IP Forte 3 - Final International Report

     IP Forte III 
 
 
 
The Perception of European 
Tourists with Regard to 
Sustainable Tourism 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The Perception of European Tourists with Regard to 
Sustainable Tourism 
 
 
Belgium  Finland  Lithuania  Netherlands  Spain 
P. Driesen  J. Koivisto  I. Krasnickaite  J.L. Capelle  S. Garcia 
J. Heirman  V. Parviainen  A. Stupuraite  D. Huitink  C. Gimeno 
S. Siongers  S. Riski  A. Meistaite  Z. Meng  S. Bartolome 
R. Verheyen  V.  K. Lisauskas  M. Nicolaas  F. Jautz 
Romppanen 
E. Wichelen,  E. Valenius  M.  C.  I. Caballero 
van  Paulauskas  Montagnani‐
Salles 
       
   
Kaunas, Lithuania 
 
Kaunas, 9 May 2011 
International Project III  ‐  2011  2 
 
Executive Summary
The International Project Forte III (IP Forte III) is the third phase of the IP Forte program. In IP
Forte I, students made an approach relevant to all tourism stakeholders (hotels, travel agencies,
Tour Operators and airlines, among others) to investigate how sustainable development was
perceived and which factors contributed to the success or the failure of implementing sustainable
practices in the tourism sector. During IP Forte II, research was focused on one of the main
stakeholders: hotels. The hotels that took part in the research were examined to determine
current trends in the field of hospitality management.
To complete the IP Forte (sustainability) program, IP Forte III focuses on the tourists and their
demand for responsible (sustainable) tourism. To determine the demand for sustainability,
tourists from five different nations are studied from five different perspectives by five different
universities, from five different countries. The perspectives that will be used in order to analyze
the demand for sustainable tourist routes include an economic, social, cultural, environmental,
and information and communications technology (ICT) viewpoint.
Each participating team was responsible for creating the parameters for each perspectives and
analysing the results in order to compare with the other countries’ participants of IP Forte III. The
research has been conducted in Belgium, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Spain.
The participating countries were responsible for the following perspectives:
- Environmental: Finland
- Social: Lithuania
- Cultural: Belgium
- ICT: Spain
- Economic: Netherlands
Research methods used were questionnaires and an observational study. These methods were
utilized in order to answer the following for each participating country:
“What role does sustainability play in the selection process of tourists, with respect to
their destination and their activities?”
 
 
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................5 
1.1  Introduction to the Project ........................................................................................... 5 
1.2  Main Objectives .......................................................................................................... 6 
1.3  Research Questions ................................................................................................... 6 
2  Research Method.................................................................................................................................7 
2.1  Primary Research ....................................................................................................... 7 
2.1.1  Questionnaire Methodology ................................................................................. 7 
3  Data Results and Analysis by Perspective .............................................................................................9 
3.1  Environmental Perspective ......................................................................................... 9 
3.1.1  Research Objectives Relating to the Environmental Aspect................................ 9 
3.1.2  Research Questions ............................................................................................ 9 
3.1.3  Research Findings ............................................................................................... 9 
3.1.4  Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 10 
3.1.5  Recommendations ............................................................................................. 13 
3.2  Social Perspective .................................................................................................... 15 
3.2.1  Research Objectives Relating to the Social Aspect ........................................... 15 
3.2.2  Research Questions .......................................................................................... 15 
3.2.3  Research Findings ............................................................................................. 15 
3.3  Cultural Perspective.................................................................................................. 21 
3.3.1  Research Objectives Relating to the Cultural Aspect ........................................ 21 
3.4  Internet Communications and Technology (ICT) Perspective .................................. 24 
3.4.1  Research Objectives Relating to the ICT Perspective ....................................... 24 
3.5  Economic Perspective .............................................................................................. 28 
3.5.1  Research Objectives Relating to the Economic Perspective ............................. 28 
4  General Conclusion and Recommendations .......................................................................................33 
4.1  General Conclusion .................................................................................................. 33 
4.2  General Recommendations ...................................................................................... 34 
5  Appendices ........................................................................................................................................38 
5.1  Appendix 1: Research Findings ................................................................................ 38 
Appendix 2: Questionnaire................................................................................................. 73 
 
1 Introduction 
1.1 Introduction to the Project 
The International Project Forte III (IP Forte III) is the third phase of the IP Forte program. In IP
Forte I, students made an approach relevant to all tourism stakeholders (hotels, travel agencies,
Tour Operators and airlines, among others) to investigate how sustainable development was
perceived and which factors contributed to the success or the failure of implementing sustainable
practices in the tourism sector. During IP Forte II, research was focused on one of the main
stakeholders: hotels. The hotels that took part in the research were examined to determine
current trends in the field of hospitality management.
To complete the IP Forte (sustainability) program, IP Forte III focuses on the tourists and their
demand for responsible (sustainable) tourism. To determine the demand for sustainability,
tourists from five different nations are studied from five different perspectives by five different
universities, from five different countries. The perspectives that will be used in order to analyze
the demand for sustainable tourist routes include an economic, social, cultural, environmental,
and information and communications technology (ICT) viewpoint.
 
1.2 Main Objectives 
The main objective of this project is:
To determine the role that sustainability plays in the selection process of European
tourists with respect to their holiday destination and holiday activities.
To achieve the main objective, the following sub-objectives were created:
 To determine whether European tourists value sustainable (public) transportation means.

 To determine whether European tourists make use of the tourist destinations’ local
services.
 To examine whether European tourists prefer natural sights over purposely built
attractions.
 To identify the extent to which European tourists find direct contact with local inhabitants
and their local lifestyle important.
 To identify the extent to which European tourists value the employees of the nations that
they visit.
 To determine the extent to which European tourists want to get acquainted with the
culture of their tourist destination.
 To ascertain the extent to which they feel that sustainability is an important decision-
making factor when visiting attractions and or carrying out local activities.
 To establish whether European tourists use the Internet and its sources to determine the
tourist routes that they choose.
 To determine the extent to which European tourists find online sources to be credible.
 To identify the average amount of money that a European tourist spends when on
vacation.
 To establish whether European tourists would be willing to pay more for certain aspects
when on vacation.
 To identify whether European tourists would consider changing their main vacation from
a high season to a low season, for both sustainable and economic reasons.
 To determine whether European tourists have economical reasons for spending their
main holiday in their local region.
1.3 Research Questions   
Based on the objective of the project, the main research question is:
“What role does sustainability play in the selection process of European tourists, with
respect to their destination and their activities?”
  
 
2 Research Method 
2.1 Primary Research 
As a start, every country had to do research on a national level. The national teams mainly used
the Internet, but also books, folders, face-to-face interviews and surveys to investigate tourist
routes and how sustainability is implemented in these routes.
2.1.1 Questionnaire Methodology 
In order to create a reliable and credible outcome, standardization of the research methodology
had to be developed. This chapter outlines the research methodology that was utilized among the
five members of the IP Forte III program.
2.1.1.1 Target Group 
The following characteristics outline the target group:
 Interviewees had to be of a minimum age of 17 years old.

 Interviewees have to be able to independently make decisions for the holiday
destinations that they choose.
 Respondents have an income.
 Must be of one of the following nationalities: Belgium, Finland, Lithuania, The
Netherlands, or Spain.
2.1.1.2 Sampling Frame 
Each nation was responsible for a sample size between 50 to 100 interviewees. This results in a
minimum of 250 respondents.
After arriving in Kauno Kolegija, Lithuania, five international teams were formed. Every team
consisted of one student from each participating country. Then, these new teams started
comparing the national results to the overall results. One of the goals was to find the differences
between the countries, and to come up with useful recommendations for the governments and
the Tour Operators based and compare them to the overall European results. After five
workshops in which the results were compared and recommendations were created, the final
report was developed.
2.1.1.3 Data Collection Method 
Based on the results, the teams worked out one overall questionnaire, divided into five themes:
environmental, social, cultural, economic and the use of sustainable Internet and communications
technology tools. Each national team was responsible for one of the themes.
This questionnaire consisted of 29 questions, with an additional five questions for the collection of
classification data.
A link to a Google Documents Site was sent out by e-mail to possible respondents and placed on
the various online platforms. Also face-to-face interviews were conducted to reach people with
limited access to the Internet. All together, 307 questionnaires were filled in. More information is
to be found in the table (2.1) below.
 
2.1.1.4 Data Analysis Method 
2.1 Table: detailed questionnaire information

Number of Average age of
Country Interview source
respondents respondents
E-mail
Belgium Online platforms 76 28
Face-to-face
Finland E-mail 36 43
E-mail
Lithuania 80 22
Face-to-face
E-mail
Spain 57 32
Face-to-face
E-mail
The Social media
87 34
Netherlands platforms
Face-to-face
After gaining all the results, each national team had to analyze the results of their own country’s
respondents. These results were converted into pie charts and bar graphs by using Microsoft
Office Excel, to get a clearer overall view.
2.1.1.5 Limitations 
Time Constraint
As there was little time in to carry out the questionnaires (approximately two weeks).
Language Barrier
As the questionnaires were in English, it is possible that there were difficulties understanding the
questions in the survey. Although this was less problematic for the younger respondents, it was
evident that the elder generations had more problems understanding the questions.
Questionnaire Translation Bias

In order to help respondents understand the various what the questions were asking, the
questionnaire was also translated to the national languages. Although it helped the interviewees
understand the question, the questions could have been translated in such a way that it became
biased to the manner in which the national team members understood the questions.
Approximately 20% of all the respondents used the translation in order to comprehend a query.
Comprehensive Limitation
Another limitation is the misunderstanding of a question. Some queries were unclear to the
respondents, by which the respondents answered how they interpreted the question. This means
that every interviewee may have understood and answered the same question differently,
depending on the manner in which they comprehended the query.
 
