Entitled Making a Difference, the report concludes that while there have been some excellent examples of action to embed the lessons learnt from the Games, for example, through the Government’s on-going support for the 2012 Learning Legacy web portal, there is still more to be done.

The Commission’s findings point to two main factors holding back widespread adoption of sustainable practice in the UK: firstly, slowness in government action in embedding sustainability in government procurement; and secondly, the need for more independent oversight to ensure that sustainability targets in all sectors are met. The Commission has recommended the Government revisit advice to embed sustainability into the construction sector, and that major projects open themselves up to independent scrutiny of their sustainability commitments.

Also examined are issues relating to corporate sponsorship, which raised some unresolved ethical concerns during London 2012. The use of forced labour and excessive working hours in supply chains remain a problem for many industries as a whole.

To combat this problem in the Olympic and Paralympic world, the Commission’s report recommends that the IOC and other sports bodies work together to develop an ethical framework as a means of encouraging sponsors to improve human rights in the supply chain.

Shaun McCarthy, Chair of the Commission for a Sustainable London 2012, said:

“London 2012 was the first games to be monitored by an independent sustainability body. It was a ground-breaking decision seven years ago when we were first established. We’ve proved that the concept works, and now we’re seeing evidence of Commission-style assurance being used on large-scale private developments around the world.’

“However there is some way to go before the model is embedded in the UK public sector. London and the UK is looking to host a number of high profile events in the coming years and are well placed to take advantage of London 2012’s sustainability successes and lessons learnt. Internationally, Rio 2016 and the 34th America’s Cup in San Francisco have already demonstrated a commitment to cutting edge sustainability goals and we look forward to even better sustainability outcomes from the UK into the future. So much good has come from the Games, it’s up to government and the private sector to adopt Olympic best practice and ensure the legacy lives on.”

The full report can be read here.

BP was appointed by London 2012 as the Olympic and Paralympic Games offset partner for official travel. In addition, BP established a voluntary programme which offered to offset travel related carbon emissions for spectators, London 2012 corporate partners and the wider ‘Olympic family’ such as athletes and country delegations.

The Target Neutral Programme:

“…is an initiative that provides information and tools primarily through a website (www.bptargetneutral.com) but also other channels such as Facebook, to support the reduction of carbon footprints. The information and tools are structured around three topic areas: ‘Reduce, Replace and Neutralise’. Participants are encouraged to reduce their travel emissions, for example by replacing car journeys with public transport, by driving ‘smarter’, driving less and maintaining vehicles better. Participants are also encouraged to consider new fuel-efficient vehicle technologies such as high efficiency engines and improved tyres, or products that may support vehicle efficiency such as “BP Ultimate Fuels” and BP’s “Castrol” lubricants. The ‘Neutralise’ stream encourages participants to offset the carbon emissions from unavoidable travel, and provides the facility to offset”[1]

The Commission for a Sustainable London 2012 (‘CSL’ / ‘The Commission’) decided to conduct assurance of the Target Neutral Programme in order to determine the robustness, efficacy and success of the programme in offsetting travel related carbon emissions and in influencing participants’ travel and offsetting behaviour.  To assist in its assurance CSL commissioned consultants Point Carbon to carry out a technical assessment of the Programme’s carbon offsets and the behaviour change elements.

The Commission is satisfied with the robustness of the Target Neutral Programme in respect of its treatment of carbon offsets.  The review found that BP has established a carbon offset programme which is innovative and which surpasses best available standards for the voluntary offset market in some respects, and met best available standards in all other respects.

The Commission believes that BP carefully researched and established a programme that could influence spectator and partner behaviour to make less carbon intensive travel choices and to consider offsetting their journeys to and from the Games. However, there is no evidence yet that longer term behaviour change has occurred although BP has put in place measures to engage participants over time through its ongoing carbon offsetting programme.

The Programme offset 99,027 tonnes of carbon and 501,412 journeys, which we estimate to be  between 3.88% and 7.76% of all spectator journeys[2] and 20% of the travel-related carbon originally estimated in LOCOG’s initial carbon footprint for the games[3].  This required over 500,000 people to actively engage with Park-based offset activities in order for their offset to be recognised under the programme which was a significant achievement. While the carbon offset was within expectations, the voluntary nature of the scheme meant that this was only a small proportion of all carbon emissions linked to travel for the Games.

The Commission recognises that offsetting carbon related to travel for major events can play an important role in reducing their overall carbon impact.  Previously we have been critical of moves to integrated carbon offsetting as a fundamental management strategy for addressing carbon as part of the London 2012 programme, as this can reduce the priority placed on reducing carbon impacts at source in favour of offsetting.  However, we supported the use of a travel related carbon offsetting strategy given that travel is largely unavoidable for international visitors.

