Photo: SEECult
My journey towards environment-friendly events has been ongoing for almost two decades. Since then, much has changed, and plenty of ink has been spilt over the topic, yet I am still baffled by colleagues who compensate for their lack of knowledge in the field with huge egos and empty statements à la paperless and net-zero events. To add insult to injury, such individuals resort to tree planting and using words such as carbon-neutral, net zero, carbon-zero or carbon-negative event, resulting in an explosive combination of greenwashing, which most often does not happen consciously. At one of the most recent conferences I attended as a speaker, the abundance of such phrases became irritable.

“What someone says in an Eastern-European accent à la Slavoj Žižek is not comparable to someone speaking in a Cockney accent.”

I preferred to stay silent on the topic for some time, deciding not to pose questions I had when hearing empty phrases. I had many doubts about the credibility of sustainable certificates that had flooded the industry and eventually made their way to national Green Schemes and similar pyramid schemes. Although having debated these misleading practices with colleagues in private, I held my tongue and did not share my concerns in public. In the public debates, colleagues who discussed their schemes and greatness were often the loudest. I pricked up my ears when hearing long-known ideas, but put differently. Speakers misused ideas because of their position, be it academic, organisational, symbolic or even gender-related. What someone says in an Eastern-European accent à la Slavoj Žižek is not comparable to someone speaking in a Cockney accent.

ljubljana_sustainable
Photo Credit: TheMayor.Eu

Sustainable cryptomnesia

The phenomenon of cryptomnesia is ever-present in sustainability. The best way to describe it is to refer to it as unintentional plagiarism. This phenomenon occurs when people wrongfully claim an idea for their own, albeit, in reality, it comes from their subconsciousness. Usually, this is reflected in words such as green, net zero, zero-waste, tree-planting, etc. We have an unbelievably high tolerance for such words in the meetings industry. We even turn a blind eye when it is plain to see an event is greenwashing or, put bluntly, full of lies. One example is recycling name badges, which does not solve any pressing problem. The most conspicuous example, though, are handbooks for organising green or sustainable events. They are, by far and large, copied from various sources without mentioning authors. Most authors do not find this problematic. Artificial intelligence is shaking these foundations, fueling doubts about credibility and authorship.

Numbers are crucial to avoiding greenwashing

Due to sustainable cryptomnesia, following numbers and the binary system in organising regenerative events is even more paramount – we must strictly measure our product’s carbon footprint instead of hoarding certificates. Consumers demand that from us, especially those from Generation Z and Alpha. When posing this question to a focus group, it turned out they cared little about certificates but wanted precise information about a product’s carbon footprint (also tourist ones). Singular manufacturers of miscellaneous products have already started measuring their carbon footprint, especially those producing outdoor sports equipment. Companies in the automotive, agricultural, beauty industries and other sectors have followed suit. The golden standard regulating this field is the GHG Protocol (www.ghgprotocol.org). Instead of championing cryptomnesia, this standard precisely identifies how to measure three scopes of emissions. If we translate the three scopes into the world of events, they encompass the following emissions:

Scope 1: Direct greenhouse (GHG) emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organisation (vehicles, used energy for the office, process emissions, etc.) – category 1 according to ISO 14064-1

Scope 2: Indirect (GHG) emissions (all purchased energy that is spent by event equipment or activity), category 2 according to ISO 14064-1

Scope 3: Indirect (GHG) emissions that arise in the value chain of an organisation (transport of employees from and to work, business trips, services, etc. – matters not owned by an organisation, yet have an indirect impact on the organisation), category 3 – 6 according to ISO 14064-1

The easiest way to illustrate this is by showing how I decided to travel to Bratislava, which I frequented recently. The distance between the two destinations is 846 kilometres by road (both ways).

Here is what the numbers have to say:

GO BY CAR?
Medium car, gasoline, 1 passenger EF=0,1847 kg CO2e/km
My carbon footprint would be 156,26 kg CO2 / 4.45 hours

USE GO.OPTI?
Van, diesel, 6+1 passengers EF=0,2316 kg CO2e/km/6
My carbon footprint would be 32,66 kg CO2 / 5.15 hours

OPT FOR FLIXBUS?
Coach, diesel, 30 passengers EF=0,0273 kg CO2e/passenger km
My carbon footprint would be 23,10kg CO2 / 6.05 hours – 7.40 hours

GO BY TRAIN?
International train, EF=0,0045 kg CO2e/passenger km
My carbon footprint would be 3,81 kg CO2 / 7.25 hours – 9.16 hours

