1. Introduction

Cittàslow, meaning ‘slow city,’ is an international network of small towns that originated in Italy with the goal of enhancing quality of life for both residents and visitors (Miele, 2008). Çiçek et al. (2019) highlighted that the Cittàslow concept embodies an emerging global movement in which towns commit to sustainable development by preserving authenticity and celebrating local culture and diversity. Knox (2005) emphasizes the relationship between the pace of life and the capacity of urban environments to sustain routine interactions and shared experiences, which underpin the intersubjectivity essential for the social construction of place. In response to the adverse effects of globalization and rapid urbanization, the Slow City movement has emerged as a counter-trend that prioritizes local identity, environmental stewardship, and quality of life over economic growth and speed (Knox, 2005; Miele, 2008). Rooted in the principles of the Slow Food movement, Cittàslow encourages sustainable urban practices by supporting small-scale economies, cultural preservation, and active citizen participation (Mayer and Knox, 2006).

However, recent studies have raised concerns about challenges faced by designated slow cities. Coşgun and Kaya (2023) argued that the slow cities often find themselves in a paradoxical position – compelled to compete with larger urban centers for recognition and tourism, which risks undermining the original values and principles of the Cittàslow philosophy. Similarly, Kwon (2009) observed that the spirit of the Slow City movement in South Korea has diminished over time, losing much of its initial momentum. This decline has been attributed to interrelated factors, including insufficient systematic financial and administrative support tailored to regional characteristics and limited resident participation in development initiative (Kwon, 2009).

To address these concerns, this study proposes a comprehensive research model to examine how citizens’ perceptions of various aspects of the slow city experience shape their evaluations and engagement. Specifically, it investigates perceptions of slow city impacts across multiple dimensions: economic revitalization, cultural promotion, traditional value preservation, environmental protection, resident relationships, intergenerational exchange, tourism industry effects, and local image enhancement. This study links these perceived impacts to six key outcomes: perceived contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development. By identifying the most influential factors driving civic engagement and long-term commitment to Cittàslow values, this research aims to develop a sociotechnical and trust-based framework for evaluating slow cities. Ultimately, it offers policy insights for local governments and urban planners seeking to foster more citizen-centered and future-oriented urban environments.

While previous studies have addressed the philosophical origins (Miele, 2008), principles (Mayer and Knox, 2006), and international expansion of the Slow City movement, relatively few studies have empirically addressed citizens’ multidimensional perceptions. Existing researches in South Korea have largely examined on tourism impacts (Jung et al., 2016), policy implementation factors (Park, 2016), or evaluation frameworks (Kim et al., 2022). Comparative studies (Brown and Jeong, 2018) provide valuable cross-national insights but do not fully capture localized citizen perceptions across diverse socio-economic contexts. This study fills this gap by employing survey-based regression analysis to investigate how citizens perceive the impacts of Slow Cities and how these perceptions shape their attitudes, satisfaction, and future prospects.

2. Literature Review

1) Slow cities

The Cittàslow (Slow City) movement, which originated in Italy in 1999, emerged as a counter-response to the pressures of globalization and rapid urban transformation, aiming to strengthen local identity and promote sustainable community development (Aygün et al., 2021). Within the context of globalization, Hergül and Kahveci (2019) emphasize that cities shaped by the emerging global trends increasingly resemble one another, leading to the erosion of distinctive social, physical, and cultural identities. Recognizing this trend, several countries initiated a counter-movement to rapid globalization and adopted the hybrid English-Italian term Cittàslow, symbolize by a snail, to advocate for a slower pace of urban life (Hergül and Kahveci, 2019).

Mayer and Knox (2006) argue that the principles of Slow Food – emphasizing sustainable food production and consumption practices, including organic, seasonal, traditional, and locally distinctive foods – laid the foundation for the Slow City movement. These principles underscore values such as high quality, cultural sensitivity, a craft- oriented approach, and a strong focus on environmental sustainability (Mayer and Knox, 2006). Similarly, Ada and Yener (2017) noted that the Cittàslow network emerged in response to cities losing their rural, regional, and traditional characteristics, as they increasingly distanced themselves from the natural world.

