Blockchain for Environmental Accountability: An Experimental Approach to Sustainable Tourism Reporting

Abstract

Keywords:

Introduction

The global tourism industry is a major economic driver, contributing approximately 10% of the world’s GDP and supporting millions of jobs (Klamsaengsai et al., 2025; Panigrahy & Verma, 2025). However, its rapid expansion has come at a significant environmental cost, including carbon emissions, resource depletion, and ecosystem degradation. Analytically, Bali serves as a critical research laboratory due to its unique position as a global tourism epicenter currently undergoing a transformation toward green economy regulations through Bali Provincial Regulation No. 8 of 2019 concerning Standards for the Implementation of Balinese Cultural Tourism. The region faces a high risk of greenwashing due to the fragmentation of reporting standards between traditional governance practices such as Subak and the demands of international certification, creating significant information asymmetries for tourists. By examining Bali, this research not only explores the technical challenges of blockchain adoption but also tests the technology's effectiveness in integrating local wisdom with global digital accountability, making it a representative case study for tourism destinations in developing countries transitioning to regulation-based digital transparency systems. As sustainability becomes a critical concern, there is an urgent need for transparent and verifiable environmental accountability mechanisms in tourism. Traditional reporting systems often suffer from opacity, manipulation, and a lack of standardization, leading to widespread greenwashing—where businesses falsely claim sustainable practices to attract ecoconscious consumers (Capucho et al., 2025; Galli et al., 2025; Rejeb et al., 2025) . In this context, blockchain technology emerges as a disruptive solution, offering immutable, decentralized, and auditable record-keeping that could revolutionize sustainability reporting. The integration of blockchain characteristics such as data immutability, decentralization, and auditable transparency significantly strengthens the empirical evidence base for validating corporate environmental claims, thereby narrowing the perceived gap between organizational activities and societal values. Through the lens of stakeholder theory, this technology serves as a digital governance mechanism that mitigates information asymmetry, enabling the real-time and reliable distribution of sustainability data to all stakeholders. By aligning these technical features within a broader governance framework, blockchain becomes more than just a record-keeping tool, but a strategic instrument for building systemic accountability that strengthens public trust and meets regulatory expectations within the sustainable tourism ecosystem. Despite its potential, existing research presents contradictory findings on blockchain’s efficacy in environmental accountability, while real-world adoption in tourism remains limited. This study seeks to experimentally evaluate blockchain’s role in enhancing transparency and trust in sustainable tourism reporting, addressing both its promises and challenges (Galli et al., 2025; Li et al., 2025). Sustainable tourism relies on accurate and honest reporting of environmental impacts, yet current systems are plagued by inefficiencies. Many tourism operators voluntarily disclose sustainability metrics, but these reports are often unaudited, inconsistent, or misleading (Gričar et al., 2025). For instance, hotels may claim carbon neutrality without providing verifiable data, while tour operators might exaggerate their conservation efforts. This lack of accountability undermines consumer trust and hampers genuine progress toward sustainability. A 2023 survey by Booking.com revealed that 83% of global travelers prefer sustainable options, yet 52% distrust environmental claims made by tourism providers (Chauhan & Sahoo, 2024; Conefrey & Hanrahan, 2025). The primary report referenced is the "2023 Sustainable Travel Report" published by Booking.com in April 2023, its eighth annual comprehensive study of global traveler preferences. The survey's metadata covers a vast sample size of 33,228 respondents across 35 countries and territories worldwide (including key markets in Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas). The study was conducted using an online survey of adults who had traveled at least once in the past 12 months and planned to travel in the coming year. This data confirms a consumer behavior paradox: 83% of global travelers expressed a strong desire to choose environmentally friendly options, yet there is a significant crisis of trust, with 52% of respondents expressing distrust in the validity of sustainability claims marketed by travel providers. The skepticism stems from the absence of a reliable, tamper-proof system to validate sustainability assertions. Existing environmental reporting frameworks, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), rely on self-reported data and third-party audits, which are costly, time-consuming, and vulnerable to bias. Moreover, the fragmentation of sustainability standards across regions complicates cross-border comparisons (Gričar et al., 2025; Yap et al., 2024). Blockchain technology, with its inherent characteristics of decentralization, transparency, and cryptographic security, could address these challenges by enabling