csr in arilines

Journal of Sustainable TourismVol. 19, No. 1, January 2011, 59–77

The adoption of corporate social responsibility practices in the airlineindustry

Allan Cowper-Smith and Danuta de Grosbois∗

Department of Tourism and Environment, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada

(Received 27 October 2009; final version received 27 May 2010)

This paper identifies initiatives related to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in theairline industry and evaluates the overall state of their adoption as reported by membersof the three largest airline alliances. Of 41 airlines, only 14 had annual CSR reportspublically available in January 2009. Reports were analyzed using a qualitative contentanalysis approach. Results showed a stronger focus on environmental issues than on thesocial or economic dimensions of CSR. Of the seven major environmental themesexamined, emission reduction programs predominate. Other environmental issuesreceive much less attention, with no single other initiative implemented by all airlines.Four social and environmental themes were found, including employee wellbeing andengagement, diversity and social equity, community wellbeing and economic prosperity.The data analysis supported the arguments made in the literature that the airlines reportCSR initiatives using differing or inconsistent measurements, making evaluation andcomparison of their performance and effectiveness difficult. Although a large number ofairlines publishing CSR reports discussed their achievement of major goals (reductionof emissions, increasing community involvement or increasing workforce diversity),a much smaller number provided detailed information relating to specific initiativesimplemented in order to contribute to these goals. Further, important issues for CSRresearch are posed in the paper.

Keywords: airlines; air travel; corporate social responsibility; sustainability; reporting

Introduction

Over the last 20 years awareness of the environmental impacts of human activity has in-creased significantly. There is growing public expectation that companies should recognizetheir social and environmental responsibilities toward society and adjust their business prac-tices to improve the sustainability of their operations (Juholin, 2004; McIntosh, Thomas,Leipzinger, & Coleman, 2003). Special attention is being paid to the tourism industry, whichwhile potentially bringing economic and social benefits to destinations can also have hugenegative economic, social and environmental impacts. Given the forecasts of significantfuture growth in tourism volume, there is increasing pressure on tourism companies to im-plement sustainability initiatives. Within the tourism industry, the airline sector is receivingnotable attention, from both the public and the academia, because of its role in tourismdevelopment and its significant environmental and social impacts. There is, therefore, agrowing interest in the scope and effectiveness of efforts undertaken by airlines to mitigatetheir negative impacts and to contribute to sustainable development.

∗Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0966-9582 print / ISSN 1747-7646 onlineC© 2011 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/09669582.2010.498918http://www.informaworld.com

60 A. Cowper-Smith and D. de Grosbois

Typically, corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives implemented by businessorganizations are made known to the public through voluntary communications, websites,media releases or corporate sustainability reports. The reporting of CSR performance hasevolved over the last two decades; for many companies a one-page declaration of com-mitment to the environment and society has been replaced by more comprehensive reportsproviding detailed information on specific initiatives and their results. Lober, Bynum,Campbell and Jacques (1997) identified trends in reporting practice such as the increasinguse of reporting guidelines produced by external bodies, the quantification of environ-mental impacts, the establishment of quantifiable targets against which to assess progressand the inclusion of third-party verification statements to improve credibility. Despite thedocumented increase in the number and quality of CSR reports across different industries(Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Lober et al., 1997), reporting practice still shows low adoption inmany sectors, and reports vary significantly in their scope and depth (Holcomb, Upchurch,& Okumus, 2007).

There is currently very little research addressing CSR practice and reporting in theairline industry. The industry’s adoption of CSR has been relatively slow, with the numberof airlines formally reporting CSR information consistently for more than 10 years beingsmall relative to the size of the sector. According to information currently public, fewer than10 airlines worldwide have been doing so. Lynes and Andrachuk (2008) note that CSR in theairline industry has yet to take prominence when compared with other sectors, for examplethe manufacturing industry. Therefore, the current state of adoption of CSR initiatives inthe airline industry is largely unknown. The trade and academic literature confirms thatan increasing number of airlines have been implementing sustainability initiatives andreporting sustainability performance in CSR reports. However, the few available studiesof airlines’ reporting practices indicate lack of consistency due to different measurementframeworks and reporting structures and lack of capacity for inter-firm comparisons ofCSR performance. This has severely limited the extent to which stakeholders may makeinformed decisions about the sustainability of an airline’s operations (Gebel, 2004; Hooper& Greenall, 2005; Lynes & Dredge, 2006; Mak & Chan, 2006, 2007). The literature stronglyrecommends the development of a universal framework that would allow the evaluationand comparison of CSR initiatives among airlines (Gebel, 2004; Hooper & Greenall, 2005;Lynes & Dredge, 2006). It is also notable that previous research on CSR in the airlineindustry has focused on the reporting of CSR performance or major themes and goals.No research that investigates the scope and breadth of specific initiatives implemented tosupport CSR goals has thus far been conducted.

The main objective of this study is therefore to create a framework of CSR goals andinitiatives in the airline industry to allow comparison of the adoption of CSR initiativesacross different airlines. The second objective of this paper is to evaluate the overalladoption of identified CSR goals and initiatives among the industry leaders on the basis oftheir current reporting practices.

The airline industry and its impacts

The airline industry is recognized as an important part of tourism system. In 2007, the totalscheduled traffic carried by all airlines of the 190 member countries of the InternationalCivil Aviation Organization (ICAO) was approximately 2 260 million passengers (ICAO,2008, p. 6). Annual airline passenger traffic growth has been around 5–6% per annum from1970 to 2000 (Gossling & Peeters, 2007). As Hanlon (1999) noted, very few industries haveenjoyed such growth for such a sustained period of time. The airline industry is often viewed

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 61

as a provider of social and economic benefits through its support of leisure and businesstravel, job creation and the sharing of knowledge and experiences. However, the airlineindustry also imposes numerous impacts on the natural, social and economic environments,including contribution to climate change, air pollution, noise pollution, biodiversity loss,waste generation and other social and economic issues (Daley, Dimitriou, & Thomas, 2008;Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Lynes & Dredge, 2006; Vellas, 2001).

Aviation’s contribution to climate change by fuel consumption and the resultant green-house gas emissions is widely recognized (Abeyratne, 2003; Becken, 2007; Daley et al.,2008; Gossling & Peeters, 2007; Holden, 2006; Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Lynes & Dredge,2006; Mak & Chan, 2007). Although the airline industry is responsible for only 3–5% ofhuman greenhouse gas emissions (Daley et al., 2008), its contributions to climate changewill probably increase because of the projected rapid future growth of air transport (Button,2007; Chan & Mak, 2005; Gossling & Peeters, 2007; Mak & Chan, 2007). Total aviationfuel use is estimated to increase by 3% per year (Abeyratne, 2003). The IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change (1999) recently concluded that the increase in emissions fromair travel due to projected growth would not be fully offset by the reduction in emissionsachieved through technological advances. A significant difference between aviation andother industries is that jet aircraft are the primary source of emissions deposited directlyinto the upper atmosphere (Duval, 2007). Research indicates that the impacts on climatechange from air transport could be several times greater than the emission of greenhousegases alone, because aircraft emit other gases in addition to carbon dioxide (CO2), and theyemit these gases directly into a more climate-sensitive region of the atmosphere (Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1999). At an altitude of 10,000 meters, fuel can be upto 10 times more toxic for the environment than at the ground level (Keller, 2001).

