Student Perceptions of Sustainability in the HoReCa Sector: Awareness, Engagement, and Challenges

Abstract

The HoReCa (Hotels, Restaurants, and Cafes) sector plays a pivotal role in the economy due to its strong connections with various other industries, including agriculture, food and beverage, construction, packaging, waste management, water, and textiles. Given its broad impact, understanding the perceptions of students—emerging consumers and future professionals—could provide valuable insights for businesses seeking to enhance sustainable practices in ways that resonate with younger generations and improve their competitiveness. However, there is still limited understanding of how students perceive and engage with sustainability in this sector. This study explores student perceptions of sustainability practices within the HoReCa sector, examining their awareness levels, expectations, and behavior. The objective is to assess how effectively current business approaches align with student values regarding sustainability initiatives and identify key factors influencing their engagement. A structured questionnaire was distributed among university students, and the collected data was analyzed using statistical techniques to identify meaningful trends and correlations. Findings revealed a notable disconnect between students’ professed sustainability values and their actual behavior. Primary obstacles included price sensitivity, skepticism toward environmental marketing claims, and insufficient access to clear sustainability information from businesses. Despite supporting sustainable initiatives in principle, students often struggle to translate their values into purchasing decisions. The research suggests that greater business transparency, enhanced sustainability education, and incentive programs could foster increased student engagement.

1. Introduction

One of the most interconnected industries we have in today’s world is the HoReCa (Hotels, Restaurants, and Cafes) sector. Due to its reliance on sectors that are both upstream and downstream, it is both a significant economic driver and an important element when implementing sustainable strategies.

Nowadays, the HoReCa sector is undergoing fundamental change due to factors like post-COVID-19 expectations, increased awareness of environmental, social, and governance policies, and previously unmatched technological advancement. The catalyst for change is both customers and employees, who now seek more than just products or services. They also expect from companies meaningful, well-oriented, and socially responsible experiences. Moreover, the topics of digitalization and artificial intelligence (AI) are no longer a novelty in this sector. They have become essential tools not only for enhancing operational efficiency but to further shape customer loyalty toward the brand through personalized and responsive services. The demographic responsible for driving change is Generation Z. This generation could rephase the industry as we know it by changing the workforce’s priorities and placing emphasis on purpose as well as sustainability and personal development. These changes suggest that HoReCa businesses of the future will move toward a more holistic and human-centered model. Failing to strategically adapt to these new dynamics will overall lead businesses to fade into irrelevance [1].

The aim of our study is to address this gap by exploring student awareness of, engagement with, and perceptions of sustainability in various HoReCa businesses, such as coffee shops, restaurants, hotels, and food trucks. First, we wish to understand the familiarity of students with sustainability-related marketing, how they perceive sustainable practices, and the barriers that limit their effectiveness or visibility. Additionally, the study examines how students value sustainability efforts in HoReCa businesses and identifies the key factors that shape their attitudes and behaviors toward such initiatives.

To guide this investigation, the study addresses the following research questions:

RQ1. 

To what extent are students aware of and engaged with sustainability in the HoReCa sector, and how do they perceive communication, meaning, and barriers related to sustainability in this context?

RQ2. 

To what extent do students value and perceive the implementation of sustainable practices in HoReCa establishments?

RQ3. 

What are the key factors that influence students’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors toward sustainability in the HoReCa sector?

This study finds its novelty in the approach that we chose, as we performed a bottom–up analysis that is focused on students, as they represent both future professionals and consumers in the hospitality industry. We fill the gaps in the literature regarding their perception and engagement regarding sustainable practices within the industry. Traditional top–bottom studies only examine business strategies, while our approach provides new insight into the way businesses can better align their green efforts with modern day consumer and employee values. By understanding students’ expectations within the sector, companies can implement clear and competitive sustainability strategies in their business plan. This area of research holds significant untapped potential. However, there is a clear lack of studies focusing on students’ perceptions as both potential consumers and future employees in the hospitality sector, highlighting the innovative contribution of our work.

2. Literature Review

Focusing on sustainability has been a key reason why the hospitality industry has been changing and evolving. Issues like climate change, resource depletion, and pollution are growing worse, and the industry does not escape the need to act. Governments and official bodies are introducing laws and regulations to force businesses to adopt more sustainable practices, but the change should not only come as a reactive measure. Consumers and the general public are more informed and concerned about environmental issues, and they expect businesses to behave responsibly and proactively. Otherwise, they might choose competitors who do. Businesses in hospitality are actively adopting practices like energy-efficient systems, water conservation measures, and waste minimization to reduce their environmental footprint and support global sustainability goals. At the same time, social responsibility is gaining traction, with a growing emphasis on ethical labor, local sourcing, and community involvement, all factors that reflect broader stakeholder expectations. By implementing sustainability into daily operations, hospitality businesses are finding a common path between long-term business objectives and societal objectives [2].

Sustainability also offers a number of benefits for companies. From a strategic perspective, sustainability offers a significant competitive advantage in the hospitality sector. Environmental practices improve cost efficiency and contribute positively to financial performance, while social initiatives foster stronger brand identity, employee satisfaction, and customer loyalty. Initially, setting up processes and systems to ensure high-quality environmental and social standards can be costly, but these systems help businesses improve over time, making it easier to incorporate responsible business practices into daily operations. However, it has been noted that out of all sustainability actions, social initiatives, such as treating employees fairly and supporting local communities, bring the biggest financial benefits in terms of resources needed. In other words, guiding business practices through the triple bottom line of sustainability, especially the social dimension, is becoming essential to generating profits and staying competitive in the long run [3].

In the hotel industry, sustainability has become a core component of operational performance, guest satisfaction, and competitive advantage. Environmental practices, such as reducing energy and water consumption, minimizing waste, and integrating sustainable sourcing, directly improve efficiency and reduce costs, while also making the hotel more attractive to guests who are concerned about the environment. Hotels that embed sustainability into their overall business strategy often report higher occupancy rates and greater guest loyalty, especially when their efforts are visible, consistent, and perceived as being proactive and not reactive by their customers [4]. Staff workers are a crucial part of making sustainability programs actually work. For this, managers have the greatest influence on how much employees know and are concerned about responsible business practices. If management is actively concerned and promotes these practices, employees will be more engaged in delivering on them. Organizational culture can support this awareness, but its influence is more indirect and varies depending on the cultural and operational context of the hotel [5]. Guest satisfaction is directly correlated to all three pillars of sustainability: economic, social, and environmental. However, the social and environmental practice aspects, such as fair labor conditions and clear environmental actions, are what primarily move the needle toward customer loyalty. Making sure the hotel is profitable and efficient is important for the business itself, but it does not directly make guests more loyal. Especially in cultures where customers value community over individualism, the effect of fairness, diversity, charity, and other strong social initiatives is more responsible for customer retention [6].

