An inconvenient truth:
WTP: willingness to pay – in this case in order to avoid risks/cost when not entitled to risk protection.
Measurements of passenger WTP will help policy makers to design effective financial instruments aimed at
discouraging climate-unfriendly travel activities as well as to generate funds for the measures directed at
climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Valuation Methodology:
It is called contingent valuation: is a social survey method here individuals are presented with information
about specific environment changes, the values of which aren’t accounted for in economic markets or full
captured through market based instruments. In the survey, individual perception, attitudes and preferences
regarding these changes and their non-market values are elicited. In order to measure the effect of the
suggested changes on people’s welfare, respondents were asked to state their willingness to pay or their
willingness to accept compensation for the gains or losses involved. WTP is more popular method.
the aggregated WTP or WTA amount provides an indicator of the total economic value (TEV) of any
change in their provision, including their quality level. Within this we find that there are two main values:
use values and non-use values. Whereas use values refer to the values associated with the actual use of
the various goods and services provided by ecosystems and natural resources, non-use values are
unrelated to any actual or potential use, and may refer for example to the value people attach to preserving
ecosystems or species (existence values) or the value they attach to leaving a healthy environment behind
for future generations (bequest value).
Results: 60% of the passengers were male – passengers ranged between 18-83 years with an average of
38 years. 40% travelled for business reasons. 80% of passengers travelled alone.
Besides income, significant differences are found between these nationalities in terms of (continental and
intercontinental) travel frequency and the price paid for airplane tickets. Europeans and North Americans
travel most frequently: about ten times per year. Passengers from the rest of the world travel half as much.
North Americans paid most for their plane ticket (€950 including taxes and other services), followed by the
rest of the world (€780) and Asians (€735).
Most of the passengers came from Europe, followed by Asia, north America, Latin America and then Africa.
Differences around investigating passenger knowledge and awareness of the impacts of flying on the
environment and the link with climate change:
UK and Dutch travellers were significantly more aware of the relationship between flying and climate
change than other nationalities. The awareness level was lowest for passengers from Asia.
Concern levels also showed huge differences between the passengers. UK passengers seem to show
more concern more than any other nationality of passengers. There seemed to be no significant difference
between North Americans and other non-UK Europeans, but concern is significantly lower in Asia, Latin
America and Africa. UK residents also attach significantly more importance to the environment compared to
other important public issues like employment, health and safety or economic growth. On the same scale,
US citizens value the environment significantly less than any other group of passengers. Europeans and
Asians also feel more responsible for climate change than North-Americans.
When asked how much passengers know about the Kyoto protocol, we find that Europeans are more
knowledgeable than other nationalities. Half of all European passengers know the protocol’s objectives.
This is the case for 44% of the North-American passengers and 35% of the Asian travellers.
North-Americans and Europeans are more convinced than Asians that the introduction of a carbon
travel tax will be effective in tackling climate change.
Testing the passenger pay principle:
After introducing the idea of carbon tax to the passengers they
were asked if they were willing to pay in principle for such a tax over and above the plane ticket for their
current flight. Three quarters of all travellers were willing to pay a carbon tax in addition to the price
of their current ticket.
Differences again however, are found across continents where slightly more Europeans (80%) than North-
Americans (75%) willing to pay in principle, and Asian travellers (59%) being least willing to pay for a
carbon travel tax. Protests against tax mainly came from passengers not believing that the tax and
proposed (trees for travel) program would have any real impact.
Passengers who are willing to pay are primarily motivated by a sense of moral obligation and
responsibility to pay for their contribution to climate change, concern about the environment in general and
future generation. No evidence of “warm glow” indicating that travellers agree to pay because they like to