Beyond its philosophical underpinnings, empirical studies underscore both opportunities and tensions. Çiçek et al. (2019) suggest that the Slow Ciy movement holds significant promise for place marketing and could help mitigate rural-to-urban migration in emerging economies. However, critics raise concerns about the limitations of the slow city movement. Parkins and Craig (2006) view slow living as a complex response to globalization rather than a straightforward alternative. Mayer and Knox (2006) highlight the difficulties of transferring the Cittàslow model to larger urban contexts, questioning its scalability beyond small towns.

2) Slow cities in South Korea

The Cittàslow Corea Network was established between 2007 and 2009, with six towns were certified as the first Asian Cittàslows, making a significant milestone for the movement (Cittàslow International, n.d.). The network encourages global collaboration and knowledge sharing among member towns, emphasizing the relevance of slow living as a meaningful response to the accelerating pace of modern life (Cittàslow International, n.d.).

South Korea officially joined the Cittàslow network in 2007, with Cheongsando Island becoming Asia’s first designated slow city (Cittàslow International, n.d.; Cittàslow Corea Network, n.d.). Since then, several rural and semi-urban municipalities – including Damyang, Jeonju Hanok Village, Yesan, and Jangheung – have embraced the movement to promote local tourism, environmental protection, and cultural revitalization (Cittàslow International, n.d.; Cittàslow Corea Network, n.d.). Among them, Shinan has notably preserved its distinctive island culture and traditions, resisting the intense pace of industrialization and digitalization (Cittàslow International, n.d.; Cittàslow Corea Network, n.d.). Cheongsando’s Slow Walk Trail, once used by residents to connect villages, has beome a symbolic site where visitors are invited to slow their pace and appreciate the island’s breathtaking scenery (Cittàslow International, n.d.; Cittàslow Corea Network, n.d.).

Scholars highlight both opportunities and challenges in the Korean adaptation of Cittàslow. Brown and Jeong (2018) observe that the slow city approach has increasingly been adopted in South Korea as a strategy for promoting sustainable rural development. Park (2016) emphasizes the importance of educational initiatives tailored to residents’ socioeconomic characteristics in shaping positive attitudes and satisfaction toward slow city policies. However, Joo (2025) contends that the adaptation of the slow city concept in South Korea has followed a distinct trajectory, shaped by market-oriented imperatives that have often overshadowed its original ethos and policy intentions.

Empirical researches have further examined citizen perceptions of Slow Cities and tourism outcomes. Cho (2023) analyzed perceptions of the role of Slow Cities and generation-based distributional values using a survey, showing meaningful differences across age cohorts and deriving policy implications for tailored management strategies. Kim, et al. (2022) developed a Slow City Tourism Evaluation Index via a Delphi–AHP approach, proposing a multi-domain assessment framework that includes local identity, education, conviviality, environment, and governance – thereby offering measurable criteria for policy evaluation and benchmarking. Jung et al. (2016) investigated that in Cheongsando – Asia’s first designated Slow City – survey research shows that perceived economic and environmental impacts and practice of the Slow City movement significantly predict residents’ satisfaction with tourism resource development. Comparative analyses also situate Korean cases in global context. A study by Brown and Jeong (2018) contrasting Damyang (Korea) and Seferihisar (Turkey) synthesizes slow-city “success determinants” and links them to implementation experiences, thereby providing transferable criteria for evaluation and benchmarking. Hwang (2014) investigates how visitors’ motivations, satisfaction, attitudes, and behavioral intentions shape perceptions of Slow City tourism resources, providing practical insights for strategic revitalization. At the policy level, studies evaluating the implementation of Slow Cities highlight that Korean municipalities have focused heavily on infrastructure development and landscape improvement, while comparatively neglecting cultural preservation, environmental initiatives, and citizen awareness (Won and Kim, 2009). This imbalance underscores ongoing challenges in aligning the Korean adaptation of Cittàslow with its founding principles.

3. Theoretical Background

To explore the dynamics of citizen perception and engagement in Slow Cities, this study draws on complementary theoretical frameworks. Urban regime theory, introduced by Stone (1989), emphasizes how informal coalitions of public and private actors collaborate to govern cities and pursue shared objectives. Mossberger and Stoker (2001) emphasize that urban regime theory has become a dominant paradigm in urban politics, offering valuable insights into the interplay of governmental and nongovernmental actors in shaping urban governance. However, Imbroscio (2003) contends that incorporating alternative economic paradigms could foster a fundamental reconstruction of urban regimes, making them more responsive to social equity and sustainability concerns.

