Exploring Gen Z Sustainable Behavior in the Hospitality Industry

Abstract

This study investigates Generation Z’s perceptions and behaviors regarding sustainable practices in the hospitality sector, with a particular focus on the gap between intentions and actual behaviors. A significant attitude–behavior gap emerges: while the majority (69%) reports adopting sustainable practices in daily life, only 30% actively reduce air travel. Through exploratory analysis, this study contributes to the existing literature by examining sustainability perceptions as key drivers in hotel selection, offering both theoretical and practical implications for the tourism industry. The data were collected through questionnaires and processed using descriptive and inferential statistics, specifically hypothesis testing tools. The findings indicate that while Gen Z exhibits strong environmental consciousness, economic constraints remain a barrier to sustainable choices. This research suggests that tourism companies need to develop targeted strategies to make sustainable options more accessible, considering both environmental sensitivity and financial limitations of the younger generation. This work addresses a notable gap in the tourism literature regarding travelers’ perceptions of sustainable practices, particularly focusing on Generation Z as an emerging market segment.

1. Introduction

The global tourism industry faces unprecedented challenges in balancing economic growth with environmental responsibility, as sustainability has emerged as a critical imperative for the sector’s long-term viability. Sustainability has become a pressing global concern, driven by environmental crises such as climate change, resource depletion, and biodiversity loss.

The tourism sector, contributing approximately 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions and significantly impacting local ecosystems and communities, stands at a crossroads where sustainable transformation is no longer optional but essential for industry survival (WTTC, 2023). A majority of global travelers (75%) express a desire to travel more sustainably, with 54% planning to opt for greener modes of transport. Additionally, 43% report feeling guilty when their travel choices are not eco-friendly, and 57% are committed to reducing their energy consumption on future trips (Booking.com (2019), Sustainable Travel Report). According to a recent Deloitte report about Italian travelers (Deloitte, 2024), sustainability plays an increasingly important role in travel decisions for Italian tourists. A total of 64% consider environmental and sustainability factors when planning trips—a figure that rises to 71% among those under 35. Sustainable tourism is mainly associated with landscape protection (60%) and the use of eco-friendly transport (52%). A total of 75% believe that developing sustainable tourism is essential for Italy’s ecological transition. A strong preference (63%) is shown for local destinations to support proximity tourism and revitalize small villages. Traveling “like a local” is seen as a way to boost local economies by choosing farm-to-table restaurants (45%) or booking tours led by local operators, with activities that respect wildlife and ecosystems (41%).

Among the groups responding to these challenges, Gen Z stands out for its proactive approach and engagement. Unlike older generations, whose adoption of sustainable behaviors was often gradual, Gen Z exhibits a deep-rooted commitment to environmental and social responsibility.

According to recent reports, 62% of Gen Z consumers prefer to buy from sustainable brands, and 73% are willing to pay more for sustainable products. Additionally, Gen Z and Millennials are the most likely to base their purchase decisions on values and principles—whether personal, social, or environmental (FirstInsight, 2024). Deloitte (2024) highlights that Gen Z feels anxious about environmental issues, with the majority (69%) taking steps to minimize their impact, such as avoiding car usage, reducing fast fashion consumption, saving energy, and adopting vegetarian diets. A total of 38% consider staying in eco-friendly or green accommodation in their next holidays (European Travel Commission [ETC], 2021). In this context, there is a critical paradox; while this generation demonstrates strong environmental consciousness, their actual travel behaviors often contradict their stated values, creating a significant research opportunity to understand this disconnect.

This study confirms that while Gen Z is willing to pay a premium for sustainable products, economic concerns remain a barrier. Therefore, companies and governments should create opportunities for consumers to access sustainable options. Travelers are increasingly considering environmental attributes in their decisions (Robinot & Giannelloni, 2010). According to Deloitte (2024), although tourism does not rank among the top ten most popular sustainable practices (Mintel Global Outlook on Sustainability, 2024), 30% of Gen Z travelers reduce air travel, with 23% planning to do so in the future. Therefore, tourism and hospitality companies should pay close attention to the growing interest of travelers in sustainability, understanding their perceptions and attitudes toward sustainability to develop tailored services and define future strategies. Similarly, future academic tourism research should explore tourists’ perceptions of sustainability as a key driver of hotel choices (Madar & Neaşu, 2020), offering significant theoretical contributions and practical managerial insights. Despite the increasing academic focus on sustainability, there remains a significant underexplored area concerning how travelers’ favorable perceptions of sustainable practices translate—or fail to translate—into concrete behaviors. While prior studies have highlighted the so-called attitude–behavior gap (Ajzen, 1985; Becken, 2004; Bergin-Seers & Mair, 2009), existing findings are often inconsistent and fragmented, particularly within the context of sustainable tourism and hospitality. Notably, there is a lack of research that delves deeply into this gap within a single, clearly defined generational cohort. This leaves critical questions unanswered about the actual decision-making processes behind sustainable accommodation choices. To bridge this knowledge gap, the present study conducts an in-depth exploratory investigation of Generation Z’s sustainable travel behaviors, with specific emphasis on hotel accommodation decisions. By doing so, it aims to enrich the sustainable tourism discourse with robust, generation-specific insights that clarify how sustainability attitudes shape—or diverge from—real-world actions, offering valuable implications for both theory and practice. More precisely, this study makes three key contributions to this critical research gap. First, it delivers detailed, generation-specific insights into how Generation Z perceives and enacts sustainable behaviors when choosing hotel accommodations, thus directly addressing the lack of empirical evidence in generational tourism research. Second, it provides robust empirical validation of the attitude–behavior gap within a clearly defined generational segment, shedding light on the complex interplay between declared sustainability intentions and actual booking decisions. This contributes substantially to refining theoretical frameworks on sustainable consumer behavior. Third, it generates practical, actionable knowledge for hospitality managers and policymakers, enabling them to design and implement sustainability initiatives that genuinely resonate with Gen Z’s values and behavioral patterns, ultimately bridging the gap between sustainability messaging and consumer action.

