urban tourism

urban tourism

Assessment of the Smartization Level of Ecolodges and Its Impact on Tourists’ Loyalty: A case study of Mazandaran and Isfahan

Document Type : Research Article

Authors
1 Department of Tourism Management, Faculty of Cultural Heritage, HandiCrafts and Tourism, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 Department of Physical Geography, Faculty of Geographical Sciences and Planning, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
A B S T R A C T
Emerging technologies have transformed the tourism industry, and the integration of technology into tourism services has become essential for its sustainable development. This study evaluates the smartization of ecolodges and its impact on tourists’ loyalty using a descriptive-survey methodology and a questionnaire-based approach. Data were collected and analyzed from 163 tourists. The findings revealed that the smartization level of ecolodges was at a moderate level with statistical significance (p<0.000), with a mean score of 2.92, indicating a substantial gap between current practice and the full implementation of smart technologies. Nevertheless, smartization demonstrated a highly significant and strong impact on tourists’ loyalty, explaining more than 73% of the variance in customers’ loyalty. This finding highlights the importance of applying technology to enhance customers’ retention. Among the smartization components, the provision of cultural information through smart methods had the greatest positive effect on tourists’ loyalty, emphasizing the significance of integrating technology with cultural richness and the authenticity of the travel experience. Smartization has strong potential to improve tourists’ experiences; however, its success depends on aligning technology with tourists’ cultural and emotional expectations. Therefore, it is recommended that smart technologies in ecolodges be developed along three principal axes: operational efficiency, defined by the optimization of resources and processes; user-friendliness, reflected in simple and accessible interfaces; and cultural enrichment, achieved through digital tools that facilitate a more meaningful connection with local culture. Adopting such a comprehensive approach can significantly increase tourists’ loyalty and improve the competitiveness of ecolodges. Moreover, this holistic strategy contributes not only to enhancing tourists’ personal experiences but also to preserving and promoting the cultural and regional identity heritage.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Smartization in ecolodges is a multidimensional concept that goes beyond merely implementing modern technologies such as high-speed internet, online reservation systems, digital information services, and security systems. At its core, this approach seeks to enhance the overall tourists’ experience by providing personalized services tailored to visitors’ cultural, social, and even emotional needs. Smart technologies can be effective when they create a simple, efficient, and enjoyable experience for guests, encouraging them to revisit or recommend the accommodation to others. However, this potential can only be realized when technology aligns with tourists’ needs and expectations; otherwise, complexity, inefficiency, or incompatibility with users’ culture and habits may lead to dissatisfaction and even disloyalty. Therefore, accurately identifying the status of technology implementation and evaluating its compatibility with the real needs of tourists is essential for the success of ecolodges in today’s competitive environment.
Tourists’ loyalty to an ecolodge is a complex phenomenon that is not formed solely through satisfaction with basic services. Rather, it results from multiple interactions and deeper experiences, such as a sense of place attachment, rich cultural experiences, quality of human interactions, and feelings of safety and comfort. In this regard, smart technologies can play a significant role in strengthening loyalty if they are designed and implemented in ways that also address emotional and cultural needs. Nevertheless, there remains a notable deficiency in existing research, particularly regarding the national context of countries such as Iran. This lack of studies limits a deeper understanding of the relationship between smartization and tourists’ loyalty and creates difficulties for managers and policymakers due to insufficient documented data. Furthermore, cultural and geographical diversity across regions requires localized studies that consider the unique characteristics of each area in order to understand the moderating effects of these factors on the effectiveness of technologies.
Considering the strategic importance of eco-lodges in sustainable tourism development and cultural heritage preservation, examining the level of smartization in these accommodations and assessing its impact on tourists’ loyalty is both a scientific and practical necessity. Previous studies have mainly focused on broader aspects of smart tourism and paid less attention to the unique characteristics of ecolodges, which require more specialized approaches. Therefore, conducting a comprehensive study in the provinces of Mazandaran and Isfahan — which differ significantly in tourism patterns (nature-based tourism versus cultural-historical tourism) and in the number of ecolodges (54 units in Mazandaran and more than 208 units in Isfahan) — can help identify key smartization indicators and analyze their effects on tourists’ behavior and loyalty. In addition to developing a localized theoretical framework for assessing smartization in ecolodges, the findings of this research can provide practical guidance for organizations and operators in this sector to design and implement targeted programs aimed at improving smart services according to the capacities and needs of each province, thereby contributing to the sustainable development of eco-tourism.

