Background: Tourism in Nepal has bounced back very well from the COVID-19 pandemic, with the Annapurna Conservation Area alone recording 300,000 foreign visitors in 2025. But as garbage, water stress and trail deterioration become evident in Nepal’s premier hiking corridors exposing the limit of sustainability paradigm, rather than focusing on restoring destination. Objectives: This paper is a conceptual framework with empirical validation. It constructs a RT framework adapted for Nepal, which governs sustainability toward ecological, cultural, and economic restoration, and formalizes its four building blocks (“Ecological Restoration”, “Cultural and Community Regeneration,” “Economic Reciprocity” and “Adaptive Multi-Stakeholder Governance”) into testable hypothesis Methods: The framework was created by means of a semi-systematic literature review of regenerative tourism and Nepal homestays (2023–2026). It was then field tested with a quantitative cross-sectional survey of 95 community homestay operators of Ghalegau, Sirubari and Ayodhyapuri by means of purposive site selection and stratified sampling by sites. Data analysis was carried out with descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s alpha and Pearson correlations. Results: Based on 95 respondents, all four hypotheses were supported. Of the four pillars of the framework, Cultural and Community Regeneration was most closely associated with intergenerational cultural transmission (r =.57). Economic Reciprocity had the lowest pillar mean. Conclusion: The findings provide validation of the Nepal-adapted RT framework and its four pillars and implications for policy: The study recommends action for the Nepal Tourism Board, ACAP, hospitality operators and hospitality management education to embed regenerative practices into Nepal’s homestay and conservation-area tourism. Novelty: This paper discusses the gap between regenerative tourism and Nepal’s hospitality industry, particularly the country’s established homestay model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dulal et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: