← 論文一覧に戻る

人々は飛行回数を減らすより多く支払うことを選ぶ：航空脱炭素への示唆

People would rather pay more than fly less: implications for aviation decarbonisation (原題)

Joon K, Leung C, Hanger S, Patt A, Tröndle T, Brazzola N

Research Squareプレプリント2026-09-04#政策Origin: Global対象セクター: transport
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-10239437/v1
原典: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10239437/v1

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

米国・スイス・中国でのランダム化比較試験（N=3,454）により、航空サーチャージと飛行予算の4つの分配デザインに対する支払意思と行動変容意思を検証。回答者は飛行削減より追加支払いを強く選好し、個人の公平感が集団レベルの公平感より重要であることが判明。頻繁に飛行する層や高所得層は飛行制限に反対し、一律の飛行手数料が最も広い支持を集めた。需要抑制政策の政治的課題を浮き彫りにする。

English

A randomized controlled trial (N=3,454) in the US, Switzerland, and China tests four distributive designs of a flying surcharge and a flying budget. Respondents are markedly more willing to pay more than to fly less, with personal fairness driving outcomes more than group-level fairness. Frequent, business, and high-income fliers oppose flying constraints; a uniform flying fee attracts broadest support. Highlights political challenges for demand-restraint aviation decarbonization policies.

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters

日本のGX文脈において

日本の航空脱炭素政策（SAF導入促進など）はコスト転嫁が前提だが、本結果は需要抑制策への国民の抵抗感を示唆。日本の航空需要や観光政策への示唆として、一律サーチャージの受容性を考慮した政策設計が重要。

In the global GX context

Globally, aviation decarbonization relies on cost pass-through; this study provides cross-country evidence that passengers prefer paying more over flying less, informing carbon pricing and demand-management policy design under ICAO and national frameworks.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Provides experimental evidence on public support for aviation carbon pricing and demand restraint, relevant to climate policy research.

🏢実務担当者:Airlines and aviation stakeholders can anticipate passenger responses to surcharge designs, informing pricing and sustainability communication.

🏛政策担当者:Informs design of aviation carbon pricing and demand-management policies, highlighting the need for uniform fees and fairness considerations.

📄 Abstract（原文）

<title>Abstract</title> <p>Current policies designed to decarbonise aviation rest on the assumption that passengers will absorb higher ticket prices. Yet whether this assumption holds and how distributive design shapes public support remains largely untested. Using a randomised controlled trial (N=3,454) in the United States, Switzerland, and China, we test four distributive designs of a flying surcharge and a flying budget on willingness to pay and willingness to change. Respondents are markedly more willing to pay more than to fly less, and personal fairness drives both outcomes more strongly than group-level distributive fairness, contradicting the pattern in the broader climate-policy literature. Frequent, business, and high-income fliers oppose designs that constrain flying; a uniformly applied flying fee attracts the broadest support. These results highlight a major political challenge for demand-restraint policies: across a range of countries and subgroups, passengers consistently prefer cost pass-through over flying less, and willingness to change remains low and contingent on individual climate concern.</p>

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。

gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。