Methodology
This study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach based on survey data analysis. Its primary objective is to investigate the smartization status of ecolodges and analyze its impact on tourists’ loyalty in the tourism destinations of Isfahan and Mazandaran provinces. To collect data, a researcher-made questionnaire was designed based on the research objectives and indicators related to smartization and tourists’ loyalty. Quantitative methods were employed for data analysis, and appropriate statistical tests were applied to examine the research hypotheses. The statistical population consisted of tourists who stayed in ecolodges in Isfahan and Mazandaran provinces. The statistical sample of participants is different in both regions. Due to the unknown exact size of the statistical population, convenience sampling was employed to determine the sample size. During two months (approximately May–June 2025), 163 accessible tourists were surveyed, and their responses analyzed as the sample. Among them, 91 tourists were from Isfahan and 72 from Mazandaran. Inclusion criteria included at least one-night stay and age over 25 years old. The provincial shares were determined based on the number of ecolodges, the number of tourists, and the participation rate in completing the questionnaire. The serveyed ecolodges in Isfahan province were located in the counties of Kashan, Isfahan, and Ardestan, while in Mazandaran province they included ecolodges in the counties of Sari, Chalus, and Savadkuh. Participants were selected from a total of 13 ecolodges, including 7 lodges in Isfahan and 6 in Mazandaran.
Instrument validity was established through expert review: the opinions of 10 tourism and technology scholars with master’s and doctoral qualifications were collected, thereby confirming the questionnaire’s content validity. Reliability was measured using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, which was greater than 0.70 for the entire questionnaire, indicating an acceptable level of reliability. Data analysis was conducted utilizing SPSS statistical software, and statistical tests were applied including the binomial test, regression analysis, and the Mann–Whitney test.

Results and discussion
The analysis of the smartization status of Iranian ecolodges indicates that this sector has begun moving toward smartization but remains in an early stage of development. Basic indicators such as security systems, high-speed internet, and online payment services are in relatively favorable condition, whereas advanced and interactive indicators indicate poor performance including augmented reality, smart energy management, and digital attraction guides. Overall, the average smartization score was evaluated at 2.92, which remains significantly below the desired level. In terms of tourists’ loyalty, smartization has strengthened emotional experiences and the sense of attachment; however, it has not yet succeeded in creating long-term loyalty. Despite the high scores of experience-oriented indicators, tourists’ willingness to choose the same ecolodge again was very low, indicating a lack of innovation and insufficient competitive differentiation to encourage repeat visits. Although overall satisfaction and staff behavior received relatively high scores, their influence on loyalty was not consistently significant across the entire sample.
The regression model, with an F-statistic of 234.168, confirmed the significant impact of smartization on tourists’ loyalty. These findings suggest that although the current levels of smartization and loyalty are relatively low, smartization represents a strategic solution for enhancing the quality of tourists’ experiences and fostering sustainable loyalty. Therefore, moving beyond basic infrastructure toward innovative smart services is the key step in increasing tourists return rates and creating competitive advantages. The results further showed that the coefficient of determination was:
R2=0.732R^2 = 0.732R2=0.732
This means that 73.2% of the variance in tourists’ loyalty is explained by ecolodge smartization indicators. This value demonstrates the model’s strong explanatory power and confirms that smartization has a positive, strong, and significant effect on tourists’ loyalty. In other words, the higher the level of smartization, the greater the likelihood of increasing tourists’ trust, satisfaction, and intention to revisit. Among the smartization indicators, the provision of local cultural information through smart or multimedia methods, with a coefficient of 0.654, had the strongest impact and was identified as the most important predictor of loyalty. Other indicators such as 24-hour online support, smart check-in and check-out notifications, smart guidance systems for facilities and accommodation rules, energy-saving devices, and smart security systems also had significant positive effects on loyalty. These results indicate that technology contributes to loyalty when it creates a secure, convenient, organized, and culturally enriching experience for tourists.
In contrast, some indicators such as high-speed internet and smart entry systems using cards or mobile phones did not exhibit significant impacts. Therefore, merely having technology without effective and user-oriented functionality does not necessarily lead to loyalty. The findings also demonstrated no significant difference between ecolodges in Isfahan and Mazandaran in terms of smartization levels. However, a significant difference was observed in the tourists’ loyalty, with Mazandaran achieving a higher average loyalty ranking than Isfahan. This suggests that although smartization levels are similar in both provinces, the tourism experience in Mazandaran has had a stronger influence on tourists’ loyalty.
The findings are consistent with many previous studies. The results indicate that smart technologies positively affect tourists’ loyalty only when they are designed in accordance with users’ needs, ease of use, and the cultural context of the destination — a conclusion also supported by studies conducted by Aziz et al. (2020), Ng et al. (2023), and Jeong and Shin (2020). Conversely, the findings are also aligned with the perspectives of Asgarpour et al. (2015) and Mimandi et al. (2023), who emphasized that complexity or technological incompatibility may produce negative effects. Therefore, merely implementing innovative technologies is insufficient for fostering loyalty; these technologies must support a comfortable, meaningful, and culturally compatible experience.
Furthermore, the findings demonstrate that tourists’ loyalty depends less on technology by itself and more on the integration of technology with cultural experience, human interaction, and a sense of belonging — an issue also emphasized in studies by Molavi and Basteneghar (2024) and Qiu et al. (2025). Comparison between the two provinces revealed that despite similar levels of smartization, tourists’ loyalty differed significantly. Accordingly, the key factor in fostering tourists’ loyalty is not only technical infrastructure, but also the quality of experience, service integration, and the creation of a pleasant and unique atmosphere.

