The global health pandemic is affecting how large international meetings are being held. With the crisis not ending any time soon, it’s time for organizations to start looking for an alternative model.
Other than maybe digital displays replacing hand-sketched illustrations, not much has really changed at the Geological Society of London since Charles Darwin first presented the results of his research on evolution in 1837. What has changed though is the audience, which has grown over the years – thanks to the advent of air travel – from small, local gatherings to larger international ones. This was the conclusion of a survey carried out by a team of Dutch researchers, who recently published the results and observations in a piece published by the Dutch daily Volkskrant.
The findings of the survey on the environmental impact of international conferences are alarming. The analysis of the effects of travel, accommodation and services for an international conference attended by 5,000 participants showed that the total distance traveled amounted to 44 million kilometers, equivalent to 58 space trips to the moon. The full environmental footprint of such a conference over a two-day period, including carbon emissions, waste, pollution and additional resource consumption, exceeded that of 300 homes during a whole year. Thus, the environmental footprint of one participant at an international conference is equal to that of about 50 people during the same period.
Just think of the impact when you apply those kinds of numbers to say a two-week meeting, such as an international United Nations environmental conference, where up to 30,000 people participate from all over the world, or a major radiology conference, which is held in the United States with more than 50,000 specialists from 137 countries.
But with the global health pandemic, this may all change.
When the 105th Congress of Radiology was held in Chicago in December 2019, some speakers were unable to obtain visas to enter the United States, so they requested permission to submit their papers online. This was flatly rejected by the organizers, arguing that the technical capabilities for remote presentations were not available. Ironically, in less than six months, the organizers announced that the next conference, to be held at the end of 2020, would be entirely virtual, with no in-person attendance – all sessions will take place online.
What was considered unattainable a few months ago has today become the norm. It turned out that digital technology can evolve rapidly in response to new situations. The recent meeting of the High-Level Global Political Forum on Sustainable Development was a landmark of this transformation. The annual meeting, which has convened at UN headquarters in New York since 2013, attracts thousands of delegates from governments, international organizations and civil society. It is the place where governments present their national reports on the progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This year, the entire plenary and side meetings were held remotely.
What lessons can be learned from this sudden shift of international meetings going virtual? The first takeaway is that what was once considered impossible a short time ago quickly became the acceptable norm.
But, in order for a virtual meeting to be successful, it is still important to ensure face-to-face interaction, even if it is not in-person. Eye contact, facial expressions and body language are an essential part of proper communication. They are just as important as speaking and listening, not to mention that group meetings help develop teamwork skills. That is why it is so important to ensure that any virtual meeting has both voice and video capabilities, especially for participants from countries where internet networks are often lacking.
As the era of huge international conferences, with their carbon emissions, pollution and waste of human, financial and natural resources, is being drastically effected by the COVID-19 crisis, it may be time to start thinking about an alternative approach, one which combines smaller regional meetings, but linked online for a larger audience to take part.
Many may not be happy with this approach, especially those who used to travel to international meetings at popular destinations – New York, Rome, Geneva, Nairobi – and stay on a few extra days to take advantage of what they had to offer. As long as entertainment does not overtake the substantive part of the meetings, this might boost cultural interaction and boost local economies, if tourism adheres to high sustainability standards. There is more to be said about meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions (MICE) tourism, and its contribution to local economies. But for the time being, it looks like this will be severely reduced.
Surprisingly, some organizations and development funds are still devoting the largest portion of their budgets for international meetings to air travel, hotel accommodation and printing expenses, refusing to reallocate a substantive share to virtual meetings and electronic publishing. But changing the mindset takes time. Let us remember that what we are witnessing is the first major change in how conferences are being attended since Charles Darwin presented his theory in London two centuries ago.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the GGKP or its Partners.