Business School
PERCEIVED BARRIERS TO SUSTAINABLE TOURIST BEHAVIOR AMONG FINNISH GENERATION X FEMALES
Master’s thesis, Tourism Marketing and Management Janita Juvakka (297562) March 2020
Abstract
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND Faculty
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies
Unit
Business School
Author
Janita Juvakka Supervisor
Raija Komppula
Name of the Thesis
Perceived barriers to sustainable tourist behavior among Finnish generation X females
Major
Tourism Marketing and Management
Level
Master’s thesis Date25.3.2020 Pages87+1
Abstract
The purpose of the thesis is to examine what are the perceived barriers to sustainable travel behavior among Finnish generation X females. In the tourism industry sustainable behavior has mostly been studied from an environmental perspective. This study also takes into account the socio-cultural and economic aspects of sustainability. Consumers often have sustainable values and intentions, but those are not always implemented in practice. Therefore, values, intentions and actual travel behavior are also examined in this study.
The research was carried out using qualitative methods. The material was collected through semi-structured theme interviews. The themes (values, intentions, actual behavior and perceived barriers) were chosen on the basis of a theoretical framework. A total of twelve interviews were conducted, half of them face to face and half by phone calls. The interviewees were selected by non-probability purposive sampling by researcher. The data was analyzed mainly through theory- bound and theme-based content analysis. Sustainable value analysis was based on Schwartz's (1994) value theory. The analysis of perceived barriers was guided by internal and external barriers by Dickinson et al. (2013).
The findings show that the internal barriers to sustainable tourist behavior are lack of resources such as time, money and knowledge, prioritization of unsustainable values, locus of control, lack of forethought, habits and attitudes, and reluctance to change lifestyle. Interviewees perceived the lack of sustainable options, models and enabling systems, such as recycling or public transport, as well as lack of actions by governments, industries and companies as external barriers.
Barriers that differed from previous studies were lack of forethought, habits and attitudes, and lack of sustainable options and models. In order to elaborate sustainable tourism and remove the barriers, it is important to develop sustainable tourism services. In addition to sustainability values, those services should represent also other values that are important to this large tourist segment that will continue to be important in the future. The sustainable option should be easily available, high quality, affordable, attractive and comfortable. Businesses, industries and governments could increase the promotion of sustainable tourism, including information, subsidies and taxes, which could also influence individuals’ forethought, attitudes and habits.
Key words
sustainable tourism, sustainable values, travel behavior, perceived barriers, generation X
Tiivistelmä
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO Tiedekunta
Yhteiskuntatieteiden ja kauppatieteiden tiedekunta
Yksikkö
Kauppatieteiden laitos
Tekijä
Janita Juvakka Ohjaaja Raija Komppula
Työn nimi
Koetut esteet vastuulliselle matkustuskäyttäytymiselle suomalaisen sukupolvi X:n naisten keskuudessa
Pääaine
Matkailun markkinointi ja johtaminen
Työn laji
Pro gradu -tutkielma Aika 25.3.2020
Sivuja
87+1
Tiivistelmä
Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on selvittää minkälaisia esteitä sukupolvi X:n naispuoliset edustajat kokevat heidän kestävälle matkustuskäyttäytymiselleen. Kestävää käyttäytymistä on tutkittu matkailualalla enimmäkseen ympäristönäkökulmasta. Tässä tutkimuksessa on otettu huomioon myös sosiokulttuuriset ja taloudelliset kestävyyden näkökulmat. Kuluttajilla on usein kestäviä arvoja ja aikeita, mutta ne eivät aina käytännössä toteudu. Siksi myös kohderyhmän arvoja, aikeita ja todellista matkustuskäyttäytymistä selvitetään tässä tutkimuksessa.
Tutkimus toteutettiin laadullisin menetelmin. Aineisto kerättiin puolistrukturoiduilla teemahaastatteluilla. Teemat (arvot, aikeet, todellinen käyttäytyminen ja koetut esteet) valittiin teoreettisen viitekehyksen pohjalta. Yhteensä 12 haastattelua toteutettiin, joista puolet kasvotusten ja puolet puhelimitse. Haastateltavat valittiin tutkijan harkinnan mukaan (non-probability purposive sampling). Aineistoa analysoitiin pääasiassa teoriasidonnaisella ja teemoihin perustuvalla sisällönanalyysillä. Vastuullisia arvoja analysoitaessa nojauduttiin Schwartzin arvoteoriaan.
Koettujen esteiden analysointia ohjasi muun muassa Dickinsonin ym. (2013) jaottelu sisäisiin ja ulkoisiin esteisiin.
Tutkimustuloksista löydettiin seuraavat sisäiset esteet kestävälle matkustuskäyttäytymiselle:
resurssien puute, kuten aika, raha ja tieto, muiden kuin kestävien arvojen priorisointi, oma hallintakäsitys, harkinnan puute, tavat ja asenteet sekä haluttomuus muuttaa elämäntapaa.
Kohderyhmä koki ulkoisiksi esteiksi kestävien vaihtoehtojen, mallien ja mahdollistavien järjestelmien, kuten kierrätyksen tai julkisen liikenteen, puutteen, sekä hallitusten, toimialojen ja yritysten toimien puutteen.
Aiemmista tutkimuksista eroavia esteitä olivat harkinnan puute, tavat ja asenteet, sekä kestävien vaihtoehtojen ja mallien puuttuminen. Kestävän matkailun edistämiseksi ja esteiden poistamiseksi olisi tärkeää kehittää matkailupalveluita, jotka vastaavat tämän suuren ja tulevaisuudessakin merkittävän kohderyhmän muitakin arvoja, kuin kestävyysarvoja. Kestävän vaihtoehdon tulisi olla helposti saatavissa, laadukas, edullinen ja houkutteleva. Yritykset, toimialat ja valtiot voisivat lisätä kestävän matkailun edistämistä, muun muassa tiedolla, tuilla ja veroilla, mikä voisi vaikuttaa myös yksilöiden harkintaan, asenteisiin ja tapoihin.