real-time, tamper-proof tracking of environmental data (Hikal et al., 2025). However, despite its theoretical advantages, empirical evidence on blockchain’s effectiveness in tourism sustainability remains inconclusive, with some studies highlighting its transformative potential while others point to significant implementation barriers. Several studies advocate blockchain as a game-changer for environmental accountability. (Feng, 2025) demonstrated that blockchain enhances supply chain transparency by providing an immutable ledger for carbon footprint tracking, reducing opportunities for greenwashing. Similarly, (Gomez-Guillen & Tapias-Baque, 2024) found that smart contracts—selfexecuting agreements on blockchain—can automate sustainability compliance, eliminating the need for intermediaries and reducing fraud. In the tourism sector, pilot projects have shown that blockchain can verify ecocertifications, track energy consumption in hotels, and ensure fair carbon offsetting (Taufiqqurrachman et al., 2024). These findings suggest that blockchain could standardize sustainability reporting and foster greater trust among stakeholders. Conversely, other researchers caution against overestimating blockchain’s capabilities. (Berbeka et al., 2024) argues that blockchain’s immutability does not guarantee data accuracy; if input data is flawed (a "garbage in, garbage out" scenario), the blockchain merely records incorrect information permanently. Additionally, (Hong & Xiao, 2024) identify several barriers to blockchain adoption in environmental reporting, including high energy consumption (particularly in proof-of-work systems), technical complexity, and resistance from traditional auditors and policymakers. In tourism, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—which constitute the majority of the industry—often lack the resources and expertise to implement blockchain solutions, raising concerns about equitable access (Chen et al., 2025). These contradictions highlight a critical research gap: while blockchain theoretically offers robust solutions for sustainability reporting, its real-world applicability in tourism remains underexplored (Raja Segaran et al., 2025). Most studies focus on supply chains or energy sectors, leaving tourism—a highly fragmented and service-oriented industry— understudied. This study aims to bridge that gap by experimentally testing blockchain’s feasibility and effectiveness in a tourism context (Kumar & Al-Sharif, 2024). The growing demand for sustainable travel has fueled the rise of greenwashing practices, where businesses often exaggerate or falsify their environmental credentials. A 2021 report by the European Commission, which systematically scanned hundreds of tourism websites across the European Union using the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) criteria, found that 42% of online environmental claims were deceptive, false, or exaggerated. These findings from official regulatory sources provide a strong methodological basis for explaining the 52% of travelers' distrust of the validity of global sustainability certifications. Blockchain technology offers a solution to mitigate this problem by enabling real-time verification of claims, such as renewable energy use or waste reduction, through immutable data logs. Unlike financial accounting, sustainability reporting currently faces the challenge of data inconsistency due to the lack of universal standards (Saputra & Paranoan, 2024). Blockchain's ability to create standardized and auditable records can harmonize reporting practices, enabling stakeholders to objectively assess environmental performance. In addition to restoring consumer trust through public data accessibility, blockchain implementation also helps tourism businesses comply with increasingly stringent regulations, such as the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), efficiently while avoiding sanctions due to inaccurate reporting (Laksmi et al., 2024). This research was conducted in Bali's tourism sector, a globally renowned destination celebrated for its natural beauty, rich cultural heritage, and thriving tourism industry. Bali was selected as the research site for several strategic reasons. First, as one of Indonesia's largest tourism hubs, Bali faces significant sustainability challenges, including pressure on natural resources, increasing waste generation, and growing demands for transparency in sustainable tourism practices. Second, Bali's tourism industry comprises diverse stakeholders, ranging from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to large corporations, providing a representative sample to evaluate blockchain's effectiveness across different business scales and operational contexts. Furthermore, Bali has emerged as a pioneer in implementing sustainable tourism policies, such as the Bali Clean and Green Initiative and its commitment to achieving Net Zero Emissions by 2045, which aligns with this study's objectives. The adoption of blockchain technology is expected to enhance environmental accountability and mitigate widespread greenwashing practices in the tourism sector. The diversity of tourism businesses—including hotels, restaurants, tour operators, and cultural attractions—enables this study to assess blockchain implementation across various operational scenarios. By engaging tourism stakeholders in Bali, this research not only holds local relevance but also serves as a case study for other destinations facing similar