Activity of older tourists

Abstract

A global demographic shift is leading to an increasing number of older citizens, particularly in the most developed regions, and social tourism is becoming growingly relevant throughout Europe, especially in Spain, where it has been successfully developed by the Institute for Elderly and Social Services (IMSERSO) programs. The aim of this study is to create a profile of older tourists according to the types of trips they make. It uses a multinomial logistic regression to rate older citizens according to their motivation, travel, and sociodemographic characteristics. Results show that older tourists prefer organized trips regardless of whether they travel on IMSERSO trips or any other type of package tour.

Keywords

Demographic change motivation older tourists social tourism travel characteristics

Introduction

The International Social Tourism Organization defines social tourism as a way of making leisure tourism accessible to people with limited financial resources. The growing relevance of social tourism in the most developed societies and economies (McCabe and Johnson, 2013; Minnaert, 2014) is converting it into a tool for social policies (McCabe and Johnson, 2013; Minnaert et al., 2009). Over the recent years, this field has been increasingly attracting the attention of the scientific community. However, few studies look at the benefits generated by these types of programs (McCabe et al., 2010; Minnaert et al., 2009; Sedgley et al., 2012). Therefore, the evidence available for policy decision-making is limited (McCabe et al., 2010).

This form of tourism is being highly implemented in Europe—especially in countries like France, Spain, and Belgium—but it is hardly being developed in countries like United States and Brazil (Minnaert et al., 2009). In 2009, in line with its social tourism objectives, the European Commission launched the Calypso project, meant to combat the seasonality of this sector, strengthen the notion of European citizenship, and promote regional development for specific local economies. Under the Calypso project, the Europe Senior Tourism program was developed for people older than 55 years living in the European Union and wishing to travel to Spain. The project aims to make tourism accessible to the most disadvantaged strata of the population: mainly older citizens and retirees, youth, disabled, and families in difficulty (e.g. social or financial).

The global demographic change, with an ever-increasing number of older citizens, is making this type of tourism growingly relevant among older citizens, one of the groups benefiting from this type of travel (Van den Berg et al., 2011). According to the latest United Nations (2013) estimates, Europe will be the continent with the oldest population in the world over the next decades. Spain is depicted as one of the countries that will have the highest number of elders in 2050, when the average age of the population is expected to be 50.

According to the latest report from the OECD (2014), demographic change is one of the external factors that will shape demand and develop tourism in the medium and long term; moreover, older travel market represents a growing market niche. The World Travel Organization (WTO) estimates that by 2050 the whole of the population aged 60 or more will have made over 2 billion international trips as compared to the 593 million trips made by this segment of the population in 1999 (Patterson, 2006). In Spain, in 2012, 62.1% of households made up of individuals between 51 and 65 years of age had made some type of trip; and foreign visitors of over 64 years of age were those who had spent the most on tourism in this country (IET, 2012a, 2012b).

Demographic change will make older travelers one of the most attractive markets in the tourism industry and will turn this segment into the “growth engine” of tourism (Chen et al., 2013; Schröder and Widmann, 2007; Wang et al., 2013). Chen and Shoemaker (2014), Chu and Chu (2013), Cooper et al. (2007), and Mahadevan (2014) signal the aging of the baby boom generation—a generation that has been more oriented toward a lifestyle of entertainment and leisure trips than any other generations have ever been (Dann, 2007; Kazeminia et al., 2015; Kuo and Lu, 2013; Van den Berg et al., 2011)—as one of the most important markets for the tourism industry.

Older citizens have traditionally been considered an unattractive segment to the tourism industry. Most trips aimed at this group have formed part of the so-called social tourism and have thus been promoted through social policies (Carneiro et al., 2013; Dann, 2001).

In Spain, the supply of social tourism for elders, which has already been around for over 25 years, is articulated through Institute for Elderly and Social Services (IMSERSO) programs: Vacation programs for the aging and social cures. These programs organize trips for specific lengths of time and include transport, accommodation, and full board. Both programs make tourism accessible to elders with modest incomes; they are a source of job creation and they solve the seasonality of the demand that is of great relevance to the tourism industry. It also represents an important source of revenue for the state because it generates taxes (PriceWaterhouse et al., 1997 ). The success of these programs encouraged the Spanish government to internationalize this initiative in 2008 by launching a program set within the aforementioned Calypso project, the Europe Senior Tourism program.

However, as Chen and Shoemaker (2014) point out, these programs are becoming obsolete; current older citizens, known as “young seniors,” show less interest in this type of trips. This is because this segment of the population has become much more heterogeneous in terms of education, purchasing power, or health (Wallace, 2000); this heterogeneity is reflected in their consumption patterns in the tourism sector (Javalgi et al., 1992; Le Serre and Chevalier, 2012; Ryan and Trauer, 2005; Van den Berg et al., 2011; Wu, 2003). Nowadays, older citizens have more purchasing power than other groups, such as young as indicated by Metz and Underwood (2005), Prideaux et al. (2001), Reece (2004), Tréguer and Segati (2005), and Wang et al. (2013). Moreover, the generations that are reaching maturity now are characterized by a higher propensity to travel than previous generations (Dann, 2007; Van den Berg et al., 2011). Individual travel behavior is also closely related to specific life cycle stages, leading individuals to diverse patterns of behavior according to age, employment status, or household type (Boksberger ans Laesser, 2009; Collins and Tisdell, 2002a, 2002b; Cooper et al., 2007).