In addition to contributing to climate change, air transport also affects local air quality,particularly near airports (Daley et al., 2008; Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Lynes & Dredge,2006). The major sources of pollution are ground transport to and from airports, aircraftemissions and aircraft maintenance activities such as refueling (Daley et al., 2008). Emis-sions from aircraft engines and power units include significant quantities of particulatematter, which can contribute to human respiratory illnesses, as well as nitrogen oxides(NOX) which cause respiratory irritation and acidification of ecosystems (Daley et al.,2008; Duval, 2007). In addition to emissions from aircraft, airports contain large numbersof airside ground support vehicles that also contribute to the worsening of local air quality(Daley et al., 2008; Hooper & Greenall, 2005).

Another important environmental impact from aviation is noise pollution (Abeyratne,2003; Daley et al., 2008; Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Mak & Chan, 2007). Aircraft noisenuisance is thought to be the most important issue that surrounds the operation and devel-opment of airports (Daley et al., 2008; Hooper & Greenall, 2005). Noise management iscomplex because of the different frequency and output from aircraft movements, their tim-ing and predictability and the location of local populations near airports (Daley et al., 2008).As with many other large industries, the airline industry also has effects on biodiversity,as well as resource and waste production issues. Airports require large land areas whichare hostile to wildlife because they are either paved or built (Daley et al., 2008). Wastesare created from aircraft maintenance, onboard service and airport operations, and thereis the need to process and transport this waste (Chan & Mak, 2005; Hooper & Greenall,2005; Lynes & Dredge, 2006; Mak & Chan, 2007).

However, air travel delivers social and economic benefits through tourism, businesstravel and the sharing of knowledge and experiences. It provides mobility and facilitatestransportation of tourists to destinations around the world, which can contribute to poverty


alleviation in developing countries (Air Transport Action Group [ATAG], 2008). In remoteareas, other modes of transportation are generally unavailable, and aviation acts as theonly public transport facilitating access to these destinations (ATAG, 2008; InternationalLabour Organization, 2003). Air travel creates jobs and revenue (Chan & Mak, 2005). Itis estimated that over 5.5 million people worldwide are directly employed in the airlineindustry, an industry with a turnover of $307 billion in 2000 (ATAG, 2008; ATAG &United Nations Environmental Programme, 2002). In addition, it is estimated that theairline industry generates a further 32 million jobs through indirect and induced impacts.These include indirect jobs from the purchases of goods and services from companies inthe industry’s supply chain, induced jobs from spending by airline industry employees andjobs from the airline industry’s catalytic impact on tourism (ATAG, 2008). The last refersto tourism jobs that would not exist without the airline industry, for example at destinationsthat are only accessible by air. In terms of general social benefits, air travel makes foreigntravel accessible for increasingly large numbers of people; it increases understanding ofdifferent cultures and nationalities; it supports the development of multicultural societies;and it increases the quality of living standards by making goods available around the worldat reasonable prices (ATAG & United Nations Environmental Programme, 2002).

Although the airline industry delivers social and economic benefits, there are also someshortcomings. These include economic leakage, i.e. the loss of earnings for the delivery ofproducts and services at the destination (Daye, 2006). For example, airlines often contractground operations at many overseas destinations to large multinational ground handlingcompanies. These companies may employ local people at low wages in developing coun-tries, and the profits and taxes are exported to the country in which the company is based. Inaddition, airlines in smaller developing countries cannot enter the market and successfullycompete against established carriers, resulting in lost employment for local people. As illus-trated in the case of Air Zimbabwe by Mutambirwa and Turton (2000) and Turton (2004), it isdifficult for a small airline from a developing country to compete with the large airlines thathave more resources and tend to monopolize airline traffic to and from developing countries.

CSR in the airline industry: the concept and its reporting

Given the airline industry’s growth and significant impacts, it has been increasingly pres-sured to undertake initiatives that would reduce or mitigate its negative impacts whilemaintaining or increasing its positive impacts. As a result, a growing interest in and com-mitment to the idea of CSR by airlines can be observed. CSR is an evolving concept whichrefers to the ethical behavior of a company toward society. At the World Business Councilfor Sustainable Development’s (WBCSD’s) Stakeholder Dialogue on CSR held in 1999, theformal working definition was developed: “CSR is the continuing commitment by businessto behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the qualityof life of the workforce and their families as well as the local community and society atlarge” (WBCSD, 1999, p. 3). The WBCSD (1999) stated that CSR was an integral part ofsustainable development and divided CSR into the same three categories accepted as themain dimensions of sustainable development: environment, economy and society.

The trade and academic literature confirms that an increasing number of airlines areimplementing CSR initiatives in their operations and reporting them to the public (Hooper& Greenall, 2005). Among others, Lynes and Andrachuk (2008) discussed airline reportingpractices. They argued that although the early reports were almost exclusively focused onenvironmental performance, a change from “environmental reporting” to “sustainabilityreporting” is noticeable, and social responsibility is becoming increasingly prominent.


Still, the literature concerning CSR practices and their reporting in the airline industryis very limited (Tsai & Hsu, 2008), and the current state of adoption of CSR initiativesis largely unknown. Accounts of sustainability practices in the airline industry are oftenanecdotal, focusing on specific case studies (Tsai & Hsu, 2008), environmental managementalone (Mak & Chan, 2007) or a selected aspect of CSR (Phillips, 2006) and failing to providean overview of CSR practices across the industry.

The most extensive research thus far on CSR practices and reporting in the airline indus-try has been conducted by W. Chan, B. Mak and colleagues, analyzing the environmentalreporting structures of European (Chan & Mak, 2005), Asia-Pacific (Mak & Chan, 2006)and Japanese (Mak & Chan, 2007) airlines, as well as a comparative study of European andAsian airlines (Mak, Chan, Wong, & Zheng, 2007). Their work indicated that the airlineshave recognized the need for environmental reporting and have demonstrated various de-grees of effort. The research observed an increasing number of airline environmental reportsthat follow the guidelines of the Global Reporting Initiative.1 In analyzing the reports, Maket al. (2007) adopted a framework developed by Adams (1998). The modified frameworkidentifies 16 elements relating to companies’ commitment to environmental improvementand environmental improvement systems. While this research contributed significantly toknowledge concerning environmental management and reporting in the airline industry,it did not provide an in-depth examination of CSR initiatives and their adoption level inthe industry. Also, by focusing on environmental reporting, it overlooked the social andeconomic dimensions of CSR.

A study addressing all three dimensions of CSR in airline industry was conducted byHooper and Greenall (2005). It found that while there were quantitative data available,and there was some consistency in the use of key performance indicators, there are manydifficulties in comparing social and environmental performance across the industry dueto variations in the exact definitions of the indicators used. The authors argued that thishampers inter-airline comparisons and recommended that environmental and social impactsshould be reported in a more standardized manner.

