GENERAL HAPPINESSAND TOURISM BEHAVIOR

Ecological Efficient Tourism

Jeroen Nawijn

Paul Peeters

Content of presentation

• Background of study

• Crash course happiness studies

• Previous studies on tourism

• Methodology

• Conclusion & discussion

Background

Sustainability related to tourism focuses on: preservation of nature and cultures, poverty alleviation and reduced climate change. These issues are mostly economic and environmental ‘despite the early definitional focus of sustainable tourism on subjective well-being (SWB) and intergenerational equity’

(Hardy, Beeton and Pearson 2002)

Ecological-efficiency (I)

The eco-efficiency of long haul travel is on average about ten times worse compared to the world economy average

(Gössling, Peeters, Ceron, Dubois, Patterson and Richardson 2005)

Ecological-efficiency (II)

Long haul travel requires air transport, which does not only contribute to climate change through emissions of carbon dioxide but also by emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon-hydrates, water vapor and the forming of contrails. Half of the contribution to current aviation related climate change is caused by these non-carbon dioxide impacts

(Sausen, Isaksen, Grewe, Hauglustaine, Lee, Myhre, Köhler, Pitari, Schumann, Stordal and Zerefos 2005).

Our question

Would a future with less long haul travel lead to general unhappiness?

Crash course happiness (I)

What is it? (SWB)

Evaluation of one’s life (life satisfaction) combined with positive affect and negative affect

Generally measured on a 1-7 or 1-10 scale, using either one question or a scale (SWLS, SHS, PANAS, etc).

Crash course happiness (II)

What determines one’s happiness?• Goal striving• Coping skills / life events• Health• Meaningful relationships• Income/wealth • Optimism• Religion (meaning of life)• Work

Previous studies on tourism

• Travel does not change the level of general happiness. However, other variables such as activity level on a trip, may intervene (Milman 1998)

• Length of stay (LOS) negatively (-0.09) influences satisfaction with life in general for those who stay six or fewer nights on a trip (Neal 2001)

• The anticipation of a holiday trip positively affects happiness (Gilbert and Abdullah 2002)

• LOS had a positive effect (0.12) for those who stay seven or more nights (Neal and Sirgy 2004)

Methodology

• Sample of CVO

• n = 588

• Travel data from late 2001- early 2006

• Happiness measured once, early 2006

• Scale: SHS (4 items), corrected for known effects

Conclusion (I)

First hypothesis: the general happiness of leisure tourists is positively correlated to the total distance the tourist travels to destinations

SUPPORTED(very) low correlation of 0.087, significant at

0.05 level

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 180000

Total Travel Distance (km)

Cor

rect

ed G

ener

al H

appi

ness

Conclusion (II)

Second hypothesis: the general happiness of people is positively correlated to the number of long haul leisure trips

SUPPORTED

low statistical correlation between corrected general happiness and the number of long haul leisure trips undertaken between 2001 and 2006 is low, 0.140, significant at the 0.01 level

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Number of Long Haul Trips per Year

Cor

rect

ed G

ener

al H

appi

ness

Conclusion (III)

Third hypothesis: general happiness is positively correlated to the amount of freedom of destination choice

SUPPORTED The feeling of being limited in one’s

destination choice correlates with corrected general happiness negatively with –0.244, significant at the 0.01 level

Conclusion (IV)

Fourth hypothesis: general happiness is positively correlated to the reported personal ‘importance of traveling’

PARTLY SUPPORTEDThe correlation between the statement “travel is important

to me” and corrected general happiness is 0.078 but is not significant

However: there is a correlation of 0.095 between corrected general happiness and importance of travel when controlling for limitation in destination choice (significant at the 0.01 level).

Would a future with less long haul travel lead to general unhappiness? (I)

Travel to remote locations seems not necessary to achieve greater general happiness, thus reducing the environmental impact by reducing the total distance traveled may be reached without loss of general happiness.

Would a future with less long haul travel lead to general unhappiness? (II)

If aviation is actually reduced, then some impact on general happiness might occur. But this might be in two directions: people actually hindered by the limits become a bit less happy, while people that now already are limited in travel choice might change their goals with respect to travel and thus become more happy.

Finally the causality is of importance; if happy people travel on average more than unhappy people, limits to air transport will not affect general happiness.

Lead for follow-up study

The happiest people (7.42) are those that consider travel important and who are not limited in their destination choice (n = 182, SD = 1.78).

The least happy people (5.29) are those who state travel is not important to them and that they are limited in their destination choice (n = 30, SD = 2.23).