1 Sustainable Tourism: Travel Groups and Intervention Strategies Susanne Böhler, Wuppertal...

1

Sustainable Tourism:Travel Groups and Intervention Strategies

Susanne Böhler, Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment EnergySylvie Grischkat, University of LüneburgSonja Haustein, Ruhr-University BochumMarcel Hunecke, Ruhr-University Bochum

UNIVERSITÄT LÜNEBURGFachbereich IV

Institut für Umweltstrategien

Projekt: MOBILANZ In Cooperation with

Wuppertal Institute University of LüneburgRuhr-University Bochum

Financed by

2

Facts and Trends of Tourism

80 % of persons in Germany (>14 years of age) made at least one holiday trip in 2003.

An increase from 720 million tourists worldwide in 2004 to 1600 million in 2020 is predicted.

Most trips are conducted by car. 80 % of European air travel is due to tourism. Aviation has shown the highest growth rate. The majority of the greenhouse gases of domestic tourism is emitted

during travel to and from the holiday destination (60 %).

3

Research Questions

What is travel behaviour like? How is the environmental impact? Do individual characteristics explain travel behaviour? What are the strategies and obstacles to reduce environmental

impact of holiday mobility?

4

Research Questions

What is travel behaviour like? How is the environmental impact? Do individual characteristics explain travel behaviour? What are the strategies and obstacles to reduce environmental

impact of holiday mobility?

5

ActivitiesTrips per year and person

Km travelled per year and person

Average km travelled per trip

and person

Working 286.4 4482 15.6

Shopping 241.6 487 2.0

Private Errands 137.2 577 4.2

Leisure time 390.2 4053 10.4

Short stay trip 4.0 1055 263.8

Holiday 3.2 3839 1199.7

Description of the MOBILANZ Sample (N=1991): Mobility purposes

6

ActivitiesTrips per year and person

Km travelled per year and person

Average km travelled per trip

and person

Working 286.4 4482 15.6

Shopping 241.6 487 2.0

Private Errands 137.2 577 4.2

Leisure time 390.2 4053 10.4

Short stay trip 4.0 1055 263.8

Holiday 3.2 3839 1199.7

Description of the MOBILANZ Sample (N=1991): Mobility purposes

7

Holiday Trips [%]

Short Stay Trips [%]

Non-motorized Travel 0.3 0.4

Car Travel 60.7 77.1

Public Transport Travel (local) 9.1 9.2

Public Transport Travel (long distance) 7.4 11.6

Air Travel 22.5 1.7

Modal Split of Holiday and Short Stay Trips (N=1991)

8

Description of the Sample by Travel Groups (N=1984)

Travel Group Kilometer categories

n %

Non-Traveller

Local Traveller

Mid-distance Traveller

Long-haul Traveller

0

1 to 600

601 to 3000

> 3000

491

523

757

213

24.7

26.4

38.2

10.7

9

Non-Traveller

Local Traveller

Mid-distance Traveller

Long-haul Traveller

Number of holiday trips (means)

0.0 1.8 2.3 2.7

Number of short stay trips (means)

1.2 2.1 2.3 2.7

Travel Groups: Number of holiday trips and short-stay trips per year

10

Transport Modes [%]Local

TravellerMid-distance

TravellerLong-haul Traveller

Non-motorized Travel 0.5 0.3 0.0

Car Travel 80.7 56.6 27.6

Public Transport Travel (local)

9.7 10.1 3.9

Public Transport Travel (long distance)

8.7 7.1 4.6

Air Travel 0.4 25.9 63.9

Travel Groups: Transportation Mode Choice

11

Travel Groups: Description by Main IndicatorsTravel Group Age and Household Educa

-tionIncome Psychological Dimension

Non-Traveller

high share of unemployment -- --

Low openness to change, high rating for public transport-

excitement and public transport-control

Local Traveller

30 to 60 years old, married couples,

children in household- -

Mid-distance Traveller

Middle-aged, double income households + ++ High self-enhancement

Long-haul Traveller

26 to 35 or 51-65 years old, no children ++ +

High openness to change and self-enhancement, low rating for public transport-excitement and

public transport-control

12

Research Questions

What is travel behaviour like? How is the environmental impact? Do individual characteristics explain travel behaviour? What are the strategies and obstacles to reduce environmental

impact of holiday mobility?