Conclusion
The rapid growth of modern technologies in the tourism industry has driven eco-lodges toward smartization, creating opportunities to improve tourists’ experiences and strengthen tourists’ loyalty. Examining the impact of smartization on tourists’ loyalty, to increase revisit intention and destination recommendation, is therefore significant. This study analyzed smartization indicators in ecolodges in Mazandaran and Isfahan provinces and explained their role in increasing tourists’ loyalty. The findings indicate that smartization has played an effective role in improving the quality of tourism experiences, although its effects have not been uniform across all dimensions. Services such as stable internet access, smart security systems (including CCTV and access control), and fast, convenient online reservation systems received positive responses from tourists and facilitated travel and increased satisfaction.
In contrast, more advanced and complex technologies such as augmented reality (AR) for introducing attractions or AI-based smart guides did not have the expected positive impact on tourists’ satisfaction and loyalty. This may be due to the incompatibility of such technologies with the traditional and local nature of ecolodges, the complexity of using them, or tourists’ limited understanding of their added value. Despite efforts to collect reliable data, the study faced several limitations. The focus on only two provinces — Mazandaran and Isfahan — limits the generalizability of the findings to other regions. Additionally, the use of self-report questionnaires may have been influenced by subjective factors. Important variables such as tourists’ personal characteristics - age, education, and interest in technology - familiarity with digital technologies, and cultural differences were not examined independently or in detail.
It is recommended, based on the findings and limitations, that the eco-lodges’ managers reconsider their approach to smartization and view it as a strategic tool for enhancing indigenous, cultural, and personalized tourists’ experiences. Smart services should be designed with emphasis on simplicity, user-friendly, high interactivity, and the creation of real added value. Staff training and continuous collection of tourists’ feedback regarding the efficiency and desirability of smart tools are also essential for service improvement and development. For future studies, it is recommended to expand the geographical scope and use mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) to better cover the diversity of ecolodges in different regions. In-depth interviews with tourists and managers, as well as analysis of online reviews, could help identify hidden dimensions and provide more practical solutions for sustainable and smart tourism development. Independent examination of personal factors, technological familiarity, and cultural differences would also enrich forthcoming research findings.

Funding
There is no funding support.

Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.

Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.
Keywords

  1. Al Mousa, H. A. (2022). Use of smart technologies and individual re-consideration of tourism destination. Lex Humana, 14(1), 471-485. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9912393
  2. Asgarpour, R., Hamid, A. B. A., Sulaiman, Z. B., & Asgari, A. A. (2015). Efficiency or inefficiency of customer satisfaction as one of the main antecedents of customer loyalty in tourism and hospitality industry. Advanced Science Letters, 21(6), 1842-1844. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2015.6133
  3. Azis, N., Amin, M., Chan, S., & Aprilia, C. (2020). How smart tourism technologies affect tourist destination loyalty. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 11(4), 603-625. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-01-2020-0005
  4. Beigi, H., & Esmaeili, S. (2025). Investigating the effect of natural soundscape on tourist satisfaction and sense of place perception in tourism destinations (Case study: Hyrcanian forests of Gilan). Tourism Marketing and Hospitality Research, 3(1), 197-222. https://doi.org/10.22080/tmhr.2025.29248.1058 [In Persian]
  5. Buhalis, D., & Amaranggana, A. (2015). Smart tourism destinations enhancing tourism experience through personalisation of services. In Information and communication technologies in tourism (pp. 377-389). Springer. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/application.Additional
  6. Carvache-Franco, M., Carvache-Franco, W., Pérez-Orozco, A., Víquez-Paniagua, A. G., & Carvache-Franco, O. (2022). Satisfaction factors that predict loyalty in ecotourism: A study of foreign tourism in Costa Rica. Land, 11(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11010125
  7. Cerdá-Mansilla, E., Tussyadiah, I., Campo, S., & Rubio, N. (2024). Smart destinations: A holistic view from researchers and managers to tourists and locals. Tourism Management Perspectives, 51, 101223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2024.101223
  8. Chandran, C., & Bhattacharya, P. (2022). Development and implementation of sustainability criteria and indicators for eco-lodges and resorts in ecotourism destinations: Case studies from India. Turizam, 26(3), 161-175. 
  9. Diwan, S. A. (2025). Optimizing guest experience in smart hospitality: Integrated fuzzy-AHP and machine learning for centralized hotel operations with IoT. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 116, 535-547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2024.11.051
  10. Gretzel, U., Sigala, M., Xiang, Z., & Koo, C. (2015). Smart tourism: Foundations and developments. Electronic Markets, 25(3), 179-188. 
  11. Heidari Sarban, V., Ziarati, M., & Bakhtar, S. (2024). Survey and effect of ICT on rural tourism: The case study of villages of tourism destination, Bushehr Province. Geographical Planning of Space Quarterly Journal, 14(2), 79-95. https://doi.org/10.30488/gps.2019.167523.2980 [In Persian]
  12. Hessam, M. (2019). Identifying obstacles to the establishment and development of ecotourism accommodations in rural areas of Gilan Province. Rural Research, 10(3), 546-559. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrur.2019.281777.1363 [In Persian]
  13. Ionescu, A. M., & Sârbu, F. A. (2024). Exploring the impact of smart technologies on the tourism industry. Sustainability, 16(8), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083318
  14. Jamini, D., Dehghani, A., & Mohammadi, A. (2024). Rural tourism marketing and identification of key factors affecting it with a sustainable development approach (Case study: Palangan Village in Kamyaran County). Green Development Management Studies, 3(2), 135-152. https://doi.org/10.22077/jgdms.2024.7429.1106 [In Persian]
  15. Jeong, M., & Shin, H. H. (2020). Tourists' experiences with smart tourism technology at smart destinations and their behavior intentions. Journal of Travel Research, 59(8), 1464-1477. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875198830
  16. Khavarian-Garmsir, A., Jashni, M., Khadem, F., Shakouri, B., & Ebrahimi Turk Mahallah, E. (2024). An analysis of the role of smart tourism technologies in the memorable experience of urban tourists in Iran. Journal of Urban Tourism, 11(4), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2024.366326.1160 [In Persian]
  17. Kim, K. H., & Park, D. B. (2017). Relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: Community-based ecotourism in Korea. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(2), 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1156609
  18. Kovačić, N. (2022). The acceptance of smart technologies in tourist regions with respect to mobility preferences of their visitors. Transportation Research Procedia, 64, 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2022.09.030