The Cittàslow movement embodies a counterpoint to growth-driven paradigm by emphasizing quality of life, local distinctiveness, and sustainability over rapid economic growth (Knox, 2005; Miele, 2008; Karataş, 2021). Cittàslow reflects a governance model in which local governments, civil society, and businesses form coalitions to implement policies that preserve cultural identity, promote environmental stewardship, and resist the homogenizing pressures of globalization (Knox, 2005; Miele, 2008; Karataş, 2021). In contrast, City Limits theory (Peterson, 1981) argues that local governments operate under structural constraints in a competitive interjurisdictional system, compelling them to prioritize economic growth and avoid redistributive policies that could discourage mobile capital and high-income residents. From this perspective, Slow Cities signify a departure from growth- centric urban governance, adopting policies that prioritize quality of life, cultural preservation, and sustainability – even when these policies do not directly attract capital or increase tax revenues (Knox, 2005; Miele, 2008; Karataş, 2021).

Together, these theoretical perspectives provide a comprehensive lens for understanding how citizens interpret and respond to the multidimensional impacts of Slow Cities – including economic revitalization, cultural promotion, environmental protection, and social cohesion (Knox, 2005; Miele, 2008; Karataş, 2021). This framework underpins the study’s focus on perceived impacts and their relationships to key outcome variables such as sustainable development, attitudes, satisfaction, future prospects, and civic support.

4. Hypotheses Development

This study builds on prior research suggesting that multiple factors – including economic, cultural, ecological, image, and relational dimensions – shape the performance and perception of Slow Cities. While existing studies often emphasize positive contributions, evidence also indicates that such effects can be conditional, context-dependent, or even conflicting (Han and Choi, 2013; Khamis et al., 2023). Accordingly, the hypotheses developed posit generally positive influences while recognizing the potential for complementary or contradictory dynamics.

1) Effects of local economic impact on slow cities

Mayer and Knox (2006) emphasize that the Slow Food and Slow City movements as alternative approaches to urban economic development. Çiçek et al. (2019) note that Slow City membership positively moderates the relationship between perceived authenticity, entrepreneurial opportunities and economic development, thereby enhancing residents’ quality of life and intention to remain. Similarly, Baek (2008) observes that Slow Cities foster environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable practices that highlight local distinctiveness, cultural characteristics, and traditions. Drawing from these insights, this study hypothesizes that the perceived local economic impact significantly influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H1a~H1f: Perceived local economic impact positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

2) Effects of cultural promotion on slow cities

According to the Cittàslow International Charter (2017, 5), the organization seeks to promote and spread the culture of good living through research and the application of innovative urban solutions. Alp (2024) emphasizes Cittàslow’s role in fostering a local development model rooted in community values and lifestyle. Building on these insights, this study hypothesizes that the perceived cultural promotion, by enhancing visibility and participation through cultural events and community activities, positively influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H2a~H1f: Perceived cultural promotion positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

3) Effects of traditional value preservation on slow cities

Gavrilova et al. (2023) emphasize that preserving traditional values are strengthens cultural identity, intergenerational continuity, and moral frameworks within communities. Similarly, the Cittàslow International Charter (2017) emphasizes identity, memory, environmental protection, and social inclusion as central values. Based on these perspectives, this study hypothesizes that perceived traditional value preservation, by reinforcing cultural identity, intergenerational continuity, and collective memory, positively influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H3a~H3f: Perceived traditional value preservation positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

4) Effects of environmental protection on slow cities

Knox (2005) highlights that a key aspect of good urban design lies in the capacity of the built environment to cultivate a positive sense of place in the everyday life. Ada and Yener (2017) highlight Cittàslow’s environmental policies, which integrate infrastructure, agriculture, tourism, and craftsmanship to enhance urban quality of life. Miele (2008) further stresses that “good living” in Cittàslow is rooted in local environmental quality and the use of technologies for collective well-being. Building on these insights, this study hypothesizes that perceived environmental protection shapes citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H4a~H4f: Perceived environmental protection positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

