more than the island’s population	2.99 (1.27)
Environmental Impacts: α = 0.77	2.66 (0.93)
Sport tourism causes a lot of pollution or nuisance (water, carbon, waste...) in the island	2.94 (1.18)
Sport tourism is responsible for road traffic congestion in the island	2.35 (1.18)
With sport tourism, neighborhood infrastructures deteriorate in the island	2.45 (1.18)
With sport tourism, the island’s natural spaces are overcrowded and threatened	2.90 (1.31)

show that residents of La Réunion Island have “average” perception of the negative impacts of ST (2.53, SD = 0.76) for the island’s SD, knowing that the reliability of the scale was determined by Cronbach’s alpha analysis, being above the threshold set at 0.70 except for economic impacts. The strongest negative dimensions are environmental impacts (2.66, SD = 0.93) and cultural impacts (2.61, SD = 0.90), and the lowest dimensions are social impacts (2.40, SD = 0.91) and economic impacts (2.44, SD = 0.73).

Comparatively, the negative perceptions of environmental impacts are essentially linked to the pollution or nuisance created by ST (2.94, SD = 1.18) and the fact that the natural spaces are overcrowded and threatened by ST (2.90, SD = 1.31). The negative perceptions of cultural impacts are mainly associated with the lowest benefits for the island’s residents (3.10, SD = 1.24) compared to people from other countries (2.99, SD = 1.27). On the other hand, the lowest negative perceptions of social impacts are principally linked to precarious jobs and decreased quality of life (2.85, SD = 1.07; 2.79, SD = 1.25) and economic impacts are principally linked to too much overcrowding and the increasing cost of living on the island (2.83, SD = 1.33; 2.51, SD = 1.23).

These results could be explained by a lack of awareness of all forms of ST and their real negative impacts on the island of Reunion, but also by the fact that the negative impacts linked to SD on the island are more affected by global climate change (cyclone in particular), automobile traffic (with its pollution), and seaside overtourism during the summer than ST or other markets.

Results in

Table 4. Mean scores, standard deviation, and Cronbach’s alpha of the residents’ intention to support ST for the SD of La Réunion island.

Intention to support ST: α = 0.78	3.32 (0.86)
Development: α = 0.80	3.54 (0.92)
Sport tourism should be actively stimulated in your island for its sustainable development	3.41 (1.13)
Sport tourism should remain an important element of the sustainable development of your island	3.54 (1.10)
Your island should support the promotion of sport tourism for its sustainable development	3.66 (1.13)
Your island should remain a destination for sport tourism for its sustainable development	3.49 (1.20)
Restriction-Limitation: α = 0.55	3.20 (0.87)
Your island should limit the number of people per day at sport tourism sites	2.90 (1.27)
Your island should temporarily close some sport tourism sites to protect them	3.06 (1.34)
Your island should support sport tourism during the low seasons for its sustainable development	3.65 (1.14)
Your island should create more protected areas to prevent the development of sport tourism	3.08 (1.21)
Taxation: α = 0.60	3.23 (0.85)
Prices for sport tourism trips should be increased further for the sustainable development of your island	2.70 (1.21)
Your island should reprimand sport tourists who do not respect your island with fines	4.14 (1.13)
Your island should charge for access to sport tourism sites for its sustainable development	2.74 (1.29)
Sport tourism providers should be taxed more for the sustainable development of your island	2.85 (1.20)

show that residents of La Réunion island have varying intentions to support ST (3.32, SD = 0.86) for the SD of their island, but the reliability of the scale, which was determined by Cronbach’s alpha analysis, is below the threshold set at 0.70 for restriction-limitation (α = 0.55) and for taxation (α = 0.55). A majority of residents support the development of ST (3.54, SD = 0.92), especially its promotion (3.66, SD = 1.13). Others have the intention to support the restriction-limitation of ST (3.20, SD = 0.87), particularly during the low seasons (3.65, SD = 1.14), or to support the taxation of ST (3.23, SD = 0.85) for tourists who do not respect the ST sites (4.14, SD = 1.13), or who have to pay to access the ST sites in order to preserve them in the long term (2.85, SD = 1.20).

5.2. Statistical Comparison and Correlation

Table 5. Comparison between negative and positive perceptions of the impacts of ST on island and intention to support development, restriction-limitation and taxation of ST for the SD of the island.

