The emerging consumption of, and demand for slow travel · (Miller et al. 2010), with a number of...

1

The emerging consumption

of, and demand for slow

travel:

Just another niche travel adjective?

Submitted by Mair Smith to the

University of Exeter

as a paper towards the degree of

Master of Science by advanced study in

Sustainable Development

August 2012

I certify that all material in this dissertation which is not my own work has been

identified with appropriate acknowledgement and referencing and I also certify

that no material is included for which a degree has previously been conferred

upon me.

.................................................................................... Signature of Candidate

Abstract

580002734

2

Tourists are increasingly travelling further, faster and more often than ever

before, with increasing pressure consequently being placed on the environment and

the climate system. This contemporary hypermobility has been argued unsustainable,

with slow travel proposed as one solution for a more responsible form of tourism, due

primarily to the use of low carbon transport. This study examines the current

consumption of, and demand for slow travel. Analysis of social media identifies and

characterises four typologies of current slow travellers. Defined by a variety of values

and motives, the typologies indicate varying commitments to different components of

slow travel and suggest that interpretations do not consistently involve reduced

emissions or represent a more sustainable form of travel. The wider demand for slow

travel is assessed through an online quantitative survey. Based on 261 responses,

slow travel is shown to be perceived as widely viable however, the time and costs

associated with slow transport are broadly considered barriers. Analysing the results of

cluster analysis, segments supportive of slow travel are found to be more easily

defined by pro-environmental attitudes and a strong locus of control than by socio-

demographic and economic variables. The total support for some form of slow travel

suggests that it represents more than a niche market. However, it is only a significantly

smaller segment who are committed to low carbon transport, casting doubt on the

viability and support for slow travel as an environmentally sustainable form of travel

and tourism.

Key words slow travel, sustainable tourism, mobility, low carbon transport, segmentation, social

media analysis

Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank her academic supervisor Dr Stewart Barr for all his help

and guidance throughout the year and Simon Wrench from the company Inntravel for

his support and suggestions. The author would also like to express her gratitude to all

respondents of the survey who gave up their time and those who helped in sharing it

both on and offline.

3

Table of Contents CHAPTER HEADING

PAGE & sections & subheadings

TITLE PAGE 1

ABSTRACT & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 5 DEFINITIONS 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION 6 1.1 Climate change and the case for a modal shift 1.2 Slow travel and sustainability 7 1.3 Rationale for academic research 8 1.4 Aims and Objectives 9 1.5 Structure 10 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 11 2.1 Sustainable mobility 11 2.2 The concept of slow travel 13 2.3 The evolution of slow travel 16 2.2.1 Slow Movement 16 2.2.2 Slow travel over time 16 2.2.3 Slow travel in mass and new media 17 2.4 The profile of a slow traveller 18 2.3.1 Values and motivations 19 2.3.2 Slow travel identity 21 2.5 The potential viability of slow travel 22 2.4.1 Barriers 22 2.4.2 The popularity of slow travel 24 3.0 METHODOLOGY 26 3.1 Research Design 26 3.2 Qualitative data 26 3.2.1 Collection 26 3.2.2 Analysis 27 3.3 Quantitative data 28 3.3.1 Data collection 29 3.3.2 Survey design 29 3.3.3 Data analysis 30 3.3.4 Results dissemination 31 4.0 QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS 32 4.1 Characteristics of slow travel bloggers 32 4.2 Values and motivations 34

4.2.1 Engagement with people and place 4.2.2 Personal development 4.2.3 Environmental and ethical values

34

36

37

4.2.4 Antithesis of fast 38 4.3 What is the typical profile of a slow traveller? 40

580002734

4

5.0 QUANTITATIVE RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 42 5.1 Descriptive statistics 42 5.2 How willing and able are individuals to adopt slow travel? 43

5.2.1 The propensity to adopt slow travel and its perceived viability

43

5.2.1 Barriers to slow travel 45 5.3 Cluster analysis 47 5.3.1 Defining clusters by slow travel support 47

5.3.2 Socio-demographic, economic and attitude profiling of clusters

50

6.0 CONCLUSION 55

6.1 Summary of key findings 55 6.2 Evaluation of study and further research 57 6.3 Concluding comments 59 REFERENCES 60 APPENDICES 68 Appendix 1: Blogs analysed 68 Appendix 2: Dendogram produced from cluster analysis 69

Appendix 3: Screeplot and results of PCA rotated factor analysis

70

Appendix 4: Profiling clusters by travel preferences 71 Appendix 5: Questionnaire 73

5

List of Tables and Figures

Tables Page

2.1 Characteristics of slow travel based on dimensions identified by Dickinson

et al. (2011)

14

3.1 Social media platforms and their key features (adapted from Parker et al.

2011)

27

3.2 Questionnaire structure and question rationale 29

4.1 Examples of blogs analysed and descriptions 32

5.1 Cluster profiles according to slow travel principles 48

5.2 Comparison of clusters with socio-demographic and economic variables 50

5.3 Attitudes and wider behaviour of clusters 52

6.1 Evaluation of research methods 57

6.2 Future research 58

Figures

2.1 Conceptual framework of slow travel developed by Lumsdon and

McGrath (2011:12)

13

2.2 Dimensions which characterise interpretations of slow travel (Dickinson

et al. 2011:287)

15

4.1a “Malaysian dessert made from sweet red beans, sugar and jelly served

on a bed of condensed milk.” (withoutwings.org)

35

4.1b “Makhmali Chicken Kebab, Nepal” (Dave, thelongestwayhome.com) 35

4.2 Suggested typologies of slow travellers resulting from analysis of social

media

40

5.1 Age bracket percentages of sample [all statistics rounded to 0 decimal

places]

42

5.2 Source from which respondents accessed survey 43

5.3 Future holiday intentions related to slow travel components 44

5.4 Attitudes towards the viability of slow travel for various socio-

demographics

45

5.5 Barriers to slow travel 46

5.6 Interpretation of profiles of four clusters 49

5.7 Profiling clusters by socio-demographic, economic, attitude and

behaviour variables

54

Definitions

Social media – a collection of internet based applications based on the creation and

sharing of user generated content

Slow travel- enjoyment of the journey, the unexpected and authentic off the beaten path

experiences characterised by a slower pace and intimate engagement with people and

places. Additionally includes conscious choices related to lowering personal carbon

emissions through use of low carbon transport, travelling less often and closer to home.

580002734

6

1. Introduction

Tourists are increasingly travelling further, faster and more often, for shorter

durations than ever before (Mason, 2005; Peeters et al. 2006; Dickinson and Peeters,

2012) with little sign of a reduction in movement in the long term (Sheller and Urry,

2006). However, traditional perceptions of the benefits of increasing mobility have

begun to be questioned (Metz, 2008), with conventional mass tourism increasingly

considered inherently unsustainable (Markwell et al. 2012). A concurrent rejection of

the cult of speed has seen a counter movement develop in tourism (Markwell et al.

2012) based on the proposal that a reduction in speed is an effective method for

mitigating the currently high environmental burden of transport (Nijkamp and Baaijens,

1999). The terms slow travel and tourism were consequently conceived to describe a

new form of travel, purported as offering a sustainable future market for tourism,

combining low carbon transport and enjoyment of the journey with deep engagement

with local food, cultures and communities (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). Interest in

the concept is growing with a recent proliferation of websites, blogs and products for

the slow traveller over the past few years (Markwell et al. 2012). However, the term has

only recently attracted academic attention and therefore little is known about the

consumption and demand for slow travel. As a result, it remains debatable if the term

can offer a widely viable alternative to mainstream tourism, or if it simply adds to the

ever increasing number of “niche travel adjectives” (Gelber, 2012:1).

1.1 The necessity for a modal shift

The increasing consumption of travel and tourism has imposed growing

pressure on sustainability (Wheeller, 1991; van Goeverden, 2007; Bows et al. 2009).

Through the mobility it implies, tourism represents a significant contributor of

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Ceron and Dubois, 2007). Estimated to account for

5% (within the range 4.0-6.0%) of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (Gössling et

al. 2008), the contribution of the tourist industry has become an increasing concern

(Dickinson et al. 2011). 75% of these emissions are attributable to transport (World

Tourism Organisation and United Nations Environment Programme: WTO and UNEP,

2008), of which air travel and the private motor car the largest contributors (Høyer,

2000; Lumsdon, 2000).

Air travel is a significant contributor of GHG emissions, responsible for

approximately 40% of tourist CO2 emissions (WTO and UNEP, 2008). Furthermore, the

impact of aircraft GHGs is augmented due to the altitude at which they are emitted.

Altering the chemical and physical properties of the upper atmosphere, the emissions

The emerging consumption and demand for slow travel

7

and cloud effects from aircraft result in changes to the radiative forcing of the climate

system, with consequent additional climate change impacts (Lee et al. 2009). The

significant growth in short haul air travel, although travelling comparatively small

distances, has also led to disproportionately more fuel used per mile as the greatest

amount of fuel is required in ascent (Chapman, 2007). As a result, taking into account

the overall predicted growth rate, aviation emissions could exceed the total UK carbon

allowance by 2050 (Anderson et al. 2006).

There is therefore a critical need to uncouple tourism growth from increasing

GHG emissions linked to high carbon transport (Rheinberger et al. 2007). A modal shift

in tourist travel towards methods of low carbon transport has consequently been

argued as necessary (Peeters and Landré, 2012) and critical to promoting sustainable

travel (Holland and Holland, 2012).

Potential has been identified for encouraging more sustainable travel methods

(Miller et al. 2010), with a number of indicators suggesting changes in the tourism

market (Lumsdon, 2000) and a growth in the demand for non-aviation based holidays

(Holland and Holland, 2012). The development of corresponding tourism products has

therefore represented a key challenge for sustainable travel and tourism (Peeters et al.

2006) with a variety of terms emerging and purporting to offer alternative forms of

tourism (Soininen, 2011) such as eco- and responsible tourism (Markwell et al. 2012).

Slow travel is one of the most recent trends to emerge, currently described as a niche

market but increasingly argued to represent a more sustainable form of transport by

academics (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

1.2 Slow travel and sustainability

Relating to the mode and a reduction in speed, slow travel is a holistic idea that

combines destination and travel-based experiences along with the preference for low

carbon transport (Dickinson et al. 2010; Dickinson, et al. 2011, Markwell et al. 2012). In

a review of definitions from various prominent slow travel websites, a recent Mintel

(2011) report concluded that slow travel represents the trips made to a destination,

usually comprising of train, bus, boat or bike, together with the exploration of the area

around that destination, including interaction with people, places, culture and food. For

consistency, slow travel is predominantly referred to in this study however this is often

used interchangeably with slow tourism in wider literature (Dickinson et al. 2011). In

this context, the concept refers only to travel for tourism and not for business or daily

commuting.

The slow movement is argued to have much in common with sustainable

tourism (Heitmann et al. 2011, Lumsdon and McGrath, 2011), with the term slow travel

580002734

8

argued to embody sustainable development within its philosophy (Matos, 2004). The

primary reason for this is the use of low-carbon transport. With air travel the most

ecologically costly act of individual consumption, the switch to alternative modes is a

significant method for reducing personal carbon emissions (Dickinson and Lumsdon,

2010). Furthermore, in development of a backcasting scenario for sustainable tourism

mobility, Ceron and Dubois (2007:201) envisage “stays are longer and the travel

between home and destination is often slower (more train and bus), considered as

pleasant and interesting”. Slow travel epitomises this description with longer stays at

destinations and preferences for local businesses ensuring increased economic

benefits for local economies (Caffyn, 2009; Heitmann et al. 2011). It is also predicted

that such prolonged stays lead tourists to seek local accommodation or homestays

over hotels, further contributing to the local economy (Buckley, 2011) and maximising

the tourist multiplier effect (Heitmann et al. 2011). In addition to the low carbon nature

of slow travel transport modes, consumption of local food often reduces packaging and

the emissions associated with food miles (Caffyn, 2009). Meanwhile, walking and

cycling have health benefits, reduce congestion and encourage deeper engagement

with people and place (Metz, 2008).

1.3 Rationale for academic research

Pursued by a small number of researchers, slow travel has only recently

become the subject of academic concern (Heitmann et al. 2011) and consequently the

opportunities for further research are vast (Heitmann et al. 2011). It is asserted that

there is a critical need to examine the market and demand for slow, low carbon tourism

(Hares et al. 2010) and to assess the propensity of consumers to embrace the

principles of slow travel (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010; Markwell et al. 2012). Further

exploration of the role of identity in relation to market segments has also been argued

necessary (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010; Fullagar, 2012). This study will therefore

contribute valuable, exploratory research to the emerging agenda of slow travel.

Whilst the majority of papers focussed on slow travel and even air travel have

emerged recently, they are still largely based on data collected prior to the recession.

As slow travel is argued to complement current attitudes and behaviours in the

recession (Caffyn, 2009), this study also, importantly, provides an update on the

attitudes of individuals within the current economic climate. The concept of slow travel

has also received little critical attention by academics (Markwell et al. 2012) with the

majority of publications included in books (such as Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010 and

Fullager, et al. 2012) and theses (Kruithof, 2009; Soininen, 2011) and is therefore not

consistently peer-reviewed in reputable, well-known journals. Although acknowledging


9

challenges, researchers such as Lumsdon, (author of Slow Travel in the Marches,

2011) are evidently advocates who practise slow travel themselves, rendering a

detached perspective perhaps difficult to achieve.

The study also links a number of fields including climate change mitigation and

sustainable tourism, situated in previous research of air travel attitudes and behaviour.

Sustainable tourism and travel have been predominantly treated as isolated research

themes (Høyer, 2000; Lumsdon, 2000; Barr and Prillwitz, 2012) with greater integration

argued to offer synergistic gains (Becken, 2006). Travel is arguably an integral

component of tourism, and it has therefore been asserted that sustainable mobility

needs to be linked to sustainable leisure travel (Holden, 2007) and tourism (Høyer,

2000). With both mobility and tourism intrinsic to slow travel (Dickinson and Lumsdon,

2010), this study therefore addresses the lack of integration across academic agendas.

Existing research of air travel behaviour has revealed attitudes do not

consistently translate across contexts and found environmental behaviours to differ

substantially “at home and away” (Barr et al. 2010:477). Barr et al. (2010) consequently

argue that previous segmentation analysis has been limited in combining the two types

of transport behaviour. This study therefore contributes to research by examining

holiday transport in isolation from daily transport use.

1.4 Aims and objectives

The aim of this study is to explore the consumption of, and demand for slow

travel, investigating the motives, values and identity of current slow travellers and the

propensity of consumers to embrace slow travel principles. Qualitative analysis of slow

travel social media, in addition to quantitative data collection, investigates what

motivates individuals to support and may prevent others from choosing slow travel.

Using the questionnaire data, segments of the sample open to slow travel principles

are identified along with their typical socio-demographic and economic characteristics

and attitudes. The guiding research questions are as follows, whereby question 1 is

satisfied by objective (a), question 2 by objective (b) and 3 by objectives (c) and (d).

1. What is the typical profile of a slow traveller, their characteristics, values and

motivations?

2. How willing and able are individuals to adopt slow travel principles?

3. Whose travel preferences support slow travel principles according to socio-

demographic, economic and attitudinal variables?

580002734

10

Objectives

a) To identify, through analysis of slow travel social media, predominantly blogs,

the characteristics, values and motivations of current slow travellers.

b) To identify, using an online questionnaire, the propensity to adopt slow travel,

attitudes towards its viability and significant barriers preventing consideration of

its principles.

c) To segment individuals by their preferences for slow travel principles using

questionnaire data so that different groups can be identified by their relative

support for slow travel.

d) To define key characteristics of the segments that are supportive of slow travel.

1.5 Structure

This chapter has introduced the reasoning for slow travel and rationale for

research along with the aims and objectives of the study. This is subsequently followed

by an academic literature review which leads onto the methodology for this study.

Chapters 4 and 5 respectively provide an analysis and discussion of the qualitative and

quantitative research. Chapter 6 finally summarises the findings and suggests

limitations of the study and potential for future research.


11

2. Literature Review This chapter situates the study within existing academic research. Beginning

with sustainable mobility and an outline of slow travel, subsequent sections of the

chapter discuss the evolution of slow travel and the currently limited existing research

base. This leads to a discussion on the extent to which slow travel represents a niche

product.

2.1 Sustainable mobility

It has been suggested that excessive consumption of tourism since the late 20th

century, in particular holidays accessed through air travel, is a growing addiction

contributing to ‘binge mobility’ (Urry, 2010; Cohen et al. 2011) also termed

hypermobility, the substantial growth in temporary mobility (Hall, 2005). Developments

in travel technology have increased the speed of travel and opened up new

destinations to mass tourism (Dickinson and Peeters, 2012). Despite the events of

September 11th 2001, the multiple suicide bombings on worldwide public transport

networks and global concerns such as the spread of numerous viruses, the speed,

scale and intensity of movement around the world continues to increase (Sheller and

Urry, 2006).