5) Effects of cultural preservation on slow city

Karatosun and Çakar (2017) emphasize the integrative conservation of cultural heritage within the Slow City framework, advocating for cities to maintain cultural identity and traditions. Karatosun and Çakar (2017) also highlight that the Cittaslow movement aims to transform cities into places of high quality by promoting holistic approaches to heritage conservation. Knox (2005) similarly emphasizes that both the Slow City and Slow Food movements endorse local and traditional cultures, a slower pace of life, and conviviality. Based on these perspectives, this study hypothesizes that perceived cultural preservation, by safeguarding tangible and intangible heritage and ensuring long-term resource protection, positively influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H5a~H5f: Perceived cultural preservation positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

6) Effects of resident relationships on slow city

Khamis et al. (2023) identify social interaction as a critical component of social sustainability, noting its contribution to residents’ quality of life. While their study reported neutral effects on social sustainability indicators and users’ satisfaction, this study posits that strong relationships are foundational to the Slow City experience. Accordingly, it hypothesizes that perceived resident relationships influence citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H6a~H6f: Perceived resident relationships positively influence Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

7) Effects of intergenerational exchange on slow city

Webster et al. (2024) emphasize that intergenerational exchange fosters social cohesion, particularly when different generations engage as equal partners, as communities age and become increasingly segregated, fractured relationships between generations have emerged as a significant challenge. Building on this insight, this study posits that intergenerational exchanges can strengthen communal bonds and mutual understanding in the context of Slow Cities. Accordingly, it hypothesizes that the perceived intergenerational exchange influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H7a~H7f: Perceived intergenerational exchange positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

8) Effects of tourism industry impact on slow city

Aygün et al. (2021) note that the Slow City designation serves as a tool for enhancing city recognition, promoting tourism development, and boosting competitiveness. Coşar et al. (2015) further emphasize the close relationship between the concept of slow city and the tourism industry, particularly in terms of promoting sustainable living and sustainable destination marketing. Han and Choi (2013) highlight that local residents play a crucial role in shaping tourists’ perceptions of Slow Cities and encouraging repeat visitation. Based on these perspectives, this study hypothesizes that perceived tourism industry impact influences citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H8a~H8f: Perceived tourism industry impact positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

9) Effects of local image improvement on slow city

Kavaratzis and Ashworth (2006) emphasize that principles of product branding principles can be adapted to city branding, serving as a powerful image-building strategy highly relevant to contemporary urban contexts. Aygün et al. (2021) argue that Slow City branding differentiate towns from other modern cities by embedding them within a sustainable economic framework, addressing issues such as infrastructure, pollution, and traffic, mobilizing local dynamics, and offering visitors unique experiences. Similarly, Knox (2005) highlight that promoting local distinctiveness and a strong sense of place is nearly as important to the Slow City movement as the enjoyment of good local products. Based on these perspectives, this study hypothesizes that perceived local image improvement shapes citizens’ evaluations of Slow Cities across six outcomes, including contributions to sustainable development, overall attitudes, and satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth development.

H9a~H9f: Perceived local image improvement positively influences Slow Cities’ (a) sustainable development contribution, (b) overall attitudes, (c) satisfaction, (d) future prospects, (e) intention to recommend, and (f) support for youth development.

5. Methodology

This study employed an online survey administered in collaboration with a reputable research firm, to examine citizens’ perceptions of Slow Cities in South Korea. From the 17 officially designated Slow Cities, six were selected – Chuncheon, Jecheon, Jeonju, Mokpo, Sangju, and Gimhae – to ensure both generational cohort representation (Generation X, Y, and Z) and regional diversity. These cities are distributed across multiple provinces, enabling broader geographical and demographic coverage. The survey was conducted anonymously and voluntarily, with all data stored securely to ensure confidentially.

A structured questionnaire was developed using a 5-point Likert scale (1 – Strongly disagree, 5 – Strongly agree) for the primary items. The questionnaire comprised three sections: introductory questions, demographic information, and core questions addressing key variables. The core questionnaire items assessed perceptions of local economic impact, cultural promotion, traditional value preservation, environmental protection, cultural preservation, resident relationships, intergenerational exchange, tourism industry impact, and local image improvement. Additional items measured six key outcomes: contributions to sustainable development, overall attitude toward Slow Cities, overall satisfaction, perceived future prospects, intention to recommend, and support for youth employment.

This study selected a range of independent variables to evaluate key aspects of the Slow City experience, grounded in existing literature and the foundational principles of the Cittaslow movement. By systematically assessing these variables, the study provides a comprehensive evaluation of the factors shaping civic engagement and support for the Slow City movement in South Korea.

