This document discusses how two emerging sustainability standards for events, ISO 20121 and APEX/ASTM, can work together effectively. It outlines that ISO 20121 takes a process-based approach, requiring a management system to help organizations achieve sustainability objectives through continuous improvement. APEX/ASTM takes a performance-based approach, setting specific sustainability targets. The document argues that using the standards together can maximize their benefits, with ISO 20121 providing a systematic framework and APEX/ASTM addressing specific environmental issues. It provides an example of how the standards can be integrated into a planning process from goal-setting to monitoring and improvement.

1. How International Standards Work Together
Sustainable Events Corner, EIBTM 2012

2. @AndrewSWalker

3. Master’s Research Paper:
Process vs. Performance
Standards for Sustainable
Meeting and Event
Management

4. ISO 20121
Event Sustainability
Management Systems!
APEX/ASTM
Environmentally Sustainable
Event Standards!
Two Emerging Voluntary Standards

5. Can They Work Together?

6. Two Types of Sustainability Standards
Process-based Performance-based

7. Two Types of Sustainability Standards
Process-based
• Requires implementation
of a management system
• Outlines steps to help
users to achieve their
sustainability objectives
- Flexible and adaptable
- Continuous improvement
- Potentially less rigorous

8. Two Types of Sustainability Standards
Performance-based
• Sets specific targets that
must be met in a checklist
• Tells users what their
sustainability objectives
should be
- More stringent
- Clear expectations
- Potentially less feasible

9. Process vs. Performance
Event
Owners
Organizers
Suppliers

10. Process vs. Performance
Planners
Suppliers

11. Continuous Improvement

13. On-Site
Office
Destination
Meeting
Venue
Accommodations
Food &
Beverage
Exhibits
Audio Visual
& Production
Transportation
Communications

14. Planner
Total
Supplier
Total
P S
P S
P S
P S
P S
P S
P S
P S

15. Levels 1-4 Encourage
Continuous Improvement

16. Three Criteria for Evaluation
Effectiveness
Accountability
Legitimacy

17.  Three strategies to strengthen
legitimacy:
1. Input legitimacy
• Who is involved in the standard-
setting process
1. Procedural legitimacy
• How the standard-setting process is
managed
1. Output legitimacy
• What is the end result of the
standard-setting process
Legitimacy
Quest for
credibility

18. Input Legitimacy
→ Who is involved in the standard-setting process
Credible standard-setting organization
Event industry and standards experts involved
Chair is event sustainability expert
International participation
Main organizational driver

19. Procedural Legitimacy
ISO: Decisions made by consensus at international meetings
→ How the standard-setting process is managed

20. Procedural Legitimacy
APEX: Nine committees developed the nine sector standards
→ How the standard-setting process is managed

21. Procedural Legitimacy
ASTM: Every single negative vote had to be addressed
→ How the standard-setting process is managed

22. Output Legitimacy
Neither standard is perfect, but ready for publication and
use
→ What is the end result of the standard-setting process

23.  Two accountability structures:
1. Responsiveness to stakeholders
• More proactive and flexible
• Choice of who to be accountable to
1. External control
• Debate on how much is necessary
• Third-party certification is common
type of enforcement mechanism
Accountability
Quest for
authority

24. Responsiveness to Stakeholders
Mainly focused on the needs of the meetings industry

25. External Control
1st 2nd 3rd
ISO 20121 can be 1st
, 2nd
or 3rd
party verified

26. External Control
2nd 3rd1st
Future possibilities:
•2nd
and 3rd
party verification
•CMP sustainability sub-specialty
APEX/ASTM can be 1st
party verified

27.  Four factors that influence
effectiveness:
1. Producer participation
• More users means more
widespread change of behaviour
1. Stringency of standards
• If too strict, industry uptake may be
negatively impacted
• If too lenient, minimal positive
social/environmental impacts
1. System operation
• Process/performance requirements
to ensure compliance
1. Consequences of
non-compliance
Effectiveness
Quest for
widespread
use

28. Producer Participation
Strong support from trade
publications and industry
associations so far
ISO 20121 will appeal to
organizations that want
systematic approach
APEX/ASTM will appeal to busy
planners who want to know
exactly what they need to do
Suppliers will likely support either
standard if it wins them more
business or saves them money

29. → If too strict = industry uptake may be negatively impacted
→ If too lenient = minimal positive social/environmental impacts
More stringent but potentially
less feasible in practice
Less stringent but potentially
leading to minimal improvements
Stringency of Standards
→ If too strict = industry uptake may be minimized
→ If too lenient = minimal positive social/environmental impacts

30. System Operation
→ Process and/or performance requirements to ensure compliance

31. System Operation
Both standards will need significant
amount of time investment in beginning

32. System Operation
Cost is another potential barrier to industry uptake

33. Consequences of Non-Compliance
→ The reality is these are voluntary standards
• Organizations already making progress may not see value in adopting standards
• Others will see opportunity to validate their efforts or help them get started
• Will take time for industry to become aware and start putting into practice
• Certification will be less important in the beginning
• Instead of penalizing non-users, better to promote various incentives to encourage
widespread use

34. Some Predictions…
• Organizations already making
progress may not see value in adopting
standards
• Others will see opportunity to validate
their efforts or help them get started
• Will take time for industry to become
aware and start putting into practice
• Certification will be less important
in the beginning
• Instead of penalizing non-users,
better to promote various incentives to
encourage widespread use

35. So Can These Two Standards...

36. Work Together?

37. • Both standards have
strengths & weaknesses
• Each standard can stand
alone but more beneficial
to use together
• Without combined
approach, both standards
risk not achieving industry
uptake to ensure long-term
viability
• Balanced approach: flexible
and stringent
Dynamic Duo

38. • Address critical
environmental issues
to reduce growing
footprint
• Prescriptive
requirements
address concerns
about ISO 20121
accountability
• Provide systems
thinking to imbed
practices into
organization
• Moderate step by
step approach
address concerns
about inflexibility
of APEX-ASTM
Dynamic Duo

39. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
PLAN
1. Identify and engage your
event stakeholders (ISO)
• Include all relevant sectors
(APEX/ASTM)
2. Establish and document
your sustainability
policy
(ISO & APEX-ASTM)

40. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
PLAN
3. Identify sustainability
issues you wish to
address (ISO)
• Include (APEX-ASTM)
checklist as guideline for
environmental issues
(waste, energy, air
quality, water,
procurement) and social
(procurement,
community partners)

41. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
PLAN
4. Set goals and objectives
and plans to achieve
them
(ISO & APEX-ASTM)

42. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
DO
5. Planners and suppliers
make decisions related
to resources,
competence, awareness
and communication
(ISO)
– Ensure it is well documented
and there are processes in
place for operational control
(ISO)

43. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
CHECK
6. Decide what, how and
when to monitor and
evaluate the
performance of the
system
(ISO & APEX-ASTM)

44. Using ISO 20121 and APEX-ASTM Together
ACT
7. Identify what didn’t
work according to plan
and decide what actions
to take to fix it (ISO &
APEX-ASTM)

45. Images:
Andrew Walker, BComm, MES
andrew@E3strategy.co.uk
@AndrewSWalker
TAK