at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e10

Contents lists available

Tourism Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ tourman

Space tourism: Research recommendations for the future of the industryand perspectives of potential participants

Maharaj Vijay Reddy*, Mirela Nica, Keith WilkesBournemouth University, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 18 August 2010Accepted 30 November 2011

Keywords:Space tourismResearch recommendationsSouthern EnglandMotivation and demand

* Corresponding author. School of Tourism, BourneUK. Tel.: þ44 1202 961520; fax: þ44 1202 515707.

E-mail address: mvreddy@bournemouth.ac.uk (M.

0261-5177/$ e see front matter Crown Copyright � 2doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.11.026

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M.of potential participants, Tourism Manageme

a b s t r a c t

This paper has two objectives. Firstly, it proposes a set of research dimensions for the further investigationof the emerging space tourism industry and secondly, it examines the perceptions of potential space travelparticipants on key factors that influence their motivation, behaviour and decision-making. The researchmethodology adopted in this study involved collecting quantitative data fromBritish residents in SouthernEngland to explore and understand their perceptions of space tourism. In addition, qualitative data wasgathered by interviewing key informants connected to the space tourism industry including VirginGalactic, Airbus and EADS Astrium to understand their views on people’s motivations, perceptions and thefuture of the industry. Data analysis shows that intentional need for adventure and exploration is themotivational force in space tourism. Willingness to undertake space travel is also influenced by theperception to risk, which plays a central role in potential tourist behaviour. Furthermore, factors such astype of space travel (orbital/sub-orbital),type of launch and design of the spacecraft, location of spaceports,training required, duration, insurance, health and reputation of the operating company also seem to havesome influence on tourist decision-making. The paper contends that while global research dimensions arenecessary it is also important to understand perceptions on a country-specific and regional basis.

Crown Copyright � 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Space tourism is no longer a myth but significant researchquestions remain unexplored. Several magazines have beenpublishing brief articles on such advancements (e.g.: TechnologyReview, The Engineer, The Guardian, and The Daily Telegraph). Inrelation to tourism, Crouch (2001) gave early indications of theindustry and research notes have outlined the potential of spacetourism market advances in a few countries. For example, moti-vational perceptions and early developments in the space tourismindustry in Japan were addressed by Collins, Iwasaki, Kanayama,and Ohnuki (1994); in Canada and the United States by Collins,Stockmans, and Maita (1995); and in Australia by Laing andChouch (2004). Though these studies have provided some usefulearly thoughts most of them are now outdated; for instance, theindications on the UK space tourism market by Barrett (1999).However, the space tourism industry, which is experiencing manytechnological and legal advances, is considered to have enormouspotential in the UK (and elsewhere) and it has become imperativeto better understand potential space tourists’ motivations, demandand price on a regional and country-specific basis. There are serious

mouth University, BH12 5BB,

V. Reddy).

011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All

V., et al., Space tourism: Reseant (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

academic debates yet to come in this area as only a few full papershave been published, in research journals (e.g.: Cater, 2010; Collinset al., 1994; Crouch, Devinney, Louviere, & Islam, 2009; Olds,McCormick, Charania, & Marcus, 2005; Peeters, 2010), and inbooks (e.g.: Duval, 2005; Laing & Chouch, 2004; Lappas, 2006).

This paper aims to propose a set of research dimensions for thefurther investigation of this under-researched topic; and to examinethe perceptions andmotivations of potential space travel participantsin Southern England. Structured interviewswith five ‘influential’ keyinformants in the space tourism industry (e.g.: Virgin Galactic, EADSAstrium) and a quantitative questionnaire survey (n ¼ 164) werecarried out to explore theperceptionandattitudes amonga sampleofthe British population. First, the key research focus is debated withinthe section on the current status of the space tourism industry.Secondly, the research methodology and finally the findings of thestudy analysing the motivational factors, risk perceptions of thepotential market in Southern England are presented.

2. Current status of the space tourism industry

2.1. The business of space tourism industry

The commercial space market has existed since 1970. The worldmarket for satellite-based services, which includes television,

rights reserved.

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e102

telecommunications, global positioning systems, and earth obser-vation missions (weather, environmental, and search and rescue)increases every year (Lappas, 2006; National Space Society-NSS,2009). Over the last ten years, the gross domestic product (GDP)has increased 16% per year for theworld’s commercial space relatedactivities, with the market reaching more than $250 billion yearly(Shkolyar, 2009). The space tourism industry has enormouspotential and seems to be a great economic driver with thepotential to reduce the cost of space access and attract other playersto the space market. According to the National Aerospace Labora-tory (Japan), the demand for space tourism “apparently has thepotential to grow to many times the most optimistic projections forexisting commercial space activities” (Collins, 2003:5). SpacesportScotland (2009) states that the space tourism industry is ex-pected to grow by 18e26% per year during 2020e2030.

Russia first gave the opportunity for a space tourist on its Soyuz(Futron, 2002) and created the beginning of orbital space tourism.Today, only the Russian Soyuz and Chinese Shenzhou spacecrafts areregarded as suitable for human travel though several privatecompanies are involved in the manufacture of commercial space-crafts. The growth of the space tourismmarket is expected to followa classic ‘S-curve’ similar to products that offer a new capability; forexample, air travel,mobile phones and personal computers (Ashford,2007). Spencer (2004) envisages four phases of space tourismdevelopment from 2001 to 2040 and beyond. A pioneering phase,which startedwith Dennis Tito’s first flight in 2001, is followed by anexclusive phase. In these two phases themarket is limited towealthyand adventurous people, willing to pay large amounts for thisexclusive adventure. There follows a rapid growth phase (thematurephase) when the costs are reduced by the maturing technology,economy of scale, and competition. Finally, there is a saturationphase (mass market phase) when the growth is driven by economicexpansion and new markets (young people) (Ashford, 2007;Spencer, 2004). At present, Virgin Galactic, Space Adventure, XCORand Rocketplane-Kisler are some of the companies developing sub-orbital tourist vehicles (Excell, 2009; Globus, 2008). The first sub-orbital passenger flight is expected to travel in 2012. On the 4thMay 2011, SpaceShipTwo developed by Virgin Galactic, demon-strated its unique re-entry ‘feather’ configuration for the first time.Though this was a test flight and the third in less than two weeks, itmarks another major milestone on the path to powered test flightsand commercial operations (Virgin Galactic, 2011). Virgin Galacticadvertised a price of $200,000 per seat in its SpaceShipTwo fora two-hour space experience (Ker Than, 2009; Telegraph, 2009).Though there are differences between the costs of these tripsadvertised by companies and the space activities listed on the itin-erary for that price, there is a widespread agreement that the costsneed to be lowered. The NSS (2009) stated that this industry has thepotential capability of sustaining thousands of flights per year, if thecost is maintained at the $100,000 level or less.

