PROJECT DESCRIPTION
BACKGROUND
Camping is an important part of the tourism sector. It is important for municipalities as owners of camp sites or as those responsible for planning of land use. However, at European camp sites very few measures have been taken to improve the quality of the environment and to reduce environmental damage. In particular there is a lack of: - integration of environmental considerations into the management of camp sites - structuring and planning of such measures - continuity and control of the processes once undertaken - documentation and evaluation of these measure. These deficiencies could be redressed by the ECOCAMPER project. ECOCAMPING is an initiative of the BodenseeStiftung. Between August 1999 and September 2001 fourteen camping sites at Lake Constance and six at the Lago Maggiore participated in the development and introduction of an environmental management system for camp sites, based on the European Environmental Management and Audit scheme (EMAS). Working through regional and international workshops, and individual meetings, the camp site managers dealt with the areas of: Energy, Waste, Water, Traffic, Site design, Education in environmental problems, and Supply. The experiences of ECOCAMPING will influence the development of EMAS guideline for tourist services.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of the project was to introduce permanent environmental measures at camp sites and to make these measures an integral part of camp site management. In doing so, the aim was to improve the quality of the environment on camp sites and reduce environmental damage. In order to achieve concrete conclusions regarding the overall environmental impact, the project also aimed to analyse and document the results. The following implementation steps were planned: 1. Managerial measures, lasting the entire duration of the project, were aimed at ensuring goals within the given cost and time limitations. Method: A project team and a project committee with regional and international experts was to be appointed, regular meetings of the project team held, data collection organised, workshops prepared and analysed, the project evaluated by an external committee, and time and financial scheduling regularly checked. Expected results: Planning of costs and time, analysis of data collection, evaluation of results, interim and financial reports, final report. 2. Development and pilot implementation of the environmental management system at 15 camp sites at Lake Constance and Lago Maggiore Method: Research on all European and international environmental and quality management systems for the service sector was to be conducted and the results compared. Environmentally relevant parameters were to be set, ex ante and ex post data collected, and workshops were to be held in each region and a checklist developed (also as PC-software). Results: A complete overview of environmental management in the service sector, workshop reports, usable checklist and software, submission/availability of ex-ante and ex-post-data and of EMAS specific documentation. Medium-term: EMAS-certification of the firms involved. 3. International exchange of experience between public and private camp sites. Publicising the results. Method: 4 international workshops were to be held, an information brochure produced, a website presentation developed, and an exhibition was to be designed and held. A presentation for trade fairs was also to be designed. Results: Trilingual information brochure, workshop reports, international media reports, exhibition, documentation of trade fair presentations.
RESULTS
Thanks to savings in energy and water, and reductions in waste etc., this project concluded that there is an economic benefit for the participants of ECOCAMPING. Furthermore, there are also marketing benefits due to an enhanced public image, stronger media interest and a general increase in acceptance in the region. Thanks to the introduction of effective environment management systems, internal communication is also improved. This results in indirect cost savings, but these are very difficult to quantify. ECOCAMPING also improves safety aspects, through measures concerning emergency precautions or dealing with hazardous substances. This also has economic benefits by reducing business risk and its associated costs. Unfortunately this has not yet resulted in a reduction in insurance costs. The exchange of experiences between camp site managers during the workshops and on other occasions also lead to considerable savings and other improvements. Overall however, the potential benefits for ECOCAMPING participants depends largely on the situation of the respective camp site. In terms of savings, the following respresent the best case results: (Scenario: high saving potential) -> all figures are estimates based on the present experience at Lake Constance and Baden-Wurttemberg 50 -70 % reduction in waste charges by consistent waste avoidance and systematic separation 30 -50 % reduction in water costs by use of water saving technologies and consumption dependent charging of the hot-water 10 -30 % reduction in electricity costs by consistent use of electricity economising technologies, regular checks of the site electrical equipment, renunciation of electrical radiators, and consumption dependent charges of the electricity costs for campers. 40 -60 % reduction in gas or fuel oil costs by modernisation of the hot-water and heating system as well as the identification of energy expensive areas (e.g. a lack of insulation of hot-water pipes, open windows and doors in heated areas). An extract of the results of a recent study on more sustainable consumer behaviours on holidays show that: =>At present, none of the different holiday decisions take account of environmental issues. =>Those interviewed do not mention environmental or conservational topics in connection with holidays. However, once mentioned they are quite open-minded. Generall speaking a sound environment and landscape is still taken for granted, which may be the reason for the initial interest and engagement. Most holiday makers are only conscious of the importance of the environment when disturbances occur (e.g. waste in the landscape, dirty bath water, noise etc.) This is when there is strong environmental consciousness. =>Communication is very important in highlighting that a high quality environment should not be taken as granted, but should for example, be a deciding factor in the choice of holiday destination. =>Holidays must allow for the greatest possible freedom. The holidaymaker must have the choice to do what he/she wants. All constraints and restrictions contradict this essential feeling of freedom. This is an important hindrance factor for environmentally friendly behaviour on holidays which is apparently in contradiction to total liberty. This hindrance factor is however only a problem if environmentally friendly behaviours are associated with perceived restrictions and renunciations. =>According to our interviews it is likely that most holidaymakers are not willing to invest more time or money or to give up experiences and amenities in favour of the environment and conservation. This is why communication should only focus on activities which motivate holidaymakers into environmentally friendly behaviour and which do not impose considerable restrictions. It should be more fun, and aimed at creating a more positive feeling, with varied experiences and sensory satisfaction in connection with environmentally friendly behaviour. Experiences of the project promoter: Environmental protection measures which are carried out in the context of an environment management system on camp sites should under no circumstances lead to a general loss of quality. On the contrary: quality, environmental protection and safety should be brought into harmony thanks to participation in ECOCAMPING and to the introduction of an environmental management system. Only commercially successful camping site with satisfied customers will be able to concentrate on environment measures in the longterm, and will not be forced to generate shortterm profits at the expense of the environment and safety. Generally you should always look at the specific situation on the ground. Permanent campers have considerably different demands to tourist campers. An assessment of the acceptance of environment measures shows that the opinion of single permanent campers can not be taken as the norm. In case of doubt, the only feasible way is the systematic interview of the guests, as was carried out on all ECOCAMPING sites at Lake Constance. Examples of profit areas would be: =>Establish a scale of resources according to the criteria of ECOCAMPING (separation of the fractions, clean, clearly arranged, sheltered and provided with additional use) =>Establish a nature pond with swimming possibilities =>Offer and use of fresh, regional products in catering and shops, organic if possible. =>Provide bicycle rental (free of charge for shopping, etc..) =>Organise a holiday program with a focus on nature =>Establish a nature area =>Avoid carcinogenic scents in the sanitary area =>Rent solar cookers and grills to guests =>Provide a magazine exchange box Examples of loss areas could be: =>Too rigorous control mechanisms for waste separation (in principle, waste separation is welcomed by the guests, though) =>Use of tokens for showers (chip card systems with exact invoice are regarded preferred by guests) =>Car-free spaces (car-free camping sites do not record any sales volume losses at Lake Constance) =>Limitations on drinking (can cause debate on camp sites with youthful audience)