A Brighter, More Sustainable Future…But it’s time to rise above the noise.

All of the anguish and isolation of COVID lockdowns didn’t just make us want to travel more
(although they certainly did that): they also made us want to travel sustainably. And perhaps that’s
because the threats our planet currently faces, combined with being deprived of its splendour too
long, have made us all cherish the natural environment like never before. Who knows…but whatever
the reason, the underlying facts are undeniable: according to the Sustainable Travel Report 2021
(www.sustainability.booking.com) 61% of respondents were travelling more last year as a result of
what might best be described as a COVID hangover; and, wherever they were going, an astonishing
81% were intent on staying in sustainable accommodation: that second figure is up from 74% in
2020…and is 19% higher than the comparable figure from five years ago. Something’s obviously in
the wind…we seem to be heading into a brighter, more sustainable future.
But are we?

The Shame Distortion

Those of you who’ve been around as long as I have will probably remember the 1992 UK Election: in
the run up to that election, the Polls were consistently giving Labour a strong (often double digit)
lead over the Conservatives, but when the actual votes were counted, it was the Conservatives who
romped home with a 21 seat majority. The reason for the apparent aberration was simple, and
fundamental to polling psychology, and it was this: in the run up to that Election, the Conservatives
were so unpopular in the media that people didn’t want to admit to supporting them…so they lied,
and said they were voting Labour instead. Psychologists call this a “shame distortion”.
So let’s get back to sustainable travel again: how likely is it that the figures we were looking at earlier
could be affected by a shame distortion? After all, and sadly, there are quite a few climate change
deniers around, but very few of them are standing up to admit it (Nigel Lawson is the exception that
proves the rule): saying you support sustainability is unquestionably popular, whereas admitting you
couldn’t care less about your carbon footprint, or about how much of the rainforests will be torn
apart to produce flooring and furniture…well, of course, that’s not popular at all, so you might not
want to tell anyone: which means you put a tick in the “sustainable” box instead. Is there any
evidence of this happening here?

Let’s take a look…

Earlier this year the Global Research Agency Skift (www.skift.com) asked over a thousand people
(1,011 to be exact) if they would be willing to pay extra on their airfare to cover the cost of carbon
offsetting: only 14% said yes. And, at the end of last year, a group of Swiss researchers asked more or
less the same question to an even wider sample of travellers: only to come up with an even lower
response rate of 5%…and if that was translated into real life, it would equate to an offset purchase of
just €1 per flight, which obviously isn’t going to change anything anytime soon. Is this, then, the
authentic voice of the travelling public, stripped of its mask of shame?

Well, as it happens (and happily)…no.

Greenwashing and Message Confusion

What we’re looking at rather is an unfortunate lack of clarity within the travel sector itself: in
particular, a marked muddying of consumer options that has been created by major corporates and
(for want of a better phrase) sectoral fly by nights, who are increasingly “greenwashing” their tired
old messaging, with little or no commitment to real sustainability (except as a punchline).
Muddying the message in this way can (and does) confuse travellers all the time: we know that as
well, which is why the same Skift report we looked at earlier ( “Accelerating the Transition to Net
Zero”) also found 70% of customers felt “overwhelmed” by the range of travel options on offer, plus
they struggled to distinguish between available lodging and transportation choices because of
obvious “greenwashing” (often amounting to nothing more than saying “we’re greener so we’re
better”), which means, in turn, that they distrust the messaging altogether.
That explains why, in a market with more and better hospitality providers who are genuinely
committed to sustainability, 49% of travellers also believed there weren’t enough sustainability
options available…it seems to be a case of the greenwashed apple spoiling the rest of the barrel.
But, of course, this lack of messaging clarity and consumer understanding does not in any way
evidence a lack of overall commitment towards sustainability…this isn’t, in other words, any kind of
a “shame distortion”…it’s just what it is: a lack of understanding.

The Skift and Swiss Surveys can easily be explained on that basis: after all, if you ask someone to pay
more for something they don’t understand, what do you expect them to say?

Back to Basics

But it all means that its high time to get back to basics on the message (we’re in the business of
siding with the planet and local communities… building a sustainable future): it’s time to filter the
bad apples out, and for those companies who are truly committed to sustainable business models,
companies like Eco Hotels (www.ecohotelsglobal.com)... well, for those companies to speak a little
louder, and rise above the noise.

That’s the best way to build on what we have, and the best way to move forward together towards a
brighter and better future.