Even though package deals are one of their favorite options (Javalgi et al., 1992), elders also travel independently (Alén et al., 2014; Bai et al., 2001; Batra, 2009; Van den Berg et al., 2011). This behavior is heterogeneous in function to how they decide to travel. As indicated by Le Serre and Chevalier (2012), further studies are required to characterize such a heterogeneous segment as that of the older population in the tourism sector.

This study aims to develop a profile for elders who travel on organized trips. It distinguishes between subsidized or social tourism trips and other tour package deals and independent travel.

Trip typology

The type of trip can be organized/planned—commonly known as package tour—guided, or independent (Patterson, 2006)—a trip totally on account of the traveler. Of these three types of trips, the package tour is one of the most important within the context of a highly competitive market where agents and tour operators require information about tourist purchasing decisions (Wang et al., 2007). Package tours are therefore one of the most extensively studied forms of travel (Bai et al., 2001). Morrison (in Hsie et al., 1993) identifies the package tour as one with trips planned well in advance at a unique cost including both transport and accommodation (and in some cases, food and sightseeing too). One of the reasons most people choose this type of trip is that it appeals to first-time travelers, travelers lacking language skills, or even travelers who have no time to organize their own trips.

However, organized trips are one of the favorite options for older tourists (Bai et al., 1999), mainly for reasons of convenience, safety, and travel in company (Patterson, 2006). They are a good alternative to independent travel. This is especially true for elders who are single, widowed, or divorced (Patterson, 2006). However, elders also travel independently, as may be extracted from the studies of Alén et al. (2014), Bai et al. (1999), Bai et al. (2001), Batra (2009), and Van den Berg et al. (2011).

Existing studies associate the types of older travel with sociodemographic characteristics, motivation, and certain variables related to the characteristics of the trip.

Sociodemographic variables

Age and sex lead to different patterns of tourist behavior based on the stage of the individual’s life cycle, as shown in the studies of Collins and Tisdell (2002a, 2002b). Empirical studies of Bai et al. (1999), Bai et al. (2001), Batra (2009), and Van den Berg et al. (2011) show that two variables determine older choice of travel. In terms of age, Bai et al. (1999) argue that the tendency to travel on a tour package or as part of a group is higher among elders over 65 years. Batra (2009), however, ensures that from 55 onwards, individuals prefer a package tour to any other type of trip. Van den Berg et al. (2011) claim that the probability of traveling on an organized tour package is higher among elders. Concerning sex/gender, Bai et al. (2001) obtained that the Germans show a lower preference for German tour packages. Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1: Age determines the type of trip chosen.

H2: Sex/gender determines the type of trip chosen.

As for the income level and employment status of the individual, Bai et al. (2001) obtained that elders and retirees with lower income levels are more prone to travel on a tour package, while Javalgi et al. (1992) argue that elders retired from the labor market, who have pensions, are more willing to travel on tour packages than youngers. This is mostly for economic reasons. So, the following hypotheses are proposed::

H3: The level of income determines the type of trip chosen.

H4: The employment situation determines the type of trip chosen.

According to Batra (2009) and Wang et al. (2007), other variables influencing the type of trip chosen by elders are the structure and composition of the household. Batra (2009) states that older citizens living with their couples prefer tour packages, while single, separated, or divorced elders choose to travel independently. Wang et al. (2007) claim that when disposable income is high, the head of the household has a greater influence on decisions concerning tourist-related issues like the vacation spot, the duration of the trip, and so forth. Then, it is considered that:

H5: The structure and composition of the household determine the type of trip chosen.

Variables related to the sociocultural level of individuals generate differences between the different generational cohorts of elders nowadays. The variables corresponding to educational level and travel experience determine, among other things, the type of trip chosen. According to Batra (2009), elders with less education choose to travel on organized tour packages, while elders with a higher education prefer to travel independently. In terms of travel experience, Bai et al. (2001) claim that elders who travel for the first time are more inclined to travel on tour packages than they are to independent travel. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H6: Level of education determines the type of trip chosen.

H7: Travel experience determines the type of trip chosen.

Motivation (“push” and “pull” factors)

Studies in the field of travel motivation are developed based on the two dimensions of motivation: the “push” and “pull” factors. Crompton (1979) and Dann (in Crompton, 1979) were the precursors of these two dimensions of motivation that associated push factors with the desire or need to travel and pull factors with the choice of destination. More recently, push factors have been linked to the purpose of the trip and pull factors have been linked to the destination attributes (Chen and Wu, 2009).

Most of the literature on push factors focus on older citizens traveling on vacation. However, elders also travel for other purposes like visiting friends and/or relatives (VFR), health, and work reasons (Bai et al., 1999; Chen et al., 2013; Collins and Tisdell, 2002a, 2002b). Yet, these four types of trips—vacation, VFR, health, and work—are among the most important choices of the older population (Backer, 2012; Connell, 2006; Javalgi et al., 1992; Various authors (VVAA) in Lee, 2005; Wu, 2010). Although leisure travel continues to be the most important for this collective, Fleischer and Seiler (2002) deem it convenient to focus on elders who travel for reasons other than leisure.