Positive Impacts (Means)	Negative Impacts (Means)	t	ddl	p
General Impacts (3.15)	General Impacts (2.53)	12.165	434	<0.001
Economic (3.16)	Economic (2.44)	14.403	434	<0.001
Social (2.76)	Social (2.40)	6.300	434	<0.001
Cultural (3.65)	Cultural (2.61)	16.651	434	<0.001
Environmental (3.00)	Environmental (2.66)	5.511	434	<0.001
Intention to Support	Intention to Support	t	ddl	p
Development (3.54)	Restriction-Limitation (3.20)	7.057	434	<0.001
Development (3.54)	Taxation (3.23)	6.014	434	<0.001
Restriction-Limitation (3.20)	Taxation (3.23)	−0.661	434	0.509

presents the results obtained for the comparison between negative and positive perceptions of the impacts of ST on islands and between the intention to support development, restriction-limitation, and taxation of ST for the SD of La Réunion island. The Student t-test was used to measure the significance of the means obtained for each variable.

Results in Table 5 show that residents of La Réunion Island consider that ST produces more benefits than detriments on islands. The positive perceptions that the local population has of the impacts that ST causes or could cause are significantly greater than the negative perceptions that they have of it, even if they are aware of the negative impacts it causes. In addition, the intention to support the development of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island is significantly higher than that of supporting its restriction-limitation or its taxation. On the other hand, there is no difference between the intention to support the restriction limitation or the taxation of the ST for the residents of this island.

Data in

Table 6. Correlations between variables of the exploratory research model.

Variable		NEP-SD	PO-ST	PO-IMP	NEG-IMP	SUPP-DVP	SUPP-RES/LIM	SUPP-TAX
1. NEP-SD	R de Pearson	—
	p-value	—
2. PO-ST	R de Pearson	0.312	—
	p-value	<0.001	—
3. POS-IMP	R de Pearson	0.345	0.671	—
	p-value	<0.001	<0.001	—
4. NEG-IMP	R de Pearson	0.266	−0.043	−0.015	—
	p-value	<0.001	0.369	0.762	—
5. SUPP-DVP	R de Pearson	0.380	0.515	0.553	−0.069	—
	p-value	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.151	—
6. SUPP-RES/LIM	R de Pearson	0.438	0.157	0.184	0.450	0.389	—
	p-value	<0.001	0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	—
7. SUPP-TAX	R de Pearson	0.420	0.113	0.110	0.461	0.264	0.577	—
	p-value	<0.001	0.019	0.022	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	—

present the correlations between each variable of the exploratory research model applied to residents of La Réunion Island to test our hypotheses (Figure 1).

On a final note, all initial hypotheses have been confirmed, even if the positive correlations did not turn out to be very strong. Thus, we can observe interesting trends compared to our exploratory research model.

H1a. 

There is a strong positive correlation (0.671) between a positive attitude toward the impacts of ST on the intention to support the development of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island. Therefore, the more positive the attitude towards ST is, the more the intention to support the development.

H1b. 

There is a positive correlation (0.553) between positive perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands and the intention to support the development of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island. Hence, it can be deduced that the more positive the perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands are, the more the intention to support the development.

H2a. 

There is a positive correlation (0.450) between negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands and the intention to support the limitation-restriction of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island. Thus, the more negative the perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands, the more the intention to support the limitation-restriction.

H2b. 

There is a positive correlation (0.461) between negative perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands and the intention to support the taxation of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island. Therefore, the more negative the perceptions of ST impacts on the SD of islands, the more the intention to support the taxation.

H3a. 

There is a positive correlation (0.438) between perceptions of SD (by NEP) on the intention to support the limitation-restriction of ST for the SD of La Réunion Island. Thus, the higher the perceptions of SD, the higher the intention to support the limitation-restriction.

H3b. 

There is a positive correlation (0.420) between perceptions of SD (by NEP) and the intention to support the taxation impacts for the SD of La Réunion Island. Thus, the higher the perceptions of SD, the higher the intention to support the taxation.

5.3. Discussion and Limitation

This study on La Réunion Island adapts the social exchange theory to explain three kinds of intention to support ST (development, limitation-restriction, taxation) by the residents’ perceptions and attitudes. While most research has studied the impacts of tourism development in general, few have focused specifically on ST from an SD perspective, while using a quantitative analysis to understand the opinions of residents in small islands. In the context of our study, this social exchange theory makes it possible to explain why certain residents support or reject tourism initiatives on the basis of economic benefits (income, employment) and perceived costs (pressure on infrastructure, loss of authenticity, environmental impacts). In this way, the application of this theory sheds light on the dynamics of local acceptance or resistance to tourism development, offering a nuanced reading of residents’ perceptions. Indeed, the residents of La Réunion consider that ST produces more benefits than detriments to the island.