GO BY PLANE (IF THERE IS AN EXISTING FLIGHT CONNECTION)? (602 kilometres)
Short haul flight, EF=0,1859 kg CO2e/passenger km
My carbon footprint would be 111,92 kg CO2 + the distance to the airport / 0.51 hours

Once we begin thinking and using numbers, the situation becomes clear, enabling us to act transformatively and make the right decisions. If I have enough time, I will go by car; if not, shared transport is the optimal solution.

go_opti
Photo: Go.Opti

Authentic-ish sustainable events

Recently, Ljubljana hosted the legendary Claus Raasted, the father of experience marketing, whose theory of authentic and authentic-ish experiences wowed attendees. He vividly showcased why authenticity is too often radical and brutal, making us resort to authentic-ish experiences. Consider if you want to stay in a genuine African bushman hut without electricity or a toilet or opt for its more subtle imitation referred to as glamping. Fake authenticity, on the other hand, has no problems with being genuine, as it does not even pretend. Consider Disneyland, Gardaland and all the other … lands.

“We have settled on authentic-ish sustainability – taking small steps, cryptoamnesia and shortcuts.”

Something similar has been occurring in organising sustainable events recently. We have settled on authentic-ish sustainability – taking small steps, cryptoamnesia and shortcuts. For instance, event organisers often focus on waste at events without understanding the holistic image of the event. Worsening the situation are tools and “consultancy experts” who simplify the entire process to obscurity or, worse still, fabricate data and facts.

Real, authentic regenerative event organisation demands that we measure and understand all four dimensions of sustainable event organisation:

• Event’s sustainability – measurement of the carbon footprint for an event’s entire life cycle (event LCA)
• Event’s regenerative impact – measurement of the short-term impact of an event with the help of the SDG matrix
• Event’s transformative legacy – measurement of the long-term legacy of an event with the help of the ESRS matrix
• Event’s creativity – measurement of creative activities that are the foundation for a sustainable and regenerative transformation.

The fundamental ethical principle we all must adhere to is fairness. According to this principle, sustainable events must be organised, executed, measured and reported on in a fair, trustworthy and transparent way. In addition, sustainable events must consider clients’ standards, practices and values.

Regardless of tendencies to criticise the European Union behind closed doors due to its ineffectiveness and slow bureaucratic wheels, the EU played a positive role, at least in this segment. The paradigm “America innovates, Europe regulates, and China copies” has long been obsolete. Still, Europe played a pivotal role in regulating sustainable reporting with its ESRS Standards. As I previously wrote, the CSRD Directive and the new standards have completely changed the game. As more and more event clients (especially corporate ones) are using it, we hope the period of authentic-ish fake sustainable events ends soon. That will also lead to a decrease in the number of greenwashing practices.

klaus_raasted
Photo: Marko Delbello Ocepek

Zero bullshit

My journey to creating an authentic tool began several years ago. Today, my prompt on ChatGPT would look something like this at the start of my career:

  • Which tool for sustainable event organisation is genuine, not fake?
  • Which tool for sustainable event organisation is legit, not unofficial?
  • Which tool for sustainable event organisation is authorised, not unauthorised?

Personally, I wrote all these questions into my black book under the category Zero Bullshit. After that, we tested numerous tools, calculators and recommendations. There was always something amiss, which is why we developed our tool, Planet Positive Event, which answers seven pressing challenges:

  1. Imprecise carbon footprint calculators
  2. Reporting in accordance with legally binding ESRS Standards
  3. Collecting data for the carbon footprint calculation of events (Scope 3)
  4. Flawed database
  5. Poor visualisation of results
  6. Evaluations without external assessment
  7. Measuring regenerative effects

Recently, we measured one of the most demanding sports events hosted in our country thus far. I was delighted to see the positive feedback from the client and their amazement about the final report. I hope others in our industry follow suit, helping stop authentic-ish sustainable events. Even the loudest in the industry fall silent when reading our sustainability report.

In Ljubljana, we have envisaged a marathon vision to create a movement for responsible event organisation based on measuring direct, indirect, multiplicative and regenerative effects. At the same time, we encourage organising events within planetary boundaries, considering the prosperity and well-being of all. Imagine a world where we will measure whether a host destination has improved after an event ends and whether an event has a long-term positive impact on the local community instead of measuring the number of overnight stays. We want to create events focused on the future. Ultimately, our events are about the future and Generation Z and Alpha. When organising our events today, they must be on our minds. That is why I naively and optimistically believe we are running a lap of honour. We hope colleagues from the advertising industry realise that soon. No more bullshit, colleagues!

Join our newsletter!

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay up-to-date with the latest updates from Kongres Magazine.