The literature on CSR and the airline industry describes the difficulty in measuringCSR adoption and management due to the lack of standardized measurements and differingreporting structures (Gebel, 2004; Mak & Chan, 2006, 2007). It further recommends thedevelopment of a universal framework that would allow for the evaluation and comparisonof the state of CSR among different airlines (Gebel, 2004; Hooper & Greenall, 2005; Lynes& Dredge, 2006).

Research methodology

This research was designed to identify the specific CSR initiatives implemented in theairline industry and their level of adoption. The data were collected from the airlines’environmental or CSR reports (free-standing or published jointly with annual financialreports) available online. Member airlines of the three major airline alliances were selectedfor inclusion in the study: Star Alliance, Oneworld and Skyteam. Almost all of the world’smajor international airlines are members of one of these alliances; they represent airlinesfrom all regions of the world, and they lead the industry in terms of innovation and settingtrends. Their members also account for the majority of airline traffic with an estimated82% of worldwide market share (Rajasekar & Fouts, 2009; Saglietto, 2009). As of January2009, 14 airlines out of a total of 41 members of the three alliances had annual CSR orenvironmental reports available online in English. For this study, only annual CSR reportswere examined; airlines which publish sporadic reports were not included. The most recent


annual reports available as of January 2009 were examined. They included reports for thefollowing periods:

� 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2007 (Lufthansa-Swiss, Asiana, SAS, Cathay Pacific,Finnair, Iberia, China Southern, Korean Air),

� 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008 (All Nippon Airways, Air France-KLM, British Airways,Singapore Airlines, Japan Airlines) and

� 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008 (Qantas).

The data analysis method employed was qualitative content analysis. The CSR initiativesidentified from the analysis were organized into a framework consisting of two maindimensions, namely environmental impacts and socioeconomic impacts, and then dividedfurther into 11 themes. Under each theme, specific goals were identified as well as thespecific initiatives which contribute to each goal. The themes were selected on the basis ofthe content of the reports as well as the major principles of sustainability and CSR drawnfrom Global Reporting Initiative (2006) and United Nations Environmental Programmeand World Tourism Organization (2005). It is important to note that the CSR frameworkpresented here is based on the items reported by the 14 airlines studied: it is not an exhaustivelist of CSR initiatives for the airline industry. Other unreported CSR initiatives may existin the airlines studied; other initiatives may exist in other airlines not included in thisstudy; there may be initiatives that no airlines are doing but could or should be done.Further, there may be information on CSR initiatives publically available from sourcesother than the CSR reports which were analyzed for this study.

For each goal, the number of airlines reporting the goal was recorded as well as thenumber of airlines that provide a measurement of their contribution to the goal. For example,13 airlines stated that they seek to reduce waste; 7 of them also provided a measurement ofprogress toward that goal, some in terms of percentage reduction of waste over the previousyear.

Some airlines also provided information about specific initiatives implemented to reacha given goal. All specific initiatives which contribute to each goal were identified. Thenumbers reporting implementation of each, as well as the numbers providing measurementsfor each initiative, were recorded. For example, recycling of onboard waste was mentionedby seven airlines and measured by four. It is possible for the number of companies reportingor measuring progress toward a goal to be lower than the number of companies reportingor measuring progress toward a specific initiative that contributes to that goal. This couldoccur when, for example, only a few airlines measured progress toward a given goal (suchas increasing diversity in the workforce), but a larger number of airlines measured a specificinitiative (such as increasing the number of women in management).

The number of airlines reporting each CSR goal and initiative as well as the number ofairlines that measure their progress toward each goal/initiative are presented in Table 1 forenvironmental results and Table 2 for social and economic results.

Results

Environmental results

The goals and initiatives implemented by the airlines in order to mitigate or reduce en-vironmental impacts were organized into seven themes: emissions, waste, energy, water,biodiversity, noise and other. The environmental results are presented in Table 1.


Table 1. CSR initiatives within the environment dimension and their adoption among the airlineindustry leaders.

Theme and goals Initiatives

EmissionsReduce CO2 emissions

(14/14)*Reduce fuel consumption (12/11); introduce new fuel-efficient aircraft (12/11); optimize

operational procedures (11/9); weight reduction measures (11/6); sponsorship ofscientific research projects related to CO2 emissions (6/4); carbon-offsetting program(third party) (7/2); engine washing (6/2); install winglets (4/3); conduct/supporttesting of alternative fuels (2/0); take atmospheric measurements with the aircraft(2/2); reduce emissions at technical facilities (2/1); replace employees’ company cars(1/1); partnerships with NGOs (1/1); eliminate extra short-haul flights withpartnerships with rail, among others (1/1); use of simulators for flight training (1/1)

Reduce air pollution (11/9) Introduce latest technology engines (that reduce NOX) (9/5); introduce environmentallyfriendly ground vehicles (6/2); reduce consumption of chemical substances (4/2);replace ground equipment with electrically powered equipment (4/2); consult withlocal businesses on local air pollution (1/0)

WasteReduce waste (13/7) Recycle onboard waste (7/4); reduce number of paper boarding passes/tickets (4/4);

recycle paper in offices (4/3); recycle aircraft/aluminum parts (4/1); convert onboarddocumentation to electronic documentation (3/3); green purchasing (3/2); evaluatebiodegradable materials for use onboard (2/0); implement waste management processmap of all facilities (1/0); operate a waste classification facility (1/0); in-flightcustomer education about onboard waste management (1/0); implement opportunitiesfor passengers to recycle their own waste (1/0); reduce waste generated onboard (1/1)

EnergyReduce energy

consumption (12/6)Reduce energy use in offices/facilities (7/2); use green/renewable energy (6/2); install

new energy-efficient simulator equipment (1/1); install new energy-efficientair-conditioning (1/1); departmental energy-saving training programs (1/0); programequipment to automatically turn off (1/0); raise room temperature to 25◦C in alloffices (1/0); use LED bulbs in aircraft and offices (1/0); use sea water forair-conditioning (1/0)

WaterReduce water use (12/8) Use rainwater/graywater (5/2); wash trucks/equipment with rainwater (2/0); onboard

water usage analysis program (1/1); use flow restrictors and self-closing taps, amongothers (1/0)

Reduce water pollution(3/2)

Reduce discharge from maintenance facilities (3/2)

BiodiversityEnsure ecological integrity

(4/0)Use environmentally friendly refrigerants in air-conditioning (1/0); use paper certified

by the Forest Stewardship Council in all divisions (1/0); test alternative de-icing(1/0); conduct soil pollution prevention inspections at all facilities (1/0)

Involvement inenvironmentalconservation projects(11/7)

Sponsor avoidance of deforestation (2/1); support oil spill relief activities (1/1);reporting of wildfires program (1/1); sponsor returning urban land/landfills toparkland (1/1); funding of Ph.D. research scholarships for endangered species (1/1);employee tree-planting initiative (1/0)

NoiseReduce noise (14/4) Test new operational procedures (continuous descent and so on) (9/2); introduce quieter

aircraft (9/7); conform with ICAO Chapter 4 noise level (5/5); usecontinuous-descent/optimized procedures as established procedure on all flights (2/1);conduct engine testing during daytime (1/0); reduce night landings/takeoffs (1/1)

OtherObtain ISO 14001 or forthcoming certification for EMS (8/0); sponsor environmental

organizations (6/6); contribute to scientific research projects (4/3); developenvironmental indexes (3/3)

Note: The first number in each bracket represents the number of airlines that reported their commitment to thegiven goal or implementation of a given initiative. The second number in the bracket represents the number ofairlines that provided some type of measurement of their progress toward each goal or initiative.


