Factors influencing destination and transport mode choices (RQ1 & RQ2)

This section discusses the results with regard to the factors influencing tourism mode and destination choices (RQ1) and the relationship between them (RQ2). Building on the conceptual framework above, the discussions is structured along these dimensions that influence tourists and their mobility behaviour regarding both destination and transport mode choices.

(Inter-)Personal influences on tourism mobility choices

The findings from both qualitative methods and the MNL model have indicated the collective nature of tourism decisions, as previously discussed (Bronner & de Hoog, 2008; Gronau, 2014).

Throughout the MNL model, this was shown by the importance of the travel company on mode choices (see Paper IV). The model on destination choice (see Paper III) has also presented a strong influence of the traveller’s social surrounding, both as a wish to comply with their views (social norms) and the perceived pressure to do so (subjective norms). Similar results were reported from previous TPB-based destination contexts although cultural contexts play a role in shaping the effect size (Hsu et al., 2006; Cohen, Prayag, et al., 2014; Bianchi et al., 2017). Because personal and interpersonal factors are so strongly intertwined, they are discussed together in this section.

Other than in previous studies (Masiero & Zoltan, 2013; Le-Klähn et al., 2015; Gutiérrez &

Miravet, 2016), sociodemographic characteristics did not have a significant influence in neither the destination nor the mode choice model. While this may be attributed to the homogeneity of the sample, it could also be a result of this specific study context of urban-rural tourism trips.

Independent of age, gender and education, these trips are connected to family visits or other social ties in rural areas (see Juschten et al., 2017), possibly blurring the distinct boundaries between different travel segments. The only noteworthy influence were available mobility tools (cars or PT reduction cards, see Paper V). As highlighted for urban settings (Mitra & Saphores, 2017), their availability represents a path-dependency, directing the options to be considered.

Travel motives play an ambiguous role in the results of this thesis. According to Lam & Hsu (2006), push factors (as many travel motives are) are mainly useful for explaining the desire to travel while destination-specific pull factors (e.g. beaches or mountains) explain the specific choice of destinations. This could explain why the travel motives (esp. outdoor activities) turned out to be an influential factor on the self-reported intention to visit rural destinations, but had no influence in the joint mode-destination choice model, where pull factors were more influential.

Another influential decision driver is the desire to avoid risks related to travelling. Less frequently acknowledged in transport research (albeit the body of research on the importance of PT reliability is growing), this represents a widely studied field of knowledge in tourism research (Sirakaya &

Woodside, 2005; Quintal et al., 2010; Karl, 2018). Within the TPB model, the influence of uncertainty was expressed through the significant role of perceived behaviour control on both current visit intentions and the intention under climate change influence (see Paper III).

Destination familiarity through past experience is one potential strategy to overcome uncertainties, as illustrated by previous work (Bianchi et al., 2017) and by the positive effect of past behaviour on visit intentions in the TPB model (see Paper III).

Chapter 6 - Discussing findings and implications

43 Perceptions of different transport modes with regard to travel distance, time and speed are another important influence. The paper findings suggest that the relativity of time depends on the generated utility of it. As such, time spent on high-quality PT (train rather than buses) is perceived less negatively than time spent travelling by car because of the way it can be used in more enjoyable ways (see Paper V). This supports findings from previous studies that investigate the subjective meanings attached to time for different activities (Larsen & Guiver, 2013; Hössinger et al., 2020). Unfortunately, travel costs and the perceptions thereof were not included in this data set, which is why they could not be included in the model; income, however, did not have a significant influence on mobility choices. The New Zealand case study showed that the perception of transport modes also affected what was considered an option. In this regard, the strong dependence on automobility was re-produced by respective societal discourses and social stigma evolving around PT, especially buses, which were framed as 'loser cruisers' (see Paper VI). While the societal stigma against PT usage may be less strong among residents of most European cities (as also illustrated by the PT-related attitudes in Paper II), symbolic car use motives as well as habit have also shown to be important in European leisure studies (Anable & Gatersleben, 2005).

Within the New Zealand case study, experiential expectations of the tourism trip appeared to be influential for tourism destination and mobility choices. This includes people's desire to find remoteness and solitude (as opposed to crowdedness and encounters with strangers) in visited places; with privacy and family time as key aspired experiences. Those aspects were also mentioned in the Viennese focus groups and seem to also apply to other nature-based, more remote travel contexts (e.g. peripheral mountain areas in Switzerland, see Boller et al., 2010).

Escaping societal expectations and feeling at home while travelling adds substantially to the trip enjoyment of some interviewed travellers in New Zealand, largely driving automobility developments. What is more contested is the notion of freedom, independence and fun associated with car travels. While some people perceive automobility as the definition of freedom and independence and largely enjoy being on the road, others feel stressed by the dangers and exogenous factors (weather, traffic, need for concentration), an aspect that was mentioned previously (Lumsdon et al., 2006; Hannam et al., 2014). Due to this association of driving as being stressful, these travellers perceive train trips as ‘freedom and independence’ because the associated peace of mind and lack of responsibility allows for a more enjoyable trip. What drives these differing perceptions remains unclear at this point and could be explored in future studies.

There are a number of factors that appear to be important in other studies, but were either not included or insignificant within the present one. Income or travel budget did not have a significant influence in any of the mode or destination choice models, which deviates from previous research (Gutiérrez & Miravet, 2016; Gross & Grimm, 2018). While accommodation prices were briefly mentioned as a constraining factor within the focus groups, income did not appear to affect any of the choices made. While this effect could be caused by an overly homogenous participant sample, it may also be an effect of domestic trips, which are also performed by low-income household, especially when combined with visits of family or friends. The dataset contained no other economic variable besides income (e.g. transport or accommodation prices or price differences), which is why these conclusion should be judged with caution.