3 Data Results and Analysis by Perspective 
3.1 Environmental Perspective 
3.1.1 Research Objectives Relating to the Environmental Aspect 
The main objective of this environmental aspect is:
To determine the role that environmental sustainability plays for the European tourists in
the selection process of their tourist routes.
To achieve the main objective, the following sub-objectives were created:
 To determine whether European tourists value sustainable (public) transportation means.

 To determine whether European tourists make use of the tourist destinations’ local
services.
 To examine whether European tourists prefer natural sights over purposely built
attractions.
 To determine whether European tourist appreciate short travelling distances.
 To examine whether the possibility to enhance responsible tourism matters to European
tourists
3.1.2 Research Questions 
Based on the objective of this environmental aspect, the main research question is addressed:
“What role does environmental sustainability play in the selection process of European
tourists, with respect to their tourist routes?”
To find out the answer to the main research question, the following sub-questions were created:
“What kind of travelling European tourists prefer when choosing a tourist route?
(Transportation, distances)”
“What kind of attractions do European tourists prefer when choosing a tourist route?
(Natural sights vs. purposely built attractions)”
“What kinds of importance does local services (local food, accommodation, activities)
have to European tourists when choosing a tourist route?”
3.1.3 Research Findings 
For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.
Question 1. The possibility to use environmentally friendly transportation options (e.g.

biking, walking, sailing, rowing, skiing, using public transportation, among others) is
important when choosing a tourist route.
The international result shows that 60% of the respondents agreed on this issue, 23% disagreed
and 17% had neutral opinion toward the statement. There aren’t any significant differences
between age or income groups. When comparing the national results, Belgian result is that vary
 
the most: only 48% of the Belgians agreed with the statement. For this question the Lithuanians’
have the highest rate of agreement (73%).
Question 2. The possibility to travel shorter distances and/or locally is important when
choosing a tourist route.
It can be seen from the international result that there is 64% positive responds, and 22%
negative. Age doesn’t seem to have any influences to the answers. Income group of 2500-3499€
has the least positive responses (52%) and the most negative responses (30%) comparing to
other income groups. Oppositely, income group of 3500-4499€ has fewer negative answers (8%)
than any other income groups.
Nationally, the Netherlands (48%) and Lithuania (50%) have the least negative responds. The
highest rates of positive answers are from Spain and Finland, that both countries have 72% of the
respondents agreeing.
Question 3. The possibility to use local services (e.g. accommodation, restaurants, and
activities) and locally produced food is important when choosing a tourist route.
In general this statement is considered important (84%) while only 12% not important. The only
age group with noticeable differences from the responds is people who are 45 years or older.
They have the least agreeing answers (76%). There are also differences between income groups.
In the income group 1500-2499€, people have either agreeing (76%) or disagreeing (24%)
opinions, there are no neutral opinions. They seem also have much larger negative responds
than other ones. Income groups 3500-4499€ and 4500€ plus have strongly positive opinions
(92%) about this issue. The latter group doesn’t even have any negative answers-all the other
answers are neutral.
Nationally the biggest exception was Lithuania. There are only 73% of positive answers. Finland
had the highest rate of positive answers (89%), and all the other countries had quite similar
results.
Question 4. The possibility to enhance responsible tourism (keeping in mind nature’s

biodiversity, minimizing one’s own footprint) is important when choosing a route.
International results for this issue are with 56% agreeing, 18% neutral and 26% disagreeing. All
the respondents have more or less similar positive opinion among all age groups, but the
differences can be seen in the age group of 30-45, where the negative part (31%) is greater than
the general figure. There seems to be no radical differences between any of the income groups or
national results.
Question 5. The possibility to experience natural sights (e.g. scenery, geological

formations, waterfalls, mountains, etc.) over purposely-built attractions (e.g. Zoo,
amusement park) is important when choosing a tourist route.
It can be seen that this is the question with the largest positive respondents in the environmental
part, with 85% agreeing. According to the answers, the older the respondents are, the less they
agree to this statement (17-29 years 90%, between 30-45 years 81% and over 45 years 74%).
Generally the differences between income groups aren’t that noticeable. Internationally, the
smallest percentage comes from Finland and the most is from Spain.
3.1.4 Conclusions 
Question 1. The possibility to use environmentally friendly transportation options (e.g.

biking, walking, sailing, rowing, skiing, using public transportation, among others) is
important when choosing a tourist route.
Conclusions drawn from question 1 are that in general European tourists are environmentally
conscious and they try to do their part when it comes to sustainability. The use of environmental-
friendly transportation is taken into consideration but it is still not a significant part of the decision
making process when choosing a tourist route.
 
The countries’ infrastructure can explain some differences in the results. In the Netherlands and
Belgium, tourists have access to the main cities through public transportation. But in Lithuania,
cycling paths are not well developed yet and there are only a limited number of them in the
region. However, in Lithuania people seem to find it more important to use environmental-friendly
transportations, e.g. a trolleybus and the reason to this could be the fact that it is cheap.
Lithuania, Spain and Finland agreed more, due to the fact that there is a great net of public
transport, which encourages people to use it more.
Question 2. The possibility to travel shorter distances and/or locally is important when
choosing a tourist route.
A high percentage of positive answer is generated for this question. It is due to the fact that
people have less time and take shorter vacations close by but more often on an annual basis.
In Lithuania, there are not as many local promotions about tourism destinations as other
countries; this is one of the reasons why Lithuanian tourists prefer to spend their holidays abroad.
Another reason could be the higher prices paid in local tourism comparing to destinations abroad.
In Spain, people have a tradition to travel short distances on their vacations due to economical
reasons. In Belgium and the Netherlands, people do have money to spend so it’s part of their
lifestyle to discover more by travelling abroad than nationally. Also they are quite small countries
with comparably short distances to many European countries. This enables them to travel longer
distances in a short period of time. The reason for Finns to travel nationally is the four different
seasons they have in Finland.
Question 3. The possibility to use local services (e.g. accommodation, restaurants, and
activities) and locally produced food is important when choosing a tourist route.
First of all it is noticeable that there has been a misunderstanding among the respondents
considering the perspective of the question. Some of them have thought the question from
cultural rather than environmental point of view. This became apparent in some face-to-face
interviews and that surely affected the final results.
In this question, people generally find it important to use local products and services. The Finnish
respondents strongly value to have local services and food both abroad and nationally. However,
because the winter in Finland is long, producing food locally year around is unsustainable and
very expensive. That is one of the reasons why Finnish people don’t have much local food during
wintertime.
Question 4. The possibility to enhance responsible tourism (keeping in mind nature’s

biodiversity, minimizing one’s own footprint) is important when choosing a route.
People nowadays are more aware of the idea of the ecological footprint; they are trying to save
and maintain the natural resources. In the Netherlands, the result is similar to the global one. In
Lithuania the results appear to be higher comparing to the other countries, they may be more
concerned with nature.
Question 5. The possibility to experience natural sights (e.g. scenery, geological

formations, waterfalls, mountains, etc.) over purposely-built attractions (e.g. Zoo,
amusement park) is important when choosing a tourist route.
In general the respondents find it important about this issue. The results from Finland and
Lithuania are below the general average figure, which could be explained with the fact that big
parts of these countries are still in their natural conditions and that they value their nature. It’s
also assumed that because nature sights are more common in Finland and Lithuania, they might
not consider those as attractions.
For the Spanish respondents natural sights are important which could be explained with the fact
that in Comunidad Valenciana, where the Spanish questionnaires were conducted, there are no
 
astonishing natural sights, except from the coast. Lack of natural sights in their region is the
reason they want to experience natural sights.
 
3.1.5 Recommendations 
Tour Operators
 In each country the Tour Operators should work together with the governments to promote
sustainable tourism from the transportation point of view. It would be interesting if the Tour
Operators had sustainable routes figured out and they would sell those to the people who
are interested.
 The Tour Operators and the governments could make packages for accommodation or
attractions etc. where they could also include travelling tickets to sustainable transportation
options or on the other hand, sustainable transportation could be included in the entrance
price of attractions or for a very small amount of money the people could by a combo ticket
both to the attraction and to the transportation to reach the attraction. This could persuade
tourists to use these kinds of transportation more when it would be easy to have them both
in the same time.
 Should include restaurants, which have typical local dishes in their menus (use locally
produced food) in the routes and should promote it in an international way (e.g. English
menus). They should promote local food both locally (e.g. giving away a brochure) and
before hand on the Internet, so that the customers would get an idea what local food is
about. To gain more value for the local food, the food could be prepared in front of the
customers; this way customers would see the actual making process.
 Could promote shops, accommodation and attractions in the tourist routes that use local
products as much as possible. The governments could develop certifications or symbols in
which the customers can recognize the restaurants, bars and cafés who offer (only) local
food and develop a touristic booklet with this information. Then the Tour Operators could use
these 'booklets' for promoting the sustainable tourist routes for their customers.
 Together with the governments together could make a list of all the components of a tourist
route like means of travel, accommodation, food, etc. According to this list, the customers
could make an informed decision about each of these components and decide for
themselves how sustainable they want to be and decide for themselves witch components
they value most.
 In case of sustainable option doesn’t exist or is difficult to implement, sustainability could be
enhanced in other ways. Customers could be convinced about the importance of
sustainability for example when travelling by airplane, there could be an option to “plant a
tree” which would reduce the ecological footprint of the customer.
 Combining both natural and built attractions within the tourist routes could attract more
customers to experience the routes. This would bring the nature and sights closer to the
customers as the options for different kind of attractions would be clear and immediately on
hand. Also the nature itself would become more familiar to the customers and they would
probably start caring more about the natural issues.
 Both the governments and the Tour Operators could develop a strategy for advertising local
tourist routes in other countries: countries with natural resources should target their
advertising to countries that are more architecture-oriented and the other way around. When
promoting the tourist routes with natural sights, the governments should also think the ways
how to prevent for example the erosion of the ground and sights, and to maintain the
biodiversity of flora and fauna. When guiding customers with instructions it should be kept in
mind that the instructions (signs, paths, other materials) also follows the principles of
sustainability. Instructions like “do not throw garbage in the nature” should be that clear that
regardless of the origin or the culture of customers, it wouldn’t make a difference between
their actions.
 
Government
 The governments should carry out surveys trough the local population to find out the most
used type of transportation and then come up with ideas how to make it more sustainable.
For example they could improve the sustainability of public transportation in busses and
trains by using bio-fuel in order to minimize the bad impacts on the environment. The
governments should promote public transportation by making it cheaper, making it more
attractive and easy to use. In this way more people will use the sustainable transportation
options.
 The governments could give incentive to the tourists to use public transportation instead of
private cars. For example they could give a “Welcome Pass” for the cities that are already in
use in big capital cities. With this pass the tourists have access to public transportation and
discount to different tourist attractions for a small amount of money.
 It is suggested to use trains more instead of airplanes when travelling to the route if possible.
This could be promoted and implemented with the governments’ common website, where
customers could easily find all the information regarding to the planned tourist routes and
more sustainable transportation options between different countries. Through this way
customers could plan their routes in advance to be sustainable and they would also be able
to experience more also during the travelling (view from the airplane is different than from
the train).
 While travelling in the actual route, customers should have options for sustainable
transportation (cycling, paddling, rowing etc.). The governments need to support these
sustainable ways of transportation, for example by improving the public infrastructure
providing more bicycle paths and taking care of the roads. Also the governments should
make clear signs to tell the tourists where to find it so that it’s easy to find the transportation.
They have to promote the sustainable transportation, and maybe create at least European
standardized label so tourists would know which way of transportation is sustainable in their
routes.
 The governments could give for example a lower taxation for the companies using local food
or local services so these companies could give lower prices to the customers. In this way,
the costs of the local products wouldn’t be higher for the customers than the imported
products and they might be used more.
 Nationally the governments should invest in educating their people by advertising,
organizing seminars and giving school lessons. When starting the sustainability education
since early age, the sustainability will become a way of living, not only a habit. Because of
this, there could be more governmental funding for sustainable education and promotion to
enhance sustainability in one’s country. The focus point could be especially in management
studies, because these students will be the leaders of the world economic in the future. The
governments could implement more projects (e.g. a fair about sustainability) to get local
people more involved in sustainability. This way they could also promote local nature better
and get their people to know how beautiful and versatile their own countries are and what
they have to offer.
 
3.2 Social Perspective 
3.2.1 Research Objectives Relating to the Social Aspect 
 Determine whether the European tourist is interested in meeting local people and
experiencing their lifestyles.
 Establish the extent to which European tourist value staff satisfaction when composing a
tourist route.
 Determine whether the European tourist thinks that a sense of responsibility should be
rewarded.
 Determine what direction of social sustainability gains the most attention of the European
tourist.
 Establish the extent to what extent the European tourist values sustainable labels, or
check labels and acknowledgements when composing his tourist route.
3.2.2 Research Questions
 Do European tourists find it important to immerse themselves in the culture of the nations
that they visit?
 Do European tourists find it important that local staff is treated with a sufficient level of
dignity?
 Do European tourists find it important to receive a reduction when choosing
sustainability?
 What aspect of social sustainability gains the most attention of the European tourist?
 Do European tourists value sustainable labels, or check labels and acknowledgements
when composing his tourist route?
3.2.3 Research Findings
Question 1: When I’m on a holiday/trip/weekend I find it important to meet the local people.
I truly want to immerse in the life of the local inhabitants.
All countries seem to have the same opinion about this question. They all find it quite important to
meet the local people and their lifestyle. Only Belgium and Lithuania stands out because of the
following reasons.
If we look at the Belgian results, which more or less stand out because they have a 50/50 ratio as
a result. There are two divergent explanations for this result. On one hand, Belgian people are
accustomed to live in a multicultural environment so that might be an explanation for this higher
negative figure. We can say that due to this fact Belgian people have less the intention to
immerse with the local inhabitants. But on the other hand, a lot of Belgian people like to have
contact with the national residents of that country. A Belgian person can easily adapt himself and
likes to do this when he is on holiday. That’s probably the reason why the amount of positive
answers is still high (around 50%).
The Lithuanian people aren’t really used to a multicultural environment, the inhabitants want to
experience new cultures, which they can meet in foreign countries.
 
Segmentation
The age groups 16-29 and 30-45 are almost equally divided. But we noticed that people older
than 45 are more interested. This can be explained by the fact that the older population already
has a big amount of life experience and are more aware of the importance to immerse into the
local population.
The income group earning more than 4500 Euro is not that interested compared to the other
income groups. The majority of the income group earning more than 4500 Euro remains neutral
about the importance to immerse with local people during their holidays.
Question 2: When choosing a place to stay, I consider it is important that employees are
treated with respect.
As no particular country really stands out in this question, we would like to discuss the one that
has the lowest positive rate; that would be Lithuania. The idea behind this is that Lithuanian
companies treat their personnel with less respect, so that the general conviction is that
employees aren’t treated with a high value. This does not mean that those people don’t want to
be treated with respect, they are just used to the opposite way.
As the most countries have strict laws, labour unions and a social security system, it is almost
impossible to treat your employees disrespectful. For example in Finland, due to the Finnish law,
companies are forced to treat their employees well and they have to provide them with healthcare
insurance.
Segmentation
The age group older than 45 and the income group 1500 – 2499 Euro both agree on the fact that
employees should be treated with respect. In contrary to the younger age group and the income
Question 3: When I travel in an ecological way, and get myself completely immersed in the
local culture, I should get a reward/reduction for that, given by the government.
In general the countries disagree. Perhaps the countries don’t agree, because people want to
travel in a cheaper way instead of paying more to travel ecological. So it is the countries’
perceptions that differ.
Belgium: For this question, a lot of Belgians think it’s not important to get money from the
government if they travel in an ecological way. Maybe because a Belgian person is quite proud
of himself and doesn’t want to get help from anyone else. On top of that, in Belgium, people don't
think that much about sustainability yet, in contrary to other countries.
Finland: Also Finnish people think this way. They think they don’t need a reward, because the
travelling itself is already some sort of reward. Also, Finland has got a high-income level and the
sustainable tourism is developed a lot more in comparison to others.
Lithuania, Spain and The Netherlands all have rather high positive results for this question,
which means that it is preferable for them to get a reward or reduction for their ecological way of
travelling. For the Dutch people it is usual to accept additional profits. For Lithuanian people,
sustainability is not well developed there so people need incentives to become attracted. This
also counts for Spain.
Segmentation
The youngest age group/ those who earn less than 1500 and the group 1500-2499 find it more
important to receive a reduction when travelling in an ecological way. As this group probably
contains the students amongst the respondents, this result can be considered rather logical.
Young people are more aware of sustainability, and as they earn less, a reduction is always
welcome.
 