The early years of the aviation industry offers many lessons tothe newly emerging and as yet expensive space tourism industry.The quest for lower costs and improved performance driven bycompetition led to today’s global aviation industry (Collins et al.,1994). Whilst providing parallelism with commercial flights,Peeters (2010:1625) discussed the ‘potential evolution of commercialpersonal spaceflights’ as well as indicating the assumptions that‘point-to-point (P2P) commercial space transport will become the longterm sustainable market’. Taking into account the current potentialspace tourism demand, International Space University (ISU)suggests that a ticket price of around $50,000 should be sufficientfor a viable space tourism industry but this will depend heavily ontechnological developments in the propulsion system and vehicledesign, lowmaintenance and operational costs (Swarbrooke, Beard,Leckie, & Pomfret, 2003). Though the need for private investment is

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

now realised, authors such as Collins (2003) argue that govern-ments have a duty to contribute to the funding of such techno-logical developments.

The London Royal Aeronautical Society Conference (RAS, 2009)revealed that there is a more favourable situation in the UnitedStates as a result of the government’s green signal for the launch oftourism-related spacecraft from New Mexico. European perspec-tives are much influenced by the decision of the European SpaceAgency (ESA), which is not to allow the launch of tourism-relatedspacecraft given the sensitivities involved (ESA, 2008). However,a study conducted in all 27 EU Member States (Eurobarometer,2009) revealed that 26% of respondents believe that the EUshould do more regarding space exploration while 38% thoughtthat it should perhaps put more emphasis on this sector; more than60% believed that the EU should increase or maintain the level ofbudgetary resources allocated to space activities; with 43% sup-porting the budget remaining unchanged; and 20% wanting thebudget to be increased. These findings indicate the need for moreattention to space-related activities in Europe.

Such scepticism also prevailed in the USA. NASA initially treatedthe idea of space tourismwith some disdain viewing, civilian spaceflights a waste of valuable time and research with obvious safetyhazards (Collins, 2003; Swarbrooke et al., 2003). However, recentlythey reviewed their policy on space tourism and recognised thehuge potential associated with the development of safe and rela-tively inexpensive space transportation. Griffin (2008), theAdministrator of NASA states that ‘a successful space tourismindustry would offer many synergistic opportunities for private-publicpartnerships’ and would generate new revenues for space agencies.Futron (2006) estimated that the sub-orbital space tourism busi-ness could generate 10,000 passengers by the year 2021 withrevenues of more than $650 million. Swarbrooke et al. (2003:330)stated that ‘the potential for big business is there - the race is on torealise that potential’. Companies such as Virgin Galactic and XCORAerospace are already into this race. In future, minor differences invehicle design, time duration in space might bring major compet-itive advantages for some of these companies. As Goehlich (2007)stated, space tourism flights have the potential to change thebalance in human space flight from the traditional higher publicfunding to private expenditures in the long-term. However, therealities of the industry exhibit that current launch capabilities areinadequate for space settlement as anticipated by some authors(e.g.: Lappas, 2006).

Therefore, the main problem for the commercial space tourismindustry is its limited ability to attract the private investmentneeded to lower the cost of access to space as well as to mobilisepublic and private sector support to increase the capacity toaccommodate commercial passengers in the space. George Neild,the Associate Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA), Department of the US Government commented that ‘the next2-3 years will be a critical time period for the U.S space program.During this period, we are likely to see the retirement of the spaceshuttles, demonstration of commercial cargo deliveries to theInternational Space Station and the start of commercial humanspace flight operations’ (Neild, 2009). For instance, Atlantis carrying3.5 tonnes of supplies to ISS made its final lift-off on 8 July 2011.Upon its return, the 30-year space shuttle programme will come toa close, with Atlantis and the other two shuttles retired tomuseums(BBC, 2011). The retirement of the Space Shuttle has considerablyreduced the chances for a space tourist to obtain the third seataboard Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Therefore, until the above goalsare met by government departments supporting commercialflights, space travel will have to be short trips affordable only by thewealthy. Researchers at the US Space Systems Design Laboratoryinvestigated the driving economic factors of space tourism markets

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e10 3

and launch vehicle characteristics that affect businesses enteringthe industry (Olds et al., 2005).

While the demographic characteristics of potential customerssuch as nationality, education, gender, age and the level of risk-taking behaviour play a significant role in influencing their spacetravel choices, the past studies reveal some commonalities anddifferences (e.g.: Collins et al., 1994; Laing & Chouch, 2004). Futron(2002) reported that space travel was perceived to be less riskythan activities such as mountain climbing and skydiving, and someof the adventure tourism activities are more expensive than spacetravel. For instance, expeditions to the Himalayas, especially to MtEverest, cost a total of almost $1million including guides andporters (Lappas, 2006:161) and trips to Antarctica and Amazon arealso activities on which people are prepared to spend more. Frompast market research reports on the expensive adventure activitiesit is also interesting to note that people are willing to pay a signif-icant amount of money to do something that no one (or) only a fewhave done before such as space travel.

The NSS (2009) argued that space tourism will attract potentialcustomers from two already existent markets: extreme sports fromwhich people seek the excitement of experiencing a new sensationof high acceleration and zero gravity, and wealthy leisure travellers.However, space tourism is not only about enjoyment for richpeople, it is also seen as a major step towards a large spacesettlement, a way to promote human expansion into space(Hopkins, 2008). Whatever the future projections may be, earlypredictions indicate that space tourism would attract tourists whoare interested in doing something new and unusual from theadventure tourism sphere as well as the established space-relatedinterests such as viewing Earth from the space (rather than forscientific purposes).

2.2. Factors that influence space travel and directions for futureresearch

There are ongoing debates on the motivation of space tourists,safety needs and preferences, technological issues and trainingneeds. Many topics need attention from tourism researchers as wellas air transport engineers. For instance, motivation theories havebeen successfully applied to explain tourist motivations in generaland, to a lesser extent, adventure tourism. However, there isa considerable need to clearly identify tourists’motivation for spacetravel. With the exception of seven people who have already trav-elled into space as tourists to date, there is no track record ofcommercial space tourism that might reveal potential consumermotivation, attitudes and behaviour (Crouch, 2001). Due to socio-demographic change, an active ageing population has emergedover the last few years. These so-called ‘new-tourists’ (Swarbrookeet al., 2003) are characterised by an increasing preference forescaping from everyday routine and a strong need for self-fulfilment and excitement.

As there is no specific typology of space tourists, a sensiblecorrelation regarding motivation and tourist behaviour could bemade with adventure tourists which seek to have self-directed,social, emotional, spiritual and intellectual needs that motivatethem to engage in an adventure experience (Radder, 2005). Otherassumptions that need some statistical backing are the actualaffordability of the potential space tourists as most studies on spacetourism do not consider the affordability of the samples selected forsurveys whereas ‘per capita’ income is seen as the most importantdeterminant of tourism demand (Martin and Witt, 1994 cited inBarrett, 1999). Based on a thorough analysis of reports and view-points of experts actively involved in space tourism, the authors ofthis paper propose ten research topics, which merit further inves-tigation if we are to better understand the space tourism industry:

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

1. Notion of ‘space tourist’: needs more agreement as debated byFAA and ESA officials who would prefer using the term ‘spacetravel participant’ rather than ‘space tourist’ considering thehuman risk factors and insurance issues involved. However,there seems to be no discrepancies in defining what is spacetourism and the ESA has defined space tourism as an activitythat will ‘encompass the execution of sub-orbital flights byprivately-funded and/or privately-operated vehicles and theassociated technology development driven by the space tourismmarket’ (ESA, 2008:19; Farand, 2009; RAS, 2009);

