OERC Seminar Series 2018 Prof James Higham Department of Tourism Te Tari Tapoi, Otago Business School Te Kura Pakihi, University of Otago Te Whare Wananga o Otago While transportation currently accounts for 23% of total global energy-related CO2-e emissions, transport emissions are projected to double by 2050, driven significantly by continued high growth in global passenger demand for air travel. Addressing continuing high growth in aviation emissions is critical to the Sustainable Development Goals (2015-2030) (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Accord (2016). Currently we rely on individual decisions to forego air travel as the means of reducing these high-risk emissions (and the promise of future technological solutions to the problem). In this seminar I will reflect on the problem of aviation emissions in relation to individual (consumer) and collective (policy) action. Participation in the high-carbon air travel regime is a social convention, and transition from social conventions requires coordination among players. Within this context, particularly given the University’s ‘Sustainability Strategic Framework 2017-2021’ it is important to consider possible pathways for reducing aviation emissions through collective action at the departmental, divisional and/or institutional levels. Consideration is given to the pathways forwards for collective action to reduce our own professional air travel emissions, before encouraging questions and discussion.

1. Europe 24
http://vimeo.com/88093956

2. Climate change and aviation:
Collective action to reduce our air travel emissions?
James Higham
Email: james.higham@otago.ac.nz
Otago Energy Research Centre Seminar Series
31 July 2018

3. Seminar
outline
1. The problem of aviation emissions
2. Individual responses
3. Industry accountability?
4. Collective action
5. Global and sub-global action

4. 1. The problem
of aviation
emissions

5. • Transportation currently accounts for 23% of total global energy-
related CO2 emissions
• Projected to double by 2050 (Creutzig et al., 2015).
• Air travel produces a large and growing portion of the world's
greenhouse gas emissions (Creutzig et al., 2015; Bows-Larkin et al., 2016).
• Global passenger demand for air travel continues to grow at 5-
6% per annum (Bows-Larkin et al., 2016)
The unconstrained growth of aviation emissions

6. 6

8. Slide courtesy of Paul Peeters (2012)

9. The environmental costs of air travel are unavoidable.
The jet engine has achieved its ‘evolutionary sophistication’.
Efficiency gains have consistently failed to meet the 1.5% per annum target
(2009-2020) set by ICAO (EFTE, 2016).
In the absence of ‘game-changing’ innovations in transport technology, air travel
is now recognised as incompatible with carbon mitigation (Peeters et al., 2016).
Current technologies are locked-in for a period of decades.
9

11. Growth in the global commercial fleet
Global commercial fleet of civil aircraft has more than doubled
every 20 years since 1970 (Boeing, 2014 Airbus, 2014).
1970 - 3700 aircraft
1990 - 9100 aircraft
2010 - 21000 aircraft

12. Revenue Passenger Kilometres (RPK)
Even greater has been growth in revenue passenger kilometres (RPK)
Increased ninefold between 1970 and 2010, from 500 billion RPK in
1970 to 4500 billion in 2010 (Airbus, 2014).
Distance flown by humanity 2010 = 4500 billion km

13. It is expected that by 2030 a global fleet of
40,000 civil aircraft will produce 10,000 billion
RPK per annum (Boeing, 2014).
Distance to the sun 66,845 times
Revenue Passenger Kilometres (RPK)

17. “Even under the most aggressive
technology forecast scenarios, the
anticipated gain in efficiency from
technological and operational measures
does not offset the expected growth in
demand driven emissions”
(ICAO, 2016:12).

18. “Even under the most aggressive
technology forecast scenarios, the
anticipated gain in efficiency from
technological and operational measures
does not offset the expected growth in
demand driven emissions”
(ICAO, 2016:12).
ICAO (2016) concedes that “…aviation
emissions are expected to grow by up to 300%
by 2050 unless action is taken”.

19. High-carbon mobility
• Dependent on high-carbon
transport modes;
• Increasing demand for high-
speed, long haul air travel;
• Those who fly are flying
more than ever;
• Air travel has been omitted
from meaningful global
efforts to mitigate climate
change

20. 2. Individual
responses

22. 1. Flying is socially embedded
In some parts of some societies…. (94% of the world’s population has never
flown in an aeroplane)
Air travel has evolved from an extraordinary event to the domain of
the everyday as a ‘locked-in’social institution (Randles & Mander, 2009)
• Social connections ever-more networked and spatially ‘stretched out’
• Air travel is embedded in social life in new ways
• Events that would have in the past been held locally have migrated(e.g.
birthdays, anniversaries, hen/stag nights, football fandoms, golf weekends…)
Tourism increasingly coupled with (and masked by) business travel (linked to
professional mobilities)

