The document presents research findings on virtual conferencing in the university sector, highlighting that virtual meetings can significantly reduce travel costs and carbon emissions. Despite reported benefits such as improved work-life balance and communication, barriers like lack of technology and support hinder widespread adoption. The conclusions emphasize the need for institutional policies, technical support, and senior management backing to encourage the use of virtual meetings.

1. Conferencing in the Sector
- Research Findings
Peter James and Lisa Hopkinson
SusteIT, University of Bradford, UK
www.goodcampus.org
6 March 2012, University of Warwick

2. Previous Research
• SusTEL
- 7 partners in 5 countries
• Multiple surveys
- 10,000 + responses
- conferencing & flexible
working at BT & customers
- conferencing at DFID
• New ways of working
- can reduce global carbon by
0.5% by 2020 (Smart 2020)

3. Virtually Sustainable
• One of 3 JISC Green IT projects
• Surveys in 9 universities
- Aberystwyth, Bangor, Bradford, Glasgow, Leeds,
MMU, Staffordshire, Swansea, UCLAN
- 1120 users; 684 non-users
• Survey of university travel coordinators
• Three workshops with c 150 attendees
• 11 Briefing papers and case studies
- e.g. Llandeillo College; University of Kent

4. Virtual Meetings
• Content – audio; text; video; web
• Location – suite, mobile VC, desktop, portable
• Interactiveness – 1:many; 1:few; 1:1
• Diverse use of technologies
- Janet Videoconferencing enabled
- Skype
- Blackboard Collaborate
- Adobe Connect
- Flash Meeting
- Audio (BT MeetMe)

5. Conferencing Works!
• Last virtual meeting
- completely successful for 65%
- partially successful for 28%
- avoided travel for 54%
- average 300/1346 miles avoidance
- saved £106 of travel/subsistence costs
- released 8 hours unproductive time
• Desire for more
- 81% of current users see more opportunities
- 46% of non-users if easier to access and use
- teaching & learning; meetings; collaborative research;
conferences; interviews

6. Sector Patterns
• Last call averages
- 1 hour length
- 4 locations
- 9 participants
• Access mainly from office/suite
• Main uses
- continuing regular discussion
- specifically set up call
• Limited use for teaching and learning

7. Key Benefits - 1
• Reduced stress & time of
travel (75%)
• Better control of time (61%)
• Easier to stay in touch (49%)
• Better work-life balance

8. Key Benefits - 2
• Compensate for travel
difficulties
• Easier to arrange meetings
• Involve more people
• Improved communication
with external partners
• Tangible travel and
subsistence savings

9. Disbenefits
“In a virtual meeting do you get virtual tea and biscuits?”
• Reduced face to face contact (19%)
• Less effective meetings (16%)
• Bad experiences
• Can’t replace face to face
• Better when relationships
established

10. Barriers to Greater Use
• Difficulties (perceived or
actual) in setting up
• Lack of confidence or ability to
use technology
• Lack of equipment or facilities
• Lack of support from
colleagues
• Lack of knowledge about
facilities

11. Travel Coordinators - 1
• 52 individuals from 44 separate institutions
• 31%: institutional travel plan encourages virtual meetings
& teleworking
• 66%: institution has no quantified targets to reduce staff
business travel
• A few, e.g. Glasgow, have specific VC targets
• 72%: considerable or very considerable potential at their
institution, especially business meetings & intra-site travel

12. Travel Coordinators - 2
• Main barriers similar to university surveys
• 3 best means of encouraging greater uptake:
• Senior manager support e.g. by using it more (66%)
• Simple technical guides to technologies (53%)
• Demo projects in pilot areas e.g. estates, IT (53%)

13. Conclusions
• Considerable benefits from, and opportunities for
more, virtual meetings
• Virtual meetings don’t always replace travel
- new uses; stimulating contact
• Considerable CO2 benefits for all
- largest element in research unis is (long haul) air
• Air generally dominates CO2 equivalent travel
• But overall business benefits are mainly related
to short-medium distance travel air travel
• Best to target UNPRODUCTIVE travel?

14. What’s Needed - Universities
• Technical support
• Training
• Ease of booking
• Suitable dedicated facilities
• Conferencing “champions”
• Institution-wide policy and support
• Culture of usage supported by senior staff
• Target areas of existing use (audio, skype etc)

15. What’s Needed - Sector
• Sector support for wide
variety of technologies
• Interoperability of
different technologies
• Senior level support
• Leadership from sector
bodies

16. Assessing Carbon Impacts
• 1. Scoping
- e.g. identifying the reference case
- determining impact significance
- work/private travel; buildings; eqt
• 2. Calculating impacts per virtual meeting
- net MINUS gross (i.e. eqt, rebound etc.)
- applying air uplift
- range of cases (low, medium, high)
- how many participants avoid how much travel?
- how many virtual meetings in a university?
• 3. Conducting reality check
• 4. Producing figures