Airline travel is a major contributor to anthropogenic climate change, amounting to about 4% of all global greenhouse gas emissions every year. Airlines must take specific measures to reduce, and ideally neutralise, their greenhouse gas emissions and environmental footprint. The airline industry and air travellers are aware of this. However, the question of who should pay for the transition to green air travel is still under debate.
Charging consumers for benefits is not new. For example, the user-pays principle has been adopted to fund road infrastructure through road tolls.
But if the findings of our survey of airline travellers in South Africa are anything to go by, airline users don’t want to pay for airlines to become more environmentally friendly.
We are social science researchers who want our research to inform real life practices. Finding a gap in the research on green business models for airlines, we set out to explore the environmental consciousness and consumer behaviour of domestic air travellers. Our aim was to find out whether green initiatives by airlines make a difference to people when choosing which airline to fly with.
Our research centred on the South African airline industry, where we surveyed domestic air travellers who were jetting off from the OR Tambo airport in Johannesburg.
Martin Harvey/Getty Images
We found that even though not all airline passengers were sure how air travel worsens climate change, they all agreed that airlines must find ways to become environmentally friendly. However, passengers don’t want to pay for this.
Our research helps create a better understanding of the relationship between environmental consciousness and willingness to pay for green travel. This will help airlines assess all the different ways they can lessen the environmental impacts caused by air travel.
Paying more for environmentally friendly flights
We used social media surveys to get 394 air travellers to tell us how they chose the airlines they flew with. Most were female (60.4%) and primarily leisure travellers (62%). Almost 70% of the participants flew with low-cost carriers.
We found that air travellers believed airlines should strive to conserve the environment and reduce their negative impact. We were curious about whether travellers would be willing to pay “green premiums” (extra charges to offset carbon emissions) for this. Only 31.5% were in favour of this and 23.6% were indifferent. Of the people we interviewed, 41.9% were against paying a green premium, with one saying “don’t touch my pocket!”
Airline emissions and the case for a carbon tax on flight tickets
We also explored the idea of a “green class” ticket, where eco-conscious consumers would pay extra for a greener flight option. But again, most air travellers believed the airline industry, not the passengers, should cover the expenses of climate change mitigation.
This view was aligned to those of Australian air travellers in another study where air travellers psychologically distanced themselves from the “cost” of emissions from their flights.
How airlines can go green
Among other measures, airlines could use more fuel-efficient aircraft or sustainable aviation fuels. But this requires a large capital outlay and, for South African domestic aircraft, might only happen over a long period of time, especially if there was no increase in ticket prices to fund it.
Knowing how air travellers feel about the environment is useful for airlines in their strategic decision making for green business models, which maximise environmental benefits beyond the level that can be achieved through traditional business models.
Air travellers are price-sensitive yet they value protecting the environment. This means airlines should offer green services that consumers perceive as valuable. These could include environmentally friendly products like reusable water bottles or biodegradable wet wipes. By making these products easily available, plane travellers can make greener choices with minimal effort.
Firstly, green attributes could become marketable items to air travellers and the airline could develop a green image from these efforts. In other words, passengers might start choosing airlines that become environmentally friendly over other, less-green airlines.
Secondly, cheapest airfares could be replaced with value for money, while doing something good for the environment. Airline marketers could clearly communicate the value that consumers can derive from any green services.
Finally, green efforts could also include reducing waste on-board, recycling on-board waste, reducing paper boarding passes and serving fair trade and organic products.
Green initiatives can generate extra revenue for airlines. But they shouldn’t just be a way for airlines to make more money. Instead, airlines should incorporate green initiatives so that they stand out from competitors. In the future, airlines that fail to include environmental practices in their operations and marketing strategies could lose market share and find that passengers opt for other, environmentally friendly airlines.
Airline marketers should design and implement education programmes about the environmental impacts of flying. This will mean that the air travellers who haven’t considered the environmental consequences of their flying habits become more aware. These education programmes could also showcase anything the airlines do to reduce their carbon footprint.
Flight shame won’t fix airline emissions. We need a smarter solution
Research has found that some airlines use eco-labels to share their product’s environmental information with consumers. An eco-label informs airline travellers about the environmental impact of their travel choices by showing the carbon emissions, the fuel efficiency, sustainable practices or offset initiatives from their flight. This allows travellers to make consumption decisions that are both well-informed and sustainable, without compromising their freedom of choice.
We argue that once consumers are exposed to knowledge, this awareness can lead to a heightened sense of responsibility and more environmentally responsible purchasing decisions. To meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5˚C, emissions need to be reduced by 45% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.
To achieve this, airlines and air travellers must all play their part in reducing environmental impact – even if those efforts touch their pockets! Airline travellers can no longer be simply passengers, oblivious to the impact of their actions. They should accept that the burden of flying greener is also theirs to carry.
