Air Travel: Who Is Willing to Pay More to Reduce Pollution?
The growth prospects facing the aviation sector are undermining its technological efforts to reduce carbon emissions. These costly initiatives will have to be factored into ticket prices in order to be implemented. But are passengers willing to pay more for greener flights? A survey of 1,150 people in 18 countries provides some insights.
Sara Laurent, Montpellier Business School; Anne-Sophie Fernandez, University of Montpellier; Audrey Rouyre, Montpellier Business School and Paul Chiambaretto, Montpellier Business School
Although air travel accounts for only a small portion of CO₂ emissions (2.1%) and greenhouse gas emissions (3.5%), the sector faces a complex situation.
On the one hand, over the past few decades, the industry has developed numerous technological innovations that enable it to reduce kerosene consumption and, consequently, CO₂ emissions per air passenger carried. On the other hand, air traffic growth has never been as strong as it has been in recent years—aside from the COVID-19 pandemic. Forecasts seem to confirm this trend for the next twenty years, particularly in developing countries, which undermines all the efforts made by the aviation industry.
Faced with this challenge, the aviation industry is pursuing more radical innovations, from more sustainable aviation fuels to electric aircraft. But these “green” innovations are complex and costly for airlines to develop and adopt.
This additional cost will likely tempt airlines to pass it on to passengers through higher ticket prices, which could directly impact passengers’ wallets. But are passengers really willing to pay more to travel more sustainably? We sought to answer this question through an experiment conducted in 18 countries across Europe, North America, Asia, and Oceania, surveying 1,150 people to better understand how they choose their airline tickets.
Nearly 10 centimes more for 1 kg less of CO₂
We offered them flights with various options—price, comfort, baggage allowance, flight duration, and more—as well as options based on the type of fuel used andCO2 emissions. The goal? To find out if they were willing to pay a little more for less polluting planes.
Various innovations, each with a different environmental impact, were proposed. For each one, we were able—without ever explicitly asking respondents—to calculate their willingness to pay, that is, the additional amount they are willing to pay to reduce theirCO2 emissions.
The survey mainly showed that passengers are willing to pay an average of 10 euro cents to reduce theirCO2 emissions by 1 kg. In other words, for a domestic flight (within France) that will emit 80 kg ofCO2, our passengers would be willing to pay an average of 8 euros more to produce zero emissions.
These amounts are nevertheless modest compared to the actual additional costs associated with adopting these innovations. For example, sustainable aviation fuels cost 4 to 6 times more than kerosene, so the additional cost to the airline would be much higher than the extra 8 euros our passengers would be willing to pay.
People who feel guilty are willing to pay more
However, not all airline passengers are willing to pay the same amount, and some would be willing to pay much more than 10 cents per kilogram. Who are these people?
Contrary to popular belief, young people (who generally claim to have stronger environmental values) are not inclined to pay more than the rest of the population, and people with higher levels of education are not more sensitive to this issue.
Certain psychological factors, however, seem to play a much more significant role. Passengers who feel a strong sense of shame at the thought of flying (flight shame)—about 13% of respondents—say they are willing to pay between 4 and 5 times more than those who do not feel this way (27 cents/kg, compared to 6 cents/kg of CO₂).
Similarly, people with strong environmental values or who engage in eco-friendly behavior in their daily lives tend to be more willing to pay (between 17 and 34 centimes to reduce their CO₂ emissions by one kilogram).
Similarly, in terms of behavior, frequent flyers and business travelers believe they would be willing to pay about 15% more than other travelers to reduce the CO₂ emissions associated with their flights.
Airlines should therefore adopt a more targeted approach by prioritizing passengers who are motivated by their values or behavior to make an effort.
The Need for Better Information on Innovations
Beyond these figures, our study calls for strategic reflection among stakeholders in the air transport sector. Airlines cannot rely solely on consumer goodwill to finance their environmental transition. While passengers are generally in favor of greener aviation, their willingness to pay remains below the actual financing needs.
Two factors are therefore essential: education and incentives.
- From an educational standpoint, it is crucial to better communicate the concrete environmental benefits of SAFs (Sustainable Aviation Fuels) and other disruptive technologies. This improved communication could familiarize the general public with these innovations and thereby increase their trust in the sector—and even their willingness to pay more. To this end, targeted and educational marketing campaigns could be launched. While avoiding greenwashing, these campaigns must be grounded in a commitment to education and transparency.
- In terms of incentives, offering attractive fares on low-impact flights or rewarding eco-friendly behavior through airline loyalty programs could help win over some of the more reluctant members of the public, encouraging them to adopt more sustainable behaviors for reasons other than environmental concerns.
The Inevitable Decline in Air Traffic
So, should we pay more to pollute less? Our findings show that travelers are willing to make an effort, but not to the extent required by the colossal challenges of the transition. Sustainable aviation cannot, therefore, rely solely on the goodwill of passengers: it will require a collective effort, in which airlines, governments, industry, and travelers must work together.
In fact, the use of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is limited by current supply capacities to meet the needs of all industrial sectors, particularly road transport. The aviation sector’s use of new forms of energy is therefore only part of the solution for the medium and long term. Reducing traffic and implementing demand-side measures are essential to lowering CO₂ emissions from aviation.
It is up to airlines to prioritize transparency in order to build trust and influence behavior. It is up to passengers and public policymakers to shoulder their share of the cost of a greener aviation industry. For the question on the horizon is not merely how much a plane ticket will cost tomorrow, but rather who, collectively, will be able to develop a sustainable model for air travel.
Article published in collaboration with other researchers from the Pégase Chair (MBS School of Business) at the University of Montpellier and Bauhaus Luftfahrt—Ulrike Schmalz, Camille Bildstein, and Mengying Fu.
Sara Laurent, Assistant Professor of Marketing, Montpellier Business School; Anne-Sophie Fernandez, University Professor, University of Montpellier; Audrey Rouyre, Lecturer and Researcher in Strategic Management, Montpellier Business School, Montpellier Business School and Paul Chiambaretto, Professor and Director of the Pégase Chair, Montpellier Business School
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.