The positive perception that the local population has on the impacts that tourism causes or could cause is correlated with favorable intentions to support development oriented towards the ST in an SD perspective. This result coincides with that obtained by various studies on the perceptions and attitudes of residents regarding the impact of ST [58,70]. Like in La Réunion, these studies showed or revealed that residents are in favor of more tourism development because they consider it beneficial; however, they are consistent with the negative impacts it causes. Frequently, since residents emphasize the benefits of tourism development, they may overestimate, particularly the positive economic [57,59] and social impacts, and underestimate these same negative impacts [2,58]. Residents of La Réunion have shown to be more supportive of ST for enhanced SD on their island with regards to the balance between the benefits of the inclusive economy for residents, particularly in the isolated areas at the heights of the island, and the ability of stakeholders to preserve their UNESCO World Heritage environment [35].

The originality of this research is also to show that residents of La Réunion are not only in favor of the development of the ST for the SD on their island, but some of them support its restriction-limitation in protected areas in particular, or even support the taxation for tourists. These residents are those who have a higher negative perception of ST impacts on the island and a higher perception of SD issues. According to Refs. [71,72], probably citizens could vary their types of perceptions and intentions depending on their area of residence; for instance, residents in rural areas confirmed being more perceptive about negative environmental impacts than those residing in urban or eminently tourist areas. The phenomenon of “sports overtourism” is starting to emerge in some parts of the island, particularly in the “ilets” and canyons of Mafate and Cilaos, where the influx of visitors during trail running competitions disturbs the peace and quietness of residents. Some residents express their frustration about noise pollution, traffic jams, and saturation of public infrastructure. This could also be linked to their own outdoor leisure activities, their strong attachment to motorized practices (water, land, and air), their anarchic use of nature for their traditional picnic, or their fatalism towards global climatic change.

The results of the exploratory research model applied to residents on small islands like La Réunion are not yet significant enough to guarantee their reliability for application to all small islands or even beyond. First of all, despite the relative representativeness of our sample, the low number of respondents means that our results cannot be generalized to all residents of the island. Thus, one of the principal explanations is linked to the definition of ST, which can generate confusion among residents depending on whether they focus on one, two, or three activities of ST according to their physical support (only water, land, or air) and their main characteristics (practice or spectacle; motorized or not). Moreover, the perceptions of islanders regarding the impacts of ST on SD vary according to the diversity of island contexts, which are often focused solely on water tourism or overtourism [21,58].

Furthermore, it would be possible to use other measurement models or scales to analyze intentions to support ST for the SD of this island. It would be interesting to modify the model and/or choose other items or scales more adapted to our specific topic linking ST and SD for the residents in islands. For example, it would be possible to use causal models to measure the influence of positive and negative impacts on the intention to support ST from an SD perspective or add other dimensions or items as did Refs. [57,58] for the residents of Gran Canaria with SmartPLS and the political-administrative impacts. It should also be interesting to measure the moderation effects of individual variables (age, gender, native or not from the island, place of residence, etc.) in the model. Finally, it would be advisable to identify whether residents are involved in ST, as this directly influences their degree of involvement in the activities and affects their ability to assess the negative aspects.

6. Conclusions: Implications and Recommendations for Future Research

6.1. “Private and Public” Implications

Findings from this particular study can help private managers to better implement specific sustainable strategies on La Réunion Island, especially in a climate change with fewer international tourists and more “domestic tourists” from the Metropole or the Indian Ocean. It would be interesting to promote more authentic and/or more specific holidays with services developing nature or outdoor activities and ecotourism [78], while involving residents in the form of “greeters guides”. ST managers can also promote more familiar experiences for domestic tourists with creative and repetitive pleasure through the discovery of their own limits, new sensations, and new playgrounds.

Despite the maintenance of crisis conditions, more sustainable tourism will have a prominent place and would allow visitors to travel less far, less often, but better and safer. In view of constraints imposed by climate change, the establishment of an effective communication system for the residents will contribute to the recovery of the ST in an SD way. New innovations and digital services should be proposed in La Réunion Island to limit the negative impacts of ST: visits and experiences without thermic (only electric) vehicles; limitation of over-tourism in protected natural areas; digital and geolocalized promotion of tourists’ services and sites.

6.2. Recommendations for Future Researches

This exploratory research on residents of La Réunion island provides promising results that may guide perspectives for future studies. First, it would be useful to test the influence of the four variables on the intention to support the ST for the SD of La Réunion Island by a regression, structural equations, or SmartPLS model, while eliminating certain incorrectly used items and integrating others validated in new research such as those used by Refs. [57,58] for the impacts of ST. Second, it would be interesting to conduct future studies focused on the categories of ST according to their physical support (only water, land, or air) and their main characteristics (practice or spectacle; motorized or not). Third, it could also be interesting and more efficient to test the model research on other small islands with new samples to confirm (or not) a new design with new scales. Finally, complementary qualitative methodologies (observations and interviews) with residents, managers of ST associations, tourist agencies, and political leaders would enrich the understanding of the quantitative results obtained.