Emissions

The studied airlines identified two goals regarding emissions: reduction of CO2 emissionsand reduction of local air pollution. Reduction of CO2emissions was reported and measuredby all 14 airlines. It was the only goal to be implemented and measured by all the airlinesstudied. Local air pollution reduction was reported by 11 airlines (78.6%) and measuredby 9 (64.3%). The measures provided by the airlines were highly inconsistent and madecomparisons between airlines very difficult. In addition, two airlines reported only theemissions generated at their main base, thus not reflecting their entire operations andmaking it impossible to compare their performance with that of the other airlines.

Reduction of CO2 emissions was pursued through various initiatives to reduce fuel use,including introduction of new fuel-efficient aircraft, optimization of operational procedures(such as taxiing with one engine only), aircraft weight reduction measures, sponsorship ofscientific research projects related to CO2 emissions, engine washing and installation ofwinglets. Remarkably, only seven airlines reported offering a carbon-offsetting program forpassengers, and only two provided measurements of this initiative. All remaining initiativesto reduce CO2 emissions were reported by one or two airlines only. Within the reductionof local air pollution (other than CO2), a much lower number of initiatives were identifiedwith significantly lower adoption levels. Nine airlines reported introducing latest technologyengines reducing NOX emissions; six introduced environmentally friendly ground vehicles;four reduced consumption of chemical substances; and four replaced ground equipmentwith electrically powered units. One airline reported consultations with local businessesregarding local air pollution.

Waste

Thirteen airlines (93%) reported the goal of waste reduction. Twelve different initiativeswere identified, with recycling onboard waste being the most popular. None of the initiativesconcerning waste reduction were reported by more than seven airlines. Only four airlinesreported reducing the number of paper boarding passes/tickets, recycling of all paper inoffices or recycling aircraft parts; and only one airline mentioned providing opportunitiesfor passengers to recycle their own waste. Very few measurements were reported, with onlyseven airlines providing measurements for the overall goal of waste reduction and four orfewer providing measurements for each initiative.

Energy

Twelve airlines (86%) reported the goal of reducing on-ground energy consumption; onlysix provided measurements of their performance. Nine specific initiatives were identified.The most popular involved green/renewable energy and reducing energy use in officesand facilities. Initiatives concerning energy reduction had low adoption levels and weremeasured by very few airlines. Five initiatives were not measured at all.

Water

Two goals were identified under the theme of water: reduction of water use and reduction ofwater pollution. Water use reduction was reported by 12 airlines (86%), and 8 of these (57%)provided measurements. Although almost all of the airlines studied mentioned the goal ofreducing water use, they rarely quoted specific initiatives contributing to this goal. Onlyfour initiatives were identified: use of rainwater/graywater, washing trucks or equipment


with rainwater, onboard water usage analysis program to reduce water boarded onto theaircraft and use of water-saving equipment such as flow restrictors and self-closing taps.Reducing water pollution was reported by three airlines and measured by two. Only onespecific initiative (reduction of discharge from maintenance facilities) was identified.

Biodiversity

Two goals were identified within the theme of biodiversity: ensuring ecological integrityand increasing involvement in environmental conservation projects. The first was reportedby four airlines but measured by none. Four specific initiatives were reported, with verylow adoption (each implemented at one airline only and none measured). Involvement inenvironmental conservation projects was reported by 11 airlines, with 7 providing mea-surements. Six specific initiatives were identified with the first being reported by twoairlines and the rest by one airline each: sponsoring avoidance of deforestation, supportingoil spill relief activities, reporting of wildfires program, returning urban land/landfills toparkland, funding of Ph.D. scholarships for endangered species research and an employeetree-planting initiative.

Noise

All 14 airlines stated that they pursued noise reduction. However, only four providedmeasurements of this. Six specific initiatives were identified. The most popular includedtesting of new operational procedures such as continuous descent or new navigation systems,introducing new quieter aircraft and, related to this, conforming with ICAO Chapter 4 noiselevel. Chapter 4 noise level is one of the standards for noise emitted from aircraft thatwere developed by the ICAO and is currently the quietest group of aircraft. All aircraftmanufactured after 2006 must conform to Chapter 4 noise levels; older aircraft can beretrofitted to conform to Chapter 4 levels.

Other environmental initiatives

Four initiatives that could not be linked to one theme only, but had a wider scope, werereported. These included obtaining ISO 14001 certification for environmental managementsystems (EMS), sponsorship of environmental organizations, contribution to scientific re-search projects (other than emissions-related) and developing environmental indexes.

ISO 14001 is the most widely accepted international standard for EMS. Eight airlinesreported that all of their EMS or the EMS of one or more divisions have been certified toISO 14001 standard. Six airlines reported sponsoring environmental organizations. Thosesix also provided measurements. Examples included the following: Singapore Airlines’sponsorship of Senoko Power’s Weather Study Project, educating students on how climatechange and shifting weather patterns can impact the environment; Cathay Pacific’s in-flight catering division’s sponsorship of the Marine Stewardship Council’s promotion ofsustainable fishing; and Iberia’s sponsorship of the World Wildlife Fund’s transportation ofanimals to various sanctuaries.

Contributions to scientific research projects were reported by four airlines and measuredby three. Examples include Lufthansa’s participation in a project developing infrastructureto observe the earth’s atmosphere on a global scale by creating an atmosphere-monitoringnetwork and SAS’s participation in the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research inEurope, to help develop solutions to reduce CO2 emissions, NOX emissions and noise by


specified targets by 2020. Three airlines reported and measured an initiative to developenvironmental indexes measuring environmental performance by capturing environmentalimpact relative to production. Environmental indexes have been implemented in severaldifferent areas, for example CO2 emissions, waste, water, air pollution and noise.

Analysis of the environmental initiatives reported by the airlines indicates high com-mitment to the major goals with over 10 airlines mentioning reducing CO2 emissions,reducing air pollution, reducing energy use, reducing water use, involvement in environ-mental conservation projects and noise reduction. However, apart from CO2 emissionsreduction, which is addressed by numerous initiatives, the airlines do not provide muchdetail regarding the specific initiatives that are implemented to contribute to the goals. Theadoption levels of specific initiatives are low: there is no one single initiative implementedby all the studied airlines, and very few airlines provide performance measurements for theinitiatives.

Social and economic results

The goals and initiatives related to the social and economic dimensions of CSR in the airlineindustry were organized into four major themes: employee wellbeing and engagement,diversity and social equity, community wellbeing and economic prosperity. The results arepresented in Table 2.