In the restaurant industry, in order to successfully adopt and maintain sustainability efforts, they need to focus on three main subjects simultaneously: stakeholder involvement, operational processes, and contextual influences. Leaders and managers must take the first step and show strong support for sustainability, and then employees must be actively involved in the process [7]. When restaurants commit proactively to sustainability, they become more competitive, increase customer satisfaction, and often keep their employees longer. The transition to responsible management often comes with challenges, especially in big chain restaurants, where rules are stricter and processes more standardized to maximize efficiency, creating a barrier for individual locations to adapt to local needs. Some companies risk using sustainability only as a marketing tool without real implementation. Contextual elements, such as restaurant type and regional characteristics, further shape the adoption and impact of green initiatives. For environmentally conscious consumers, particularly millennials, green consumerism and green perceived value strongly influence their intention to revisit a location and become loyal customers. Green perceived quality enhances the connection between consumer attitudes and behavior, although its role is more significant when influencing perceptions of consumerism than value itself. Trust and clear, honest communication about sustainability have been seen as crucial for getting customers to come back and stay loyal to the business over a longer period of time [8]. Even though corporate social responsibility (CSR) is generally seen as positive, not every type of CSR brings the same level of success in restaurants. It has been seen that efforts focusing on improving employee conditions and promoting diversity do not always lead to strong business improvements in restaurants, mainly because staff turnover is very high. In contrast, CSR activities that are more economic and focused on the customer, such as supporting local communities or offering higher-quality products through local supply, consistently lead to a stronger brand image and build customer loyalty for long-term success [9].

Moving toward the coffee shop industry, sustainability is shaped by both internal and external business practices. Inside of the coffee shop business, long-term sustainability success mainly relies on four elements: an organizational learning culture, a digital organizational culture, ethical sensitivity, and access to finances. In other words, when a coffee shop encourages continuous learning, it becomes more innovative and more adaptable to change. Digitalization helps with the way businesses connect with their customers, while being aware of and active with regard to maintaining ethical standards create a better work environment that boosts overall performance. Having continuous stable financial resources leads coffee shops to grow and stay strong during uncertain times [10]. Externally, proactive initiatives have been shown to be favorable for coffee shops, as well. Businesses that adopt visible eco-friendly practices, such as using organic products, recyclable containers, paper straws, and reusable cups, are more likely to successfully build a green brand image and create emotional bonds with their customers. These practices lead to greater customer loyalty, positive word-of-mouth, and even advocacy in response to negative feedback. Among Gen Z consumers, these impacts are particularly strong, as they respond actively to environmental messaging and expect clear sustainability efforts from brands they support [11]. This strengthens the necessity of our study, because students are mainly Gen Z consumers. Understanding their needs and perceptions will help better capture the evolving expectations within the hospitality sector from the perspective of future employees all the way to consumers.

Waste management, especially when talking about food waste, is one of the most frequently discussed topics in the HoReCa literature. The main causes of food waste include oversized portions, inefficient kitchen processes, poor demand forecasting, and customer-related behaviors. Understanding and dealing with these issues generate several benefits. They not only help improve the perceived green quality of the business but also help improve operational efficiency and lower the environmental impact [12]. This is easier said than done, as sustainable food waste reduction requires a group effort and collaboration from all stakeholders. Hospitality businesses, consumers, suppliers, and policymakers need to coordinate actions, align strategies, and share accountability across all levels in order to create systemic and lasting change in improving food waste management [13]. Similar studies in European countries have also taken place regarding student perceptions of sustainability. Generally, students feel that they have a high degree of familiarity with sustainability practices [14]. However, their self-assessment does not corelate with engaging in sustainable practices. Sustainable development is a primary concern among students, but they feel that it is not covered well enough in higher education institutions [15]. It is also noted that the younger the students, the more concerned they are with the effects of climate change, and the concern slowly fades as they grow older, which should raise questions regarding the efficiency with which it is studied in universities [16]. Previous research has shown that the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) can effectively assess how well students are prepared to apply sustainability practices in professional contexts [17], supporting its relevance for understanding student engagement and willingness to act sustainably in the HoReCa sector, as well. However, some studies on the TPB show that the lack of social pressure and references around students in higher education institutions (HEI) regarding sustainability leads to an inability to translate intentions into actual behavior [18].

3. Methodology

This study is based on a quantitative research approach using a structured questionnaire, which was administered to students of the Politehnica University of Timisoara. The survey was conducted over a ten-day period, from 9 to 18 April 2025, and resulted in a total of 327 valid responses. The questionnaire was distributed to 400 students, with 329 responses received, of which 2 were invalid. Of the 327 valid responses, 216 were from bachelor’s students, 61 were from master’s students, and 50 were from PhD students. These results include responses from students across all three levels of education: bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral programs. The data was analyzed using statistical software to identify patterns and relationships relevant to the research questions.

The questionnaire was designed to address three main research questions. To answer the first research question, the initial section of the survey focused on assessing students’ general knowledge of, awareness of, and interest in sustainability topics within the HoReCa sector. The questionnaire was developed with input from academic specialists in sustainability and hospitality management. Sampling followed a convenience-based, voluntary response approach. Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated for the main constructs, with values ranging from 0.74 to 0.81, indicating acceptable to good consistency.

To explore the second research question in greater depth, students were asked to rate a series of sustainability strategies specific to different types of business profiles that operate in the hospitality industry. Additionally, they were asked to evaluate the current implementation of these strategies in order to better understand how sustainable practices are generally perceived. The questionnaire also explored whether students typically choose sustainable over non-sustainable businesses and whether they are willing to pay more for sustainability. Furthermore, respondents were asked to assess the perceived transparency of sustainability efforts of the places they often go to.

Lastly, in order to respond to the final research question, we categorized three groups of variables, including perceptual and attitudinal factors, sociodemographic and experience-based factors, and behavioral and evaluative factors, in order to conduct a set of statistics to explore the relationships between these influencing variables. Perceptual and attitudinal factors included how students define sustainability in the HoReCa sector, their reasons for avoiding sustainable choices, and their willingness to select or pay more for sustainable options. Sociodemographic and experience-based factors covered variables like age, gender, level of study, monthly spending, and whether the respondent had work experience in the HoReCa sector. Behavioral and evaluative factors considered the frequency of visiting different HoReCa establishments, perceived transparency of sustainability practices, and the importance students attributed to various sustainable actions, such as waste management or local sourcing.

The methodology of this study finds its novelty in the multiple statistical analyses designed to find relevant connections within the data provided. First, we conducted a descriptive analysis to explore and identify patterns, trends, and distributions among our variables. Secondly, to understand how these variables influence each other, several inferential statistical tests were applied. Here, we included regression analysis to examine relationships, ANOVA and t-tests to assess key differences between groups, and correlation analysis to measure the strength and direction among our variables. In the end, we present novel results that consist of both an overview and a deeper, relationship-focused understanding of the subject studied.

