Decisions Decisions

Behaviour change isn't just necessary when it comes to cars, and in 2010 Hares et. al looked at the decisions of UK tourists with regards to air travel.

Tourism contributes 5% of global carbon dioxide emissions, and 90% of this is because of travel, and often specifically air travel. With tourist arrivals growing (903bn in 2007 which is expected to rise to 1.6bn in 2020), the growth rates of air travel are growing too (5-6%/annum since 1970 and will continue at this rate until 2020). Tourism has been identified by many as the most important area for reducing these emissions. These can come through technological changes, but the emission reductions will be low and the impacts limited. Behavioural changes similar to the ones discussed in the previous post are necessary therefore, and they have the most important role to play in leading the GHG emissions of air travel (Gossling et. al, 2007).

Very little previous research into the extent to which tourists are aware of their holidaying can have on the environment. of the studies that are around, there seems to be a consensus that there is very little awareness (Becken, 2007; Shaw and Thomas, 2006). Staggeringly 34% of people didn’t believe air travel harmed the environment, but 62% of people would be willing to take fewer flights to reduce their carbon foot print. 

To explore their research ideas, Hares et. al conducted 4 focus groups in Bournemouth with 34 people taking part in total. While the number of participants and the rage of ages, from 18- 65 was appropriate, there were no follow up interviews or questionnaires. This could hinder the accuracy of the results, and must be remembered when thinking about the conclusions. 

While participants were able to identify how their holidaying contributed to climate change and the mitigation measures that could be taken, for example they recognised that renting a car on holiday could be damaging, and it would be better to walk and drive, they could not establish an alternative to air travel, and admitted the environment was not one of their 5 most important factors when planning their last holiday.

A more interesting element of the focus groups findings is regarding questions to do with barriers to behavioural change. Each of the barriers are support with appropriate respondent quotes, that promote the validity of the conclusions. Appropriately this comprises the largest section of the paper, as it highlights the ideas that will need to be changed if emissions are to be lowered. 

Firstly strong preferences for air travel over alternative travel methods were expressed in all 4 groups, with flying considered by many the only viable option. Many saw other public transport as too slow, poor and in need for improvement. Hares et. al are not the first people to point this out, and in fact many studies (Dickinson et. al, 2009) have found similar opinions.  

The second barrier comes in the importance placed on holidays. While emissions could be lowered if people were willing to limit their holidaying, not one participant though that enforced restrictions on flights for climate change was acceptable. This is unsurprising given the onus places on personal freedoms, but is distinctly individualistic and does not look at the global problem. 

The third barrier is similarly individualistic, and relates to the the belief amongst participants that responsibility for climate change lies with others. Many blambed governments and bussiness for emissions and did not necessary think they could do much about the problem. 

Rather than an attitude-behaviour gap highlighted by other studies, Hares et. al, seems to show there is awareness-attitude gap. Many people do not necessarily think that it is possible to change their behaviour, and even if they were to the impact would be limited. It needs to be remebered, however, that even if awareness if increased that this will not always lead to positive environmental behaviour, with many people exhibiting a preference for individual rather than global gain. 

It is difficult therefore to suggest how this research can impact policy. It is necessary though for the government to send out clear messages about its own activities relating to climate change to help people understand that they are not solely to blame green house gas emissions. As price is often seen as a critical factor when going on holiday, if people are not willing to cut down their air traveling, it could be beneficial to increase the cost, and reduce the money needed for other public transport.