2. Conceptual Framework

2.1. The Drivers of Hotel Choice: The Role of Sustainability

Sustainable consumption is an important issue in the tourism and hospitality industries (Kiatkawsin & Han, 2017; H. Han, 2021).

Environmental or sustainable consumer behavior in tourism is defined as travelers’ eco-friendly choices for green products and services that contribute to environmental preservation (H. Han, 2020). Key sustainable practices in the hospitality industry include water and energy conservation, towel reuse, purchasing green products, supporting local products, reusing plastic bottles and bags, and reducing food waste at tourist locations (Choi et al., 2015; Kiatkawsin & Han, 2017; Untaru et al., 2016).

Most previous research on sustainability in tourism focuses on green hotels and accommodations (Choi et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2018), green restaurants (Moon, 2021), and sustainable destinations (Kiatkawsin & Han, 2017; Werner et al., 2022). This study builds upon the existing literature about the factors that travelers typically consider when selecting a hotel to better understand the role sustainability plays. Factors such as cleanliness and location (Dolnicar & Otter, 2003), price (Lockyer, 2005), and value for money (Caber & Albayrak, 2014) are well-known influences on hotel choice. Only recently, sustainability has started to emerge as a key factor in decision-making, alongside these traditional considerations (Bohdanowicz, 2005; Lee et al., 2010; H. Han, 2021; Millar & Baloglu, 2011; Verma & Chandra, 2018), primarily focusing on the environmental aspect (Franco, 2021). The social and economic dimensions of sustainability have been explored by only a few studies (Noonan & Rizzo, 2017; Tölkes, 2018; Franco, 2021).

In this context, some researchers have investigated the purchasing behavior of Generation Z travelers, aiming to understand the importance they place on sustainability in various sectors, such as transportation (D’Arco et al., 2025) or in specific regions (Prayag et al., 2025). Other studies have investigated loyalty toward green brands (Rasheed & Balakrishnan, 2023). Additionally, Wee’s (2019) study shows that Generation Z is particularly conscious of social and environmental values tied to sustainability in their practices.

2.2. Generational Theory and Sustainability

In tourism and hospitality, where consumer choices are increasingly value-driven, understanding generational differences becomes essential for market segmentation, experience design, and communication strategies. Generation Z, for instance, as a digital-native and hyper-connected cohort, not only expects transparency and authenticity from brands but also demands meaningful engagement with environmental and social causes. They are more likely to support businesses that integrate sustainability holistically—across environmental practices, social equity, and local community engagement—into their operations. For these reasons, we decided to use Generational Theory, which allows researchers and practitioners to move beyond static demographic indicators and adopt a dynamic perspective that captures the cultural and psychological underpinnings of sustainable behavior. Generational analysis provides a systematic framework in the social sciences to explore how people born during the same period tend to exhibit similar characteristics, influenced by the historical and socio-cultural contexts they have collectively experienced (Costanza et al., 2017; Thomson, 2014). We focus especially on Generation Z (also known as iGen or Centennials, born approximately between 1996 and 2015) as the youngest active consumer cohort in the market. The existing literature suggests that certain socio-demographic factors significantly influence environmental attitudes (Yeoman & McMahon-Beattie, 2019; Smith & Kingston, 2021). Among these factors, generation is considered a key predictor of environmental behavior (Kafkovà, 2019). According to Generational Theory (Strauss & Howe, 1997), different birth cohorts may have distinct perceptions and behaviors regarding sustainability (Li et al., 2013). Consequently, understanding how different generations perceive and engage with sustainability is of great importance for companies today (Haddouche & Salomone, 2018). Several studies highlight that Gen Z’s consumer behavior and lifestyle differ significantly from those of previous generations (Prayag et al., 2025; Seyfi et al., 2025c; Sharma et al., 2023). Generation Z is often described as more open-minded and culturally aware than older generational cohorts, largely due to its constant online presence as a digital-native generation (Van den Bergh & Pallini, 2018). Furthermore, Gen Z is generally more engaged in activism and volunteerism and actively supports brands that contribute to making the world a better place (Minazzi et al., 2024). Previous research on sustainability suggests that Gen Z actively engages in sustainable practices (Dabija et al., 2019; Prayag et al., 2025) and exhibits a greater willingness to pay for environmentally sustainable products, with 64% expressing such a preference (Deloitte, 2022). Regarding travel behavior, as early as 2019, Booking.com identified a strong interest among Gen Z travelers in eco-friendly and pro-environmental travel, sustainable hotel practices, and contributions to local communities (Ribeiro et al., 2025).

2.3. Attitude–Behavior Gap in Sustainable Tourism

In the consumer behavior literature, the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1985) postulates that attitudes, among other factors, affect behavior. Attitude is an evaluative reaction to an object that influences an individual’s tendency to act in a specific way toward it (Ajzen, 1985; Dawes & Smith, 1985). Initial studies (e.g., Wicker, 1969) revealed that attitudes did not reliably predict behavior, prompting doubts about the scientific worth of the concept. This led to the term “attitude-behavior inconsistency,” which describes the weak connection between attitudes and actions. The attitude–behavior inconsistency, as described by researchers like Wicker (1969), highlights the challenge of predicting behavior based solely on attitudes. Although attitudes are often thought to influence behavior, the relationship between the two is not always straightforward. The observed inconsistency has prompted researchers to investigate additional factors that may influence or regulate the relationship between attitude and behavior. Ajzen’s (1985) Theory of Planned Behavior is one such approach that attempts to address this inconsistency. According to this theory, behavior is influenced not just by attitudes, but also by subjective norms (perceived social pressure) and perceived behavioral control (the ease or difficulty of performing the behavior). These additional factors are proposed to explain why attitudes might not always align with actual behavior.