Meanwhile, the expansion of budget airlines has resulted in widespread growth

in low cost, short-haul air travel with a profound effect on leisure markets, particularly in

Europe and the United States, where even price sensitive travellers are now able to

travel regularly (Mason, 2005). As a result, the social norms relating to travel have

been redefined with social events increasingly celebrated as opportunities to make a

trip abroad, frequently involving air travel (Randles and Mander, 2009a). Annual, long-

distance mobility has become an “expectation” (Shaw and Thomas, 2006:213) with

practices such as overseas travel for Christmas, weddings, stag and hen nights,

consequently becoming normalised (Randles and Mander, 2009a). The time-space

compression described by Harvey (1990) has led to a widening spatial distance of

social networks and with it, the obligation to travel long distances to visit family and

friends (Larsen et al., 2006; Larsen, et al. 2007).

The sustainability of this compulsive mobility has begun to be questioned with

suggestions that environmental constraints and moral pressures condemning travel

could lead to the end of tourism (Ceron and Dubois, 2007). Improvements in efficiency

and technology are argued as insufficient, with a modal shift and reduced travel

distance to destinations required to meet to meet emissions targets (Peeters and

Dubois, 2010).

580002734

12

Often ignored in favour of environmental sustainability, the social dimension to

sustainable mobility should also be considered. Taking into account ecological and

social sustainability, access to air travel is currently unjust as the majority of mobility is

held by a minority of the global population (Høyer, 2000), often those on higher

incomes and of higher social class (Shaw and Thomas, 2006; Randles and Mander,

2009a). Whilst airports continue to expand in order to cater for the increasing demand

for air travel, it is estimated that only 2-3% of the global population travel by air each

year (Peeters et al. 2006). This uneven distribution has been argued to contribute to

wider environmental injustice as the consequences of climate change, resulting from

GHG emissions, are predicted to disproportionately affect poorer groups who bear the

least responsibility and are the least frequent air travellers (Randles and Mander,

2009a). The World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

consequently argue that an objective for sustainable development is to allow more

equal mobility opportunities within and between nations (WBCSD, 2004). Exploring the

consumption and demand for slow travel will indicate to what extent the concept is

equally available to all and and complies with suggestions for sustainable mobility.

It is also necessary to consider the economic impacts of tourist mobility (Burns

and Bibbings, 2009). Accounting for 75% of arrivals, air travel is economically important

to the UK and its tourism sector, as with many other economies worldwide (Holland

and Holland, 2012). In order to sustain current levels of mobility, which provide

significant economic benefits worldwide, a sustainable mobility will therefore require a

significant reduction in car and air travel, replaced instead with energy efficient land-

based means of transport such as bus, train, tram, cycling and walking, sometimes

referred to as soft mobility (Høyer, 2000).

Combining this with aforementioned sustainability priorities, will also require

significant changes to the distribution of leisure mobility (Ceron and Dubois, 2007) and

necessitate both a strengthening of alternative transport modes and persuading

travellers to value such traditional, slow means of travel (Høyer, 2000). Creating a

modal shift is argued to require the targeting of intrinsic values and motivations (Miller

et al. 2010) and a need to appeal to the self-identity of an individual (Crompton, 2008).

This research assists with this targeting through identifying the values and motivations

of individuals who have already chosen slow travel modes.


13

2.2 The concept of slow travel

Recent research into slow travel has focussed predominantly on establishing

several fundamental principles which have come to represent the contemporary

academic definition of slow travel. The framework shown in Figure 2.1 illustrates the

core dimensions associated with a slow travel holiday, in contrast to fast travel. As this

suggests, the philosophy of slowness as the antithesis of fast is argued fundamental to

the experience and not purely for environmental purposes (Lumsdon and McGrath,

2011; Soininen, 2011; Fullagar et al. 2012).

Figure 2.1. Conceptual framework of slow travel developed by Lumsdon and McGrath

(2011:12)

As demonstrated by Figure 2.1, Lumsdon and McGrath (2011) argue the

constituent elements to be slowness, travel experience and environmental

consciousness. Reflecting similar principles, Dickinson et al. (2011) suggest that slow

travel is characterised by travel mode, experience and a consideration of the

environment, each of which is further described and explained in Table 2.1.

580002734

14

Table 2.1 Characteristics of slow travel based on dimensions identified by Dickinson et al. (2011)

Characteristic Description and explanation

Mode/

slowness

Refers to the preference for train, local bus or bike or other slow

transport in lieu of car or air travel (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

Much academic literature focuses on overland methods of travel

however, modes such as sailing and canoeing are also encompassed

by the concept (Fullagar et al. 2012). Such modes are argued to

facilitate a closer connection to people and place with the journey

celebrated and enjoyed as much as the destination itself (Markwell et

al. 2012).

Experience Describes the desire for active and intimate engagement with a place

over passive observation (Fullagar et al. 2012). Slow travellers seek to

embrace local culture, history and cuisine and to connect and interact

with local people and communities (Fullagar et al. 2012), learning local

languages and attempting to live like a local (Gardner, 2009). Often

referred to as a state of mind (Gardner, 2009:12), the pace and

mindset of slow travel is frequently juxtaposed to that of mass tourists

and the pursuit of a ‘bucket list’ of destinations and tourist hotspots

(Fullagar et al. 2012:4). The concept is described by Gardner

(2009:11) as “making conscious choices” in The Slow Travel

Manifesto, including giving back to communities visited.

Environment Relates to an awareness and desire to minimise the carbon footprint

of travel and tourism (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). Therefore

public transport including buses and trains are preferred, in addition to

carbon neutral travel of walking and cycling. Slow travel and tourism

are consequently also characterised by taking fewer holidays overall

and often spending a prolonged period of time at each place (Ceron

and Dubois, 2008). Given that transport is responsible for a large

proportion of holiday carbon emissions, this is argued to reduce the

annual individual carbon footprint (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). A

similar principle is applied to distance travelled with shorter journeys

and exploration of the personal localities valued as part of the

commitment to reducing emissions.

Despite academic agreement on its definition, there is also a consensus that

wider interpretation of slow travel is far from universal or agreed (Fullagar et al. 2012)

with definitions ranging from the length of time spent at a destination to connotations


15

with ecotourism and low carbon transport (Dickinson, et al. 2011; Field, 2012). As a

result of this ambiguity, it is sometimes difficult to classify slow travel, as illustrated by

Field (2012), who debates and consequently excludes cruise ships from the term due

to both its high carbon consumption and lack of deep cultural interaction. It is also

evident that whilst academics from the UK often refer to slow travel as including a

preference of low carbon transport (Dickinson et al. 2011), various imaginative sources

from the United States consider slow travel from an experiential perspective and often

include air travel as part of a slow travel holiday. This research therefore examines the

to what extent current consumption of slow travel is characterised by these

components.

As a result of varying definitions, Dickinson et al. (2011) consequently propose

interpretation of the concept rests on a scale. Figure 2.2 demonstrates the suggested

scale with ‘soft’ slow travel referring to the components of a preference for a particular

mode of transport and the pursuit of experiential aspects whilst ‘hard’ slow travel is

characterised by the inclusion of an environmental concern (Dickinson et al. 2011).

Figure 2.2 Dimensions which characterise interpretations of slow travel (Dickinson et

al. 2011:287)


16 GEOM201 Dissertation

2.3 The evolution of slow travel

2.3.1 The Slow Movement

The concept of slow travel derives its origins from the Slow Food movement in

Italy (Fullagar et al. 2012). Officially established in 1989, the movement developed in

reaction to proposals for a McDonald’s restaurant to open at the bottom of the Spanish

Steps in Rome (Parkins, 2004). Continuing as a critical response to postmodern

culture, the movement supports farmers and artisans and promotes enjoyment of local

food produced from traditional, environmentally sensitive farming practices (Slow Food,

2011). Flourishing since its development, Slow Food now has over 78,000 members in

85 different countries (Parkins, 2004).

The desire for speed however, remains a dominant feature of contemporary

culture, evident throughout daily habits, fast-food and from business practice to the

increasing demand for faster broadband download times (Parkins, 2004). Meanwhile

slowness is typically associated with weakness, incorrect or undesirable ways of

travelling (Germann Molz, 2009). Challenging these assumptions, the imperatives of

global capitalism, productivity and mass consumption (Fullagar et al. 2012), the Slow

Food Movement continues to provoke wider attention to a reduction in speed and has

led to the emergence of further concepts and groups, including slow money, parenting,

sex, work and travel (Markwell et al. 2012).

2.3.2 Slow travel over time

Travelling at a slow speed and exploring localities along the way is not new

(Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). Until the 20th century the majority of travel was slow

with travellers traversing the world by foot, horse and sailing boat (Krantz et al. 2009).

Analogies can be drawn between slow travel and many early travel experiences such

as religious pilgrimages, scientific investigation, anthropological study and cultural

excursions (Krantz et al. 2009). The Grand Tour in particular has been identified as an

antecedent of slow travel (Dickinson et al. 2011). Growing in popularity from the 17th

century, this consisted of cultural immersion in European destinations for both

education and pleasure (Towner, 1985), much like the pursuits of contemporary slow

travel.

However, whilst train travel is epitomised as a key mode of slow travel today,

Parkins (2004) claims that the desire for slowness in fact began in reaction to the

speed of railway travel in the nineteenth century. Just as train travel is romanticised by

contemporary slow travellers, earlier forms of transport such as walking and horse

powered transport became aestheticized, with the desire for slowness evidently

580002734

GEOM201 Dissertation 17

relational to perceptions of speed (Parkins, 2004). Contemporary slow travel similarly

represents a critique of the profound acceleration associated with modernisation

(Parkins, 2004) and the pace and nature of modern tourism (Mintel, 2011) as well as

the pursuit of the slow pace experienced by travellers long ago.

Recent attention to slow travel and tourism has also emerged as a form of

responsible travel, in reaction to concern for rising greenhouse gas emissions (Mintel,

2011). This has been accompanied by the development of a range of slow travel

products and websites (Markwell et al. 2012) such as The Man in Seat 61, a service

providing guidance for worldwide train travel (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

2.3.3 Slow travel in mass and new media

The growth of slow travel is reflected in the abundance of slow travel narratives

and images, popularised through mass and new media (Field, 2012; Fullagar et al.

2012). Slow modes of transport have been portrayed in a variety of television

programmes (Fullagar et al. 2012) such as the series ‘Around the World in 80 Days’

presented by Michael Palin (BBC, 1989) and ‘Long Way Down’ (BBC, 2007a) and

‘Long Way Round’ (Sky One, 2004), following celebrities Charlie Boorman and Ewan

McGregor engaging with local communities on long-distance motorcycle journeys.

Further attention and critique of aviation has been expressed by a number of influential

travel journalists (Randles and Mander, 2009b) such as Ed Gillespie who documented

his round the world overland travels in The Guardian.

Further demonstrating the developing interest in the concept, slow travel has

been discussed worldwide in newspapers from The Sunday Times (Haslam, 2009),

Time Magazine (Pope, 2006), El Pais (Gosalvez, 2006), Ha’aretz (Gilad, 2006) as well

as online news sources (BBC, 2007b; Le Point, 2009) and radio programmes (BBC

Radio 4, 2010). This attention raised the profile of alternative forms of travel and

climaxed in 2010 with the eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull, which

resulted in the disruption of flights in the northern hemisphere (Millington, 2011), forcing

thousands of holiday makers to prolong their stays or return overland (Mintel, 2011).

Many of these tourists consequently reported the pleasure of experiencing places en

route as well as the enjoyment of the challenge and adventure (Mintel, 2011),

demonstrating a wider appeal of slow travel.

Furthermore, Dickinson et al. (2011) refer to an emerging slow travel

community with increasing online web presence. Incorporating mobile technologies, a

new trend of interactive travel has complicated the ‘tourist gaze’ (Urry, 1990) with the

gazing traveller becoming themselves, the object of gaze (Germann Molz, 2006).

Mediated through social media, slow travel experiences are now widely shared and



recreated through a virtual tourist community (Fullagar et al. 2012). It is noted as ironic

by Markwell et al. (2012) that, the very travellers who seek to escape the fast-paced

nature of their home lives, rarely travel without a laptop or some connection to the

internet. Through practices of observation and sharing using social media, new

technologies facilitate wide distributions of social power which shape perceptions and

attitudes (Germann Molz, 2006) and therefore have the potential to influence

understandings and the popularity of slow travel.

The rich narratives of many blogs can be interpreted as expressions of tourist

identity and consumption, and, as such have potential to inform research (Bosangit et

al. 2009). This renders blogs an optimal source of social media for analysis of attitudes

towards slow travel.

2.4. The profile of a slow traveller

Citing a variety of empirical evidence from transport studies, Lumsdon (2000)

argues that certain market segments are more willing than others to change travel

mode. This has been reinforced by a recent study by Anable (2005) which used the

results of a survey of 666 National Trust volunteers to identify the characteristics of

groups with varying propensity to consider alternative modes to that of the car. The

segment considered to have the highest potential to switch mode was consequently

labelled “aspiring environmentalists”, and was characterised predominantly by

favourable attitudes towards alternative modes, stronger moral norms and perceived

locus of control (Anable, 2005:183). In this case, no significant differences in socio-

demographics were identified except education, with those with greatest propensity to

switch comprised of highly educated individuals.

Heitmann et al. (2011) consequently identify the need for further research in

order to establish the profile of a slow traveller and tourist. Whilst Markwell et al. (2012)

suggest slow is simply a single component situated within the wider, conventional and

fast tourism practices of the air-travelling, international tourist; Dickinson and Lumsdon

(2010) argue there is potential for segmentation based on environmental concern,

travel mode and distance. Soininen (2011) also suggests the existence of a variety of

slow tourists, based partly on Dickinson et al. (2011) ‘soft’ or ‘hard’ categories. This

informs both research question 1, which aims to identify the profile of current slow

travellers and research question 3, which seeks to segment individuals with potential

slow travel preferences.

In two of the only previous categorisations of slow travellers and tourists, a

large scale internet survey by Mintel (2009 cited in Mintel, 2011) and a questionnaire

survey of visitors to a slow city in Turkey (Yurtseven and Kaya, 2011) found slow

580002734


enthusiasts to be well-educated. The studies demonstrated conflicting results on

demographics with research by Yurtseven and Kayak (2011) indicating slow tourist

types to be largely aged 15-34 and the survey by Mintel (2011) indicating slow

travellers to largely comprise of those aged over 45. Further research has appeared to

confirm the latter, with slow travel associated with the practices of senior travellers,

seeking comfort and slowness over adventure (Heitmann et al. 2011). This is

reinforced in a French study of 122 individuals, in which the popularity of “le tourisme

lente” (slow travel) positively correlated with the age of respondents, with the segment

of slow travellers characterised by those aged over 55 (Babou and Callot, 2007).

However, using a large scale survey of Dutch consumers, Kruithof (2009) found slow

travellers to vary in both age and family life stage with the most dominant segment

represented by couples and small groups of single friends.

Previous studies of tourist travel behaviour have demonstrated a higher

relevance of socio-economics such as income and household size than attitudes

towards the environment in the decision to use sustainable transport (Böhler et al.

2006; Dolnicar, 2010). Meanwhile Buckley (2011) suggests one segment of slow travel

is represented by a trend for professionals, working as they move residence every few

months. Conversely, slow travel has also been associated with budgeting tourists due

to the proposed reduced costs of slow travel (Mintel, 2011). Such factors are therefore

investigated by this study through analysis of questionnaire data in order to address

research question 3 and assess if segments of slow travellers can be identified by

socio-economic and demographic characteristics.

2.4.1 Values and motivations of slow travellers

In addition to socio-demographic variables, tourist typology also seeks to

classify individuals by motivations, values and behaviour (Kruithof, 2009) which are

examined in this study through the analysis of slow travel social media to address

research question 1. As previously discussed, reducing personal carbon footprints and

environmental values are key features of slow travel, identified as central motives for

some (Mintel, 2011). However environmental concern is not a universal motivating

factor for slow travel which has its own appeal as an alternative tourist product

(Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). This is reinforced by Lumsdon and McGrath (2011)

who argue perceptions of minimised environmental damage were more likely a

desirable outcome than a fundamental motivating factor. Slow travellers are therefore

also motivated by generic tourism motivations (Heitmann et al. 2011), which

necessitates the examination of wider motives and values.



Suontausta & Tyni (2005, cited in Soininen, 2011) argue that tourism is situated

in the upper levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and therefore motivated by the

desire for self-esteem, self-actualisation and personal development. Previous research

summarised by the World Wildlife Fund, has reinforced the importance of this desire for

those who choose to avoid air travel, who were frequently associated with tendencies

to pursue intrinsic goals and personal growth (Crompton, 2008). Hodgkinson (2012:15)

argues that slow travel provides an opportunity to “inscape”, a word he uses to

describe deep and productive inward thinking. In this way, some slow journeys have

been found to represent a type of pilgrimage aimed at self-transformation and

introspection (Howard, 2012).