Avainsanat
kestävä matkailu, kestävät arvot, matkailukäyttäytyminen, koetut esteet, sukupolvi X
CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION ... 6
1.1. Background ... 6
1.2. Key concepts ... 7
1.3. Description of the research ... 9
1.4. Structure of the study ... 13
2. SUSTAINABLE TOURIST BEHAVIOR ... 14
2.1. What is sustainable tourist behavior? ... 14
2.2. Sustainable consumer behavior ... 15
2.3. Suggestions for sustainable tourist behavior ... 16
2.4. Factors influencing sustainable behavior ... 20
2.5. Sustainable values affecting sustainable behavior ... 25
2.6. Barriers to sustainable behavior ... 29
3. DATA AND METHODS ... 36
3.1. Scientific approach ... 36
3.2. Data collection methods ... 37
3.3. Data analysis methods ... 41
4. FINDINGS ... 43
4.1. Values ... 43
4.2. Intentions ... 47
4.3. Actual behavior ... 51
4.4. Barriers for sustainable travel behavior ... 54
4.4.1. Internal barriers ... 54
4.4.2. External barriers ... 61
4.4.3. Other excuses ... 65
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION ... 66
5.1. Main findings and implications ... 66
5.2. Theoretical conclusions ... 70
5.3. Managerial contributions ... 72
5.4. Evaluation of the study, research ethics and future research suggestions ... 74
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1. Key concepts of the study ... 8
Table 2. Sustainable development goals for 2030 (UNWTO 2017) ... 17
Table 3. Motivational Types of Values (Schwartz 1994) ... 27
Table 4. Findings of the barriers from previous studies ... 32
Table 5. Framework for internal and external barriers ... 33
Table 6. Participant information ... 39
Table 7. Details of the interviews ... 40
Table 8. Mentions of each value in the data ... 43
Table 9. Findings regarding sustainable intentions ... 47
Table 10. Findings regarding most common sustainable actions ... 51
Table 11. Findings regarding most common unsustainable actions ... 53
Table 12. Internal barriers mentioned by participants ... 55
Table 13. External barriers mentioned by participants ... 62
TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1. Positioning of the study ... 10
Figure 2. The model of responsible environmental behavior (Hines, Hungerford & Tomera 1987) ... 21
Figure 3. Model of pro-environmental behavior (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002) ... 22
Figure 4. Theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991) ... 23
Figure 5. Schwartz’s (1994) self-transcendence and self-enhancement continuum ... 28
Figure 6. Numbers and percentages of values mentioned in the data ... 44
Figure 7. Perceived barriers for sustainable travel behavior ... 66
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Tourism industry grew faster than any other industry in 2017. According to the UNWTO World Tourism Barometer and Statistical Annex 2018, the annual growth was 84 million international arrivals, which is 8% more than the previous year. The total international tourist arrivals in 2017 was 1,323 million. (World Tourism Organization 2018.) Tourism being a huge industry worldwide, it contributes 10 % of global GDP, 7 % of world exports and employs millions of people (UNWTO 2017). Along the growth of tourism, the unsustainable effects of tourism increase simultaneously.
Tourism has a range of negative environmental, social and economic outcomes (Gössling 2002;
UNWTO 2005). It is estimated that tourism is responsible of 5 % of world’s CO2 emissions, while the total greenhouse gases of tourism being something between 4,4-9 %. Globally, air travel, car travel and accommodation together are responsible of 93% of CO2 emissions of tourism field.
Tourism is contributing the negative climate change. The scenario of growing tourism includes three trends that are increasing the energy use and emissions: more frequent holidays, growing tourism demand, increased long-haul travel and. (UNWTO-UNEP-WMO 2008.)
Tourism can contribute the sustainable development on a global level (World Tourism Organization and United Nations Development Programme 2017). UNWTO is actively promoting the sustainable tourism development by raising the awareness, co-operating with stakeholders towards positive change and fostering the changes within policies, business practices and consumer behavior (World Tourism Organization 2018). A few priorities for fighting against climate change and other sustainable factors are to develop sustainable consumption and production, effective resource management and environmental protection (World Tourism Organization 2018), respect the local communities and their heritage and values, and ensure equal economic benefits to all stakeholders (UNWTO 2005). In addition to the actions of government agencies and businesses, the sustainability of the tourism industry depends on the actions of individual tourists (Buckley 2019). Nowadays consumers are aware of their contributions to the climate change for example,
even when they travel. Nonetheless, increasing awareness and attitudes do not show in the behaviors. (Antimova, Nawijn & Peeters 2012.) Contrarily, only few are ready to change their behavior and people with extensive consciousness are even less likely to change their behavior (Hares, Dickinson & Wilkes 2010; Cohen & Higham 2011; McKercher, Prideaux, Cheung & Law 2010). The gap between attitudes and behavior is not sufficiently explained (McKercher, Prideaux, Cheung & Law 2010).
This study focuses on the perceived barriers that prevent people acting in a sustainable way on their travels. The studied segment is Finnish generation X females. The phenomena that are studied are sustainable tourist and consumer behavior. Sustainable behavior is a much-studied phenomenon but mostly within the context of environmentally sustainable behavior. For example, plenty of models and approaches have been created and used with environmentally sustainable behavior (ESB), such as Rational-Economic Models of ESB, which stands for behavior that is determined by financial interests, Attitude Models of Environmental Behavior, that are the most common ones, using attitudes directing behaviors, and Behavioral Models of ESB, which is about direct antecedents and consequences of behavior (Kurz 2002). Not many studies have included the economic and socio-cultural aspects to the sustainable behavior. However, the results from those environmental studies can mostly be applied to economic and socio-cultural aspects. As the results say that environmental attitudes have a major impact on ecological behavior (Fraj & Martinez 2007), it can be applicable that other sustainable attitudes influence the general sustainable behavior.
1.2. Key concepts
In this subchapter, the important concepts that are closely related to this study are explained. Some of the concepts support the background of the study and some of them help to understand the theories. The concepts also reveal the context of the study. Concept are presented in the Table 1.
Table 1. Key concepts of the study
Sustainable tourism Sustainable tourism is protecting the destinations and its environmental resources for future development by policies, regulations and management. Sustainable tourism aims for long term balance and satisfaction between the local people, visitors and the whole tourism industry by reducing the cultural and environmental damage, boosting the economic growth of the region and keeping the visitors satisfied. (Lane 1994.)
Sustainable tourism is also described as “tourism which is economically viable although does not destroy the resources on which the future tourism will depend, notably the physical environment and the social fabric of the host community”
(Swarbrooke 1999, 13).
Sustainable tourist behavior
It is tourist’s behavior that reduces negative impacts of traveling in various ways, for example, by making sustainable vacation decisions and behaving in a sustainable manner in the destination (Juvan & Dolnicar 2016, 31).