Research on environmentally sustainable behavior has shown that positive attitudes do not always predict environmentally responsible travel choices. Several studies have pointed to an attitude–behavior gap in sustainable tourism (Becken, 2004; Bergin-Seers & Mair, 2009), revealing that our understanding of how experiences, perceptions, awareness, and beliefs influence pro-environmental actions remains limited. What has become clear is that sustainability-oriented behavior extends beyond the simple attitude–behavior link (J. H. Han et al., 2016). According to Nikolić and Trajković (2022), awareness of environmental practices plays a crucial role in shaping these behaviors.

Some studies seek to identify the reasons behind this attitude–behavior gap. Juvan and Dolnicar (2014) explored environmental activists’ awareness and behaviors related to sustainable tourism and identified six motivational groups: denial of the consequences of travel, downward social comparison with others who behave worse, denial of personal responsibility (feeling powerless to make a difference), denial of control (due to financial or time limitations), exception handling (justifying behaviors based on daily life), and compensating through other benefits of tourism. These beliefs help people cope with cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957; Hares et al., 2010; Mattar et al., 2018), which occurs when behavior contradicts attitudes. In the context of sustainable travel, Generation Z demonstrates high environmental consciousness and positive attitudes toward sustainable practices, yet their actual booking behaviors often contradict these values. This dissonance may arise from various factors, including cost considerations, convenience preferences, limited sustainable options, or social pressures. The psychological tension created by this inconsistency may lead individuals to rationalize their choices or minimize the importance of sustainable practices to reduce discomfort, thereby perpetuating the gap between intention and action (Xi et al., 2022).

Specific studies on Generation Z (Gen Z) have shown that while they hold strong environmental values and attitudes, their actual engagement in sustainable practices is limited (Giachino et al., 2022; Parzonko et al., 2021; Pinho & Gomes, 2023). The relationship between Gen Z and sustainable consumption is more connected to beliefs than to behaviors, especially when compared to other generations’ pro-environmental behaviors (Seyfi et al., 2025c). According to Fei et al. (2024), although members of Gen Z may show a willingness to support environmentally friendly hotels, their choices are often influenced more by financial limitations. In certain situations, economic factors seem to outweigh environmental considerations. The ongoing debate and mixed findings regarding Gen Z’s sustainability perceptions and actions emphasize the need for further research on the subject (Seyfi et al., 2025b).

2.4. Research Questions

With reference to the previously illustrated conceptual framework, we tried to identify the main literature gaps. To the best of our knowledge, existing research has not fully explored Gen Z’s perceptions of sustainability and its role as a key driver in hotel selection across all three dimensions—environmental, economic, and social—compared to other generations. Therefore, this paper seeks to contribute to the literature on sustainability in hospitality by addressing the following research questions:

• RQ1a: What are the most important attributes considered by Gen Z when choosing a hotel?
• RQ1b: Are there significant differences in the perceived importance of hotel attributes between Generation Z and other generations?
• RQ2a: What are the most important dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic, and social) for Gen Z travelers?
• RQ2b: Are there significant differences in the perceived importance of sustainability dimensions (environmental, economic, and social) between Generation Z and other generations?
• RQ3a: What are the main eco-conscious practices of Generation Z?
• RQ3b: Are there differences between the eco-conscious practices of Generation Z and those of other generations?

This paper also aims to examine the relationship between Gen Z’s eco-consciousness and their sustainable practices, questioning whether Gen Z is truly more sustainable and whether there is a connection between their self-perception of being sustainable and their active sustainable hotel choices and behaviors.

This brings us to reply to the following research question:

• RQ4: Is there a gap between self-reported eco-consciousness and actual behavior?

3. Methodology and Survey

An exploratory survey (Mutepfa & Tapera, 2018) was conducted to address research questions, which have been proposed in the conceptual framework.

Primary data were collected in May–June 2023 through a structured questionnaire divided into three main sections with specific indicators. The first section gathered demographic and social characteristics, including age, gender, and educational background, serving as key segmentation variables for cross-generational analysis.

The second section focused on hotel behavior patterns, examining multiple indicators: primary travel motivations (leisure, business, family visits), types of accommodation structures preferred (luxury hotels, budget hotels, boutique properties, eco-friendly facilities), frequency of hotel stays (measured on ordinal scales), and average spending per stay (categorized in monetary ranges). These behavioral indicators enabled comprehensive profiling of respondents’ accommodation preferences and usage patterns.

The third section was entirely dedicated to sustainability assessment, evaluating hotel-related parameters through importance ratings on 7-point Likert scales (1 = not important at all, 7 = extremely important). Key sustainability indicators included both basic operational practices (cleanliness, service quality, location convenience) and specific sustainable practices (energy efficiency, water conservation, recycling policies, local sourcing, eco-certifications). Respondents rated the perceived relevance of each practice, allowing measurement of the gap between traditional and sustainable priorities.

Finally, the questionnaire included indicators related to sustainability communication, assessing how hotel properties communicate their environmental initiatives and how this information influences booking decisions.

The questionnaire was distributed via Google Forms through social media platforms and online groups predominantly used by Generation Z, ensuring targeted demographic reach.