Employee wellbeing and engagement

Within this theme there were four major goals identified: to increase employee health,safety and wellbeing (reported by 11 airlines, measured by 8); to increase employee in-volvement and empowerment (reported by 10 airlines, but measured by none); to increaseemployee involvement in CSR issues (reported by 10 airlines, measured by none); and toprovide opportunities for employee education and advancement (reported by 10 airlines,measured by 6).

Thirteen specific initiatives supporting the goal of improving employee health, safetyand wellbeing were reported. The most popular included providing sport and health activi-ties, ensuring good working conditions throughout the supply chain and periodic inspectionsof working environments and employees’ health. The initiative of ensuring good workingconditions throughout the supply chain referred to ensuring that employees within the sup-ply chain have equal or close to equal working conditions to employees who work directlyfor the airline. The initiative of periodic inspections of working environments and em-ployees’ health included inspections of workplaces, medical check-ups for employees andpreventative measures. The remaining 10 initiatives under the goal of improving employeehealth, safety and wellbeing were all reported by one or two airlines each: two of them weremeasured.

Eight initiatives supported the goal of increasing employee involvement and empow-erment. The most popular were the provision of opportunities for employee feedback(9 airlines) and providing reward/bonus schemes (10 airlines). Types of employee feedbackranged from online surveys and discussion forums on the company intranet to informalmeeting sessions with managers and colleagues from other departments of the company. Inaddition, formal channels of employee feedback existed for issues of a critical nature, suchas health or safety issues. The initiative of reward or bonus schemes included bonuses forindividual performance (such as perfect attendance), group performance bonuses (such asachieving company-wide performance targets) and one-time bonuses for special occasions


Table 2. CSR initiatives within the social and economic dimensions and their adoption among theairline industry leaders.

Theme and goals Initiatives

Employee wellbeing andengagement

Improve employee health,safety and wellbeing(11/8)

Provide sports and health activities (8/3); ensure good working conditions throughout the supplychain (5/0); periodic inspections of working environments (4/0); employee award forworkplace safety initiative (2/1); increase parental leave (1/1); company-sponsored childcarecenters (1/1); accident analysis training for managers (1/0); personal protection equipmentusage campaign (1/0); food safety and swimming pool inspections at all crew hotels (1/0); allcrew required to complete health and safety e-learning (1/0); issue fatigue managementhandbook for crew (1/0); publish cabin safety magazine for crew (1/0); open employeeservice center (1/0)

Increase employeeinvolvement andempowerment (10/0)

Reward/bonus schemes (10/9); create opportunities for employee feedback (9/9); provide avariety of work-time models, e.g. flextime (3/1); develop employee-led carpool andcycle-to-work programs (2/0); familiarization trips for employees of supply chain/partnercompanies (1/1); commendation program for human error reporting (1/0); employeesolidarity fund (1/0); possibility for part-time pensions (1/0)

Increase employeeinvolvement inenvironmental/CSRissues (10/0)

Provide employees with environmental education programs (4/3); employee sustainabledevelopment suggestion program (3/1); hold employee environmental protection/awarenessevents (4/1); employee award for CSR or environmental initiative (3/1)

Provide opportunities foremployee education andadvancement (10/6)

Provide training to better enable employees to do their jobs (6/4); provide employees withvocational and continuing education (4/2); open learning center for past accidents/safetyawareness (2/1); include sustainable development issues in mandatory safety training (2/0);provide ethical management education (1/1); provide funding for employees to pursue MBA(1/1); scholarship opportunities for employees’ children (1/0)

Diversity and social equityIncrease diversity in the

workforce (10/0)Increase number of women in management (8/8); employment of persons with disabilities (5/5);

participation in initiatives to encourage women in the workforce (3/2); employment extensionsystem for seniors (2/2); increase intercultural competence of workforce (2/2); mentoringprograms for employees with disabilities (1/1); indigenous employment program (1/1);provide internships for students with disabilities (1/0)

Universal accessibility forcustomers andemployees (4/0)

Training of flight crew in sign language (1/1); barrier-free airports and aircraft (1/1); check-incounters designed with Universal Design (1/0); employee business cards in Braille (1/0)

Community wellbeingInvolvement in community

projects (13/9)Support training and education opportunities for youth (10/10); support arts and culture projects

and events (7/7); support athletic programs (5/5); support environmental education in schools(4/3); employee volunteering program (3/3); social and educational assistance for the disabled(2/0); employee blood donation programs (3/1); improve impoverished communities (1/1);support university educations (2/2); breast cancer awareness campaign (2/1); indigenousreconciliation (1/0)

Involvement ininternational projects(11/7)

Involvement in humanitarian aid projects (7/6); donations to charitable organizations (7/7);partnerships with NGOs (6/6); onboard charity collection program (6/6); transport childrenfor medical treatment (2/2); disaster relief/rescue (2/1); publicize UN MillenniumDevelopment Goals to stakeholders (2/0); transport of peacekeeping troops (1/1); transport oforgans (1/1)

Raise customer awarenessof sustainabledevelopment issues (9/3)

Website (12/0); in-flight magazine (4/0); certified fair trade coffee on all flights (4/0); in-flightvideo (3/0); hold focus group with frequent flyers (1/0); environment-themed flights (1/0);sustainable tourism awards (1/0)

Economic prosperitySustainable procurement

practices (7/0)Supplier code of conduct with CSR criteria (5/2); create equal opportunities for all suppliers

(3/0); fair trade compliance program (1/0); misconduct reporting system (1/0); createcompetition compliance department (1/0); use local/regional suppliers (1/0); improvepayment performance (1/1); procurement with preferred suppliers (1/1)

Job creation (7/5) Promote local employment though internships and apprenticeships (3/3)Contribute to local

economic development(2/1)

Support networks of small-/medium-sized businesses at main base (1/0)

Note: The first number in each bracket represents the number of airlines that reported their commitment to thegiven goal or implementation of a given initiative. The second number in the bracket represents the number ofairlines that provided some type of measurement of their progress toward each goal or initiative.


(such as the company winning an award or for employee anniversaries). The remaininginitiatives were reported by one or two airlines each.

The goal of increasing employee involvement in environmental and CSR issues wassupported by four specific initiatives: providing employees with environmental educationprograms, implementing employee sustainable development suggestion programs, orga-nizing employee environmental protection events and an employee award program forCSR/environmental initiative. All had low adoption levels and were not reported by morethan four airlines each.

Provision of opportunities for employee education and advancement was supportedby seven initiatives. The most popular, reported by six airlines and measured by four,provided training to better enable employees to do their jobs. It is important to note thatthis type of training may not necessarily be voluntary, as training for many positionsat an airline is heavily regulated by various laws. The second most popular initiativeprovided employees with vocational and continuing education opportunities, including thefollowing: Bachelor’s programs offered jointly by an airline and a university; continuingeducation courses in different areas, from computer skills to foreign languages; and onlineworkshops on topics such as time management, developing creativity and process design.The remaining initiatives under this goal were reported by one or two airlines each.