Question 4: What do you find most important: a company that takes good care for his
employees (1), or a company that supports charity (7)?
For this question, there is not really a positive or negative answer, nor a good or a bad answer.
This is just the opinion of what the respondents think is more important. Therefore, we can
conclude that many of the Belgian, Finnish, Spanish and Dutch people find it more important
for companies to take care of the employees, than to support charity. The main reason for this
might be because they are afraid to give their money to charity because they aren't sure where
the money will be invested in.
In these countries people care more about the actual things they can experience themselves.
Happy employees do their jobs more productively (therefore gain more profit for a company) and
they will reflect this on to the customer. On the other hand, the customer will not know about the
charity funds the hotel supports, unless he has done some research or received this information
through another channel.
The most remarkable differences between the countries are the following:
In Spain there is the assumption that business is to make profit and not to support charity
The Netherlands: Another reason is because in Holland there are several charity programs that
people can contribute as individuals.
Finland: The state takes good care of the people that are not wealthy and supply their needs,
therefore is not that relevant for the Finnish tourist that a company supports charity. Like in
general, it is for Finnish people more important that the company takes good care of its
employees.
Lithuania stands out in here, because they seem to find both issues very important. We can link
this to a question of the ICT-part about the reliability of Internet. They trust people easily, and they
think charity is a good thing without knowing where the money is going. The other countries are
more careful concerning charity. Also, there are several social projects and socially engaged
people working on the wellbeing of the ones in need and there are also several institutions
operating for the same cause. As the government doesn’t fulfil all the needs of those institutions
they still depend on donations. This explains the reason why Lithuanians have a higher % of
answers supporting charity than the European average. As the country is in phase of
development there is a concern about the wellbeing of the employees. If the employees are
having a good care they will be more productive and it will benefit them, the company and the
society as a whole.
Segmentation
When comparing the income groups, the income group 4500+ Euros has the largest group of
people who consider both options as equally important. Nevertheless taking good care of
employees is still most important according to the majority of the group.
Question 5: When planning a trip, do you pay attention to the special labels that a
particular company/hotel has received (for instance: “best employer of the year”)(1) or are
you more guided by the experiences of people you know?(7)
In all countries, people seem to trust their friends or other people with experience more than the
existing labels. They are probably not really familiar with the labels that exist and don’t really
know the meaning of them. This might be the explanation why they like to have other people’s
opinions about vacations and holiday trips.
Segmentation
In general, all age groups and income groups have the same results.
 
Tour Operators
 We assume that people who book online are less informed about sustainable activities*,
maybe the website should include information about various local cultures or routes that they
should visit on a sustainable way, and where the tourists can meet local population. The
travel agencies should promote this kind of local habits in which tourists can be immersed.
 In a Travel Agency clientele will get more information, thanks to the direct contact. Because
this social part is missing when people book through a website, they will get fewer
acknowledgements. For that reason websites should contain more information concerning
sustainable tourism.
 Tour Operators should inform people more about local events, local museums, local bars
and restaurants, Not only the informing part is important, it might be even more important to
promote those things in order to be sustainable. People should be more aware about the
importance of traditions.
 Tour Operators can create a special program for host families, so that consumers can move
in on short-term basis in order to truly immerse themselves in local lifestyle.
 The Tour Operators should organize unannounced audits in the various organizations and
should take anonymous questionnaires among the employees throughout the whole
structure.
 From this a label can be rewarded to the most employee-friendly organizations (comparable
to the “best-choice hotels”). This label can be used as a marketing tool for the Tour
Operators.
 Tour Operators can decide to go a step further than mentioned in the first recommendations.
If they check the organizations and they don’t cope with the standards (developed by the
government), they should get rejected from their catalogue and website.
 Tour Operators should advise companies within the tourist routes (like hotels, B&B’s,
restaurants) to be sustainable (in a cheap(er) way), in order to provide this kind of service,
and so to enlarge their customer potential.
 The Travel Agencies should also attract customers emotionally to the sustainable issues, by
giving them a reward for things like using sustainable toilet paper, helping poor people on
your visit to Africa for example. This reward could be a local souvenir.
 To convince customers to try to travel in an ecological way, reward them with some sort of
reward/reduction; the government should subsidize the difference in price between travelling
with an ecological package and travelling with a regular package. This way, the price of a
regular and cheaper holiday should be equal to a sustainable one. In order to do this, tour
operators should carry out marketing in countries such as Belgium, Netherlands and Spain-
where awareness of green tourist routes is still minimal.
 Here as well, the supporting of charity should be emphasized. When promoting a
sustainable route, the supported charity funds should be clearly mentioned, in order to
create reliability.
 The travel agencies could implement symbols, which enable the customers to find out how
the agencies and their co-workers are working on the social perspective of sustainability. For
example: they could mark these symbols in a brochure.
 Tour Operators should have at least one option/service on their tourist routes assortment
from the social sustainability point of view.
The Government should be responsible for the acknowledgement of these symbols for
employee-friendly hotels/accommodations.
 We assume that people who book online are less informed about sustainable activities*,
maybe the website should include information about various local cultures or routes that they
should visit on a sustainable way, and where the tourists can meet local population. The
travel agencies should promote this kind of local habits in which tourists can be immersed.
 In a Travel Agency clientele will get more information, thanks to the direct contact. Because
 
this social part is missing when people book through a website, they will get less
acknowledgement. For that reason websites should contain more information concerning
sustainable tourism.
 Tour Operators should help the government with this issue (not making extra labels, but
providing more information on this subject), because they are the ones who have to sell the
accommodations with these labels to the customers. So, as an important stakeholder in this
issue, they should be informed and work with the government to make these labels crystal
clear.
 For Tour Operators: to have questionnaires concerning sustainability filled in after a
customer has done a tourist route, in order for future customers to have an idea about e.g.
the service, treatment of employees etc. Not only for future customers, but also for Tour
Operators it will be helpful to improve the situation of the employees working in the
accommodations or activities of the tourist route.
Government
 The government can make a website were local people can upload the characteristics
features of their local region and tourist routes in which they can meet local people. The
Tour Operators should use this on their websites.
 On European level, countries can choose several areas that tourists might find interesting.
 The government should increase the accessibility towards typical cultural and local
inhabitants, because these are mostly not in the direct neighbourhood of the town centre.
They can do this by increasing the mobility towards them.
 The governments themselves should promote their local habits and try to attract tourists
mainly with the cultural features. When tourists participate in such cultural activities, they will
automatically have direct contact with local inhabitants.
 It should be underlined that a government must promote local tourism in its own country. In
Belgium for example, there is a governmental organization that is really busy with this
aspect. And that’s very important, because this way they have already been able to attract
its own inhabitants to travel inside the country. Other governments should do this as well.
 There should be a promotion of local festivals where the tourists can interact with the local
inhabitants.
 The government should stimulate the use of the local accommodation such as Bed and
Breakfasts, local hotels and initiatives like Couch Surfing, which make it possible to interact
in a more directly way with the local inhabitants and experience their lifestyle.
 The government should invest in language courses so the local population can interact more
easily with the tourist.
 The Eastern-countries should get assistance with their governmental structure (social
security system, labour unions etc). Simultaneously they should receive an external audit by
the EU concerning this matter. This should lead to a better image of this country in which
tourist development should be increased.
 Governments must implement a reward and penalty system to achieve a higher level of
respect between employer and employee. This system shouldn’t be based on a monetary
value but on a publicity reward (for example “employee of the year-reward”). The
organizations will receive free promotion.
 All governments and companies should provide equal human rights to everybody, no matter
their gender, age, religion, believes
 The governments should create several standards, which the organizations should meet.
The Tour Operators must verify these norms.
 The government should inform companies within the tourist routes (like hotels, B&B’s,
restaurants) about being sustainable in a cheap(er) way and give financial support to them,
in order to provide this kind of service.
 Customers who are interested, but don’t specifically take action to travel sustainable should
be persuaded to make their sustainable travel plans tangible. E.g. in Lithuania many people
show interest for sustainable travelling, but mostly they don’t do it.
 
 Make a report that indicates where the money is given to and also for what it will be used.
E.g.: to ensure that charity money is not only spending on the charity’s marketing campaign,
but mostly on the cause they support.
 Although people find the aspect of employee wellbeing more important, they still think that
charity is important as well. Therefore, the government should emphasize the importance of
charity to tourism companies.
 An option is that the government implements marketing plans, for instance, “Green up your
business”, for a greener and more sustainable way of tourism.
 The government can make a website were local people can upload the features of their
cities and tourist routes. The Tour Operators can use this on their website. On international
level, countries can choose several cities that tourist might find interesting and they can
upload this.
 The governments should not make more labels or other actions; instead they should provide
more information. Not only to the people, but also to the companies that have the labels and
also those who don’t have the labels. It is important to explain these actions better and give
directions to the hotels. Only this way, people can get convinced of the importance of this
issue.
 
3.3 Cultural Perspective
3.3.1 Research Objectives Relating to the Cultural Aspect
 To determine the role of sustainability in the selection process of the main vacation of
European tourists, with respect to their destination and their cultural activities
 To determine the tourist demand to make local handcrafts themselves
 To determine how important it is for European tourists to experience traditional local food
and watch its preparation process
 To determine the willingness to experience the lifestyle of the local inhabitants
3.3.2 Research Questions
 What role does sustainability play in the selection process of European tourists with
respect to destination and activities?
 To what extent do European tourists value the opportunity to experience traditional local
food and/ or its preparation process?
 Are European tourists interested in experiencing the local inhabitants’ lifestyle?
 Would European tourists value an attraction more if it would be marked as ‘sustainable’?
 Do European tourists want to participate in local festivals and other traditional events?
Question 1: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I like to go to the museum where I
can learn to make local handcrafts myself.
When we analyzed the response to this question we have noticed that in general more than 65%
of the total respondents would like to be able to make local handcrafts themselves. Lithuanian
and Spanish respondents proved to be the most interested in making local handcrafts. The
Finnish, Belgians and Dutch respondents are less willing to engage in this kind of activity.
We believe that the difference for the desire to make local handcrafts between Lithuania and
Spain, and the Finnish Belgians and Dutch respondents is mostly due to the fact that Lithuanian
and Spanish tourists have a lot of specific traditions in their culture that are still alive. The Dutch,
Finnish, and Belgian tourists are more likely to buy local handcrafts as souvenirs.
When reviewing the results of the different participating countries there was no considerate
difference among the age or income groups. We found that the age group over 45 years and the
income group of subjects that earn between 2500 and 3499 euro is slightly more interested in
making local handcrafts.
Question 2: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to have meals at a
restaurant where I can try traditional food and drinks and/or watch food preparation
process.
Around 83% of the respondents were positive about this issue. The most interested respondents
were Lithuanian respondents and the least interested respondents are Belgian and Finnish
respondents.
When we considered groups segmented by age and income, the age group between 30 and 45
years old is slightly more interested in experiencing traditional food and drinks. The income group
below 1500 euro is least interested.
 