13

Travel Groups: Ecological Impact of Holiday Travel

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Local-traveller Mid-distance traveller Long-haul traveller all (average)

Car travel Public transport travel (local) Public transport travel (long-distance) Air travel

CO

2-e

quiv

alen

t in

kg p

er y

ear

and

pers

on

14

Travel Groups: Ecological Impact of Daily Mobility

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Non-traveller Local-traveller Mid-distance traveller Long-haul traveller all (average)

working shopping private errands leisure time short-stay holiday

CO

2-eq

uiv

alen

t in

kg

per

yea

r an

d p

erso

n

CO2-e

quviv

alen

t in

kg p

er y

ear a

nd p

erso

n

15

Research Questions

What is travel behaviour like? How is the environmental impact? Do individual characteristics explain travel behaviour? What are the strategies and obstacles to reduce environmental

impact of holiday mobility?

16

Variables B SE ß

Income 0.45 0.04 0.32 ***

Household size -0.45 0.05 -0.21 ***

Higher education 0.80 0.13 0.14 ***

Living-apart-together relationship 0.58 0.20 0.07 **

Openness to change 0.25 0.04 0.14 ***

Public transp ort excitement -0.18 0.06 -0.07 **

Note. R2 = .17 adjusted R2 = .17 **p < .01; ***p < .001

Stepwise Regression to Predict Greenhouse Gas Emissions

17

Summary

There are significant differences between travel groups. Travel Groups’ behaviour differs concerning number of holiday

trips and transportation mode. The smallest group (10.7%) is responsible for most emissions of

greenhouse gases. Socio-demographic variables are important factors for holiday

pattern. Values like “Openess für Chance” have an effect on number of

trips and distances travelled. A contradiction between ecological awareness and holiday

behaviour is identified within all travel groups.

18

Research Questions

What is travel behaviour like? How is the environmental impact? Do individual characteristics explain travel behaviour? What are the strategies and obstacles to reduce

environmental impact of holiday mobility?

19

Strategies for Sustainable TourismConcerning Travel behaviour

Change of Holiday Destination – Reduction of Distances Transportation Mode Shift to Long-distance Train and Coach Compensation Opportunities Economic Instruments Communication

20

Intervention Strategies for Travel GroupsTravel Group

Characteristics Choice of Destination

Transportation Mode Choice

Compensation Information Pricing instruments / mechanism

Long-haul Travellers10.7%

High rate of mobilityImportance of air travelNo childrenEcological impactPotential for reduction

+/-

+

+

Mid-distance Travellers38.2%

60% of the trips by carFamilies + + +

Local Traveller26.4%

Short distances80% of the trips by carPositive ecological balanceAttitudes towards public transport

+

+

+

Non-Travellers24.7%

Financial constrainsLess interest in travelling

+

21

Perspectives for Sustainable Tourism

Limited possibilities to change holiday travel behaviour and to reduce environmental impact under current conditions.

Coaches and long-distance trains are options for a more sustainable holiday travel, but

interviews proved especially less experience with train travelling for holiday and a high extent of refusal of train travelling due to choice of destination, time money and complicity.

More knowledge about individual motivation of choice of destination and the acceptance and effects of intervention strategies are necessary.

Intervention strategies and the development of services should consider different target groups.

22

Thank you for your attention!

susanne.boehler@wupperinst.orgsylvie.grischkat@uni-lueneburg.de

For further information check the Internet for MOBILANZ

http://eco.psy.ruhr-bochum.de/mobilanz