However, some authors link the main purpose of the trip, push factors, to the kind of trip. Carneiro et al. (2013) obtained different segments of tourists traveling under social tourism programs based on the main motivation for the trip. They distinguished between “sociocultural,” “passive,” and “active” tourists. Cai et al. (2001) claim that the main purpose of the trip differs significantly from the type of trip; this is especially reflected in terms of selecting a tour package. Thus, individuals traveling for leisure or to visit family and/or friends use tour packages more recurrently than do those traveling for work. Yet, Jang et al. (2003) obtained that those traveling for work travel on tour packages more recurrently than do those traveling to visit family and/or friends. Thus, it is stated that:

H8: The main motivation (push factor) determines the type of trip chosen.

According to the results obtained by Baloglu and Shoemaker (2001), Chen (2009), Huang and Tsai (2003), Jang and Wu (2006), Sangpikul (2008), Wang (2005), and Wu (2003), the key attributes of destination attraction among the pull factors are hygiene and cleanliness, security, climate, cost, events and attractions, transport facilities, shopping areas, medical coverage, historical/architectural interest, attractions/natural landscapes, and distance.

Huang and Tsai (2003) and Wong and Kwong (2004) claim that there is a relationship between the attributes of the destination attraction, pull factors, and type of trip. Huang and Tsai (2003) obtained that elders using tour packages are attracted for reasons of safety, end price, and sights included in the package. They ensure that elders opt for the tour package because it offers safety, while young people select this option to socialize, to meet people. Finally, Wong and Kwong (2004) obtained that safety and quality service in terms of accommodation and price are the attributes most valued when deciding on the choice of a tour package, while weather and traveling season are the least valued, among others. Therefore, it is proposed that:

H9: The attraction of the destination attributes (pull factors) determines the type of trip chosen.

Travel characteristics

The type of companion, travel time, and the activities at the destination are among the travel characteristics related to the type of trip.

Concerning the travel companion, Bai et al. (2001) obtained that the number of people traveling on tour packages is comparatively higher than the number of those traveling on other types of trips. In addition, those traveling with spouses prefer the tour package, while those traveling with other family members choose alternative types of trips. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H10: The type of travel companion is related to the type of trip.

The travel time variable is of particular interest to the tourist destination, given that it relates positively to tourism income (Barros et al., 2010). Older citizens seem to enjoy longer stays than the rest of the population because they have more free time and a higher discretionary income than other groups do (Nicolau and Más, 2006). However, this variable seems to be determined by the type of trip. Bai et al. (2001) state that there is a relationship between the type of trip chosen by elders and the length of stay. Older tourists traveling independently seem to have longer stays than those who choose to travel on a package tour. Alén et al. (2014) obtained that Spanish older citizens traveling on IMSERSO programs enjoyed longer stays than did those who traveled independently or used other types of tour packages. Therefore, it is proposed that:

H11: The duration of the trip is related to the type of trip.

Finally, note that activities at the destination are also related to the type of trip chosen, as reflected in Bai et al. (2001) and Wong and Kwong (2004). Shopping, organized excursions, and physical and sports activities are among the main activities carried out by elders at the destination (Bai et al., 2001; Batra, 2009; Litrell et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2008). Bai et al. (2001) obtained that elders who travel on package tours show greater interest in activities like shopping and guided tours, while those traveling independently are more interested in physical and sports activities. Wong and Kwong (2004) argue that guided tours are the main attraction of tourist packages. Thus, the following hypothesis arises:

H12: The destination activities are related to the type of trip.

Methodology

To meet the research goals, a quantitative analysis was chosen. To collect data, a telephone survey was used. The questionnaire is based on the theory previously reviewed and is divided into two parts. The first part consists of questions about sociodemographic variables: age, sex, income level, employment status, household structure and composition, education, and travel experience. The second part consists of issues regarding the two dimensions of motivation, push and pull factors, and the characteristics of the trip. In terms of motivation, among the purposes of the trip were included vacation, visiting family and/or friends, health, and work, while among the attributes of the destination were introduced hygiene and cleanliness, safety, climate, total/final cost, events and attractions, transport facilities, shopping areas, medical coverage, places of historical interest, attractions/natural landscapes, and distance. Finally, issues relating to the characteristics of travel concerned companionship on the trip, length of stay, and time spent on the following activities: shopping, organized tours, and physical and sports activities.

A telephone interview was carried out with individuals over 55 years living in Spain. This age cutoff was decided because, first of all, it represents the average age in the previously reviewed studies that deal with elders and tourism. Second, because the baby boom generation in Spain is about this age now and this generation will introduce profound changes in the tourism market (among others) according to Cooper et al. (2007), Prideaux et al. (2001), and Ramos (2005). And third, because the most important social tourism programs have a target audience people over 55 years, for example, the Europe Senior Tourism program (EU level) or the Spanish Social Tourism programs.

A two-stage probability sampling was chosen to obtain the data required to verify the hypotheses. In a first step, the target population was divided into subpopulations—conglomerates—in function of the geographical areas of residence, namely the provinces. The number of travelers by province was calculated using the number of travelers over 55 years per province and the total number of travelers over 55 years per autonomous community. Subsequently, a sample size proportional to the number of travelers per province was calculated. Data were collected over a 3-month period between March and May 2012. Finally, a total of 358 valid questionnaires were obtained from all of the Spanish provinces (50 in total) and used for the statistical analysis.