Learning new languages and skills, experiential features of slow travel, also

represent the desire for personal development (Heitmann et al. 2011). This is also

driven by the search for authenticity and the unfamiliar (Heitmann et al. 2011; Soininen,

2011), including the development of meaningful connections with people and places

(Kruithof, 2009). Meanwhile, use of modes such as cycling are valued and motivated

by the physical challenge and sense of achievement they offer (Lumsdon, 2000) as

well as the opportunity to keep fit, active and healthy (Fullagar, 2012). This is

reinforced by Ory and Mokhtarian (2005) who argue exploration of unfamiliar

surroundings and activities such as long-distance bike journeys, exemplify the desire

for travel as the drive to conquer a place or oneself.

In satisfying higher level needs (Heitmann et al. 2011), slow travel is

additionally motivated by similar desires to responsible and ethical tourism products

which also rest in the upper tiers of Maslow’s hierarchy when applied to tourism (Krantz

et al.2009). Linked to this assertion, slow travel has been associated with high levels of

community involvement (Crompton, 2008) and moral obligations (Dolnicar, 2010), with

slow travellers suggested to show ethical sensibilities (Fullagar et al. 2012), and anti-

consumerist intentions (Fullagar, 2012).

The motivation to travel slowly has been associated with increased interest in

quality of life (Dickinson et al. 2011). Motivations are consequently asserted as the

desire to escape work, economic pressures (Markwell et al. 2012) and the pace of

contemporary living (Kruithof, 2009; Howard, 2012) as well as to avoid stress and noisy

environments (Heitmann et al. 2011). Negotiations between freedom and responsibility

have consequently also been found important to slow travellers (Fullagar et al. 2012).

Slow travel has been said to partly resemble the typology of the non-

institutionalised traveller, first presented by Cohen in 1972 (Kruithof, 2009; Heitmann et

al. 2011). The roles of such travellers represented a counterculture to mass tourism,

(termed institutionalised) and were described by Cohen as an ‘explorer’ and ‘drifter’

580002734


with corresponding values for novelty, spontaneity, risk and independence and

motivations for escapism, hedonism and anarchism (Ateljevic and Doorne, 2001:171).

The motivation for travel can also relate to preferences for various transport

modes (Ryley and Davison, 2008), particularly in the case of slow travel (Mintel, 2011).

Much attention has been paid by the discipline of emotional geographies to the ways in

which different means of travel are argued to embody unique emotions and

performances, through which places and movement are experienced across the

senses (Sheller and Urry, 2006). In many contexts, slow travel would not be perceived

as a rational decision due to frequently high costs and time taken (Dickinson and

Lumsdon, 2010). However, for some, the mode of travel becomes equally, or even

more important than the destination (Mintel, 2011), such as the Orient Express and

heritage railways (Holland and Holland, 2012) or recreational cycling which is valued

for its relaxation qualities and escapism it offers (Lumsdon, 2000).

2.4.2 Slow travel identity

Other have argued leisure travel behaviour to be influenced less by drivers such

as accessability and price and instead, linked with psychological issues and the

expression of identity (Anable, 2002). Dickinson et al. (2010:100) suggest the slow

travel identity is associated with “independent people who are tough, resilient, good at

beating the odds and coping with problems”. However, it is argued that consumers are

not autonomous individuals and that consumption is instead driven by social and

normative practices (Southerton et al. 2004). Nomative travel patterns and values in

society are argued to have the power to shape travel identities, motives and choices

(Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010), with consumption practices highly influenced by the

way in which individuals wish to be perceived by others (Southerton et al. 2004).

In a series of in-depth interviews, Dickinson (2008) found this had a significant

impact on slow travellers, who drew on dominant and traditional holiday discourse in

attempts to normalise their holiday practices. Individuals have also concurrently been

found to “frame their travel practices positively and use rhetoric to undermine

alternatives to create a positive self-image” (Dickinson, 2008:1). This positive

positioning of self is part of social identity theory and illustrates the tendency of

individuals to emphasise positive aspects of themselves and negative of others (Oktar,

2001 cited in Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010:72). These may be important theories to

consider in the analysis of travel blogs which represent key artefacts of self-defined

traveller identity (Bosangit et al. 2009) and are often driven by the desire to gain status

(Wang and Fesenmaier, 2004).



However, it has also been suggested that instead of seeking to conform to

wider identities, slow travellers often desire to challenge conventional perceptions. As a

result of multiple in-depth interviews, Fullagar (2012) identified a strong gender

discourse amongst leisure cyclists. Female participants described the pleasure of slow

travel and cycling as deriving from the confidence it fostered and independent identity it

offered as an alternative to the traditional gendered responsibilities of the home setting.

This suggests the importance of examining gendered attitudes towards slow travel in

this study.

Furthermore, although the identity of frequent long-distance travellers has

traditionally been associated with high social status (Gössling and Nilsson, 2010),

perpetuated by schemes which reward frequent flyers (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010),

a small shift in consumer attitudes has been identified in the media and academia. A

growing minority are challenging traditional perceptions and seek to portray frequent air

travel as socially unacceptable (Cohen, 2011). Attitudes towards air travel and

perceptions of the relative status of other modes are therefore investigated in this

research as potential motivators or barriers to slow travel.

2.5. The potential viability of slow travel

2.5.1 Barriers to slow travel

There is insufficient scope here to review literature on the barriers to each mode

of low carbon transport and therefore the review focuses predominantly on barriers

explicitly to slow travel. Field (2012) argues that, whilst trains, buses and ferries are

viable options as commuter systems and for compact regions such as Europe, there

are no slow travel options for intercontinental transoceanic travel. Air travel has

consequently been argued an “inevitable consequence of the choice of destination”,

with the continued desire for distant destinations preventing the uptake of slow travel

based on its inconvenience and the travel durations necessary (Rheinberger et al.

2007:154). Furthermore, alternatives to air travel are rarely offered by tour

operators or as part of packages (Rheinberger et al. 2007; Holland and Holland, 2012)

and therefore the difficulty of booking a holiday without a package including flights and

food has been identified as a key barrier to slow travel (Dickinson et al. 2010). Air

travel is further favoured over other modes for its speed and prestige (Rheinberger et

al. 2007) and is frequently considered the only viable option (Randles and Mander,

2009a). Impracticalities and a lack of products and infrastructure offering alternatives to

air travel therefore represent structural barriers to the use of slow travel modes. Each

of these factors is assessed by the questionnaire in order to address research question

2 and establish how willing and able consumers are to adopt slow travel.

580002734


Travel time to the destination has been previously identified as a key barrier to

the use of many alternatives to air travel but particularly to the use of train travel (van

Goeverden, 2007, Hares et al. 2010). In contrast to the car, which is perceived as

efficient and flexible by consumers (Rheinberger et al. 2007; Dickinson and Peeters,

2012), the international rail travel network has been argued difficult to negotiate, with

consumers unwilling to risk the purchase of overland travel (Holland and Holland,

2012). Luggage transfer (Rheinberger et al. 2007), number of transfers, obligation for

seat reservation and price have all been considered barriers to use of train travel (van

Goeverden, 2007), factors which are investigated in this study as part of the second

research question. Furthermore, in-depth interviews conducted with slow travellers in a

study by Dickinson et al. (2010) revealed the difficulties in booking European train

travel acted as a barrier for several respondents due to the limited opportunities for

advanced booking, the inconvenience of packages on offer and lack of integration with

other modes.

Cost is a further critical factor, with soft mobility options frequently perceived as

associated with unnecessary expenses, particularly rail transport (Rheinberger et al.

2007; Hares et al. 2010). Meanwhile, it has been suggested that a decline in slow

modes such as walking and cycling is due to both poor levels of fitness and

psychological barriers of a fear of crime, unfavourable weather (Chapman, 2007) and

reluctance to cycle in traffic (Davies et al. 1997 cited in Lumsdon, 2000, Mintel, 2011).

Whilst structural factors act as significant barriers, Rheinberger et al. (2007)

argues that the statements of barriers are frequently based on hearsay and therefore

perceived behavioural control barriers are also significant. The prominent discourse

considering alternatives to air travel as significantly more expensive is a strong

behavioural barrier to slow travel as individuals consequently neglect to investigate the

true cost of other modes (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010). As a result, several studies

involving interviews with tourists concluded that air travel has become embedded in the

practice of UK tourists (Dickinson et al. 2010) and that it is a now a habit and everyday

expectation (Randles and Mander, 2009a).

Furthermore, whilst slow travel has the potential to appeal as an act of pro-

environmental behaviour, holiday choices have been found to differ significantly from

daily behaviours, with an expressed sense of entitlement to enjoy holidays,

unencumbered by the necessity to consider impacts (Barr et al. 2010; Miller et al.

2010). Therefore, despite offering an opportunity for financial and environmental

benefits, there is significant scepticism towards reversing the trend of increasing travel

speeds (Nijkamp and Baaijens, 1999).



2.5.2 The popularity of slow travel

Demand for ethical and environmentally sensitive travel was predicted to

quadruple over the past three years (YouGov, 2009 in TUI Travel PLC, 2010) with

research suggesting experience will become greater valued by travellers (Heitmann et

al. 2011; Mintel, 2011). Combining these factors, it was forecast that slow travel in

Western Europe would grow at an estimated 10% compound annual growth rate into a

significant worldwide trend (Euromonitor International, 2007 in Kruithof, 2009). Further

research anticipated the period from 2000-2050 to undergo significant changes in

travel, with the growth of currently marginal behaviours such as cyclo-tourism, river

tourism and slow travel (Ceron and Dubois, 2007). It has also been suggested that

predicted increases in the cost of air travel along with improved communications

technologies will encourage individuals to travel less but for longer, continuing to work

whilst away from home (Buckley, 2011). However, the trajectory of slow travel is

argued difficult to predict (Morgan et al. 2011) and it remains questionable whether

slow travel has the ability to transform tourism and its carbon footprint or if it will add to

the large number of niche “adjectival” travel products (Markwell et al. 2012:232).

Despite suggestions that developing interest in sustainability would increase the

popularity of slow travel (Mintel, 2011), research has shown individuals are reluctant to

give up air travel for their holidays (Barr et al. 2010) which is often justified as the only

viable transport method for most holiday destinations (Hares et al. 2010). This has

been found to exemplify wider inconsistencies between the pro-environmental attitudes

and behaviours referred to as the attitude-behaviour gap (Blake, 1999; Kolmuss and

Agyeman, 2002). Hares et al. (2010) detail various intervening barriers to action

including a weak locus of control (the perceived difference individuals can make), an

issue which is examined by the questionnaire.

Empirical evidence has also demonstrated holiday behaviour to embody its own

unique issues, differing significantly from everyday pro-environmental activities

undertaken in the context of the home (Barr et al. 2010). In a focus group study with

international tourists, Becken (2007) found individuals distinguished holiday travel as

extraordinary and separate from daily life where environmental factors should be

considered. Therefore perceived as a space in which social norms (Selanniemi, 2003)

and pro-environmental behaviour restrictions can be relaxed (Randles and Mander,

2009b), personal benefits have been found to outweigh perceived low environmental

costs in holiday travel choices (Becken, 2004; Shaw and Thomas, 2006). Studies have

found justification of this to relate to denial mechanisms (Becken, 2007; Hares et al.

2010) linked to controversial public understandings of the environmental impacts of air

travel (Gössling and Peeters, 2007), as well as an expressed entitlement to travel and

580002734


holidays (Barr et al. 2010). Further to this sense of entitlement, the emerging Asian

markets of China and India are also anticipated to demand the same travel

opportunities enjoyed by developed nations, posing an additional challenge to the

reduction of air travel (Markwell et al. 2012).

Meanwhile, individuals in developed countries are asserted to be increasingly

‘car dependant’ and therefore likely to resist changing patterns of behaviour (Lumsdon,

2000). Leslie (2012) also argues an air travel component is integral to package

holidays and unlikely to be replaced by an overland alternative in the near future.

Dickinson and Lumsdon (2010) argue that exploratory research has even revealed that

some slow travellers continue their use of air travel in other contexts. However, with

both domestic and international flights now included in the European Union Emissions

Trading Scheme as of 2012 (Randles and Mander, 2009b), it has been suggested that

additional charges passed on to consumers could provoke increased consideration of

alternative modes, although this remains uncertain (Buckley, 2011).

Furthermore, featured in high status magazines, the wider slow movement has

also been widely criticised as an elitist preoccupation (Fullagar, 2012), more expensive

than other tourist products and therefore more available in developed countries

(Soininen, 2011). It has been suggested that opportunities to slow travel are restricted

to the minority who are both time and financially rich (Markwell et al. 2012). Slow travel

has therefore been argued to be perceived as a luxury “private option for the privileged”

(Parkins, 2004:366) and consequently only attracting segments of the middle classes in

developed countries (Mintel, 2011). This will be investigated through the questionnaire

as this suggested market does not appear conducive to the socially sustainable

mobility previously examined.

These predictions and suggestions are largely unsubstantiated and there is a

significant need for further empirical evidence. The majority of academic tourist

literature has focussed on UK and North American markets (Markwell et al. 2012) with

neglect for the wider potential of slow travel. Whilst slow travel may be popular in these

areas, this may differ in other parts of the world which have comparably fewer

passenger rail lines, or where distances between destinations are considerably larger

(Field, 2012). Previous research is also dominated by in-depth studies of slow

travellers (Dickinson et al. 2010; Dickinson et al. 2011; Lumsdon and McGrath, 2011)

and therefore little is known of the wider attitudes of the public towards slow travel. In

particular, a discussion is required to establish the value of the label ‘slow’ to a product

or service (Heitmann et al. 2011) due to the varying connotations it provokes. Through

a broad survey, this study will address this need, developing understandings of the

relative support for slow travel and the profile of slow travel enthusiasts.



3. Methodology

This chapter describes the methodological research design and, outlines in

turn, the qualitative and quantitative techniques employed, their justification for

addressing the aim of the study and the processes of capturing and analysing the data.

3.1 Research design

The study takes a mixed methodological approach combining qualitative and

quantitative methods. In integrating different methods, the study aims to immerse the

researcher in the online discourse of slow travel, through analysis of social media,

whilst also surveying the terrain of debate and potential public support for slow travel

through a large scale questionnaire survey.

3.2 Qualitative method: Social media analysis

It is difficult to locate and identify slow travellers in person since there is no

common location of gathering. However, a growing web-based community of slow

travellers has recently been recognised in academic research (Dickinson et al. 2011).

Therefore, analysis of social media, predominantly blogs addressing slow travel,

constitutes an innovative method to respond to research question 1.

Social media describes online platforms which facilitate connections and the

generating, sharing and consumption of content (Kelly and Autry, 2011; Parker et al.

2011). Understanding tourist characteristics through the examination of social media is

increasingly recognised as important in the development of successful marketing

campaigns (Xiang and Gretzel, 2010). This has consequently emerged as a method in

travel research (Germann Molz, 2006), argued to represent a more credible source of

consumer information than mass media or marketing information (Pan et al. 2007).

Providing a platform for individuals to construct and negotiate their self-identity, blogs in

particular, allow an insight into the signs and symbols of identity and are indicative of

wider values, consumption and social conformity (Bosangit et al. 2009).

3.2.1 Data collection

Selection of blog sources was based on satisfying criteria which represent slow

travel outlined by Dickinson and Lumsdon (2010), referring both to the use of low

carbon, slow methods of transport and experiential elements. Through use of a search

engine, an accepted method for generating blog sites for analysis (Bosangit et al.

2009), the words “slow travel” and associated phrases were able to generate a list of

blogs. However, as individuals may follow the principles of slow travel but do not

identify themselves as such, additional searches, such as for walkers, cycle tourists

580002734


and train travellers were also necessary. The final list comprised of 37 blogs, the

details of which are included in Appendix 1. Data were collated from the main static

pages of blogs, in addition to individual posts selected by the researcher from the

archives of blogs.

Blogs are often integrated within wider social media, with audiences able to

become active participants in webtexts (Germann Molz, 2006) and content including

reader feedback comments, tags and ratings (Parker et al. 2011). Therefore, analysis

was extended to include social network pages, discussion boards and comments in

response to blogs and articles focussed on slow and anti-air travel. The types of social

media analysed are outlined in Table 3.1, along with a description of their format and

content.

Table 3.1 Social media platforms and their key features (adapted from Parker et al. 2011)

Social Media Description Format of content

Blogs and microblogs eg. Wordpress, Twitter

An online diary shared with contacts and wider web-based communities. Managed by individuals, entries can include a variety of multimedia content and often allow readers to interact with the blogger as well as other readers.

Text and Multimedia (Images, Animations, Audio, Video)

Social Networks eg. Facebook,

A platform which allows users to share media and applications, exchange private messages and make public broadcasts.