For economic effects, items measured residents’ perceptions of contributions to local economic development and tourism, reflecting the initiative’s role in economic revitalization. For cultural effects, items assessed whether Slow Cities promote local culture and preserve traditional values, consistent with prior studies on cultural distinctiveness and identity. For environmental effects, items captured perceptions of environmental protection, highlighting links to ecological stewardship and climate resilience. For social effects, items assessed whether Slow Cities improve community relationships and foster intergenerational exchange, reflecting their contribution on social capital and cohesion. Finally, for symbolic and image effects, items evaluated perceptions of enhanced recognition and improve local image, emphasizing the reputational and place-branding dimensions of Slow Cities.

A total of 900 respondents participated, residing in the six designated Slow Cities. The highest proportion was from Gimhae (29.4%), followed by Jeonju (24.4%), Chuncheon (9.4%), Mokpo (7.0%), Jecheon (3.9%), and Sangju (3.0%). Sampling prioritized relatively larger Slow Cities to ensure both data collection feasibility and representativeness. Larger Slow Cities, such as Gimhae and Jeonju, serve as regional hubs with diverse socio-economic groups, allowing for more robust comparisons across demographic categories. Moreover, their role as policy and cultural centers makes their experiences particularly significant for assessing the scalability and policy relevance of the Slow City movement in South Korea.

Table 1 presents the demographic distribution of respondents across the six designated Slow Cities. Overall, the gender distribution was nearly balanced (51.4% male, 48.6% female), though Jeonju and Gimhae accounted for the largest shares of respondents with relatively even ratios. Age composition varied: Jeonju attracted a younger demographic with a notable proportion aged 25–29 years, while Gimhae and Chuncheon had higher representation in the 40–49 age groups, reflecting distinct local labor markets and family settlement patterns. Educational attainment was relatively high (68.7% undergraduate, 11.7% graduate), but disparities were evident: Jeonju and Gimhae showed higher proportions of university graduates, whereas Sangju and Jecheon included more respondents with only a high school education. Employment patterns further underscored local differences. White-collar workers were concentrated in Gimhae and Jeonju, consistent with their larger urban economies, while Sangju recorded more agricultural and self-employed respondents, reflecting its rural character. Students were particularly prominent in Jeonju, suggesting its role as an educational hub. Income levels also varied: middle-income groups (20–50 million won annually) were concentrated in Gimhae and Jeonju, while Jecheon and Sangju had higher proportions in lower-income brackets. Notably, Jeonju included the largest share of higher-income respondents (above 100 million won), underscoring socio-economic stratification across Slow Cities.

6. Data Analysis

This study employed multiple regression analysis to examine citizens’ perceptions across six designated Slow Cities in South Korea. For sustainable development contribution as the dependent variable, the model demonstrated strong explanatory power (R² = .633; Adjusted R² = .629) and was statistically significant (F = 170.399, p < .01). Significant predictors at the 0.01 level included local economic impact, cultural promotion, traditional value preservation, environmental protection, cultural preservation, intergenerational exchange, and local image improvement. The tourism industry impact was significant at the 0.05 level, whereas resident relationships were not statistically significant. Therefore, hypotheses H1a, H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a, H7a, H8a, and H9a were supported, while H6a was rejected. In terms of effect size, traditional value preservation emerged as the strongest predictor, followed by local economic impact, cultural preservation, local image improvement, environmental protection, intergenerational exchange, cultural promotion, and tourism industry impact. These findings suggest that citizens perceive sustainable development as being primarily driven by the preservation of traditional values and local economic vitality.

For overall attitudes toward the slow city, the regression model was also significant (R² = .568; Adjusted R² = .563, F = 129.894, p < .01). Significant predictors at the 0.01 level included local economic impact, environmental protection, intergenerational exchange, and local image improvement. Traditional value preservation was marginally significant at the 0.1 level, while cultural promotion and cultural preservation were not significant. As a result, H1b, H3b, H4b, H6b, H7b, H8b, and H9b were supported, while H2b and H5b were not. Local economic impact was the strongest predictor, followed by intergenerational exchange, local image improvement, environmental protection, traditional value preservation, resident relationships, and tourism industry impact. These findings suggest that favorable attitudes toward Slow Cities are primarily driven by economic benefits, generational interaction, and an enhanced local image.