4. Results

4.1. RQ1: To What Extent Are Students Aware of and Engaged with Sustainability in the HoReCa Sector, and How Do They Perceive Communication, Meaning, and Barriers Related to Sustainability in This Context?

The scope of the first research question is to examine students’ awareness of and engagement with sustainability in the HoReCa sector, their understanding of the concept, how clearly it is communicated, and the main barriers that limit their support of sustainable establishments.

The first step of RQ1 was to determine students’ general understanding of sustainability. The corresponding question was the following: How familiar are you with the concept of sustainability in general? It was answered using a scale from 1 = completely unfamiliar to 5 = familiar. The results show that most respondents have a moderate to high level of familiarity with the concept. Specifically, 53.5% rated their familiarity as 4 on a 5-point scale, and 4.0% rated it as 5, indicating that 57.5% of students consider themselves well-acquainted with sustainability. An additional 33.0% chose a neutral score of 3, reflecting moderate familiarity. Only a small minority indicated low familiarity, with 6.4% selecting 2 and 3.1% selecting 1. These findings suggest that sustainability is generally well understood among the students (

Table 1. Familiarity with sustainability.

Level	Frequency	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	10	3.1	3.1
2	21	6.4	9.5
3	108	33.0	42.5
4	175	53.5	96.0
5	13	4.0	100.0
Total	327	100.0

).

Next, we aimed to assess students’ familiarity with sustainability specifically within the HoReCa sector. The corresponding question was the following: How familiar are you with the concept of sustainability in HoReCa? It was answered using a scale from 1 = completely unfamiliar to 5 = familiar. The results indicate that most students reported a moderate level of familiarity, with 33.3% selecting 3 on a 5-point scale. Additionally, 26.0% rated their familiarity as 4, and only 4.3% selected 5, reflecting high familiarity. On the other hand, 15.0% of respondents reported very low familiarity (1) and 21.4% selected 2, meaning that a significant portion (36.4%) feel only slightly or not at all familiar with the topic. These results suggest that although students have a general understanding of sustainability, their awareness of how it applies specifically in the HoReCa industry is limited (

Table 2. Familiarity with sustainability in the HoReCa sector.

Level	Frequency	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	49	15.0	15.0
2	70	21.4	36.4
3	109	33.3	69.7
4	85	26.0	95.7
5	14	4.3	100.0
Total	327	100.0

).

Regarding the clarity of communication on sustainability in the HoReCa sector, the results show generally positive but varied perceptions. The corresponding question was as follows: Do you appreciate the clarity of communication regarding sustainable practices in HoReCa businesses? It was answered using a scale from 1 = not clear at all to 5 = very clear. A significant proportion of students rated communication as clear, with 33.0% selecting 4 and 20.8% selecting 5, meaning that over half of the respondents (53.8%) perceived a high level of clarity. Meanwhile, 18.7% chose a neutral score of 3, indicating some uncertainty. However, 26.6% rated the clarity as 2 and 0.9% as 1, suggesting that nearly 28% view sustainability communication in the HoReCa sector as unclear. These findings indicate that while many students find sustainability communication relatively effective, a considerable minority still perceive a lack of clarity that could limit understanding or engagement (

Table 3. Level of communication clarity.

Level	Frequency	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	3	0.9	0.9
2	87	26.6	27.5
3	61	18.7	46.2
4	108	33.0	79.2
5	68	20.8	100.0
Total	327	100.0

).

Another survey question asked whether students had participated in sustainability-related courses or events focused on the HoReCa sector. The corresponding question was as follows: Have you taken part in any courses or events related to sustainability in the HoReCa sector? The vast majority (92.0%) had not, and only 8.0% reported any participation, all outside of the university. Notably, none of the respondents indicated that they had attended such courses within the university. This highlights a major educational gap and the need for universities to offer more structured learning opportunities on sustainability in the HoReCa sector (

Table 4. Attendance of sustainability course.

Answer	Frequency	Percent
No	301	92.0
Yes, outside of university	26	8.0
Yes, at the university	0	0.0
Total	327	100.0

).

To further assess students’ perceptions, students were asked the following question: What comes to mind when you hear that a venue is concerned with sustainability? The majority linked the concept to higher product quality (45.3%), followed by environmental protection (35.5%) and support for local businesses (12.5%). A significantly smaller proportion associated sustainability with reputation (3.1%) or trend appeal (3.7%). These findings indicate that students predominantly conceptualize sustainability in terms of product excellence and environmental responsibility, while social and marketing-related dimensions appear to be less salient (

Table 5. Understanding of sustainability.

Answer	Number	Percent
Good reputation	10	3.1
Environmental protection	116	35.5
Higher product quality	148	45.3
It is trendy	12	3.7
Support for local businesses	41	12.5
Total	327	100.0

).

Finally, the study sought to identify the primary barriers preventing students from choosing sustainable HoReCa establishments (What do you consider to be the main obstacle that would prevent someone from choosing a sustainable venue?). The results show that price sensitivity is the most significant obstacle, with 63.6% of respondents citing higher costs. A further 30.9% identified the lack of clear and accessible information on sustainability practices as a barrier, underlining the role of communication in shaping consumer choices. Only a small fraction (5.5%) expressed distrust of sustainability claims, suggesting that skepticism is not a major issue. Overall, economic constraints and limited transparency emerge as the main factors discouraging students from engaging with sustainable HoReCa options (

Table 6. Reasons for avoiding sustainability.

Answer	Number	Percent
Higher prices	208	63.6
Lack of clear information about sustainability	101	30.9
Skepticism toward “green” initiatives	18	5.5
Total	327	100.0

).

4.2. RQ2: To What Extent Do Students Perceive and Value the Implementation of Sustainable Practices in HoReCa Establishments (Hotels, Restaurants, Coffee Shops)?

The scope of the second research question is to assess how students perceive and value the implementation of sustainability practices in hotels, restaurants, and coffee shops, including their willingness to support such efforts and their evaluation of current practices. To better understand their level of engagement with these establishments, students were asked to indicate how frequently they visit them using a 6-point scale, where 1 = never, 2 = once every few months, 3 = monthly, 4 = once a week, 5 = several times a week, and 6 = daily. Firstly, we aimed to explore how often students’ frequent various types of HoReCa establishments. The frequency distribution shows that the majority of students visit coffee shops regularly, with 40.4% reporting visits several times a week and 13.5% visiting daily. Only a small percentage (1.8%) indicated that they never visit coffee shops (

Table 7. Frequency of visits to coffee shops.

Frequency	Value	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	6	1.8	1.8
2	8	2.4	4.3
3	61	18.7	22.9
4	76	23.2	46.2
5	132	40.4	86.5
6	44	13.5

).

The results indicate that the majority of respondents frequent restaurants with moderate to high regularity. Specifically, 35.5% of students selected option 4, and 29.1% selected option 3, suggesting consistent engagement with this HoReCa subsector. A smaller share of respondents reported a low visiting frequency, with 24.8% selecting option 2 and only 1.8% selecting option 1. Meanwhile, 8.9% indicated very frequent visits by selecting option 5 (

Table 8. Frequency of visits to restaurants.