2. Actual demand: the real future demand (Crouch et al., 2009; Oldset al., 2005) for space tourism needs to be determined. Somecompanies preparing for space travel have conducted marketresearch but this is not available for public use. In addition toexploring the real demand and market share from developedcountries, it would be interesting to investigate the potentialmarket in the fast developing BRIC countries. For instance, thenumber of peoplewhomademore than amillion dollars in Indiagrewby14%at a rate faster than inUSAorUK (UNWTO, 2006). Asa result of successful Indian andChinese space explorations thesepotential millionaire tourists tend to be aware of space tourismopportunities. Areas to concentrate upon in terms of spacetourism demand and market are the demand across geographicregions and in specific countries, price fluctuations, marketingstrategies already in place and the actual growth of the industry;

3. Space tourism awareness: the common attitudes, interests andscientific knowledge level of the general public need to beinvestigated to analyse their opinions on the development ofspace tourism activities. The attitudes of the general publicwould be useful to influence the funding decisions of the publicsector bodies and governments. For instance, the amount ofqueries received by the ESA from various groups starting from2006 urge them to review their views on the legislations inplace for commercial launches from Europe;

4. Motivational inquiry: motivational concepts and theories(Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, pushepull factors, etc) have beenapplied to explain tourist’s motivation in the past (Cohen, 1974,1979; Crompton, 1979; Dann, 1977, 1981; Uysal, 1998, pp.79e94) but not as yet in relation to space tourism. To avoidunproven assumptions that space tourism may be linked toadventure tourism, in-depth research is needed to investigateand establish the motivational hypotheses;

5. Risk factor: risk is one of the significant variables in space tripsand there is aneed toexplore the roleof the risk factor (to identifyresilient markets for space tourism) and its influence on tourists’decisionmaking process. Neild (2009) stated that ‘over the last 20years, there have been 196 licensed launches, without any fatalitiesor property damage to the uninvolved public’. Therefore it alsobecomes necessary to enhance people’s awareness on the typesof spacecraft, safety measures and training provided to reducethe reluctances of the public about safety aspects;

6. Liability and insurance issues: difficulties in getting travelinsurance as a result of the assumption that greater risk isinvolved in space trips demands more information from thebanking and insurance sector as well as assurances from theprivate companies. Debates from the Aeronautical SocietyConference (RAS, 2009) confirm that the New Mexico author-ities, the FAA and the US Government will not be responsiblefor insurance issues arising from technical failures or accidents.Experts stress the point that the liability aspect is not fullycovered as well as there are uncertainties about role of regu-latory organisations, such as, the FAA. Wells (2009) raisedserious questions as ‘there is no doubt that accidents will occurand there is uncertainty today as to which rules govern liability inSpace Tourism activities’? Does (the) Air Law (Warsaw/Montreal

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e104

Conventions) or (the) Outer Space Law (OS treaties) apply?’Wellsalso commented that ‘insurance markets are preparing toaddress the needs of space tourism operatorse the earlier they arebriefed the better’ (Wells, 2009);

7. Health and training aspects: the implications of health aspects,psychological issues, sufficient training and training time frame(the willingness of space tourists to spend longer time intraining) need to be explored. In reality more information onthese aspects can be collected only when the industry picks upin a year or two. At present, ‘the Civil Aerospace Medical Institutehas issued Guidance for Medical Screening of Commercial Aero-space Passengers’ (Neild, 2009) to advise launch operators onthis issue;

8. Impacts of the EU legislature restrictions: the wider implicationsof the ESA legislature restrictions, ongoing operation relatedregulations of the ESA, their impact on European public atti-tudes towards space industry and the future of possibilities ofcommercial launches from the EU need to be researched.Farand (2009) and ESA (2008:24) stated the intention torecognise this activity initially ‘by helping provide the necessaryenvironment for this industry to flourish, for example by assistingin the setting up of legal frameworks for operation across Europe,involving civil aviation authorities and other relevant bodies indebate’. However, ESA permits to start commercial operationsfrom European bases may take a while though several Euro-pean companies are already actively involved in this industry;

9. Socio-economic benefits: Collins and Autino (2010) reviewedpossible economic growth, employment, cultural influencesand the possibilities of preserving peace in the world throughthe creation of the new space travel industry, some of whichrequire detailed examination. There are wider benefits toEurope and particularly to the Swedish spaceport locationsadjacent to Kiruna as the possibilities are bright for new hotelfacilities, roads and travel centres (Abrahamsson, 2009). Thereseems to be multiple streams of revenue and first-moveradvantage as commented by the President of the VirginGalactic (Whitehorn, 2009). Spacesport Scotland (2009) statedthe potential benefits that Lossiemouth and adjacent areas inScotland might receive. The Telegraph (2009) reported thatbringing Virgin Galactic from New Mexico to Britain ‘couldcreate up to 2000 jobs’ and it would also ‘spur greater interest inthe fast-growing space industry. Virgin wants the government toamend the 1986 Outer Space Act to allow it to launch space flightshere. The legislation makes it difficult to run such a service inBritain’. ESA has slowly started considering the growing socio-economic importance of this industry in Europe;

10. Carbon footprint of space tourism: though several authors havesought to calculate the carbon footprint of air transport (e.g.:Peeters, Williams, & Gossling, 2007), some early indications areneeded in relation to the possible carbon footprint of spacetourism activity. Laporte-Weywada (2009) argued that thereare plans to use Methane or Oxygen for commercial spacecraftand there will be less NOx and CO2 emissions. However, thereare concerns that space tourism activity might increase tour-ism’s total share of emissions to global warming. Collaborativeresearch between astronauts, aircraft engineers and climatol-ogists may be necessary to investigate this. The Head of theLaunchers and Exploration Legal Matters Office at the ESAstated that the studies funded by the ESA to evaluate thecredibility of emerging private ventures as well as to evaluatethe carbon footprint of the activity might shed some light onthese aspects (Farand, 2009).

In an attempt to address some of these research gaps, this paperexplores public opinion of residents of three cities in Southern

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

England on their motivations to travel to space and the key factorsinfluencing their decision-making process as well as the viewpointsof key informants actively connected to the global space tourismindustry.