Text and Multimedia (Images, Animations, Audio, Video)

Discussion Boards eg. Lonely planet, slowplanet.com www.lowflyzone.org

A public platform consisting of forums to allow discussion according to certain themes and threads.

Mostly text

Reader comments in response to articles

Pages attached to online articles allowing readers to comment, provide feedback and discuss issues with other readers.

Mostly text

3.2.2 Data analysis

Due to the continually evolving, integrated and considerable quantities of

content produced by social media, prior to formal analysis it is often useful for the

researcher to become deeply immersed in the discourse across multiple platforms

(Parker et al. 2011). Therefore initial analysis comprised of regular observation of and

note-taking on blog and microblog updates made by slow travellers.

Further analysis consisted of the qualitative techniques of narrative and content

analysis, based on subjective and inductive interpretation of content to identify themes



and patterns (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). This allows more meaningful understandings

of the experiences and behaviour of tourists (McCabe and Foster, 2006) but has only

recently been employed by a small number of researchers for analysis of social media

(Parker et al. 2011).

According to the guidelines of Zhang and Wildemuth (2009), cross-cutting

themes were derived and differences identified between individual blogs. This analysis

was also conducted on comments attached to blogs in addition to discussion boards.

Following initial analysis, the process was repeated to test and seek further evidence in

addition to ideas overlooked. Description was used along with quotes selected in order

to provide evidence for the interpretations made and conclusions drawn.

This method was considered important in identifying the characteristics, deeply

held values and motives of slow travellers. However, as a fundamentally interpretive

technique, the positionality of the researcher must be taken into account throughout

(Robson, 1993). This includes the influence of personal values, expectations and

theoretical understandings on the production and interpretation of data (Zhang and

Wildemuth, 2009). Critical analysis is also required to identify the agendas and

background influences of various sources and individuals since the motives for

producing blogs and websites are diverse (Pan et al. 2007).

3.3 Quantitative method: Questionnaire

Questionnaires addressed research questions 2 and 3. Few UK studies of slow

travel have investigated the breadth of overall support or demand for slow travel

through wider public surveys, with the majority of academic research employing in-

depth interviews with a small number of individuals (Dickinson et al. 2010; Dickinson et

al. 2011; Lumsdon and McGrath, 2011). Use of an online, self-administered

questionnaire will address this gap in research, offering a cheap and efficient way of

gathering a large number of responses to facilitate quantitative analysis and allow for

broad generalisations (Cresswell, 2003).

Emphasising the confidentiality and anonymity of the self-complete survey was

anticipated to encourage individuals to answer questions of a sensitive nature (Bailey,

1994; Burton, 2000) including issues of finance. Detaching respondents from the

researcher through a self-complete survey was also intended to reduce the influence of

the social desirability bias associated with climate change.

580002734


3.3.1 Data collection

Surveymonkey.com was used to develop an online questionnaire, (shown in

Appendix 5). Distributed through a snow-balling technique, the website link was shared

through online forum websites (ie. Lonely Planet) and social networking platforms (ie.

Facebook), individual and corporate social media users, with a prize draw offered in

order to encourage participation.

The survey was piloted with 10 members of the public in order to address

problems. Through posting on travel websites and through social media, the survey

targeted those with an interest in travel and tourism and was available to complete from

anywhere at anytime. This was considered an effective method to share and gather

data from a range of individuals in a short period of time. The sample is non-

probabilistic and therefore not representative of any larger populations. This does

however remain appropriate for the intended exploratory nature of the study and the

time-frame of the study. A total of at least 200 responses was desired due to the

objective of performing statistical analyses. This also more than satisfied the suggested

minimum sample rate for cluster analysis of 2k, where k represents the number of

variables in the segmentation base (Formann, 1984 cited in Dolnicar, 2002).

3.3.2 Survey design

The survey was designed to be concise and appealing to complete and

therefore predominantly consisted of closed questions which also facilitate statistical

analysis (Robson, 1993; Lewis-Beck et al. 2004). Close-ended questions can however

induce the bias of the researcher, through both the choices available and potential for

predisposing responses according to the phrasing used. Therefore a number of open

questions were included (and subsequently coded for analysis) but were kept to a

minimum, due to the time-consuming nature of analysing large qualitative datasets.

Table 3.2 Questionnaire structure and question rational

Section and

Question type

Description and Reasoning

1. Wider values

and attitudes

5 point likert scale

(strongly disagree to

strongly agree)

Consisted of a number of variables including several New

Ecological Paradigm statements outlined by Dunlap et al. (2000)

to indicate pro-environmental attitudes. This was included as

support for slow travel has sometimes been associated with

concern for the environment (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).



2. Holiday

preferences in

relation to slow

travel components

25 statements

based on likert

scales

Comprised of statements developed from the Manifesto for Slow

Travel (Gardner, 2009) but also informed by wider literature

(Kruithof, 2009; Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010) and preliminary

analysis of blogs. Slow travel was not referred to in order to avoid

predisposing responses. A likert scale was frequently used

throughout the survey due to its suitability for analysis, specifically

segmentation and inferential techniques.

3. Rank 4 types of

holiday

Scale of 1-4, least to

most appeals and

open question for

explanation

The four types of holiday described and pictured, included one

characterised by elements of slow travel and the others of typical

mass tourism. This was included in order to retain interest

amongst the large number of likert questions and to qualitatively

assess opinions towards an example slow travel holiday. This was

also important due to the largely unexplored nature of the subject

which rendered anticipation of responses difficult.

4. Slow travel

understanding

Cateogircal and

open

Respondents were asked for their understanding of slow travel

and attitude towards the term in order to assess initial reactions to

the label ‘slow’. The concept was then introduced, accompanied

by its definition and participants asked to select slow travel

principles they would consider adopting for future holidays.

5. Attitudes and

barriers

Likert scale

Designed to acquire data on attitudes towards and barriers to

adopting slow travel principles.

6. Socio-economic

and demographics

Categorical and

dichotomous

Including gender, age, nationality, education level and

employment status.

3.3.3 Data analysis

The data were manipulated using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences

(SPSS) programme in order to calculate descriptive and inferential statistics and to

perform cluster analysis. Descriptive techniques and graphs were employed to identify

and visually represent attitudes and barriers for the whole sample. Inferential

techniques were used to identify significant differences between barriers and socio-

demographics.

Through the aggregation of 25 likert scale travel preferences, 8 future travel

intentions and the ranking of an example slow holiday, a hierarchical cluster analysis

580002734


using Ward’s linkage method was performed. This approach has been successfully

used in the past to delineate groups according to both environmental behaviours (Barr

et al. 2010) and transport preferences (Dolnicar, 2002; Anable, 2005). Post-hoc

segmentation comprises of a process of continually pairing similar data points

according to multiple variables, through which clusters are created which represent

maximum homogeneity within, and maximum distance between groups of observations

(Anable, 2005). Through analysis of the resulting dendogram (shown in Appendix 2),

four clusters were identified by the researcher for interrogation.

Due to the large number of variables, for ease of profiling the cluster solution,

factor analysis was performed to assess the clusters against fewer dimensions. The 25

travel preference variables used to create the clusters were subjected to principal

components analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation (results in Appendix 3). Inspection of

the correlation matrix confirmed the suitability of the data for factor analysis and

demonstrated satisfaction of the recommended Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin value of .6 (Kaiser,

1970) with statistical significance (p<0.01) confirmed by Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity

(Bartlett, 1954). With numerous components demonstrating eigenvalues exceeding 1, a

break in the scree plot suggested 5 significant components. These were recognised as

relating to the desire for deep experience, enjoyment of the journey, pro-environmental

travel practices, the preference for tourist attractions and facilities and hypermobility.

The data for the variables were then compiled into averages for each factor with

statements demonstrating negative associations to variables in the same factor

reversed for this purpose.

3.3.4 Results dissemination

Piloting of the survey revealed respondents were keen to find out more about

the concept and therefore, the results and information were disseminated through a

website, a link to which was included at the end of the survey. The website

(www.slowtravel1.wordpress.com), allowed participants to access opportunities to find

out more and further pursue the topic.



4. Qualitative data analysis and discussion:

Slow travel social media

This chapter and the one which follows discuss in turn, the qualitative and

quantitative results of this study in relation to the literature reviewed. The current

chapter addresses research question one, identifying the typical characteristics, values

and motivations of slow travellers through analysing the narratives and constructs in 37

blogs and wider social media.

4.1 Characteristics of slow travel bloggers

Due to the large number of sources analysed, the full list of blogs, their

websites and/or twitter usernames are detailed in Appendix 1. The key blogs discussed

are however detailed in Table 4.1 to inform and provide examples.

Table 4.1 Examples of blogs analysed and descriptions

Blogger Name and Website Description

Akila and Patrick www.theroadforks.com

Long term slow travellers, occasionally overland but with

a key focus of local food celebration.

Alistair Humphreys www.alistairhumprheys.com

Frequent long distance walker and cyclist both for the

physical challenge and the enjoyment of travel.

Anna Rice and Alex Hayton

withoutwings.org

A couple self-identifying themselves as slow travellers,

avoiding air travel and embracing local culture.

Barnali and Anirvan

yearofnoflying.com

A couple consciously avoiding air travel in order to

reduce their carbon footprint and explore solutions to

reducing aviation emissions.

Colin Wright exilelifestyle.com

Self-identified slow traveller, immersing himself in new

localities and relocating every 4 months.

Denise Pulis www.theartofslowtravel.com

Slowly travelling, living and working around the world

with her partner.

Ed Gillespie www.lowcarbontravel.com

Undertook a circumnavigation of the world without flying.

Writer for the Guardian and co-founder of the

communications agency Futerra.

Elisa www.globetrottinginheels.com

Long-term expatriate and experiential slow traveller.

Ethan Gelber www.ethangelber.com/

Long distance cyclist and travel writer, advocate of sustainable travel and creator of thetravelword.com .

James and Tracy www.Jamesandthegiantbikeride.blogspot.co.uk

Couple self-defined as slow travellers who cycled around the world in 800 days.

Jason Lewis http://jasonexplorer.com/about

Author and environmental activist, undertook a circumnavigation of the world without the use of motorised transport.

Jeannie Mark www.nomadicchick.com/about/

Quit her job to become a travel writer, slowly moving

Jillian and Danny ishouldlogoff.com

A couple taking a career break in order to travel slowly overland.

580002734


Jools Stone www.trainsonthebrain.com

After dissatisfaction with his marketing job, Jools quit his

job and became a freelance journalist, and social media

slow and train travel enthusiast.

Lainie www.raisingmiro.com/about/

A self-identified slow traveller, Lainie home-schools her son whilst volunteering and permanently travelling.

Lara and Tom www.worldinslowmotion.com

A couple who undertook a circumnavigation of the world without flying with focus on local culture and identity.

Lauren www.lateralmovements.com

Supporting her enjoyment of travel through employment

in over 30 positions, slowly moving across 6 countries,

Michael Hodson www.goseewrite.com

Former attorney undertaking an overland

circumnavigation of the world.

Nick and Holly

www.3mphroundtheworld.com

Undertook a slow circumnavigation of world without the

use of air travel.

Nora Dunn www.theprofessionalhobo.com/about/

Sold her possessions and adopted a life of permanent travel, supplemented by freelance writing and volunteering.

Tom tomsbiketrip.com

Adventure cyclist who has undertaken numerous long-

distance journeys ranging from Mongolia, the Middle

East and Africa, the US and Europe.

Tyler and Tara

www.goingslowly.com

A couple slow cycle touring the world, homesteading,

learning new skills and pursuing challenges.

Wade Shepard Adopted a permanent life of travel, preferring to travel slowly in order to learn more about his destination.

Whilst many bloggers self-identified themselves as slow travellers, others were

selected due their identification with similar principles, such as seeking longer stays

and authentic experiences or using overland, low carbon transport modes. It was

evident that even self-defined slow travellers existed on the scale of slow travel from

‘soft’ to ‘hard’ described by Dickinson et al. (2011), with some bloggers engaging with

only experiential aspects and others considering the essence of slow, low carbon travel

as a way of life.

In contrast to the findings and suggestions of previous work (Babou and Callot,

2007; Heitmann et al. 2011; Mintel, 2011), the majority of slow traveller bloggers were

relatively young, often describing taking a career break after five to ten years of

working professionally since leaving education. This could however be more

representative of the demographic structure of blog use than the characteristics of slow

travellers. Reflecting the dominant slow travel segment found in a Dutch study

(Kruithof, 2009), the majority of slow traveller bloggers were individuals and couples.

In similarity with the trend of slow travelling professionals suggested by Buckley

(2011), many of the bloggers, such as Michael Hodson, financially supported their

travel through online paid work, including payments for advertisements on their blogs,

freelance writing and publications and other innovative means termed “location

independent work” by Michael Hodson. For some, this was chosen to suit their



permanently nomadic lifestyles whilst others supplemented this income with temporary

employment at their destinations. Like many others, Jillian and Danny referred to

minimising costs, in particular through using the online network CouchSurfing (2012),

to find free accommodation. However, this was also motivated by the desire to connect

with local people, and therefore low budgets were not revealed to be fundamental

motives for slow travel as suggested by previous research (Mintel, 2011).

The majority of blogs identified were written by Europeans and North

Americans, which could reflect the fact that English speaking nationalities are the top

groups of bloggers (Bosangit et al. 2009) but is also likely to be biased by the use of

the English language in the search terms used to identify slow travel blogs. However, it

should be noted that few slow travel bloggers were identified from Australia or New

Zealand. This could be due to a lack of support for slow travel, or possibly due to the

limited infrastructure and increased distances required to reach foreign destinations

from these areas (Field, 2012).

Differences could also be observed in the understanding of the term slow travel.

Individuals from North America frequently recognised and supported slow travel as the

‘soft’ form described by Dickinson et al. (2011). This conformed to the definition

provided by the forum slowtrav (slowtrav, 2012) which refers only to experiential

aspects and does not include the use of low carbon transport, as was more valued by

Europeans. This reinforces suggestions that the interpretation of slow travel is far from

agreed (Dickinson et al. 2011; Fullagar et al. 2012) and indicates geographical

differences in understandings.

4.2 Values and Motivations

4.2.1 Active engagement with people and place

The desire for engagement with places was emphasised widely by slow travel

bloggers and members of the forum slowtrav (2012) who extolled the benefits of

travelling slowly in order to gain an appreciation of places and their identity.

“[bikes] expose you just enough, connecting you with the local ambience and exposing your senses to myriad subtle climate changes and microcosms of sounds and smells” Jason Lewis

“I felt like a traveler, not a tourist… seeing those things most people do not. Goat farms, family homes, private vineyard

tours…I loved the feeling of being a ‘local’.” Nick, in feedback for the Luberon Experience (2012), specialising in slow travel tours

580002734


Learning to cook local cuisine and enjoyment of local food was also frequently

the subject of many blog posts with photographs such as those shown by Figures 4.1a

and 4.1b accompanied in some cases by recipes for readers to try at home.

Figure 4.1a “Malaysian dessert made from sweet red beans, sugar and jelly served on a bed of condensed milk.”

(withoutwings.org)

Figure 4.1b “Makhmali Chicken Kebab,

Nepal” (Dave, thelongestwayhome.com)

Further contributing to the motive for active engagement with a place, bloggers

such as Ethan Gelber and Jools Stone reinforced the motive of seeking to connect with

and relate to local people (Kruifhof, 2009). Denise Pulis described spending a month in

Seoul trying to gain an appreciation of the difficulties faced by young Koreans.

Repeatedly visiting the same places, she described watching and interacting with

locals until she had developed a true “understanding of what it means to be a Seoulite”.

These values, which relate to the search for local identity in places, people and food,

reflect the desire for intimate and authentic experiences asserted by Heitmann et al.

(2011) and Soininen (2011). They also illustrate the aspiration to be active and

participate in the experience itself, as suggested by Dickinson and Lumsdon (2010).

Reader comments attached to an article “5 reasons why slow travel beats going

on vacation” (Kearns, 2007), suggested that slow experiences of new places

constituted a permanent way of life for some, with the contributor ‘Jul’ describing

“moving to a new country or city every couple of months or years” in order to

continually satisfy her desire for immersion in new cultures. Although members of the

slowtrav (2012) forum also frequently cited this motivation, it was evident this

represented just a single holiday product they pursued occasionally. This confirms to

some extent a suggestion made by Markwell et al. (2012), that slow travel is often

interchanged and integrated with conventional, wider holiday practices for some.



4.2.2 Personal development

Learning was a key value inherent in many blogs, ranging from learning the

local language and cuisine to discovering the history, geography and culture of places.

“Learning is a core part of why I seek out adventure and take delight in the process of discovery” Tom

“[this method of travel is] a huge part of my education... to learn from others as I try to help others learn” Colin Wright

This motivation for learning and personal development reinforces the ways in

which slow travel satisfies higher level needs, as argued by Soininen (2011) and

Heitmann et al. (2011). Learning was also often extended to teaching others. Wade

Shepard for example, referred to his blog as a travel guide and instruction, as well as a

chronicle of current events, people and places. The opportunity to share knowledge

and experiences was therefore widely valued. Perhaps however, this could be more

significant of the motivation to use blogging than a value of slow travellers.