Results

Sociodemographic profile of the sample

As reflected in Table 1, the mean age of respondents was 67.2 years and most of them were females (56.7%). The income level of the sample was relatively low because more than half of the respondents had incomes below €16,000 per year (58.4%), with most incomes ranging between 8000 and12,000€ per year (24.8%). Additionally, most of the respondents were retired (65.4%).

Table 1.

Sociodemographic description of the sample.

Variables	$\bar{X}$ (%)
Age (years)	69.5
Sex
Male	43.3
Female	56.7
Annual income
Less than 8000 €/year	17.3
Between 8000 and 12,000 €/year	24.8
Between 12001 and 16000 €/year	16.3
More than 16,000 €/year	41.6
Working situation
Pensioner	65.4
Non pensioner	34.6
Type of household
One member	18.7
Nuclear	51.1
Nuclear with more relatives	21.5
Monoparental/other	8.7
Number of dependent members	0.34
Educational level
No studies	13.7
Primary	32.3
Secondary	29.0
College degree	24.8
Travel experience
None or little	19.3
A lot	80.7

In terms of the type of home, nuclear households (51.1%) stood out over the rest. However, most of the respondents were self-sufficient, with an average of 0.3 economically dependent members.

Finally, most respondents had some form of education, fundamentally primary education (32.3%), and over half of them claimed to have a lot of travel experience (80.7%).

Concerning the type of trip, it is worth pointing out that over half of the Spanish older citizens surveyed traveled independently (58.7%), while the rest did so on tourist packages (41.3%). This shows an overwhelming preference among elders to travel independently; this is contrary to the findings of Javalgi et al. (1992). Among those individuals who traveled on tour packages, over half of them resorted to the subsidized IMSERSO (21.2%) trips that form part of the social tourism travel program, while the rest turned to other unsubsidized tour packages (20.1%).

Exploratory factorial analysis (pull factors)

Before proceeding with the statistical technique, the variables related to the importance given to the attributes (pull factors) of the destination (hygiene and cleanliness, safety, climate, cost, events and attractions, transport facilities, commercial areas, medical coverage, historic/architectural interest, parks/natural landscapes, and distance) were reduced because they could be correlated and might share some sort of—not directly observable—latent structure. To do this, an exploratory factor analysis and the principal component method to extract factors were used (Lévy and Varela, 2003; Pérez, 2005).

The two factors that explain 58.4% of the variance were obtained in Table 2 of the factor analysis. The first one (factor 1: “basic services, distance, cost, and climate”) consists of eight variables—medical coverage, hygiene and cleanliness, safety, transportation facilities, distance, total cost of the trip, climate, and commercial areas—and explains most of the variance, 35.8%. The second (factor 2: culture, nature, and leisure) under which the remaining three variables were grouped—places of historical interest, attractions/natural landscapes, local events, and attractions—accounts for the rest, 22.5%.

Table 2.

Factor analysis: Attributes of the destination (“pull” factors).

Factors/attributes	Factor load	Percentage of explained variance	Average Standard Deviation (SD)
Factor 1: basic services, distance, cost, and climate (α = 0.86)		35.8	1.97
Medical coverage	0.84		1.78 (1.07)
Hygiene and cleanliness	0.75		2.22 (1.17)
Safety	0.75		2.17 (1.16)
Transport facilities	0.73		1.87 (1.13)
Distance	0.73		1.74 (1.03)
Total cost of the trip	0.60		2.29 (1.17)
Climate	0.54		2.34 (1.23)
Commercial area	0.44		1.41 (.73)
Factor 2: culture, nature, and leisure (α = 0.75)		22.5%	2.21
Places of interest history/art	0.87		2.51 (1.25)
Attractions/landscapes	0.84		2.33 (1.25)
Events and attractions	0.62		1.8 (1.01)
Total explained variance		58.4%

Note: Keiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) = 0.883; Bartlett’s test of sphericity χ ² = 1688.568 (p = 0.000). Extraction method: Principal components analysis with varimax rotation. The destination attributes were assessed using the following scale values: 1 = Not important; 2 = Little important; 3 = Important; 4 = Very important.

Multinomial logistic regression

Based on the results obtained, the first of the hypotheses, H1, since the package tour was the favorite choice, as opposed to independent travel, among elders, is accepted (Table 3 ). This runs in line with the findings of Bai et al. (1999), Batra (2009), and Van den Berg et al. (2011). However, contrary to the results obtained by Bai et al. (2001), no statistically significant relationship was found between the gender/sex variable and the type of trip. So, the second of the hypotheses, H2, is rejected.

Table 3.