Sustainable values Values have a central role in predicting sustainable behavior (Lindenberg 2001, Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002, Steg and Vlek 2009, Moon 2015). Especially biospheric and altruistic values are seen as sustainable values (Steg et. al. 2012), and according to Shepherd, et, al. (2009) sustainable values are equality, tolerance, respect for nature, freedom, solidarity and shared responsibility. In Schwartz value model (1994) universalism and benevolence create the self-transcendence value orientation, which predict sustainable intentions and behavior (Stern & Dietz 1994).
Intention Intention is an attempt to do something. Even after the attempt, the action can fail due many factors. (Ajzen 1985.)
Barriers Intended behaviors may face some barriers that affect to the successful execution (Ajzen 1985) and may prevent for example people’s sustainable behavior (Dickinson, Robbins, Filimonau, Hares & Mika 2013). According to Dickinson et. al.
(2013), barriers can be divided into internal and external barriers.
Generation X In this study, Generation X is understood as a generation that is born between years 1961 and 1981 (Appelbaum, Serena and Shapiro 2000).
1.3. Description of the research
Objectives, aims, context, research questions
This is a qualitative study, which does not aim the generalize anything but to gain deeper understanding of the phenomenon. The context of the study is tourism, more detailed sustainable tourism. Sustainable tourism aims to development, which means finding a balance between economic, social and environmental dimensions. Economic sustainability is keeping the society economically viable, by generating wealth in all levels. Social sustainability is respecting the equal rights of all humans. It requires decreasing poverty and exploitation, giving equal opportunities for everyone, supporting local communities and respecting different cultures. Environmental sustainability is managing especially non-renewable resources, protecting biological diversity and natural heritage and minimizing pollution of air, land and water. (UNWTO 2005.)
The study focuses on the sustainable tourist behavior, and which things the tourists think that prevent their sustainable behavior to happen, even if they have the sustainable values, attitudes and intentions. The purpose of the study is to increase understanding of the barriers to sustainable tourist behavior. Positioning of the study is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Positioning of the study
The aim of this study is to understand better why tourists do not behave sustainably and what are their perceived barriers preventing sustainable tourist behavior. The assumption is that there are differences between their sustainable intentions and actual behavior. The main research question is: “What are the perceived barriers that prevent Finnish generation X females to behave in a sustainable way on their travels?”
Besides that, it is valuable for the study to understand what the original intentions for sustainable travel behavior among the interviewees are, and what are their actual behaviors. If the intentions and actual behavior differ, the reason for that could be in the perceived barriers. These things lead us to the sub-questions of the study:
• What are the sustainable values and intentions among the traveling Finnish generation X females?
• What are their real actions? How do their sustainable values come true?
• If values and intentions do not come true, how do they explain the gap between their values and actions in tourism context?
Sustainable behavior
Sustainable tourist behavior
intentions
Actual tourist behavior
Internal and external barriers
The limitation to female participants is reasoned, as women usually decide 80 % of the household consumption, and they are engaged with sustainable consumption behavior better than men (Kelan 2008; Khan & Trivedi 2015), and women express more pro-environmental attitudes than men (Panzone, Hilton, Sale & Cohen 2016).
Approach and limitations
This study is based on Finnish context and the Finnish women are studied through a qualitative approach. It would be interesting to find out whether the citizens of the country, that is considered to be sustainably developed, really behave sustainably. The government of Finland aims for being ecologically, economically and socially sustainable country by 2030, and is planning a model for emissions-free Finland. Finland wants to be a trailblazer, showing the example for the rest of the world how to mitigate climate change and protect the biodiversity. (Government Communications Department 2019.) Finland has done a strategy for sustainable development, which is called “The Finland we want by 2050 ─ Society’s Commitment to Sustainable Development”. It is implementing the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. There are eight shared objectives, and any actors like companies, cities and institutions can implement these goals by their own concrete operations. The objectives are 1. equal prospects for wellbeing, 2. participatory society for all, 3. work in a sustainable way, 4. sustainable society and local communities, 5.
carbon-neutral society, 6. resource-wise economy, 7. lifestyles respectful of the carrying capacity of nature and 8. decision-making respectful of nature. (Development 2016.) Overall, the Nordic countries are assumed and even ranked to be sustainable destinations. The Global Destination Sustainability Index ranks the cities based on their environmental and social sustainability. The top 5 cities are all in Nordic countries, Helsinki being in the joint-fifth place with Uppsala (Global Destination Sustainability 2019). Finnish DMO, Visit Finland, is also marketing the destination and its habitants sustainable, living in a harmony with nature (VisitFinland.com 2019).
As a limitation to the study, the generation X (Gen X) was chosen to be studied. Current studies on sustainable consumption behavior are primarily focused on younger generations (Kanchanapibul,
Lacka, Wang & Cha 2014; Hume 2010; Fien, Neil & Bentley 2008; Tan & Lau 2009; Stanes, Klocker & Gibson 2015; Hill & Lee 2012; Budac 2014). This research focus can be explained by Gen X’s highest consumption rate, and they are the ones to pass on the available natural resources for future generations (Bulut, Kökalan Çımrin & Doğan 2017). Stanes et. al. (2015) discovered that generation Y and generation X consumers are not likely to buy and use environmentally friendly goods, although older generations are frugal consumers and they are for example likely to reduce energy use and to buy energy efficient devices. Appelbaum, Serena and Shapiro (2000) define the Gen Xers’ years of birth between 1961 and 1981. Gen X is the generation that is used to spend their childhood at home alone and experienced the divorce of parents (Sandeen 2008). They value a quality of life and finances and stability (Severo, De Guimarães, Brito & Dellarmelin 2017). As consumers, the Gen Xers consider price, quality, other people’s opinions and environmental issues (Appelbaum, Serena & Shapiro 2000). In future, the Gen X will be the next big senior market after the baby boomers and an important travel segment that have the time and money to spend in their travels. Gen X has already been the most spending leisure travelers (Benckendorff, Moscardo &
Pendergast 2010). That is why it is useful to understand their values and behavior.
Measuring sustainable tourist behavior is difficult, because the actual behavior often differs from the intentions, values and beliefs. Only a third of studies measure actual or reported sustainable behavior, and the self-reports by individuals are unreliable. (Juvan & Dolnicar 2016.) In this study, the focus is on the participants values, intentions, their real actions and possible barriers between them. Their actual behavior is studied by interviewing them face-to-face so that their the threshold of lying would be high, and also on the phone to reach more people in Finland.