Focusing on the quantitative analysis, both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses are used (Sirkin, 2006), aiming to provide a comprehensive overview of the respondents and to differentiate potential variations in the perception of sustainability dimensions (social, environmental and economic) between users who identify themselves as a sustainable tourist in the hotel choice and those who do not. These methods act as the initial step in understanding the dataset’s characteristics, enabling researchers to gain insights into the central tendencies and variations present in the data (Winkler & Dyckman, 2010). After the description of the data, the hypothesis testing technique is used, and, specifically for this paper, the Wilcoxon test and the Shapiro–Wilk test are employed. The Shapiro–Wilk test is employed to determine the normality of data distribution. When data do not conform to normality, alternative statistical approaches may be warranted. These tests offer a structured and unbiased way to evaluate the significance of research findings (González-Estrada & Cosmes, 2019). Subsequently, the Wilcoxon test is particularly valuable when dealing with non-normally distributed data or paired samples, as it assesses the differences between two related groups (Woolson, 2005). The elaboration is provided using R Studio (R 4.3.0 version), a robust software environment, which is employed for data analysis and visualization, and this enhances the ability to explore data, test hypotheses, and make informed decisions based on analytical outcomes (for further information, see Crawley, 2012). Data was collected through a questionnaire that is a critical instrument for the study, aimed at uncovering the multifaceted factors that guide customer choices within the hospitality industry, with a specific lens on sustainability-related considerations. A non-probabilistic sampling technique was employed, generally used when researching hard-to-reach populations or when the research context necessitates a specific network of respondents (Naderifar et al., 2017).

In conclusion, ethical issues are crucial to the research, especially when human subjects are involved (Asai et al., 2003). Therefore, it is important to highlight that for this study, all the practices related to upholding the rights and welfare of survey participants, which include getting informed consent, keeping information private, and guaranteeing participant anonymity, were respected.

4. Results

4.1. Respondent Profiles

The aim of the paper is based on understanding the sustainability perception and behavior of Generation Z in comparison with “Other Generations”; therefore, the descriptive section is divided into these two main components of the respondents. The total number of respondents is 1295: 675 of Generation Z and 620 of other generations.

The following table (

Table 1. Respondents’ demographic features.

Demographic Features	Gen Z	% Gen Z	Other Generations	% Other Generation	Total
Gender
Female	451	55.5%	362	44.5%	813
I prefer not to say	4	100.0%	0	0.0%	4
Male	220	46.0%	258	54.0%	478
Employment/Job
Housewife/Homely	0	0.00%	49	7.90%	49
Other	6	0.90%	1	0.20%	7
Worker	179	26.50%	478	77.10%	657
Retired	0	0.00%	81	13.10%	81
Student	490	72.60%	11	1.80%	501

) illustrates the respondents’ gender distribution and employment within the two generational groups. The total respondents is 813 females and 478 males. Generation Z shows a higher number of female respondents (451), while other generations have slightly more male participants. Concerning employment, as expected, the majority of respondents of Generation Z are Students (72.6%) and the remaining part are Workers (25.5%), while 77.1% of other generations are Workers.

Considering travel habits (

Table 2. Respondents’ travel habits.

Travel Habits	Gen Z	% Gen Z	Other Generation	% Other Generation	Total
Travel companions
With Friends	226	33.48%	52	8.39%	278
With Partner	218	32.30%	227	36.61%	445
With Family	167	24.74%	292	47.10%	459
Alone	51	7.56%	42	6.77%	93
Other	13	1.93%	7	1.13%	20
Accommodation facilities (prevalent)
Hotel	282	41.78%	290	46.77%	572
Apartment	242	35.85%	183	29.52%	425
Bed and Breakfast	113	16.74%	96	15.48%	209
Other (Agritourism/Hostel/Camping)	5	0.74%	10	1.61%	15
Motel	7	1.04%	2	0.32%	9
Touristic Village	26	3.85%	39	6.29%	65

), Generation Z travels more with “With Friends” (33.5%), with partner (32.3%), and with family (24.7%), while other generations travel more “With Partner” (36.6%) and with family (47.1%).

Another aspect to be analyzed is the different kinds of accommodation used by the respondents (Table 2). It is important to specify that in the questionnaire, the question referred to the prevalent accommodation. Data confirms that both generations have a strong preference for the hotel category: 41.78% of Generation Z and 46.77% of other generations. Also, the category “apartments” is chosen by both generations: 35.9% Generation Z and 29.52% other generations. “Bed and breakfasts” and the “Other” category, which includes a variety of options such as agritourism, guest houses, and camping, are a less popular choice for both groups.

Table 3. Travel motivations.

Travel Motivations	Gen Z		Other Gens		% Difference
Cultural	302	24.94%	232	22.90%	2.04%
Relax	345	28.49%	385	38.01%	−9.52%
Fun/Entertainment	443	36.58%	209	20.63%	15.95%
Business	24	1.98%	51	5.03%	−3.05%
Engaging in Sports	25	2.06%	19	1.88%	0.19%
Religion Reasons	0	0.00%	6	0.59%	−0.59%
Nature	36	2.97%	67	6.61%	−3.64%
Gastronomy	36	2.97%	43	4.24%	−1.27%

presents the respondents’ purpose of travel. “Cultural” experiences emerge as quite significant motivation for both generations, with Generation Z at 24.94% and other generations at 22.90%, reflecting a modest 2.04% difference. Moreover, focusing on “Relaxation” ranks as another crucial factor, with Generation Z representing 28.49% and other generations at 38.01%. In this case, the difference between the two subsamples is −9.52%, emphasizing the importance of relaxation for the elderly respondents. Subsequently, “Fun and Entertainment” is remarkably more favored by Generation Z, making up 36.58% of their choices compared to 20.63% in other generations. Finally, “Work or Job-related reasons,” “Engaging in Sports,” “Religion-related purposes,” “Nature,” and “Gastronomy” display differences between the two generational groups.