Frequency	Value	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	6	1.8	1.8
2	81	24.8	26.6
3	95	29.1	55.7
4	116	35.5	91.1
5	29	8.9	100.0
6	0	0

).

In terms of food truck visitation frequency, the results indicate that most students engage with this type of establishment occasionally to moderately. The most commonly selected option was 3 (36.7%), suggesting a moderate frequency of visits. This is followed by 24.2% of students selecting option 4, indicating fairly regular engagement. Lower frequencies were reported by 23.2% (option 2) and 9.5% (option 1), while only 6.4% of respondents reported visiting food trucks very frequently (option 5) (

Table 9. Frequency of visits to food trucks.

Frequency	Value	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	31	9.5	9.5
2	76	23.2	32.7
3	120	36.7	69.4
4	79	24.2	93.6
5	21	6.4	100.0
6	0	0

).

Regarding the frequency of visits to guesthouses, the results reveal that such establishments are less frequently accessed by students compared to other HoReCa subsectors. A substantial majority, 76.5% of respondents, selected option 2, indicating infrequent visits. Additionally, 16.8% chose option 1, suggesting minimal or no engagement with guesthouses. Only 6.7% of students reported more regular visits (option 3) (

Table 10. Frequency of visits to guesthouses.

Frequency	Value	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	55	16.8	16.8
2	250	76.5	93.3
3	22	6.7	100.0
4	0	0
5	0	0
6	0	0

).

With regard to hotel visitation, the data indicates that students generally engage infrequently with this type of HoReCa establishment. The vast majority of respondents (75.8%) selected option 2, suggesting occasional use, while 14.1% selected option 1, indicating very limited or no engagement. Only 10.1% of students reported visiting hotels more regularly (option 3) (

Table 11. Frequency of visits to hotels.

Frequency	Value	Percent	Cumulative Percent
1	46	14.1	14.1
2	248	75.8	89.9
3	33	10.1	100.0
4	0	0
5	0	0
6	0	0

).

To determine how students evaluate the implementation of certain sustainable practices in hotels/guesthouses, restaurants/food trucks, and coffee shops, students were asked the following question: To what extent are the following sustainable practices implemented in the hotels or guesthouses you usually visit? They answered using a scale from 1 = not at all implemented to 5 = fully implemented. When it comes to hotels, while none of the categories were rated as excellent or very good, the results suggest overall a moderate level of implementation. However, if we were to rank them comparatively, a hierarchy can still be established. Waste management (M = 3.26), energy-saving measures (M = 3.09), towel and linen reuse programs (M = 3.07), and water-saving efforts (M = 3.02) were considered to be better implemented, with all mean scores slightly above the midpoint of the 5-point scale. On the other hand, practices like using eco-certified textiles (M = 2.91), green construction materials (M = 2.84), charity partnerships (M = 2.81), and sustainability education for guests (M = 2.69), were perceived as less developed, falling below the midpoint threshold (

Table 12. Adoption of sustainable practices in hotels.

Practice	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Impl. Hotel Waste	1	5	3.26	0.937
Impl. Hotel Energy	1	5	3.09	0.833
Impl. Reuse Program	1	5	3.07	1.072
Impl. Hotel Water	1	4	3.02	0.759
Impl. Eco Textiles	1	5	2.91	1.017
Impl. Green Materials	1	5	2.84	0.891
Impl. Hotel Charity	1	5	2.81	1.001
Impl. Hotel Education	1	5	2.69	1.089

).

Similarly, students were asked the following question: To what extent are the following sustainable practices implemented in the restaurant and food trucks you usually visit? They answered using a scale from 1 = not at all implemented to 5 = fully implemented. In the case of restaurants and food trucks, the results reveal a consistent pattern. All sustainability practices are perceived to be implemented at a moderate level, with some rated slightly above and others slightly below the average. Waste management (M = 3.41) and packaging (M = 3.37) are best implemented. At the opposite end, once again, sustainability education (M = 2.60) and charity partnerships (M = 2.58) are considered the least well-implemented, similar to the findings in the case of hotels (

Table 13. Adoption of sustainable practices in restaurants/food trucks.

Practice	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Waste	1	5	3.41	0.905
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Packaging	1	5	3.37	0.976
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Energy	1	5	3.06	1.119
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Local	1	5	3.05	0.955
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Food Waste	1	5	2.98	1.077
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Origin	1	5	2.94	1.136
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Water	1	5	2.87	0.997
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Discount Own Container	1	5	2.64	1.279
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Education	1	5	2.60	1.086
Impl. Restaurant/Food Truck Charity	1	5	2.58	1.065

).

Not surprisingly, for the question “To what extent are the following sustainable practices implemented in the coffee shops you usually visit?”, using a scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = fully implemented, we identified a pattern similar to that observed in restaurants. Students consider waste management (M = 3.40) and sustainable packaging (M = 3.30) as the best practices implemented. Interestingly, the use of locally sourced products (M = 3.18) received a slightly higher score compared to restaurants, suggesting a stronger emphasis on local sourcing in cafes. At the opposite end, as in the case of restaurants and hotels, sustainability education (M = 2.79) and charity partnerships (M = 2.74) were rated the lowest. Even lower was the practice of offering discounts for customers who bring their own containers (M = 2.67) (

Table 14. Adoption of sustainable practices in coffee shops.

Practice	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Impl. Coffee Shop Waste	1	5	3.40	1.007
Impl. Coffee Shop Packaging	1	5	3.30	1.052
Impl. Coffee Shop Local	1	5	3.18	0.912
Impl. Coffee Shop Energy	1	5	3.12	1.081
Impl. Coffee Shop Origin	1	5	3.05	1.122
Impl. Coffee Shop Food Waste	1	5	2.98	1.017
Impl. Coffee Shop Water	1	5	2.93	0.936
Impl. Coffee Shop Education	1	5	2.79	1.192
Impl. Coffee Shop Charity	1	5	2.74	1.046
Impl. Coffee Shop Discount Own Container	1	5	2.67	1.244

).

Furthermore, we asked students whether they believe there is sufficient transparency regarding sustainable practices in each HoReCa sector. Most students reported that they do not perceive sufficient transparency, with 65.4% responding “No” for hotels and an even higher reporting 70.0% for restaurants/food trucks. In contrast, coffee shops received a much more balanced response, with 49.8% of students stating that transparency does exist. Overall, the results highlight that students are most skeptical about transparency in restaurants and hotels, while coffee shops are perceived as more open or effective in communicating their sustainability practices. This underscores the need for improved sustainability disclosure and visibility in the hotel and restaurant sectors to foster consumer trust and engagement (

Table 15. Transparency in the HoReCa sector.