Diversity and social equity

This theme encompasses two goals: to increase diversity in the workforce and to provideuniversal accessibility for customers and employees. Ten airlines reported eight specificinitiatives to increasing diversity in the workforce. Increasing the number of women inmanagement and employment of persons with disabilities were by far the most popular,followed by activities to encourage more women in the workplace. Examples includeLufthansa’s annual “Girls’ Day”, a career open-house event for female high school students,and the Women’s Employee Committee at China Southern. Remaining initiatives under thisgoal were all reported by one or two airlines each. One of them was that of increasingintercultural competence of the workforce, reported by Lufthansa, aimed at increasing theproportion of employees who are not German citizens. Lufthansa and Qantas were the onlyairlines to explicitly identify a diversity initiative related to ethnicity or citizenship. Themajority of workforce diversity initiatives addressed women and persons with disabilities,with significantly less focus on other dimensions of diversity, which include ethnicity,sexual orientation, age and social class.

The second goal identified within this overall theme was to provide universal accessi-bility for customers and employees. It was reported by four airlines. It should be noted thatthe low response for this goal may reflect the fact that most airlines are legally required toprovide equal accessibility; the majority of the airlines may not have felt the need to reportthis information, as providing equal accessibility is largely obligatory rather than voluntary.To achieve this goal, four specific initiatives were identified, each reported by one airlineonly. For example, the initiative of barrier-free airports and aircraft was reported only byAll Nippon Airways: it reported providing writing pads for customers with hearing difficul-ties, onboard wheelchairs, seats with moveable armrests, wheelchair-accessible lavatoriesand subtitles on certain in-flight videos. It should be noted that items such as onboardwheelchairs and wheelchair-accessible lavatories are legally required in many jurisdictionsand are provided by most airlines; however this study indicates that they are largely notreported as CSR initiatives.


Community wellbeing

The theme of community wellbeing includes three goals: involvement in communityprojects (reported by 13 airlines, measured by 9), involvement in international projects(reported by 11 airlines, measured by 7) and to raise customer awareness of sustainabledevelopment issues (reported by 9 airlines, measured by 3). Involvement in communityprojects related to both the community in which the airlines are based and the communitiesto which they operate. The most popular initiatives here included supporting training andeducation opportunities for youth (encompassing both in-house programs operated by theairlines and third-party organizations and programs supported by the airlines), supportingarts and culture projects and events, supporting athletic programs and supporting environ-mental education in schools. The remaining initiatives under this goal were all reported byone or two airlines each.

The goal of increasing involvement in international projects was supported by ninespecific initiatives. The most popular were involvement in humanitarian aid projects anddonations to charitable organizations, partnerships with nongovernmental organizations(NGOs) (non-emissions-related) and onboard charity collection programs (collecting sur-plus foreign change from passengers on international flights returning home). Contributionsto NGOs included financial support or support in kind such as flight tickets or employee vol-unteers. The remaining initiatives under this goal were reported by one or two airlines each.

The third and last goal within the community wellbeing theme was to raise customerawareness of sustainable development issues. It was supported by seven specific initiatives.The most popular (reported by 12 airlines) was to have a section on the airline’s websitededicated to environmental issues related to air travel and/or the airline’s environmental ini-tiatives. The remaining initiatives were reported by four (information in in-flight magazinesand the serving of fair trade coffee), three (in-flight video) or one airline each. Although fourairlines reported serving only certified fair trade coffee onboard in order to increase cus-tomer awareness, it was unclear if passengers are informed that the coffee served is fair tradeor what fair trade coffee is. Two unique and innovative initiatives were also implemented:Cathay Pacific conducted focus group studies with their most frequent flyers to explore theenvironmental and social performance of the airline, while All Nippon Airways offeredenvironment-themed flights, called “e-flights”, on selected routes to disseminate informa-tion about environmental issues and to get passengers thinking about environmental impacts.

Economic prosperity

The three goals identified within the theme of economic prosperity were improving pro-curement practices, job creation and contributing to local economic development. Therewere eight specific initiatives to improve procurement practices. The most popular initia-tive, reported by five airlines, was to implement a supplier code of conduct. Three airlinesreported creating equal opportunities for all suppliers. The remaining initiatives contribut-ing to better procurement practices were reported by one airline each. Interestingly, oneairline (British Airways) reported its commitment to making progress in paying supplierspromptly and provided the percentage of on-time payments per year. Similar to some otherinitiatives, it raises the question of whether this initiative is within the scope of CSR or if itshould be a minimum standard of service.

The second major goal within the economic prosperity theme, the goal of job creation,was reported by seven airlines and measured by five. Three airlines reported their involve-ment in an initiative to promote local employment through apprenticeships or internships.


The last goal related to the theme of local economic development was reported by two air-lines, Air France-KLM and Qantas. Air France-KLM discussed its initiative of supportingnetworks of small- and medium-sized businesses around the airline’s main airport. Withinthis program, executives from Air France-KLM provided personalized coaching to small-and medium-sized business owners over a period of 2 years, as well as setting up networksamong small businesses.

Similar to the environmental results, the analysis of social and economic goals andinitiatives identified by the studied airlines shows higher levels of adoption and measure-ment for goals and lower levels of adoption and measurement for specific initiatives. Theinitiatives identified in this section are not as numerous, and many are reported by one ortwo airlines only.

Discussion and conclusion

Data analysis conducted for this paper supported a number of observations already foundin the literature, as well as several new findings. First, the overview of reporting practicein the airline sector in 2009 indicated considerable variation in content, consistent withthe findings by Hooper and Greenall (2005) for the year 2001. Second, the majority of theanalyzed reports focused heavily on the environmental dimension of CSR and providedless detail regarding the social and economic dimensions. The goals and initiatives inthe environmental dimension were the most widely adopted. Although there were a largenumber of initiatives in the social dimension, they were generally reported by a considerablylower number of airlines. Only two goals (out of 21 in total) were reported by all 14 airlinesin this study: those of reducing CO2 emissions and of reducing aircraft noise, notablyboth from the environmental dimension. Additionally, the goal with the greatest numberof specific initiatives implemented to support it was from the environmental dimension:15 initiatives contributed to reduction of CO2 emissions. This was not unexpected. Thisis the area in which the airlines are challenged most often. The reports can be seen asaddressing the arguments in the academic literature as well as public opinion, that thenatural environment is where airlines are most commonly associated with negative impactsor consequences.

This research showed a general high level of commitment to the major goals within theCSR scope among the studied airlines. However, there was often only a small number ofspecific initiatives given as contributing to each goal. For example, 12 airlines reported thatthey undertake efforts to reduce water use, but there were only four initiatives identifiedthat contribute to this goal, of which the most frequently reported was only by five airlines.This illustrates the situation in which an airline reports its commitment to a certain CSRgoal, yet provides very few or no tangible courses of action to demonstrate its commitment.

It was also observed that even when specific initiatives were identified, they oftenwere not adopted as frequently as the goals they supported. For example, although thegoal of increasing employee involvement in CSR issues was reported by 10 airlines, all theinitiatives to support it were reported by not more than four airlines each. Only 17 initiativeswere adopted by more than 50% of the airlines that publish CSR reports. Of those, onlythree were adopted by more than 80% of the reporting airlines. It is also notable that noinitiative in the socioeconomic dimension was reported by more than 80% of the airlines. Asummary of the initiatives in the high-, moderate- and low-adoption categories is presentedin Table 3.