3. Research methods, data collection and analysis

This study used both qualitative interviews with key industryinformants and a quantitative questionnaire for residents. Althoughsemi-structured interviews offer more flexibility in obtainingunrestricted viewpoints, for this study the researchers consideredthat a more efficient way to gather data was necessary andselected structured interviews as the preferred research tool.Interviews with industry experts were undertaken to determinethe supply side perspective of the potential space tourism market.It combines the flexibility of in-depth interviews with thecomparability of key questions (Finn, Elliott-Whire, & Walton,2000). The expert interview is a particular form of applyingstructured or semi-structured interviews (Meuser and Nagel, 2002cited in Flick, 2009) with a focus on a person’s capacity as anexpert in a certain area of activity and less interest in them as anindividual. The question arises of who should be seen as an expert,especially in a new field like space tourism. Deeke (1995 cited inFlick, 2009) stated that deciding who the experts are depends onthe issue of the research and the theoretical and analyticalapproaches applied. Consequently, experts are those persons ‘whoare particularly competent as authorities on a certain matter of facts’(Flick, 2009:165) and have ‘technical process oriented and inter-pretive knowledge referring to their specific professional sphere ofactivity’ (Bogner and Menz, 2002 cited in Flick, 2009, p.166).Moreover, the key informant interview suggested by Jankowicz(2005) refers to respondents who are chosen on the basis oftheir idiosyncratic, specialised knowledge and not randomly.Limited budget issues made it impossible to achieve face-to-faceinteraction between the interviewer and interviewees located indifferent parts of the UK, France and the USA; therefore, structuredinterviews through emails were carried out based on purposiveselection with key informants. Though the advantage offered byemail interview alleviated some time pressure of the interviewees,dealing with a new topic caused considerable difficulties inobtaining responses. Interviews by five key informants fromdifferent businesses linked to the space tourism industry wereselected for interpretation: the Assistant Vice President ofa leading bank in UK/Europe; a Manager and Aerospace Engineerfrom Airbus; Director of a leading Spaceport Consultancy; seniormanagers from the space flight companies Virgin Galactic andEADS Astrium.

The quantitative questionnaire survey was used to exploreinformation on the attitudes and perceptions regarding spacetourism among the British residents (n ¼ 164) in Southampton,Bournemouth and Poole areas in South, and South West England.The survey instrument was designed to gather both open-endedqualitative and closed-ended quantitative data to better under-stand the motivation and potential behaviour of potential spacetourists. Analysis of both methods offered the possibility ofchecking qualitative opinions (structured interviews) againstquantitative results and to also establish if they correlate (Flick,2009). The questionnaire design process also involved a thoroughreview of past studies (e.g.: Barrett, 1999; Crouch et al., 2009;Futron, 2002; Webber, 2009) as well as ongoing debates (e.g.:RAS, 2009) and appropriate variables were selected for the pilotsurvey. Non-probability convenience sampling strategy was chosenfor gathering the final quantitative data due to the limitedresources and time. One of the authors actively took part in thefieldwork and waited for its return but allowing the participant to

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e10 5

complete at their own pace. 164 fully-completed questionnaireswere gathered during 10 February 2010 and 12 March 2010.

The qualitative interview quotes taken from the structuredinterviews were used thematically to strengthen the quantitativefindings. In order to preserve their anonymity only the sectorsrepresented by the key informants are mentioned. The key infor-mant interview data was quantified using coding, which refers tothe process of organising the data into “chunks” by taking text data,segmenting sentences or paragraphs into categories or themes andthen labelling them with a term (Creswell, 2003). The codes werethen categorised before patterns were identified. The data fromquantitative questionnaires were analysed using SPSS and Excel,The outcomes of each analysis were then compared to determinesimilarities and differences. However, only findings related totourist motivational factors and decision-making process are pre-sented in this paper.

4. Key findings

The survey results reflect the attitudes and perceptions ofa sample of respondents from Southern England towards spacetourism. The results are outlined under headings, namely, spacetourism awareness and interest, motivation, key factors influencingcustomer decision to travel into space, perceived risk in spacetravel, safety issues in space tourism, and demand in the UK. Of the164 respondents, 53% were male and 47% female. However,according to the UK Census 2001 (ONS, 2010), the population isrepresented by 48.6%men and 51.4%women. Consequently, there isa variance of 4.4% compared to the overall gender ratio but it isunlikely to have a significant impact on the survey results. Thesample had a moderate group age representation related to bothmale and female groups, with most respondents (30%) agedbetween 35 and 50, a further 26% were under 25 years, thosebetween 25 and 34 were 23%, between 51 and 65 were 17%, andover 65’s were 4%.

4.1. Awareness, interest and reasons for not undertaking spacetravel

In terms of awareness, 51% of respondents mentioned that theyare aware of the idea of space tourism but only 22% of respondentsconsider space tourism experience as important or very important.39% of the respondents prefer to adopt a neutral position. Thesurvey proposed a hypothetical situation in which the respondentswere able to pay the cost of the trip and, thus, the affordabilityvariable was excluded as carried out in past studies. Fig. 1 attemptsto identify and present their willingness to travel into space.Combining the “likely” responses with the “very likely” responsesresulted, a total of 54% of respondents werewilling to participate inspace travel, confirming an interest in space tourism among theBritish people and a willingness to undertake space travel if they

Fig. 1. Willingness to undertake space tr

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

could afford it, which is not surprising. On the other hand, morethan a quarter (26%) of the respondents claimed that they areunlikely to participate in a space fight experience even though thecost would not be an issue.

Among those who claimed they are unlikely or not interested inundertaking space travel, three quarters (74%) werewomen (Fig. 1).Fig. 1 also gives the breakdown of different opinions of therespondents based on their age groups. It seems that women areless interested in space trips because they are more concernedabout safety and consider space travel is “too risky”.

Table 1 shows that “risk” is their primary reason for not beingwilling to travel into space, and represents 34% of total responses.Perceived risk seems to act as a hurdle for some people in thedecision-making process whilst for others it is something attrac-tive, something that they are actively searching for (Dickson &Dolnicar, 2004). As a result, in space tourism, the concept of riskis central to tourism behaviour. Uncertain buying goals or purchaserewards; predictions of positive or negative consequences orfinancial considerations (Moutinho, 1980) are sources of perceivedrisk, which could also influence the potential space tourismdemand. Around 33% of the respondents consider that there are“enough destinations to see on Earth” and they are not interested inspace. This reflects the fact that there are considerable numbers ofpeople for whom space holds no attraction at all. The third reason isrelated to “environmental concern” but it seems to be less impor-tant as only 9% of the respondents mentioned it.

Some of the respondent quotes (from the open-ended questionspresented in the quantitative survey) show their unwillingness toundertake space travel: “I am concerned about the environmentalimpact” (female respondent, aged 25e34); “Apart from the view Idon’t see what other value could be added to the experience” (malerespondent, aged 35e50); “I have no interest in going to space.”(Male respondent, aged 35e50); “Plenty to see here on Earth.”(Female respondent, aged above 65); “Not keen on flying, too risky.”(Male respondent, aged 25e34); “I think it would be generally boringwith occasional excitement” (Female respondent, aged 51e65); “Itdoesn’t appeal to me as a major step for human race.” (Malerespondent, aged 35e50).

Given that it is also possible that lack of knowledge about spacetourism makes some respondents declare that they are not inter-ested in space tourism. Provision of information and a targetedmarket campaign might change their opinion in future.

4.2. Space tourism motivation

For a clear representation the 5-point Likert scale used in thesurveywas reduced to a scale of 1 to3 (very important; important andless important) by combining the “most important” with “veryimportant”, and “less important” with “the least important”. Theresults are illustrated in Fig. 2, which shows the overall respondentrating for themotivational variables. Over 66% of survey respondents

avel vs. Respondent gender and age.

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

Table 1Unwillingness to undertake space travel vs. gender.

Gender If you are not that interested in a space trip, what is the reason?