As the Target Neutral Programme was voluntary, a key factor in the level of take-up for the programme was its visibility to spectators and partners and the level of public discourse and therefore awareness about climate change and carbon emission issues at the time.  The Commission has previously commented on the high level of press interest in local sustainability issues during the 2012 Games.  A notable exception to this was the general lack of media interest in global sustainability issues such as climate change or resource shortages (for example, water, or materials).  This may have played a part in the modest uptake by spectators of the offer to have their travel carbon offset.

The Commission believes that the BP Target Neutral Programme experience offers powerful lessons for future major events considering offsetting travel related carbon emissions and has a number of observations for future major event organisers.  The high standard of BP’s carbon offset programme sets a new bar for the major events industry and BP should be congratulated for its programme design in this regard.

It will be important for future events to try and establish a baseline of changed consumer preferences resulting from engagement in travel offset programmes so that learnings can be gathered about what works best and why during and after the programme has been implemented.  Early engagement by event organisers to determine a clear goal for a travel related carbon offset programme will be crucial in this regard. Defining parameters including behaviour change will assist delivery partners in designing a programme which best incentivises involvement, and which measures behaviour related impact.

Notwithstanding the very successful Park activation activity operated by BP, serious consideration should be given to ways in which spectators’ engagement with the programme could be even further strengthened, for example, by increasing the attractiveness of programme incentives or by stronger ties between event organisers and offset delivery partners.  We are aware that BP sought opportunities for greater connection with ticket holders but not all of these opportunities were given the go-ahead by games organisers.

There is merit in a globally standardised approach to calculating emissions from travel for international events. BP’s methodology would make an appropriate basis for this approach.  In communicating how an individual journey has been calculated, future programme design could optimize further the interest of the consumer and their engagement with ways to reduce emissions at source.

References: 

They think the London 2012 Olympic Games are all over but from a sustainability point of view this is the end of the beginning. Today sees the release of our report entitled “London 2012 – From vision to reality“. It documents the fantastic effort made by my team to get to practically every Olympic venue with the exception of the football stadia. Not bad for a team of four people in a few short weeks. We also visited live sites, logistics hubs, waste transfer stations and numerous other “back of house” activities that would not normally be experienced by the public who just need to expect this stuff to be done well while they have a good time. Somebody has to check this and I would like to thank the team for doing such a great job in some of the less glamorous areas of the Games.

We can conclude from our assurance work that London 2012 has indeed delivered the most sustainable Games ever. Of course there are some things that could have been done better; energy conservation was pretty poor and inconsistency in delivery between LOCOG venues and government Live Sites did not help but the overall package of a great green space, food vision, a very visible waste strategy, great public transport and access for most disabled people proved to be a gold medal winning combination.

The Commission has one more piece of work to do before we shut up shop in March 2013; this is a review we call “Beyond 2012” where we will look for evidence of an “Olympic effect” on more sustainable practices. The ODA and LOCOG have demonstrated to the construction, event management and catering industries respectively that it is possible to deliver a step change in sustainable practice. The challenge is now with those industries and the people who commission services from them to demand these standards as a minimum and for the sectors to kick on and raise the bar even higher. My observations of these sectors to date make me optimistic, there is a growing band of people and organisations who understand the business opportunities presented through more sustainable solutions.

In other areas London 2012 has exposed weaknesses. The merchandise industry served up the same old tat in slightly more sustainable packaging here or containing a small percentage of organic cotton there. This is not step change and question marks remain about ethical standards in the supply chains of some suppliers and licensees. Global brand owners such as the IOC and FIFA have the power to demand more and should use it more effectively in the future. Transparency is important too. I have to question why no other event or major project has submitted itself to scrutiny by a body such as the Commission. Instead they rely on “advisory committees”, talking shops with no real influence, accountability or added value.

The party has left town but has London 2012 inspired a generation to be more respectful to the planet and the people on it? Maybe some future commentator starting a blog with “I was 8 years old when Mo Farrah won his second gold medal” will provide the answer.

Shaun McCarthy

November 2012

I recently met with some of the team working on what LOCOG call “look and feel”, which includes everything from signage and way finding to all the banners throughout London and the messages that these are used to convey.

Some of the figures involved with this are quite remarkable. 100km of fence scrim (the material used to wrap a fence with) have been used. That’s enough to wrap a fence running all the way from the Olympic Park to the Channel Tunnel. 3,500 flags have also been used to display logos and messages aroundLondon and Olympic and Paralympic venues.

This got me thinking about the materials they are made from and what will happen to them post-Games. Maybe this makes me a ‘sustainability geek’ but someone has to think about these things! LOCOG have been thinking about it too. For example, they worked with their supplier to source alternatives to PVC and specified that that supplier to take everything back and recycle it. In some cases, they used a different material to ensure the banners and signs were more recyclable (for those fellow geeks out there, one example was using corex polypropylene instead of foamex for hard signs and banners).

