Investigates how mobility experiments influence travel decisions in tourists, suggesting effective strategies for climate change mitigation.
Purpose One of the most important climate change mitigation measures in tourism is the decision on travel mode. To change this decision away from private vehicles requires both behavioural changes by visitors as well as new or improved alternative transportation offers. Design/methodology/approach To investigate behavioural change, this study applied a discrete choice experiment integrated into a survey which was distributed among tourists and daytrip guests from the metropolitan area around Vienna, Austria (n = 5,544). The study was strengthened through a survey among attraction managers (n = 21) and mobility providers (n = 10) in the metropolitan area of Vienna. Findings The survey demonstrates that mobility experiments, such as free public transportation on select days or for specific events, are likely to initiate significant changes in the decision-making of visitors and guests. Possible mitigation and adaptation strategies by providers, such as parking fees are not impactful enough to lead to climate change mitigation. Practical implications The study provides ideas and practical solutions to initiate behavioural change that can be transferred and tested in other destinations. Furthermore, matching supply and demand sides is a precondition to establish successful mitigation strategies. The findings illustrate the fact that carefully designed short-term offers open doors for effective mitigation in tourism. Originality/value This study combines the behavioural change theory with mobility experiments in tourism. The results advance knowledge on how to trigger behavioural change through unique, carefully designed nudges considering both the demand and supply side. The results show that new collaborations and new products are required to initiate behavioural change.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wanner et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: