ESG integration pathway for heritage tourism SMEs: operational evidence from a circular economy pioneer in Hoi An, Vietnam

Tourism accounts for 8–11% of global greenhouse gas emissions and places disproportionate pressure on heritage destinations whose viability depends on environmental and cultural integrity. Although environmental, social, and governance (ESG) frameworks are widely adopted at the corporate level, the pathway by which small and medium-sized tourism enterprises transition from fragmented green initiatives to structured ESG integration remains poorly understood. Drawing on a combined institutional-theory and organizational-readiness lens, this study examines the ESG integration pathway of a heritage tourism SME in Hoi An, Vietnam, through three analytical lenses: longitudinal carbon tracking (12 months, 3279 guests), quantified circular economy flow analysis, and a structured ESG monitoring diagnostic mapped against Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) indicators. All comparisons are descriptive contrasts from a purposively selected information-rich case. The low-carbon tour model achieved a 37% carbon efficiency gain relative to a constructed reference-scenario benchmark (cumulative avoidance: 7.26 tCO₂e/year), while electric-vehicle introduction increased transport coverage by 60% without a statistically distinguishable change in carbon efficiency. The circular food system achieved enterprise-tracked near-complete waste diversion (99.9%) through closed-loop pathways, with 100% local food procurement and enterprise-reported livelihood co-benefits for farming households. However, environmental practice maturity (3.25/4.0) substantially outpaced governance infrastructure (2.0/4.0) — a gap robust to ±1 scoring sensitivity — with ESG reporting and data systems the largest deficits. For heritage tourism SMEs with established environmental practices, governance capacity-building — targeting data management, internal audit, and reporting readiness — may warrant greater strategic priority than additional environmental interventions; these findings reflect a single information-rich case and require multi-site validation.