Whilst the quantities used are substantial, they would have been higher if LOCOG hadn’t adopted the mantra “communicate, not decorate” and only placed “look” where they wanted people to look. Also, whilst there has been a change of materials from the Olympic Games to the Paralympic Games, only about 1/3 has changed through the swapping out of Olympic logos and replacing them with Paralympic logos. This is as opposed to a complete change. Of course, it would have been even better if only one London 2012 logo had been needed rather than having two versions but even here we have seen a step forward as LOCOG succeeded in getting both of the international committees (IOC and IPC) to agree to their respective logos being displayed side by side in some places. Hopefully we will see this integration continue for future Games so these wholesale changes become a thing of the past.

So, the look and feel is being made more sustainable but does it feel that way and will it inspire a generation? We have been asking visitors to the Games their thoughts on this. It’s been clear that people are noticing some of the key London 2012 sustainability features, in particular the parklands, the recycling provision, the micro wind turbines and the overall regeneration of the Stratford area. Whether those people are inspired to make their own behaviour more sustainable after the Games is still to be seen.

The “look and feel” aspect of the London 2012 Games didn’t set out to be overtly sustainable but various features of the biodiverse areas of the Olympic Park present their own message on this. Our Chair also wrote a recent blog about the unsung buildings in the Park – those that contribute a significant amount to the sustainability of the programme without necessarily being as well noticed. Perhaps there is actually a positive message here – that sustainability can be embedded without it necessarily having to be an obvious feature. But is this enough? Why don’t you leave a comment with your thoughts on this.

Jonathan Turner 

September 2012 

On the Tuesday of the final week of competition this has not happened to date. My team travelled to all London venues and found the tube lines to be very busy as they often are at peak times. The Docklands Light Railway struggled a little and there were some queues but nothing like the queues of several hours that were predicted. The route to the Olympic Park via West Ham is a great option, using the less busy district line. I have used this a lot and enjoy the 20 minute walk along the Greenway with the crowds, entertainers and friendly volunteers. It is good exercise, great fun and adds to the experience of visiting the Park. Visitors can take advantage of the many walking and cycling routes available and can take the opportunity to enjoy the glorious September sunshine.

Barring any last minute hitches London’s transport network and the team of people who make it work every day appears to have met the challenge of welcoming the world to our city. I hope it will encourage more people to visit and for businesses to invest their money here.

London’s transport network has always found access for disabled people a challenge. The age of some of the infrastructure does not make this easy. There are 66 step free stations in the 270 station underground network but there are still difficulties actually boarding trains at some stations. During the Games TfL made 16 key stations more accessible with use of ramps to board the trains. These were originally seen as temporary measures but now look set to remain in legacy. The facility could be expanded further. Transport campaigners claim that there are 30 additional stations that could be made more accessible with ramps.

This is true Olympic and Paralympic legacy. Long may it continue.

Shaun McCarthy

September 2012

On arrival we were transported by bus from Stratford station, my bus driver let his engine idle while we were waiting which is against LOCOG’s policy but I was assured by my fellow guests that their busses had their engines switched off. Let’s put that down to fate, the one bus I happened to take had the engine running. Bad luck rather than bad planning hopefully.

Progress through security was quick and efficient, the massive temporary structure had no air conditioning but it was very cool from natural ventilation and there was plenty of natural light. My first impression and an over- riding impression of the whole event was how friendly, helpful and well informed the staff were. There was always somebody there with a smile able to help. This contrasted slightly with my experience in Beijing where the people were lovely but did not really know what they were doing – they just made you feel better about being lost.

The Village will be a housing development in legacy with 2,700 homes, a school for all ages, a GP poly clinic, shops, playgrounds and the spanking new Stratford International DLR station on the doorstep, not to mention the massive Westfield shopping centre. During the Games the homes are kitted out for athletes with no kitchens, single beds in shared rooms and very basic cheap furniture and laminate flooring. This will all be reused or recycled after the Games and the homes will be fitted out for legacy; 50% affordable housing, 50% homes for sale. This is the first major development to be built to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4. It will be a very energy and water efficient development in legacy with living roofs and sustainable drainage systems. The school is the operations centre during the Games and the poly clinic is a medical centre for athletes.