The last aspect of the descriptive statistics is related to the most used way to have information before booking a hospitality structure.

Several key trends emerge from the data:

• Booking portals (e.g., Booking.com, Expedia) and websites prove to be the most popular information sources for both generations, with Generation Z at 41.78% and 45.55%, and other generations at 36.20% and 41.46%, respectively. This indicates a strong online presence and aligns with the digital age’s information-seeking habits.
• Social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, are also significant platforms, with Generation Z and other generations showing an appreciation for these channels, accounting for 9.59% and 5.36%, respectively. This reflects the role of social media in influencing travel decisions, which is prominent in Generation Z.
• Print/digital daily newspapers and tourist guides have a relatively minor share in both groups, while other channels like TV and weekly/monthly magazines occupy an even smaller portion of information sources.

Overall, this data underscores the prominence of online platforms, especially booking portals and websites, in disseminating tourism information (

Table 4. Tourism information channels.

Tourism Information Channels	Gen Z		Other Gens		% Difference
TV	14	1.20%	50	5.06%	−3.86%
Print/Digital Daily Newspapers	5	0.43%	40	4.04%	−3.62%
Weekly/Monthly Magazines	9	0.77%	21	2.12%	−1.35%
Booking Portals (Booking.com, Expedia, etc.)	488	41.78%	358	36.20%	5.58%
Websites	532	45.55%	410	41.46%	4.09%
Social Network (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)	112	9.59%	53	5.36%	4.23%
Tourist Guides	8	0.68%	51	5.16%	−4.47%
Other	0	0.00%	6	0.61%	−0.61%

).

Another analyzed aspect aims to understand which information channels are considered most important for communicating the sustainability of hotel facilities. The objective is to verify if there are differences in the priority use of these channels between the two groups in the sample, to know which tools are most effective in conveying sustainability initiatives and policies to the public.

Respondents were asked to evaluate a variety of communication tools. The results are somewhat different for the two groups of respondents and are reported in

Table 5. Sustainable hospitality informativeness.

Z-Generation	Average	Ranking	Other Generations	Average	Ranking
Social Media	6.12	1	Social Media	5.40	5
Websites	6.05	2	Websites	5.80	1
Web Portal	5.98	3	Web Portal	5.65	2
Online Advertising (Overall)	5.89	4	Online Advertising (Overall)	5.51	3
Internal Advertisement Material	5.27	5	Internal Advertisement Material	5.46	4
External Advertisement Material	4.85	6	External Advertisement Material	4.87	6
Traditional Advertising	4.43	7	Traditional Advertising	4.72	7

Spearman’s correlation = 0.64—p (2-tailed) = 0.12.

.

Social media clearly stands out as the most popular medium among Generation Z, with the highest average rating and ranking. This aligns with Generation Z’s well-known preference for using social media platforms for information and communication. Websites and online portals closely follow in popularity, and Generation Z is more inclined to use these platforms compared to other generations. This relates to their active engagement with online content and online sources of information. The previous table indicates a non-significant Spearman’s correlation of 0.64, showing a quite positive relationship between the preferences of Generation Z and those of other generations.

Shifting to the sustainability factor in the hotel choice, it is found that Generation Z respondents are equally divided between those who declare themselves sustainable in hotel choices and those who do not. In the other part of the sample, there is a prevalence of people who declare themselves sustainable (59%), and considering gender, 56.8% of women declare themselves sustainable, while 50% of men do.

Subsequently, a series of attributes were listed to understand which ones the respondents most predominantly associate with the word “green.” The results are in the following table (

Table 6. Green terminology association.

Variable/Attribute	Test Gen Z—Other Generations	Significance
Eco-friendly	5.14	p-value lower than 0.001
Bike rental	0.37	p-value higher than 0.10
Plastic	−0.58	p-value higher than 0.10
Separate waste collection	−1.96	p-value 0.049
Waste recycling	0.92	p-value higher than 0.10
Global warming	−0.48	p-value higher than 0.10
Cleaning	−0.85	p-value higher than 0.10
Hygiene	−0.49	p-value higher than 0.10
Water saving	0.63	p-value higher than 0.10
Water conservation	0.08	p-value higher than 0.10
Green building	0.38	p-value higher than 0.10
Biodegradable	1.56	p-value higher than 0.10
Pollution control	1.89	p-value 0.058
Rainwater harvesting	−1.16	p-value higher than 0.10
Energy-efficient lighting	1.08	p-value higher than 0.10
Local purchases	−1.00	p-value higher than 0.10
Use of organic products	1.33	p-value higher than 0.10
Energy saving	0.51	p-value higher than 0.10
Improving social conditions	−0.04	p-value higher than 0.10
Green certifications	−0.12	p-value higher than 0.10
Global warming	−0.48	p-value higher than 0.10
Organic	1.20	p-value higher than 0.10
Local sourcing	0.39	p-value higher than 0.10
Renewable energy	1.57	p-value higher than 0.10
Territory enhancement	0.72	p-value higher than 0.10
Support for people with disabilities	−0.47	p-value higher than 0.10
Smart room	0.40	p-value higher than 0.10

).

Anyway, except for three cases, the tests did not yield statistically significant results, and this suggests that the proportion of respondents who indicated a particular attribute or service (and consequently, considered it relevant to their experience) is similar between the two parts of the sample. This implies that there are no substantial differences between Generation Z respondents and respondents from other generations for these elements or practices. There are, however, as emerged in Table 6, three exceptions in the case of eco-friendly policies and pollution control (considered significantly more important by Generation Z), and recycling/waste management, which is deemed more relevant by other generations.

