Response Attributes among Accommodation Types

Differences exists with respect to most common measures mentioned on the websites among different accommodation categories. Three specific dimensions which hotels prominently disclosed while the other three accommodation types mentioned less on their websites were energy, water, and waste conservation. Previous studies indicate that these three key areas are hotels’ most popular sustainable practices (Chan et al., 2017; de Grosbois, 2011; Kyoto GPN, 2010; Priego & Palacios, 2008; Richins & Scarinci, 2009; Sloan, Legrand, Tooman & Fendt, 2009; Wan, 2007). A number of studies have identified that the primary motivation factors for their implementation of such practices involve cost savings and response to environmental concerns, as well as simplicity in sustainable practice implementation and operation (Ali et al., 2014; Bohdanowicz, 2005; Dodds & Holmes, 2011; Erdoğan, 2007; Fotiadis, Vassiliadis & Rekleitis, 2013; Graci & Dodds, 2008; Javis & Ortega, 2010; Leslie, 2009; Levy & Park, 2011; Mishra, 2016; Niga et al., 2002; Su et al., 2013; Tanaka, 1999; Ueoka & Kanaya, 2012; Wan et al., 2017; Warnken et al., 2005).

Furthermore, there is a higher rate of hotels implementing specific practices among the affirmative category, for example, having an EMS in place, installing monitoring systems, and using alternative and/or RE sources, which entail high installation and operating costs as well as familiarity of their existence (Bohdanowicz, 2006; Chan, 2011; Erdogan & Tosun, 2009; Nicholls & Kang, 2012). These findings of this study could be associated with firm size which influences sustainable practices of accommodation establishments (Ali et al., 2014; Álvarez Gill, Jiménez & Lorente, 2001; Chan, 2013; Dalton et al., 2007; Mensah & Blankson, 2013; Su et al., 2013). Larger-

106

sized accommodation facilities appear more involved in environmental management practices (Park, Kim & McCleary, 2014; McNamara & Gibson, 2008; Sánchez-Medina, Díaz-Pichardo & Cruz- Bautista, 2016). Due to their greater capital and strong organisational culture, they have an increased capacity to execute more effective and long-term environmental initiatives in response to environmental concerns and climate change (Erdoğan, 2007; Mackenzie & Peters, 2014; McNamara & Gibson, 2008). Indeed, most of the attributes were more prominently mentioned among international accommodation providers than standard accommodation providers. As Jenkins and Karanikola (2014) note, larger hotel companies are more committed to information disclosure of green initiatives on their websites. This was reflected in their findings that a higher rate of keywords in relation to human responses to climate change were contained among hotels. However, Font et al. (2012) argue that while, in general, larger hotel companies disclose CSR policies more comprehensively, they are also accompanied by substantial gaps in implementation, which has been termed as a ‘disclosure-performance gap’.

Firm size also appears to have an impact on green practices of ryokan operations. Ryokan revealed more of low carbon food attributes amongst accommodation categories, and it is consistent with the finding of the Kyoto GPN (2010) study that ryokan have a higher implementation rate of using seasonal and locally sourced food and beverage than hotels. This finding is also supported by Nicholls and Kang’s (2012) study that small-sized accommodation providers are more likely to have implemented green purchasing with the time and effort invested in obtaining food and beverage which is locally produced or organic. Another possible explanation for ryokan’s higher engagement in local and seasonal foodstuff could be their greater emphasis on optimising local identity and authenticity in their branding and promotional strategies. As the ryokan sector is embraced by the local atmosphere of tradition and culture (UNWTO & KCTI, 2016), locally and seasonal sourced food and beverage products are integral to creating and offering such service experiences to customers, as a factor in the attractiveness of ryokan (Cooper, 2013; Jimura, 2011).

Lodges appeared to be more involved in reducing the use of materials, environmental education of guests, reusable towel/linen programmes, and reducing the need for energy use. This could be significantly related to the extent of availability of service offerings and facility standard based on

107

the accommodation category. For example, the majority of lodges’ websites mentioned that they do not provide towels or change linen unless a request is made by guests or they charge for rental towel purchases in their facility. Another possible explanation for this could be a fewer facility criteria for lodging operations compared with hotels and ryokan (see also Table 3.1 in Chapter 3). This may allow for lodges to have more flexibility to exert, for example, a more conventional approach in removing in-room electrical appliances.

Interestingly, the results of this study clearly shows a substantial gap in online communication of the response attributes between love hotels and other types of accommodation establishments. Although love hotels’ high implementation level was found with respect to reducing the use of materials and the provision of information on public transport, the rest of the response attributes were rarely mentioned on the websites. One possible explanation for this could be a difference in operational styles given that love hotels are more entertainment-oriented accommodation facilities. They provide the minimum information required to communicate through corporate websites regarding their service offerings and features, and pay little attention to environmental information disclosure. Notably, only one love hotel website contained climate change-related keywords.