Answer	Hotel	Restaurant/Food Truck	Coffee Shop
Yes	65.4%	70.0%	50.2%
No	34.6%	30.0%	49.8%
Total	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%

).

Next, for RQ2, we aimed to identify which sustainable practices are important to students: To what extent are the following sustainable practices important to you in a hotel or guesthouse? Participants answered using a scale from 1 = not important at all to 5 = very important. In the case of hotels, waste management received the highest importance rating (M = 4.15), followed by sustainability education for guests (M = 4.02) and partnerships with charitable organizations (M = 3.98). Mid-range ratings were observed for energy saving (M = 3.77), eco-certified textiles (M = 3.73), and the use of green construction materials (M = 3.53), indicating moderate importance attributed to resource efficiency and eco-friendly infrastructure. The lowest-rated items, while still above the scale’s midpoint, were water-saving measures (M = 3.48) and towel/linen reuse programs (M = 3.45), which may reflect students’ view of these practices as less impactful (

Table 16. Importance of sustainable practices in hotels.

Practice	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Hotel Waste Management	1	5	4.15	0.945
Hotel Education	1	5	4.02	1.074
Hotel Charity	2	5	3.98	1.036
Hotel Energy Saving	1	5	3.77	0.953
Eco Textiles	1	5	3.73	1.211
Green Materials	1	5	3.53	1.252
Hotel Water Saving	1	5	3.48	1.056
Towel/Linen Reuse	1	5	3.45	1.237

).

In the case of restaurants and food trucks, the question was similar: To what extent are the following sustainable practices important to you in a hotel or guesthouse? Participants answered using a scale from 1 = not important at all to 5 = very important. Seeing the results, all scores rank above 3 and reach values slightly over 4. Interestingly, a greater number of practices received ratings above 4 compared to the accommodation sector. However, it is important to note that these practices are specific to the food service context and not directly applicable to accommodations. Again, waste management (M = 4.33) was identified as the most important practice. This was followed by the practice that they are not available for accommodation, knowing the origin of ingredients (M = 4.29), and the use of local products (M = 4.22). This indicates students’ preference for transparency and trust in sourcing. Other important practices are biodegradable or reusable packaging (M = 4.03) and food waste reduction (M = 4.01). Among the lower-rated practices were energy-saving measures (M = 3.77) and water-saving efforts (M = 3.72). This may be due to a lack of student awareness regarding the operational implications of these practices or because such measures are less visible and do not have a direct, tangible impact on the customer experience. The practice of offering incentives for customers who bring their own containers received the lowest importance rating in the restaurant and food truck category (M = 3.67) (

Table 17. Importance of sustainable practices in restaurants/food trucks.

Number	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Restaurant/Food Truck Waste	1	5	4.33	0.969
Restaurant/Food Truck Origin Known	1	5	4.29	0.990
Restaurant/Food Truck Local Products	1	5	4.22	0.892
Restaurant/Food Truck Packaging	1	5	4.03	1.031
Restaurant/Food Truck Food Waste	1	5	4.01	1.320
Restaurant/Food Truck Education	1	5	3.90	1.016
Restaurant/Food Truck Charity	1	5	3.79	1.104
Restaurant/Food Truck Energy	1	5	3.77	1.056
Restaurant/Food Truck Water	1	5	3.72	1.100
Restaurant/Food Truck Own Container	1	5	3.67	1.301

).

In the case of coffee shops, the results are consistent with those found in restaurants and food trucks, with all scores above the midpoint and several practices rated above 3. Waste management (M = 4.28) emerged as the most important sustainability practice, followed closely by transparency regarding the origin of products (M = 4.20). These were followed by the use of biodegradable or reusable packaging (M = 4.12) and local sourcing (M = 4.05), indicating that students value traceability, visible eco-friendly solutions, and support for local producers. More socially oriented or participatory practices, such as sustainability education (M = 3.80), charity partnerships (M = 3.80), and offering discounts for bringing personal containers (M = 3.69), were rated as less important. The corresponding question was as follows: To what extent are the following sustainable practices important to you in a coffee shop? Participants answered using a scale from 1 = not important at all to 5 = very important (

Table 18. Importance of sustainable practices in coffee shops.

Number	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Coffee Shop Waste Management	1	5	4.28	0.981
Coffee Shop Product Origin	2	5	4.20	0.893
Coffee Shop Packaging	1	5	4.12	1.030
Coffee Shop Local Products	1	5	4.05	1.000
Coffee Shop Energy Saving	1	5	3.91	1.096
Coffee Shop Water Saving	1	5	3.85	1.064
Coffee Shop Food Waste	1	5	3.84	1.181
Coffee Shop Education	1	5	3.80	1.067
Coffee Shop Charity	1	5	3.80	1.056
Coffee Shop Own Container	1	5	3.69	1.368

).

Additionally, students were asked the following question: Would you be willing to choose a hotel or guesthouse/coffee shop/food truck or restaurant that promotes sustainable practices? Participants answered using a scale from 1 = not willing at all to 5 = very willing. In the table, we can observe the percentage of respondents who selected each rating option. Across all sectors, the most frequent response was a neutral/moderate position (score = 3). This suggests that most students are moderately inclined to choose sustainability when selecting where to go. Notably, the percentage of students who expressed a strong likelihood (score = 5) to choose sustainable options was highest for coffee shops (9.5%). On the opposite end, low likelihood responses (scores 1 and 2) were more common for hotels (29.9%) and restaurants (30.6%), compared to only 19.9% in coffee shops. Overall, if we were to make a rough estimation, the responses appear to be evenly distributed, as approximately one-third of the respondents tend to say no, one-third remain neutral, and one-third lean toward choosing a sustainable establishment (

Table 19. Willingness to choose sustainable HoReCa establishment.

Answer	Hotel	Restaurant/Food Truck	Coffee Shop
1	11.9%	8.6%	5.8%
2	18.0%	22.0%	14.1%
3	38.8%	33.6%	43.4%
4	28.1%	30.6%	27.2%
5	3.1%	5.2%	9.5%

).

To assess students’ willingness to pay a higher price for sustainable practices, participants rated their responses on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all willing, 5 = very willing) across three types of HoReCa establishments. For both hotels and restaurants/food trucks, nearly half of the respondents (48.3% and 47.1%, respectively) selected a neutral score (3), indicating moderate willingness to pay more. The remaining responses were roughly evenly split between those inclined to pay more (scores 4–5) and those unwilling to do so (scores 1–2), suggesting a balanced distribution of opinions in these two sectors. In contrast, for coffee shops, fewer respondents chose the neutral option (33.3%), and a larger proportion (approximately 40%) expressed a willingness to pay more. Notably, the highest level of willingness (score = 5) was reported most frequently for coffee shops (19.0%), compared to just 10.7% for restaurants and 8.9% for hotels (

Table 20. Willingness to pay more for sustainable HoReCa establishment.

