KLM - Fly Responsibly

In our May 2019 editorial, we looked at what the Spring climate change protests mean for the aviation industry, as airlines and air travel in general are increasingly in the crosshairs of environmental campaigners.

Our recommendation was that the industry should adopt a two-pronged approach. First of all, it had to demonstrate real commitment to change, beyond just 'we're getting rid of plastic straws.'

We held up SAS as a good example of that. Secondly, we argued for a beefed up version of IATA’s current advocacy campaigns, which seeks to remind people of the ways in which air travel is a social good from medical trips to cultural tourism, and that rolling back air travel is also (as IATA has pointed out) rolling back a century of progress.

KLM has gone much further than that through an initiative which has got it acres of media coverage worldwide. It is suggesting people fly much less in it's 'Fly Responsibly' campaign.

Backed by a micro-site and short video, the campaign looks at ways in which people can fly more responsibly, or not fly at all (e.g. take the train) as well as showing research that’s currently being carried out to reduce the overall carbon footprint.

If the idea was to gain exposure and get people talking, then KLM has certainly succeeded.

KLM’s campaign is ready made for some pretty eye-catching headlines, but is it actually a double edged sword, by putting the spotlight on some of its own operations?

For example, in its video, KLM says that in some cases people might be better off going by train.

So, will KLM be cancelling its flights from (e.g) Düsseldorf and Brussels to Amsterdam, journeys that can be done in just over two hours by rail?

There is also the question of premium cabins. KLM and other major airlines are rightly proud of their premium class offerings, and rely on them as an important revenue source.

But as Quartz points out, they are (relatively speaking) environmentally unfriendly.

Though KLM scores pretty well on fuel efficiency on transatlantic routes, the leader is LCC Norwegian, which has no equivalent of the first or business class you’ll find on other airlines.

Then, as this piece in the Washington Post points out in some areas of the world, flight shaming won’t work.

To take the US as an example, it has no usable rail network to speak off (with some exceptions such as the Acela East Coast line). As the Washington Post says, it’s actually a case of don’t fly and don’t travel at all.

As a result, we have mixed feelings about this campaign. And we’re not alone in that. This is from the Miles to Memories blog. Though we may not agree with the exact wording, the overall sentiment seems right:

“If KLM is truly conscious about carbon emissions then they should eliminate all unprofitable routes or routes where trains will work, only fly the most efficient planes and retire all older ones.

They could also come out with smaller bag requirements etc. to cut down on fuel usage. Until I see them do things like this I think it is more just an advertisement to make the company look ahead of the curve.