The data presented in this descriptive section provides insights into the preferences and behaviors of two generational groups—Generation Z and other generations—regarding their hospitality choices and decisions. As the younger cohort, Generation Z exhibits distinct travel habits and preferences compared to older generations. Generation Z demonstrates a stronger inclination toward traveling with friends and prioritizes fun and entertainment as key travel motivations. They also rely heavily on digital platforms, such as booking portals and websites, to gather information about hospitality options, reflecting their digital-native tendencies and information-seeking habits. In contrast, older generations are more likely to travel with family and place greater emphasis on relaxation during their trips. Their approach to information sources is more balanced, utilizing both online platforms and, to a lesser extent, traditional sources such as newspapers and travel guides.

In conclusion, the descriptive analyses do not indicate a strong inclination toward sustainability among Generation Z. Therefore, a differential analysis is necessary to obtain more comprehensive insights on this topic.

4.2. Data Analysis

As previously stated, this study provides a comprehensive comparison between Generation Z travelers and individuals from other generations. The primary objective is to explore Gen Z’s sustainability perceptions and behaviors while assessing whether significant differences exist between this generation and older cohorts. Generation Z, born in the late 1990s and early 2000s, represents a distinct cohort with unique preferences and values. Understanding how their expectations and demands differ from those of previous generations is crucial for both researchers and industry stakeholders. To address the research questions, hypothesis testing analysis is employed.

Table 7. Hotel attributes importance (from 1—low importance to 7—high importance).

Variable	Test and p-Value	Mean Gen Z	Mean Other Gens	Sign
Cleanliness	W = 228,270, p-value = 0.002	5.93	6.11	−0.18
Value for Money	W = 221,518, p-value = 0.05	5.89	5.98	−0.09
Price	W = 215,755, p-value = 0.31	5.82	5.88	−0.06
Location	W = 237,288, p-value < 0.001	5.49	5.75	−0.26
Staff	W = 244,285, p-value < 0.001	5.46	5.87	−0.41
Food and Beverage	W = 251,999, p-value < 0.001	5.28	5.78	−0.5
Rating	W = 196,988, p-value = 0.06	5.22	4.94	0.28
Quality	W = 239,500, p-value < 0.001	5.02	5.38	−0.36
Sustainability	W = 248,071, p-value < 0.001	4.24	4.79	−0.55
Brand	W = 230,959, p-value = 0.002	3.24	3.58	−0.35

presents the results of the Wilcoxon test, which assesses differences in the perceived importance of various hotel attributes during accommodation choices between Generation Z and other generations. To accurately interpret these findings, it is essential to consider both the p-value and the direction of the relationship. The results indicate that some attributes hold greater statistical significance than others in shaping hotel preferences. A clear pattern emerges: across all evaluated attributes, the average ratings are consistently higher among older generations, suggesting that Generation Z tends to assign lower importance overall.

Despite these variations, “Cleanliness” and “Value for Money” emerge as the two most critical factors for both generational groups, reinforcing their universal importance in hotel selection. However, Mann–Whitney U tests reveal that certain attributes—namely “Price,” “Value for Money,” and “Rating”—do not show statistically significant differences at the 5% level, indicating that Gen Z and older generations perceive these aspects similarly. Conversely, for other attributes—including “Location,” “Cleanliness,” “Quality,” “Sustainability,” “Food and Beverage,” “Brand,” and “Staff”—statistically significant differences exist, meaning that the two generational groups assign varying levels of importance to these factors when choosing a hotel.

Regarding the relevance of hotel attributes, Generation Z prioritizes cleanliness, value for money, and price as the most important factors. Location and staff hold intermediate importance, while attributes such as brand and sustainability receive significantly lower ratings (RQ1a). Similarly, for the remaining respondents, the top three priorities remain the same, though they place greater emphasis on aspects like staff and food and beverage compared to Generation Z. This aligns with previous findings from Dolnicar and Otter (2003), Lockyer (2005), and Caber and Albayrak (2014).

Furthermore, both groups consistently rank brand and sustainability as the least important attributes, with significantly lower ratings than the highest-ranked factors. Consequently, while some differences exist in specific attribute evaluations, the overall ranking and assessment of hotel attributes are largely similar between Generation Z and other generations (RQ1b). To further examine the role of sustainability in accommodation choices, respondents were asked to evaluate the importance of various sustainable hotel practices. These practices were categorized into three dimensions of sustainability: environmental (e.g., energy efficiency and waste reduction), social (e.g., support for the local community), and economic (e.g., development of the destination and local commerce). As outlined in the methodology, respondents rated the importance of these practices, and the data was analyzed by counting the number of responses for each variable. Additionally, a hypothesis test was conducted to compare the proportions between the two generational groups.

Table 8. Sustainable dimensions.

Variable	Test and p-Value	Mean Gen Z	Mean Other Gens	Sign
Economic	U = 190,712.5; p-Value = 0.005	5.08	5.26	−0.18
Social	U = 187,986; p-Value = 0.001	5.32	5.52	−0.19
Environmental	U = 179,548; p-value < 0.001	5.33	5.47	−0.14

provides a comprehensive analysis of sustainability dimensions in the hospitality sector, comparing mean values and statistical significance between Generation Z and other generations. As previously discussed, sustainability plays a crucial role in today’s world, making it essential to understand how different age groups engage in its various dimensions. This understanding is key to developing effective sustainability initiatives tailored to the hospitality industry.

