
Sweden invented ‘flight shaming'. Now it is begging airlines to return
As of July 1, Sweden has dropped the levy of 76–517 krona (£5.50–£37.40) per passenger per flight, an eco measure introduced by the centre-left government in 2018.
The U-turn will be seen as a disaster by environmentalists, and it exposes a tension at the core of the aviation versus climate debate. When jumbo jets disappear emissions drop, but other things begin to dwindle too: regional growth, connectivity and – it appears in Sweden – public support for eco concerns.
The emptying of Swedish skies
Sweden introduced its air tax in the same year that a 15-year-old Greta Thunberg organised her first solo climate protest outside Swedish Parliament.
In a short period of time the 'flight shaming' ('flygskam') movement took hold. A survey in 2019 showed that nearly a quarter of Swedes were abstaining from flying in a bid to reduce their climate footprint, up from 17 per cent the year before.
The impact on Sweden's aviation industry was stark. Swedavia AB, which runs 10 Swedish airports, saw passenger numbers drop for seven consecutive months in 2019. The country witnessed its slowest growth in airline passenger numbers for a decade. Meanwhile, state train operator SJ saw passengers leap to 32 million citing 'big interest in climate-smart travel.'
In the seven years that followed, international flights dropped by a third. Smaller airports, particularly in the wild and remote northern regions, saw fewer arrivals as airlines scaled back operations. Ryanair ceased all domestic flights in Sweden, while the domestic-focused Bromma Airport near Stockholm came to the brink of closure. Today, only one regional airline, Västfly, still uses the airport.
The pandemic was the catalyst for change. The country suffered a recession in 2023 and the economy shrank by 0.3 per cent between April and July 2024. It was within this economic climate that the new right-wing government, elected in 2022, said that there were 'few reasons to feel flight shame' as they announced plans to invest £76m into the aviation sector and drop the air tax entirely.
Airlines were quick to praise the decision. Ryanair promptly re-introduced two new aircraft to its Swedish fleet and added ten new routes. EasyJet said 'we strongly welcome the abolition of taxes on passengers to help keep flying affordable' and Norwegian announced it would add new routes from Norway to Sweden.
'We congratulate the Swedish government for abolishing the aviation tax. It is excellent news, which recognises that taxation of air passengers is counterproductive economically and ineffective environmentally,' was the international aviation body IATA's response to the news.
The climate lobby, however, is disheartened by the news. Justin Francis, co-founder and executive chair of Responsible Travel, tells The Telegraph: 'Some governments' short-term attitudes to regulating aviation have shifted, but the science hasn't, and aviation will account for an ever-increasing percentage of total global carbon emissions and the massive costs of climate change to business and society.'
The European countries banning domestic flights
No doubt politicians in neighbouring countries will be watching keenly from the sidelines to see how Sweden's U-turn plays out. That's because since Sweden introduced its eco-war against aviation, other countries have followed suit.
In 2020, Germany increased its domestic and intra-European flight taxes by 75 per cent, while Belgium imposes a €10 'boarding tax' for flights of less than 500km (310 miles). In the Netherlands passengers must pay a departure tax of €29.40 per flight, regardless of the destination.
Denmark is the latest to join the party. As of January 1 this year, passengers have had to pay 50DK (£5.73) for intra-European flights, 310DK (£35.83) for medium-haul and DK410 (£47.55) for long-haul flights. Ryanair was quick out of the blocks to criticise the tax. The Irish airline publicly described it as a 'discriminatory, fake eco-tax', criticising Denmark for penalising short-haul passengers while not taxing transfer passengers travelling far greater distances. The airline has scrapped its services from Billund and Aalborg, in response.
Other countries are clamping down on short-haul aviation through other means. In 2023, France passed a law banning domestic flights on routes where the journey could be made by rail in less than 2hr 30m. While this was hailed as a 'domestic flight ban', effectively ruling out air travel between Paris Orly and Nantes, Lyon and Bordeaux, some argued they could have been more ambitious by extending the train travel time to four hours, or to measure from city to city rather than airport to airport.
In its current form, where you can still fly from Paris Charles de Gaulle to Nantes, Lyon and Bordeaux. Because of this, the domestic flight ban has been criticised for being more gestural than anything else.
Spain is considering mirroring the policy, banning flights where you can make the same journey in 2hr 30m. This would rule out 11 domestic air routes, reducing the country's domestic aviation emissions by an estimated 10 per cent. But, as in France, climate activists said it didn't go far enough, with the group Ecologistas en Acción describing the measures as 'purely symbolic'.
The question is where these countries will go next. Clearly the Swedish U-turn highlights the complexities around marrying green policies with national interconnectivity and regional prosperity.
