Hotels already have the labels. The harder question is what comes next?
Recent research suggests hotel guests judge eco-friendliness less by sustainability performance than by the quality of the stay.
Xavier Font considers what that says about hospitality’s communication problem, its muddled chain of ownership, and the shifting value of certification.
Words by Liam Aran Barnes | Tuu Co-founder
Xavier Font, professor of sustainability marketing at the University of Surrey.
Hospitality has hardly been shy about sustainability.
In recent years, certifications have multiplied, badges have spread across hotel websites and booking pages, and the language of responsible tourism has settled into the industry’s everyday jargon.
The signals are everywhere. What is less clear is how much any of them are really saying.
That tension sat at the centre of a recent conversation between Tuu and Xavier Font, a professor of sustainability marketing at the University of Surrey and one of the sharper observers of how hospitality talks about green claims, guest perception and commercial value.
For Font, the issue is not that hotels are doing nothing. In many cases, the data exists, the certification is in place, and the intent is genuine. The difficulty begins after that.
All too often, sustainability communication drifts into a kind of organisational limbo: marketing teams may lack the depth to handle it properly, while sustainability teams may not see communication as their job at all. The result is familiar enough: plenty of activity, plenty of language, and not always much clarity.
New research co-authored by Font doubles down on this point. It suggests that guests tend to judge a hotel’s eco-friendliness far less by its sustainability practices or certifications than by the quality of the stay itself.
At a moment when pressure is building from buyers, platforms, owners and regulators, that leaves the industry facing a harder question than it has often had to answer. If the badge is there but the value remains unclear, what exactly comes next?
I caught up with Font recently to discuss why hospitality still struggles to communicate sustainability clearly, what his latest research says about the limits of certification, and where the more tangible commercial value may now lie.
Liam Aran Barnes: Hotels now have more certifications, badges and ESG language than ever. Why does the sector still seem to struggle with sustainability communication?
Xavier Font: Because certification and communication are not the same thing. A hotel can do the work, gather the evidence and get the label, but that does not mean it knows how to explain any of that clearly to the outside world.
A lot of this still falls between teams. The marketing people often do not really understand sustainability, while the sustainability people do not necessarily know how to communicate it or do not see that as their responsibility. So it ends up in a kind of no man’s land where everybody thinks it is somebody else’s job.
That is one of the reasons so much sustainability communication in hospitality still feels vague or disconnected from what the hotel is actually doing.
“Certification can show that standards and systems are in place. But getting certified does not, on its own, answer what happens afterwards.”
LAB: Where does certification tend to fall short?
XF: Certification can be useful. It can show that certain standards, systems and commitments are in place. But too often it becomes static. The badge goes on the website, maybe it appears in a deck, and that is about it.
The harder question is what the hotel does with it afterwards. How does that certification help guests understand what is actually different? How does it help a buyer, an owner, a platform, or a procurement team make a decision? How does it support a clearer internal conversation about performance?
Those are separate questions. Getting certified does not answer them on its own.
“The data exists, but it is not being turned into something that helps the business”
LAB: You mentioned that the issue often sits between departments. How big a problem is that in practice?
XF: It is a very practical problem. If ownership is unclear, nothing really happens.
A lot of hotels still do not have someone who can bridge sustainability, communications and commercial value.
The sustainability team may focus on the operational side, which makes sense. The marketing team may focus on promotion, which also makes sense. But no one is properly joining the dots.
That’s why you get situations where the hotel has done the work, but the communication is weak, generic or not especially useful. The data exists, but it is not being turned into something that helps the business.
LAB: Your recent research looks directly at the gap between sustainability performance and guest perception. What did you find?
XF: We compared Expedia’s post-travel eco-friendliness ratings with sustainability information on Booking.com, including both self-reported practices and third-party certifications.
The study analysed 6,696 hotels across the world’s top 100 city destinations, with a final regression sample of 6,222 hotels that had more than 100 reviews on both platforms.
The core finding was that eco-friendliness ratings were explained almost entirely by overall guest satisfaction, while sustainability indicators contributed little meaningful explanatory power.
Guests were mostly scoring how much they liked the stay. They were not reliably distinguishing between stronger sustainability performance and the general quality of the experience.
That doesn’t mean sustainability is irrelevant. It means the current signals are weak, noisy and easy to confuse with general satisfaction.
LAB: That’s quite a big deal, no? Does it mean guest-facing sustainability messaging is failing?
XF: I wouldn’t say it is irrelevant. I would say it is often underdeveloped or poorly framed, though.
There is still value in guest-facing communication, but it has to be specific, credible and connected to the actual experience. If a hotel makes sustainability claims and the guest immediately sees something that feels inconsistent, the whole thing starts to unravel.
A lot of sustainability measures are also simply not very visible to guests. They may be real and important, but if they sit in the background or feel too abstract, they do not shape perception in a distinct way.
That’s one reason the research points to the need for sustainability to be more visible, more relevant and more integrated into the stay itself.
LAB: What should hotels do differently after certification?
XF: First, stop assuming the label speaks for itself. It does not.
Second, be much clearer about who owns the next stage. Someone needs to take responsibility for translating sustainability performance into communication that is accurate, credible and useful.
And also make sustainability more tangible.
If guests are going to recognise it, they need to be able to see it, understand it and connect it to the stay. That might mean visible refill systems, clearer explanations of local sourcing, or energy-saving features presented in a way that feels relevant rather than preachy.
“Procurement, RFPs, owner reporting and platform requirements are all settings where hotels are actually being asked for information that can stand up to scrutiny”
LAB: Where do you think the more immediate commercial opportunity sits for hotels?
XF: In the short term, the clearer case is probably on the B2B side.
Procurement, RFPs, owner reporting and platform requirements are all settings where hotels are actually being asked for information that can stand up to scrutiny. In those cases, the link between the work and the commercial outcome is easier to see.
That does not mean leisure or guest-facing communication disappears. But if a hotel wants a more immediate return, the lower-hanging fruit is often in those more formal decision-making environments where sustainability data is already being requested.
LAB: What does that tell us about the future of certification in hospitality?
XF: I don’t think certification disappears. The space is crowded, but the need for credible third-party validation is still there.
What changes is that certification on its own is no longer enough. Hotels, venues and certification bodies need to think much harder about what happens afterwards. Once the label is achieved, what comes next? How does it help the property commercially? How does it improve customer understanding? How does it support a stronger business case internally?
If the industry cannot answer those questions more convincingly, then certification risks becoming something that looks good in theory but does not create enough value in practice.
LAB: So where does that leave the industry now?
XF: At a point where it has to stop speaking in generalities.
For guests, that means clearer and more meaningful communication. For buyers, platforms, owners and others, it means information that can stand up to scrutiny.
Certification still has a role. But on its own, it is no longer enough.