Answer	Hotel	Restaurant/Food Truck	Coffee Shop
1	8.0%	7.0%	11.6%
2	14.7%	14.4%	15.9%
3	48.3%	47.1%	33.3%
4	20.2%	20.8%	20.2%
5	8.9%	10.7%	19.0%

).

4.3. RQ3: What Are the Key Factors That Influence Students’ Perceptions, Attitudes, and Behaviors Toward Sustainability in the HoReCa Sector?

To explore the third research question, variables were grouped into three main categories: perceptual and attitudinal factors, sociodemographic and experience-based factors, and behavioral and evaluative factors. Perceptual and attitudinal factors include how students define sustainability in the HoReCa sector, their reasons for avoiding sustainable choices, and their willingness to choose or pay more for sustainable options. Sociodemographic and experience-based factors cover age, gender, study level, monthly spending, and whether the respondent has worked in the HoReCa sector. Finally, behavioral and evaluative factors involve the frequency of visiting different HoReCa establishments, perceived transparency regarding sustainability practices, and the importance students assign to various sustainable actions (e.g., waste management, local sourcing). This structure enables a comprehensive analysis of how individual values, experiences, and behaviors interact to shape sustainability engagement.

First, we aimed to identify whether there is a correlation between a person’s appreciation of sustainability in one type of HoReCa establishment and their appreciation of it in another. The results revealed statistically significant positive correlations between all three sectors at the p < 0.01 level. These findings suggest that students who value sustainable practices in one type of establishment are likely to value them similarly in others, reflecting a generalized pro-sustainability attitude across the broader HoReCa sector (

Table 21. Correlation sustainability indexes.

		Hotel_Sustainability_Index	Restaurant_Sustainability_Index	Coffee Shop_Sustainability_Index
Hotel_Sustainability_index	Pearson Correlation	1	0.361 **	0.385 **
	Sig. (2-tailed)		0.000	0.000
	N	327	327	327
Restaurant_sustainability_index	Pearson Correlation	0.361 **	1	0.482 **
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000		0.000
	N	327	327	327
Coffee shop_sustainability_index	Pearson Correlation	0.385 **	0.482 **	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	0.000	0.000
	N	327	327	327

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

).

Following this, we aimed to understand which factors influence students’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors regarding sustainability in the hotel sector. Unsurprisingly, our findings revealed that students with a higher overall sustainability index are more likely to be willing to pay extra for sustainable practices (

Table 22. Regression analysis (pay more for sustainable hotel).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.846	0.431		4.281	0.000
	Hotel_Sustainability_index	0.326	0.114	0.157	2.870	0.004

Dependent variable: pay more for sustainable hotel.

).

Subsequently, we aimed to understand which factors influence students’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors regarding sustainability in choosing a restaurant. Similarly to the previous findings, students who demonstrate a greater interest in sustainability are more likely to express willingness to pay a higher price for sustainable restaurant and food truck options (

Table 23. Regression analysis (pay more for sustainable restaurant/food truck and restaurant sustainability index).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	2.067	0.456		4.529	0.000
	Restaurant_sustainability_index	0.269	0.114	0.130	2.362	0.019

Dependent variable: pay more for sustainable restaurant/food truck.

).

Moreover, the result of the linear regression shows a significant positive relationship between communication clarity regarding sustainability practices and students’ willingness to pay more for sustainable restaurants or food trucks. This suggests that students who perceive sustainability communication as clearer are more likely to express a willingness to pay a higher price for sustainable food service options (

Table 24. Regression analysis (pay more for sustainable restaurant/food truck and communication clarity).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	2.687	0.182		14.744	0.000
	Communication Clarity	0.130	0.050	0.143	2.595	0.010

Dependent variable: pay more for sustainable restaurant/food truck.

).

Additionally, a significant relationship was identified between students’ likelihood of choosing sustainable restaurants or food trucks and their age group (

Table 25. ANOVA, choose sustainable restaurant/food truck based on age group.

	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	12.207	4	3.052	2.893	0.022
Within Groups	339.683	322	1.055
Total	351.890	326

). Post hoc comparisons using Tukey’s HSD test demonstrate that only one pairwise comparison reached significance, as students aged 26–30 reported a significantly greater willingness to choose sustainable food establishments compared to those aged 20–25 (mean difference = 0.494, p = 0.031) (

Table 26. Tukey’s HSD, dependent variable: choose sustainable restaurant/food truck.

(I) Age	(J) Age	Mean Difference (I–J)	Std. Error	Sig.	95% Confidence Interval
					Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	2	0.147	0.282	0.985	−0.63	0.92
	3	−0.347	0.316	0.807	−1.21	0.52
	4	−0.474	0.414	0.782	−1.61	0.66
	5	0.071	0.455	1.000	−1.18	1.32
2	1	−0.147	0.282	0.985	−0.92	0.63
	3	−0.494 *	0.170	0.031	−0.96	−0.03
	4	−0.621	0.316	0.286	−1.49	0.25
	5	−0.076	0.369	1.000	−1.09	0.94
3	1	0.347	0.316	0.807	−0.52	1.21
	2	0.494 *	0.170	0.031	0.03	0.96
	4	−0.127	0.347	0.996	−1.08	0.83
	5	0.419	0.395	0.828	−0.67	1.50
4	1	0.474	0.414	0.782	−0.66	1.61
	2	0.621	0.316	0.286	−0.25	1.49
	3	0.127	0.347	0.996	−0.83	1.08
	5	0.545	0.477	0.784	−0.76	1.85
5	1	−0.071	0.455	1.000	−1.32	1.18
	2	0.076	0.369	1.000	−0.94	1.09
	3	−0.419	0.395	0.828	−1.50	0.67
	4	−0.545	0.477	0.784	−1.85	0.76

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

).

Third, we analyzed students’ perceptions of sustainability in coffee shops. Similarly, students who show greater interest in sustainability are also more willing to pay a higher price for sustainable coffee shop options (

Table 27. Regression analysis (coffee shop sustainability index and pay more).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	3.800	0.073		51.743	0.000
	Pay More Sustainable Coffee Shop	0.048	0.021	0.124	2.245	0.025

Dependent variable: coffee shop_sustainability_index.

).

Similarly to restaurants, the result of the linear regression shows a significant positive relationship between communication clarity regarding sustainability practices and students’ willingness to pay more for sustainable coffee shops. This suggests that students who perceive sustainability communication as clearer are more likely to express a willingness to pay a higher price for sustainable service options (

Table 28. Regression analysis (coffee shop sustainability index and communication clarity).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	3.775	0.087		43.470	0.000
	Communication Clarity	0.052	0.024	0.119	2.162	0.031

Dependent variable: coffee shop_sustainability_index.

).

Additionally, a significant difference was identified in students’ evaluation of sustainability practices in coffee shops based on their academic level (

Table 29. ANOVA analysis of the coffee shop sustainability index across academic levels.