challenges in achieving transparency and sustainability. Core Features of Blockchain Relevant to Sustainability Reporting Blockchain technology offers several fundamental characteristics that make it uniquely suited for enhancing sustainability reporting in the tourism sector. The first key feature is transparency, as blockchain operates on a distributed ledger system where all participants have access to the same verified data in real time (Putra et al., 2024). This transparency helps eliminate information asymmetry between tourism operators, regulators, and consumers, creating a shared source of truth for environmental claims. The second critical aspect is immutability, meaning once data is recorded on the blockchain, it cannot be altered retroactively without network consensus (Saputra et al., 2023b). This feature provides an auditable trail of sustainability metrics like energy consumption or waste reduction, preventing fraudulent manipulation of environmental data (Saputra et al., 2023a). Another vital characteristic is decentralization, which removes the need for a central authority to validate transactions. In sustainability reporting, this reduces reliance on potentially biased third-party auditors and enables peer-topeer verification of environmental performance data (Bhattacharyya et al., 2024; Konapure & Nawale, 2025). Blockchain's smart contract functionality further enhances accountability by automatically executing predefined sustainability agreements when specific conditions are met, such as releasing carbon offset payments only after verified emission reductions. The technology's cryptographic security ensures that all transactions and data entries are securely encrypted, protecting sensitive environmental data from unauthorized access or tampering (Boumaiza, 2025; Hikal et al., 2025). Additionally, blockchain enables granular traceability throughout supply chains, allowing tourism businesses to track and verify the environmental impact of their operations at each stage (Ariffin et al., 2025; Yap et al., 2024). This is particularly valuable for monitoring sustainable sourcing of materials or measuring the carbon footprint of tourism activities. The interoperability of blockchain systems also facilitates standardized sustainability reporting across different organizations and jurisdictions, addressing current challenges of inconsistent measurement methodologies (Chauhan & Sahoo, 2024; Gričar et al., 2025). These features collectively address major pain points in traditional sustainability reporting, including lack of trust, verification challenges, and inconsistent data quality, while providing a framework for more credible and efficient environmental accountability in the tourism industry. Environmental Accountability in Sustainable Tourism Environmental accountability in sustainable tourism refers to the responsibility of tourism stakeholders to measure, disclose, and take ownership of their ecological impacts through transparent and verifiable reporting systems (Almeida & Wasim, 2023; Broccardo et al., 2023). This concept has gained urgency as the tourism sector faces increasing scrutiny for its environmental footprint, including carbon emissions, water consumption, and ecosystem degradation. Effective accountability mechanisms require robust frameworks that go beyond superficial claims of sustainability to provide measurable, auditable evidence of environmental performance (Wagenseil et al., 2024). The current landscape reveals significant challenges, including inconsistent reporting standards, difficulties in verifying claims across complex supply chains, and limited tools for real-time impact monitoring. Traditional reporting methods often rely on periodic selfassessments that lack independent verification, creating opportunities for greenwashing where organizations exaggerate their environmental credentials (Scott, 2021). Moreover, the fragmented nature of global tourism operations makes it particularly difficult to establish comprehensive accountability across destinations, accommodations, and service providers (Sharpley, 2023). Stakeholders ranging from hotel chains to local tour operators face growing pressure from environmentally conscious consumers, regulators, and investors to demonstrate genuine sustainability commitments. This demand has spurred innovation in monitoring technologies and reporting methodologies that can provide more accurate, timely, and comparable environmental data (Gomez-Guillen & Tapias-Baque, 2024; Li et al., 2025). The emergence of digital solutions, particularly blockchain-based systems, offers new possibilities for creating immutable records of sustainability metrics that are resistant to manipulation. Such technological advancements are transforming accountability from a retrospective compliance exercise into a proactive management tool that can guide operational decisions and policy development (Berbeka et al., 2024; Boumaiza, 2025). When properly implemented, environmental accountability systems not only ensure regulatory compliance but also create competitive advantages by building trust with eco-conscious travelers and meeting the requirements of sustainable investment criteria (Ariffin et al., 2025; Hikal et al., 2025). The transition toward meaningful environmental accountability represents a critical step in aligning the tourism industry with global sustainability goals while maintaining economic viability in an increasingly eco-aware marketplace.