The general pattern of frequent reporting of goals and less frequent reporting of initia-tives was true even in the case of initiatives that are thought to be relatively simple and easy


Table 3. Adoption levels of the most popular CSR initiatives.

Adoption Environmental initiatives Socioeconomic initiatives

High, 80–100% of airlines thatpublish reports

Reduce fuel consumption;introduce new fuel-efficientaircraft; provide informationabout CSR on website

None

Moderate, 70–79% of airlinesthat publish reports

Weight reduction measures Reward/bonus schemes;support training andeducation opportunities foryouth

Low, 50–69% of airlines thatpublish reports

Introduce latest technologyengines (that reduce NOX);recycle onboard waste;reduce energy use inoffices/facilities; test newoperational procedures(continuous descent and soon); obtain ISO 14001certified or forthcomingcertification for EMS

Provide sports and healthactivities (for employees);create opportunities foremployee feedback; increasenumber of women inmanagement; support artsand culture projects andevents; involvement inhumanitarian aid projects;donations to charitableorganizations

to implement. For example, using low-consumption lighting and reducing air-conditioningin offices were both reported by only one airline. They both contributed to reducing energyconsumption, a goal reported by 12 airlines. It is unclear whether this is because the airlinesconsider these to be too minor to include in CSR reports or whether actually only one airlinehas implemented these initiatives. It is also possible that some airlines did not include theentire information on the initiatives in their CSR reports but made it available throughother sources. The bottom line is that the readers of the reports have no way of determiningthis information. Similarly, the initiative of using flight simulators for crew training wasa unique initiative reported at All Nippon Airways, despite the fact that it is a commonpractice at most major airlines and can be confirmed through other sources. It raises theissue of what airlines choose to include in the reports and how it may influence the readersof the reports.

A related question refers to the scope of CSR itself. There is a discussion in theliterature as to whether initiatives that are required by law or initiatives that are “commonsense” practices because of cost savings should be reported within the scope of CSR.Among others, Phillips (2006) argued that actions taken to meet regulatory requirementsare mandatory, and including them on a list of socially responsible actions is debatable.He argued that only actions which exceed the spirit of the law may be viewed as sociallyresponsible actions. The current study has shown that some of the airlines choose to reporttheir initiatives even when they are required by law, while others choose not to. Initiativesto support universal accessibility for customers and employees are a good example. Despitethe fact that in many jurisdictions provisions for accessibility are regulated by law, thespecific initiatives displayed low levels of adoption. This is probably related to the fact thatsome airlines decided not to report initiatives viewed by them as obligatory and thereforenot within the CSR scope. The issue becomes more complicated if some actions whichare regulated by law in one jurisdiction may be considered voluntary in another. Again,the reader of the reports may not have the knowledge to differentiate between required andvoluntary initiatives and therefore understand why some initiatives may be omitted in some


reports. As a result, the readers of CSR reports may mistakenly perceive that the airlineswhich do not report initiatives required by law are less committed to CSR than airlineswhich do report them.

These observations lead to a wider debate on the scope of CSR reporting by airlines ingeneral and its desired characteristics. Like several previous studies, this research confirmsthat reporting practices of different airlines are inconsistent, making it very difficult to makemeaningful comparisons. More standardized information regarding areas of responsibilityand practice is desired, in order to allow comparison of corporate performance betweendifferent companies. However, standardized reporting faces a number of challenges, in-cluding differing national standards and diverse objectives for reporting. On the other hand,it can be argued that the purpose of CSR reporting is to demonstrate a willingness andan ability to engage with and respond to stakeholder requirements, which leads to moreflexibility in reporting efforts. The process that is applied by companies in order to choosethe information to be included in CSR reports is, therefore, becoming a very importantfactor that needs to be further investigated.

The CSR framework proposed in this study encompasses all the findings from theanalyzed reports. It can be noted that a number of initiatives can contribute to more thanone goal. For the purpose of this study, decisions were made to include each initiative inone part of the framework, on the basis of the sections of the CSR reports in which theywere more frequently reported. For example, offering recycling opportunities for customersmay support the goal of waste reduction and the goal of raising customer awareness of CSRissues.

Previous research on CSR efforts in airline industry is limited and mostly high-level.This study has provided detailed insight into the CSR initiatives reported by 14 of theworld’s largest airlines and synthesized the numerous initiatives which can be useful forboth academics and industry professionals. As CSR takes a more prominent role in theindustry, it is expected that research in the area will also increase; this study serves asgroundwork.

In conclusion, this research has shown low levels of reporting of CSR initiatives amongthe 14 airlines publishing CSR reports. It is important to remember that these airlinesthemselves represented a very small part (only 34%) of the study population which includedall the member airlines of the three major world alliances. This very low level of CSRreporting among the airlines is an interesting finding, especially given that the alliancespride themselves on being industry leaders and declare their commitment to the goal ofsustainability on their websites and through other communications.

Study limitations and future research

The main limitation of this research is its use of only one data source, the CSR reportspublished by the airlines. The framework presented for CSR reporting may therefore beincomplete: the CSR reports are not necessarily an exhaustive list of all applicable practices.It should also be acknowledged that information on CSR activities could be available to thepublic from sources other than the CSR reports analyzed in this study.

Also, the current research is based on the assumption that the information that theairlines publish in the reports is accurate. It is important to note that the research is basedon written policies and information; therefore it is based on the assumption that the contentof the reports is consistently put into practice. Content of the reports vary, with the contentof some reports more limited than others because of varying levels of effort and monetaryand other resources invested in preparing the reports. Limited content of a report does not


necessarily mean that the airline that published it has limited CSR initiatives. Previousresearch noted the chance that an airline engages in CSR efforts but under-reports thembecause of minimizing the costs of data collection, lack of standards or not considering theinformation as relevant (Hooper & Greenall, 2005). Additionally, given that the populationchosen for the study included only the member airlines of the three alliances (assumed tobe the best in the industry), there is a possibility that additional initiatives practiced by otherairlines were not identified. It is therefore important to recognize that the findings from thisstudy do not represent the entire industry.

This paper has addressed the scope of CSR initiatives and how they are reported.It is recommended that future research addresses the actual performance of the airlines’initiatives, that is, how well the airlines are doing in terms of their CSR programs. It isalso recommended that research comparing the performance of the 14 airlines be done,as well as research comparing the performance of the airlines which publish CSR reportsagainst airlines which do not publish CSR reports. A useful direction of further research inthis area would also be to identify common characteristics of the airlines that are relativelyadvanced in the reporting of CSR initiatives. Factors such as their geographical location andrespective national regulations or standards could be analyzed in order to better understandthe motivations and rationale behind CSR adoption or the lack of it. Future research shouldalso focus more on critical analysis of what the airlines are reporting and the extent to whichthey are reporting it, in order to understand the reasons for the often-diverse practices inCSR reporting.

AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their suggestions andassistance in the production of this paper.

Note1. The Global Reporting Initiative’s vision is that disclosure of economic, environmental and social

performance become as commonplace and comparable as financial reporting and as important toorganizational success (see www.globalreporting.org).