23. 2. Attitude-behaviour gap acute in tourism
• Increasing evidence of awareness of air travel climate impacts
and even attitudes of concern over these impacts
• Dissonance between environmental attitudes and actual steps to
modify behaviour
Attitude-behaviour gap:
• attitudes do not translate into specific behaviour across contexts (e.g.,
home versus away)
• Climate concern in daily practices (e.g. reducing waste and energy use,
buying ‘ethical’) does not carry over to holiday behaviour (Barr et al, 2010)

24. 3. Behavioural addiction?
Sentiments of guilt, denial, acceptance of a problem, failure to change...
Also an inability to change behaviours - implicating others, blame, excuses,
refusal to accept individual sacrifice, need for triggers, external interventions
(etc)
Little different to other forms of excessive consumption that may be addictive
- e.g. shopping, exercise, video games, eating, sex, gambling…
HOWEVER - THE CONSEQUENCES ARE DIFFERENT
A broader behavioural change to sustainable air travel practices is partially
dependent upon society repositioning high levels of consumption as
destructive

26. Stigmatizing ‘excessive’ air travel
• The term ‘binge flying’ itself epitomizes negative
public sentiments towards excessive or compulsive
air travel (Burns & Bibbings, 2009)
• Might airlines be putting themselves in a similar
position to the tobacco industry?
• Climate change is requiring people to consider
what they think constitutes socially acceptable
levels of flying
• Will require those with a carbon conscience to
influence others (e.g., role of celebrity endorsement).

27. 3. Industry
accountability?

29. Who wins and loses?
The locus of responsibility is important.
How do particular public problems come into being, and who stands to
win and lose from their deployment? (John Dewey, 1927).
Who gains from the transference of the environmental costs of aviation
to the psychological cost of the individual?
29

30. The ‘obesity epidemic’
Obesity was classified as a disease by the recent annual meeting (June
18, 2013) of the American Medical Association (AMA).
Over one-third of US adults are apparently suffering from this ‘complex
disorder’ (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2013).
By locating the problem in the diseased individual, responsibility is
moved away from the fast food industry, the sugar industry,
government regulators, urban designers, car manufacturers, schools and
the advertising industry (to name but a few) towards the pathologized
subject – the ‘sick’ individual.
A complex social issue created by the consumer society (Harvey, 2011) is
represented as a psychological problem of the undisciplined, irrational,
excessive subject (Orford, 2001).
30

31. 31

32. 32

33. An alternative formulation
The ‘flyers’ dilemma’ is the product of structural conditions (i.e. political,
societal, economic, technological) rather than excessive individual appetites
(i.e. psychological)
Rather the environmental costs of flying, and the individual anxieties
associated with those costs, are an inevitable part of flying production.
33

34. Air New Zealand
• Undertaken a number of actions to begin to address its carbon impact
• Establishment of a Sustainability Advisory Panel.
“the dilemma for anyone who cares passionately about addressing the multiple
threats of climate change: either stop flying altogether, or fly as little and as
discriminately and responsibly as possible”.
(Air NZ Sustainability Advisory Panel chairperson, Sir Jonathon Porritt)
• Energy efficient fleet
• Pioneered the testing of alternative biofuels
• Exploring carbon capture and storage (negative emissions; not geo-engineering!)
• Entered into a corporate partnership with the Department of Conservation,
which receives offset payments made by Air New Zealand passengers

36. 3. Collective
action

38. The failure of individual action
Currently we rely on individual decisions to forego
air travel as the means of reducing high risk
emission.
But we are facing a problem that individuals acting
independently can not resolve…

39. The failure of individual action
1. Rational decision making:
Information discouraging unnecessary flights is
ignored if it does not reinforce our preferred views
on costs and benefits

40. The failure of individual action
2. Availability bias:
To make decisions we call to mind
instances of the harms in question.
We are yet to see unequivocal climate
catastrophes (radical permanent climate
shift; massive sea level rise).

41. The failure of individual action
3. Confirmation bias:
People look for confirming rather than
disconfirming evidence for theories that
they prefer.
The effect of confirmation bias is stronger
among people who rely on social media
for their news (Bozdag, 2013)

42. The failure of individual action
4. Optimistic bias:
People tend to believe misfortune will
impact the lives of others rather than
themselves.
Feel that they can continue to behave as
they always have without consequences.

43. High carbon transport use is a social convention
that entrenches suboptimal social and
environmental outcomes for everyone.
Such conventions can only be ended by
coordinated action, since any unilateral exit
simply disadvantages those leaving without
affecting the convention itself.
(Mackie 1996; Hechter & Satoshi, 1997; Hardin 1982).

44. The need for
collective action
“Transitioning from the high-carbon
air travel regime requires coordination
among players”
(Higham, Ellis & McClaurin, 2018).

