Page 51 - Sustaining Accommodation SMES

5.2 Quantitative Study

tics, complemented by selected inferential tests to assess cross-country
differences. For sustainability practices measured using a binary response
format, analysis focused on the presence or absence of practices. Re-
sponses were coded accordingly and analysed by calculating the percent-
age of respondents reporting adoption of each practice. These results
were first examined at the country level and subsequently synthesised
across the Mediterranean sample to identify practices that are widely
adopted versus those that remain rare. This approach allows a clear dis-
tinction between adoption and non-adoption, without implying differ-
ences in implementation depth.
For sustainability practices measured on ordinal scales capturing the
extent of implementation, responses were analysed using a threshold-
based aggregation strategy. To strengthen interpretive clarity, responses
were grouped into low implementation (scores 0–1) and high implemen-
tation (scores 5–6), while midpoint responses were excluded from se-
lected analyses. This forced-contrast approach highlights practices that
are clearly embedded in organisational routines as opposed to those that
are weakly implemented or symbolic. A similar aggregation logic was
applied to constructs capturing sustainability orientation and perceived
success. Responses were grouped into low endorsement (scores 0–2) and
high endorsement (scores 7–9). This strategy emphasises polarised eval-
uations and allows meaningful cross-country comparison of normative
commitment and self-assessed performance, while avoiding overinter-
pretation of moderate responses.
Organisational readiness for iso 21401 adoption was analysed by cal-
culating the share of respondents reporting high readiness (scores 5–
6) for each readiness dimension. Readiness was treated as a multidi-
mensional construct, with results reported at the item level rather than
aggregated into a single index. Country-specific analyses were comple-
mented by cross-Mediterranean synthesis tables to identify areas of rel-
ative strength and weakness. Perceived barriers to iso 21401 adoption
were analysed by aggregating responses into low pertinence (scores 0–2)
and high pertinence (scores 5–6) categories. The proportion of respon-
dents identifying each barrier as highly pertinent was calculated. Barri-
ers were subsequently interpreted using Stern’s environmentally signifi-
cant behaviour framework, which distinguishes between attitudinal fac-
tors, personal capabilities, and contextual constraints. This theoretical
alignment was applied at the interpretation stage to explain dominant be-
havioural mechanisms rather than as a statistical classification. The same

51