Table 8 highlights some differences, albeit modest, that are statistically significant (p-value < 0.01 for all dimensions), indicating that Generation Z assigns slightly less importance to all sustainability aspects compared to other respondents. An analysis of sustainability dimensions reveals that Generation Z places greater emphasis on environmental and social aspects, with the economic dimension being the least relevant. A similar trend is observed among other generations, though with a reversal in priority between social and environmental dimensions.

Regarding RQ2a, it can be confirmed that Generation Z prioritizes environmental and social sustainability over economic sustainability, aligning with the findings of Wee (2019). Addressing RQ2b, significant differences exist in how these dimensions are perceived, with non-Generation Z participants assigning higher importance to all sustainability aspects. Notably, while both groups acknowledge social and environmental sustainability as the most important, Generation Z prioritizes environmental concerns, whereas other generations place greater emphasis on social sustainability.

As previously mentioned, the questionnaire also explored respondents’ sustainable behaviors to identify the most relevant practices for each group.

Table 9. Sustainable behavior.

Variable	Test and p-Value	Mean Gen Z	Mean Other Gens	Sign
Energy Saving	W = 253,711, p-value < 0.001	5.25	5.75	−0.50
Alternative Transportation	W = 220,557, p-value = 0.09	4.44	4.56	−0.12
Waste Sorting	W = 240,787, p-value < 0.001	5.84	6.09	−0.25
Plastic Reduction	W = 258,587, p-value < 0.001	4.81	5.45	−0.64
Reuse Objects	W = 243,014, p-value < 0.001	4.61	5.08	−0.47
Cultivate Km 0	W = 255,709, p-value < 0.001	3.94	4.68	−0.74
Use of Renewable Energy	W = 247,039, p-value < 0.001	4.27	4.82	−0.55
Support of Community	W = 242,484, p-value < 0.001	4.77	5.26	−0.49

presents these aspects, categorized by generation, along with their average evaluations.

The p-values associated with each attribute provide insights into the statistical significance of the differences observed between Generation Z and other generations. Notably, several attributes, such as Energy Saving, Plastic Reduction, and Cultivate Km0, show exceptionally low p-values, indicating highly significant differences in sustainable behavior scores. This is further highlighted by the negative values in the “Sign” column, which reveal a consistent trend where Generation Z tends to exhibit lower levels of sustainable behavior in these areas compared to their counterparts from other generations (RQ3a). The most pronounced disparities are found in the attributes of Cultivate Km0 and Plastic Reduction, with differences of −0.74 and −0.64, respectively. These differences suggest that targeted sustainability initiatives and campaigns may be needed to address the specific needs and behaviors of Generation Z, considering their lower engagement in certain sustainable practices. It is important to note that these score differences do not reflect differences in priorities. In fact, the top five elements—Waste Sorting, Energy Saving, Plastic Reduction, Support of Community, and Reuse of Objects—maintain the same order of importance for both groups. Therefore, concerning RQ3b, it can be concluded that generation is not a significant factor. Finally, focusing on RQ4, we see that there is consistency between the importance of sustainability (as shown in Table 9) in hotel choice and the behaviors exhibited by respondents in their daily lives. From the perspective of Generation Z, the scores are consistently lower compared to the rest of the sample, both in hotel choice and daily activities. Thus, it can be concluded that, despite expectations that Generation Z would be more eco-conscious regarding environmental sustainability issues, they consider sustainable attributes less important when selecting accommodations and exhibit less sustainable behavior in both daily life and travel. This aligns with previous studies on the attitude–behavior gap (Becken, 2004; Bergin-Seers & Mair, 2009).

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Discussion

The findings of this study reveal a nuanced perspective on Generation Z’s approach to sustainability in the hospitality industry. While this cohort is frequently portrayed in the literature and popular media as the most environmentally aware generation, the data suggest a more complex reality. Although nearly half of the respondents describe themselves as “sustainable”, this self-perception does not fully translate into their actual decision-making: when selecting accommodations, sustainability emerges as a secondary or even marginal criterion, often overshadowed by more immediate and practical considerations such as cleanliness, location, and value for money.

In response to RQ1a, the results indicate that Generation Z prioritizes cleanliness, affordability, and price above all when making travel-related choices. Attributes such as location and staff quality are of moderate importance, while sustainability and brand reputation receive notably lower evaluations. These ranking challenges the assumption that sustainability is a primary driver for Gen Z consumers. Furthermore, in relation to RQ1b, the study finds that Gen Z’s preferences do not significantly differ from those of other generational groups, suggesting that the generational divide in sustainability preferences may be narrower than commonly assumed.

Regarding the dimensions of sustainability deemed most important (RQ2a), Generation Z shows a clear preference for environmental and social aspects, particularly actions related to energy conservation, plastic reduction, and waste sorting (RQ3a). These findings align with prior research that identifies environmental concerns as central to Gen Z’s values. However, the analysis did not reveal any statistically significant generational differences in either the perceived relevance of these dimensions (RQ2b) or the adoption of sustainable behaviors (RQ3b). In other words, Gen Z does not demonstrate a substantially stronger commitment to sustainability than other age groups, at least in terms of tangible choices and practices.

Perhaps most noteworthy is the attitude–behavior gap highlighted by the study (RQ4). While Generation Z may express eco-conscious intentions and values, these do not consistently translate into sustainable actions—particularly when convenience, cost, or habit are at stake. This discrepancy points to the need for further research into the psychological, contextual, and structural barriers that inhibit the transformation of sustainability awareness into actual behavior within this demographic.