Toorisky

Healthproblems

Enoughdestinations tosee on earth

Environmentalconcern

Other Total

Female 30.00% 2.90% 17.10% 5.70% 10.00% 65.70%Male 4.30% 4.30% 15.70% 2.90% 7.10% 34.30%Total 34.30% 7.10% 32.90% 8.60% 17.10% 100.00%

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e106

rated ‘vision of Earth from space’ as the very important reason forundertaking space trip. This result is supported by previous studiesthat claimed that the most important motivation for people to go tospace is the fascinating view of Earth from space. Futron (2002)revealed that 63% of the US respondents declared viewing Earthfromspacewas the biggest attraction for sub-orbital space tourism. Adecade before Barrett (1999) confirmed that viewing earth andlooking deeper into space represent the key motivations for UKresidents to take the trip.

Many astronauts have declared that viewing Earth from space asthe most magnificent experience they ever had (Spencer, 2004).Personal communication of one the authors with Richard Garriott,the second-generation space traveller as well as the only persontravelled to space on both the American Space Shuttle, and RussianSoyuz, also confirmed the value of the experience of viewing theearth from space. ‘People enjoy the emotional appeal of the limitlessspace frontier’ a key informant from the aerospace industry alsopointed out. Thus, people’s need for exploration and the thought ofimagery represent the most important motives for space tourism,which is the push factor, the so-called Ulysses factor (Anderson,1970 cited in Mayo & Jarvis, 1981). The next very important reasonfor going to space is the weightlessness or experiencing zerogravity, which received 44% of the responses, followed by theunusual nature of the experience (43%). These two reasons seem tomeet the need for a challenging and fun experience, which repre-sents the attractiveness of any adventure travel that entices tourists(Hall, 1992 cited in Fluker, 2005). The high speed experience ispreferred by only 26% of the respondents perhaps related to safetyconcerns. ‘Scientific contribution’ does not play an important rolein respondent motivations to undertake space travel.

An investigation of what key informants in the space tourismindustry consider to be the reasons for space travel revealed thatthe most important reasons for space tourism stated by quantita-tive survey respondents correlates with their answers. The keyinformant from EADS Astrium mentioned: “for some at the begin-ning: pride, demonstration of courage or of ability to perform leadingedge activities. For most (others), it is (the) discovery of new areas

Fig. 2. Reasons for space travel.

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

(Going to Space, seeing earth from space), (and) of new sensations(weightlessness)”. Therefore, there are two aspects related to spacetourismmotivationwere reflected. Firstly, there is themotivation todo something that only a few have done before and, thus, to be thefirst private astronauts (the pioneering aspect) and, secondly, theexperience of space flight, which includes the view of Earth fromspace, weightlessness and the excitement of high speed sensations.Table 2 shows the mean values for the motivational variables. It isevident that “vision of Earth from space” is the most importantreason with a mean of 2.08, followed by “unusual experience”(mean 2.72) and “weightlessness” (mean 2.74). “High speed expe-rience” is rated as the fourth reason (mean 3.37) and the leastimportant is “scientific contribution” (mean 3.92).

For the interviewees space travel represents an exceptionaladventure, “a thrilling once in a lifetime experience”, according to thekey informant from the banking sector (the Assistant Vice Presidentof a leading bank in UK/Europe). It was also suggested that spacetourismwill improve environmental awareness and understandingof Earth and the Universe. This was mentioned by three keyinformants: “there is a potential for more awareness of the environ-ment and humanity” (respondent from Airbus); “better perception ofEarth’s fragility, better awareness of environmental problems”(respondent from EADS Astrium); or “enhancement in faith,compassion and environmental concern” (interviewee from thebanking sector). This aspect is also pointed out by one of theprevious seven space tourists’, who mentioned that: “You’re outthere in space looking back at your life, yourself, your accomplish-ments. Thinking about everything you own, love or care for, andeverything else that happens around the world. Thinking (the) biggerpicture. Thinking in a more global fashion” (Ansari, 2009 cited inFisher, 2009:69). However, all these viewpoints do not actuallyreflect the long-term goal of possible human settlement in space towhich many astronauts and policy makers at space agencies aspire.

4.3. Key factors influencing space travel decision-making

Two factors influencing people’s motivation to undertake spacetravel are the socio-psychological motives to travel to space (pushfactors) and specific attributes or characteristics of the product(pull factors). Specific attributes of the space tourism product alsoseem to have considerable influence on a customer’s decision toundertake space travel. The factors that seem to affect people’sdecision-making process, as stated by key informants include, a)type of experience (orbital vs. sub-orbital space travel); b) healthand training requirements; c) safety issues; d) type of launch anddesign of the spacecraft (e.g.: number of window seats); e) numberof passengers onboard; f) reputation of the operating company; g)location of spaceports; f) reliability statistics; and h) environmentalcredentials.

Survey results demonstrate, the most important aspect in thedecision-making process is related to risk as about 27% of respon-dents claimed that safety is the key factor that will mainly influencetheir decision to travel into space (Fig. 3). The training required isthe next important aspect as around 20% of respondents refer to

Table 2Descriptive statistics: Motivational factors for space tourism.

Motivational variables N Mean Std. deviation

Vision of earth from space 156 2.08 1.26Weightlessness 156 2.74 1.17High speed experience 156 3.37 1.26Unusual experience 156 2.72 1.268Scientific contribution 156 3.92 1.4Valid N (listwise) 156

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

Fig. 3. Key factors which influence tourists’ decisions to undertake space travel.Fig. 5. Participation in risky activities.

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e10 7

this.When asked about themaximumperiod of time theywould bewilling to take part in training, 47% of respondents mentioned astwo weeks to one month (Fig. 4), which is similar to the trainingscheme planned by some operators. One of the Administrators ofthe FAA commented that “an operator must train each space flightparticipant before the flight on how to respond to emergency situa-tions, including, smoke, fire, loss of cabin pressure, and emergencyegress” (Neild, 2009). This also indicates that appropriate traininglessons and rehearsals for a passenger who has never been to spacewould require two to four weeks. However, operators such as VirginGalactic require only 3 days of pre-flight preparation for sub-orbitaltravel which raises questions about the viability of the training andtheir effectiveness in a likely event of an accident in space. Thelength of training may vary between operators and will depend onthe specific needs of their vehicle, mission architecture and on legalregulations (Seedhouse, 2008).

Training programmes are an integral part of the space tourismexperience aimed to prepare the tourist for the space flight but alsoplaying a significant role in people’s decision to undertake spacetravel. The training programmes are already in place for orbitalspace travel, for instance, the Russian training programme (Fisher,2009; Swarbrooke et al., 2003). For sub-orbital flights, trainingprogrammes are still in the developmental stage, as the inter-viewee from Airbus stated, “They will, however, evolve to include notjust the minimum necessary training and fun, but other activities”.Other factors such as a company’s reputation and duration of spacetravel experience are also important for 12% and 11% of the Britishrespondents respectively (Fig. 3). It is apparent that people areaware of the fact that companies like Virgin Galactic cannot affordto damage their name by having a significant failure, which wouldaffect not only their space business but the entire space tourismindustry.

4.4. Perception of risk and participation in risky activities

A vast majority of the respondents (Fig. 5) claimed that they hadparticipated in at least one extreme sport which shows similaritywith research conducted by others (e.g.: Webber, 2009). The mostpopular activity among 27% of the respondents was skiing and

Fig. 4. Availability to take part in training.