Lithuanian tourists are most interested in trying local traditional dishes because they do not have
a lot of different cultures within their society and they want to try something new. Dutch, Belgian,
and Finnish tourists have lower interest in these activities because their countries are multicultural
and are already used to the idea of eating and trying food from foreign countries.
Question 3: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to use

accommodation services in such a place where I can experience the local people’s
lifestyle.
Comparing answers from the all the participating countries, we can say that there are no clear
differences between the respondents’ willingness to use local accommodation and experience the
local lifestyle.
In general we can conclude that the most part of the European population like to get to know the
local traditions (approximately 65%). There are slight differences between the 5 different
countries participating, but they are not important or significant.
The respondents that have the most interest are Finnish (69.3%) and the lowest are the Belgian
respondents (59%).
Again the reason for the Belgian people is that they live between different cultures so they are
used to it already. The Finnish people live in cottages and because this is very close to nature,
they are more down to earth and so they adapt more easily, so they will usually not stay in five-
star hotels but in more simple and humble places where they can meet the local people and local
habits.
From the data it shows that the majority of the respondents gave a negative feedback to this
question. There is some difference between the different countries, the Dutch for instance do like
to use accommodations where they can experience the local peoples lifestyle.
Question 4: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to visit such cultural
attractions that are certified as sustainable.
An average of 66% of the interviewees responded positive to this question. This indicates that
European tourists are moderately interested in a certification for certain cultural attractions.
Question 5: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to participate in

various local festivals and traditional events.
To this question 77% of the respondents replied positive. There were no differences between the
national results worth mentioning.
Tour Operators 
 When the tour operators are offering cultural tourists’ routes, they should inform people
where they can find the Museums that already offer the possibility to make your own local
handcrafts. They can add to the description of the museum what features it offers and what
consumers can not only watch or experience, but also what activities there are available.
 Tour operators should provide some sort of travel package or cultural tourist routes where
tourists can immerse themselves in local culture and the museums, which are offering to do
the local handcrafts, are included in the total price.
 Tour operators should let customers to know the importance of the sustainability. When
there is an increase in a price then customer should be informed about this and should be
explained that he is paying more for the sustainability reasons and why.
 Tour operators should involve more local people in the welcoming process.
 Tour operators should promote more local hotels instead of the big hotels ‘chains.
 
 Tour operators should make more use of local guides, because they have richer knowledge
about their country and they can give useful advises. It is also an improvement for the locals
to enrich their attitude to the foreign languages.
 Tour operators should emphasize why the cultural route or attraction has been marked as
sustainable and what kind of benefits it generates. (Like uses 20% less water or electricity,
which is good for the environment).
 
Government 
 The government should put more general and clearer explanations in several languages in
the museums.
 The government should try to make all kinds of transport to be sustainable and every
transport company should receive subsidy.
 The government should implement the marketing strategy.
 The government should increase mobility to create easier access.
 They should take an example from Finland‘s marketing strategy to implement the
sustainable certifications/ labels in the other European countries. For instance, the Green
Key and Blue Flag etc. aren’t well known. There is quite a big difference between North and
the rest of Europe when it is concerning sustainable/ Eco-labels.
 The government should organize more local festivals to promote country‘s native culture.
Local inhabitants often do not realize what their native country has to offer.
 The government should give the labels for cultural attractions, and if there is already such
kind of labels, they should be developed more.
 The government should support museums to stay sustainable and it can help them to offer
different collections and exhibitions.
 The government should organize The European cultural day in all countries of the Europe
once a year.
 The government should provide a certificate for the restaurants, which use local products
and prepare local and traditional dishes.
 The government should stimulate the museums to offer these kinds of activities by offering
subsidies to museums that do offer the possibility to make your own local handcraft.
 The government could stimulate local festivals that the tour agencies advertise among the
tourists, where cooking shows, to show how traditionally dishes are prepared, and
workshops for making local traditional handcrafts yourself are offered by locals. This will
stimulate the attractiveness of a sustainable tourist route.
 The government should set a strict set of criteria for marking an attraction ‘sustainable’. It
has to be a reward for the attraction to receive this status.
 
 
3.4 Internet Communications and Technology (ICT) Perspective 
3.4.1 Research Objectives Relating to the ICT Perspective 
 Determine the criteria in the decision making process while choosing between responsible
tourist routes
 Determine the use of ICT among European tourists.
 Establish to what extent the European tourist uses ICT tools when planning a sustainable
tourist route and the possibility of offering new ones in a more efficient way.
 Determine how different countries feel about the reliability of social media and opinions of
various acquaintances when composing a tourist route.
 Establish to what extent ICT tools help the European customer and if they have improved his
way of booking.
 Establish to what extent customers consider Internet as a way to help other travellers with
their opinions or just to get information for them.
 What is the attitude of European tourist towards other people’s opinions and the use of the
ICT tools as a source of information such as Web 2.0 (Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace),
search engines (Google, Yahoo, Safari, among others), map navigation systems (Google
maps, Yahoo Local, among others), images from Google Images, Flickr, among others and
specific Web page site reviews?
 Does the European tourist use the Internet for sharing his experiences and media concerning
sustainable routes (forums, official web-sites, Facebook)?
 How reliable are the opinions of people on the Internet and do they differ between different
cultures.
In general, before choosing a responsible route, people consult other opinions on Web pages.
When talking about social networks, not everyone uses Facebook, Twitter or other social
websites, especially Belgium and Finland, to obtain information about responsible tourism routes.
Therefore, people do not tend to write about their experience or upload photos on Blogs or
Facebook due to the little use of these websites.
Nearly everyone uses search engines such as Google, Yahoo as a source of information and
therefore also use map navigation systems provided by these search engines (Google maps).
On the other hand, images are not commonly used on the Internet. For example, Flicker or
Google images are not necessary tools, because nowadays everyone has their camera and do
not have the knowledge on how to use Flicker properly.
Quite a few people use specific Web page reviews to obtain information when planning their trips.
This question has an average of 67% positive answers. This number is once again confirmed by
a number of 40% of people distrusting all the information and opinions they find in the Internet.
Finally, a large majority of the respondents, around 71%, find that Internet is not only used to
inform people but also is a useful way to communicate, exchange opinions and helping in the
decision making process.
 
Question 1: Before I choose a responsible route, including sustainable ones, I consult
other people’s opinions (on web pages such as Trip advisor) to see what they think about
it.
There is still a difference between the highest percentage and the lowest one (80%-50%). In
Lithuania people prefer mouth-to-mouth communication in general.
Question 2: I always consult my friends and family through the Web 2.0 (Facebook,
Twitter, Myspace) to inform myself and obtain documents about all type of responsible
tourist routes.
Mostly the younger generation has Twitter and Facebook account, but the Finnish who has been
interviewed had an average age of 40, so they don’t have Facebook or Twitter, which leads to
negative results.
The Lithuanians had the highest percentage of positive responses, although Internet is very
developed in Lithuania, people prefer to take advice from someone they know.
Question 3: After having made a sustainable tourist route, I write about my experience and
also upload photos on the Internet (forums, official web-sites, Facebook).
There are no big differences between national results, as every country has a comparably low
positive result in the use of social websites. This fact could be by the reason of elder people don’t
use social networks as much as younger people. Also they are concerned about the security of
their personal data, which they don’t want to share. Furthermore, social networks usually don’t
cover all detailed information about a hotel or destination. So that people cannot get everything
they need through for example Facebook or twitter.
Question 4: When I’m planning my trips, I use as a source of information and

recommendations search engines (Google, Yahoo, Safari, among others).
All the nations use search engines as their main source of information. Google is a very
advanced website which finds exactly what you are looking for. You can find extremely detailed
data and even plan every single step of your whole trip.

recommendations map navigation systems (Google maps, Yahoo Local, among others).
Because of the fact that people use GPS and have it on their phones, the use of Google maps
etc. becomes less important.
Spain has the highest percentage using Google maps because they are really involved in
technology and like to share the places they are going to visit in collaborative map navigation
systems.
Comparing search engines and navigation systems, images are used less. This might be
because people search for information through Google, where pictures are automatically shown.
For example, in Finland, people can get instructions on their phones by local companies. That’s
why image websites are being used less than the other systems.

recommendations images (Google Images, Flickr, among others).
Nowadays everyone has their own camera to make photos; therefore they do not need the
Internet. Programs such as Flicker are rather hard and complicated to use. For that reason, these
programs are used less.

