Visitor Segmentation Through Sustainable Travel Behaviors: Insights from Indonesia

Sustainable tourism has become a key strategy for balancing environmental conservation, economic development, and socio-cultural preservation — especially in rapidly developing countries like Indonesia. As one of Southeast Asia’s most visited destinations, Indonesia faces increasing pressure to manage tourism growth while minimizing negative impacts on natural and cultural assets. The government has actively promoted sustainable tourism through national policies and the designation of sustainable tourism pilot destinations. However, the success of these efforts largely depends on how tourists themselves behave—how they consume resources, interact with communities, and make travel choices.

Understanding tourist behavior is thus critical for achieving long-term sustainability goals. Globally, researchers have segmented tourists based on their environmental and social orientations, identifying groups such as “eco-centric” versus “mid-centric” tourists [1], “sustainable”, “medium”, “low” [2], and “high” versus “low” environmental attitude segments [3]. Additionally, nuanced classifications such as “environmentally responsible” versus “general nature-based” travelers [4], “active preservers of nature and culture” versus “local culture and community seekers” [5], and “environmental”, “mixed-bag environmental” [6] further illustrate the complexities in visitor profiles.

Despite the growing body of literature, there remains a notable gap in research on sustainable purchasing behavior within the Asian context [7]. The majority of studies examining the relationship between environmental attitudes and actions across generations are conducted in Western nations, with only Korea and Malaysia representing the Asian perspective in this area [6]. Moreover, while there is a growing trend towards adopting sustainable consumption habits, this inclination has not always translated into actual purchasing behavior [8]. Existing research has primarily focused on projected sustainable travel actions rather than the actual behaviors that are seen [6, 7]. In addition, many studies have focused solely on the environmental element, neglecting the economic and socio-cultural aspects [5, 9, 10].

This study addresses these gaps by segmenting urban tourists in the Jakarta Metropolitan Area based on their actual environmental and social sustainability behaviors. It also investigates generational patterns, offering insights into how sustainability engagement varies across cohorts. In doing so, the research contributes to a more localized and multidimensional understanding of visitor segmentation, informing more targeted and effective policy and planning interventions in sustainable tourism.

Demographic and Travel Characteristics

The survey revealed that the majority of respondents were female (60.11%) and held an undergraduate degree (48.24%), as shown in Table 2. Jakarta residents comprised the largest share of participants (44.06%), and a significant portion (41.22%) reported a monthly income below IDR 5 million, highlighting a predominance of lower-income travelers. In terms of generational composition, Gen Z accounted for the largest group (37.51%), followed by Gen Y (31.15%), Gen X (28.96%), and Baby Boomers (2.37%).

Table 2. Summary of demographics

*the generational age ranges are defined based on the year 2023, as the data collection was conducted during that year.

The analysis, as seen in Table 3, also showed that most respondents travel occasionally (80.06%), with recreation being the main purpose of their trips (66.97%). Most traveled with family (59.26%) and relied on private vehicles (72.55%) as their main mode of transport. Hotels were the most common accommodation type (62.77%). Nearly all respondents planned their trips independently (96.2%), with the most frequently cited travel interests being adventure (21.56%) and nature (19.56%).

Table 3. Summary of travel behavior

Cluster Analysis and Behavioral Segmentation

As shown in Table 4, the results of a two-step cluster analysis indicated that Cluster 1 accounts for 39.1% of the total sample (412), whereas Cluster 2 makes up 60.9% (641). It also shows that Cluster 1 had the highest agreement levels with most of the statements except when considering eco-friendly accommodation options, where both clusters show a moderate tendency with nearly identical means, with Cluster 2 having a slightly higher mean than Cluster 1.

Table 4. Two-cluster solution for environmental attitudes and generational cohort

*the generational age ranges are defined based on the year 2023, as the data collection was conducted during that year.

Across both clusters, the mean scores for all listed behaviors fall within the 3.5 – 4.0 range, suggesting a moderate to strong, though not highly robust, commitment to sustainable practices. Respondents generally show an inclination toward environmentally and socially responsible travel choices, but their commitment is not at the highest levels.

Overall, the differences in mean scores and standard deviations suggest that tourists in Cluster 1 generally have stronger and more consistent environmental attitudes and behaviors compared to those in Cluster 2. While both clusters exhibit some degree of environmental consciousness, Cluster 1 demonstrates a more robust commitment to sustainable practices. Therefore, the data indicate distinct environmental attitudes and behaviors between the two clusters.

As the respondents in Cluster 1 were more environmentally conscious relative to the other cluster, this cluster was labeled “More Environmental Travelers.” In contrast, the respondents in Cluster 2 had slightly lower agreement levels than those in Cluster 1 on many statements, including those related to preferences for unique destinations over mainstream ones, eco-friendly transport, environmental impact consideration, and support for local communities. Thus, this cluster was labeled “Less Environmental Travelers”.