Further reinforcing the importance of personal development, several slow

travellers likened their journeys to religious and spiritual pilgrimages. Featured in an

interview (Blackman, 2011), frequent long distance walker Karen described another

slow traveller who travelled without possessions and was living off the land, using

walking as an opportunity to try and decide who he was to marry on his return. She

also referred to a Norweigan man who, she claims, was walking in order to forgive

himself for his behaviour as a former drug addict. This reinforces the comparisons

made in academic literature between slow travel and pilgramages linked to the desire

for self-transformation (Howard, 2012) and deep inward thinking (Hodgkinson, 2012).

Similarly, many young individuals such as Jason Lewis, and couples such as

James and Tracy and Nick and Holly, also used slow travel as a personal challenge,

often undertaking long-distance walks and cycle tours. This included numerous self-

defined slow travellers who were undertaking overland, walking and cycling

circumnavigations of the world. This resonates with the established motive to conquer

a place or oneself (Ory and Mokhtarian, 2005) and the sense of achievement desired

from walking or cycling (Lumsdon, 2000).

“I simply relished the challenge; the absurd urge to assert

myself over the elements and the obstacles, negotiating

unpredictability and pain and fatigue.” Tom

“I want it to be hard. I want to spend most of the time dearly

wishing I was not here... it at least provides perspective, self-

worth, and an appreciation for how good normal life is” Alistair

Humphreys

580002734


This reflects the enjoyment expressed by individuals in the challenge to return

home overland after the disruption to flights in 2010 (Mintel, 2011) and also indicates

the desire for self-actualisation, corroborating previous arguments for the relationship

between slow travel and the satisfaction of higher level needs (Soininen, 2011).

4.2.3 Environmental and ethical values

Pro-environmental values were widespread amongst slow travellers, confirming

low carbon travel as a key motivator of slow travel for some individuals (Mintel, 2011).

This was clearly demonstrated by the forum lowflyzone (2012), whose members signed

a pledge to “to be free from flying for 12 months”, with the aim of both enjoying the

journey and reducing GHG emissions. It was evident that undertaking

circumnavigations without air travel was particularly popular amongst couples and

those taking career breaks. For bloggers Anna Rice and Alex Hayton, and Lara and

Tom, their choice to travel slowly and overland represented a compromise between

their desire to travel and the aim to minimise their carbon footprint. For some such as

Ed Gillespie, the environment and sustainability represented both their core values and

career, with low carbon transport consequently a strong commitment. Meanwhile,

Barnali and Anirvan used slow travel to explore careers in the environment, covering

topical environmental issues in their blog and interviewing prominent experts.

“going to spend the next year challenging ourselves to live

aviation-free ...talking to environmentalists and planners, and

trying to explore solutions ... be that greener aviation

technologies, or imagining a post-aviation future.” Barnali and

Anirvan

Colin Wright additionally expressed his desire to live a less resource intensive

lifestyle. This confirms that, both reducing personal carbon footprints, and wider

environmental values were key motives for some slow travellers (Mintel, 2011). The

abstinence from air travel also to some extent confirms predictions that frequent air

travel is beginning to become negatively perceived by some travellers (Cohen, 2011).

Ethical values were rarely referred to directly, however many described their

aspiration to travel responsibly, confirming to some extent, the ethical and moral

sensibilities suggested by Fullagar et al. (2012). For Ethan Gelber this combined

minimising his impact on local environments as well as seeking to maximise his

contribution to the local economy.

Whilst some, such as Ed Gillespie and Jools Stone, continue to abstain from air

travel, it was evident that others began to use air travel again following their round-the-

world trips as well as in between slow travelling at their destinations. This confirms



suggestions that not all slow travellers consistently forgo air travel (Dickinson and

Lumsdon, 2010) and could reinforce the argument by Lusmdon and McGrath (2011)

that minimised carbon emissions are frequently a desirable outcome but not

necessarily a fundamental motivating factor. Supporting this suggestion, although

widespread environmental values were evident in the forum lowflyzone (2012), the

majority of individuals contributing to the forum slowtrav (2012), did not associate slow

travel with the ‘hard’ interpretation described by Dickinson et al. (2011) and often used

air travel to reach the destinations at which they pursued ‘slow’ experiences. This

emphasizes not only varying interpretations but also that environmental values are not

shared by all as motivators of slow travel (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

4.2.4 Antithesis of fast

Slow travel was often referred to as an opportunity to temporarily or

permanently escape work and the fast-paced nature of conventional daily and working

life. Anna Rice describes how spending increasing time commuting she had

“...started to adopt the corpse-like...hunched posture of the 9-? commuter, used to putting their head down, elbow out and

headphone in”.

This reinforces previous research in which travel has been described as a

chance to temporarily escape obligations, routines, work and home life (Kruithof, 2009;

Howard, 2012; Markwell et al. 2012). Reflecting the negotiations between freedom and

responsibility described by Fullagar et al. (2012), Alistair Humphreys argued that

through slow travel he was able to escape and make his own decisions on when and

where to go and construct his own identity at each place.

Of the bloggers who referred to this sense of freedom, several described an

event or period in their life which provoked them to reassess their priorities and seek a

different way of life, referred to by Lainie as “lifestyle redesign”. Jillian and Danny also

described forging their own lifestyle having

“...decided that the trajectory we [Jillian and Danny] were on was not going to give us that deep sense of satisfaction”.

This was also a decision taken by Nora Dunn and Colin Wright, who both

described slow travel as an opportunity to experiment with an alternative lifestyle. Like

several others, Colin had aspired to a minimal number of possessions, and claimed to

have reduced his possessions to fifty items. Frequent references to the pursuit of

experiences over the accumulation of possessions also confirm suggested anti-

consumerist intentions for some slow travellers (Fullagar, 2012). For some therefore,

long-term slow travel was linked with a self realisation of the freedom to reject typical

580002734


contemporary lifestyles and conventional capitalist values. Supporting several

suggestions (Heitmann et al. 2011; Mintel, 2011), the majority of bloggers instead

placed greater value on experiences.

The alternative lifestyles forged through slow travel were evidently also

significant in challenging the expectations of others. This is illustrated by both Akila and

Jeannie Mark, for whom slow travel represented freedom from the expectations of

society, friends and family for a successful career, responsibility and family. This

reflects a wider challenging of expectations to the defiance of gender stereotypes

described by Fullagar (2012).

The pursuit of slowness was also frequently juxtaposed and valued as superior

to contemporary mass tourism. Denise Pulis took a condescending attitude towards

mainstream travellers, generalising their blogs as “superficial” and their travelling as

“country-binging”. Similarly, Alistair Humphreys likened mass tourism to the

accumulation of lists, miles, countries and sights. This was also expressed by Elisa

who described conventional travel as

“just another way for people to show off, or something they approach much like fast-food: something that only gives you the

illusion of nourishment.”

Slow travellers distanced themselves from this trend and frequently referred to

slow travel as “real travel” (Hodgkinson, 2012:16). Considering their travels superior to

those of others, many portrayed their identities as alternative and their travels as

following a more fulfilling and worthwhile way of life. This conflicts with the results of

Dickinson (2008) who described slow travellers as frequently seeking to normalise their

holiday practices. The negative emphasis placed on mass tourism does however

support a different argument by the same author with regard to the tendency of

individuals to frame their own travel practices positively and those of others negatively

(Dickinson, 2008; Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

This supports the argument that promoting alternative forms of transport and

tourism will require an appeal to the self-identity and intrinsic motivations (Crompton,

2008). The desire to be different, prominent amongst bloggers, could also be an

attempt to establish a unique online presence in order to attract readers. Observation

of social media however, suggests the existence of wider agreement on the superiority

of slow travel. An article entitled “Travel is not a contest (and other reasons to embrace

slow travel)” (Miller, 2012) was dispersed across multiple platforms. Comments on the

article from others conveyed agreement with the author and reinforced negative

associations with mass tourism. In this way, individuals distinguished themselves from

other travellers and simultaneously connected with other slow travellers.



4.3 What is the typical profile of a slow traveller?

It is difficult to establish the profile of a typical slow traveller due to varying

interpretations. However, from analysis of social media, four distinctive types of slow

traveller were identified to form the four typologies described in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 Typologies of slow travellers developed from analysis of social media

[images illustrate examples of each profile, taken from the blogs of the individuals. The

image for profile A depicts the slowtrav forum logo and represents contributors to the

forum in addition to wider supporters of ‘soft’ slow travel]

A. The 'soft' slow tourist

Slow travel is taken as a holiday or trip in which emphasis is placed on the journey, such

as long distance train travel, or importance devoted to in-depth experience such as spending a prolonged amount of time or

volunteering in an area. Characterised by 'soft' slow travel, the dominant interpretation by

North Americans, engagement with people, culture and food are key motivations.

Frequently taking air travel to the destination, slow is sometimes an interlude to wider 'fast' travels or simply as an annual holiday, valued

as an experience but not always a central priority.

B. The slow challenge-seeking career breaker

Sometimes individuals but often couples without children, taking slow travel as a once in a lifetime

opportunity or career break for personal development. Using low carbon transport and

frequently cycling, long distance journeys represent personal mental and physical

challenges, (occasionally circumnavigations of the world). Their journeys are sometimes justified by environmental values and also occasionally linked to careers related to

sustainability. The journey tends to be enjoyed more than deep and slow experiences.

C. The permanently nomadic 'soft' slow traveller

'Soft' slow travel is adopted or experimented with as an alternative way of life, sometimes as a

rejection of expectations or capitalist values, with new experiences valued over possessions. Travelling between places every few weeks,

months or years, this group often seek employment and temporary residence at the desintation. Usually travelling alone with no fixed home, they also often

support their travelling through blogging and 'location independent' work. Their emphasis is often on deep engagement with place with less

attention given to low carbon transport.

D. The strictly 'hard' slow traveller for life

'Hard' slow travel is a personal policy applied to all holidays in addition to wider travel. Often expressed as a commitment

to abstain from air travel due to environmental values and careers in

sustainability, slowness is further perceived as enhancing the experience

of travel and as superior to mass tourism.

580002734


The typologies are not necessarily mutually exclusive or fixed through time as

certain bloggers exhibit the characteristics of more than one profile or even transition

between them. A suggested distinction between the slow traveller and slow tourist is

made in order to distinguish between those who undertook long distance travels and

those who chose ‘slow’ as a short-term holiday. It is evident that slow travel can be

interpreted in a number of ways, including retaining elements of hypermobility such as

the permanent travelling of profile C, the long distance journeys of profile B and the

continued use of air travel by A and C. Therefore not all interpretations are likely to

support the sustainable future market for tourism proposed by academics (Dickinson

and Lumsdon, 2010).

When considered as an alternative lifestyle, such as profile C, or a long-term

career break such as B, the slow travel dominating blogs may be considered a niche

market. However, this could be more representative of the nature of blogging as

opposed to slow travel. The blogs of these travellers were often popular and well-

known specifically for their eclectic and innovative angles on travel and therefore not

necessarily indicative of the wider consumption of slow travel. The following chapter

will therefore investigate the wider appeal and potential demand for slow travel through

a quantitative survey of preferences and attitudes towards the concept.

580002734

42

5. Quantitative data analysis and discussion: Quantitative Survey

This chapter presents the results and analysis of questionnaire data.

Descriptive statistics provide a representation of the profile of the sample followed by

further statistics and graphical representations responding to research question 2 and

demonstrating how willing and able respondents were to adopt slow travel. Finally,

cluster analysis addresses research question 3 and segments the sample by their

travel preferences to identify those in support of slow travel.

5.1 Descriptive statistics

The survey achieved 300 responses, of which 261 were fully completed and

suitable for analysis. 62.84% of the sample was female and 37.16% male with the

demographics shown in Figure 5.1 revealing the greatest number of responses to be

from individuals aged 18-25 and 50-59. The results reveal a wide geographic

distribution of respondents with the majority (69%) residing in the UK and Ireland, 22%

from North America, 5% from mainland Europe and 4% from elsewhere. The sample

appeared to be well-educated with 81% having completed at least an undergraduate

degree and only 3% stating their highest education as GCSE/CSE/O-Level.

Figure 5.1 Age bracket percentages of sample [all statistics rounded to 0 decimal

places]

Figure 5.2 shows the source from which respondents accessed the website link

to the survey. Although the category friend/family/colleague overlapped other


43

categories, this was the most frequently stated source. It also reveals significant

responses from social media, suggesting this to have been an effective method for

distribution. 50.2% of the sample had not heard of slow travel, whilst 49.8% had not.

Figure 5.2 Source from which respondents accessed survey

5.2 How willing and able are individuals to adopt slow travel?

5.2.1 The propensity to adopt slow travel and its perceived viability

Responding to research question 2, Figure 5.3 demonstrates how willing

respondents were to consider slow travel principles. It is also significant to note that

attitudes towards the label slow changed following the provision of a definition. 50% of

those who claimed the label ‘slow’ did not appeal initially later agreed that slow travel

appealed after a definition of the concept. Therefore, as suggested by Heitmann et al.

(2011), the value of the label slow must be questioned whilst individuals are still

unaware to what it refers.

After reading a definition of slow travel, 72% of respondents claimed slow travel

“really appeals” to them. However, breaking down slow travel into its components as

shown by Figure 5.3, it was evident that intentions to undertake certain aspects were

stronger than others.

580002734

44

Figure 5.3 Future holiday intentions related to slow travel components

Figure 5.3 indicates the majority (85%) of respondents claimed they would

‘always’ consider eating and drinking at local cafes and restaurants. Over half also

stated they would consider ‘always’ staying in local accommodation, using public

transport and cycling or walking at the destination. Very few claimed they would ‘never’

consider these factors, and 98% said they would consider at least ‘sometimes’

spending longer in one place, therefore indicating a strong willingness to travel

according to slow experiential principles.

14% were however unwilling to ever consider making the journey a central part

of the holiday, the same proportion also claiming they would ‘never’ not fly to their

destination. Only 9% were willing to ‘always’ consider not flying to their destination,

suggesting to confirm a reluctance to permanently give up flying despite its

environmental burden (Barr et al. 2010; Hares et al. 2010). Therefore it is evident that

respondents were very willing to choose ‘soft’, experiential slow travel aspects but less

willing to commit to the ‘hard’ slow travel principle and use low-carbon transport to

reach their destination.

Also responding to research question 2, Figure 5.4 demonstrates attitudes

towards the viability of slow travel.

0% 50% 100%

spending longer in one place.

not flying to my destination.

making the journey a central part of my holiday.

cycling or walking at my destination.

using public transport at my destination.

staying in local accommodation.

eating and drinking at local cafes and restaurants.

travelling off the beaten path. Never

Sometimes

Always

% of sample

Respondents would consider...


45

Figure 5.4 Attitudes towards the viability of slow travel for various socio-demographics

In conflict with suggestions that slow travel is perceived as limited to the elite

and financially rich (Parkins, 2004; Soininen, 2011; Fullagar, 2012), the majority of

respondents disagreed that slow travel ‘is an option reserved for the privileged’. The

results shown in Figure 5.4 additionally demonstrate that, for over half of respondents,

slow travel was considered viable for those in full-time education or employment,

somewhat conflicting with claims that it is perceived as only for those with abundant

free time (Markwell et al. 2012). The majority of respondents also did not agree with the

statements that slow travel was only for young or old people and only 19% agreed slow

travel was not viable for those with children.

This indicates that the market for slow travel is not widely perceived as limited

to these segments of the population. Slow travel was most associated with

‘environmentalists’ (agreed by 41%) and ‘the adventurous’ (agreed by 43%). Despite

this, the results revealed 72% considered slow travel to be a viable option, suggesting

the majority felt able to adopt its principles and did not broadly perceived it be a niche

market.

5.2.2 Barriers to slow travel

Responding to how able respondents felt to adopt slow travel principles, Figure

5.5 indicates the extent to which certain factors acted as barriers to slow travel.

0% 50% 100%

is an option reserved for the privileged

is not viable for those in full-time education/employment

is not viable for those with children

is for young people

is for old people

is for the adventurous

is for environmentalists

is a viable option for me

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Slow travel...

580002734

46

Figure 5.5 Barriers to slow travel

As suggested by previous research, travel time to destination was a significant

factor (van Goeverden, 2007, Hares et al. 2010) and was the most widely and strongly

agreed barrier to slow travel. The next most frequently stated barrier was the price of

alternative modes of transport, confirming cost to represent a critical factor

(Rheinberger et al. 2007; Hares et al. 2010).