This study offers an original contribution by deeply investigating the attitude–behavior gap paradox in the context of sustainable tourism, focusing for the first time on Generation Z as a homogeneous generational cohort. Although Gen Z is widely recognized for its strong environmental awareness and willingness to support sustainable brands, its actual travel and accommodation choices often do not fully reflect these declared values. While the existing literature acknowledges this gap in general terms, it rarely examines how it manifests in hotel booking decisions within a single, clearly defined generation—leaving critical questions unanswered about the real drivers of sustainable travel behavior. This paper addresses this gap through a detailed exploratory analysis, providing empirical evidence on how perceptions, attitudes, and economic barriers shape Gen Z’s sustainable accommodation choices. In doing so, it strengthens the theoretical foundation of sustainable consumer behavior and offers actionable insights for hospitality managers and policymakers to design strategies that genuinely align with the values and actual practices of young travelers.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

According to Seyfi et al. (2025a, 2025b, 2025c), a gap in the sustainable tourism literature is that few comparative studies analyze differences between Gen Z and other generations regarding sustainability, particularly in terms of behavior. To the best of the available knowledge, current research has not yet thoroughly examined Gen Z’s perceptions of sustainability and its impact on hotel selection across all three dimensions—environmental, economic, and social—compared to other generations. From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the literature on sustainable behavior and practices in tourism by analyzing the role of sustainability in travelers’ decisions and sustainable practices. It applies Generational Theory to compare Gen Z’s perceptions and behavior with those of other generations. The findings of this paper indicate that Gen Z sustainable travelers recognize the importance of sustainability in hotel selection, aligning with previous research by Bohdanowicz (2005), Lee et al. (2010), H. Han (2021), Millar and Baloglu (2011), and Verma and Chandra (2018). However, sustainability is not as prominent a factor in their decision-making when compared to other attributes (e.g., cleanliness, price), aligning with findings from studies on key drivers of hotel choice by Dolnicar and Otter (2003), Lockyer (2005), and Caber and Albayrak (2014). Gen Z is often influenced by financial limitations and economic factors more than environmental considerations. This confirms the study of (Fei et al., 2024).

It appears that strong environmental values and awareness do not translate into actual practices and engagement, reinforcing the attitude–behavior gap identified by Giachino et al. (2022), Parzonko et al. (2021), and Pinho and Gomes (2023), as well as the broader research on this gap (Becken, 2004; Bergin-Seers & Mair, 2009). Gen Z may show a willingness to support environmentally friendly hotels, but their choices are often influenced more by financial limitations; that is, economic factors seem to outweigh environmental considerations (Fei et al., 2024). Regarding sustainability dimensions, our study confirms that Gen Z is socially and ecologically conscious, supporting the findings of Wee (2019).

5.3. Managerial Implications

From a managerial perspective, the study provides valuable insights for travel and hotel managers to develop strategies that meet the needs of sustainable-conscious Gen Z travelers, who represent young tourists and future potential customers. Although this study found that sustainability may not be the primary driver in hotel choice, an increasing percentage of these travelers are placing greater importance on sustainability. By understanding the key sustainability dimensions for these travelers—particularly environmental and social factors—hotels can decide how to allocate resources and shape their future management and communication strategies. Looking at the hotel industry, there is a significant effort towards sustainability by large international hotel brands and some mid-sized hotel groups. At the independent hotel level, there is still a need for guidance on which dimensions may interest different customer segments, and which sustainable practices might be both attractive to customers and cost-effective in terms of performance. This study suggests that customers give similar importance to some specific attributes apart from the generation. The findings indicate that while Gen Z exhibits strong environmental consciousness, economic constraints remain a barrier to sustainable choices. Therefore, hotel companies need to develop targeted strategies to make sustainable options more accessible, considering both environmental sensitivity and financial limitations of the younger generation. The study’s findings show that young people are interested in sustainability but are often constrained in their choices by cost-related factors. One area where hotel businesses can improve is by increasing guest engagement in sustainable practices. Simply stating on a website that the hotel invests in solar panels, renewable energy, etc., can be informative, but it does not directly impact the guest experience. Travelers do not feel truly involved in actions that contribute to sustainability. Developing initiatives that actively engage consumers in sustainable practices could enhance their interest and potentially convince them to pay a premium price for the experience—such as purchasing locally sourced products at community markets or participating in traditional meal preparation with residents.

The findings also have implications for policymakers and other travel companies involved in integrated travel experiences. Additionally, travel companies could invest in communication strategies aimed at raising awareness of sustainable practices during vacation activities, helping individuals who want to act sustainably align their behaviors with their values, and thus reduce the gap between attitude and behavior.

6. Limitations and Further Research

This study has some limitations. First, the sample could be expanded to include a broader range of generations and nationalities. This would enhance the generalizability of the findings and provide a more comprehensive understanding of how perceptions and practices related to sustainable travel may differ across various demographic groups and cultural contexts. Such comparative analyses could offer valuable cross-cultural insights, enriching the interpretation of the research outcomes. Second, the study focuses exclusively on one sector of the travel industry—accommodation, specifically the hotel sector. Third, this study, like others in the literature, analyzes self-reported intentions rather than observed behaviors, therefore, offering a limited basis for assessing their actual impact (Seyfi et al., 2025a). Furthermore, future research could adopt longitudinal study designs to track changes in sustainable travel attitudes and behaviors over time, particularly as Generation Z matures and gains more travel experience and purchasing power. Additionally, experimental studies could test the effectiveness of different intervention strategies, such as gamification, social media campaigns, or financial incentives, in bridging the gap between sustainability consciousness and actual behavior. Finally, a cross-industry collaboration between researchers and tourism stakeholders should be able to facilitate the development of more targeted and effective sustainability initiatives tailored to younger generations’ preferences and communication styles.