Tourism is a cornerstone of the Greek economy, contributing nearly 25% of national GDP and providing employment for over 800,000 people ( Skordoulis et al., 2024a, 2024b ; National Bank of Greece, 2025 ; Matsali et al., 2025 ). However, this critical sector is acutely vulnerable to climate change impacts, including rising temperatures, extreme heatwaves, sea-level rise, and increasing water scarcity, particularly in island destinations such as Crete, Santorini, and Rhodes ( Streimikiene & Kyriakopoulos, 2024 ). Among tourism subsectors, hotels represent both a significant economic driver and a major source of emissions and resource consumption, notably through energy-intensive operations, transportation linkages, and water use ( ETC, 2019 ).

As part of the European Union’s climate objectives and Greece’s National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), tourism operators are expected to align with broader mitigation targets, including a 55% reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by 2030. However, empirical studies focused specifically on mitigation efforts within the Greek hotel industry remain scarce, particularly in relation to how these businesses perceive, plan for, and act upon climate risks.

Recent studies emphasize that the Mediterranean region is warming 20% faster than the global average, with profound implications for tourism infrastructure and demand ( Cramer et al., 2018 ). In Greece, 2023 marked one of the hottest summers on record, with multiple heatwave events exceeding 40°C, affecting both tourist comfort and safety ( Diakakis et al., 2017 ; Molina-Terrén et al., 2019 ). Such events have not only short-term effects, such as reduced visitor numbers, but also long-term consequences, including increased operational costs for cooling, greater stress on water resources, and damage to infrastructure ( Papathoma-Köhle et al., 2022 ).

The literature highlights the critical role of financial and technical capacity in shaping climate strategies in tourism enterprises. Smaller tourism firms, such as family-owned hotels, often lack access to capital, technical expertise, and policy incentives needed to transition towards low-carbon and climate-resilient operations. This aligns with our survey data, where financial constraints were cited by 76% of hotels as a barrier to mitigation implementation. The role of public subsidies and EU green transition funding is repeatedly emphasized as a determinant of success in Southern Europe ( Farid et al., 2016 ; Skordoulis et al., 2022 ), yet our analysis suggests that such mechanisms are underutilized in Greece.

Another critical theme in the literature concerns the behavioral and risk-perception dimensions of climate action in tourism. Studies by Lorenzoni et al. (2007) and more recently by Haywood (2020) suggest that direct experience with climate-related disasters often acts as a “wake-up call” for tourism enterprises.

Finally, the existing literature underscores the opportunity for co-benefits when firms adopt mitigation strategies for different types of crises ( Christopoulos et al., 2021 ; Katsampoxakis et al., 2022 ). Energy improvements and renewable energy deployment can reduce operational costs, improve brand reputation, and attract environmentally conscious visitors ( Skordoulis et al., 2020a ; Ntanos et al., 2019 ; Thapa et al., 2024 ). Similarly, water conservation measures, such as greywater recycling and desalination powered by renewable energy, are increasingly critical in island contexts facing acute water shortages ( Bohdanowicz & Martinac, 2007 ).

This study aims to fill that gap by analyzing empirical data collected from a sample of hotel companies across Greece. We investigate the extent to which these firms implement mitigation strategies, identify the main barriers they face, and examine whether organizational characteristics (such as size and location) influence climate action. By combining original data with existing literature, the study offers a comprehensive assessment of climate risk governance in the Greek hotel sector.

This study offers an empirical examination of climate risk mitigation strategies among hotel companies in Greece, providing insight into both their actions and constraints. The findings show that while over half (52%) of hotels have adopted a formal mitigation strategy, implementation remains uneven across specific practices: only 43% use renewable energy, 39% invest in green transport, and 30% conduct carbon audits. This indicates a gap between strategic intention and operational execution.

Financial and informational barriers emerged as dominant challenges. Three-quarters (76%) of hotel operators identified lack of funding as a major obstacle, consistent with previous research on Southern European tourism enterprises, which often face limited access to credit and subsidies for sustainability investments ( Streimikiene & Kyriakopoulos, 2024 ; Sarafidis et al., 2024 ). Similarly, lack of technical expertise (52%) hampers effective planning and deployment of energy or water-saving technologies.

Notably, this study also revealed a statistically notable link between past disaster exposure and willingness to insure against climate risks. Among hotels that had previously suffered from climate-related disruptions (e.g., wildfires, water shortages, coastal erosion), 60% were willing to pay for private insurance, compared to only 40% of those without prior experience. This finding is consistent with broader behavioral and policy studies suggesting that personal exposure significantly influences risk perception and adaptive motivation ( Lorenzoni et al., 2007 ; Kalogiannidis et al., 2023 ).