Regarding overall satisfaction, the regression model exhibited good explanatory power (R² = .561; Adjusted R² = .577, F = 126.507, p < .01). Significant predictors at the 0.01 level included local economic impact, environmental protection, resident relationships, intergenerational exchange, and local image improvement. Traditional value preservation was significant at the 0.1 level, whereas cultural promotion, cultural preservation, and tourism industry impact were not significant. Accordingly, H1c, H3c, H4c, H6c, H7c, and H9c were accepted, while H2c, H5c, and H8c were rejected. The most influential variable was local economic impact, followed by intergenerational exchange, local image improvement, environmental protection, resident relationships, and traditional value preservation. These results indicate that satisfaction with Slow Cities is mainly influenced by perceived economic vitality, generational interactions, and improvements in environmental quality and local identity.

Regarding future prospects of Slow Cities, the model was statistically significant (R² = .428; Adjusted R² = .422, F = 73.965, p < .01). Significant predictors at the 0.01 level included local economic impact, traditional value preservation, cultural preservation, resident relationships, environmental protection, and local image improvement. Cultural promotion, intergenerational exchange, and tourism industry impact were not significant. Thus, H1d, H2d, H4d, and H9d were supported, while H3d, H5d, H6d, H7d, and H8d were not. Local image improvement was the strongest predictor, followed by local economic impact, environmental protection, and cultural preservation. These findings suggest that citizens’ outlook on the future of slow cities is most influenced by local image and economic enhancement, alongside environmental and cultural contributions.

For intention to recommend the slow city, the regression model was significant (R² = .502; Adjusted R² = .497, F = 99.861, p < .01). Predictors significant at the 0.01 level included local economic impact, environmental protection, intergenerational exchange, and local image improvement. Cultural promotion, traditional value preservation, cultural preservation, resident relationships, and tourism industry were not statistically significant. Therefore, H1e, H4e, H7e, and H9e were supported, while H2e, H3e, H5e, H6e, and H8e were not. The strongest driver was local economic impact, followed by local image improvement, intergenerational exchange, and environmental protection. These results suggest that word-of-mouth recommendations are largely shaped by perceived economic benefits, community connectivity, and improvements in environmental and civic branding.

Lastly, for youth employment support as the dependent variable, the model showed significance (R² = .261; Adjusted R² = .253, F = 34.897, p < .01). Local economic impact, cultural preservation, and local image improvement were significant at the 0.01 level, while all other predictors were not. Accordingly, H1f, H6f, and H9f were supported, and H2f, H3f, H4f, H5f, H7f, and H8f were rejected. In terms of effect size, local economic impact had the greatest influence, followed by local image improvement and cultural preservation. These findings suggest that the perceived potential of slow cities to support youth employment is most closely tied to strong local economies and cultural value.

Multicollinearity diagnostics showed that Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) ranged from 1.00 to 2.80. Table 2 summarizes the results of these multiple regression analyses.

Furthermore, this study employed multilevel linear modeling (MLM) to examine the effects of predictors on dependent variables, with the regional variable specified as the grouping factor. Across all models, the coefficients, standard errors, and significance levels from MLM closely mirrored those from OLS, indicating that regional variance was negligible. Consistently, the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were close to zero, confirming minimal clustering effects. Stratified regression analyses further showed that the regional control variable alone explained virtually none of the variance across outcomes, underscoring that regional differences did not significantly shape citizens’ perceptions. By contrast, when substantive predictors were included, the models demonstrated strong explanatory power. The explained variance (Adjusted R²) was highest for sustainability (63.3%), followed by attitude, satisfaction, and intention to recommend. Perceptions of future prospects were moderately explained, whereas youth employment exhibited the weakest explanatory power, suggesting that labor market expectations may be shaped by broader structural factors beyond the model.