45. Collective action
at the global
scale
COP21 and the ICAO 39th
General Assembly

46. COP21 and the ICAO Montréal Agreement
UN COP21 (Paris, 2015) agreed to the goal of stabilising GAT at below +2°C.
International aviation a notable omission from the Paris Agreement (Scott et al., 2016).
Addressed at the 39th ICAO General Assembly (Montréal, Canada, 27 Sept–7 Oct 2016)
Carbon offsetting and reduction scheme for international aviation (CORSIA)
- Carbon offsetting from a future baseline
- Voluntary pilot phase (2021-2023); formal phase (2024-2026) also voluntary; mandatory
phase (2027-2035)
Does not require airlines to reduce emissions at source
Concerns for low levels of ambition, exemptions, distortion of behaviour
Applies to only 40% of total aviation emissions.
CORSIA fails to address the deep-cut emissions reductions
in aviation that are required under COP21 46

47. Aviation remains in a parallel universe
“…historically found itself in a parallel universe when it comes to the
industry’s contribution to the fight against climate change. Airlines have
been operating in a world where they pay no fuel taxes, are VAT-
exempt, face no legally-binding fuel efficiency requirements, and have
no limits placed on their emissions” (Eickhout & Taylor, 2016).
Eickhout, B., and K. Taylor. 2016. “Planes Need to Stop Existing in a Parallel Universe When It Comes to the
Climate Fight.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/ (accessed September 26, 2016).

48. Collective action
at the sub-
global scale
“The dreaded patchwork”

51. Collective action
at the sub-
national scale
Academic travel emissions

53. 2017 – a turning point
∎Office of Sustainability created
∎Sustainability Strategic Framework: 2017 – 2021 approved by
Council
• Integrating sustainability across all our campuses and everything we do
∎Approved operational sustainability targets
∎Measured against 2012 benchmarks

54. 2016 air travel
∎54,472,762 kilometres
∎To the moon and back
70 times
∎To help put that into
perspective:
• DUD-WLG 19,146 times
• DUD-BNE 3,417 times
• AKL-LAX 3,209 times
0
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
Passengerkilometres(pkms)
Whole University
Long haul Short haul Domestic

55. A mix of approaches
Avoid
Reduce
Replace
Offset
∎ Avoid carbon-intensive activities
and re-think strategy
∎ Improve efficiency (i.e. reduce)
∎ Replace high-carbon sources with
low or zero-carbon sources
∎ Offset those emissions that can’t
be eliminated by other strategies
Increasingly
transformative,
with lasting
impact

56. Adoption and use of Zoom
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Minutesofzoomusage
2015
2016
2017
2018

57. Meaningful sub-
national
responses
Collective action at the
departmental and divisional level

58. Academic travel
Transnational mobility is
considered an essential
part of an academic
career path and is integral
to an academic’s
recognition and
reputation.
(Fahey & Kenway, 2010: 564)

59. Academic travel
“Failing to demonstrate an
international mobility
experience is likely to be
detrimental to career
progression” (Ackers, 2008:419)
The quality of experience
is deemed to be less
important than the fact
that mobility and the
perceived benefits of
travel have occurred.

60. Department of Tourism initiatives
∎ Higham & Phipps seminar (21 March 2018)
∎ Staff meeting – conference hosting agenda item
• Desire to advance collective action at the departmental level
∎ To convene a retreat involving all staff
• Quantified department air travel emissions (benchmark)
• Quantify by purpose of travel
• Review decision and approval processes
• Critique in relation to:
• Purpose/need (e.g., importance; combine trips)
• Planning (e.g., fewer/longer; links to sabbatical leave)
• Decision processes (e.g., scope for substitution)
• Reduced travel (e.g., conference satellite centres)
• Reduced distance (e.g., regional conferences; fields schools/field trips)
• Modal shifts (e.g., travel booking arrangements; low-carbon, active – links to time)
• Measure and report reductions in department air travel emissions

61. Visiting appointments
17,638km one way
35,276km return
2,559km one way
5,118km return
86% reduction in air travel emissions

62. Research collaborations (2014-)

64. Acknowledgements
Dr. Scott Cohen (University of Surrey)
Dr. Christina Cavaliere (University of Otago)
Dr. Wiebke Finkler (University of Otago
Dr. Arianne Reis (UWS)
Dr. Debbie Hopkins (Oxford University)
Dr. Paul Peeters (Breda Uni of Applied Sciences)
Prof. Stefan Gössling (Lund University, Sweden)
Dr. Adam Doering (Wakayama University)
Dr. Caroline Orchiston (University of Otago)
A/Prof. Martin Young (Southern Cross University)
Dr. Francis Markham (ANU)
A/Prof. Lisa Ellis (University of Otago)
Prof. James Maclaurin (University of Otago)

65. Climate change and aviation:
Collective action to reduce our air travel emissions?
James Higham
Email: james.higham@otago.ac.nz
Otago Energy Research Centre Seminar Series
31 July 2018