recommendations specific Web page site reviews.
Spain and Belgium have the highest use of specific site reviews. For example, the Spanish and
the Belgians often use TripAdvisor and Booking.com. But in general the use of these sites is
 
really low, because they are very specific websites not in Lithuanian language. Furthermore, the
public are not aware of these sites.
Question 8: I believe that all the information and opinions a person can reach on the
Internet regarding responsible tourism and sustainable routes are highly reliable.
All countries seem to be more or less careful with the information they find on the Internet. We
can conclude from this that they probably look for information, but not always believe what they
find. Only the Lithuanians stand out in this result, as their figures are a lot higher than the other
countries. This because they have special forums about different topics (i.e. also concerning
sustainable tourism) and those forums are highly reliable for them.
Question 9: Internet in my opinion is not only worthy to inform people, but is also a useful
way of communication, posting opinions and helping other people in making decisions
regarding responsible tourism.
We expected a higher use of the Internet. Apparently the general idea in people’s minds is that
the Internet is only there to inform, and for leisure.
The Belgians use the Internet the least, they like to inform themselves, but they do not like to
share their own experiences, while the Spanish think opinions posted on internet are not reliable,
they think their opinions are not going to be taken into account, so they don’t post on Internet
themselves.
The Internet is not sustainable at itself, but it contributes to the sustainable development.
Important changes are communicated, new innovative techniques, new responsible tourism
trends and many other things.
Tour Operators
 Use of Social Medias: Facebook, Twitter among other social Medias are increasing
popularity every day. The creation and updating of Social Medias enables the interactivity
with consumers and among them.
 It is a good tool to promotion of hotels and destinations since it is possible to post pictures
and the consumers can express their opinion about the products and services offered.
 Using Social Medias the companies will also be able to reduce costs with printing.
 Green Websites: www.greenpages.be and www.groupon.nl are examples of web pages that
have a sustainable offer, perhaps an entire ready-made route that could be personally
made. The more they book a tourist route with them (for example accommodation,
gastronomy, services), the bigger the reduction will be.
 Promotion of online booking: When customers book through internet, they should be offered
by Tour Operators some kind of incentives (extra facilities on the hotels for example some
kind of discounts on services) for products like hotels or services included in tourist routes
that are sustainable. This could also include the idea of green pages. The Tour Operators
could plant a tree in this case in a nice forest or to substitute the incentive explained above.
 Online Check-in via Internet and phone promotion: It is already available for consumers the
online check-in but it is not yet available for all companies. The process is interesting for
both companies and consumers:
 Consumers: it is time saving since the consumers do not need to wait in lines.
 Companies: it is cost saving because it will reduce the use of paper and save working time
for its employees.
 Increase the reliability of companies website:
 When giving comments to websites such as booking.com and TripAdvisor, it could be a
good idea to secure the information in order to make it a bit more reliable. This integrated
secure payment system should be more advertised in online media. For example, after a
stay in a hotel, customers should receive an original code and reservation number related to
their reservation so that they could use it to make comments only to the reservation they just
 
made.
Government
 Promotion of the Internet use: The government should advertise more the payment online
and educate the population to be able to use the payment systems online.
 Improve the reliability and security of internet: They should create a service to control the
reliability of booking sites in general, and specifically the booking sites that claim to be
sustainable. Furthermore they should provide a list of sites that are approved to be reliable
and secure. Also customers should be given the possibility to select criteria in order to
compose a tourist route according to their own needs.
 Creation and/or promotion of green labels website: The government should advice
companies to become member of Web pages that support labels such as the green key or
similar and get their certifications. When customers book via these Web sites they should be
rewarded with a reduction.
 Creation of websites to promote sustainable tourism routes in different languages: the
government could create special platforms, such as TripAdvisor, promoting sustainable
routes.
 There should be a single and complete Web site built by some department of the
government that explains the whole idea of sustainability applied to tourist routes in order
that they have criterion to choose among the entire offer available for a tourist route.
 Improvement of national websites making it available in several languages: It is still difficult
for a large amount of the population in Baltic countries to understand the languages that are
available on the national websites (English or Spanish for example).
 Creation of mobile guides: Provided by the government agencies, for example guides that
people can download through the internet and put on their cell phones. So the people don’t
need to buy any paper guides because they can just download it. There is also the
possibility to charge for the service.
 “Twitter points”: These are very similar to the special picture points in some attraction parks,
where they invite people to make a picture of a certain place, view or monument. You can
invite people to Twitter or update their Facebook status about this certain place and to tell
what and how they felt when they were there by using hash tags, for example
#nameofthemonument. Other people can use them as well to give their own opinions.
 Use of Social Medias: The reasons mentioned for the use of Social Medias for Tour
Operators are also applicable for governmental agencies. It is possible to promote
sustainable destinations.
 Information up to date on the governmental agencies website: Up to date information helps
to increase the reliability of the website
 
3.5 Economic Perspective 
3.5.1 Research Objectives Relating to the Economic Perspective 
 To identify the average amount of money that a European tourist spends when on
vacation.
 To establish whether European tourists would be willing to pay more for certain aspects
when on vacation.
 To identify whether European tourists would consider changing their main vacation from
a high season to a low season, for both sustainable and economic reasons.
 To determine whether European tourists have economical reasons for spending their
main holiday in their local region.
 How much money does a European tourist spend when (s) he is on their main vacation?
 Are European tourists interested in spending more money on sustainable activities,
accommodation, transportation, and or gastronomy?
 Would European tourists consider changing their main vacation from a high season to a
low season vacation for economic reasons?
 Are there any sustainable or economic reasons for European tourists to spend their main
vacation within their local region?
Question 1: How much do you spend (per person) when you are on your main vacation?
In general, European tourists spend between 601 to 800 Euros when planning their main
vacation. The table below indicates the money spending differences among the various countries
that were researched.
Country Tourist Spending in Euros Percent of National

(Per Person) Population
International Between 601 – 800 22%
Belgium Between 601 – 800 24%
Finland Between 601 – 800 25%
Between 801 – 1,000 25%
Lithuania Between 401 - 600 35%
The Netherlands More than 1,000 26%
Spain Between 601 – 400 28%
Between 201 – 400 27%
From this table, it can be seen that most Lithuanian tourists spend less (between 401 and 600
Euros) in comparison to the other European countries’ tourists who, on average, spend between
601 and 800 Euros during their main vacation.
The reason for Lithuanian tourists to spend less in comparison to the others tourists is because
the average income of a Lithuanian employee is 750 Euros (approximately 220 Euros), which is
much less than the average Western-European employee.
Interestingly, Spanish tourists also had a low spending amount when on vacation: less than 200
Euros. The amount of Spanish tourists (28%) that indicated this is almost equal to the percentage
 
of Spanish tourists who indicated that they spend between 601-800 Euros when they are on
vacation.
An almost equal percentage (27%) of the Spanish tourists indicated that they spend less than 200
Euros per person when they are on their main vacation. The high percentage of tourists who
spend less than 200 Euros when they are on their vacation is indicative of the fact that Spanish
individuals love to travel within their nation, as the Spanish culture possesses rich heritage and
traditions.
It is important to highlight, however, that 72% of the respondents in Spain did not inform how
much their monthly income is, making it difficult to see a relationship between the income and the
average spending per tourist during their main holiday.
In Finland and the Netherlands, one fourth of the tourists are willing to spend more than 1,000
Euros per person during their main holidays. When comparing the average income of the
respondents in all the countries where the research was conducted, it is notable that in Finland
and in the Netherlands the average income of the respondents is higher than 5,000 Euros and
2,000 Euros respectively. It is also important to mention that the average age of the respondents
in Finland are above 40 years old (have security in terms of their finances).
Question 2:
a) Which tourism or leisure activity would you pay more for if it were sustainable?
This part of the economic section was focused on which tourism or leisure activity a tourist would
pay more for if it were sustainable. In the table below the results for tourism or leisure activities
from the participated countries can be found.
In overall, the respondents of the participated countries had chosen local area/products as first
choice; this was similar to the results of Belgium and the Netherlands. It was assumed that these
respondents value local produced products more than hotels, because they prefer something can
stay rather than hotels. The highest percentage is local area/products with more than half of the
respondents, followed by airplane and hotel, respectively 59% and 57%.
Hotel was chosen in the second place for the general analysis, but for Finland (55% of their
respondents), Lithuania (44% of their respondents), and Spain (11% of their respondents), hotel
was the first choice. Moreover, Spanish respondents also have equivalent percentage of
respondents of willing to pay for hotel. Finland has hotel with more than half respondents as well,
but airplane and local area/products were not listed in the top three choices of tourism or leisure
activities. They thought experiences are way more important than transportation, that’s why they
have quite a high rate on organic food and drinks. Lithuanian people think they have a beautiful
nature and landmarks, that’s why they would like to pay more for historical landmarks.
Choices for tourism or leisure activities indicated in general and of the participated
countries, if a person is willing to pay more if it were sustainable.
st nd
Participated 1 choice 2 choice 3rd choice
countries
General Local area/products (13%) Hotel (12%) Organic food (8%)
Belgium Local area/products (58%) Hotel (57%) Airplane (33%)
Finland Hotel (55%) Organic food (50%) Organic drink (44%)
Lithuania Hotel (44%) Local area/products (38%) Historical landmark (28%)
Netherlands Local area/products (69%) Airplane (59%) Hotel (55%)
Spain Hotel (11%) Local area/products (11%) Food (10%)
 