Notes on contributorsAllan Cowper-Smith is a recent graduate from the Department of Tourism and Environment at BrockUniversity and holds a Bachelor’s degree with honors in tourism studies. His research interestsinclude sustainability management and human resources in the airline industry. He has several yearsof working experience in the airline industry.

Danuta de Grosbois is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Tourism and Environment atBrock University; she was previously an Assistant Professor at the Warsaw School of Economics,Division of Decision Analysis and Support, in Poland. She holds a PhD. in management from CarletonUniversity in Canada and two Master’s degrees from Warsaw School of Economics. Her researchinterests include the measurement of environmental, social and economic impacts of tourism activity,as well as sustainability management and reporting practices in the tourism industry.

ReferencesAbeyratne, R. (2003). Air transport and sustainable development. Environmental Policy and Law, 33,

138–143.Adams, R. (1998). Accounting for the environment: Latest steps at the UN. Environmental Accounting

and Auditing Reporter, 3, 4–6.


Air Transport Action Group. (2008). The economic and social benefits of air transport 2008. Retrievedfrom http://www.atag.org/files/ATAG%20brochure-124015A.pdf

Air Transport Action Group & United Nations Environmental Programme. (2002). Industryas a partner for sustainable development. Retrieved from http://www.atag.org/files/UNEP-ATAGAviationSustain.pdf

Becken, S. (2007). Tourists’ perception of international air travel’s impact on the global climate andpotential climate change policies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 351–368.

Button, K. (2007). Airlines: Sustainable development in a transatlantic context. In P. Rietveld & R.R.Stough (Eds.), Institutions and sustainable transport: Regulatory reform in advanced economies(pp. 155–187). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Chan, W., & Mak, B. (2005). An analysis of environmental reporting structures of selected Europeanairlines. International Journal of Tourism Research, 7, 249–259.

Daley, B., Dimitriou, D., & Thomas, C. (2008). The environmental sustainability of aviation andtourism. In A. Graham, A. Papatheodorou, & P. Forsyth (Eds.), Aviation and tourism: Implicationsfor leisure travel (pp. 239–253). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

Daye, M. (2006). Developing mass tourism in developing nations. In J. Beech & S. Chadwick (Eds.),The business of tourism management (pp. 463–482). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Duval, D.T. (2007). Tourism and transport: Modes, networks and flows. Clevedon, UK: Channel ViewPublications.

Gebel, A. (2004). The aviation industry. In U. Steger (Ed.), The business of sustainability: Buildingindustry cases for corporate sustainability (pp. 99–123). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Global Reporting Initiative. (2006). Sustainability reporting guidelines. Retrieved fromhttp://www.globalreporting.org/NR/rdonlyres/ED9E9B36-AB54-4DE1-BFF2-5F735235CA44/0/G3 GuidelinesENU.pdf

Gossling, S., & Peeters, P. (2007). “It does not harm the environment!” An analysis of industrydiscourses on tourism, air travel and the environment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 402–417.

Hanlon, P. (1999). Global airlines: Competition in a transnational industry. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Holcomb, J.L., Upchurch, R.S., & Okumus, F. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: What are tophotel companies reporting? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19,461–475.

Holden, A. (2006). Managing the environmental impacts of tourism. In J. Beech & S. Chadwick(Eds.), The business of tourism management (pp. 359–375). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Hooper, P.D., & Greenall, A. (2005). Exploring the potential for environmental performance bench-marking in the airline sector. Benchmarking, 12, 151–165.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (1999). Aviation and the global atmosphere. Retrievedfrom http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/spm/av-en.pdf

International Civil Aviation Organization. (2008). Annual report of the council. Retrieved fromhttp://www.icao.int/icaonet/dcs/9898/9898 en.pdf

International Labour Organization. (2003). The impact of the restructuring of civil aviationon employment and social practices. Retrieved from http://www.icao.int/icao/en/atb/ecp/CaseStudies/IloRestructre En.pdf

Juholin, E. (2004). For business or for the good of all? A Finnish approach to corporate socialresponsibility. Corporate Governance, 4, 20–32.

Keller, P. (2001). Introduction. In World Tourism Organization (Ed.), Tourism and air transport (pp.15–21). Madrid: World Tourism Organization.

Lober, D.J., Bynum, D., Campbell, E., & Jacques, M. (1997). The 100 plus corporate environmentalreport study: A survey of an evolving environmental management tool. Business Strategy andthe Environment, 6, 57–73.

Lynes, J.K., & Andrachuk, M. (2008). Motivations for corporate social and environmental respon-sibility: A case study of Scandinavian Airlines. Journal of International Management, 14,377–390.

Lynes, J.K., & Dredge, D. (2006). Going green: Motivations for environmental commitment in theairline industry; A case study of Scandinavian Airlines. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14,116–138.

Mak, B., & Chan, W. (2006). Environmental reporting of airlines in the Asia Pacific region. Journalof Sustainable Tourism, 14, 618–628.


Mak, B., & Chan W. (2007). A study of environmental reporting: International Japanese airlines. AsiaPacific Journal of Tourism Research, 12, 303–312.

Mak, B., Chan, W., Wong, K., & Zheng, C. (2007). Comparative studies of standalone environmentalreports – European and Asian airlines. Transportation Research Part D, 12, 45–52.

McIntosh, M., Thomas, R., Leipzinger, T., & Coleman, G. (2003). Living corporate citizenship.London: Prentice Hall.

Mutambirwa, C., & Turton, B. (2000). Air transport operations and policy in Zimbabwe 1980–1998.Journal of Transport Geography, 8, 67–76.

Phillips, E. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in aviation. Journal of Air Transportation, 11,65–87.

Rajasekar, J., & Fouts, P. (2009). Strategic alliances as competitive strategy: How domestic airlinesuse alliances for improving performance. International Journal of Commerce and Management,19, 93–114.

Saglietto, L. (2009). Airline alliances: When competitiveness can be approached with specific socialnetworks. Competitiveness Review, 19, 304–322.

Tsai, W., & Hsu, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility programs choice and costs assessment inthe airline industry – A hybrid model. Journal of Air Transport Management, 14, 188–196.

Turton, B. (2004). Airlines and tourism development: The case of Zimbabwe. In L. Lumsdon & S.J. Page (Eds.), Tourism and transport: Issues and agenda for the new millennium (pp. 69–78).Oxford, UK: Elsevier.

United Nations Environmental Programme & World Tourism Organization. (2005). Makingtourism more sustainable: A guide for policy makers. Retrieved from http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx0592xPA-TourismPolicyEN.pdf

Vellas, F. (2001). Interdependence of tourism development and air transport in Europe. In WorldTourism Organization (Ed.), Tourism and air transport (pp. 37–53). Madrid: World TourismOrganization.

World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (1999). Corporate social respon-sibility: Meeting changing expectations. Retrieved from http://www.wbcsd.org/DocRoot/hbdf19Txhmk3kDxBQDWW/CSRmeeting.pdf

Copyright of Journal of Sustainable Tourism is the property of Multilingual Matters and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

csr in arilines

Documents