Methods

This study used a quasi-experimental design to test the effectiveness of blockchain technology in improving environmental accountability in sustainable tourism reporting. The study involved two groups of subjects: a treatment group consisting of tourism businesses that implemented a blockchain-based reporting system, and a control group that continued to use traditional reporting methods. Participants were selected using a stratified random sampling technique to ensure a balanced representation of various tourism sectors, including hotels, tour operators, and tourist attractions, and businesses ranging in size from SMEs to large corporations in The operational definition table (Table 1) provides a precise methodological framework for measuring the impact of blockchain implementation by transforming abstract concepts into quantifiable indicators. By establishing specific formulas such as the Audit Discrepancy Rate for reporting accuracy and timestamp rules for verification time, the study ensures that operational efficiencies are not merely claimed qualitatively but demonstrated through tangible cost savings and measurable ROI. This study employed a stratified random sampling technique to recruit 60 tourism businesses in Bali, spanning the hotel sector, tour operators, and tourist attractions, ranging in scale from SMEs to large corporations. Given the quasi-experimental nature of the design, group assignment was not completely random, but rather based on their technology readiness and willingness to integrate blockchain

To ensure each construct has specific measurable outcomes, the main hypothesis is broken down into the following four operational hypotheses: 1. H1 (Accuracy & Transparency): The implementation of blockchain technology significantly reduces the audit discrepancy rate in sustainability reports compared to traditional reporting methods. 2. H2 (Time Efficiency): The use of a distributed ledger significantly accelerates the verification time of green transactions from the point of initiation to the final confirmation (consensus timestamp). 3. H3 (Accountability & Trust): The adoption of blockchain significantly improves the stakeholder trust score by providing a permanent and immutable audit trail. 4. H4 (Economic Impact): The implementation of smart contracts significantly reduces operational audit costs and increases the efficiency of return on investment (ROI) for tourism providers. Sustainability Transparency: Inferred from data accessibility and the completeness of the audit trail. This is measured by stakeholders' ability to trace green claims back to their original source in real time without third-party intervention. Environmental Accountability: Inferred from the validation of empirical evidence. This is measured by low reporting error rates and the system's ability to prevent greenwashing through automated verification powered by blockchain protocols. By separating these hypotheses, the research moves from broad qualitative claims to rigorous statistical testing. For example, H1 and H4 directly test technical and economic effectiveness, while H2 and H3 test system performance and user perceptions. This approach allows for the use of more rigorous Partial Least Squares (PLS) or Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) techniques to validate whether each indicator truly represents the intended constructs of transparency and accountability.