b) If you indicated that you are willing to pay more for a category, what percentage
more of your travelling budget would you dedicate to sustainable activities?
In general, the highest three choices for tourism or leisure activity a tourist would pay more for if it
were sustainable: local area/ products, hotel and organic food. The results show that the most
choices are on the rage of 6-10%. Lithuanian, Dutch, Belgian and Spanish figures show us that it
applies to local area/products, hotel and organic food. In Finland, hotel, organic food and drinks
are the results, which stand out.
General results for the Local area/products, hotel and organic food, in which tourists are willing to
pay more of their travelling budget if it the activities were sustainable.
General, % of Local area/products Hotel Organic food

the travelling (% of the respondents) (% of the (% of the
budget respondents) respondents)
<5% 25 29 34
6 - 10 % 38 36 39
11 - 20 % 26 14 20
21 - 30 % 8 10 5
>30 % 3 11 30
Question 3: If you are willing to pay more for one or more of the categories in question 2,
please indicate why these are important to you?
The reasons given by the respondents, if they are willing to pay more for a sustainable tourism or
leisure activity when choosing a tourist route.
Reasons why a tourist would pay more for a sustainable tourism or Amount of
leisure activity respondents
Because if we do not pay more for these aspects, they will reduce 19
the vacation's level of comfort
Because it increases the income in the zone of reference and 20
contributes to the areas' growth
I believe monuments should be kept intact; therefore financial 10
support is needed by tourist.
I would not mind paying more for local products/food/activities 50
because I am interested in these aspects
I would not mind paying more for sustainable reasons/the future 26
Not applicable 123
Sustainability is important (interest/ opinion) 50
The selected category is responsible for a lot of pollution 9
In general, the most 2 popular reasons are “I would not mind paying more for local products/ food/
activities because I am interested in these aspects” and “sustainability is important (interest/
opinion)”. However, some respondents did not understand this question well; or they just did not
want to answer this question, because it would take too long to answer it. For that reason the
non-applicable part has the highest amount.
When analyzing the results (in Appendix 1) of each participating country, various opinions were
given. This may be caused by the different cultural perception of these participating countries. For
the Netherlands, the most popular reason is “I would not mind paying more for sustainable
reasons/the future” and “sustainability is important (interest/opinion)”. Spain has for the most two
popular reasons: “I would not mind paying more for local products/food/activities because I am
interested in these aspects” and “because it increases the income in the zone of reference and
contributes to the area”. The most popular reasons for Finland are: “sustainability is important
(interest/opinion)” and “I would not mind paying more for sustainable reasons/the future”.
Lithuania and Belgium did not any response for this part.
 
Question 4:During the low seasons (i.e. Not the winter, nor the summer holidays), tourist
destinations tend to be cleaner, have better environmental quality, generate more
employment for the local people, and tend to be cheaper for tourists.
For the reasons stated above, if you could change your holiday period, would you
consider changing your main vacation from a high season to a low season period?
Countries “Yes”
International 75%
Belgium 85%
Finland 83%
Lithuania 47%
The Netherlands 70%
Spain 79%
Quite a high percentage of respondents have answered “yes” to this question, with international
percentage of 75% and a highest national percentage of 85% from Belgium. The lowest
percentage was from Lithuania with 47%, yet it was certainly not a small amount. When the
results were cross analyzed with income classification, it was interesting to see that lower income
groups (<1500, 1500-2499, 2500-3499) have more positive answers than higher income groups
(3500-4499, >4500), as expected.
However, here it is noticeable that many of respondents “WANT TO”, but do not actually “GO” in
low seasons, due to the reason of their work or family members’ schedules. The result only
shows the intention, but not the will to take action.
Question 5:
a) Are there economic reasons for you to spend your vacation holidays in your local
region? What are your reasons?
Countries “No”
International 64%
Belgium 83%
Finland 64%
Lithuania 76%
The Netherlands 74%
Spain 48%
64% of total respondents have answered “No” to this question. Belgium is again with the highest
percentage of 83%, while Spain is the lowest of 48%. It can be seen from the result that
economic reasons barely affect people from Belgium, the Netherlands and Lithuania to travel in
their local region. Following by Finland, people care slightly more than the above stated 3
countries. Spanish people are affected by economic reasons to travel in their local regions the
most. When we cross analyze the result with income classification, it can be seen that income
plays a slight role as well. If seems the group with lowest income (less than 1500 Euros) care less
than middle income one on this issue,
b) If there were, what were your reasons for spending holiday in your local
Countries Reason
International Cheaper in own country
Belgium No reason
Finland Cheaper in own country
Lithuania No reason
 
The Netherlands No reason
Spain Cheaper in own country
Most respondents in question 5a have chosen “No”, that’s why there aren’t many reasons
indicated here. However, we do see that people are willing to take holidays in their local regions
because it’s cheaper than travelling abroad.
From the findings, it is clear that people are ready to pay more for sustainability; there is a
demand as well as a market for it. The readiness to pay more for sustainability is especially
apparent for hotels and local/area products.
Based on the pre-mentioned findings, the following recommendations were developed.
Tour Operators
 When a tour operation offers a sustainable route, it is important for them to let customers
know that they are paying more for sustainability reasons (as sustainable routes are usually
more expensive than non-sustainable routes). The Tour Operators should let the customers
know of the importance of sustainability so that when there is an increase in price the
customer is aware its for the betterment of the environment.
 From the findings, it can be seen that most European tourists do not mind changing their
main vacation from a high-season period to low-season period. Therefore, Tour Operators
should promote low-season vacations more heavily. Moreover, Tour Operators should focus
on sustainable vacations during this period, as they can be offered at a lower price (in
comparison to high-season sustainable tourist routes). Hence, Tour Operators should
innovate and design more seasonal routes containing interesting activities and food; by
promoting and enforcing sustainable vacations during low seasons, it will bring more
economic benefit to the touristic destinations. For example, by generating more jobs and
income, and also having less impact on the environment.
Government
 Data analysis indicated that tourists tend to doubt the benefits of being sustainable by
paying more for the good or service. To minimize the doubt that customers have when
purchasing a sustainable good or service from a firm, the government is recommended to
implement an organization specialized in the auditing of firms who offer sustainable services.
This particular organization should then be authorized to give a “verification” that indicates
the credibility of the firm’s sustainability services. This can be done making a EU-wide
symbol which firms are authorized to utilize in any of their communication medias.
 Raise more awareness by providing information about being sustainable and the benefits of
being sustainable in hotels, airplanes, and other sites or transportation means that are often
used by tourists. By raising awareness of the benefits of sustainability, it might influence
customers to become greener, or at least allow customers to make a conscious decision
when considering to purchase a good or service that is sustainable.
 It is advised to give a subsidy or tax cut to transportation companies who offer sustainable
transportation means to enforce transportation companies to go green.
 Make sustainable activities more attractive through implementing a miles system: “Green
Miles”. This miles system can be used in order to save miles or points that may be
exchanged for discounts on goods or services members are on holiday.
 
4 General Conclusion and Recommendations 
4.1 General Conclusion 
The following chapter answers the main research question:
To determine the role that sustainability plays in the selection process of European
tourists with respect to their holiday destination and holiday activities.
Concluding from the data analysis that was established in the previous chapter, it can be said that
European tourists do have an interest in being sustainable, nevertheless have limited access or
knowledge of the various sustainable routes that exist.
This conclusion is based on the fact that 60% of all the respondents indicated that they are willing
to use environmentally friendly transportation. The enthusiasm for sustainable public
transportation is especially apparent in Lithuania, where 73% of their participants indicated that
they would be willing to utilize green transportation. Also, with regard to the environmental
aspect, nations who are infrastructure-oriented should promote their country in nations that are
more nature-oriented and vice-versa.
Moreover, a high number of respondents (82%) indicated that they use search engines to find
tourist routes and information regarding them, which is followed by navigation sites such as
Google-Maps (75%).
The role of sustainability is clearly visible in the cultural part of this questionnaire. From the
results that were received from the participants it can be concluded that especially the
participation in festivals and events is of utmost importance. Their underlying thought is that this
gives a great possibility to meet the local culture and traditions by immerging into the total
process. In contrary to the previous point the making of local handcrafts is not that popular in
some nations. The Spanish and Lithuanian population in contrary to the Finnish, Belgian and
Dutch are very much interested in participating the making of handcrafts itself, while the others
would rather overlook the total process.
Another important factor in this aspect is the local food. The main reason for this could be that
when people go abroad they can enjoy the local and traditional food in the right context. This is
particularly important for people in the age group from 30 to 45 years. The younger population
probably cannot afford to pay for many of these traditional dishes and prefer to eat at fast food
chains such as McDonald’s or Burger King for example.
The possibility to enjoy accommodation at the homes and even working with the local population
in order to really integrate into their lives is not an essential point for the participants.
Concerning the social aspect, the participants still have some difficulties. For example, the
Spanish population does not like to meet the local inhabitants of the place they are visiting during
the tourist routes. In the contrary, the Dutch people show more interest to immerse in the local
life. Also the people that earn more than 4500 Euro have more interest in it.
An interesting fact is that there is a mutual understanding concerning the question that companies
need to treat employees with respect.
The general idea is that people don’t want a reduction coming from the government, except the
youngest participants, probably because they have less money than the age group between 30
and 45 years old. This is quite strange, because we had the general idea that people would like to
receive a discount when they could get one.
 