The relatively low uptake of high-effort mitigation measures, such as carbon audits or renewable energy systems, reflects both structural and perceptual barriers in the Greek hospitality sector ( Ntanos et al., 2018b ). Compared to Northern European counterparts (e.g., Austria, Germany, and Denmark), where tourism enterprises are often embedded in sustainability certification ecosystems and benefit from strong policy alignment ( ETC, 2019 ), Greek hotels operate in a more fragmented and underregulated climate governance environment ( Drosos & Skordoulis, 2018 ; National Bank of Greece, 2025 ).

The finding that large hotels reported 0% engagement in carbon audits is counterintuitive, particularly given their greater capacity for sustainability initiatives. One possible explanation lies in the distinction between operational sustainability efforts and formalized measurement tools like carbon audits. As Eccles et al. (2014) note, many large firms prioritize visible, high-impact investments that appeal to guests and stakeholders over internal emissions accounting, which may lack immediate marketing value or clear regulatory mandates. Moreover, in the hospitality sector, standardized carbon auditing protocols are still evolving, and the complexity of multi-site operations can make consistent carbon tracking technically and administratively challenging ( Bohdanowicz & Martinac, 2007 ). It is possible that carbon accounting is being conducted informally or embedded within broader ESG reporting frameworks without being explicitly identified as a “carbon audit” in practice. This gap highlights the need for clearer definitions, streamlined tools, and capacity-building for large hotel operators to embed emissions monitoring as a routine part of their sustainability strategy.

Furthermore, the strong correlation between company size and mitigation engagement, with larger hotels showing a higher likelihood of having formal strategies, is consistent with resource-based theory. Larger firms typically possess the internal capacity (financial, technical, managerial) to assess risks and act proactively, whereas smaller hotels remain more reactive and under-resourced ( Kester et al., 2013 ; Christopoulos et al., 2019 ; Kalantonis et al., 2020, 2021, 2023 ).

The data strongly support the need for targeted public policy interventions, including:

Additionally, the development of a mandatory carbon reporting system for hotels could incentivize consistent mitigation tracking and benchmarking. This would align Greece’s domestic tourism policies with broader EU sustainability frameworks such as the European Climate Law and Fit for 55 targets.

Future research should build on these findings with in-person interviews, longitudinal data, and case studies to explore behavioral dimensions in greater depth.

This study offers a data-informed, sector-specific analysis of how Greek hotel companies are addressing climate change through mitigation strategies. Drawing on structured survey responses from 225 hotels across diverse Greek regions, the findings underscore that while a majority of hotels report some form of mitigation planning, adoption of specific interventions remains partial and inconsistent. Key measures such as renewable energy, water conservation, and carbon auditing are still not industry-wide practices.

The analysis confirms well-documented barriers in the literature, financial constraints and knowledge gaps, as major inhibitors of progress. Importantly, the study also reveals that hotels with prior disaster exposure are significantly more willing to invest in private insurance, indicating that personal experience with climate impact enhances risk sensitivity and readiness to act.

These results offer several implications for policy and industry. Targeted public incentives, technical assistance, and risk-sharing mechanisms such as subsidized insurance could support wider adoption of climate mitigation strategies. Integrating carbon accounting and sustainability standards into national tourism policy frameworks would help mainstream climate action within the hotel sector, ensuring that Greece’s tourism infrastructure remains both competitive and resilient in an era of accelerating climate change.

Last, the results of this analysis highlight that the adoption of mitigation strategies, ranging from renewable energy and water conservation to carbon audits, can serve not only as a response to climate risks but also as a pathway to enhanced financial and reputational performance ( Drosos et al., 2019 ; Skordoulis et al., 2020b ). Hotels that integrate these practices align themselves with the principles of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting, which is increasingly demanded by investors, regulators, and eco-conscious customers ( Kalantonis et al., 2014 ; Papagrigoriou et al., 2021 ; Delegkos et al., 2022 ; Xanthopoulou et al., 2024 ). Research shows that hotels with proactive ESG strategies often experience lower operational costs, particularly through energy and water savings, and gain competitive advantages by appealing to sustainable tourism markets ( Peeters et al., 2024 ). Furthermore, the implementation of carbon audits and renewable energy projects strengthens transparency and accountability, which are key ESG metrics. By leveraging these green initiatives, Greek hotels can not only improve their resilience against climate risks but also enhance brand value, attract green financing, and achieve long-term profitability, thus transforming sustainability from a compliance obligation into a strategic asset.