The holidays are in full swing and people are shopping, wrapping and packing to visit loved ones. Along with the extra fees for checked baggage and seat upgrades, some airlines are also considering weight-based pricing. A recent study out of the University of New Hampshire looked at how people felt about weighing their baggage and themselves to help reduce emissions and found while over half of travelers are not keen about hopping on the scale, some would be open to the idea — especially if it aligns with their own interests in the environment.
“We wanted to explore how air travel could be made more sustainable, especially considering the weight we carry — both personal weight and baggage that often travels back and forth,” said Markus Schuckert, professor of hospitality management. “We wondered if reducing weight overall could contribute to more eco-friendly air travel and began questioning whether passengers might accept pricing that reflects this.”
In their study, recently published in the journal of Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, researchers surveyed over 1,000 U.S. air travelers to gauge their view on three potential fare policies that provided a more sustainable flying option. The heavier the aircraft, the more jet fuel it burns and the more carbon emissions are produced so they devised a tier approach — a standard policy where all passengers pay a uniform price; a threshold policy where passengers exceeding a certain weight pay additional fees; and a unit-of-body-weight policy where each passenger’s airfare is based on their combined body and baggage weight.
The standard policy was the most accepted approach across all demographics, with more than half of respondents rating it as the most ethical option. Nearly 60% of participants voiced concerns about weight-based policies, citing potential fairness issues and the risk of discrimination, especially around factors like nutrition, income and accessibility which often influence body weight.
Those who were more in favor of weight-based policies tended to be younger with those ages 18-35 accepting weight-based pricing almost 20 percentage points more than travelers who were 66 and older. Additionally, travelers with higher incomes or frequent flyer status were 25% more likely to support weight-based policies than those in lower income brackets or who didn’t travel as much.
The idea of weight-based pricing touches on some key concerns for airlines — specifically, the balance between environmental impact and customer privacy. This concept can be polarizing and has yet to gain traction with most airlines due to ethical concerns.
Researchers say the study isn’t meant to be an endorsement of such policies, it just makes sense from a research perspective to investigate whether the idea offers a pathway to reduce emissions for a more sustainable air travel — and if passengers would accept these changes.
“This topic has been widely discussed for decades, but there’s surprisingly little research on it,” said Schuckert. “Some airlines have tried or considered weight-based policies, but the main roadblock remains ethical concerns, which make it difficult to even discuss. But if we aim to make air travel more sustainable, we should have an open discussion. That’s really the point of research — to put everything on the table for consideration.”
Researchers say future studies could look at alternative ways to incentivize lighter travel or new approaches to sustainability that avoid discrimination and support both environmental and social responsibility.
Co- authors include Lorenzo Masiero and Judit Zoltan, both from the University of Bologna, Italy; Denis Tolkach, James Cook University, Australia; Stephen Pratt, University of Central Florida; Matias Thuen Jørgensen, Roskilde University, Denmark; and Kaye Chon, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.