Climate change has been described as the greatest environmental challenge of our time, not only for mankind (UN, 2011), but also for tourism (OECD-UNEP, 2011). Severe impacts of climate change, generally linked to exceeding 2°C global temperature rise, can only be prevented to some extent by drastically reducing the use of fossil fuels and thereby greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within the next few decades. In this respect, an 80-95 per cent reduction of CO2 emissions by 2050 compared to 1990/2000 levels is recognised as the minimum required effort (Allison et al., 2009; Rogelj et al., 2011). Even with a full implementation of these goals, an increase above 2°C is not unlikely (World Bank, 2012). The contribution of global tourism to anthropogenic CO2 emissions has been estimated at around 5 per cent for 2005, corresponding to 1,302 Mt CO2, 75 per cent of which were from transport and 40 per cent from aviation alone. Tourism’s CO2 emissions are estimated to increase 135 per cent (to 3,000 Mt CO2) by 2035, which includes the high efficiency gains forecasted for air transport (Peeters and Dubois, 2010; UNWTO-UNEP-WMO, 2008). The share of aviation will increase as air travel is expected to grow faster than overall tourism trips (ICAO, 2010; UNWTO, 2011). Emission scenarios for civil aviation vary from 1,034 to 3,105 Mt CO2 for 2050 (Lee et al., 2013). The further development of tourism CO2 emissions is in stark contrast to the aforementioned global emission reduction needs. In fact, when assuming this business-as-usual growth path, tourism would exceed the global economy’s reduced emission budget by midcentury on its own (Scott et al., 2010). Given these developments it is not surprising that some regard the (mainstream) tourism industry as becoming less sustainable (Bramwell and Lane, 2012; Buckley, 2012; Gössling et al., 2012). In acknowledgement of the limited short-term energy reduction potential of technological improvements in aviation and the absence of short-term structural changes in travel behaviour, carbon offsetting has been accepted as an intermediate, albeit less effective solution for mitigating tourism emissions. This research aims to register the motives for buying offsets, but more particularly the effect of offsetting, as well as not offsetting, on the travel behaviour of Dutch tourists.
LINK
(‘Co’-)Designing for healthy behaviour greatly benefits from integrating insights about individual behaviour and systemic influences. This study reports our experiences in using insights about individual and systemic determinants of behaviour to inform a large co-design project. To do so, we used two design tools that encourage focusing on individual determinants (Behavioural Lenses Approach) and social / systemic aspects of behaviour (Socionas). We performed a qualitative analysis to identify 1) when and how the team applied the design tools, and 2) how the tools supported or obstructed the design process. The results show that both tools had their distinctive uses during the process. Both tools improved the co-design process by deepening the conversations and underpinnings of the prototypes. Using the Behavioural Lenses under the guidance of a behavioural expert proved most beneficial. Furthermore, the Socionas showed the most potential when interacting with stakeholders, i.c. parents and PPTs.
MULTIFILE
Purpose: This study aims to examine the impact of terrorism on risk perception and travel behaviour of the Dutch market towards Sri Lanka. Design/methodology/approach: The research process involved an online self-administered method created with one of the leading research and web-based survey tools called Qualtrics. The questionnaire was filled in by 328 respondents. Findings: Findings indicate that Sri Lankan is perceived to be a relatively safe destination. However, the likeliness of visiting the country is unlikely. The respondents with past travel experience (PTE) perceive Sri Lanka to be safer than those without PTE and are more likely to revisit. Male respondents have a higher safety perception of Sri Lanka than women. Most of the respondents see Sri Lanka as an attractive destination and would consider travelling there with children. Research limitations/implications: The majority of the respondents are female and aged between 18 to 29 years old. The majority of the respondents’ children were already 19 or older and not accompanying their parents on holiday. This study has managerial implications for Sri Lanka’s tourism board that could work on developing a marketing strategy that focusses on promoting Sri Lanka as a safe destination in combination with all the other unique selling points. Originality/value: To the best of author’s knowledge, no analysis has been so far published with a focus on the impact of terrorism on risk perception and attitudes of the Dutch tourist towards Sri Lanka. The aim of this paper is to close the existing gap in the literature and to provide valuable knowledge on the influence of terrorism on risk perception and attitudes of the Dutch tourists’ travel behaviour towards Sri Lanka as a destination.
PBL is the initiator of the Work Programme Monitoring and Management Circular Economy 2019-2023, a collaboration between CBS, CML, CPB, RIVM, TNO, UU. Holidays and mobility are part of the consumption domains that PBL researches, and this project aims to calculate the environmental gains per person per year of the various circular behavioural options for both holiday behaviour and daily mobility. For both behaviours, a range of typical (default) trips are defined and for each several circular option explored for CO2 emissions, Global warming potential and land use. The holiday part is supplied by the Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (CSTT) of the BUas Academy of Tourism (AfT). The mobility part is carried out by the Urban Intelligence professorship of the Academy for Built Environment and Logistics (ABEL).The research question is “what is the environmental impact of various circular (behavioural) options around 1) holidays and 2) passenger mobility?” The consumer perspective is demarcated as follows:For holidays, transportation and accommodation are included, but not food, attractions visited and holiday activitiesFor mobility, it concerns only the circular options of passenger transport and private means of transport (i.e. freight transport, business travel and commuting are excluded). Not only some typical trips will be evaluated, but also the possession of a car and its alternatives.For the calculations, we make use of public databases, our own models and the EAP (Environmental Analysis Program) model developed by the University of Groningen. BUAs projectmembers: Centre for Sustainability, Tourism and Transport (AT), Urban Intelligence (ABEL).
In the coming decades, a substantial number of electric vehicle (EV) chargers need to be installed. The Dutch Climate Accord, accordingly, urges for preparation of regional-scale spatial programs with focus on transport infrastructure for three major metropolitan regions among them Amsterdam Metropolitan Area (AMA). Spatial allocation of EV chargers could be approached at two different spatial scales. At the metropolitan scale, given the inter-regional flow of cars, the EV chargers of one neighbourhood could serve visitors from other neighbourhoods during days. At the neighbourhood scale, EV chargers need to be allocated as close as possible to electricity substations, and within a walkable distance from the final destination of EV drivers during days and nights, i.e. amenities, jobs, and dwellings. This study aims to bridge the gap in the previous studies, that is dealing with only of the two scales, by conducting a two-phase study on EV infrastructure. At the first phase of the study, the necessary number of new EV chargers in 353 4-digit postcodes of AMA will be calculated. On the basis of the findings of the Phase 1, as a case study, EV chargers will be allocated at the candidate street parking locations in the Amsterdam West borough. The methods of the study are Mixed-integer nonlinear programming, accessibility and street pattern analysis. The study will be conducted on the basis of data of regional scale travel behaviour survey and the location of dwellings, existing chargers, jobs, amenities, and electricity substations.
The project focuses on sustainable travel attitude and behaviour with attention to balance, liveability, impact and climate change (as indicated above). The customer journey is approached from the consumer side and intends to shed light on the way COVID-19 has influenced (or not) the following aspects:• consumer’s understanding and appreciation of sustainability • the extent to which this understanding has influenced their attitude towards sustainable travel choices• the extent to which this change is represented in their actual and projected travel behaviour throughout the travel decision-making process • conditions that may foster a more sustainable travel behaviourThe project can be seen as a follow up to existing studies on travel intention during and post COVID-19, such as ETC’s publication on Monitoring sentiment for domestic and Intra-European travel – Wave 5, or the joint study of the European Tourism Futures Institute (ETFI – www.etfi.nl) and the Centre of Expertise in Leisure, Tourism and Hospitality (CELTH – www.celth.nl) highlighting four future scenarios for the leisure, tourism and hospitality sectors post COVID-19. The project will look beyond travel intention and will supplement existing knowledge with crucial information on the way consumers view sustainability and the extent to which they are willing to adjust their travel behaviour to aid the recovery of a more sustainable travel and tourism industry. Therefore, the report aims to generate knowledge vital for the understanding of consumer trends and the role sustainability will play in travel choices in the near future.Problem statementPlease describe which question in the (participating) industry is addressed.How has the sustainable travel attitude and behaviour in selected European source markets been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic? Further questions to be answered:• How did the COVID-19 pandemic influence the consumer’s understanding and appreciation of sustainability?• To what extent did this understanding influence their attitude towards sustainable travel choices?• To what extent is this change represented in their actual and projected travel behaviour throughout the travel decision-making process?• What are the conditions that may foster a more sustainable travel behaviour?