Multinomial logistic regression: Type of trip (step-forward method)

Independent variables	Independent vs IMSERSO		Other types of tour package vs IMSERSO		Independent vs other types of tour package
Independent variables	β	Exp (β)	β	Exp (β)	β	Exp (β)
Sociodemographic variables
Age	−0.135	0.874**	−0.055	0.946	−0.079	0.924*
Pensioner
No
Yes	−1.462	0.232*	−1.912	0.148**	0.450	1.568
Unipersonal (monoparental/other)	1.359	3.891	3.118	22.597**	−1.759	0.172
Nuclear	0.700	2.015	1.298	3.664	−0.598	0.550
Nuclear with children and/or parents	0.277	1.319	1.448	4.255	−1.172	0.310
Number of dependent members	0.501	1.650	1.187	3.277**	−0.686	0.503
Motivation
“Push”
Vacation (health/work)	−0.169	0.844	0.087	1.091	−0.257	0.774
VFA	2.168	8.745*	0.271	1.312	1.897	6.666
“Pull”
Culture, nature, and leisure	0.429	1.536	0.718	2.050**	−0.289	0.749
Characteristics of the trip
Companion: other family members
No
Yes	2.440	11.472**	1.404	4.071	1.036	2.818
Time spent on shopping	−0.987	0.373**	−0.813	0.443*	−0.173	0.841
Time spent on organized excursions	−1.283	0.277**	0.011	1.011	−1.294	0.274**
Time spent on physical activities	0.374	1.453	−0.996	0.369	1.370	3.935**

IMSERSO: Institute for Elderly and Social Services.

Note: N = 358; χ ² = 210.496 (p = 0.000); −2 log likelihood = 336.609; Cox and Snell R ² = 0.532; R ² Nagelkerke = 0.618; % well-classified cases = 74.7.

*p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01.

Conversely to the findings of Bai et al. (2001), no relation was found between the income of the individuals interviewed and the type of trip. H3 is therefore rejected. Yet, there was a relationship between the employment status of the individual and the type of trip. Thus, H4 is confirmed. This is consistent with the findings of Bai et al. (2001) and Javalgi et al. (1992). Retired elders chose the tour package, particularly the IMSERSO social tourism trips rather than independent travel or any other tour package.

In terms of household structure and composition, H5 is accepted; thus, the statement made by Batra (2009) and Wang et al. (2007) was corroborated. In particular, it was found that individuals who live alone, unipersonal households, as opposed to those living in monoparental households/other, prefer to travel on other types of organized trips rather than on the IMSERSO social tourism trips. This is also the option preferred by elders with a greater number of economically dependent members.

Variables associated with the sociocultural level of the individual, educational level, and previous travel experience had no significant relationship with the type of trip for either combination. Hypotheses H6 and H7 are therefore both rejected.

Otherwise, hypotheses related to the two dimensions of motivation, H8 and H9, are accepted. On the one hand, the main motivation for the trip, push factors, was found to be related to the type of trip. This is consistent with the results obtained by Cai et al. (2001) and Jang et al. (2003) revealing that elders who traveled the most to VFR traveled independently as opposed to traveling on IMSERSO social tourism trips. Results furthermore demonstrate that there is a relationship between the factors of attraction to the destination, factors pull, and the type of trip. This agrees with the previous findings of Huang and Tsai (2003) and Wong and Kwong (2004). Factor 2 (culture, nature, and leisure) was particularly valued by elders traveling on other tourist packages as opposed to those traveling on IMSERSO trips.

Regarding trip characteristics, the first of hypotheses, H10, is accepted because a statistically significant relationship was found between the type of travel companion and the type of trip. This falls in line with the results obtained by Bai et al. (2001). In particular, elders found to be traveling independently did so with other family members rather than with their spouses as did those who traveled on IMSERSO trips. However, no relationship was found between travel time and the type of trip. H11 is therefore rejected. Finally, H12 is accepted, given the statistically significant relationship between some of the activities carried out by the surveyed elders at destination and the type of trip chosen. This corroborates the work of Bai et al. (2001) and Wong and Kwong (2004). Shopping was preferred by elders who traveled on IMSERSO trips as opposed to those traveling on other types of trips, independently, and other types of package tours. Moreover, both those who traveled on IMSERSO trips and those who traveled on other package tours spent more time on organized excursions than did those who traveled independently. Finally, the time devoted to sport and physical activities was greater for those who traveled independently than for those who traveled on other package tours.

Conclusions

Social tourism, as a consequence of the global demographic aging process mainly experimented in the most developed regions, has aroused interest among the scientific community. This type of travel is associated with older citizens (among others) with limited resources, making it difficult for them to gain access to leisure. Yet, as the population ages, it is becoming much more heterogeneous in terms of purchasing power, cultural level, travel experience, and so forth. Consumption patterns are reflecting these changes. Nowadays, elders have begun to show interest in traveling independently or on other types of package tours rather than on social tourism trips. This study conducts an analysis of factors related to the types of older travelers; it distinguishes between organized trips (both for IMSERSO social tourism trips as well as for other package tours) and independent travel. Based on empirical results, most of the hypotheses were accepted. Age, employment status, household structure and composition, the two dimensions of motivation (push and pull factors), companionship, and the activities carried out by elders at the destination will all lead to different types of travel. This confirms that elders have very mixed performance in the tourism sector, as shown by Javalgi et al. (1992), Le Serre and Chevalier (2012), Ryan and Trauer (2005), Van den Berg et al. (2011), and Wu (2003).

Results show that older citizens prefer organized trips regardless of whether they travel on IMSERSO trips or any other type of package tour as opposed to traveling independently. Patterson (2006) argues that this may be related to an increased need for safety among older citizens. IMSERSO trips are more popular among retirees; this is probably largely due to the fact that the program requires elders to have a pensioner status to benefit from the program. Yet, organized trips are an important source of revenue for destinations, given their relation to the length of stay and the time spent on activities like shopping and organized excursions, as pointed out by Ferrer-Rosell et al. (2014). This type of travel allows elders with modest incomes and pensioners access the trip. Since more than 40% of surveyed people have incomes below 12,000 € per year and 65.4% are pensioners, as shown in Table 1, a large number of individuals in our country could benefit from this type of travel, with positive side effects that entail for the industry itself. But besides the benefits for the sector, it should be noted that this type of travel also favors users by providing an active and healthy aging, as indicated by Morgan et al. (2015). In this regard, McCabe et al. (2010), Dolnicar et al. (2012), and Uysal et al. (2012) noted that travel contributes to improving the health, quality of life, and well-being of the older population.