This study is conducted as qualitative study to achieve deeper understanding of the studied phenomena and target segment. The chosen data collection method is semi-structured theme interviews, because this protocol will keep the researcher focused on gathering all the information that is needed to answer the research questions. Secondly, it is still a flexible method. Qualitative study is common when studying humans and their experiences. As a result of the study, it is supposed to create a framework where the barriers to sustainable tourist behavior are presented.
The study could raise awareness of the gap between the sustainable values and behavior in tourism
and explain some reasons for that. Some stakeholders in tourism sector could be interested in these findings and even benefit of those or improve the study and repeat it.
1.4. Structure of the study
First, the introduction chapter introduces the reader to the background, phenomenon, key concepts, context, aims and objectives of the study. The scientific approach and delimits of topics are also covered in the introduction chapter. The second chapter is the core chapter of the theoretical background. It is about sustainable behavior in the context of tourism and travel related choices.
This chapter reviews what is sustainable tourist and consumer behavior and what kinds of improvements could be done. This chapter also goes through the things that affect the actual behavior, such as values and attitude-behavior gap. In addition, theories and previous studies are reviewed and the framework for the analysis for this study is created. Data and methods chapter introduces what kind of approaches are used in this study and how the data collection and analysis are done in more detail. In findings chapter, the research questions are finally answered, and findings are presented with interpretations. Conclusions include the main findings with implications and conclusions. Theoretical conclusions and managerial contributions are also discussed. The last chapter covers the evaluation of the study, research ethics and future research suggestions.
2. SUSTAINABLE TOURIST BEHAVIOR
2.1. What is sustainable tourist behavior?
Sustainable behavior is intentional actions that focus on providing wellbeing for present and future generations and minimalizing the economic, social and ecological damages. Sustainable behavior is based on individuals' values, norms, beliefs and senses of responsibility. (IGI Global 2019.) Ecologically sustainable behavior focuses on an ecologically successful future without harming the environment (ASDS 2002). Socially sustainable and responsible behavior focuses on social implications and aims to solve the social problems, like child labor, peoples’ health, safety and education (Tromp, Hekkert, & Verbeek 2011). Economic dimension of sustainable behavior stands mostly for sustainable consuming, the consumption which is guided by the sense of caring oneself, community and nature (Sheth, Sethia & Srinivas 2010).
Tourist behavior has plenty of direct and indirect impacts to the environment, cultures and economies (Juvan & Dolnicar 2017). Tourist behavior can have direct negative impacts to environment, for instance damage to flora and fauna, land clearing, pollutions, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and depletion of natural resource, such as water and fossil fuels. Tourists can indirectly, for instance, contribute extinction of species through buying animal products, trampling and disturbing their natural environments. (Gössling 2002; Abdullah, Samdin, Teng & Heng 2019.) Tourists’ misbehavior can cause negative socio-cultural impacts to the destination. (Budeanu 2007). Examples are racism, increasing crime and prostitution and disrespect toward local habits or cultures. (Mbaiwa 2005) Anyhow, tourists can reduce negative impacts of traveling in various ways, for example, “by making environmentally sustainable vacation decisions and behaving in an environmentally sustainable manner while at the destination” (Juvan & Dolnicar 2016, 31). On the other hand, tourists can support local economies, for example, by spending their money locally and it may increase employment opportunities and income levels, which change the quality of life for local people. Sustainable tourist behavior is considering all these aspects of sustainability (ecological, sociocultural and economic) in every decision.
2.2. Sustainable consumer behavior
Sustainable tourist behavior is closely related to consumer behavior and travel choices are part of the people’s overall consumption (Kostadinova 2016). Unsustainable consumption is a challenge for sustainable development (Princen, Maniates & Conca 2002). In recent decades, consumption of goods and services has risen to a whole new level globally, which is leading to reduction of natural resources, environmental decline and loss of biodiversity. Humans already consume 30 percent more resources every year than the planet is able to renew. This is called overconsumption and urgent changes in consumer behavior are needed. (Kostadinova 2016.) Consumer behavior and sustainable consumption has a major impact on the wellbeing of the society and environment, directly and indirectly (Jackson 2005).
Sustainable consumer behavior is consumption behavior where the sustainability issues and individual’s needs meet. It can be reducing consumption or consideration of the full consumption cycle, for example how to maintain or dispose products. (Prothero et. al. 2011.) People who have fulfilled the individual needs are more likely to behave environmentally, as they have enough time and wealth, for instance, to invest in the environmental issues (Borden & Francis 1978). In other words, sustainable consumption is using services and products that meet with basic needs and quality of life whilst minimizing the use of natural resources and toxic materials. The aim is also to minimize all emissions during the lifespan of the products and services, for example by waste minimalization, renewable energy use and by improving resource efficiency. (Norwegian Ministry of the Environment 1994; UNEP 2001.) Other examples of sustainable consumer behavior are:
recycling waste, using energy efficient devices, buying sustainable products, choosing green electricity, composting waste, reusing and recycling, saving water and energy, changing transport mode, reducing material consumption and changing travel behavior (Jackson 2005). Sustainable consumption overlaps with other concepts, such as ethical, green, or responsible consumption.
Sustainable consumption choices can be causes of individual’s ethical views, values, moral development or personality (D.A. Tasci 2017). Every purchase has ethical, resource, community and waste implications, that is why every purchase decision can be more or less sustainable.
Therefore, adapting to sustainable lifestyle is very complex decision-making process. (Young,
Hwang, McDonald & Oates 2009) Many parts of the lifestyle are connected to consuming and every decision can be considered from sustainable point of view. Environmental Program of UN suggest that sustainable consumer behaviors can be categorized according to the main life functions such as health, nutrition, education, clothing, housing, mobility and leisure (UNEP 2002).
Sustainable consumer behavior comes in one or more stages of the consumption process, which includes identification of want or need, information search, assessment of options, acquisition, use and post use. First of all, people have intrinsic, social and emotional needs, like food, security, acceptance and love. Secondly, there are more specific wants that are related the personal character and lifestyle. In addition to habitual and impulsive consuming, some sustainable consumer seeks for the information about sustainability of companies and products from various sources like family, friends, websites and guides. A sustainable consumer usually wants to evaluate between alternatives that can be competing products and brands but also between alternatives to reduce consumption or to find different ways to fulfill needs and wants, such as borrowing. Methods of purchase have also environmental, social and economic influences that consumer may consider.