All other factors were agreed to represent barriers by less than 50% of

respondents. The asserted barrier of difficulty of booking as part of an all inclusive, or

through a travel agent (Dickinson et al. 2010), was agreed by less than 30%. The

broader issue of the organisation required was more widely considered a barrier by

43% of respondents, as were the inconvenience of transfers, the potential for missed

connections and the comfort of alternative transport. Therefore to some extent, the

infrastructure supporting slow travel can be confirmed to represent a barrier to some

(van Goeverden, 2007).

0 50 100

Price of alternative modes of transport

The relative comfort of alternative modes

The potential for delays and missed connections

The organisation required

Difficulty in booking through a travel agent

Difficulty of booking as part of an all inclusive

Travel time to reach destination

The inconvenience of transfers or connections

Physical exertion of walking or cycling

The weather

Carrying luggage

The perceived status of public transport

Perceptions of safety and security of other methods

Strongly agree

Agree

% of sample who consider respective factors to be barriers to slow travel


47

Only a small minority agreed with the suggestions that safety fears and

unfavourable weather acted as barriers (Chapman, 2007). However, using Pearson’s

Chi-square, significant differences were evident between some socio-demographics

and certain variables. The physical exertion of walking or cycling and carrying luggage

were both agreed to represent a barrier for a greater proportion of higher age groups,

with spearman’s rank correlation coefficient tests confirming very weak positive

correlations between the variables (.145, .149 0.05%). A weak negative (-.302, 0.01%)

correlation was also found between income and the agreement that the price of

alternative modes was a barrier. Assessing if this results in varying support for slow

travel between socio-demographics, the following section seeks to profiles groups

supportive of slow travel based on such variables.

Overall, less than half of the sample evidently agreed that most of the

statements represented barriers to slow travel. Furthermore, with only 19% agreeing

with the statement that slow travel ‘is not practical’ for them, this would suggest a large

proportion of the sample felt able to pursue slow travel.

5.3 Cluster analysis

In line with the third research question, cluster analysis was used to identify

segments of the sample according to their predisposition and intent to pursue slow

travel principles, the characteristics of which are subsequently examined. Interpretation

of the dendogram (Appendix 2) produced from cluster analysis suggested the

existence of four discernible groups. Pearson’s Chi-square tests were performed

comparing the responses to slow travel principles for each of the four clusters. The

significance for all of the 33 variables was revealed to be greater than the selected

significance level of 0.05. This confirms with 99% confidence that significant

differences exist between the four clusters with respect to the preference and intent to

pursue various slow travel principles.

5.3.1 Defining clusters by slow travel support

Profiling each group first requires the examination of variables used to create

the clusters. Cross-tabulating the responses for each cluster according to these

variables enabled an understanding of the preference for slow travel principles for each

group. The results for variables which demonstrated statistically significant differences

between groups (using Pearson’s Chi-Squared tests, p<0.05) are presented in Table

5.1 with the full statistics for travel preferences shown in Appendix 4.

580002734

48

Table 5.1 Cluster profiles according to slow travel principles

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Number in cluster 38 105 75 43

Travel Intentions In my future holiday plans I anticipate..

% 1 (red= widest intention to ‘always’ consider factors)

spending longer in one place

Never 5 2 1 0

Sometimes 82 62 31 49 Always 13 36 68 51

making the journey central part of holiday

Never 3 1 0 2

Sometimes 47 81 71 49

Always 0 5 24 49

cycling or walking at the destination

Never 16 4 4 0 Sometimes 55 53 31 28 Always 29 43 65 72

eating and drinking at local cafes and restaurants

Never 3 0 0 0

Sometimes 18 22 5 12

Always 79 78 95 88

staying in local accommodation


travelling off the beaten path


not flying to my destination


Rank of holiday %

local stay holiday example

Least appeals (4th)

18 2 5 0

Most appeals (1st)

18 65 81 79

Travel preference factors

Mean factor score (1= strong positive inclination, 5=strong negative inclination)

red= greatest inclination per factor 2

Deep experience 3.26 4.01 4.45 4.28 Enjoyment of the journey 2.79 3.39 3.96 4.47 Pro-environmental travel practices 2.24 2.81 3.41 4.28 Tourist attractions and facilities 2.42 2.31 2 1.69 Hypermobility 3.84 3.7 4.09 2.07

1. As mean average is not an appropriate measure for the 3 point scale of travel intentions or

the ranking of a slow holiday, percentages for each response were used for comparison.

2. For travel preferences, the individual likert scale statements used in cluster analysis were

subjected to factor analysis for ease of interpretation of a large number of variables. The mean

factor scores for each cluster were used for the comparison of clusters.

As Table 5.1 shows, Clusters 3 and 4 were particularly favourable to holiday

preferences related to slow travel whilst Cluster 1 was less favourable to the majority of

slow travel principles. This is confirmed both by the proportion of each cluster who


49

claimed the local stay holiday example most appealed and by the statement ‘slow

travel appeals to me’, with which 95% of Cluster 4 and 89% of Cluster 3 agreed, yet

only 24% of Cluster 1 agreed. With 67% of Cluster 2 agreeing with the same

statement, this cluster demonstrated some intention to pursue experiential slow travel

components at the destination; yet this was not as widely agreed as Clusters 3 and 4.

Further to appreciation of deep experience, Cluster 4 demonstrated widespread

preferences for enjoyment of the journey and the greatest preference for pro-

environmental travel actions, suggesting an inclination towards the ‘hard’ slow travel

described by Dickinson et al. (2011). Meanwhile Cluster 3 showed less inclination for

pro-environmental travel actions. From analysis of Table 5.1 and examination of

corresponding individual travel preference variables (Appendix 4), the four clusters are

consequently labelled and described in Figure 5.6 and can be considered to show

wider preference for slow travel from Cluster 1 to 4.

Cluster 1: Anti-slow travel tourists (15%)

This group widely favour hypermobility and

display preferences for tourist attractions and

facilities. Although showing a preference for a

small level of experiential components, they

prefer not like to spend a long time in one

place or get to know it in-depth. They like to

use the fastest mode to reach their

destination and do not enjoy the journey.

Caring little about the environment in making

their plans, they have no desire to minimise

carbon emissions.

Cluster 2: Mass tourist (40%)

Holidaying at far away destinations, this

group predominantly neither agree nor

disagree with slow travel holiday preferences

and principles. They demonstrate a

preference for numerous deep experience

components and place less importance on

tourist attractions than Cluster 1. However,

they show little preference for enjoyment of

the journey and even less for pro-

environmental travel actions.

Cluster 3: Experience-seeking ‘soft’ slow

travel supporters (29%)

Preferring to get to know and spend longer in

one place, this group enjoy the unexpected

and deep experience. They also however,

show hypermobile tendencies, contradictory

to slow travel, including holidaying at far

away destinations & taking multiple holidays

a year. Although to some extent they seek to

minimise CO2 emissions, they also like to

take advantage of low cost airline deals, and

few would consider avoiding high polluting

modes.

Cluster 4: Enjoy the journey, ‘hard’ slow

travel supporters (16%)

Taking pleasure in travelling slowly and

overland, this group enjoy the journey and

show little preference for mass tourist

facilities and attractions. They consider the

environment in making holiday plans, which

includes a wide-held desire to minimise

carbon emissions, even to the extent that

77% agreed they avoid using high polluting

modes of transport. This group do not holiday

abroad regularly or at far away destinations.

Figure 5.6 Interpretation of profiles of four clusters

Whilst Clusters 3 and 4 showed different levels of commitment to the principles,

together the groups represent those supportive of slow travel and account for 45% of

580002734

50

the sample. This suggests that the number of individuals showing at least some degree

of desire to adhere to slow travel principles represents more than just a niche market. It

is of importance to note that while Cluster 3 demonstrated strong inclination towards

experiential slow travel, individuals within this cluster also displayed the highest

inclination towards the factor hypermobility, including travelling further and more

frequently. In similarity with the blogger typologies A and C, this preference for slow

travel, which does not include forgoing air travel, therefore does not entirely conform to

the currently prevailing academic suggestion for slow travel as a sustainable future

market for the travel and tourism sector (Caffyn, 2009; Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010).

5.3.2 Socio-demographic, economic and attitude profiling of clusters

In order to define the characteristics of clusters supportive of slow travel and

satisfy the final objective of the study, the socio-demographic, economic and attitudinal

variables demonstrating significant differences between clusters (as a result of

Pearson’s Chi-square test, p<0.05 and cross-tabulating expected and actual

frequencies) are shown in Tables 5.2 and 5.3 respectively.

No significant differences were evident with respect to the variables gender,

gross household income, tenancy of household, responsibility for dependents, highest

Table 5.2 Comparison of clusters and socio-demographic and economic variables

Variable Category Cluster 1 (%)

Cluster 2 (%)

Cluster 3 (%)

Cluster 4 (%)

Age < 25 37 20 25 30

26-39 11 16 17 33

40-49 24 19 17 9

50-59 24 28 19 21

>60 3 17 21 7

Place of birth UK and Ireland 90 70 47 93

Mainland Europe 3 3 5 2

North America 8 21 43 2

Other 0 7 5 2

Current occupation

Employed 55 57 59 46

Self employed 3 9 16 14

Retired 11 13 8 0

Student 24 16 15 12

Unemployed/not working

8 4 3 19

1Not all values sum to 100% due to option to withhold personal information


51

education level and relationship status. Although significant differences were evident in

the ages of different clusters, those supportive of slow travel were not only associated

with older age groups as previously found (Babou and Callot, 2007; Heitmann et al.

2011). Cluster 4 comprised of higher than expected proportions of those aged under 39

as well as a large number aged 50-59. Whilst Cluster 3 demonstrated higher than

expected individuals over 40, it generally showed a relatively even distribution of ages.

This appears to confirm the suggestion that those predisposed to slow travel vary in

age (Kruithof, 2009).

Significant differences between clusters were found for both place of birth and

country of residence. Such minor differences existed between these two variables that

only place of birth is represented in Table 5.2. Due to the small number of respondents

from mainland Europe and ‘other’ in the sample, no strong conclusions can be drawn

and further research is required to establish wider support for slow travel. ‘Hard’ slow

travel supporters (Cluster 4) can however be interpreted as predominantly comprising

of respondents born and residing in the UK and Ireland whereas ‘soft’ slow travel

supporters (Cluster 3) show an almost even number of North American and UK and

Ireland respondents. This reflects the interpretation and support for experiential slow

travel shown by individuals from North America in social media.

It must be acknowledged that the sample itself was highly dominated by

professional employed individuals and therefore it is difficult to identify differences

between groups. Cluster 4 comprised largely of employed individuals with no retired

individuals and few students but a greater than expected proportion of unemployed

individuals (19%). Meanwhile Cluster 3 was also dominated by employed individuals

but comprised of only 3% of unemployed individuals, and had a greater proportion of

those stating retired than Cluster 4.

580002734

52

Table 5.3 Attitudes and wider behaviours of clusters

Anti-slow tourists

Mass tourists

Soft slow travellers

Hard slow

travellers

Attitudes and behaviours

Category1 %

I believe my actions make a difference

Disagree 32 12 5 9 Neither agree nor disagree

18 26 4 7

Agree 51 63 91 91

I am concerned about the impacts of globalisation


29 11 11 12

Agree 61 81 85 86

I consider myself an explorer/ adventurer

Disagree 42 24 15 16

Neither agree nor disagree

32 31 23 19

Agree 26 46 63 65

I consider myself a traveller not a tourist


21 27 11 23

Agree 31 57 86 67

Physical and mental challenges are rewarding


26 22 16 19

Agree 52 67 82 70

I frequently buy from multi-national companies


16 19 20 19

Agree 42 35 20 7

I enjoy exploring places in my local area


21 13 8 0

Agree 61 77 90 96

Mean average %

New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) 2

1. strong negative environmental attitudes

3 1 1 0

2 24 23 11 5 3. strong pro-environmental attitudes

74 76 88 96

1. ‘agree’ represents composite total of ‘strongly agree’ and ‘agree’, likewise respectively for ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘disagree’ 2. NEP represents an average of 4 separate NEP statements on likert scales, confirmed by factor analysis to demonstrate similar responses to warrant amalgamation. 1= weak pro-environmental attitudes, 3= strong pro-environmental attitudes

As demonstrated by Table 5.3, Clusters 3 and 4 were more easily distinguished

from the anti-slow and mass tourist clusters by their attitudes. Indicated by the mean

average NEP score, both Clusters 3 and 4 were widely characterised by strong pro-

environmental attitudes, more so than those less supportive of slow travel, confirming


53

suggestions made by Dickinson and Lumsdon (2010). It is evident that pro-

environmental attitudes were more widely held by Cluster 4 than 3. Although causation

cannot be assumed, this suggests that ‘hard’ slow travel supporters are associated with

stronger pro-environmental values than ‘experiential’ slow travellers.

Both slow travel supporting clusters showed an equally wide belief that their

actions could make a difference, confirming the significance of a strong locus of control

(Hares et al. 2010). Clusters 3 and 4 also widely stated concern about the impacts of

globalisation however this differed little from the attitude of mass tourists.

Although there is no academic literature with which to compare some of these

attitudes, the preference of Cluster 3 and (more predominantly) Cluster 4, to

differentiate themselves as travellers as opposed to tourists, reflects the opinions of

slow travel bloggers analysed previously in this study. Further resembling the motives

of these bloggers, Clusters 3 and 4 also widely considered physical and mental

challenges rewarding.

Satisfying the final objective, Figure 5.7 defines the key characteristics of

Clusters 3 and 4 as segments supportive of slow travel, compared with the

characteristics of those less supportive of slow travel.

580002734

54

Cluster 1: Anti-slow travel tourists (15%)

aged under 60

UK and Ireland born

majority in employment with a large number of students and few self-employed.

little belief in the difference their actions can make

consider themselves tourists and not adventurers or explorers

largest proportion to frequently buy from multinational companies

Cluster 2: Mass tourist (40%)

predominantly from UK and Ireland with some from North American

predominantly employed, largest proportion of retired individuals

concerned about the impacts of globalisation

do not widely consider themselves explorers or adventurers

do not frequently buy from multinational companies

3. Experience-seeking ‘soft’ slow travel supporters (29%)

born and residing in both the UK and Ireland and the US

Predominantly in employment, with second and third largest groups self-employed and students

widely held pro-environmental attitudes

strong locus of control


widely consider themselves travellers not tourists

consider physical and mental challenges are rewarding

few frequently buy from multinational companies

enjoy exploring places in their local area

4. Enjoy the journey, ‘hard’ slow travel supporters (16%)

born and residing in the UK and Ireland

predominantly aged under 39 and 50-59

whilst the majority are in employment, this is the lowest level of any cluster.

Second and third largest groups comprised of unemployed and self-employed with no retired individuals

very widely held pro-environmental attitudes

strong locus of control

consider physical and mental challenges rewarding


do not buy frequently from multinational companies

enjoy exploring places in their local area

Figure 5.7 Profiling clusters by socio-demographic, economic, attitude and behaviour

variables


55

6. Conclusions

6.1 Summary of findings

What is the typical profile of a slow traveller, their characteristics, values and

motivations?

The variety of motivations uncovered reinforces previous research suggesting

the importance of authenticity (Heitmann et al. 2011; Soininen, 2011) and the higher

level needs of self-actualisation (Soininen, 2011) and personal development (Heitmann

et al. 2011). Evidence was also found to support the significance of environmental

values but, as suggested by other researchers (Dickinson and Lumsdon, 2010;

Lumsdon and McGrath, 2011), this was not a universal motivator for slow travel.

In addition to the value of the temporary escape offered by a slow travel holiday

(Kruithof, 2009; Howard, 2012; Markwell et al. 2012), slow travel was also found to be

motivated by the intention for permanent lifestyle redesign for some, with commonly

expressed preferences for experiences and greater freedom from expectations,

consumerism (Fullagar, 2012) and the fast-pace of contemporary living (Kruithof, 2009;

Howard, 2012). The study also supports the value of identity to slow travellers with

slow travel widely expressed as superior and juxtaposed to the purported country

bingeing of mass tourism.

The typologies developed by this study suggest slow travellers are

characterised by four typical profiles. Partially represented by the ‘soft’ and ‘hard’

interpretations of slow travel suggested by Dickinson et al. (2011), the profiles

demonstrate varying commitments to slow travel principles based on different levels of

pro-environmental values and the motivations for experience and temporary or

permanent escape.

How willing and able are individuals to adopt slow travel principles?

The study revealed that when individuals were made aware of the definition of

slow travel, it generally appealed to the majority. Slow travel was not widely perceived

as a niche market for specific socio-demographics or, as asserted previously, for

financially and time rich individuals (Parkins, 2004). It was reported as most associated

with environmentalists and those seeking adventure by respondents although this did

not appear to limit its perceived viability.