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

snowboarding. In addition, skydiving, mountain climbing andbungee jumping were extreme sports considered to have a higherlevel of risk, and received 13%,16% and 9% of responses respectively.These variables were selected to allow comparison with the resultsof similar studies conducted in other countries (e.g.: Fluker, 2005;Futron, 2002; Webber, 2009).

In addition to Fig. 5, a cross tabulation was carried out betweentheir participation in risky activities and key factors influencingtourists’ decisions to undertake space travel, which revealed thatpeople’s risk-taking behaviour has a direct impact on their appre-ciation of different factors related to space travel. For instance,many bungee jumping participants considered the trainingrequired as the key factor in their decision to travel to space whilea company’s reputation seemed to influence most of the sailors andmountain climbing participants. Insurance costs and accommoda-tion facilities in space are the least important factors, especially forsailing/boating participants. However, it is evident that for manyextreme sports participants the safety aspect plays the mostimportant role in their decision to undertake space travel.

Risk is considered to be a multidimensional phenomenon withinfluence on individual perception (Fluker, 2005; Webber, 2009).Factors such as the level of voluntary choice to accept or reject therisk or level of familiarity that people may have with the activityalso impact upon their perception of risk. Futron (2002) askedrespondents to rate five activities in the order of risk significance toexplore US respondents’ perception of risk. In this study half ofrespondents rated space travel as the most risky activity (Fig. 6).

Although for some of the respondents the risk involved in spacetravel does not seem to be an impediment at all and theywould liketo travel as soon as space flights are available and thus, they mightlike the risks of flying on new spacecrafts that nobody has everflown on before (9%). Risk-taking and danger are sought bymany ofthe respondents who would prefer to wait until space travelbecomes safer. Some 15% of respondents would travel in less than 5years after the first commercial space flight, 18% between 5 and 10years after, and 43% consider that this is something that theywill dosometime during their lifetime (Fig. 7).

In responding to a question seeking to determine how enthu-siastic the respondents were to become space tourists given thatrisk that is inherent and that personal medical problems can be

Fig. 6. Respondent perception of the most risky leisure activity.

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

Fig. 7. Availability to go into space.

30.49%

18.29% 18.29%

25.00%

7.93%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

notenthusiastic

slightlyenthusiastic

neutral enthusiastic veryenthusiastic

Percentage

Fig. 9. Willingness to participate in space travel after suggesting possible medicalproblems.

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e108

a further hurdles to their participation, 29% (Fig. 8), and 30% (Fig. 9)of the respondents claimed that they were not enthusiastic toparticipate in a space trip.

Compared to the earlier finding on ‘willingness to undertakespace travel’ (see Fig. 1), there is some difference (almost 5%) intheir likelihood of taking a space fight after realising the riskinvolved, similar to Futron (2002). It seems that their behaviour isimpacted negatively to the perception of increased risk or safetyconcerns. Perception to risk is a very individual characteristic(Dickson & Dolnicar, 2004), individuals are very receptive tochanges in risk perception and they tend to react easily to anysuggestions related to the risk involved and/or medical problems(Figs. 8 and 9). A detailed survey in future with a list of potentialrisks and the measures that are in place to reduce them mightchange risk perceptions related to space travel and help potentialspace tourists to moderate the risk they perceive to be associatedwith space travel.

4.5. Safety issues in space tourism

With regard to the significance of safety measures, all the keyindustrial informants claimed that safety is extremely importantfor the long-term development of the industry. However, spacetravel is, by definition, a risky activity, as the key informant fromSpaceport Associates mentioned: “Space is risky. There are noguarantees, and the US Government insists on space tourists signing anindemnification before they can fly. USG also insists that all tourists arefully informed of the risks”. Besides the regrettable disasters of the“Challenger” (1986) and “Columbia” (2003) space missions, theyare a reminder that people can lose their life searching for the spaceexperience. The industry has to consider high safety levels to makethis activity safe enough to constantly attract people and preventaccidents which can bring the industry to a halt like the case of the

29.27%

14.63%

19.51%

25.61%

10.98%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

notenthusiastic

slightlyenthusiastic

neutral enthusiastic veryenthusiastic

Percentage

Fig. 8. Willingness to participate in space travel after suggesting the risk involved.

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

Concorde crash in Paris, as mentioned by the key informant fromthe banking sector. Furthermore, another interviewee from Airbusnoted: “The industry should be targeting safety levels similar to orbetter than parachuting (1 death per 60,000 jumps). Safety is depen-dent upon the vehicle and flight test program which will includehundreds of flights prior to commercial passenger service”. Never-theless, risk plays a central role in space tourists’ behaviour asreinstated by the key informants. At the beginning, “for some [.]risk adds to the excitement” (Virgin Galactic) whilst, for others, itrepresents more of an impediment because of “lack of insurancecover and/or dangerous experience” (Assistant Vice President ofa leading UK/European bank). These reinstate that in the long-termthe space tourism industry needs to provide an acceptable level ofsafety in order to be successful.

4.6. Space tourism demand in the UK

Space tourism seems to attract individuals with highadrenaline-driven appetites who accept taking risks to obtain theirpersonal rewards. The interviewees indicated that “wealthy retiredentrepreneurs who partake in high adrenaline sports experiences”(respondent from the banking sector) or the middle age “self-starters who have their own businesses and are very successful in theirown areas” (respondent from Virgin Galactic) are the type of peoplewith the financial affordability to become private space explorers.These appreciations are supported by the survey results since themajority of the British respondents considered that wealthy (54%)and/or adventurous people (12%) are the target market for spacetourism industry in the UK.

It appears that certain personality traits like the geneticpredisposition to “novelty seeking” (Hamer and Copeland, 1998cited in Dickson & Dolnicar, 2004) or “sensation seeking” (Zucker-man, 1994 cited in Hansen & Breivik, 2001), make the first spacetourists push the barrier and enjoy space adventure. These “superheroes” ready to travel in “prototype like vehicles”, as noted by theinterviewee from EADS Astrium that will make the difference andwill stimulate the interest in space travel for many people to follow.Though there are launch related ESA restrictions (ESA, 2008;Farand, 2009), given the considerable role of some of the Britishcompanies, such as, Virgin Galactic, ExcaliburAlmaz, ReactionEngines, and Bristol Spaceplanes, the potential UK market for spacetravel has to be considered in forecasting future demand. As statedby the interviewee fromVirgin Galactic, globally there are ‘currently650,000 individuals’willing to experience sub-orbital flight with the

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e10 9

financial capacity to afford and that a considerable number of themare from Britain.

On the other hand, as stipulated by the interviewees, there arealso concerns in relation to the global space tourism industry,which refers to possible over-regulation by government authoritiesor, on the contrary, the development of unsafe vehicles that willslow down its growth. The concerns related to export controls dueto sensitive technology or the development of a viable orbitalspacecraft were also reflected. Overall, the interviewees’ optimismregarding the future of the space tourism industry is promising,showing that the industry is steadily progressing year after year. AsLappas (2006, p.164) stated, “space tourism is bound to expand in thenear future. Although space hotels and mass media access are stilla dream, the first steps towards making space tourism a reality havealready been taken”. Such a viewpoint was confirmed by all theinterviewees and Virgin Galactic has plans for operating hotels andhandling cargos in space through its forthcoming projects, namely,Virgin Galactic Science Services, Virgin Galactic Cargo, and VirginGalactic World Travel (Whitehorn, 2009).