Result and Discussion

This table presents the results of the baseline equivalence testing conducted before the intervention to ensure that the control and treatment groups were statistically comparable (Wilmshurst & Frost, 2000). Independent Samples t-tests or ANOVA were used to compare the means of key variables between the two groups. intervention, a baseline equivalence test was conducted to ensure that the control and treatment groups were comparable. The results showed no significant differences between the two groups in terms of reporting accuracy (Control: 72.3% ± 8.5; Treatment: 73.1% ± 7.9, p = 0.682), verification time (Control: 14.2 ± 3.1 days; Treatment: 13.8 ± 2.7 days, p = 0.541), or stakeholder trust (Control: 3.2 ± 0.9; Treatment: 3.3 ± 0.8, p = 0.610). This confirmed that any post-intervention differences could be attributed to the blockchain system rather than pre-existing disparities between the groups. Next, This table displays the Differencein-Differences (DiD) regression results, quantifying the impact of blockchain technology on key outcome variables by comparing changes in the treatment group relative to the control group (Chen et al., 2025). analysis revealed significant improvements in the treatment group after blockchain implementation. Reporting accuracy increased by 18.6% (p < 0.001), verification time decreased by 9.4 days (67% faster, p < 0.001), and stakeholder trust rose by 1.2 points on a 5-point scale (p = 0.002). Additionally, audit costs dropped by $420 due to automation, yielding a strong return on investment (ROI = 2.8:1). These findings demonstrate that blockchain not only enhances transparency and efficiency but also reduces operational costs in sustainability reporting (Li et al., 2025). themes regarding blockchain adoption. While 25 out of 30 respondents reported increased trust due to real-time data transparency, 12 noted usability challenges, particularly for non-technical staff. Additionally, 8 participants—primarily from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—expressed concerns about high setup costs potentially excluding smaller businesses (Chen et al., 2025). These insights suggest that while blockchain enhances accountability, successful implementation requires user-friendly interfaces, training programs, and financial support to ensure equitable access across the tourism sector (Capucho et al., 2025; Li et al., 2025). The table above details the cost structure and savings underlying the 2.8:1 ROI ratio, with all values expressed in USD per company (see Table 6). Implementation costs are broken down into the initial (one-time) investment for software integration and staff training, and recurring operational costs for maintaining the cloud infrastructure. Savings of $420 resulted from the reduction in third-party audit fees (from a standard cost base of $1,500 to $1,080) due to the availability of a digital audit trail automatically verified by smart contracts. With the unit of analysis at the individual tourism provider level and a six-month report review period, the model demonstrates that the efficiencies resulting from reduced manual reconciliation time and verification costs can recoup the initial investment within the first year of operation. To operationalize these recommendations, policymakers and Destination Management Organizations (DMOs) should adopt a publicprivate partnership (PPP) approach that provides subsidies or tax incentives for tourism SMEs to lower entry barriers in the initial phase of blockchain implementation. Tourism authorities can facilitate regulatory sandboxes and provide shared cloudbased digital infrastructure that allows small businesses to access distributed ledgers without having to build systems from scratch, supported by certified digital literacy training modules to ensure human resource readiness. Furthermore, destination management organizations can integrate this blockchainbased sustainability data into official destination marketing platforms, thereby providing competitive advantage to credible SMEs and creating an inclusive, transparent, and economically equitable tourism ecosystem. The qualitative insights gathered from participant interviews provide a nuanced understanding of the real-world challenges and benefits associated with blockchain adoption in sustainable tourism reporting. One of the most prominent themes was trust enhancement, with 25 out of 30 stakeholders emphasizing how real-time, immutable data access significantly boosted their confidence in sustainability claims (Klamsaengsai et al., 2025). For instance, a tour operator noted, "Seeing live updates on energy usage and waste reduction made us feel these eco-claims were credible, not just marketing fluff." This sentiment underscores blockchain’s potential to combat greenwashing by replacing opaque, self-reported data with verifiable records. However, the technology’s impact on trust was not uniform—smaller businesses, particularly those with limited digital literacy, struggled to interpret blockchain-generated reports, suggesting that transparency alone is insufficient without user-friendly interfaces and training. Another critical theme was usability challenges, cited by 12 participants, primarily managers of small hotels and local tour companies. Many described the blockchain platform as "overly technical" and "difficult to integrate with existing workflows." One hotel manager remarked, "Our staff spent weeks just learning how to input data correctly—this isn’t feasible for seasonal businesses." These barriers highlight a Financial Outcome Return on Investment (ROI) 2.8:1 Per Company 12 Months gap between blockchain’s theoretical promise and its practical implementation, particularly for organizations lacking IT support. Interestingly, larger enterprises with dedicated sustainability teams reported smoother transitions, indicating that resource availability plays a pivotal role in adoption success (Gomez-Guillen & Tapias-Baque, 2024; Taufiqqurrachman et al., 2024). The third major theme, barriers for SMEs, emerged from 8 respondents who raised concerns about equity and accessibility. A local guide pointed out, "High setup costs and ongoing maintenance fees could lock out small operators, even if the system works." This aligns with broader critiques of blockchain’s scalability, where energy-intensive protocols (e.g., proof-of-work) and proprietary platforms create financial hurdles. Some participants proposed hybrid models—such as subsidized pilot programs or simplified, low-cost blockchain modules—to democratize access (Durmuş Şenyapar, 2024; Implementation Cost Staff Training & Digital Literacy $300 (Workshops/Manuals) Per Company One-time Implementation Cost Hardware Maintenance (IoT/Cloud) $50 (Cloud Infrastructure) Per Company Monthly Savings Component Reduction in Audit Fees $420 savings from a base audit fee of $1,500 Per Audit Cycle Biannually Savings Component Manual Reconciliation Labor $250 (Labor hours saved) Per Company Biannually Feng, 2025). These findings suggest that without systemic support, blockchain could exacerbate inequalities in the tourism sector, favoring well-funded players over smaller, community-based businesses. This study bridges inconsistencies in previous literature by providing empirical evidence that contradictions regarding blockchain's effectiveness are often rooted in differences in digital maturity and scale of implementation, rather than in the technology itself. Through an experimental approach, this study clarifies that blockchain significantly improves environmental accountability when integrated with smart contracts that automate data validation, addressing skepticism regarding high costs versus tangible benefits. While previous studies (e.g., Galli et al., 2025) highlight the initial cost burden as a barrier, our findings demonstrate that a reduction in audit costs of $420 per cycle and a 2.8:1 ROI provide strong economic justification for medium-scale adoption. This study