The jewel in the sustainable crown was the catering. It is difficult to describe a hall that can seat 5,000 athletes that provides every type of food imaginable 24 hours per day at no cost to the customers. ‘Massive’ does not quite do it somehow. The sustainable experience is everywhere, from the huge HFC-free Coke refrigerator with plenty of healthy drinks from their “Innocent” subsidiary as well as their traditional products and a promise to recycle every bottle used into another bottle within 6 weeks. They have built a new recycling centre in Lincolnshire to achieve this. Healthy, locally produced food is on offer and it was very good. Paper plates and all the packaging is compostable and clearly marked to show which bin to put it in. The beer and wine bottles and plastic glasses are recyclable and also clearly marked. Breakfast the next morning was the same and the food was excellent. There was even a copy of the Village newspaper for guests with a sustainability quiz at the end. This whole system is a credit to Jan Matthews and the LOCOG team who have made painstaking preparations for several years to create a real step change in the catering and waste industries. Well done LOCOG!

Recycling at the Athletes Village

As I was leaving the Olympic Park on foot on a Saturday morning I was shocked to see theWestfieldcentre closed off by the police as a crime scene. While we were enjoying LOCOG’s hospitality a young man had lost his life in a gang fight. A chilling message that there is much to be done in legacy if London 2012 is to be truly a catalyst for sustainable regeneration and for the Olympic Park and its surrounding area to be a safe, healthy and sustainable place for people to live.

Shaun McCarthy

July 2012  

The first impression of the experience is high security, we had 3 separate ID checks to get into the Village and for specific buildings. Nigel is the director responsible for the Village and many other aspects of the Games, his pass did not have the correct date so he was refused entry until the error had been corrected. I appreciate that a large amount of additional security is necessary to ensure the Games are safe but our Commissioners have expressed concern that  additional scrutiny may continue in wider society after the Games and infringe the civil liberties of the most watched nation on earth. There has to be a balance after the Games.

The Village is the first to be located within walking distance of the main competition venues and the excellent public transport links to central London will provide a great experience for athletes of the 208 nations who will descend on us in less than 100 days. The facilities are first class, each of the apartment blocks has a green courtyard and there is high quality green space to give the Village an open, refreshing feel. We noted, however, that one area of green space is allocated for a high rise development in legacy which will detract from the ambience of the development and restrict light for residents.

A great deal of thought has been given to legacy. The operations centre will become a school and the sports fields for athletes’ entertainment will be part of the school experience. The Polyclinic will remain as a medical facility for the new residents and the ground floor will be developed with retail facilities to create a new piece of city.

This is the first major development to comply with Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4. I wondered “what would a Code 4 development feel like?”  The answer was; very little different to any other modern apartment block. The accommodation is of high quality with high levels of insulation, there are plenty of doors opening on to the balconies to provide ventilation in summer, lighting is by LEDs not bulbs but unless you are an energy geek you probably would not know the difference, neither would you know that the heating is supplied by a district heating system connected to CCHP. The only noticeable difference was the heating control system which our energy expert thought looked a little complicated, which is worrying – the systems must be useable to be effective. The future school is a great building with abundant natural light, but the transparent roof was a little noisy when the English weather did its best to disrupt our visit.

The Village has demonstrated that it is possible to live in comfortable, modern accommodation and be more sustainable. We don’t have to go back to living in caves or build houses made of straw. For London 2012 to establish this milestone for sustainable living is a major achievement to be celebrated.

Shaun McCarthy

April 2012  

We think of legacy in terms of the environmental, social and economic legacy, primarily for East London but also for the UK as a whole, we also think about the legacy of learning and how this is applied in a wider context. The track record of past Games is patchy, the Olympics helped to put Barcelona on the map as a world city and helped to regenerate the east dock area, the legacy of Athens is almost non-existent and Sydney has done well after a slow start. Beijing is emerging with a legacy of sorts but time will tell.

The time has come to consider London 2012 legacy in detail and I am grateful to my colleague Emma Synnott for an excellent and wide-ranging review which was published this week. In many ways the signs are good. There is clear evidence that the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC) take their responsibility seriously. As the baton passes from ODA and LOCOG, their job is to adopt the high standards already set and build on ever higher performance. After a difficult start the plans being developed are looking positive.

However, it is not just about OPLC or the emerging London Legacy Development Corporation – they do not own the Velodrome, the Olympic Village or the Stratford City complex; the Host Boroughs have a big role, as do organisations on the ground who have done some amazing things at street level and working with communities. We believe that the Lea Valley needs to be seen as a total ecological and socio-economic system in order to reap the undoubted benefits and to live up to the promise of a “blueprint for sustainable living” which was set by the last Government. A community of practice needs to be established to knit together the various initiatives in the area to produce a whole scheme that will be greater than the sum of its parts. This does not mean yet another bureaucratic body or a complex masterplan drawn up by people who have never lived in the area. This requires vision and leadership to galvanise the good work that has been done and to solicit the support of the necessary authorities. There is already an All Party Parliamentary Committee focused on the Olympic legacy and there is a “WaterCity” vision created by the community. We think the time has come for leaders to step up and grasp this unique opportunity.

Shaun McCarthy 

March 2012