alternatetext

Multi

Ecological sustainability of online multiplier events compared to physical events

Objectives

Green Value indicator

If done right, online multipliers reduce the ecological and carbon footprint of multiplier events

Explanation

When it comes to national multiplier events, there are many factors to take into account. At this point it makes sense to consider four major features: 1) energy consumption for the venue, 2) transport and mobility, 3) catering and 4) waste production.
Depending on the size of the event, the organiser needs to secure a venue: the venue of the host organisation or a rented venue. A large amount of energy is consumed for heating or cooling the place. Depending on the venue large differences can occur. If you chose to host a physical event this is something you should research before choosing a venue.
The environmental costs arising from transportation are very dynamic and depend a lot on the given infrastructure, the mobility behaviour of the attendees and the physical catchment area of the event. If the local infrastructure of public transport is well developed and mainly local attendees take public (i.e. trains, buses, trams, etc.) or non-motorised (walking, biking) means of transport to reach the venue, then the environmental, especially CO2, costs will be relatively low. However, if the attendees all travel by car because they’re used to it or because the public transport infrastructure is inadequate and attendees travel from far distances, some even arriving by plane, then obviously the environmental costs will be much higher.

Another factor is the catering of the attendees. The environmental footprint of catering can vary widely. Consider this: on the one hand, you can provide catering rich in meat and exotic and non-seasonal fruit and vegetables, highly processed food and everything wrapped in several layers of plastic and eaten with single-use cutlery and crockery. On the other hand, your catering can be low in meat, from local and seasonal plant-based foods and cutlery and crockery are reusable. The first option will produce large amounts of direct waste and indirect waste and CO2 emissions. The latter one has a much smaller environmental impact. Yet, both catering options are the results of a decision you take, a decision which might also impact the future behaviour of your attendees: in the first case a bad example, in the latter a good example. Maybe they will experience how good seasonal food can taste and they follow your example privately or in their organisations.
Waste is not only produced while catering but also by printing out programs, giving out merchandise like pens or folders: future waste that you could minimise.

This shows us, that the environmental footprint of a physical event is highly variable depending on decisions taken in your organisation. Nevertheless, you can always go online. Then some of the factors explained above will be close to zero: no transportation costs, no energy consumption for heating the venue, no catering and no giveaways or other waste-production. Some factors will be transferred to the homes and offices of your attendees: they will heat or cool the place where they stay and they will eat their own food. So, the large factor that drops out is transportation. Instead of people travelling, data will travel between computers and servers. For this, we can use the same values we assumed in the environmental impact of transnational meetings. Taking the estimate of 183 g CO2/h per person a four-hour online event with 50 people would generate 36.6 kg of CO2. This value decreases with participants turning off their cameras.

If those 50 participants travelled from a distance of 10 km with a medium car amounting in 100km for the 50 attendees, they would collectively emit around 25kg of CO2. This value increases, of course, if further distances are travelled. Yet it decreases close to zero if those participants reached the venue by bike, walking or public transport. Hence, in terms of ecological sustainability the difference between online and physical multiplier events might not be too big. It depends a lot on the circumstances and how you organise the event. An event where organisers and participants pay attention to sustainability can allow human interaction and networking, but also shift mindsets of attendees who realise what is possible without any major relinquishments. Yet, online events have their own advantages such as facilitating easy access all around the world. In this sense, you could also consider combining both ways to achieve more sustainability and a greater reach.

PROS/CONS of the action

Pros: Cons:

Certified

Not Certified

Link to useful sources

Video conferencing greener than most in-person meetings involving travel but not entirely green:www2.eet.unsw.edu.au
The Social, Environmental, and Economic Advantages of Virtual Events www.sustainabletourism2030.com
footer