5. Conclusion

In an attempt to investigate some the ten research dimensionsproposed earlier, this paper has demonstrated the current under-standing of space tourists’ motivations and risk perceptions in theUK. In summary, people’s need for unique, challenging and funexperiences drives the demand for space tourism. The reasons fortravel, accessibility of the destination, and the level of informationon them affect the relationship between motivations (push factors)and attributes of the destination (pull factors) (Uysal, 1998, pp.79e94) as the interaction between supply and demand is essentialfor the travel experience to take place. The reputation of theoperating company plays an important role in people’s decision toundertake space travel, as stated by 12% of survey participants. Forinstance, the use of the Virgin brand seems to act as a guarantee fora successful business. Space appears to be the next natural step insatisfying people’s need for exploration, adventure and newrecreation activities. It can be said that the experience of viewingEarth and the blackness of space represents the most desirableelement in people’s motivation to travel into space. This makesspace travel a unique and breathtaking experience; as Shuttle-worth, one of the seven space tourists to date mentioned: “It’s verystunning, very space, and very cool” (Fisher, 2009).

As discussed earlier, two aspects in particular have to be takeninto consideration when explaining space tourism motivation. First,there is the pioneering aspect, which motivated the first privatespace explorers to push the barrier and experience something thatonly astronauts have done before and, secondly, it is the space flightexperience which attracts many people with all the excitement anduniqueness. Now the industry is making an effort to develop anorbital spacecraft which will surpass the one-passenger-at-a-timeoffer of Soyuz spacecraft. Perhaps, the Space X Dragon has the bestchance to succeed but no sooner than 2016 (as commented by theinterviewee from Spaceport Associates). Risk does represent the corepart of the space travel participants’ concerns and is perhaps themost challenging issue faced by the global space tourism industrythough there are not many accidents in the recent past as stated bythe Associate Administrator of the FAA (Neild, 2009).

Survey results indicate that many British residents are aware ofthe idea of space tourism, regard space tourism development as animportant development but it is also essential that more campaignsare needed to stimulate the interests of others. Willingness toundertake space travel differs based on the UK respondent’sgender; women seem to have less interest. It has been establishedthat women play a significant role in the family and couple holiday

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

decision-making process and for instance, the cruise industry usesintensive marketing campaigns focused on catching the attentionof women to increase the demand (Spencer, 2004). It would be alsointeresting to discover whether there is a significant differencebetween generations regarding perceptions, attitudes and will-ingness to undertake space tourism; for example, Generation Y,which is reaching adulthood vs. Generation X or Baby Boomers(Benckendorff et al., 2010; Cooper, 2008).

The actual affordability is still considered the most importantaspect of space tourism demand. Therefore, efforts should be madein future to survey wealthy British residents living in UK’s richestpostcodes who could actually afford the price of a space trip toreveal their perceptions and their actual willingness to undertakespace travel. Investigating specific aspects related to sub-orbital/orbital space travel is necessary to reveal to what extent specificproduct characteristics influence choice behaviour and implicittravel decisions. However, these will take few more yearsdepending upon the knowledge level of the respondents.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers andDr Jonathan Edwards (BU) for their helpful comments.

Appendix. Supplementary data

Supplementary data related to this article can be found online atdoi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.11.026.

References

Abrahamsson, M. (2009). Spaceport Sweden: work in progress towards thecomplete spaceport. In: Paper presented at the royal aeronautical societyconference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry in the Making’ (30 June), London.

Ashford, D. (2007). New commercial opportunities in space. The Aeronautical Jour-nal, 111(1116), 61e75. http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/new_opportunities_in_commercial_space.shtml Accessed 12.10.09.

Barrett, O. (1999). An evaluation of the potential demand for space tourism within theUnited Kingdom. Unpublished Report, Bournemouth University, Dorset, England.http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/an_evaluation_of_the_potential_demand_for_space_tourism_within_the_united_kingdom.shtml. Accessed12.10.09.

BBC. (2011). Space shuttle Atlantis in historic final lift-off. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-14077893 Accessed 11 July 2011.

Benckendorff, P. J., Moscardo, G., & Prendergast, D. (Eds.). (2010). Tourism andgeneration Y. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.

Cater, C. I. (2010). Steps to space: opportunities for astrotourism. Tourism Manage-ment, 31, 838e845.

Cohen, E. (1974). Who is a tourist? A conceptual clarification. Sociological Review, 22,527e555.

Cohen, E. (1979). A phenomenology of tourist experiences. Sociology, 13, 179e201.Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research,

6, 408e424.Collins, P. (2003). Space tourism market demand and the transportation infra-

structure. In: AIAA/ICAS symposium “The Next 100 Years” in honour of the WrightBrothers’ first flight, July 17, Dayton Ohio. http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/space_tourism_market_demand_and_the_transportation_infrastructure.shtml.Accessed 15.10.09.

Collins, P., & Autino, A. (2010). What the growth of a space tourism industry couldcontribute to employment, economic growth, environmental protection,education, culture and world peace. Acta Astronautica, 66, 1553e1562.

Collins, P., Iwasaki, Y., Kanayama, H., & Ohnuki, M. (1994). Commercial implicationsof market research on space tourism. Journal of Space Technology and Science,10(2), 3e11.

Collins, P., Stockmans, R., & Maita, M. (1995). Demand for space tourism in Americaand Japan, and its implications for future space activities. Sixth InternationalConference of Pacific-Basin Societies, Marina del Rey, California. Advances in theAstronautical Sciences, 91, 601e610.

Cooper, C. (2008). The future of tourism. In C. Cooper, J. Fletcher, A. Fyall, D. Gilbert,& S. Wanhill (Eds.), Tourism principles and practice (4th ed.). Harlow: PearsonEducation Limited.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methodsapproaches (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Crouch, G. I. (2001). The market for space tourism: early indications. Journal ofTravel Research, 40(11), 213e219.

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026

M.V. Reddy et al. / Tourism Management xxx (2012) 1e1010

Crouch, G. I., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Islam, T. (2009). Modelling consumerchoice behaviour in space tourism. Tourism Management, 30, 441e454.

Dann, G. M. S. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of TourismResearch, IV(4), 184e194.

Dann, G. M. S. (1981). Tourist motivation: an appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research, 8,187e219.

Dickson, T., & Dolnicar, S. (2004). No risk, no fun: the role of perceived risk in adventuretourism. In: Proceedings of the 13th international research conference of the council ofAustralian university tourism and hospitality education (CAUTHE 2004). http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article¼1256&context¼commpapers Accessed23.09.09.

Duval, D. T. (2005). Space tourism. small steps, giant leaps: space as the destinationof the future. In M. Novelli (Ed.), Niche tourism. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Eurobarometer. (2009). Space activities of the European Union. Flash EurobarometerSeries 272. Survey conducted by the Gallup Organisation. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newsroom/cf/itemlongdetail.cfm?item_id¼3749 Accessed 28.10.09..