Independent travel as opposed to organized trips was most frequent when older citizens visited family and/or friends. This fact could be associated with the type of accommodation in this type of trip. According to Backer (2012), individuals visiting family and/or friends often opt for noncommercial accommodation (e.g. with relatives and/or friends or a second home). Moreover, elders who travel independently accompanied by other family members devote most of their time to physical and sport activities. Perhaps, they may have been younger and healthier individuals responding to the profile of active travelers as discussed by Bai et al. (1999) and Litrell et al. (2004). According to Javalgi et al. (1992), trips made for the purpose of VFR are preferred by older citizens. Pearce and Moscardo (2006) indicate that this type of travel is associated with low-income individuals. However, Backer (2012) pointed out that a large number of individuals traveling because of VFR opt for commercial accommodation rather than stay with family and/or friends, which is an important benefit for the hotel industry. It is considered that this typology of travel is going to be increased in the coming years primarily by changes in family structure, the increase in life expectancy of the population, and the geographic dispersion of families (Yun, 2009). Hence, there is a need for in-depth analysis on this type of travel in the area of older population.

Finally, there are significant differences between the two types of organized trips analyzed: Social tourism IMSERSO trips and other package tours. Elders who resorted to other package tours as opposed to IMSERSO trips were those living alone as opposed to single-parent households/others as well as elders with an economically dependent member. Noteworthy too is the fact that pensioners chose IMSERSO travel over other types of package tours. Those who traveled on other tour packages were more attracted to “culture, nature, and leisure” at the destinations than those traveling through the IMSERSO. One final point: time spent on shopping was higher among those who traveled through the IMSERSO than among those who used other package tours.

It is crucial for the public sector to be aware of the heterogeneity of the Spanish older travel market in order to adjust the supply of social tourism developed through IMSERSO programs. This will help the public sector to adjust seasonality in demand and continue reaping significant economic benefits. Programs should include trip schedules that pay special attention to the needs of the older population and pensioners. Older travel market will generate an economic impact that will simply result from the time elders spend shopping at destination. According to a recent report issued by the UNWTO (2014), besides being one of the largest expenditures of vacationing tourists, shopping has become an important source of income for national economies. Social tourism trips run the risk of being displaced by other types of package tours offering elders attractive destinations associated with culture, nature, and leisure (factor 2). IMSERSO trips have been declining, while big tour operators have been showing increased interest in the senior segment of the population (Alvarez, 2006). As Minnaert (2014) suggests, public and private sectors should work together/collaborate to deliver a diversity of products tailored to the needs and demands of this segment of the population. However, price (factor 1: basic services, distance, cost, and climate) turns out to be a major factor favoring IMSERSO travel over other types of trips.

All in all, as Javalgi et al. (1992) point out, the future of social tourism trips lies in a professionalization of the sector, specifically of travel agents. Older citizens are the individuals who rely mostly on travel agents when making reservations.

Limitations and lines for future research

One of the limitations of this study is related to the predictive ability of cross-sectional studies. As Wooldridge (2006) indicates, studies with cross-sectional data have a limited predictive capacity; however, this author also points out that this type of data is the most widely used in economics and other social sciences. A longitudinal study could be conducted to overcome this limitation in the field of older tourist behavior because it is capable of capturing changes related to travel behavior over time at the time they happen (Chen and Shoemaker, 2014; Huang and Tsai, 2003; Wang, 2005).

Certain limitations were found concerning travel destination. The study considers individuals who travel abroad and/or opt for package tour destinations (Bai et al., 2001; Hsie et al., 1993) as well as those who decide to visit several destinations on one trip (Hsie et al., 1993). It may also be necessary to take into account whether the trip is domestic or international and whether it is comprised of one or more destinations to check whether these assumptions influence the type of trip chosen by the elders.

It may also be convenient to take a deeper look into the features of the package tour since, as Wong and Kwong (2004) indicate, the criteria for selecting the type of trip vary in function of whether the tour package is basic or all-inclusive.

Finally, the results obtained are not directly comparable to elders from other countries since, as shown by Bai et al. (2001) and Spears and Rosenbaum (2012), the determining factors of trip type will vary according to the point of origin of the individual.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Alén

Nicolau

Losada

. (2014) Determinant factors of senior tourists’ length of stay. Annals of Tourism Research 49: 19–32.

Álvarez

(2006) El reto del turismo senior. Turismo senior: un segmento que rejuvence. Hosteltur 144: 6.

Backer

(2012) VFR travel: it is underestimated. Tourism Management 33(1): 74–79.

Bai

Jang

Cai

. (2001) Determinants of travel mode choice of senior travelers to the United States. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing 8(3/4): 147–168.

Bai

Smith

Cai

. (1999). Senior sensitive segments: looking at travel behavior. In: Chon

(ed) The Practice of Graduate Research in Hospitality and Tourism (pp. 75–89). New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.