  19. La Are, R. (2024). Analysis of the effect of smart tourism technology and memorable tourist experience on tourist loyalty with tourist satisfaction as a mediating variable. International Journal Multidisciplinary Science, 3(1), 27-35. 
  20. Lee, S., Jeon, S., & Kim, D. (2011). The impact of tour quality and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty: The case of Chinese tourists in Korea. Tourism Management, 32(5), 1115-1124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.09.016
  21. Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., & Liu, J. T. (2021). Developing an indicator framework for assessing sustainable tourism: Evidence from a Taiwan ecological resort. Ecological Indicators, 125, 107596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107596
  22. Meymandi, F., Keyvannia, S., & Shirmohammadi, A. (2024). Examining the challenges of smartening eco-lodges. Journal of Urban Tourism, 10(4), 17-35. https://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2024.352721.1102 [In Persian]
  23. Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicraft. (2023). Statistical report on tourism and accommodation. Tehran. [In Persian]
  24. Mododi Arkhodi, M., Ezadbahksh, M., & Najafi Arkhodi, E. (2021). Identifying the factors affecting customers' loyalty to eco-lodges: Case study of selected accommodations in South Khorasan. Journal of Geography and Regional Development, 18(2), 139-168. https://doi.org/10.22067/jgrd.2021.50992.0 [In Persian]
  25. Molavi, E., & Bastenegar, M. (2024). Impact of smart tourism technologies on tourists' experiences: The case study of tourists in museums of Tehran. Journal of Urban Tourism, 11(4), 59-75. https://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2024.371724.1187 [In Persian]
  26. Naim Abadi, N., & Javan, F. (2020). An analysis of factors influencing tourists' stay in Mashhad ecotourism resorts. Village and Space Sustainable Development, 1(1), 69-84. https://doi.org/10.22077/vssd.2020.3551.1004 [In Persian]
  27. Nawaz, I., & Iqbal, J. (2025). Smart tourism technology as a driver of sustainable religious tourism and visitor loyalty: Evidence from Pakistan. Contemporary Journal of Social Science Review, 3(2), 2807-2825. https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v3i2.903
  28. Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2015). Smart technologies for personalized experiences: A case study in the hospitality domain. Electronic Markets, 25(3), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0182-1
  29. Ng, K. S. P., Wong, J. W. C., Xie, D., & Zhu, J. (2023). From the attributes of smart tourism technologies to loyalty and WOM via user satisfaction: The moderating role of switching costs. Kybernetes, 52(8), 2868-2885. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2021-0840
  30. Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(4_suppl1), 33-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429990634s105
  31. Rahman, S. A. A., Dura, N. H., Yusof, M. A., Nakamura, H., & Nong, R. A. (2020). Challenges of smart tourism in Malaysia eco-tourism destinations. Planning Malaysia, 18(14), 442-451. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v18i14.844
  32. Sadeghi, H., & Seidaiy, S. E. (2025). Exploring the role of tourism on land use value in rural areas: A case study. International Journal of Rural Managementhttps://doi.org/10.1177/09730052251336523
  33. Sadeghi, H., & Seidaiy, S. E. (2023). Tourism and rural development. In Rural areas—Development and transformations. IntechOpen.
  34. Sigala, M. (2018). New technologies in tourism: From multi disciplinary to anti disciplinary advances and trajectories. Tourism Management Perspectives, 25, 151-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.12.003
  35. Tulung, L. E., Lapian, S. L. J., Lengkong, V. P., & Tielung, M. V. (2025). The role of smart tourism technologies, destination image and memorable tourism experiences as determinants of tourist loyalty. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 19(4), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v19n4-013
  36. Xue, K., Jin, X., & Li, Y. (2025). Exploring the influence of human–computer interaction experience on tourist loyalty in the context of smart tourism: A case study of Suzhou Museum. Behavioral Sciences, 15(7), 1-18. 
  37. Yaghmour, S. (2024). Smart tourism technology and destination loyalty. Asia-Pacific Journal of Innovation in Hospitality & Tourism, 13(1), 1-21. 
  38. Ye, B. H., Ye, H., & Law, R. (2020). Systematic review of smart tourism research. Sustainability, 12(8), 1-19. 
  39. Zhang, Y., & Deng, B. (2024). Exploring the nexus of smart technologies and sustainable ecotourism: A systematic review. Heliyon, 10(11), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31996