Conclusion

Author Contributions

Acknowledgements

demonstrates that traveler mistrust (as high as 52% according to Booking.com data) can be significantly mitigated through blockchain's technical transparency. This provides an answer to the contradictory findings regarding whether digital technology can truly change consumer perceptions of greenwashing claims. Our findings suggest that blockchain's effectiveness in improving environmental accountability is highly dependent on the accuracy of data input (such as the use of IoT sensors), thus explaining why some previous studies relying on manual input have reported suboptimal results. Blockchain's significant effect in improving reporting accuracy is due to its smart contracts and immutable ledger mechanisms, which technically eliminate manual intervention in data validation. However, this effectiveness is highly dependent on the integrity of the initial input. This phenomenon faces the risk of a "garbage in-garbage out" cycle, where environmental accountability collapses if sensor data or manual data entry from third parties at the point of origin is inaccurate or manipulated before entering the blockchain. In the context of SMEs with limited digital infrastructure, blockchain's benefits may be limited to administrative efficiency rather than full transparency, unlike large companies that can integrate IoT for data automation. This finding clarifies a contradiction in previous research by demonstrating that blockchain supports true accountability only when supported by strict data entry governance; otherwise, the technology becomes merely an efficiency tool without substantial information integrity. While providing strong empirical evidence in the Bali context, this study has notable methodological limitations, particularly regarding the validity of the assignment and the potential for selection bias in experimental participants who may already have higher digital literacy than the average industry participant. The measurement validity is also limited to short-term performance indicators, thus not fully capturing the long-term impact on stakeholder trust, which is dynamic. Furthermore, generalizing the findings beyond the Bali context requires caution, given that Bali has a specific regional regulatory structure and extensive tourism support that may not be found in other destinations. Future research should test this framework in regions with varying levels of digital maturity to verify whether the strengths of digital transparency remain consistent under the pressure of weaker governance or limited technological infrastructure. This study provides comparative evidence on the potential of blockchain technology to enhance environmental accountability in the tourism sector in Bali. Based on experimental results over a six-month intervention period, improvements in reporting accuracy and verification efficiency were found compared to conventional methods within the sample tested. The transparency features and smart contract functionality within blockchain were identified as helping mitigate the risk of greenwashing at the organizational level by providing accountable data records and reducing audit costs, specifically for the entities studied. These findings provide an important contribution to the tourism governance debate regarding the tension between corporate sustainability claims and public trust, particularly in Bali. By complementing traditional reporting models with a digital transparency system, this study indicates that strengthening systemic accountability can be achieved without unduly burdening operations, although these findings should be interpreted within the limitations of the quasiexperimental group assignment and limited observation duration. While offering a pathway to developing a more credible green reporting standard, this study identified significant implementation barriers, particularly for SMEs. Technical complexity and initial investment hindered adoption for approximately 40% of small operators in the sample, highlighting the need for a phased approach with specialized training, platform simplification, and financial incentive support. Overall, this study provides a theoretical contribution by extending the discussion of legitimacy theory to the digital space, and a methodological contribution by presenting stronger comparative evidence than previous conceptual studies. Practically, this study offers an initial roadmap for inclusive adoption through smart contract integration, demonstrating a trend toward costefficiency. Future implementation success will depend heavily on cross-sector collaboration to address interoperability challenges, enabling blockchain technology to serve as a foundation for a more transparent and inclusive sustainability reporting system in the tourism industry. The authors equally contributed to the present research at all stages, from the problem formulation to the final findings and solution. The authors would like to thank all parties who supported this research, which also helped the authors do much research. This research helped increase the authors' knowledge and skills. This research will be helpful for knowledge and a better future.

