Wildlife damage is often expected to push national park residents toward new sources of income, but the appraisals that turn damage into a willingness to move into tourism remain unclear. Drawing on protection motivation theory and questionnaire data from 513 residents in and around the Wuyishan City section of Wuyishan National Park, China, this study distinguishes perceived tourism adaptive efficacy from tourism self-efficacy and examines how these two beliefs relate to intentions to shift household livelihoods toward tourism. Greater perceived wildlife damage was related to stronger threat appraisal of traditional livelihoods. Residents who perceived greater livelihood threat also reported stronger transition intentions and were more likely to view tourism as a workable livelihood alternative. However, no clear relationship emerged between livelihood threat and tourism self-efficacy, although both adaptive efficacy and self-efficacy were positively related to transition intention. As a moderator, perceived tourism development opportunity was more relevant to adaptive efficacy than to self-efficacy. When residents perceived greater tourism opportunities, the positive relationship between livelihood threat and adaptive efficacy was stronger, as was the corresponding indirect relationship with transition intention. In contrast, perceived opportunity made little difference to the relationship involving self-efficacy. These findings suggest that livelihood threat was associated with greater perceived usefulness and feasibility of tourism without a corresponding association with residents’ confidence in their own ability to engage in tourism activities. Policies aimed at encouraging livelihood diversification in national park communities may therefore need to combine the creation of tourism opportunities with training, skills development, and other forms of support that strengthen residents’ capacity to participate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: