Pillar 2

Travel

  • A partner of the Climate Action Accelerator, found that 24% of its total emissions were from travel (2019 baseline). The organisation analysed their international travel practices, and despite challenges with data, they found that a non-negligible proportion of trips were for training sessions, pre- and post- mission briefings and debriefings, internal meetings, field visits, R&R, etc.
  • When they drew up their climate and environmental roadmap, they established quantitative targets to reduce emissions from trips of this kind. They also pooled resources between offices and organisations in the field, and adopted a ‘travel less, travel better’ policy. Deeper changes require the involvement of programmes and human resource departments, and it is important to remember that operational growth and increasing numbers of expatriate staff in the field mechanically leads to more travel and emissions.

Scope

  • International professional travel (car, plane or train)
  • Field transportation (mainly fleet).

Why does it matter?

Travel represents 7% of sector-wide organisations according to initial estimates developed by Climate Action Accelerator. Depending on the operational model of an organisation, this share can be significantly higher: travel represented between 12% and 27% of total emissions of Climate Action Accelerator’s humanitarian partners in 2019. Since organisations directly control emissions associated with travel, there is significant potential for reductions to be made.

What does this mean for humanitarian organisations?

Travelling has always been an integral part of operating. International aid involves emergency assistance and relief activities in distant locations, sending expatriate staff to field projects to reach the most vulnerable populations in remote and unstable areas.

But this model is not set in stone. Given the often large share of travel-related emissions, organisations need to drastically review their travel practices, and notably reduce international flights, to achieve ambitious climate targets. However, as we learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, there are ways to reduce flights, and travel in general, without compromising the ability to deliver assistance. Organisations found ways keep operations running despite travel restrictions, by increasing the use of online platforms and videoconferencing tools for meetings and training, with face-to-face interaction only necessary in specific situations. As travel, and especially air travel, has boomed in recent decades44, it represents a key lever for emissions reduction and ‘sobriety’.

Over the past decade, a growing number of local and national actors (LNAs) have been playing a key role in the delivery of assistance to populations in hard-to reach locations, especially when there are local capacities in place, such as staff, supply options and technical expertise. Partnerships between international organisations and LNAs have become more frequent and have provided ways to reconsider the balance between local and international capacities in the implementation of humanitarian projects. Organisations should build on and further develop such partnerships.

In addition, a thorough review of the internal practices and cultures related to professional travel has revealed that there are opportunities for change. What justifies international travel? What is the proportion of travel allocated to internal meetings and training versus travel dedicated to direct humanitarian work? Organisations need to differentiate between what is essential for their programmes and what is linked to their internal policies and practices.

Organisations need to change internal culture and habits regarding road transport. Access, security and logistics constraints mean that electric cars might not be the solution everywhere. The use of very large numbers of 4WD SUV (e.g. Land Cruisers) cars needs to be reconsidered. Where possible, lighter vehicles with alternative forms of motorisation should be introduced. Changes to regulations affecting combustion engine vehicles will have a significant impact on the market in the coming years.

Top solutions for reducing travel related emissions

Fly less and less emissive

Optimise fleet management

  • Financial savings: flying less and less emissive represents on average 0.4% savings45 on the yearly budget, savings obtained with minimal investments. Optimising fleet management by driving less and less emissive generates net savings that grow from 0.03% on average in year 1 to 0.15% in year 7.
  • Opportunities for improved staff learning and development practices.
  • Employee well-being increases as a factor of travel reduction.
  • Field visits are better planned and optimised if less frequent.
  • Online meetings increase inclusion of HQs, coordination teams and field staff as well as staff who are less likely to travel, such as those providing care for children or relatives.
  • Implementing eco-driving best practices reduces accidents (due to reduced speed), reduces emissions and saves money (reduced fuel consumption).
  • The way that organisations are perceived by local communities improves due to lower profile driving.
  • Mutualisation of trips or ridesharing may improve collaboration between organisations.

Modus operandi

  • Adopting travel reduction measures provides an opportunity to consider decentralised organisational models (regional hubs, more autonomy given to country offices, etc.).
  • There is a misconception that quality and monitoring depend on the number of field visits. Based on lessons from the pandemic, HQ teams could use travel reduction to rethink quality control and monitoring.
  • The type of organisational and geographical structure impacts available flight options. It may be easier to find lower emissive flights from Europe to Africa, than it is from Asia or America, or across African countries.

