A cluster analysis of climate change mitigation behaviours among SMTEs

Abstract

Research on tourism and climate change has emphasised the contribution that the sector should make to the effort to reduce and stabilise greenhouse gas emissions. However the tourism sector response on the supply side has been disappointing and highly variable between and within its sub-sectors. This paper addresses the knowledge gap on the willingness and capacity for tourism businesses to mitigate. Innovation is used as the conceptual framework. At the firm level, mitigation requires innovation yet businesses innovate at different rates and hence their ability to contribute towards emissions reductions varies. A Cluster Analysis is presented of over 400 accommodation providers from Southwest England, a major UK destination region. Three distinctive clusters of SMTEs are identified based on how they innovated to mitigate climate change. The smallest (12%) had introduced a range of process and managerial innovations and was most forward-thinking and active. A second cluster (23%) had introduced several process innovations but its approach to managerial innovations was both partial and confused. The largest cluster (65%) had mainly enacted straightforward process innovations but failed to introduce managerial innovations to measure, monitor and act on their environmental performance. Taken together, these data suggest that the contribution from accommodation providers to emissions reductions targets has been at best modest. Moving forward, greater analytical precision is needed if (this part of) the tourism sector is to be widely mobilised towards tackling climate change. Specifically, policy interventions have to be more effectively targeted at business needs and based on a more differentiated view of planned and enacted behaviour changes. One-size-fits-all prescriptions are inappropriate, arguably even counterproductive for encouraging the greatest level of mitigation activity across the widest range of tourism businesses.

Climate change mitigation and the age of tourism accommodation buildings: a UK perspective

“…Among supplyside research, motivations and barriers to greater action among businesses (Sampaio et al 2012a(Sampaio et al , 2012bTzschentke et al 2008;Vernon et al 2003) have attracted considerable attention as have variations in response rates (Hall 2006;Saarinen and Tervo 2006;Smerecnik and Andersen 2011;Coles et al 2014). Demand-side analyses have pointed to the significance of understanding contemporary travel choices (Hares et al 2010;Cohen et al 2011Cohen et al , 2013) and the nature of individual behaviour away from home (Barr et al 2011;Mair and Laing 2013).…”

Carbon villains? Climate change responses among accommodation providers in historic premises

“…The results of this stage have been reported in detail elsewhere (Coles et al 2013;Coles, Zschiegner and Dinan 2014;Coles, Dinan and Warren 2014). Of relevance here is that there was no significant difference in the number of, and level of total investment in, pro-environmental innovations among properties of different age.…”

Why Don't They Just Change? Contract Farming, Informational Influence, and Barriers to Agricultural Climate Change Mitigation

“…We also build upon a literature that questions an often-assumed link between climate change knowledge and attitudes and adoption of mitigation behaviors. As we noted earlier, several empirical studies have questioned this link, finding that climate change knowledge and attitudes poorly predict climate change behaviors (Attari et al 2011;Coles et al 2013;Hayles et al 2013;Schulte and Miller 2010;Semenza et al 2008;Wells et al 2010). Many have emphasized the importance of a sense of efficacy in predicting climate change mitigation behaviors (Choi, Price, and Vinokur 2003;Gifford 2011;Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002;Leiserowitz 2006;O'Neill and Nicholson-Cole 2009;Sampaio, Thomas, and Font 2012;Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon 2012).…”

“…What keeps individuals-farmers in this case-from adopting climate change mitigation behaviors that natural scientists say are effective? The "information deficit model" of behavior (Burgess, Harrison, and Filius 1998;Hargreaves 2011;Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002;Owens 2000) that theorizes that knowledge and information about climate change are the key to driving behavioral change has been widely dismissed by social theorists and empirical studies (Attari et al 2011;Coles, Zschiegner, and Dinan 2013;Hayles et al 2013;Schulte and Miller 2010;Semenza et al 2008;Wells, Ponting, and Peattie 2010). So if lack of knowledge is not the barrier to individual mitigation behavior, then what is?…”

“…Many have emphasized the importance of a sense of efficacy in predicting climate change mitigation behaviors (Choi, Price, and Vinokur 2003;Gifford 2011;Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002;Leiserowitz 2006;O'Neill and Nicholson-Cole 2009;Sampaio, Thomas, and Font 2012;Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon 2012). Others have found that the relative cost of adaptation and mitigation behaviors is related to their likelihood of adoption, particularly when short-term costs are high and potential benefits are diffuse and long term (Coles et al 2013;Hall 2006;Hobson and Essex 2001;Lorenzoni, Nicholson-Cole, and Whitmarsh 2007;Semenza et al 2008). This climate-specific literature builds upon a much broader literature concerning the adoption and diffusion of innovations in agriculture (for examples, see Levins and Cochrane 1996;Napier and Tucker 2001;Rogers 2003).…”