	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	2.051	2	1.025	4.440	0.013
Within Groups	74.823	324	0.231
Total	76.873	326

). Post hoc comparisons using Tukey’s HSD test demonstrated that only one pairwise comparison reached statistical significance, as PhD students rated sustainability in coffee shops significantly higher than bachelor’s students (mean difference = 0.216, p = 0.013). No significant differences were found between master’s and bachelor’s students nor between master’s and PhD students. This suggests that while academic level may influence students’ perceptions of sustainability, the effect is primarily driven by the difference between those at the undergraduate and doctoral levels (

Table 30. Tukey’s HSD, dependent variable: coffee shop_sustainability_index.

(I) Age	(J) Age	Mean Difference (I–J)	Std. Error	Sig.	95% Confidence Interval
					Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	2	−0.09769	0.06968	0.341	−0.2617	0.0664
	3	−0.21569 *	0.07542	0.013	−0.3933	−0.0381
2	1	0.09769	0.06968	0.341	−0.0664	0.2617
	3	−0.11800	0.09168	0.403	−0.3339	0.0979
3	1	0.21569 *	0.07542	0.013	0.0381	0.3933
	2	0.11800	0.09168	0.403	−0.0979	0.3339

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

).

Finally, a more detailed analysis was conducted on the perceived clarity of sustainability communication. The results show a statistically significant positive relationship between communication clarity and familiarity with sustainability in the HoReCa sector. This suggests that clearer communication is linked to greater familiarity, underlining the role of effective messaging in improving students’ understanding of sustainability in the HoReCa sector (

Table 31. Regression analysis (familiarity with sustainability in the HoReCa sector and communication clarity).

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	2.346	0.197		11.915	0.000
	Communication Clarity	0.140	0.054	0.142	2.591	0.010

Dependent variable: sustainability in the HoReCa sector familiarity.

).

Additionally, a statistically significant difference, indicating that at least one age group reported significantly different levels of communication clarity, was identified (

Table 32. ANOVA, communication clarity based on age group.

	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	18.025	4	4.506	3.709	0.006
Within Groups	391.247	322	1.215
Total	409.272	326

). The analysis shows that participants aged 31–40 years reported significantly higher communication clarity compared to both those under 20 years (p = 0.010) and those aged 20–25 years (p = 0.040) (

Table 33. Tukey’s HSD, dependent variable: communication clarity.

(I) Age	(J) Age	Mean Difference (I–J)	Std. Error	Sig.	95% Confidence Interval
					Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	2	0.494	0.303	0.478	−0.34	1.32
	3	0.605	0.339	0.385	−0.33	1.54
	4	1.455 *	0.444	0.010	0.24	2.67
	5	1.250	0.489	0.081	−0.09	2.59
2	1	−0.494	0.303	0.478	−1.32	0.34
	3	0.111	0.182	0.974	−0.39	0.61
	4	0.961 *	0.340	0.040	0.03	1.89
	5	0.756	0.396	0.314	−0.33	1.84
3	1	−0.605	0.339	0.385	−1.54	0.33
	2	−0.111	0.182	0.974	−0.61	0.39
	4	0.850	0.372	0.153	−0.17	1.87
	5	0.645	0.424	0.550	−0.52	1.81
4	1	−1.455 *	0.444	0.010	−2.67	−0.24
	2	−0.961 *	0.340	0.040	−1.89	−0.03
	3	−0.850	0.372	0.153	−1.87	0.17
	5	−0.205	0.512	0.995	−1.61	1.20
5	1	−1.250	0.489	0.081	−2.59	0.09
	2	−0.756	0.396	0.314	−1.84	0.33
	3	−0.645	0.424	0.550	−1.81	0.52
	4	0.205	0.512	0.995	−1.20	1.61

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

).

Additionally, aside from the differences already presented, neither age nor level of study showed any further influence. Gender, monthly spending, and prior work experience in the HoReCa sector also had no significant impact. Likewise, students’ general perception of communication clarity did not significantly influence their attitudes or behaviors toward sustainability in the HoReCa sector.

5. Discussion

Regarding the first research objective, the results suggest that while students demonstrate a generally broad awareness of sustainability as a concept, their understanding of its specific application within the HoReCa sector is limited. This gap may reflect the lack of exposure or practical experience related to sustainable hospitality. Although over half of the respondents perceive sustainability communication in HoReCa venues as relatively clear, the notable share who finds it unclear indicates potential shortcomings in how sustainability is communicated or visualized. This lack of clarity may reduce trust and engagement, especially among students who are less familiar with the sector.

The low participation in sustainability-related courses or events underscores a critical educational gap, which could be an opportunity for universities to integrate targeted sustainability content. Interestingly, students associate sustainable venues primarily with higher product quality and environmental protection, rather than with social responsibility. This could suggest that their perception of sustainability is shaped more by tangible benefits than by ethical or reputational factors.

The main barriers are higher prices and lack of information. The fact that over half of the students cited price as the main reason they would not consider sustainable HoReCa establishments could suggest that sustainability is often perceived as a premium feature accessible only to high-income groups.

Next, our study aimed to explore the extent to which students perceive and value the implementation of sustainable practices in HoReCa establishments. To interpret the results, the triple bottom line (TBL) framework can serve as a useful tool to organize the indicators related to sustainable practices. In the hotel sector, environmental sustainability is demonstrated through waste management, energy conservation, water conservation initiatives, towel and linen reuse programs, the utilization of eco-certified textiles, and the employment of sustainable construction materials. Social sustainability is promoted through sustainability education for guests and collaborations with stakeholders. The economic aspect is indicated by students’ readiness to pay more for sustainable services and products, implying an acknowledgment of additional value despite price sensitivity. Restaurants and food trucks implement environmental policies, such as waste management, energy and water conservation, utilization of biodegradable or reusable packaging, and minimization of food waste. Social sustainability is achieved through educational programs, collaborations with stakeholders, and customer engagement techniques, such as providing incentives for using personal containers. Transparency and trust are bolstered by the explicit communication of product provenance and the utilization of locally obtained ingredients. The economic dimension is shown in students’ willingness to pay more for sustainable services and products. Environmental indicators in coffee shops encompass waste management, sustainable packaging, food waste reduction, and resource efficiency via energy and water conservation initiatives. Social sustainability is bolstered by clarity about product origins, utilization of local ingredients, educational campaigns, stakeholder implication, and practices like permitting customer-owned containers. Similar to other industries, the economic factor is evident in students’ willingness to invest more in sustainable coffee experiences, particularly when these practices are transparent and effectively conveyed.