Those purchasing options can be choosing an online copy instead of physical, supporting small companies over big retailers and reducing shopping trips by car, for instance. Lastly, consumers can consider how is it possible to use, reuse or recycle products in a sustainable way. (Peattie 2010.)
2.3. Suggestions for sustainable tourist behavior
United Nations and World tourism organization (2017) have created the sustainable development goals (SDGs) for 2030 and tourism industry can contribute all of the 17 SDGs (Table 2.). Tourism is explicitly mentioned in three of the SDGs: decent work and economy growth (SDG 8), responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), and life below water (SDG 14) (UNWTO 2017). Though, sustainable development aims to develop technologies, policies, production systems and social initiatives, consumers’ willingness and ability to change their behavior is one of the main issues that sustainable development strongly depends on (Peattie 2010). Sustainable development strategies aim also for behavioral changes of citizens (Dobson 2007).
Table 2. Sustainable development goals for 2030 (UNWTO 2017)
Sustainable development
goals Explanations
1.No poverty End poverty in all forms everywhere
2.Zero hunger End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
3.Good health and well-being Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
4.Quality education Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
5.Gender equality Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
6.Clean water and sanitation Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all 7.Affordable and clean energy Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
8.Decent work and economy growth Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
9.Industry, innovation and infrastructure Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
10.Reduced inequalities Reduce inequality within and among countries
11.Sustainable cities and communities Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 12.Responsible consumption and
production Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns 13.Climate action Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
14.Life below water Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
15.Life on land Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
16.Peace, justice and strong institutions Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels 17.Partnership for the goals Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for
sustainable development
To implement the responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), tourists can choose products and services providers that are committed to these sustainable development goals, and that are for example supporting the local and seasonal purchasing, education of sustainable consumption and production, landscape protection, hiring local staff, recycling of waste and efficiently using resources such as energy and water (UNWTO 2017).
For sustainable use of seas and oceans (SDG 14), tourists can take part in beach clean-ups, purchase only certified seafood, reduce emissions and waste, and support the education and protection of the oceans. Tourists can also encourage decent work and economy growth (SDG 8) directly and indirectly by supporting local suppliers and buying local products, for example. These small actions can create prosperity and equality in destination, such as salaries for women, young and disable people. (UNWTO 2017.)
In Finland and internationally, there are associations and movements that promote sustainable and responsible traveling. According to the Finnish responsible tourism association, “Reilun matkailun yhdistys” (2019), tourists should choose the responsible tour operator and support the local economies, for example by buying local supplies and services. According to Steg (2016), it would be recommendable to favor companies that use renewable energy sources, like solar power, energy efficient and water saving devices, and that use innovative solutions and less emitting transportation. It is an important to evaluate these things in every choice, like choosing the accommodation, restaurant, activities and other purchases (Budeanu 2007). Reilun matkailun yhdistys (2019) also suggest that it would be responsible to do the payments directly to avoid the commissions, stay in locally owned hotels instead of big multinational hotel chains, eat at local restaurants and buy responsible local souvenirs (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019). In a bigger scale this can help keeping the destinations and companies economically viable and competitive even in a long term. In addition to economic prosperity, supporting the local economy will also strengthen the quality and amount of local employment (UNWTO 2005). If possible, it would be better to support companies that pay enough salary for the employees, offer good working conditions to all without discrimination, does not use the child labor and treat all the customers equally. Other sustainable and responsible actions how tourist could make a difference are, for example, giving a good amount of tip for local workers and preferring Fairtrade products. (UNWTO 2005.) And lastly, the responsible tourists give the feedback that will reward the ones who have earned it but also gives the perspective to development ideas, and give the online reviews so other travelers can have the information they are looking for (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019).
Reilun matkailun yhdistys (2019) also recommends reading and learning about the host communities beforehand, to avoid the misunderstandings and to learn some important words in local language, for example. Having the knowledge will help to respect the locals, meet the new cultures and people without prejudices, and follow the instructions given, like the dressing codes in religious places (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019). Tourists should always respect local cultures, traditions and heritage (UNWTO 2005).
One consequence of growing tourism is that destinations are becoming overcrowded, causing water and air pollution, garbage, dirty sea water and beaches, congestion, visual pollution, scarcity of resources and waste overcapacity (European Commission 2004). To avoid environmental consequences of overtourism, following actions are required: recycling, efficient use of resources, reducing waste production, water use and air pollution (Komppula, Honkanen, Rossi &
Kolesnikova 2018). Moreover, local people do not like when places get crowded because of tourism (Piuchan, Wa Chan & Kaale 2018). Tourism may even push the residents away from their living areas (Snepenger, Reiman, Johnson & Snepenger 1998). These things can have negative impacts on locals’ life and wellbeing (Budeanu 2007). Reilun matkailun yhdistys (2019) advices to choose the off season to travel to the destination if it is possible. This puts less strain on the environment than the larger crowds in high season. The local’s life does not suffer so radically as during peak season and the quality of services is usually better and prices are lower during the off season. (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019.) Low seasons can be tricky for destinations, because it may be hard to get enough revenue, places may be shut down and employees may be left without a job (Harcombe 1999).
The best transportation choice for environment would be by rails, because it causes much less GHGs than air and car transportation (European Commission 2004). Still, many studies have found out that people are unwilling to reduce flights (Dickinson, Robbins, Filimonau, Hares & Mika 2013; Kantenbacher, Hanna, Miller, Scarles & Yang 2019) In Buckley’s study (2011), 30 % of the respondents were ready to change their behavior to reduce air travel impacts. They were ready to travel less and to fewer destinations. Reducing air travel impacts includes also traveling less frequently and less far and spending more time in one destination rather than going to many places (Buckley 2011). Even a better choice would be choosing local transportation or even non- motorized vehicles such as bikes (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019).
One more good practice for responsible traveler is to protect the animals and environment. Reilun matkailun yhdistys (2019) recommends avoiding traveling to extremely endangered destinations.
According to this association, tourists should always respect the nature and follow the rules and instructions given, not collect anything from nature, not buy any products made of endangered
plants or animals, choose responsible activity service enterprises that do not destroy or burden the environment and avoid using motor vehicles in natural environments. Tourists should never participate in activities that cause pain and suffering to animals such as bullfights, circuses, or safaris where the natural habits of the animals are disturbed. (Reilun matkailun yhdistys 2019.)
