Current trends in air transport are inconsistent with international climate goals. Without substantial changes from business-as-usual travel demand, neither new technologies nor alternative fuels will reduce emissions at the required rate. Air transport demand is highly skewed towards a small share of frequent flyers in all aviation users. While the unsustainability of aviation is well-recognised in academia, academics themselves are often frequent flyers – generating the emissions many of them also problematise. To investigate this contradiction, we survey 1,116 staff members from University College London (UK). We cluster academics based on their opinions of academic travel and international conference organisation, and examine how these groups participate in, and travel to, academic activities. Five clusters are identified: 1) Conservative frequent flyers, 2) Progressive infrequent flyers, 3) In-person conference avoiders, 4) Involuntary flyers, and 5) Traditional conference lovers. Despite some levels of similarity between academic travel attitudes and behaviour, results show that certain types of academics seem forced to regularly fly to distant conferences. In fact, members of our largest cluster (Involuntary flyers) have negative attitudes towards flying, yet have the plane as dominant travel mode. To reduce academic air travel (dependency), we provide tailored policy instruments for each cluster, aimed at reducing the need to travel to lowering the impact of travel.

中文翻译：

---

解决学术航空旅行依赖问题。分析学者的旅行行为与其态度之间的（不）一致性


目前的航空运输趋势与国际气候目标不一致。如果照常营业的旅行需求没有实质性变化，新技术和替代燃料都无法以所需的速度减少排放。航空运输需求高度偏向于所有航空用户中的一小部分常旅客。虽然学术界已经认识到航空业的不可持续性，但学者本身往往是常旅客——他们中的许多人也产生了排放问题。为了调查这一矛盾，我们调查了来自伦敦大学学院（英国）的 1,116 名工作人员。我们根据学者对学术旅行和国际会议组织的看法对他们进行聚类，并研究这些群体如何参与和参加学术活动。确定了五组：1） 保守的常旅客，2） 渐进式不经常乘坐的旅客，3） 面对面的会议回避者，4） 非自愿的旅客，以及 5） 传统的会议爱好者。尽管学术旅行的态度和行为之间存在一定程度的相似性，但结果表明，某些类型的学者似乎被迫定期飞往遥远的会议。事实上，我们最大的集群（非自愿乘客）的成员对飞行持消极态度，但将飞机作为主要的旅行方式。为了减少学术航空旅行（依赖性），我们为每个集群提供量身定制的政策工具，旨在减少旅行需求，从而降低旅行的影响。