Chapter 6 - Discussing findings and implications

44

Situational influences

The survey data used within this thesis dealt with the effects of climate change related heat waves on the tourism demand of Viennese travellers. The results showed that heat stress can represent a driver for tourism trips towards cooler (rural or mountainous) destinations. This influence is strengthened by the fact that most trips are short holidays with respectively short planning horizons. This is in line with previous studies that emphasized current and expected weather at both the origin and destination as an important environmental factor for destination choices and leisure activities, with influences varying, depending on planning horizons and trip durations (Scott et al., 2012). This finding is also supported by the focus groups and the Q-study, which show that weather represents a direct influence on domestic destinations choices because it may enable or inhibit certain weather-dependent tourism activities (Scott et al., 2012).

Besides the effect on destination choices, both the attempted tourism activities and the current weather at the destination were frequently mentioned to affect people’s transport mode choices within the NZ case study (see Paper VI). Some travellers stated the importance of their car for flexibly adapting their destination choices depending on the weather conditions for performing their planned activities (such as hiking or windsurfing, which may both be inhibited by unfavourable wind or precipitation conditions). In this regards, both the decision for the trip in general and the chosen destination specifically were often made (and possibly adapted) spontaneously, which conflicts with the concept of pre-booking PT trips to obtain competitively priced tickets. Furthermore, the equipment needed for certain sports or children was mentioned as an inhibiting factor for PT usage (see Paper I and VI), while the car was valued for releasing travellers from the stress of having to choose luggage by capacity. This confirms the results of a previous study from Austria highlighting the importance of facilitating luggage transport for PT travellers (Bursa & Mailer, 2018). Lastly, trip complexity related to multi-destination trips was mentioned as an aspect that inhibits PT usage, since each additional trip leg needs to be planned ahead (see Paper VI), increasing both the planning time and risk of disturbances along the trip.

Hence, for PT trips, complexity represents a burden, while for car trip it is associated with excitements and a sense of freedom, illustrating the different meanings attached to both modes.

PT and car characteristics

The results of the study outline the general importance of accessibility by PT for both mode and destination choices (see Paper I, IV, V and VI). Especially for households without a car, PT accessibility is a crucial element in filtering possible destinations (see Paper I and V), although the results suggest that car-free households are also willing to gain access to a (privately shared or rented) car when wanting to visit specific destinations (see Paper IV, VI). The quantitative results further emphasize the role of the attractiveness of the available PT network in terms of travel times, speed and type of available PT affects for tourism mobility choices, which were also relevant in other studies (Le-Klähn et al., 2015; Tomej & Liburd, 2020). Surprisingly, the number of required changes did not affect PT choice negatively (as the results of Gutiérrez et al., 2019 indicated). Unfortunately, the analysed data did not contain information on travel costs or value for money, an aspect that showed diverging results in previous studies (Lumsdon et al., 2006;

LaMondia et al., 2010; Gutiérrez et al., 2019). Ultimately, PT travellers in Vienna appear less

Chapter 6 - Discussing findings and implications

45 sensitive to travel distances and times, which may be related to both the increasing speed over distance (due to high-speed networks) and the possibility to spend the time with secondary activities such as reading or sleeping (see Paper V). This illustrates that the PT service quality is not a purely objective feature since the perception of service quality as well as travel times and distances are highly subjective (Prideaux, 2009).

The qualitative studies further highlight the relevance of reliability and the perceived ease of travelling (see Paper I and VI). Both are considered lower for PT, as illustrated previously by the negative connotations of PT and multi-destination trips. The reasons frequently given for that are the complexity of trip planning and booking as well as the lack of knowledge on available mobility offers and alternatives in case of problems. Within the NZ study (see Paper VI), the fear of ‘being stuck’ at the destination was another frequently stated issue, which leads to the section on destination features.

Destination features

Within the destination, cross-sectional influences were found between tourism and transport infrastructures and destination and transport mode choices. As such, mobility options within the destination that provide the basis for interesting tourist activities (e.g. cable cars, bike rental) seem to be important factor in influencing destination choices. This supports previous studies emphasizing the double role that transport means can play both at the arrival and the destination level (Hopkins, 2020). The availability of tourism infrastructure in walking distance has been previously known to positively influence the attractiveness of destinations (see Hall & Ram, 2019). However, in the context of this thesis, its relevance for mode choices, in particular for PT- bound travels, has been emphasized. This corresponds with the findings from a UK-based study illustrating the relevance of good trails/paths in close proximity to other relevant amenities to strengthen positive meanings attached to walking and to allow for car-free independence (Smith et al., 2019) by reducing transport-related uncertainty (Thomas et al., 2018).

As claimed by previous research (Sparks & Pan, 2009; Scott et al., 2012), media and communication tools have crucial roles in shaping tourism choices. The paper findings suggest that the destination picture portrayed by media affects travellers’ destination perceptions (see Paper I and III), which in combination with its online presence and online and in-person information provision affects the probability of destination visits (see Paper V). The same applies to guest cards including free PT, which also increase the likelihood of a destination being chosen and illustrate the strong relevance of transport offers and their quality for shaping the overall tourism experience (Gronau, 2017).