'Until electric planes and emissions-free aviation are viable options, we all need to fly less,' says Justin Francis. 'Aviation fuel needs to be taxed in line with other transport fuels. The industry has had a free pass here for too long, and the proceeds need to be ring fenced for investment in lower-carbon aviation and improving rail infrastructure.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Labour hands illegal immigrants £60m to fight asylum claims
Labour will increase legal aid fees for asylum cases by a third after small boat crossings hit 20,000 for the year. The Ministry of Justice has announced that the fees paid to lawyers to represent migrants fighting to stay in Britain will go up by 30 per cent. The direct costs to the taxpayer will rise from £47 million a year to £61 million. Ministers said the move was necessary to clear the 90,000-strong backlog of asylum claims and end the use of hotels to house migrants. It comes just a day after the 20,000 mark for small boat arrivals was breached at a record early point in the year. 'Soft touch of Britain' Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: 'Yet again, Labour is showing their true colours. On the side of illegal immigrants, not the British people. 'Having removed our deterrent on day one, since then they have done everything in their power to make Britain the soft touch of Europe on migration. This will just make it even more attractive to illegally arrive in the UK. 'They said they would smash the gangs, but all they are doing is helping them smash small boat records.' He added: 'These parasitic lawyers help illegal immigrants manufacture bogus asylum, human rights and modern slavery claims and now they're going to be given even more taxpayers' hard-earned money. 'Labour is more interested in rewarding those who enable illegal immigration than protecting our borders. No wonder 2025 so far has been the worst in history for illegal immigrants crossing the channel.' The 30 per cent uprating will be the first time the funding has been raised since it was set in 2006, based on hourly rates established in 1996. In recent years concerns have been raised over the shrinking pool of firms who are prepared to take on legal aid work given the rates paid for it. Sarah Sackman, the justice minister, said the extra investment 'will help us support the immigration system' and clear the asylum backlog. Announcing the reforms, she said: 'In immigration, the new government is serious and ambitious about ending hotel use and increasing returns. 'This can only be done with the support of legal aid professionals, which is why supporting the capacity of the sector is crucial.' But the change is likely to prove controversial, given that it comes against the backdrop of a series of highly controversial immigration decisions. The Telegraph has revealed a string of cases where asylum seekers have been able to thwart deportation by relying on human rights laws. In one recent judgment a Pakistani criminal was allowed to stay in the UK after a judge ruled that his deportation would damage his son's mental health. Another saw an asylum seeker from Tajikistan granted the right to remain because he would have had to shave his beard off if he was deported. Migrant legal aid is largely restricted to asylum seekers and can fund cases involving fighting detention and deportation as well as accommodation claims. It is also used in cases involving migrant victims of domestic violence and modern slavery.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Steve Coogan says ‘disappointing' Labour year will ‘pave the way' for Reform UK
Actor Steve Coogan has said he understands why people would vote for Reform UK instead of Labour as he described their first year in Government as 'disappointing'. The 59-year old actor and comedian, who recently starred in The Penguin Lessons, reportedly supported the Labour Party in previous elections until last year, where he backed the Green Party. Speaking to The Guardian, Coogan said the current Labour Government is 'no different from a Conservative government in neglecting ordinary people'. 'What they're doing is putting Band-Aids on the gash in the side of the Titanic,' he said. 'The success of Reform, I lay squarely at the feet of the neoliberal consensus, which has let down working people for the last 40 years and they're fed up. It doesn't matter who they vote for, nothing changes for them. 'They'll pave the way for the only alternative, which is a racist clown. Reform (UK) couldn't organise a p*** up in a brewery, but if there's no alternative, you understand why working people will make that choice.' This comes after the Labour Government marked one year since winning the 2024 general election. Coogan added: 'It's not just the fact that people are disempowered and feel like they have no autonomy. It's compounded by the fact that these people, these multinationals, are enabled and supported by the Government to keep their foot on the neck of working people. 'If any government wants to address that extremism, what they have to do is tackle the root cause…(which is) poverty and economic decline in the post-industrial landscape, especially in the North. 'If Labour addressed that problem, Reform would go away – all their support would dissipate.' Coogan also said he agreed 'wholeheartedly' with MP Zarah Sultana's statement shared on Thursday which said the Government had failed to 'improve people's lives' and that the 'two-party system offers nothing but managed decline and broken promises'. Ms Sultana also announced that she was quitting the Labour Party to co-lead a left-wing alternative with former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Coogan is best known for portraying Alan Partridge, a persona which pokes fun at British broadcasters, having appeared in several TV series as well as the 2013 feature film Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa.


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Welfare, winter fuel payments and Trump: key markers of Labour's first year in power
The Labour party's first year in power has seen a determined and relatively successful approach to foreign policy coupled with a number of controversial domestic policies, such as the winter fuel payments and the welfare bill. One year on, we reflect on the moments that have marked the party's first 12 months in power