European Space Agency ESA. (2008). Space tourism: ESA’s view on private subor-bital spaceflights. ESA Bulletin, 135, Paris: ESA Institutional Matters and StrategicStudies Office. http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bulletin135/bul135c_galvez.pdf Accessed 10.08.2010.

Excell, J. (2009). Space tourism. Open space. The Engineer Online, 13 July. http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/312243/Openþspace.htm Accessed 14.10.09.

Farand, A. (2009). ESA’s view on private suborbital spaceflights. In: Paper presentedat the royal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry inthe Making (30 June), London.

Finn, M., Elliott-Whire, M., & Walton, M. (2000). Tourism & leisure research methods.Harlow: Longman.

Fisher, A. (2009). Oral history. “Very stunning, very space, and very cool.” Thelaunch of space tourism. Technology Review, January/February 2009 [online].http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid¼8&hid¼102&sid¼5f9aa8f3-4e1e-4038-874a-ef5715ad7959%40sessionmgr11 Accessed 06.08.09.

Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). London: SAGEPublications Ltd.

Fluker, M. (2005). Perceived risk in adventure tourism. Ph.D. thesis. Victoria Univer-sity. http://eprints.vu.edu.au/1480 Accessed 04.08.09.

Futron. (2002). Space tourism market study orbital space travel & destinations withsuborbital space travel. Futron Corporation. http://www.futron.com/pdf/resource_center/white_papers/SpaceTourismMarketStudy.pdf Accessed12.10.09.

Futron. (2006). Suborbital space tourism demand revisited. Futron Corporation.http://www.futron.com/pdf/resource_center/white_papers/SpaceTourismRevisited.pdf Accessed 21.10.09.

Globus, A. (2008). Space tourism leads to space settlement. The National SpaceSociety. http://www.nss.org/tourism/settlement.htm Accessed 12.10.09.

Goehlich, R. A. (2007). Long-term perspectives in the tourism industry. Spacetourism. In R. Conrady, & M. Buck (Eds.), Trends and issues in global tourism 2007.Berlin: Springer.

Griffin, M. D. (2008). Risk and rewards in commercial space. National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA) Lunar Lander Challenge Recognition Ceremony. 5,December. http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/295733main_Risks-and-Rewards-in-Commercial-Space-5-Dec-08.pdf Accessed 13.10.09.

Hansen, E. B., & Breivik, G. (2001). Sensation seeking as a predictor of positive andnegative risk behaviour among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differ-ence, 30(4), 627e640.

Hopkins, M. (2008). The space movement. Space settlement and space tourism: An ideo-logical marriage. National Space Society. http://www.nss.org/spacemovement/tourism.html Accessed 12.10.09.

Jankowicz, A. D. (2005). Business research projects (4th ed.). London: ThomsonLearning.

Ker Than. (2009). Virgin galactic unveils first tourist spaceship. National GeographicNews, December, 8. [online]. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091208-virgin-galactic-spaceship-enterprise-branson.html Accessed15.03.10.

Please cite this article in press as: Reddy, M. V., et al., Space tourism: Reseaof potential participants, Tourism Management (2012), doi:10.1016/j.tourm

Laing, J., & Chouch, G. I. (2004). Vacationing in space: tourism seeks “New Skies”. InT. V. Singh (Ed.), New horizons in tourism: Strange experiences and strangerpractices. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.

Lappas, V. (2006). Space tourism. In D. Buhalis, & C. Costa (Eds.), Tourism businessfrontiers. Consumers, products and industry. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Laporte-Weywada, H. (2009). Astrium space tourism project. In: Paper presented atthe royal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry in theMaking’ (30 June), London.

Mayo, E. J., & Jarvis, L. P. (1981). The psychology of leisure travel. Effective marketingand selling of travel services. Boston: CBI Publishing Company.

Moutinho, L. (1980). Consumer behaviour in tourism. European Journal of Marketing,21(10), 5e44.

Neild, G. C. (2009) Space tourism: the government’s role. In: Paper presented at theroyal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry in theMaking’ (30 June), London.

National Space Society NSS. (2009). Space tourism: Opening the space economy.National Space Society. Positional Paper on Space Tourism. http://www.nss.org/tourism/position.html Accessed 12.10.09.

Olds, J. R., McCormick, D., Charania, A., & Marcus, L. (2005). Space tourism: makingit work for fun and profit. Journal of British Interplanetary Society, 58, 241e256.

Office for National Statistics ONS. (2010). Census 2001 UK results [online]. UK: Officefor National Statistics. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/pop2001/united_kingdom.asp Accessed 29.03.10.

Peeters, P., Williams, V., & Gossling, S. (2007). Air transport greenhouse gas emis-sions. In P. Peeters (Ed.), Tourism and climate change mitigation: Methods,greenhouse gas reductions and policies. Breda: NHTV Academic Series 6.

Peeters, W. (2010). From suborbital space tourism to commercial personal space-flight. Acta Astronautica, 66, 1625e1632.

Radder, L. (2005). Motives of international trophy hunters. Annals of TourismResearch, 32(4), 1141e1144.

Royal Aeronautic Society RAS. (2009). Space tourism: a new industry in the making.Royal aeronautic society conference, (30 June) London.

Seedhouse, E. (2008). Tourist in space. A practical guide. Chichester: PraxisPublishing Ltd.

Shkolyar, S. (2009). Reaching for the stars. Engineering & Technology76e79, 14March e 03 April 2009. www.theiet.org/magazine Accessed 12.10.09..

Spacesport Scotland. (2009). ‘Lossiemouth, we have liftoff! Opportunities asa consequence of the development of a spaceport. In: Paper presented at theroyal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry in theMaking’ (30 June), London.

Spencer, J. (2004). Space tourism. Do you want to go? Burlington: Apogee BooksPublication.

Swarbrooke, J., Beard, C., Leckie, S., & Pomfret, G. (2003). Adventure tourism. The newfrontier. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Telegraph. (2009). Virgin’s Scottish space dream. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6888845.ece Accessed10.08.2010.

Uysal, M. (1998). Part B: The demand side: The determinants of tourism demand.Economic geography of the tourist industry.

Virgin Galactic. (2011). SpaceShipTwo’s first “Feathered” flight. http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/spaceshiptwos-first-feathered-flight/ Accessed28.06.2011.

Webber, D. (2009). Risking space in the next 50 years e perspectives for spacetourism. Spaceport Associates, [online]. http://www.spaceportassociates.com/pdf/ISDC2007.pdf Accessed 20.10.09.

Wells, C. (2009). Space tourism: an insurance perspective. In: Paper presented at theroyal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A New Industry in theMaking’ (30 June), London.

Whitehorn, W. (2009). Space tourism: a new industry in the making. In: Paperpresented at the royal aeronautical society conference on ‘Space Tourism: A NewIndustry in the Making’ (30 June), London.

United Nations World Tourism Organisation UNWTO. (2006). India: The Asia and thePacific intra-regional outbound series. Madrid: World Tourism Organisation.

rch recommendations for the future of the industry and perspectivesan.2011.11.026