This week, I came across two apparently unrelated opinion pieces. They reminded me of doubts being expressed in the early days of the Responsible Tourism movement. Polling research by commercial polling companies presenting the aspirations of travellers to travel more responsibly was often dismissed. Research by the same commercial pollsters reporting how many people aspired to travel to New Zealand or go on a cruise is taken seriously. Opinion surveys record aspiration and intent, whether it is about destination or sustainability.
Twenty-five years ago, research funded by Tearfund but conducted by Ipsos-RSL reported UK traveller aspirations.
As Justin Francis and I wrote at the time, 25 years ago: “As might be expected, cost, weather and the quality of facilities were judged by respondents to be of most importance when choosing a holiday, but the quality of local social, economic and political information, opportunities to interact with local people and environmental impact were all judged more important than the ethical policy commitments of the company. But all of these concerns were regarded by this representative sample of travellers as more important than whether or not they had travelled with the company before. This last point was not lost on many operators.”
In the same survey, respondents were asked if they were willing to pay more.
Fully 45% reported that they would be unwilling to pay more. I am confident that the admission quality of this answer means that it underreports. Whenever I am asked if I would pay more for x, y or z, I say no; I don’t want to encourage them to put up prices.
But this misses the point, I think. We cannot purchase what we can’t afford—well, not often. Price is a determining factor, as is whether we want to visit a place or have an experience. When we purchase a holiday, we are buying a package of goods and services. One aspect of those purchasing decisions relates to being a responsible consumer in the choices we make.
A holiday is a complex product whether we buy it prepackaged or put it together ourselves. In the supermarket, we want to be offered free range, or organic eggs, or both. I can no longer buy battery-farmed eggs in my local supermarket. There is no market for them. Egg production is complicated, but holidays are many times more complicated. There are so many ways that we might hope that a holiday would meet our aspirations for a positive impact, guilt-free trip. But there are many elements in that decision about where, when and how to holiday.
Twenty-five years ago, working with the UK Association of Tour Independent Tour Operators (AITO), we quickly realised that to be ethical was too big a claim, no more meat on the menus in the hotels and restaurants booked for the tour? Responsible Tourism was adopted because each operator could say what they were taking responsibility for and what they were doing to address the issues, and they could talk about their impact. Travellers could buy into that – and they do. Different issues are important to different people, ranging widely amongst other things, child protection, animal welfare, labour conditions and nature. Businesses and destinations have to choose their focus.
Richard Lindberg, in a thoughtful piece on LinkedIn, asked, “Why Do Travellers Talk Sustainability But Still Choose Unsustainable Options?” As he lists, there are multiple reasons:
- Convenience over Conscience
- Perceived Cost Barrier
- Social Validation: Sustainability isn’t as “Instagrammable”
- Lack of Awareness of the impact of their choices
- Limited Options: Major booking platforms prioritise convenience and scale, often sidelining small, sustainable businesses. Without visibility, travellers stick to mainstream options.
Connecting convincingly with potential customers consciences is at the heart of bridging the say-do gap, the gap between what we say and what we actually do in practice.
Then I came across a piece by Jill Boegel, SVP of Sales Americas, for Amadeus Hospitality on HospitalityTech.com. Boegel advises that travellers are “less predictable, and there are more factors influencing their decision on when and where to visit”. Amongst other things, she recommends using a digital media campaign “to target travelers with specific offers on the channels where they shop and book the most (…) digital advertising can help target your preferred customer sets and influence their bookings.” The same approach will work with travellers engaged with the responsibility issues your business or destination addresses. She advises converting window shoppers to booked guests. “Specialized offers set you apart from the crowd and help prospective guests envision their stay, making them more likely to select your hotel “.
This is an approach to targeted marketing that we could deploy to encourage and enable travellers to make better choices, but cost, place and activity will still be of paramount importance. Why would I pay more for a responsible choice? Best look for a competitively priced travel experience that offers me a guilt-free trip – and remember, the guilt is in the traveller’s head, reflecting their priorities.
And remember that 76% of consumers think that the products and brands claiming sustainability are usually too expensive. The Say-Do Company reports that “A large number of consumers we spoke to said that many of the brands identifying with sustainability did not do enough to justify their premium pricing or demonstrate the added environmental value of their products.”