The environmental dimension was most valued across all subsectors. Waste management emerged as top-rated, highlighting students’ strong preference for clear and visible environmental efforts. In restaurants and coffee shops, further highly rated environmental practices are transparent product origin, local sourcing, and sustainable packaging. This indicates an emphasis on traceability and perceived quality. On the other hand, social sustainability indicators were rated slightly lower, which may be due to their lower visibility, limited student awareness, and less emphasis in marketing. Unlike environmental actions that are easily observed, social initiatives often happen behind the scenes and are not always clearly communicated to customers. The economic dimension was assessed through students’ willingness to pay more for sustainable products and services. Most students selected the midpoint value, indicating moderate openness to higher prices. Notably, coffee shops received the highest proportion of students willing to pay significantly more. This could reflect the more frequent use of coffee shops and a stronger emotional or lifestyle connection to that environment.

A general sustainability orientation, where individuals who care about sustainable practices tend to apply those preferences broadly, may explain why students who value sustainability in one type of HoReCa establishment, such as hotels, are also more likely to prefer sustainable restaurants or coffee shops. This consistent behavior across settings suggests that their choices are driven by core values rather than isolated preferences. Moreover, students who recognize the importance of various sustainable strategies are more likely to be willing to pay more in all three contexts, as they perceive sustainability as offering added value that justifies the extra cost.

It has been found that students who perceive sustainability communication more clearly are more likely to pay a higher price for sustainable options in coffee shops and restaurants/food trucks, but not in hotels. This difference may be due to the nature of the decision-making process in these establishments. Coffee shops and food venues are frequent, casual, and experience-driven settings, where clear, visible sustainability messages could have a direct and immediate influence on consumer behavior. In contrast, sustainable practices in hotels are often less visible and may not create the same level of trust or perceived value as in more transparent, day-to-day food service environments.

Students aged 26–30 reported a significantly greater willingness to choose sustainable food establishments compared to those aged 20–25, which could be explained by several factors. Older students may have more developed personal values and a stronger sense of social and environmental responsibility, influenced by greater life experience or exposure to sustainability topics. They may also have greater financial stability, making them less sensitive to price when considering sustainable options. Additionally, this age group might be closer to entering or already involved in the workforce, where sustainability is increasingly emphasized, further reinforcing their preferences.

PhD students rated sustainability in coffee shops significantly higher than bachelor’s students, which may be explained by differences in life experience, academic exposure, and critical thinking skills. PhD students are typically older and more engaged with complex societal issues, and they may have encountered sustainability topics more deeply in their research or coursework. In contrast, bachelor’s students may be earlier in their academic journey and less exposed to in-depth sustainability discussions, leading to lower prioritization of such practices in everyday choices.

Similarly, the analysis shows that participants aged 31–40 years reported significantly greater perception of communication clarity regarding sustainability in HoReCa establishments compared to both those under 20 years and those aged 20–25 years. This difference could again be attributed to greater life and professional experience, which may help older students better interpret and evaluate sustainability messages. Individuals in this age group may also have more developed critical thinking and information processing skills, allowing them to recognize and understand sustainability efforts more easily. Additionally, they may be more exposed to sustainability in their personal lives or workplaces, making them more receptive to and aware of sustainability communication strategies. In contrast, younger students may lack the contextual understanding or familiarity needed to fully grasp the meaning or significance of such messages.

The findings of the study highlight the need for more concrete and actionable recommendations in order to integrate sustainability into hospitality education. Universities should develop sustainability courses, interdisciplinary modules, and partnerships with sustainable HoReCa businesses. Beyond academic institutions, local authorities should offer incentives for sustainable operations, promote training programs, and collaborate with educational institutions. To improve the alignment of educational initiatives with policy objectives, institutions and local stakeholders should engage with established EU sustainability frameworks, like the Circular Economy Action Plan. Incorporating this kind of policy would ensure that sustainability education is not only locally relevant but also strategically positioned within the wider European sustainability agenda.

Future research could dig into broader age groups in order to see to what extent age and education level influence the perception of green initiatives throughout generations other than Gen Z. More mature students or those in advanced stages of education showed slightly greater appreciation for sustainability, possibly due to increased exposure to these topics or a deeper understanding of their implications. However, factors like gender, spending habits, or prior experience in the industry did not appear to strongly influence sustainability-related attitudes or behaviors. This suggests that sustainability values are becoming widespread and not limited to specific student profiles.

6. Conclusions

This study provides a comprehensive view of how students perceive and engage with sustainability in the HoReCa sector.

Regarding the first research objective, the results indicate that students possess a considerably broad awareness of sustainability. Nevertheless, their understanding of specific application to the HoReCa sector is deficient. The data suggests that although many students consider sustainability communication to be rather good, a significant minority still perceive a lack of clarity that may hinder understanding or engagement. Moreover, a significant educational disparity exists, as a minimal number of students have participated in sustainability-related events or courses. When students hear that a venue is concerned with sustainability, they associate it primarily with higher product quality, followed by environmental protection. The main reason why a student would not choose a sustainable venue is the higher price. More than half of the respondents indicated this as the primary barrier, while nearly a third mentioned the lack of clear information about sustainability practices.

The study shows that coffee shops are the most frequently visited HoReCa establishments among students, with over half visiting them several times a week or even daily. Restaurants are also visited regularly, with the majority reporting moderate to high frequency of visits. In contrast, hotels and guesthouses are visited much less often, with most students indicating occasional or minimal engagement with these types of venues.

With regard to how students perceive and value the implementation of sustainable practices in HoReCa establishments, the findings highlight a strong preference for visible and impactful environmental practices, with some variation across establishment types. For hotels, students rated waste management as the most important sustainability measure, followed by guest education and charity partnerships. For restaurants and food trucks, the highest ratings were also given to waste management, transparency regarding product origin, and use of local products. Similarly, in coffee shops, students valued waste management most, alongside product origin transparency, sustainable packaging, and local sourcing. Although practices like energy and water efficiency, sustainability education, and charity involvement were rated positively in all three categories, they received slightly lower average scores. From an economic perspective, students demonstrate a moderate willingness to pay more for sustainable services, with the highest openness reported for coffee shops.

The third objective of the study was to identify the factors that influence students’ perceptions of sustainability in the HoReCa sector. The findings suggest that students who value sustainable practices in one type of establishment are likely to value them similarly across other types, indicating a consistent sustainability mindset. Unsurprisingly, a greater personal interest in sustainability is also strongly linked to a greater willingness to choose and pay for sustainable options. Additionally, students who perceive sustainability communication as clear are more likely to be willing to pay a higher price for sustainable options. The analysis also revealed that students aged 26–30 showed a significantly greater preference for sustainable food establishments compared to those aged 20–25 and that PhD students rated sustainability in coffee shops significantly higher than bachelor’s students. On the other hand, variables like gender, monthly spending, and previous work experience in the HoReCa sector showed no significant influence on sustainability perceptions or willingness to pay, suggesting that personal values and communication clarity play a more decisive role than demographic or experiential factors.

In conclusion, businesses in the HoReCa sector need to be more proactive and match their sustainability actions with what younger customers care about and expect regarding environmental and social sustainability. Implementing these systematic, long-term changes will lead to the industry being more ethical, create resilience to challenges, and make the industry more attractive to future employees and consumers.