Overall respondents were largely willing to adopt experiential aspects of slow

travel. However, whilst a majority were willing to consider sometimes foregoing air

travel, few respondents were willing to always consider this, confirming previous

findings of a reluctance to give up air travel (Barr et al. 2010). Their ability to fulfil this

580002734

56

principle could be due to the increased travel time and cost of soft modes of transport

which were the most widely considered barriers (van Goeverden, 2007; Rheinberger et

al. 2007; Hares et al. 2010). Further research is required to establish if cost is a

genuine barrier or if this is simply a perceived behavioural control barrier as suggested

by Dickinson and Lumsdon (2010). The weakness of infrastructure supporting the use

of slow travel modes, including the inconvenience of and potential for missed

connections as well as the need to carry luggage, was also considered a barrier,

although this was only cited by less than half of respondents. Whilst the difficult of

booking slow travel as part of an all inclusive holiday and through a travel agent have

previously been asserted as barriers (Dickinson et al. 2010), these were not agreed by

the majority of respondents.

Whose travel preferences support slow travel principles according to socio-

demographic, economic and attitudinal variables?

Cluster analysis revealed the existence of two groups predisposed to slow

travel, one continuing to display hypermobile tendencies and the other comprising of

‘hard’ slow travel supporters. In line with a previous quantitative survey study of pro-

environmental travel behaviour (Anable, 2005) and yet contrasting with another (Böhler

et al. 2006), those supportive of slow travel could not easily be distinguished by socio-

demographic variables and showed a wide range of ages. As one of the exceptions to

this, those predisposed to ‘hard’ slow travel largely comprised of individuals born in the

UK and Ireland residents whilst those in favour of experiential slow travel were divided

relatively evenly between respondents born in North America and the UK and Ireland.

In reference to attitudes, the two groups supportive of slow travel principles

demonstrated widely held pro-environmental attitudes, a strong locus of control and

concern for the impacts of globalisation.


57

6.2 Evaluation of study and future research

Both the quantitative and qualitative methods were found to prove effective in

gathering relevant data to satisfy the objectives and respond to the research questions.

However, limited by time and resources, Table 6.1 provides an evaluation of the

research methods and areas for improvement.

Table 6.1 Evaluation of research methods

Aspect Limitations and areas for improvement Qualitative Data collection

Due to the limited time and scope of this study, both identification of social

media sites relating to slow travel and the online questionnaire were

predominantly restricted to English speakers. Therefore, examination of

issues such as differences in interpretation or popularity across geographic

boundaries is limited and would require analysis of other language sources.

Qualitative data analysis

An overwhelming abundance of relevant social media was identified by the

study. With discussions taking place over multiple platforms and long

periods of time, there is no definitive end point to analysis (Parker et al.

2011). Therefore this method could be best optimised over a longer time

period. As a subjective technique, use of more than one researcher could

aid both the substantial task of analysis and verify interpretations.

Quantitative data collection

Distributed through online communities, respondents of the survey were

inevitably self-selected (Wang and Fesenmaier, 2004). Therefore, it was

impossible to control the sample or its distribution worldwide with potential

for unknown biases arising from sharing by social media users with varying

influence and followers. This was however shown to be an effective method

for gaining the desired large response within the time constraints. With

greater resources, a filter for the survey could be invested in and stratified

sampling employed. This could produce a representative sample of the

population to accurately indicate the demand for slow travel in the UK.

Piloting of the survey revealed participants were discouraged by the length

of the survey. Therefore the number of attitude statements were reduced,

limiting the number of variables available for comparison of clusters.

Perhaps if a greater incentive were able to be provided, participants would

be more willing to complete a more time-consuming survey which would

allow greater detail and an increased number of variables, including more

varied attitudes with which to compare clusters as well as mode-specific

barriers to different slow transport methods. This could also increase the

sample size which would increase confidence in the results.

580002734

58

Furthermore, this study has also suggested areas of interest warranting further

academic research and investigation, as detailed in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2 Future Research

Future research themes

Slow travel online community

It was evident from conversations across various networking platforms that many slow

travellers interacted online, reinforcing the suggestion of an emerging online slow travel

community (Dickinson et al. 2011; Markwell et al. 2012). This included the use of

‘crowd sourcing’ (outsourcing a problem or task to an undefined audience) to gain

information about local areas and suggestions for transport methods. Therefore,

significant scope exists to warrant more detailed attention to, for example, the use of

social media in facilitating slow travel.

Slow traveller attitudes and values

This study has suggested that those supportive of slow travel are more easily defined

by their attitudes than socio-demographic and economic variables. Therefore, further

research could investigate a greater diversity of attitudes and values in order to refine

the segmentation of those in favour of slow travel.

Slow travel or slow tourism?

The terms slow travel and tourism are often used interchangeably in both academic

literature and the media. Perhaps further research should seek to investigate the

variety of interpretations of the terms in order to arrive at a clear definition or guide for

further research themes.

Formalising social media analysis as a research method

It is difficult to capture the activity of online social media users due to the variety of

interaction from comments and photographs to the sharing of websites, articles and

videos. However, since this method has contributed valuable insights into identity and

sense-making, and successfully investigated a mobile and globally distributed group,

this method could be further investigated in order to establish an effective and

systematic approach for wider application in academic research. Additionally, greater

interaction with social media could be investigated for use as an interactive research

technique.


59

6.3 Concluding Comments

Consumption of slow travel by social media users was found to be

characterised by a variety of motives and values, many of which confirm previous

suggestions. The consequent typologies developed however indicate significant

differences in interpretations of the concept with some slow travellers continuing to

exhibit hypermobile tendencies. Therefore, despite the aspirations for slow travel to

represent a sustainable future for tourism, it is evident that many slow travel consumers

do not consistently value its ‘hard’ principle of low carbon transport. Less demand for

this ‘hard’ form of slow travel amongst survey respondents was also evident compared

to the willingness to adopt experiential aspects of slow travel. Whilst the majority of the

sample were willing to consider many principles, few would always consider foregoing

air travel. Linked to this, the time and financial costs associated with overland modes of

transport were identified as the most widely perceived barriers by the sample. Slow

travel was not however perceived as viable exclusively to specific socio-demographics,

this was confirmed by cluster analysis which revealed slow travel supportive segments

to be defined more by their pro-environmental attitudes and a strong locus of control

than any socio-demographic or economic variables. With 45% of the sample

predisposed to some form of slow travel, and the majority willing to consider at least

sometimes adopting its principles, the concept should be considered to represent more

than simply a niche travel adjective. However, with one segment of slow travel

supporters displaying strong hypermobile tendencies and only 16% of respondents

falling into the ‘hard’ slow travel segment, further research is required to confirm if slow

travel represents both a viable and entirely sustainable future market for travel and

tourism.

580002734

60

References

Anable, J. (2002) Picnics, pets, and pleasant places: The distinguishing characteristics of leisure travel demand, in Black, W. and Nijkamp, P. (eds) Social Change and Sustainable Transport, Indiana University Press, Indiana 181 -189

Anable, J. (2005) “Complacent car addicts” or “Aspiring environmentalists”? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory, Transport Policy, 12, 65-78

Anderson, K., Bows, A. and Upham, P. (2006) Growth scenarios for EU and UK aviation: contradictions with climate policy, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Working paper 84, http://tyndall.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wp84.pdf (accessed 08/07/12)

Ateljevic, I. and Doorne, S. (2001) ‘Nowhere Left to Run’: A Study of Value Boundaries and Segmentation Within the Backpacker Market of New Zealand, in Mazanec, J., Crouch, G., Brent Richie, J. and Woodside, A. (eds) Consumer Psychology of Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure, CABI Publishing, 169-186

Babou, I. and Callot, P. (2007) CO2 et tourisme: vers de nouvelles segmentations? 12ème Journées de Recherche en Marketing de Bourgogne, Dijon, http://leg.u-bourgogne.fr/CERMAB/z-outils/documents/actesJRMB/JRMB12-2007/Babou%20Callot.pdf (accessed 20/06/12)

Bailey, K. (1994) Methods of Social Research, The Free Press, New York

Barr, S. and Prillwitz, J. (2012) Green Travellers? Exploring the spatial context of sustainable mobility styles, Applied Geography, 32, 2, 798-809

Barr, S., Shaw, G., Coles, T. and Prillwitz, J. (2010) ‘A holiday is a holiday’: practicing sustainability, home and away, Journal of Transport Geography, 18, 3, 474-481

Barr, S., Shaw, G., and Coles, T. (2011) Times for (Un)sustainability? Challenges and opportunities for developing behaviour change policy. A case-study of consumers at home and away, Global Environmental Change, 21, 4, 1234-1244

Bartlett, M. (1954) A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, Series B, 296-298

BBC (1989) Around the World in 80 Days, BBC, London, 11/10/89-22/11/89

BBC (2007a) Long Way Down, BBC Two, London, 28/10/07-2/12/07

BBC (2007b) ‘Gone to ground’, BBC News Magazine, 23/01/07, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6287107.stm (accessed 28/06/12)

BBC Radio 4 (2010) You and Yours, 23/04/10, www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p007hw6b (accessed 28/06/12)

Becken, S. (2004) How tourists and tourism experts perceive climate change and carbon-offsetting schemes, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12, 4, 332–345

Becken, S. (2006) Editorial: Tourism and Transport: The Sustainability Dilemma, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14, 2, 113-116

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?cluster=8342603564118699630&hl=en&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?cluster=8342603564118699630&hl=en&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5


61

Becken, S. (2007) ‘Tourists perception of international air travel’s impact on the global climate and potential climate change policies, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 351-368

Blackman, J. (2011) Slow travel- Walking across Spain, KRRB, http://blog.krrb.com/2011/07/21/slow-travel-walking-across-spain/ (accessed 18/07/12)

Blake, J. (1999) Overcoming the ‘value-action gap’ in environmental policy: tensions between national policy and local experience, Local Environment, 4, 3, 257-278

Böhler, S., Grischkat, S., Haustein, S. and Hunecke, M. (2006) Encouraging Environmentally Sustainable Holiday Travel, Transportation Research Part A, 40, 652–670

Bosangit, C., McCabe, S. and Hibbert, S. (2009) What is told in travel blogs? Exploring Travel blogs for consumer narrative analysis, Information and communication technologies in tourism, 2, 61-71

Bows, A., Anderson, K. and Peeters, P. (2009) Air transport, Climate Change and Tourism, Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development, 6, 1, 7-20

Buckley, R. (2011) Tourism under Climate Change: Will slow travel supersede short breaks? A Journal of the Human Environment, 40, 3, 328-331

Burton, D. (2000) Data Collection Issues in Survey Research, in Burton, D. (eds) Research training for social scientists: a handbook for postgraduate researchers, Sage, London 320-334

Burns, P. and Bibbings, L. (2009) The end of tourism? Climate change and societal challenges, 21st Century Society, 4, 1, 31-51

Caffyn, A. (2009) The Slow Route to New Markets, Tourism Insights, www.insights.org.uk/articleitem.aspx?title=The%20Slow%20Route%20to%20New%20Markets (accessed 01/05/12)

Ceron, J. and Dubois, G. (2007) Limits to tourism? A Backcasting Scenario for Sustainable Tourism Mobility in 2050, Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development, 4, 3, 189-208

Chapman, L. (2007) Transport and climate change: a review, Journal of Transport Geography, 15, 354-367

Cohen, S. (2011) Consumer attitudes towards flying and sustainability: gateways and barriers to behavioural change, http://surrey.academia.edu/ScottCohen/Talks/41565/Consumer_attitudes_towards_flying_and_sustainability_gateways_and_barriers_to_behavioural_change (accessed 27/06/12)

Cohen, S., Higham, J. and Cavaliere, C. (2011) Binge Flying: Behavioural addiction to climate change, Annals of Tourism Research, 38, 3, 1070-1089

CouchSurfing (2012) A Global Network of Travellers, www.couchsurfing.org/about (accessed 27/07/12)

Cresswell, J. (2003) Research Design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches, Sage, London

580002734

62

Crompton, T. (2008) Weathercocks and Signposts: The environment movement at crossroads, World Wildlife Fund UK’s Strategies for Change Project, WWF, Surrey

Dickinson, J. (2008) Travelling slowly: An exploration of the discourse of holiday travel, 40th Universities’ Transport Studies Group Annual Conference, 3-5 Jan 2008, Portsmouth

Dickinson, J. and Lumsdon, L. (2010) Slow Travel and Tourism, Earthscan, London

Dickinson, J. and Peeters, P. (2012) Time, Tourism Consumption and Sustainable Development, International Journal of Tourism Research, DOI: 10.1002/jtr.1893 (online version published before inclusion in an issue)

Dickinson, J., Robbins, D. and Lumsdon, L. (2010) Holiday travel discourses and climate change, Journal of Transport Geography, 18, 3, 482-489

Dickinson, J., Lumsdon, L. and Robbins, D. (2011) Slow travel: issues for tourism and climate change, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19, 3, 281-300

Dolnicar, S. (2002) A review of data-driven market segmentation in tourism, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 12, 1, 1-22

Dolnicar, S. (2010) Identifying tourists with smaller environmental footprints, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18, 6, 717-734

Dunlap, R., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A. and Jones, R. (2000) Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale, Journal of Social Issues, 56, 3, 425-442

Field, M. (2012) Is there a ‘Slow Travel’ alternative to Intercontinental Flight? Hosei University Faculty for Intercultural Communication, 01/04/12, 117-182, http://repo.lib.hosei.ac.jp/handle/10114/7046 (accessed 16/07/12)

Fullagar, S. (2012) Gendered cultures of slow travel: women’s cycle touring as an alternative hedonism, in Fullagar, S., Markwell, K. and Wilson, E. (eds) Slow Tourism: Experiences and Mobilities Channel View Publications, Bristol, 99-112

Fullagar, S., Wilson, E. and Markwell, K. (2012) Starting slow: Thinking through slow mobilities and experiences, in Fullagar, S., Markwell, K. and Wilson, E. (eds) Slow Tourism: Experiences and Mobilities, Channel View Publications, Bristol 1-8

Gardner, N. (2009) ‘A Manifesto for Slow Travel’, Hidden Europe Magazine, 25, 10-14

Gelber, E. (2012) Does Anyone Really Care About Niche-Travel Adjectives, http://travelllll.com/author/ethangelber/ (accessed 06/06/12)

Germann Molz, J. (2006) ‘Watch us wander’: mobile surveillance and the surveillance of mobility, Environment and Planning A, 38, 377-393

Germann Molz, J. (2009) Representing pace in tourism mobilities: staycations, Slow Travel and The Amazing Race, Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 7, 4, 270-286

Gilad, M. (2006) So what if you will miss the train [translation], Ha’aretz, 18/08/06, www.haaretz.co.il/misc/1.1129604 (accessed 28/06/12)

Gillespie, E. (2010) Icelandic volcano: is this the start of the ‘traincation’? The Guardian, 20/04/10 www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2010/apr/20/train-rail-st-moritz-switzerland (accessed 07/07/12)


63

Gosalvez, P. (2006) El Louvre para otro da, hoy toca un cafe, El Pais, 24/08/06 http://elpais.com/diario/2006/08/24/revistaverano/1156370418_850215.html (accessed 28/06/12)

Gössling, S., Hall, M., Lane, B. and Weaver, D. (2008) The Helsingborg Statement on Sustainable Tourism, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16, 1, 122-124

Gössling, S. and Nilsson, J. (2010) Frequent flyer programmes and the reproduction of aeromobility, Environment and Planning A, 42, 1, 241-252

Gössling, S. and Peeters, P. (2007) ‘It does not harm the environment’ An analysis of industry discourses on tourism, air travel and the environment, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 4, 402-417

Hall, C. (2005) Tourism: Rethinking the Social Science of Mobility, Pearson Education Limited, London

Hares, A., Dickinson, J. and Wilkes, K. (2010) Climate change and the air travel decisions of UK tourists, Journal of Transport Geography, 18, 3, 466-473

Harvey, D. (1990) The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change, Blackwell Publishers, Massachusetts

Haslam, C. (2009) Slow travel: 5 Flight-free journeys, The Sunday Times, 14/06/09 www.thetimes.co.uk%2Ftto%2Ftravel%2Fholidays%2Fgreen%2F%3Ftoken%3Dnull%26offset%3D0%26page%3D1 (accessed 07/07/12)

Heitmann, S., Robsinson, P. and Povey, G. (2011) Slow Food, Slow Cities and Slow Tourism, in Robinson, P., Heitmann, S. and Dieke, P. (eds) Research themes for tourism, CABI, Oxford 114-127

Hodgkinson, (2012) Introduction, in Keiran, D. (ed) The Idle Traveller, AA Publishing, Hampshire 9-16

Holden, E. (2007) Achieving Sustainable Mobility: Everyday and Leisure-Time Travel in the EU, Ashgate Publishing, Hampshire

Holland, J. and Holland, R. (2012) Non-Aviation-based Tourism: A UK-based Perspective, in Leslie, D. (ed) Tourism Enterprises and the Sustainability Agenda Across Europe, Ashgate Publishing, Surrey, 51-70