The difference between the countries concerning the question that makes the people choose
between charity and a company that takes good care for his employees is also something that is
worth pointing out. The only country that generally favours charity is Lithuania while the
preference of the other countries goes out to the other aspect that is highlighted in this country.
On average European tourists spend approximately 601 – 800 Euros when on vacation and a
majority indicated that they do not have economic reasons for spending their holiday in the local
region. However, many (70%) did indicate that they would consider changing their min vacation
from a high-season vacation to a low-season period. Moreover, European tourists are prepared to
spend between 5 to 10% more on local/area products and hotels.
4.2 General Recommendations 
ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE
Government:
• The governments should carry out surveys through the local population to find out
the most used type of transportation and then come up with ideas how to make it
more sustainable. Governments should promote public transportation by making it
cheaper and making it more attractive and easy to use. In this way more people
will use the sustainable transportation options. Government could improve the
sustainability of public transportation in busses and trains by using bio-fuel in order
to minimize the bad impacts on the environment.
• National governments should invest in the educating of their people by advertising,

organizing seminars or giving school lessons. When starting a sustainable
education from early age, the sustainability will become a way of living, not only a
habit for people. Therefore there could be more governmental funding for
sustainable education and promotion to enhance sustainability in one’s country.
The focus point could be especially in business studies, because these students
will play a leading role in the future world economy. The government could
implement more projects (e.g. a fair about sustainability) to get local people more
involved in sustainability. This way they could also promote local nature better and
get their people to know how beautiful and versatile their own countries are and
what they have to offer.
SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE
Government:
• The government can make a website were local people can upload their features
of their cities and tourist routes in which they can meet local people. The Tour
Operators should use this on their websites. On European level, countries can
choose several cities that tourists might find interesting.
• The Eastern-countries should get some help with their governmental structure
(especially social security system, trade-unions). At the same time they get an
external audit by the EU about this matter (if a country image is more secure,
tourists are more comfortable to see the nation). They should imply a regulation for
 
companies especially in the tourism sector to do a personnel questionnaire. So the
companies can be graded on the working conditions/ employee satisfaction. They
have to achieve a certain grade in order to receive a certain personnel-friendly
label. When grades are bad/ not good enough, the companies will get a fine and
have to do some improvements concerning the working conditions.
CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE
Government:
• They could stimulate local festivals that the tour agencies advertise among the
tourists, where cooking shows, to show how traditional dishes are prepared, and
workshops for making local traditional handcrafts yourself are offered by locals. This
will stimulate the attractiveness of a sustainable tourist route.
• The government should set a strict set of criteria for marking an attraction, product
or leisure activity as ‘sustainable’. A company can be rewarded, if it is sustainable
and given a ‘sustainable status’ by the government. Moreover, they should give
those who are using sustainability or sustainable logos as marketing tool to gain
personal profit, a fine.
Also, they should take an example from Finland‘s marketing strategy to implement
the sustainable certifications/ labels in the other European countries. For instance,
the Green Key and Blue Flag etc. aren’t well known. There is quite a big difference
between North and the rest of Europe when it is concerning sustainable/ Eco-labels.
Tourism agencies:
• When the Tour Operators are offering cultural tourists’ routes, they should inform
people where they can find the Museums that already offer the possibility to make
your own local handcrafts.
For tourists who prefer watching, rather than making their own handcrafts, they can also
watch the process of making the local handcrafts.
They can add a description of the museum in brochures, information on websites or
information on social media. Also which features it offers and what consumers can watch
or experience, but also which activities there are available. Thus the complete programme
they offer, so the consumer can know in advance what to expect.
INTERNET AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY PERSPECTIVE
Government:
• The government should create a service to control the reliability of booking sites in
general, and specifically the booking sites that claim to be sustainable. Furthermore
they should provide a list of sites that are approved as reliable. Also customers
should be given the possibility to select criteria in order to compose a tourist route
according to their own needs. Additionally, to increase the knowledge of
sustainability, travel agencies and governments should gather all the information
needed into one page. They should check their official website on a regular basis,
to make sure updated and correct information is online. This way the customers
would become more aware of the sustainability and would probably be attracted to
different sustainable tourist routes options.
 
• In fact travel agencies loose customers due to the popularity of Internet. But what
they can do is working with the government and interfering more on the Internet.
For example, travel agencies and hotels can open a Facebook page or use other
social media with all detailed information on it in order to promote their products so
that people don’t have to view thousands of WebPages and choose one of them;
this provides for an easier selection process. Facebook is easy to use and more
informal, customers can not only see the information about their booking, but also
other customers’ review and comments, which makes it more trust worthy. They
should promote sustainable tourist routes, and explain all the issues in the page, so
that people don’t have to surf on different pages, which use a lot of energy and
time.
Tourism agencies:
• When customers book through the Internet Tour Operators should offer them some
kind of incentives (extra facilities on the hotels for example some kind of discounts
on services) for products like hotels or services included in tourist routes that are
sustainable. This could also include the idea of green pages. The Tour Operators
could plant a tree in this case in a nice forest or to substitute the incentive explained
before.
ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE
Government:
• From earlier findings we have found out that customers doubt the implementation of
the sustainability aspects that they pay extra costs for. There should be surveys
done among companies and Tour Operators to show to customers. It is really
important for companies and Tour Operators to convince customers that they will
get what they pay for, sustainable tourism is worth a try, and people should realise
that there are sustainable activities happening. To minimize the doubt that
customers have when purchasing a sustainable good or service from a firm, the
government is recommended to implement an organization specialized in the
auditing of firms who offer sustainable services. This particular organization should
then be authorized to give a “verification” that indicates the credibility of the firm’s
sustainability services. This can be done making a EU-wide symbol which firms are
authorized to utilize in any of their communication medias.
Tourism agencies:
• Raise more awareness by providing information about being sustainable and the
benefits of being sustainable in hotels, airplanes, and other sites or transportation
means that are often used by tourists. By raising awareness of the benefits of
sustainability, it might influence customers to become greener, or at least allow
customers to make a conscious decision when considering to purchase a good or
service that is sustainable. In this example, a Tour Operators can offer a
sustainable route, it is important for them to let customers know that they are paying
more for sustainability reasons (as sustainable routes are usually more expensive
than non-sustainable routes). The Tour Operators should let the customers know of
 
the importance of sustainability so that when there is an increase in price the
customer is aware it is for the betterment of the environment.
 
5 Appendices 
5.1 Appendix 1: Research Findings 
The following data illustrates the preliminary research findings and an analysis of the survey
results.
The total number of collected surveys is 306.
Before looking at the data below, it is important to highlight that the scale from 1 to 7 on the
graphs represents:
 1 – Completely disagree
 4 – Neutral or no opinion
 7 – Completely agree
The numbers 2 and 3 express variations of feelings and emotions when disagreeing with the
statement, whereas 5 and 6 express variations of feelings and emotions when agreeing with the
statement.
Environmental Perspective
 
 
 
Social Perspective
 
 
 
Cultural Perspective
 
 
 
Internet and Communications Technology (ICT) Perspective
 
 
 
 
Economic Perspective
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.2 Appendix 2: Questionnaire 
 
 
 
 
 

IP Forte 3 - Final International Report

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

IP Forte 3 - Final International Report

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

IP Forte III

To achieve the main objective, the following sub-objectives were created:

 To determine whether European tourists value sustainable (public) transportation means.

The following characteristics outline the target group:

 Interviewees had to be of a minimum age of 17 years old.

2.1 Table: detailed questionnaire information

Questionnaire Translation Bias

The main objective of this environmental aspect is:

To achieve the main objective, the following sub-objectives were created:

 To determine whether European tourists value sustainable (public) transportation means.

For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.

Question 1. The possibility to use environmentally friendly transportation options (e.g.

Question 4. The possibility to enhance responsible tourism (keeping in mind nature’s

Question 5. The possibility to experience natural sights (e.g. scenery, geological

Question 1. The possibility to use environmentally friendly transportation options (e.g.

Question 4. The possibility to enhance responsible tourism (keeping in mind nature’s

Question 5. The possibility to experience natural sights (e.g. scenery, geological

3.2.2 Research Questions

3.2.3 Research Findings

For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.

3.3.1 Research Objectives Relating to the Cultural Aspect

3.3.2 Research Questions

For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.

Question 3: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to use

Question 5: When choosing a responsible tourist route, I would like to participate in

For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.

Question 4: When I’m planning my trips, I use as a source of information and

Question 5: When I’m planning my trips, I use as a source of information and

Question 6: When I’m planning my trips, I use as a source of information and

Question 7: When I’m planning my trips, I use as a source of information and

For graph and figures, please refer to appendix 1.

Country Tourist Spending in Euros Percent of National

General, % of Local area/products Hotel Organic food

Based on the pre-mentioned findings, the following recommendations were developed.

• National governments should invest in the educating of their people by advertising,

INTERNET AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY PERSPECTIVE

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi

     IP Forte III 