References

Almeida, F., & Wasim, J. (2023). Eco-innovation and sustainable business performance: perspectives of SMEs in Portugal and the UK. Society and Business Review, 18(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBR-122021-0233

Ariffin, N. H. M., Zulkefli, N. A. M., & Nasruddin, Z. A. (2025). Challenges of Blockchain Technology and its Relationships to Sustainable Education: An Analysis using AI-Based Literature Review. Journal of Advanced Research Design, 127(1), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.37934/ard.127.1.173188

Berbeka, K., Alejziak, W., & Berbeka, J. (2024). Sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030 in the declarations and aims of international tourism organisations. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 41(1), 142– 153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2023.2239862

Bhattacharyya, J., Balaji, M. S., & Jiang, Y. (2024). Assessing the Effectiveness of Environmental Sustainability Performance Communication in Tourism: Mediation and Moderation Effects. Journal of Travel Research, 63(8), 1933–1952. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875231206548

Boumaiza, A. (2025). Advancing Sustainable Investment Efficiency and Transparency Through Blockchain-Driven Optimization. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(5), 2000. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17052000

Broccardo, L., Zicari, A., Jabeen, F., & Bhatti, Z. A. (2023). How digitalization supports a sustainable business model: A literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 187, 122146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122146

Capucho, J., Leitão, J., & Alves, H. (2025). Mapping and linking well-being, tourism economics, sustainable tourism and sustainable development: an integrative systematisation of the literature and bibliometric analysis. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621025-01122-y

Chauhan, M., & Sahoo, D. R. (2024). Towards a Greener Tomorrow: Exploring the Potential of AI, Blockchain, and IoT in Sustainable Development. Nature https://doi.org/10.46488/NEPT.2024.v23i02.044

Chen, Y., & Bellavitis, C. (2020). Blockchain disruption and decentralized finance: The rise of decentralized business models. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 13, e00151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2019.e00151

Chen, Y., Liu, L., Wu, Q., & Yang, C. F. (2025). Proactive and Adaptive Elderlycentered Governance Framework through Synergistic Integration of the Internet of Things and Multi-agent Systems. Sensors and Materials, 37(6), 2431–2446. https://doi.org/10.18494/SAM5741

Conefrey, A., & Hanrahan, J. (2025). Tourism Enterprise’s Level of Climate Action Literacy and Measuring, Monitoring and Reporting of Emissions. Tourism, 73(2), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.37741/t.73.2.14 Crespo-Cebada, E., Díaz-Caro, C., Rabazo-Martín, A. E., & Rodríguez-Rivero, E. J. (2021). Do Narcissistic Managers Prefer Incentive Systems Based on Financial Instruments? An Analysis Based on Choice Experiments. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031255

Durmuş Şenyapar, H. N. (2024). Unveiling greenwashing strategies: A comprehensive analysis of impacts on consumer trust and environmental sustainability. Journal of Energy Systems, 8(3), 164– 181. https://doi.org/10.30521/jes.1436875

Feng, J. (2025). Financial accounting management strategy based on business intelligence technology for sustainable development strategy. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5(1), 97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-02500366-x Galli, P., Concari, E., Cerini, D., Scuderi, E., Doni, F., Mohamed, S., Zitouni, M. S.,

Al Ahmad, H., & Gabbiadini, A. (2025). From Stars to Sustainability: An Integrated Analysis of Sustainable Practices and Environmental Policies in Maldives Resorts. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(11), 5191. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17115191

Gomez-Guillen, J. J., & Tapias-Baque, D. (2024). Sustainability and the environmental impact of the tourism industry: An analysis of the hotel sector in Catalonia, Spain. Intangible Capital, 20(1), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.3926/IC.2282

Gričar, S., Bojnec, Š., & Šugar, V. (2025). Domestic Cycling Tourism: Double Pollution, Greenhushing, and Slovenian Sustainable Travel. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(1), 295. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010295 Hikal, H. M. M., Abubakr, A. A. M., Musa, A. M. H., ABDELRAHEEM, A. A. E., &

Adam, M. I. A. B. (2025). Sustainability auditing and reporting in Malaysia: Strengthening transparency, accountability, and corporate responsibility. International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(4), 1068–1078. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i4.7993

Hong, Z., & Xiao, K. (2024). Digital economy structuring for sustainable development: the role of blockchain and artificial intelligence in improving supply chain and reducing negative environmental impacts. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 3912. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-02453760-3 Klamsaengsai, S., Cheablam, O., Sasithornwetchakul, A., Churugsa, W., &