2.4. Factors influencing sustainable behavior
Various factors together influence to our daily decisions, actions and for example to pro- environmental behavior which means purposefully choosing options that have a minor influence on the environment (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002). Most factors that influence consumers’ decision making and sustainable behavior can be separated to individual related and situational related factors. Individual factors are the internal factors such as attitudes, values and demographic characteristics. Situational factors are external forces that can affect sustainable behavior in a positive or negative way. (Kostadinova 2016; Wang, Zhang, Yu & Hu 2018.)
Internal factors come from individual itself. According to Moon (2015) the key elements thriving towards sustainable behavior and intentions are personal beliefs, values and norms. Steg and Vlek (2009) and Aertsens et. al. (2009) confirm that especially, social and personal norms increase the possibility for consumers’ sustainable intentions and behavior. Steg and Vlek (2009) add that also strong values, beliefs, concerns and moral obligations can drive people towards environmental behavior. Actually, environmental concern is found to be a substantial factor predicting environmentally aware behaviors (Kostadinova 2016).
Hines, Hungerford and Tomera (1987) have presented the model responsible environmental behavior (REB) (Figure 2). REB is human’s responsible interaction with an environment (Wang, Zhang, Yu & Hu 2018). Hines et. al. (1987) did analysis of the variables which have the greatest influence in people’s responsible environmental behavior. According to this model, intentions make the behavior more likely, although before the individual can have the intentions, they must
be aware of environmental problems. Knowledge and skills how to act are requirements for the actions. Intentions depend also on personality factors: attitudes, locus of control and personal responsibility. (Hines, Hungerford, & Tomera 1987.) “Locus of control represents an individual’s perception of whether or not he or she has the ability to bring about change through his or her own behavior”. People with internal locus of control are likely to behave environmentally, because they believe their behaviors can bring out the change. People with an external locus of control believe that their actions are not significant, and that change can be made by someone more influential.
(Hines, Hungerford & Tomera 1987, 4.)
Figure 2. The model of responsible environmental behavior (Hines, Hungerford & Tomera 1987)
In addition to factors mentioned in the model of REB, Tanner and Wölfing Kast (2003) found that also other personal factors such as perceived barriers like money and time, and confidence in brands can affect to consumers’ responsible environmental behavior (REB). They also found out that some of these factors in the model can predict the REB more than others, like the action-related knowledge does (Tanner & Wölfing Kast 2003).
Responsible environmental
behavior Intention to act
Personality factors Attitudes
Locus of control Personal
responsibility Action skills Knowledge of
action strategies Knowledge of
issues
Situational factors
Attitude seems to be a relevant concept in many models and theories relating to behavior. For instance, attitudes are in a central role in pro-environmental behavior formulation (Figure 3) by Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002). In this model, knowledge leads to awareness and concern (attitudes), and those lead to pro-environmental behavior. Attitude is a positive or negative evaluation of the individual's performance of a specific act (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002).
Figure 3. Model of pro-environmental behavior (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002)
Environmental attitudes and values are important factors determining the pro-environmental behavior (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002). Example of environmental attitude could be concern about the climate change. Positive attitude, especially concern towards sustainability, is a good predictor of responsible tourist behavior intentions (Paul, Modi & Patel 2016; Abdullah, Samdin, Teng &
Heng 2019; Chen & Tung 2014). Tourists usually have positive attitudes for environment, and do not want to behave in the negative ways that may influence the environment (Juvan & Dolnicar 2014).
Also, the theory of planned behavior (TPB) proposes that attitude is one of the three components determining the intention. The other two components are subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. (Ajzen 1991.) TBH is one of the widely used theories explaining humans’ harmful behavior for the environment, and behavior in general. Ajzen (1985) improved the TBH from the theory of reasoned action. Theory of planned behavior means that people have an intention to try (attitude toward trying) to do something, but many factors can prevent executing that action, like personal deficiencies and external barriers. Behavioral intentions can predict attempted behaviors better than actual behavior. Even after the attempt, the action goal can fail due the factors outside the individual’s control. (Ajzen 1985.) For example, a person has an action goal to reach their departing train next morning. They attempt to wake up early, but their tiredness or sickness can be
Environmental
knowledge Environmental
attitude Pro-environmental
behavior
a personal deficiency or the not-working alarm clock or the public transport strike can be the external barrier for the actual behavior. Successful execution depends on the plan in which the alternatives are considered if the behaviors face some barriers (Ajzen 1985). Intention is the central factor of the theory of planned behavior and the factors that affect to it are attitudes, norms and perceived control over the behavior which can also directly affect to the actual behavior (Figure 4). Subjective (or social) norm is a person’s impression of how others think they should behave.
The perceived behavioral control is person’s belief about how possible it is to accomplish a certain behavior. (Ajzen 1991.)
Figure 4. Theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991)
Theory of planned behavior is widely used in tourism research. In these studies, they have examined different influential factors on travel decision making and on intentions to visit some destinations (Quintal, Lee, & Soutar 2010) or green hotels (Chen & Tung 2014), and processes of travelers’ decision formation (Han, Meng, & Kim 2016), for example. There are also extensions used with TPB to include more things in the analysis such as egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric concerns in De Groot and Steg’s (2007) study, environmental concern and perceived moral obligation in Chen and Tung’s (2014) study, or personal norm and past behavior in Han, Meng and Kim’s (2016) study. Theory of planned behavior is also used supporting or merging with other theories in the same study, like norm activation theory (Schwartz 1977) and value-belief- norm theory (Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano & Kalof 1999).
Socio-demographic and identity issues are part of the internal factors of human behavior. Some demographic factors have been found to influence the attitudes and pro-environmental behavior.
Those factors are, for example, gender and length of the education. Women are more concerned and informed about the environmental issues and are more willing to act than men do. The longer education may be related to the better knowledge about the environmental issues, but it does not always lead to pro-environmental behavior. (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002.) Diamantopoulos, Schlegelmilch, Sinkovics and Bohlen (2003) confirm that socio-demographics factors influence the sustainable behavior, and those factors are education, occupational level, employment status, income, and living conditions such as place of residence and household size. These factors can explain for instance purchasing power and time constraints (Tanner & Wölfing Kast 2003). Juvan and Dolnicar (2017) studied the psychological and socio-demographic drivers that predict the pro- environmental tourist behavior. Psychological drivers were most often feeling of guilt, social norms, self-identity, and in some case understanding about the ecological costs of tourism. The most common socio-demographic driver was organized environmentalism, and in some cases education, age, country of origin or residential area. (Juvan & Dolnicar 2017.) Hibber, Dickinson, Gössling and Curtin (2013) find out in their study that identities can have a significant role in travel decisions, for example when choosing a travel transportation mode. Personal identity can impact travel behavior and traveling can influence the identity. Traveling can be seen strengthening the self-image. Sometimes identity can be more important factor than costs, environmental issues or even own choices (e.g. traveling because of another person wants to). People may want to present their desired identity through some travel decisions. (Hibbert, Dickinson, Gössling, & Curtin 2013.) Also, if people purchase environmentally friendly products and services, it can define what kind of persons they are and enhance their social status (Noppers, Keizer, Bolderdijk & Steg 2014).
