Newsflash: The majority of travelers want sustainable lodging and transportation options

How much is traveling by a less-polluting airplane or staying at a solar-powered hotel worth to potential travelers? A recent survey of international travelers from Bloomberg Media didn’t have an exact dollar value, but found that six in 10 respondents would be willing to pay more than comparable conventional options, and 80 percent thought sustainability in travel is important. This sounds encouraging—especially since Bloomberg reports that that’s a 35 percent increase from their last survey in 2019 (and, you know, there’s an urgent need to reduce carbon emissions and pollution).

But there’s more to unpack in their findings—and a few caveats to consider before we run around making sweeping claims about the travel industry writ large.

For one thing, the results are based on interviews of 1,456 people, all of whom live in Northern Hemisphere countries and are employed, between the ages of 25 and 65, and “affluent.” They didn’t specify exact income in their methodology, but it seems likely the respondents aren’t working with a shoestring budget. So even if many people think planet-friendly practices are important, exactly how much someone will and can pay for them isn’t clear. This dovetails with another wrinkle in the “travelers will pay extra for sustainable options” headline: There is no inclusion of how respondents ranked sustainability relative to other factors.

Across the board, COVID-19 safety measures, flexibility and convenience, and quality customer service were priorities for those surveyed. And 80 percent of the people surveyed said that sustainable options in lodging and transportation were “important.”

But is taking a lower-emissions train instead of a plane worthwhile if it means an additional few hours of travel time? A later departure? Would the travelers book a room at a hotel with passive heating, greywater recycling and solar-generated electricity if it didn’t have a pool and sauna? It’s great that people see the importance of using hotels and transportation that don’t pollute the climate and planet, but this survey doesn’t tell us what people will actually do when the rubber meets the road.

Respondents from different regions also had varying levels of concern about factoring in climate-friendliness while planning vacations and business trips. Sustainability was more top of mind among surveyed travelers from the US and Asia, with 85 percent of Asian respondents saying that the carbon footprint of their transportation and lodging would be a priority in their next trip and 6 in 10 willing to pay more for the greener option. And in the US, concern over climate and environmental impact has gone up more than in any other region. 

Now, we don’t say all that because we want to rain on the parade. It’s great that more people are considering the impact their travel has on the planet, even if fixating too much on personal carbon footprints can be pretty fraught. But an important part of creating meaningful change is being honest about the scope of the problem and the progress made towards addressing it.

At the very least, a trend towards greater climate and environmental concern is in line with our best understanding of how public perceptions of climate change have shifted in recent years. Even in the US, where climate change is a uniquely polarized and contentious topic, public awareness and concern over climate change has been steadily increasing.

Whether you think it matters if people support high- or low-carbon businesses comes down to whether or not you think that a critical mass of individuals can shift how industries operate through conscious consumption. This so-called “consumer activism,” has been used to support or oppose business practices for centuries, and its efficacy has been debated for just as long.

On the simplest level, if there’s a market for a new, greener product, it can drive brands to compete to make the greenest version in a process that spurs entrepreneurship and shifts the baseline standards—which is all for the good.

But critics would argue that consumer activism deflects from the real problems, and mollifies people from taking more meaningful action, like voting. Emily Huddart Kennedy, a University of British Columbia sociologist who researches the multifaceted impacts of mission-driven consumption, told Vox that things get murky when moral significance is attached to what we buy. These ethical purchases become a status symbol to be able to afford the net-zero lodging—even more than your run-of-the-mill luxury vacation, shifting the focus on the actual quality and impact of the product.

“I can’t imagine that the world is worse off because of conscious consumerism,” Kennedy told Vox, “but I doubt it will be enough to save the planet.”