Staffing

Increasing the proportion of local staff in senior roles can help to reduce the number of trips. The majority of coordination and leadership roles are still filled by international profiles, rather than local or regional staff, although practices have evolved in recent decades in a number of organisations.

Field vehicles

  • Based on a thorough analysis of transport needs and the specific context, the smallest, lightest, less powerful vehicles should be chosen (ex: avoid using a heavy duty 4×4 in the city), while meeting field security and operational constraints.
  • Non-motorised mobility (public transport, active mobility, etc.) presents an opportunity for reducing emissions, depending on availability due to field constraints and cultural habits.

Doing the math: cost/benefit analysis of travel-related solutions

The following financial benchmarks are based on consolidated data from financial impact assessments conducted by Climate Action

Accelerator with nine of its humanitarian partner organisations, over a seven-year period.

Fly less and less emissive

Image Description

Figure 7: Fly less and less emissive: average yearly evolution of financial impact (as % of yearly budget)

 

  • Costs on average 0.40% of the budget, with the impact varying from average savings of 0.05% to average savings of 1.04%.
  • The average net financial impact decreases from net savings of 0.26% in year 1 to net savings of 0.49% in year 7.
  • The savings represent on average 14% of the plane and travel costs in year 3, growing to 19% in year 7.
  • Running costs are limited, growing from 0.01% to 0.09% of the yearly budget between year 1 and year 7 to cover for greener travel costs.
  • There are limited human resources costs attached to these solutions, as they mainly require changes to travel policies.

  • The modelling of the ‘fly less’ solution assumes a decrease in air travel costs and all related costs (visas, accommodation, taxi).
  • The modelling of the “fly less emissive” solution uses an increased cost of greener travel of 10%.
  • The importance of travel, with the travel budget representing between 0.4% and 6.7% of their yearly budget.
  • This means that travel represents different proportions of their GHG footprints in the baseline, and therefore different reduction potential and targets.

Optimise fleet management

Image Description

Figure 8: Optimise fleet management: average yearly evolution of financial impact (as % of yearly budget)

  • This solution costs on average 0.08% of the budget over seven years, with the financial impact varying from savings of 0.20% to average costs of 0.03%.
  • The average net savings grow from 0.05% on average in year 1 to 0.19% in year 7.
  • Investments are usually offset by savings as fuel-efficient vehicles are often cheaper than existing 4×4.
  • Running costs are limited, reaching a maximum of 0.01% of the yearly budget for some organisations

  • A 10% decrease of fuel consumption for drivers with eco-driving training.
  • A decrease of fuel consumption from 15L per 100km for heavy 4×4, to 11L per 100km for 4×2 or lighter cars.
  • The cost of eco-driving training between 100 USD and 250 USD per driver.
  • Minor savings on the price of vehicles, which are in general cheaper than heavy 4×4.

Figure 8: Optimise fleet management: average yearly evolution of financial impact (as % of yearly budget)

  • The pace at which vehicles can be renewed.
  • The number of vehicles required for their operations also determines the overall impact of this solution when measured as a percentage of the budget.
  • The context where they operate also plays a role: for example, it is easier to maximise the benefits of this solution if there is the required infrastructure to charge electric vehicles, or in contexts where heavy high-clearance 4×4 are unnecessary.

Climate Action Accelerator resources:

“Toolkit: Business travel”, https://climateactionaccelerator.org/solution-areas/transport/professional_travel/, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

“Factsheet: Economy Class Tickets”, https://climateactionaccelerator.org/solutions/economy_class_tickets_only/, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

“Factsheet: Public Transport”, https://climateactionaccelerator.org/solutions/public_transport/, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

Other useful resources:

Fleet Forum “Environment Self-Assessment Tool”, 2023, https://www.fleetforum.org/esat, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

Fleet Forum, “GreenMe”, 2023, https://www.fleetforum.org/green-me, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

Fleet Forum, “Managing the environmental impact of your fleet,” https://knowledge.fleetforum.org/knowledge-base/article/managing-environmental-impact-of-your-fleet (Accessed 23 May 2024).

Fleet Forum “The Environmental Performance of EVs vs. ICEVs”, https://knowledge.fleetforum.org/knowledge-base/article/the-environmental-performance-of-evs-vs-icevs, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

CFAO Group, https://www.cfaogroup.com/fr/accueil/, (Accessed 23 May 2024).

Pillar 1
Pillar 3

Best Viewed on Desktop

This website is designed for desktop use and may not display or function optimally on mobile devices. For the best experience, please access it on a larger screen.