Baloglu

Shoemaker

(2001) Prediction of senior travelers’ motorcoach use from demographic, psychological, and psychographic characteristics. Journal of Travel Research 40(1): 12–18.

Barros

Butler

Correia

(2010) A length of stay of golf tourism: a survival analysis. Tourism Management 31: 13–21.

Batra

(2009) Senior pleasure tourists: examination of their demography, travel experience, and travel behavior upon visiting the Bangkok metropolis. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 10(3): 197–212.

Boksberger

Laesser

(2009) Segmentation of the senior travel market by the means of travel motivations. Journal of Vacation Marketing 15(4): 311–322.

10.

Cai

Letho

O’Leary

(2001) Profiling the U.S.-bound Chinese travelers by purpose of trip. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing 7(4): 3–16.

11.

Carneiro

Eusébio

Kastenholz

. (2013). Motivations to participate in social tourism programmes: a segmentation analysis of the senior market. Anatolia 24(3): 352–366.

12.

Chen

HWJ

(2009) Baby boomers' and seniors' domestic travel motivations: An examination of citizens in Tainan, Taiwan. Master Thesis. University of Waterloo, Canada.

13.

Chen

Liu

HH,

Chang

(2013) Essential customer service factors and the segmentation of older visitors within wellness tourism based on hot springs hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management 35: 122–132.

14.

Chen

Shoemaker

(2014) Age and cohort effects: the American senior tourism market. Annals of Tourism Research 48: 58–75.

15.

Chen

(2009) How motivations, constraints, and demographic factors predict seniors’ overseas travel propensity. Asia Pacific Management Review 14(3): 301–312.

16.

Chu

(2013) Service willingness and senior tourists: knowledge about aging, attitudes toward the elderly, and work values. The Service Industries Journal 33(12): 1148–1164.

17.

Collins

Tisdell

(2002a) Age-related lifecycles: purpose variations. Annals of Tourism Research 29(3): 801–818.

18.

Collins

Tisdell

(2002b) Gender and differences in Travel Life Cycles. Journal of Travel Resarch 41: 133–143.

19.

Connell

(2006) Medical tourism: sea, sun, sand and…surgery. Tourism Management 27(6): 1093–1100.

20.

Cooper

Fletcher

Fyall

. (2007) El Turismo: teoría y práctica. Madrid: Síntesis.

21.

Crompton

(1979) Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research 6(4): 408–424.

22.

Dann

(2007) Branded generations: baby boomers moving into the seniors market. Journal of Product & Brand Management 16(6): 429–431.

23.

Dann

(2001) Senior tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 28(1): 235–238.

24.

Dolnicar

Yanamandram

Cliff

(2012) The contribution of vacations to quality of life. Annals of Tourism Research 39(1): 59–83.

25.

Ferrer-Rosell

Martínez-García

Coenders

(2014) Package and no-frills air carriers as moderators of length of stay. Tourism Management 42: 114–122.

26.

Fleischer

Seiler

(2002) Determinants of vacation travel among Israeli seniors: Theory and evidence. Applied Economics 34: 421–430.

27.

Hsie

O'Leary

Morrison

. (1993) Modelling the travel mode choice of Australian outbound travellers. The Journal of Tourism Studies 4(1): 51–61.

28.

Huang

Tsai

(2003) The study of senior traveler behavior in Taiwan. Tourism Management 24(5): 561–574.

29.

IET (2012a) Instituto de Estudios Turísticos. Encuesta de los Movimientos Turísticos de los Españoles (Familitur). Madrid: IET.

30.

IET (2012b) Instituto de Estudios Turísticos. Encuesta de Gasto Turístico (Egatur), Movimientos Turísticos en Fronteras (Frontur). Madrid: IET.

31.

Jang

S (Shawn)

(2006) Seniors’ travel motivation and the influential factors: an examination of Taiwanese seniors . Tourism Management 27(2): 306–316.

32.

Jang

Pearson

(2003) Chinese travelers to the United States: a comparison of business travel and visiting friends and relatives. Tourism Geographies 5(1): 87–108.

33.

Javalgi

Thomas

EG,

Rao

(1992) Consumer behavior in the U.S. pleasure travel marketplace: an analysis of senior and nonsenior travelers. Journal of Travel Research 31(2): 14–19.

34.

Kazeminia

Del Chiappa

Jafari

(2015) Seniors’ travel constraints and their coping strategies. Journal of Travel Research 54(1): 80–93.

35.

Kuo

(2013) Expenditure-based segmentation: application of quantile regression to analyse the travel expenditures of baby boomer households. Tourism Economics 19(6): 1429–1441.

36.

Le Serre

Chevalier

(2012) Marketing travel services to senior consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing 29(4): 262–270.

37.

Lee

(2005) Motives, behaviors, and attachments: a comparative study between older travelers and younger travelers in a national scenic area. PhD. The Pennsylvania State University, PA, USA.

38.

Lévy

Varela

(2003) Análisis multivariable para las ciencias sociales. Madrid: Pearson.

39.

Litrell

Paige

RC,

Song

(2004) Senior travellers: tourism activates and shopping behaviours. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10(4): 348–362.

40.

Mahadevan

(2014) Understanding senior self-drive tourism in Australia using a contingency behavior model. Journal of Travel Research 53(2): 252–259.

41.

McCabe

Johnson

(2013) The happiness factor in tourism: subjective well-being and social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 41: 42–65.

42.

McCabe

Joldersma

(2010) Understanding the benefits of social tourism: linking participation to subjective well-being and quality of life. International Journal of Tourism Research 12: 761–773.

43.

Metz

Underwood

(2005) Older, Richer, Fitter: Identifying the Customer Needs of Britain's Ageing Population. London: Age Concern England.

44.

Minnaert

(2014) Social tourism participation: the role of tourism inexperience and uncertainty. Tourism Management 40: 282–289.

45.

Minnaert

Maitland

Miller

(2009) Tourism and social policy: the value of social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 36(2): 316–334.

46.

Morgan

Pritchard

Sedgley

(2015) Social tourism and well-being in later life. Annals of Tourism Research 52: 1–15.

47.

Nicolau

Más

(2006). Elección de la duración del viaje vacacional: una aproximación con modelos de recuento. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa 15(2): 99–116.

48.

OECD (2014) Tourism, Trends and Policies. Paris: OECD Publishing.

49.

Patterson

(2006) Growing older. Tourism and leisure behaviour of older aduls. Cambridge: Cabi.

50.

Pearce

Moscardo

(2006) Domestic and visiting friends and relatives tourism. In: Buhalis

Costa

(eds) Tourism Business Frontiers: Consumers, Products and Industry. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann, pp. 48–55.

51.

Pérez

(2005) Métodos estadísticos avanzados con SPSS. Madrid: Thomson.

52.

PriceWaterhouse, Mundo Social, AECA, ZONTUR, ANET, EMER-GFK, IMSERSO (1997) Incidencia socioeconómica de los programas de vacaciones para mayores y termalismo social del IMSERSO. Madrid: Instituto de Migraciones y Servicios Sociales.

53.

Prideaux

Wei

Ruys

(2001) The senior drive tour market in Australia. Journal of Vacation Marketing 7(3): 209–219.

54.

Ramos

(2005) El estilo de vida de las personas mayores y la comunicación publicitaria. Un análisis empírico. PhD, University of Alicante, Spain.

55.

Reece

(2004) Are senior leisure travelers different? Journal of Travel Research 43: 11–18.

56.

Ryan

Trauer

(2005) Aging populations: trends and the emergence of the nomad tourist. In: Theobald

(ed) Global Tourism. 3rd ed. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 510–528.

57.

Sangpikul

(2008) Travel motivations of Japanese senior travellers to Thailand. International Journal of Tourism Research 10: 81–94.

58.

Schröder

Widmann

(2007) Demographic change and its impact on the travel industry: oldies-nothing but goldies? In: Conrady

Buck

(eds) Trends and Issues in Global Tourism. Berlin: Springer, pp. 3–17.

59.

Sedgley

Pritchard

Morgan

(2012) Tourism poverty in affluent societies: voices from inner-city London. Tourism Management 33: 951–960.

60.

Spears

Rosenbaum

(2012) The packaged tourist: a Japanese and American perspective. Tourismos: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism 7(1): 19–40.

61.

Tréguer

Segati

(2005) Les NOUVEAUX MARKETINGS: Marketing Générationnel, Gay Marketing, Marketing Ethnique. Paris: Dunod.

62.

United Nations (2013) World Population Ageing, Population Division. United Nations. Available at: http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Ageing%20report.pdf (accesed 16 January 2014)

63.

UNWTO (2014). AM Reports, Global Report on Shopping Tourism. Vol. 8. Madrid: UNWTO.

64.

Uysal

Perdue

Sirgy

(eds) (2012) Handbook of Tourism and Quality-of-life Research: Enhancing the Life of Tourists and Residents of Host Communities. Dordrechet: Springer Science & Business Media.

65.

Van den Berg

Arentze

Timmermans

(2011) Estimating social travel demand of senior citizens in the Netherlands. Journal of Transport Geography 19: 323–331.

66.

Wallace

(2000) El seísmo demográfico. Madrid: Siglo XXI de España.

67.

Wang

(2005) An exploratory study of travel constructs in mature tourism. PhD. Clemson University, SC, USA.

68.

Wang

Chen

JS,

Chou

(2007) Senior Tourists’ purchasing decisions in group package tour. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research 18(1): 23–42.

69.

Wang

Hsu

. (2013) Seniors’ perceptions of service features on outbound group package tours. Journal of Business Research 66: 1021–1027.

70.

Wang

Zhang

Xia

. (2008) Segmenting the mature travel market by motivation. International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies 1(2): 193–209.

71.

Wong

CKS

Kwong

(2004) Outbound tourists’ selection criteria for choosing all-inclusive package tours. Tourism Management 25: 581–592.

72.

Wooldridge

(2006) Introducción a la econometría: un enfoque moderno. 2nd ed. Madrid: Thomson Learning.

73.

CME

(2003) An exploratory study of Taiwanese seniors’ travel motivations and travel behavior. PhD, Kansas State University, KS, USA.

74.

(2010) Acculturation and travel motivation for Chinese-American seniors. Master Thesis. San José State University. CA, USA.

75.

Yun

(2009) An investigation of the US family reunion travel market: motivations and activities. Master Thesis. Purdue University. IN, USA.