The findings further reveal distinct differences in environmental attitudes and behaviors among various generational cohorts. The demographic breakdown shows that More Environmental Travelers are primarily composed of Gen Y (67.07%) and Gen X (62.95%) individuals, whereas Less Environmental Travelers are exclusively made up of Gen Z (100%) and Baby Boomers (100%). This indicates that Gen Y and Gen X exhibit a stronger dedication to environmental and social sustainability practices compared to Gen Z and Baby Boomers.

Regarding these findings, the study also corroborates emerging evidence on Generation Z, which indicates that this cohort tends to engage only minimally in actual environmental practices despite their awareness of environmental issues. Previous studies [12, 13] highlight a discrepancy between Gen Z's environmental awareness and their practical engagement in sustainability.

More recent studies also highlight that this gap often driven by financial limitations, lack of accessible sustainable options, and the prioritization of convenience. For instance, a study on climate-aware travel behavior in Greece and the UK found that while Gen Z travelers express concern about environmental issues such as air quality and climate change, these concerns rarely translate into consistent behavioral changes, especially in transportation choices [14]. Similarly, another study that questioned whether Gen Z acts as pioneers or paradoxes in sustainable tourism, conclude that high environmental concern is not consistently reflected in travel decision-making, such as choosing eco-certified accommodations or carbon-conscious transport [15]. In Southeast Asia, research from Vietnam involving 314 Gen Z travelers showed that although sustainable tourism intentions are present, these intentions are highly influenced by availability and value perceptions, pointing to a practical barrier in converting intention into behavior [16].

Further analysis was conducted to explore the demographic and travel characteristics as well as sustainability practices within these clusters.

The chi-square analysis, as shown in Table 5, revealed statistically significant differences in education (χ² = 71.68, df = 3, p < 0.001), income (χ² = 246.06, df = 4, p < 0.001), and travel purpose (χ² = 6.55, df = 2, p = 0.038) between the clusters. These findings indicate that Cluster 1 (More Environmental Travelers) generally includes individuals with higher educational attainment and income levels, suggesting a more affluent and educated demographic. In contrast, Cluster 2 (Less Environmental Travelers) includes a higher proportion of respondents with lower educational and income levels. The chi-square values also show non-significant differences across variables such as gender (χ² = 0.029, df = 1, p = 0.864), residence (χ² = 3.55, df = 4, p = 0.470), travel frequency (χ² = 5.37, df = 2, p = 0.068), and others as shown in the table.

Table 5. Profiling of clusters by demographic and travel characteristics

Cluster 1 (More Environmental Tourists) generally has higher educational attainment and higher income levels, suggesting a more affluent and educated demographic. On the other hand, Cluster 2 (Less Environmental Tourists) includes a higher percentage of respondents with lower educational and income levels. These differences highlight the distinct socioeconomic profiles of the two clusters, which can inform targeted strategies for promoting sustainable tourism practices.

This research supports previous studies [17, 18], which found a correlation between higher educational attainment and income with stronger environmental attitudes. Educated individuals and those with higher incomes are generally more aware of environmental issues and have greater access to resources that facilitate sustainable living. This connection underscores the importance of education and economic stability in fostering environmental responsibility and suggests that policies aimed at improving educational and economic conditions could further enhance public engagement in sustainable practices.

Regarding the purpose of travel, Cluster 2 (Mixed-Bag Environmental Tourists) has a higher percentage of respondents traveling for recreation and to visit family or friends. In contrast, Cluster 1 (Environmental Tourists) shows a lower percentage for these purposes, reflecting their possibly more focused interest in specific types of travel experiences related to environmental sustainability.

The findings categorize sustainable travel behavior into two clusters. The first cluster demonstrates a higher tendency to consider the environmental consequences of their purchases and shows a greater preference for tourism services and products that benefit local communities compared to the second cluster. However, the minimal differences between them suggest that Indonesians generally have a neutral stance on adopting sustainable travel habits. This neutrality is further evidenced by the fact that only one statement had Cluster 1 showing an average response of "agree" (represented by a "4" on the Likert scale) compared to an average response of "neutral" (a "3") on other questions. While other studies on similar topics from other nations show greater disparity among two or more clusters in their average responses [5, 6].

The second aim of this study is to comprehend distinctions or similarities in environmental and social sustainability behaviour among generations. The results show that Gen Y and Gen X exhibit a stronger dedication to environmental and social sustainability practices compared to Gen Z and Baby Boomers. The findings of this study align with previous research [19-21] indicating that environmental attitudes and involvement in sustainable practices tend to increase with age, peaking during middle adulthood before declining in older age. They suggest that individuals often become more environmentally conscious and engaged in sustainability as they mature. This trend could be attributed to increased life experience and greater financial stability, which may enable individuals to adopt and maintain sustainable practices more effectively [22]. However, as individuals advance into older age, factors such as reduced mobility, health issues, and changing priorities might contribute to a decline in environmental engagement [23, 24].