7. Conclusion

1) Major findings

This study examined the impacts of local economic impact, cultural promotion, traditional value preservation, environmental protection, cultural preservation, resident relationships, intergenerational exchange, the tourism industry, and local image improvement on six key outcomes: sustainable development contribution, overall attitudes toward the Slow Cities, overall satisfactions, future prospects, intention to recommend, and youth employment support. Several key findings emerged. First, economic impact was the most consistent and influential predictor across all outcomes. Survey items confirmed that residents perceived Slow Cities as contributing to economic revitalization and tourism development, which significantly shaped sustainability, satisfaction, recommendation, and youth employment perceptions. This finding underscores the centrality of economic vitality in sustaining citizen support and resonates with Knox (2005) and Mayer and Knox (2006), who emphasized economic resilience as the core driver of global Cittàslow support. Second, local image improvement emerged as another strong predictor, for future prospects and youth-related outcomes. Enhancements in branding, aesthetics, and reputation fostered satisfaction, optimism about the future, and residents’ willingness to advocate for Slow Cities, although its influence on overall attitudes was more moderate.

Third, intergenerational exchange significantly shaped overall attitudes, satisfaction, and recommendation intention. This finding echoes Han and Choi (2013), who demonstrated that cross-generational participation was central to shaping positive perceptions of Slow City experiences in Cheongsando. Fourth, traditional value preservation strongly influenced perceptions of sustainable development but exerted weaker effects on satisfaction and advocacy. This suggests that heritage is closely tied to sustainability in citizens’ minds but plays a less dominant role in other dimensions, consistent with Karatosun and Çakar (2017). Fifth, environmental protection demonstrated broad and significant influence across multiple outcomes. Citizens widely valued environmental initiatives, which reinforced Slow Cities’ identity as sustainable and livable communities. This supports Alp (2024), who highlighted environmental measures as essential for maintaining Cittàslow’s sustainable identity.

Finally, cultural factors and resident relationships showed more selective effects. While cultural promotion had limited influence, cultural preservation had modest but significant effects on youth employment support and sustainable development contribution. Resident relationships predicted satisfaction and future prospects but did not significantly affect other outcomes. Youth employment support overall exhibited the weakest explanatory power (Adjusted R² = .253), with only economic impact, cultural preservation, and image improvement emerging as significant predictors. This indicates that citizens do not strongly associate Slow Cities with youth employment opportunities, pointing to a potential policy gap and the need for better communication and integration of youth- focused initiatives.

Although demographic differences existed across the six Slow Cities, multilevel and stratified regression analyses confirmed that these variations did not significantly influence citizens’ perceptions. Instead, citizens’ views were shaped primarily by substantive factors, especially economic impact, environmental protection, and image improvement rather than by regional context.

2) Policy and managerial implications

The results of this study provide important policy and managerial implications for advancing the sustainable development of Slow Cities in South Korea. These implications align with contemporary urban planning literature and the guiding principles of the Cittàslow movement. Notably, while demographic profiles varied across the six cities, multilevel and stratified regression analyses showed that such variations did not significantly shape citizen perceptions. Instead, perceptions were primarily influenced by substantive factors such as economic impact, environmental protection, and image improvement.

Policy implications center on reinforcing these substantive drivers. Economic impact consistently emerged as the strongest predictor across key outcomes – including satisfaction, recommendation intention, and youth employment support – indicating that local governments should prioritize policies that foster economic resilience. Local governments should prioritize incentives for small businesses, support sustainable entrepreneurship, and foster self-reliance within local economies (Mayer and Knox, 2006). Intergenerational engagement also requires greater policy attention. Buffel and Phillipson (2016) argue that ageing populations and urban change necessitate supportive communities that strengthen ties across generations. Governments could therefore design programs that promote collaboration between youth and elders in cultural, agricultural, and educational activities, alongside public spaces that facilitate generational interaction such as community gardens and shared learning spaces (Buffel and Phillipson, 2016). Environmental protection should also be institutionalized as a core policy pillar. Given its significant influence on perceptions of sustainability and recommendation, local governments should implement green practices such as zero-waste zones, eco-friendly transport network, and subsidies for energy-efficient infrastructure to embed sustainability into everyday urban life (Beatley, 2011).

Managerial implications highlight the importance of strengthening city image and branding. Local image improvement was a strong predictor of satisfaction, prospects, and recommendation, reinforcing the need for place-based branding strategies (Zenker and Braun, 2010). City managers and destination marketers should cultivate authentic brand identities rooted in local culture, heritage, and lifestyle, while promoting a “slow lifestyle” ethos through digital campaigns and place-making initiatives (Zenker and Braun, 2010). Branding efforts can be reinforced through local products, cultural festivals, and tourism experiences aligned with Cittaslow values. Effective implementations should involve partnerships between municipal governments, entrepreneurs, artists, and youth-led start-ups, which can revitalize local economies, expand tourism, and strengthen resident pride in community identity.