Howard, C. (2012) Speeding up and slowing down: pilgrimage and slow travel through time, in Fullagar, S., Markwell, K. and Wilson, E. (eds) Slow Tourism: Experiences and Mobilities, Channel View Publications, Bristol 11-24

Høyer, K. (2000) Sustainable tourism or sustainable mobility? The Norwegian Case, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8, 2, 147-160

Hsieh, H. and Shannon, S. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qualitative Health Research, 15, 9, 1277-1288

Kaiser, H. (1970) A second generation Little Jiffy, Psychometrika, 35, 401-415

Kearns, J. (2007) 5 reasons why slow travel beats going on vacation, Matadornetwork, http://matadornetwork.com/bnt/five-reasons-why-slow-travel-beats-going-on-vacation/ (accessed 20/07/12)

580002734

64

Kelly, A. and Autry, M. (2011) A humanistic approach to the Study of Social Media: Combining Social Network Analysis and Case Study Research,

Kolmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research, 8, 3, 239-260

Krantz, D., Chong, G., Contreras, J., Durham, W., Espeso, P., Honey, M. and Salters, R. (2009) The Market for Responsible Tourism, SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, www.responsibletravel.org/resources/documents/reports/The%20Market%20for%20Responsible%20Tourism%20Products.pdf (accessed 20/06/12)

Kruithof, J. (2009) “Slow Travel: Are the Dutch ready to slow down?” Bachelor thesis, NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences

Larsen, J., Urry, J. and Axhausen, K. (2006) Mobilities, Networks, Geographies, Ashgate Publishing, Hampshire

Larsen, J., Urry, J., and Axhausen, K. (2007). Networks and tourism: Mobile social life. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(1), 244–262

Le Point (2009) Le “slow tourisme”, elixir anticrise, 23/06/09, www.lepoint.fr/actualites-voyages/2009-06-23/le-slow-tourisme-elixir-anticrise/1088/0/354946 (accessed 28/06/12)

Lee, D., Fahey, D., Foster, P., Newton, P., Wit, R., Lim, L., Owen, B. and Sausen, R. (2009) Aviation and global climate change in the 21st century, Atmospheric Environment, 43, 22-23, 3520-3537

Leslie, D. (2012) Conclusion, in Leslie, D. (ed) Tourism Enterprises and the Sustainability Agenda Across Europe, Ashgate Publishing, Surrey, 205-210

Lewis-Beck, M., Bryman, A. and Liao, T. (2004) The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods, Sage, London

lowflyzone (2012) www.lowflyzone.org (accessed 17/07/12)

Luberon Experience (2012) Travellers’ feedback, www.luberonexperience.com/travelers-feedback/ (accessed 22/07/12)

Lumsdon, L. (2000) Transport and tourism: Cycle tourism – a model for sustainable development? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(5), 361–377

Lumsdon, L. (2011) Slow Travel in the Marches, Gardners Books, East Sussex

Lumsdon, L. and Mcgrath, P. (2011) Developing a conceptual framework for slow travel: a grounded theory approach, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19, 3, 265-279

Markwell, K., Fullagar, S. and Wilson, E. (2012) Reflecting Upon Slow Travel and Tourism Experiences, in Fullagar, S., Markwell, K. and Wilson, E. (eds) Slow Tourism: Experiences and Mobilities, Channel View Publications, Bristol 277-234

Mason, K. (2005) Observations of fundamental changes in the demand for aviation services, Journal of Air Transport Management, 11, 1, 19-25


65

Mathos, R. (2004) Can Slow Tourism Bring New Life to Alpine Regions? in Weiermair, K., Mathies, C. (eds) The Tourism and Leisure Industry: Shaping the Future, The Haworth Press, New York, 93-104

McCabe, S. and Foster, C. (2006) The role and function of narrative in tourist interaction, Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 4, 3, 194-215

Metz, D. (2008) The Limits to Travel: How Far Will You Go? Earthscan, London

Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K., & Tribe, J. (2010). Public understanding of sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(3), 627-645.

Miller, J. (2012) Travel is not a contest (& other reasons to embrace slow travel), BootsnAll, 27/07/12, www.bootsnall.com/articles/11-08/in-defense-of-slow-travel.html (accessed 28/07/12)

Millington, K. (2011) The evolution of slow travel, Travel and Tourism Analyst, 4, 1-39

Mintel (2011) The Evolution of Slow Travel, International, Travel and Tourism Analyst, 4, March, http://store.mintel.com/the-evolution-of-slow-travel-international-march-2011.html, (accessed 01/05/12)

Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. and Pride, R. (2011) Tourism places, brands and reputation management, in Morgan, N., Pritchard, A. and Pride, R. (eds) Destination Brands: Managing Place Reputation, (3rd edition) Elselvier, Oxford 3-20

Nijkamp, P. and Baaijens, S. (1999) Time Pioneers and Travel Behaviour: An Investigation into the viability of ‘slow motion’, Growth and Change, 30, 237-263

Ory, D. and Mokhtarian, P. (2005) When is getting there half the fun? Modeling the liking for travel, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39, 2, 97-123

Pan, B., MacLaurin, T. and Crotts, J. (2007) Travel blogs and the implications for destination management, Journal of Travel Research, 46, 35-45

Parker, C., Saundage, D. and Chia, L. (2011) Can qualitative content analysis be adapted for use by social informaticians to study social media discourse? A position paper in ACIS 2011: Proceedings of the 22nd Australian Conference on Information Systems: Identifying the Information Systems Discipline, AIS- Association of Information Systems, Sydney, 1-7

Parkins, W. (2004) Out of Time: Fast Subjects and Slow Living, Time and Society, 13, 363

Peeters, P. and Dubois, G. (2010) Tourism travel under climate change mitigation constraints, Journal of Transport Geography, 18, 3, 447-457

Peeters, P., Gossling, S. and Becken, S. (2006) Innovation towards tourism sustainability: climate change and aviation, International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1, 3, 184-200

Peeters, P. and Landré, M. (2012) The Emerging Global Tourism Geography – An Environmental Sustainability Perspective, Sustainability, 4, 42-71

Pope, E. (2006) Taking the slow road, Time Magazine, 2/10/06, 1-3 www.slowtrav.com/downloads/TIME_2006_09_Generations.pdf (accessed 28/06/12)

580002734

66

Randles, S. and Mander, S. (2009a) Aviation, consumption and the climate change debate: ‘Are you going to tell me off for flying? Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 21, 1, 93-113

Randles, S. and Mander, S. (2009b) Practice(s) and Ratchet(s): A Sociological Examination of Frequent Flying, Climate Change and Aviation: Issues, Challenges and Solutions, Earthscan, London 245-272

Rheinberger, U., Schmied, M. and Götz, K. (2007) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction by Target-Group Tailored Holiday Offers, in Peeters, P (eds) Tourism and Climate Change Mitigation: Methods, greenhouse gas reductions and policies, NHTV, Breda 143-155

Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford

Ryley, T. and Davison, L. (2008) UK air travel preferences: Evidence from an East Midlands household survey, Journal of Air Transport Management, 14, 1, 43-46

Selanniemi, T. (2003) On holiday in the liminoid playground: Place, time and self in tourism. in Bauer, T. and McKercher, B. (eds.), Sex and tourism: Journeys of romance, love and lust, Haworth Press, New York 19-34

Shaw, S. and Thomas, C. (2006) Discussion note: Social and Cultural Dimensions of Air Travel Demand: Hyper-Mobility in the UK? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14, 2, 209-215

Sheller, M. and Urry, J. (2006) The new mobilities paradigm, Environment and Planning A, 38, 207-226

Sky One (2004) Long way round, Sky One, London, 18/10/04-1/02/05

slowtrav (2012) Slow travel community, www.slowtrav.com (accessed 20/08/12)

Slow Food (2011) Slow Food Europe, www.slowfood.com/ (accessed 02/01/12)

Soinonen, T. (2011) Slow tourism now and in the future, Bachelor Thesis, Kajaani University of Applied Sciences, http://publications.theseus.fi/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10024/37594/Soininen _Tiia.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 20/06/12)

Southerton, D., Warde, A. and Hand, M. (2004) The limited autonomy of the consumer: implications for sustainable consumption, in Southerton, D., Chappells, H. and van Vliet, B. (eds) Sustainable Consumption: The implications of changing infrastructures of provision, Edwar Elgar, Cheltenham 32-48

Towner, J. (1985) The grand tour: A key phase in the history of tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, 12, 3, 297-333

TUI Travel PLC (2010) Passport to adventure: Industry Trend Report 2010, www.apassporttoadventure.com/assets/pdf/adventure_050110.pdf (accessed 02/01/12)

Urry, J. (2010) Sociology and climate change, The Sociological Review, 57, 2, 84-100

Urry, J. (1990) The Tourist Gaze, Sage, London


67

van Goeverden, C. (2007) Long Distance Travel in Europe: The Potential of the Train, in Peeters, P (eds) Tourism and Climate Change Mitigation: Methods, greenhouse gas reductions and policies, NHTV, Breda 105-117

Wang, Y. and Fesenmaier, D. (2004) Towards understanding members’ general participation in and active contribution to an online travel community, Tourism Management, 25, 6, 709-722

WBCSD (2004) Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability, www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/mobility-full.pdf (accessed 25/06/12)

Wheeller, B. (1991) Tourism’s troubled times: Responsible tourism is not the answer, Tourism Management, 12, 2, 91-96

World Tourism Organization and United Nations Environment Programme (2008) Climate Change and Tourism: Responding to Global Challenges, WTO and UNEP, Madrid, www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/WEBx0142xPA-ClimateChangeandTourismGlobalChallenges.pdf (accessed 09/07/12)

Xiang, Z. and Gretzel, U. (2010) Role of social media in online travel information search, Tourism Management, 179-188

Yurtseven, H. and Kaya, O. (2011) Slow tourists: A comparative research based on Cittaslow principles, American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 1, 2, 91-98

Zhang, Y. and Wildemuth, B. (2009) Qualitative analysis of content in Wildemuth, B. (ed.) Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library, Libraries Unlimited, Santa Barbara

580002734

68

Appendix 1: Blogs analysed with corresponding website and twitter username

Blogger name Website Twitter username

Akila and Patrick www.theroadforks.com @theroadforks

Alistair Humphreys www.alistairhumprheys.com @Al_Humphreys

Andrew Crouch www.groundedtraveler.com -

Anna Rice and Alex Hayton withoutwings.org @WithoutWings11

Barnali and Anirvan yearofnoflying.com -

Colin Wright exilelifestyle.com @colinismyname

Dave longestwayhome.com -

Debbie Ann http://debbieann.livejournal.com/ -

Denise Pulis www.theartofslowtravel.com @artofslowtravel

Ed Gillespie www.lowcarbontravel.com @frucool

Elisa www.globetrottinginheels.com @hipmom

Ethan Gelber www.ethangelber.com/ @bikeabout

Gavin and family http://slowtravelnomads.com/ -

James and Tracy www.jamesandthegiantbikeride.blogs

pot.co.uk -

Jason Lewis http://jasonexplorer.com/about/ @explorerjason

Jennifer Miller and family edventureproject.com @edventuremama

Jeannie Mark www.nomadicchick.com/about/ @nomadicchick

Jillian and Danny ishouldlogoff.com @ishouldlogoff

Jools Stone www.trainsonthebrain.com @jools_octavius

Karl Bushby www.odysseyxxi.com/ -

Kevine Doye and Lowanna

King bike2oz.com -

Lainie and Miro www.raisingmiro.com/about/ -

Lara and Terence http://grantourismotravels.com @gran_tourismo

Lara and Tom www.worldinslowmotion.com -

Lauren www.lateralmovements.com @LateralMovement

Michael Hodson www.goseewrite.com @GoSeeWrite

Niall Doherty www.ndoherty.com -

Nick Tuppen and Holly Gee www.3mphroundtheworld.com -

Nora Dunn www.theprofessionalhobo.com/about/ @hobonora

Paula Constant www.constanttrek.com/ -

Peter Gostelow petergostelow.com @petegost

Shannon O’Donnell http://alittleadrift.com/ -

Steve Smith and Jason

Lewis www.expedition360.com -

Tom Allen tomsbiketrip.com @tomsbiketrip

Tyler and Tara www.goingslowly.com @goingslowly

Wade Shepard vagabondjourney.com @Vagabondjourney

https://twitter.com/theroadforks

https://twitter.com/WithoutWings11

https://twitter.com/bikeabout

https://twitter.com/explorerjason

https://twitter.com/nomadicchick

https://twitter.com/jools_octavius

https://twitter.com/gran_tourismo

https://twitter.com/LateralMovement

https://twitter.com/GoSeeWrite

https://twitter.com/hobonora

https://twitter.com/petegost

https://twitter.com/tomsbiketrip

https://twitter.com/goingslowly


69

Appendix 2: Dendogram produced from ward linkage cluster analysis

Rescaled distance cluster combine

0 5 10 15 20 25

Sam

ple

res

po

nd

ents

580002734

70

Appendix 3: Results of PCA rotated factor analysis on travel preferences data

Screeplot

Component Variable Variance eigenvalue

% variance explained

1. Deep Experience

I like living as locals do. It is important to me to get to know a place really well. I enjoy contact with local people. I like to contribute or give-back to the communities I visit. I like working or volunteering whilst I travel. I like to enjoy local food and cuisine I like to learn the language of the country I am visiting. Experiencing and learning about local culture and history is important to me. I like to purchase souvenirs from local markets, shops and producers. I like to use public transport at the destination. I like to travel off the beaten path.

6.470 25.881

2. Pro-environmental principles

I avoid high polluting modes of transport such as air travel. I worry about the environment in making holiday plans. Minimising the carbon emissions of my travels is important to me.

2.880 11.521

3. Enjoyment of the journey

I enjoy walking or cycling whilst on holiday. I like the opportunity to travel as it used to be, slow and overland. I enjoy the journey as much as the destination. I do not like to reach my destination using the fastest mode of transport.

1.640 6.562

4. Hypermobile

I like to take advantage of low cost airline deals. I like to holiday at far away destinations. I like to take multiple holidays abroad each year.

1.466 5.864

5. Tourist attractions and facilities

It is important for me that there are many facilities at the accommodation, such as a large swimming pool, sport facilities and entertainment. I like to visit well-known tourist hot-spots. I do not like unexpected aspects.

1.124 4.494

Total variance 54.322


71

Appendix 4: Profiling clusters by travel preferences

% of cluster

Travel preferences demonstrating significant differences between clusters

1 2 3 4

1. I like to learn the language of the country I am visiting

Disagree 29 6 3 7

Neither agree nor disagree 37 32 11 26

Agree 34 62 87 67

1. Experiencing and learning about local culture and history is important to me

Disagree 16 1 0 2


Agree 66 90 100 95

1. I do not like unexpected aspects during my holiday



Agree 5 5 8 7

1. I don’t like to spend too much time in one place



Agree 26 23 8 16

1. I like working or volunteering whilst I travel



Agree 3 18 51 40

1. I like living as locals do

Disagree 45 11 0 2


Agree 18 47 92 70

1. It is important for me to get to know a place really well

Disagree 42 7 0 5


Agree 18 58 79 58

1. I enjoy contact with local people

Disagree 8 0 0 2


Agree 58 89 97 91

1.I like to contribute or give-back to communities I visit

Disagree 26 3 0 2


Agree 37 51 83 86

2. Minimising the carbon emissions of my travels is important to me

Disagree 53 26 11 5


Agree 5 24 65 88

2. I don’t worry about the environment when making holiday plans



Agree 47 31 15 2

2. I try to avoid high polluting modes of transport such as air travel

Disagree 84 59 44 5


Agree 5 5 27 77

2. I like to use public transport at the destination

Disagree 18 2 1 7


Agree 42 73 92 84

3. I enjoy the journey as much as the destination



Agree 16 39 69 84

3. I like to reach my destination using the fastest mode of transport



Agree 76 36 23 0

3. I like the opportunity to travel as it used to be, slow and overland

Disagree 55 13 5 0


Agree 16 46 67 86

3. I enjoy walking or cycling whilst on holiday

Disagree 13 6 1 0


Agree 71 86 97 98

580002734

72

4. I like to take advantage of low cost airline deals

Disagree 13 12 3 54


Agree 71 63 83 12

4. I like to take multiple holidays abroad a year



Agree 55 46 61 9

4. I like to holiday at far away destinations

Disagree 8 10 3 44


Agree 53 54 70 19

5. It is important that there are many facilities at my accommodation



Agree 24 11 4 0

5. I prefer to travel off the beaten path and look for less tourist areas and attractions

Disagree 13 0 1 5


Agree 63 81 96 91


73

Appendix 5: Questionnaire

580002734

74


75

580002734

76

.


77

.

580002734

78

.


79

.

580002734

80

.


81

.

580002734

82

Date post:	27-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

The emerging consumption of, and demand for slow travel · (Miller et al. 2010), with a number of...

Documents