Journal of Tourism & Hospitality
Open Access

Sustainable Transportation Policy for Tourist Mobility on Island

Author info »

Description

Indonesia Cars dominates, as the means of transport, in the most European destinations. Excessive car usage place a high social costs and cause a variety of negative externalities such as traffic congestion, land consuming, accidents, pollution, and so on [1]. The mobility model on tourist destination based on private or rental car is at risk because they are subjected to a greater amount of unsustainable traffic development and for this reason require management measures. Policy-makers have a wide range of measures to intervene in the transport market to stimulate a more sustainable situation. For instance, government may introduce subsidies to cleaners’ modes of transport and taxation to more polluting vehicles. At least, in theory, government may approach social optimum considering the tradeoff existent between economics gains and environmental impacts. The main issues in transport planning integrated to tourism policy would be to maintain the objective to make transport sector more sustainable and allowing, at the same time, tourism growth.

This commentary tries to analyse two complementary policies to change mobility model on Island: the design of a new tourist bus service to connect main tourist attractions on the island and an emission tax that encourage tourist change from rental private car to the new tourist bus route.

Storchmann estimated the price elasticity for each mode of transport, and by motive for the trip. He found high fuel price elasticity for leisure car travel [2]. He pointed out that travellers perceive car use as essential for work and business trips, but unessential in the leisure segment. This means that if gasoline prices increase (fuel tax), using cars for leisure purpose tends to decrease. There is now a margin for strategies aimed at incentives for modes of leisure transport other than the car. In addition, Dickinson found there are some support for car restrictions and some willingness by visitors to use alternatives modes in rural tourist destinations [3]. Thus, the focus is on minimizing the use of one particular transport mode in favour of a more friendly environmentally one [4]. However, before car use is managed, the level of service of the alternative modes of transport must be improved. In this sense, the implementation of a multifaceted bus line would offer welfare gains for both rural inhabitants and tourists. As Preston pointed out the most common response to transport-related social exclusion is to improve the collective bus service [5]. A new tourist bus lines would have several advantages for rural populations [6]. They would improve accessibility to leisure and other facilities for residents in terms of decreased travel time. This suggests that time-based exclusion would be improved because this new service provides an incentive to mobility for rural residents to participate in the labour market and access other facilities such as hospitals, childcare, schools, etc [7].

It is worth emphasizing the fact that this mixed approach has to be customer orientated, and in this framework one major variable that needs to be taken into account is information technology. Successful public transport services in leisure mobility nowadays require new ways of marketing. This could be crucial in improving the status of public transport in the leisure market segment [8].

Conclusion

In sum, the main aim in transport planning in this context is to make the transport sector more sustainable from a social and environmental point of view while simultaneously allowing tourism to grow. Transport planning and tourism policy have to be integrated in order to achieve joint environmental and social objectives. In this sense, it is important to create incentives that reduce the need for private cars and to minimize the length of time needed to access specific opportunities. This study suggests that this could lead to substantial welfare gains, in terms pollutions reductions and improved access for rural inhabitants, by the implementation of a new tourist bus route that links the main tourist activities on Island.

References

1. Hall D. Tour and Transport: Issues and Agenda for the new millennium. World Cat. 2004;3, 45-55.

   [CrossRef]

2. Storchmann KH. The impact of fuel taxes on public transport: An empirical assessment for Germany. Trans Policy. 2001;8:19-28.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

3. Dickinson J, Robbin D, Fletcher J. Representation of transport: A rural destination analysis. Ann Tour Res. 2009;36(1):103-123.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

4. Verbeek D, Mommaas H. Transitions to Sustainable Mobility: The social practices approach. J Sustainable Tour. 2008;16(6):629-644.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

5. Preston J. Epilogue: Transport policy and social exclusion some reflections. Transport Policy. 2009;16: 140-142.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

6. Lumsdon L. Factors affecting the design of tourism bus services. Ann Tour Res. 2006;33(3):748-766.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. Church A, Frost M, Sullivan K. Transport and social exclusion in London. Transport Policy. 2000;7(3):195-205.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

8. Gronau W, Kagermeier A. Key factors for successful leisure and tourism public transport provision. J Trans Geography. 2007;15:127-135.

   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]