Kaosiri, Y. N. (2025). Sustainable Tourism Assessment in Urban Green Spaces: The Case of Khung BangKachao, Thailand. Urban Science, 9(5), 136. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9050136

Konapure, R., & Nawale, S. (2025). Traceability and Verification to Prevent Counterfeit Drugs: A Secure, Efficient Pharma Supply Chain with IoTEnabled Blockchain and Smart Contracts. SSRG International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering, 12(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.14445/23488549/IJECE-V12I1P103

Kumar, K., & Al-Sharif, A. F. A. F. (2024). E-waste Management Using Blockchain Technology. Data and Metadata, 3. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2024.355

Laksmi, P. A. S., Saputra, K. A. K., Noordin, N. M., & Bareto, C. A. (2024). The Effect of Competitive Advantage and Sustainable Management on Sustainability Performance. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 26(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.34208/jba.v26i2.2477

Li, T., Lau, W. T., & Dato Haji Yahya, M. H. (2025). Blockchain Applications in Green Finance for Transparency and Accountability in Sustainable Investments. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(6), 2520. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17062520

Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2023). The real effects of ESG reporting and GRI standards drivers and implications for firm performance and supply chain management. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 1966– 1980. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3230 on carbon mitigation: International evidence. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(6), 2985–3000. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3281

Pamuk, H., Bulte, E., & Adekunle, A. A. (2014). Do Decentralized Innovation Systems Promote Agricultural Technology Adoption? Experimental Evidence from Africa. Food Policy, 44, 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.09.015

Panigrahy, A., & Verma, A. (2025). Tourist experiences: a systematic literature review of computer vision technologies in smart destination visits. Journal of Tourism Futures, 11(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-042024-0073 Putra, I. B. U., Saputra, K. A. K., Udayana, I. B. N., Amerta, I. M. S., Prawita, D., &

Cahyani, P. D. (2024). the Effect of Sustainability Trilogy Leadership on Green Performance: the Mediation Role of Organisational Support and Dynamic Exploration Capability in the Perspective of Local Wisdom. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 19(7), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2024.07.003

Raja Segaran, B., Mohd Rum, S. N., Hafez Ninggal, M. I., & Mohd Aris, T. N. (2025). Efficient ML technique in blockchain-based solution in carbon credit for mitigating greenwashing. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01044-9

Rejeb, A., Rejeb, K., Keogh, J. G., & Süle, E. (2025). When Industry 5.0 Meets the Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-025-00570-y

Saputra, K. A. K., & Paranoan, S. (2024). Do Cyber Security, Digitalisation and Data Visualisation Affect the Quality of Internal Environmental Audits? Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 18(2), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v18i2.10

Saputra, K. A. K., Subroto, B., Rahman, A. F., & Saraswati, E. (2023a). Mediation Role of Environmental Management Accounting on the Effect of Green Competitive Advantage on Sustainable Performance. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 18(2), 103–115. https://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2023.02.008

Saputra, K. A. K., Subroto, B., Rahman, A. F., & Saraswati, E. (2023b). Sustainability Performance in Hospitality Industry: Interaction of Strategic Sustainability Management and Sat Kerthi Culture. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 18(1), 147. https://doi.org/10.24843/jiab.2023.v18.i01.p10

Scott, D. (2021). Sustainable tourism and the grand challenge of climate change. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041966

Sharpley, R. (2023). Sustainable tourism governance: local or global? Tourism Recreation Research, 48(5), 809–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2022.2040295

Taufiqqurrachman, T., Afnira, J. P. E., & Sophia, U. (2024). Developing The Brand of Batam City as A Sustainable (Green) Tourism Destination through Social Media. BIO Web of Conferences, 134, 1003.

Wagenseil, U., Wyss, M., & Huck, L. (2024). The Case of Sustainable Tourism Development in Alpine Destinations: Importance, Implementation, and the Role of the Local DMO. Tourism Planning and Development, 21(6), 659– 681. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2022.2107561

Wilmshurst, T. D., & Frost, G. R. (2000). Corporate environmental reporting: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 13(1), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570010316126

Yap, N., Nugroho, M., & Rachmiyati, N. (2024). Evaluating village financial governance in top tourism destinations. Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, 8(6), 2971–2991. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2638

Zhang, A., Tay, H. L., Alvi, M. F., Wang, J. X., & Gong, Y. (2023). Carbon neutrality