Additionally, community programs should better integrate cultural preservation with sustainability objectives. While traditional and cultural elements strongly influenced perceptions of sustainability, their impact on satisfaction and recommendation was more limited (Richards and Khovanova, 2011). Managers should bridge this gap by embedding heritage into community initiatives – such as resident-led heritage tours or cultural workshops – that foster relevance and broader participation (Richards and Khovanova, 2011). Finally, youth-oriented policies require clearer communication and stronger alignment with Slow City principles. Given the relatively low explanatory power of youth employment support, managers should recalibrate existing programs by highlighting opportunities in agriculture, culture, and creative industries, thereby fostering youth participation in local economic ecosystems

3) Geographical implications

The geographical implications of this study highlight the importance of localizing Slow City strategies to the socio- economic and cultural characteristics of each community. This includes creating spaces and initiatives that foster intergenerational engagement and strengthen community cohesion. Expansion of the Slow City network should proceed cautiously, prioritizing residents’ satisfaction and quality of life over rapid designation. The relatively weak link between Slow City initiatives and youth employment reflects a broader policy reality: while current policies emphasize environment, culture, and economic revitalization, connections to youth-oriented development remain limited. Addressing this gap requires policies that integrate youth entrepreneurship in agriculture, culture, and tourism, and promote intergenerational collaboration to create sustainable employment opportunities. Such efforts would strengthen the social sustainability while addressing pressing generational challenges.

These findings can also be interpreted through geographical theories and emphasize the interconnections between place, identity, and sustainability. The strong influence of local economic impact aligns with Storper’s (1997) theory of regional economic coordination, which views regions as systems that sustain economic viability through structured interactions, thereby reinforcing civic engagement and place-based identity. Similarly, the importance of local image improvement resonates with Relph’s (1976) concept of “Place and Placelessness,” which emphasizes that the emotional and symbolic meanings attached to place shape individuals’ spatial experience and sense of belonging. When residents perceive that a Slow City cultivates a distinctive and positive image, their sense of identification and willingness to support it are strengthened (Relph, 1976). Similarly, the findings reflect Tuan’s (1977) notion of “topophilia,” the affective bond between people and place, which is reinforced when urban image embodies cultural and emotional values.

The role of environmental protection is consistent with urban ecological theory and McHarg’s (1969) “Design with Nature,” which advocates for planning approaches that harmonize ecological systems and human settlements. This is further supported by biophilic urbanism, which argues that environmental quality enhances psychological well-being and fosters place attachment (Beatley, 2011). In addition, findings on cultural preservation reflect cultural geography perspectives such as Nora’s (1989) concept of “lieux de mémoire (places of memory),” which stresses that safeguarding cultural and historical elements strengthens collective identity and civic pride. Finally, the uneven explanatory power of youth employment support corresponds to Kain’s (1968) spatial mismatch theory, which highlights how disconnections between residential locations and employment opportunities create barriers to equitable economic development. This suggests that while Slow Cities successfully advance sustainability, image, and community cohesion, more targeted strategies are required to connect youth employment opportunities with place-based development (Kain, 1968).

4) Limitations and future research

This study provides valuable insights into citizens’ perceptions of Slow Cities in South Korea; however, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, cross- sectional design constrains the ability to infer causal relationships between predictors and outcomes. Longitudinal research would allow a more robust examination of how perceptions and attitudes evolve as Slow City initiatives mature over time. Second, the data were collected from six designated Slow Cities that, while geographically and demographically diverse, may not fully capture the heterogeneity of all Slow Cities in South Korea or internationally. Future research should expand the scope by incorporating additional cases, accounting for demographic variation, and conducting cross-country comparisons to examine how cultural and institutional contexts shape perceptions. Third, the study relied exclusively on survey data, which may limit interpretive depth. Employing mixed-method approaches – such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, or ethnographic studies – could enrich understanding and triangulate quantitative findings. Finally, although a broad set of predictors was analyzed, potential moderating and mediating effects (e.g., generational differences, trust in local government, or urban–rural dynamics) were not assessed. Investigating these factors, potentially through structural equation modeling and interaction analysis, could strengthen theoretical development and provide a more nuanced understanding of citizen engagement with Slow Cities.