The VISIT eco-labels Potential for harmonisation:
VISIT eco-labels & the EU Flower The VISIT eco-labels (for accommodation) have intensively
collaborate with each other, and are developing relation with other
initiatives for sustainable tourism, including the European Eco-label
for tourist accommodation service (EU Flower). The basis of joint efforts is a significant group of common criteria
and a highly reliable verification procedure of all schemes. Criteria overlap :
- 9 out of 11 VISIT eco-labels for accommodation already
require same or similar criteria for 23 different environmental
issues. These aspects also form part of the EU Flower.
- This “criteria overlap” allows the VISIT eco-labels
and the EU Flower to agree on joint targets for the next revision
of their criteria with the aim to have; for example, in 2008 a
set of 20 mandatory criteria implemented at more than 1000 certified
hotels and camping sites in Europe.
- This “common environmental
quality” level should
be communicated as added value by the tour operators and promotion
and marketing organisation.
Verification procedure :
- The VISIT standard requires an “on-site visit” as
part of the verification audit, at least once every 3 years. The
degree of detail differs from scheme to scheme. The EU Flower does
not yet make it obligatory, but recommends on-site audits to the
national competent bodies, which are responsible for the verification.
- All the schemes wish to limit the cost – and thus
the fee for the applicants. The experiences with the effectiveness
and control of hundreds of environmental criteria should allow
the eco-labels to agree on a short list of those criteria, which
in any case are controlled on-site. Such a short list may minimise
the audit cost without reducing the credibility of the results.
- On a national level the competent bodies responsible for the
EU Flower can collaborate with the VISIT eco-labels:
such as linking auditing and marketing activities. For the applicant
this would mean, limited cost and time and “two for one” benefits.
Promotion:
- Each eco-label has its own promotion and marketing approach.
Based on a set of common criteria for accommodation services and
with focus on their individual strengths, the VISIT eco-labels
and the EU Flower, should have joint promotion for mutual benefits.
Criteria
overlap:
The 30 most common criteria in the EU Flower and the VISIT
eco-labels |
6 out of 11 eco-labels require activity in this
area |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Eco-label |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
| |
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T |
waste data collection |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
energy
consumption data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
| policy setting manager |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
policy action plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
Policy
setting policy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Information to guests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
staff training |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
water consumption data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
CH |
avoid chemicals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
W
A
S
T
E |
refillable bottles/bags/barrels |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
| Disposable products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
| Composting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
| Hazardous waste |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
Paper products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
Breakfast packaging |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
waste separation guests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
waste separation staff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
W
A
T
E
R |
Rainwater/
recycled water |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
water-saving machines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
Leaks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
| Water flow taps/showers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
WC flushing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
E
N
E
R
G
Y
|
insulation of buildings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
boiler efficiency |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
| switching off
heating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
window insulation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
switching off lights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
energy efficient
devices |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
| renewable sources |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
energy efficient light bulbs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
Source: ECOTRANS, project "Tourbench",2004 |
|