Hanna Mela: Sustainability issues in travel challenge the scientific community

Travel is responsible for an important part of the carbon footprint of research institutions – sometimes even the biggest source of their climate emissions. For example, at the Finnish Environment Institute, travel accounted for around 15 percent of the institute’s total emissions in 2024. The need to reduce emissions is urgent, and many research institutions have set their own carbon neutrality targets. It is therefore important to consider how the international dimension, which is often vital to research, can be fostered with a lower climate impact.

The norm of air travel is slowly changing

Air travel is particularly harmful for the climate. In the past, business travel, especially flying, has been a sign of an important and dynamic career – also in the research community. However, the urgency of solving the climate crisis has partly changed the meanings attached to air travel.

Many of our employees at the Finnish Environment Institute experience a conflict of values when flying and want to avoid it for environmental reasons, if possible. Some others see that working to promote sustainability transformation justifies flying, or that there are practically no alternatives to flying.

One of the lessons from the Covid pandemic has been that while more and more tasks can be done remotely, creative work and building trust still require face-to-face encounters. On the other hand, online meetings have already replaced many trips that would have previously been done by flying without a second thought.

Travel needs and opportunities vary

Travel can be important for building international networks, especially at early career stages. However, the need for travel varies depending on individual responsibilities.

Travel is also an issue of work well-being. Travelling can be stressful, and for some, care responsibilities or work situation affect how much time they can spend on a work trip. This can limit the use of lower-carbon forms of travel, such as trains and ships.

Guidance and good practices need to be developed

In a research institute, travel is tightly linked to various projects. Their planning can therefore influence the amount and ways of travel. For example, a goal of minimising travel emissions and favouring on-line meetings can be written into the project plan. From a climate change perspective, it is best to invest in less frequent trips that combine several meetings, and, for example, longer researcher exchange. It is essential to identify occasions where physical presence is important and prioritize them.

Project managers and immediate superiors are key people in assessing the necessity of travel. A broader discussion within the research community is also necessary. When is travel particularly important and for whom? What is a reasonable amount of travel in a research organisation and at different career stages?

Clear guidelines could encourage lower-carbon ways of travel, such as trains and ships. Slower land-based travel is not suitable for everyone or in all situations, but at Syke, for example, some employees want to travel to Europe without flying. Travel time is currently not officially considered working time, which is why slower travel can appear more expensive. However, clarifying the guidelines could help. For example, it would be good if one could agree with their superior about working on a ship or train. In this case, travelling would be comparable to remote work.

By developing guidance and sharing good practices, slower travel can be made an easier and more attractive option, which contributes to reducing travel emissions and encourages people to consider travel more carefully in general.

Towards a more sustainable travel culture

Simply focusing on the amount of travel without talking about what is achieved through travel can easily miss the point. It is essential that each trip is carefully planned. When you put an effort in physical presence at the right stage, the networks you create will also bear fruit with less travel.

Based on the interviews we made at the Finnish Environment Institute our employees are somewhat sceptical about quantitative emission reduction targets for travel and rely more on raising awareness about the topic. This is in line with other studies on the subject: research institutes generally support soft methods for reducing emissions from travel. At the same time, the question arises whether emissions can be reduced sufficiently without quantitative targets. At our own institute, emissions from travel have already returned to almost pre-pandemic levels.

An organisation like us that studies the sustainability transition, and a developed country like Finland, have a greater responsibility to reduce its carbon footprint. We can serve as an example and challenge other research institutions to build more sustainable travel practices.

A change in academic travel culture is necessary from a climate perspective, and the change has already begun. The best way to reap the benefits is to jump on board and develop lower-emission ways to create and maintain international relationships. However, this requires listening to different parties and a careful understanding of travel needs. At the same time, we must promote the real goal: research and a sustainability transformation.

Hanna Mela is a researcher at the Finnish Environment Institute's Climate Solutions Unit. She is interested in the sustainability transformation of transport and its promotion, and the various forms it takes. 

Opinions of blog contributors do not necessarily reflect the official views and opinions of the Finnish Environment Institute.