Furthermore, behavior and actions are often based on the different kinds of motivations, e.g. people often purchase goods and services because of the symbolic and affective motives (Steg & Vlek 2009). Motivation is a psychological process referring to the behavior, but motive is a concrete reason for the action (Grupo MContigo 2019). People with intrinsic motivation engage with pro- environmental behavior, because they get the pleasure from doing the right thing for environment
(Pelletier, Tuson, Green-Demers, Noels & Beaton 1998). Intrinsic motivation is the motivation to do something without being paid or forced to do that. It is a self-determined choice with the feeling of obligation. People get the pleasant feeling when they fulfill the obligations of their principles, norms, and values. Both obligation-based and enjoyment-based motivation are intrinsic motivations. (Lindenberg 2001.)
There are also external factors influencing the behavior. Some behaviors are dependent on the infrastructure, such as recycling (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002). External factors such as available alternatives can directly or indirectly limit sustainable behaviors (Steg & Vlek 2009). For instance, if there is no public transportation in the city, people may need to use their own cars which is not a sustainable option. Situational factors can be divided in environmental, site, marketing and interacting factors (Wang, Zhang, Yu & Hu 2018). Environmental factors can be for example store types and their selections of supplies (Tanner & Wölfing Kast 2003).
2.5. Sustainable values affecting sustainable behavior
According to many previously mentioned studies, values have a central role in predicting sustainable behavior (Lindenberg 2001, Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002, Steg and Vlek 2009, Moon 2015). Values are individuals’ relatively durable beliefs and statements of the ideal, that can determine behaviors (Rokeach 1973). Rokeach (1973, 5) explains values as, “an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence”. According to Kluckhohn (1951), values are a declaration of the desirable, not what the one may genuinely desire. It is about how someone could behave in a situation, instead of how someone really wants to behave (Kluckhohn 1951). Schwartz (1994) describes values as desired goals that guide individuals and societies in life. Values help evaluating, justifying and motivating actions and gaining benefits. Values are based on the common values of the group or individual experiences. (Schwartz 1994.) “Values (1) are concepts or beliefs, (2) pertain to desirable end states or behaviors, (3) transcend specific situations, (4) guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and (5) are ordered by relative
importance” (Schwartz 1992, 4; Schwartz & Bilsky 1987; 1990). Values are motivating factors that affect to preferences and behaviors (Feather 1995). Values are often mixed to attitudes, although the difference is that values are more abstract and lasting, and attitudes are more concrete (Hitlin
& Piliavin 2004). Attitudes can be influenced by values or can express the values (Kristiansen &
Zanna 1991). Values can explain beliefs and behaviors and predict attitudes and behavioral intentions (Stern & Dietz 1994).
Environmental attitudes and behavior are associated to people’s values (Karp 1996), because values form the attitudes and guide the actions (Poortinga, Steg & Vlek 2004). Many researchers suggest that the relevant values for estimating sustainable or unsustainable behavior are altruistic, biospheric, hedonic and egoistic, values. Hedonic values are mostly “focused on improving one’s feelings and reducing effort”, egoistic values reflect to the “costs and benefits that affect individual resources (such as money and power)”, altruistic values focus on other people’s wellbeing and biospheric values focus on the concern of environment and nature (Steg, Perlaviciute, van der Werff & Lurvink 2012, 166-167). Especially, biospheric values indicate toward sustainable tourism behavior (Passafaro et al. 2015).
Hedonic and egoistic values are self-enhancement values which are less likely to correlate with pro-environmental and sustainable behavior. Pro-environmental behavior comes from unselfish values (Poortinga, Steg & Vlek 2004). Altruistic and biospheric values are self-transcendence values, the “unselfish values”, that make people concentrate on the collective consequences of the alternatives. These values are positively related to pro-environmental attitudes, intentions and behavior, and biospheric values even more than altruistic. (De Groot & Steg 2007; Dietz, Stern &
Guagnano 1998) Which value people ever prioritize in the situation, depends on the perceptions, preferences, and actions (Steg 2016).
Schwartz’s motivational types of values
Schwartz value model is seen as a multi-culturally valid model and has been widely used in different value studies. Schwartz (1994, 21) created the 10 motivational values (Table 3.) based on
the three universal requirements: “needs of individuals as biological organisms, requisites of coordinated social interaction, and requirements for the smooth functioning and survival of groups”. For example, the motivational type value "self-direction" comes from the desires of independence and autonomy. In the Table 3., the value and definition represent the central goal, and the examples represent the more specific values. (Schwartz 1994.)
Table 3. Motivational Types of Values (Schwartz 1994)
Value Definition Example
Power Social status and prestige, control or dominance over
people and resources Social power, authority, wealth
Achievement Personal success through demonstrating competence according to social standards
Successful, capable, ambitious Hedonism Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself Pleasure, enjoying life
Stimulation Excitement, novelty, and challenge in life Daring, varied life, exciting life Self-direction Independent thought and action-choosing, creating,
exploring Creativity, curious, freedom
Universalism Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection
for the welfare of all people and for nature Broad-minded, social justice, equality, protecting the environment Benevolence Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people
with whom one is in frequent personal contact
Helpful, honest, forgiving Tradition Respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs
and ideas that traditional culture or religion provide Humble, devout, accepting my portion in life
Conformity Rest of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms
Politeness, obedient, honoring parents and elders
Security Safety, harmony, and stability of society, of
relationships, and of self National security. social order, clean
These values are universal and each of them is independent, and all values have social, practical and psychological effects. Values can conflict or be in harmony with other values. These relations can be seen in Figure 5, where conflicting kinds of values are in opposite side of the circle and values in harmony are next to each other around the circle. Conformity and tradition values are in a same sector because of they share the same motivational goal which is “subordination of self in favor of socially imposed expectations” (Schwartz 1994, 24). For example, some selfish values can conflict with unselfish values, like aiming for personal success (achievement) versus aiming for common good and helping others (benevolence). Each value shares the same motivation with the nearest values and there is the continuum between them in the circle, for instance power and achievement highlight social superiority and respect, achievement and hedonism focus on
egocentric satisfaction and so on. (Schwartz 1994.) Schwartz (1992) divided values into two dimensions ‘openness to change’ versus ‘conservation’, and ‘self-transcendence’ versus ‘self- enhancement’. Many researchers studying the relationships between values and environmental behavior use this Schwartz’s self-transcendence and self-enhancement continuum (Sirakaya-Turk, Baloglu & Mercado 2013).
Figure 5. Schwartz’s (1994) self-transcendence and self-enhancement continuum
From these 10 values, especially universalism can be seen as sustainable value and having a positive connection to pro-environmental attitudes and behavior (Schultz 2001; Schultz & Zelezny 1999). Universalism together with benevolence create the self-transcendence value orientation and achievement and power are parts of the self-enhancement value orientation. Also, tradition, conformity and security values aim for common good. (Schwartz 1994.) Self-transcendence values and previously mentioned altruistic values are positively related to sustainable attitudes and behavior, while self-enhancement and egoistic value orientations are negatively related to sustainable attitudes and behavior (Stern & Dietz 1994). In addition, in Hedlund’s (2011) tourism
related study, especially social justice, equality and peace on earth values predict environmental concern in vacation choices.
2.6. Barriers to sustainable behavior
There are different barriers that may prevent people’s sustainable behavior. Various studies have found different barriers and created some categories for them. According to Dickinson et. al.
(2013), barriers can be divided into internal and external barriers. Internal barriers are categorized into seven groups: 1. lack of knowledge/uncertainty/skepticism, 2. lack of environmental values, 3. self-efficacy/locus of control, 4. reliance on technology to solve problems, 5. denial or responsibility, 6. reluctance to change lifestyle, and 7. protecting the environment in other ways.
External barriers can be social dilemmas, systems of provision, social norms and lack of political and industry action. (Dickinson, Robbins, Filimonau, Hares & Mika 2013.) The model of responsible environmental behavior includes the same personal factors that can prevent sustainable behavior, such as focus of control, attitudes and responsibility. In addition to internal and external factors, there are also situational factors in that model. (Hines, Hungerford & Tomera 1987).
External barriers are more significantly affecting behavioral change than internal barriers. The strongest barriers are related to consumption expectations, social norms and “instrumental factors related to the structure of travel options”. Sustainably aware people are more committed to individual actions, than less aware people, and external barriers, such as lack of political and industry action are more significant barriers for them. (Dickinson, Robbins, Filimonau, Hares &
Mika 2013, 516) Also, based on the Heider’s (1958) attribution theory, people explain their behavior and events impacting them with 1. internal attributions (being the cause themselves) and 2. external attributions (not relating to the cause to themselves). The attribution theory can also explain some attitude-behavior gaps and barriers to sustainable tourism behavior.
Blake (1999) identifies three different barriers between environmental concern and environmental action: practicality, responsibility, and individuality. Individual barriers stand for personal attitudes or cognitive structure. People may prioritize their conflicting attitudes, like laziness or lack of interest with the environmental attitudes and the behavior may stay unsustainable. Responsibility barriers are about the perceptions of responsibility. People may not feel they have the responsibility on their own actions, or do not believe their actions could make a difference. They may think it is other’s responsibility. (Blake 1999.) This can be compared to self-efficacy/locus of control barrier (Dickinson et. al. 2013). Lastly, the practicality barriers are practical, social or institutional restrictions that may prevent people’s pro-environmental actions, despite their attitudes or intentions. These barriers can be lack of information, money, time, storage, facilities or encouragement. (Blake 1999.) Practicality barriers are partly comparable to external barriers (Dickinson et. al. 2013).
Attitude-behavior gap is one of reasons why people do not behave in a sustainable way at all times.
The attitude-behavior gap or value-action gap is a mismatch between consumers’ intentions and their real actions (Peattie 2001; Sheeran 2002). In the context of sustainable tourist behavior, having a positive attitude toward sustainable travel choices does not anticipate that the attitude and choices would meet (Juvan & Dolnicar 2014). People, in general, have positive attitudes towards sustainable and responsible consumption. They are willing to support the companies that have good values and reputation, but they are not actually changing their behavior. (Boulstridge & Carrigan 2000.) The attitude-behavior gap can be tricky for example for marketers, because consumers claim to prefer green products but are not actually buying those. Researchers have mentioned some reasons for this gap: some people do not believe in environmental claims and green products are too expensive or confusing. (Roberts 1996.) Value for money and brand familiarity are also preferred over responsible options (Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000). In other terms, attitude- behavior gap is known as intention–behavior gap, value-action gap or word–deed gap. For instance, the environmental value-action gap can be seen as a concern for the environment although not implementing the environmental actions (Blake 1999).
Five similar kinds of research that study barriers preventing sustainable behavior in some level are collected to this framework of previous research and findings (Table 4.). All these studies are conducted with qualitative or mixed methods. All the selected studies are related to sustainable tourism, but due the lack of socio-cultural and economic aspects in sustainable tourism studies, these mostly focus on environmental aspects. So, the current study discovers all the sustainability aspects and looks for the similar and deviant results compared to previous ones. Becken (2007) studied international tourists leaving New Zealand and their knowledge about air travel impacts to climate change, personal responsibility and reactions. Lorenzoni et. al. (2007) studied UK citizens’
perceived barriers to engage with climate change. Buckley (2011) studied how individual travelers rationalize their decisions in the context of long-haul air travel among two groups: customers of commercial ecolodges, and university students taking ecotourism courses. Juvan and Dolnicar (2014)interviewed environment activists to find out their attitude-behavior gap in the context of environmentally sustainable tourism. Wearing et. al. (2002) studied the relationship between environmental concern and environmentally responsible purchasing behavior among backpackers in Australia. When going through the existing researches about the attitude-behavior gaps and barriers in the context of sustainable consumption or traveling, the same reasons started to repeat, like lack of knowledge how to act in a more sustainable manner, displacing responsibility to others, being sceptic about the power of one’s actions, behaving more sustainable back home, and being selfish in some level.
