Case Study from Iberostar: setting clear targets and using nature-based solutions to manage risk

Q: How did you create the Climate Action Plan?

A: We did it in-house. Four people led the work: Our Vice-Chairman & Chief Sustainability Officer, Gloria Fluxá; Megan Morikawa, who supervised; and the two of people who wrote the plan, with Alvaro Sanchez Lopez  covering Scope 1 and 2 and Patricia Dueñas Scope 3. We gathered data across the company and produced the plan in about six months while starting implementation.

Q: How did you choose actions?

A: We worked from the numbers. Scope 1 and 2 levers are well known. On Scope 1 we focused on refrigerant gases and fossil fuels; on Scope 2 the priorities were renewable electricity and energy efficiency. We then broke this down into concrete actions such as reducing refrigerant leakages and replacing equipment. For electricity we set an order of preference: first PPAs to decarbonise and lock price, second on-site self-consumption, and if neither is possible, certificates. We modelled impacts by geography and over time, including grid emissions factors, to prioritise where and when to act across roughly 100 hotels. Scope 3 was harder. We started with a top-down baseline with Schneider Electric to see category hot spots, and we learned from other companies through meetings and groups in Spain. Over the last year we have added more bottom-up levers, for example food choices on menus.

Q: Your plan is remarkably granular in terms of year by year targets. How did you build that?

A: The starting point was clear 2030 goals that already existed when we joined: 85% decarbonisation of Scope 1 and 2, 50% for Scope 3, and 35% energy savings, all against a 2019 baseline. We used our internal tool for Scope 1 and 2 data at hotel level, then modelled efficiencies, for example switching a gas boiler to a heat pump with a coefficient of performance around 350% versus roughly 90% efficiency for a boiler. That lets you forecast energy and emissions effects from 2019 consumption. Refrigerants needed relative targets based on best performers, often in Europe. For Scope 3 we began top-down from the Schneider footprint analysis and are now layering bottom-up actions as knowledge grows. The roadmap is what we use to decide annual investments and sequencing.

Q: What does delivery look like inside the business?

A: Empowerment and data. We built a robust but simple data system so hotel teams know where they are and can compare. We provide tools, procedures and investment guidance, and we train the people who will use them. We meet monthly with hotels and regional directors, review progress and point them to where impact will be highest. This year, if we meet the objective, we will reach 22% energy savings on the path to 35% by 2030. We set KPI goals that are tangible. A generic “reduce CO₂ per guest night” can be too abstract, so we set a hotel-level KPI on refrigerant-related emissions because teams can control leakages, recharging and equipment change-outs. Overall we track about 15 main KPIs that cover most of the sustainability agenda.

Q: How do you manage knowledge transfer across so many properties?

A: We identify sustainability ambassadors and run train-the-trainer sessions. High staff rotation means training must be continuous. We also work with the commercial team so they can communicate the basics to partners. Internally, we have two sustainability teams that work together: a science and risk team and a hotel implementation team. We now have monthly one-to-one meetings with every regional operations director; going through KPIs is also practical training.

Q: How do ownership and governance affect ambition and delivery?

A: In the Americas most hotels are owned by the company. In Mexico, all except one; in the Dominican Republic, all but one. Ownership supports long-term vision, including discussing 30–50-year risks at executive level, and it simplifies decision making and implementation. You also pay the insurance on those assets, which focuses minds. Reporting lines into the executive committee give the delivery teams the backing they need.

Q: How are climate risk and adaptation entering your work?

A: We are developing a risk-reduction strategy with a suite of tools to analyse expected climate risks across our destinations: extreme heat, drought and water stress, hurricane risk, sea-level rise, and more. The focus of our response is on nature-based solutions first, such as coral reef stewardship and mangrove restoration to reduce storm-surge risk. We are adding rigour so we can prioritise which actions, where and when using the best available science. We often start with a more qualitative understanding of low-to-high exposure, then move to more precise decision support that aligns with goals for nature and local development. 
We also work on carbon sequestration with communities, for example in Mexico, co-producing business plans so communities build capacity and can later access carbon markets themselves.
We also take water stress seriously and embedding it into business guidance. A current example is new internal guidance on pool sizing that factors in local water-stress levels. The aim is to make these perspectives standard in design and operations.

Q: What has being a Glasgow Declaration signatory changed?

A: The original decision came from our Vice-Chairman & Chief Sustainability Officer, Gloria Fluxá’s vision, acting from responsibility and leadership. Since then, we have seen recognition and practical benefits, especially in Spain, Mexico and the Dominican Republic. A concrete example: when we opened one of our new hotels, we are convinced our sustainability agenda helped secure government support. We are also invited into senior conversations, like a recent call with Coca-Cola sustainability directors who identified us as a leading company in sustainability. The commitment signals that this is bigger than one company and aligns with our intent to help change how the system functions.

Q: What advice would you give to signatories who still have not published a plan?

A: It starts at the top. You need the will from decision-makers to follow through. Then take the time to write a solid plan with good data. Ours took around six months. Secure a strong executive sponsor, talk the language of the business, and be clear on the benefits for the company. 
Build KPIs people can act on, and use the plan year by year to guide investments. Even when a pure business case is not positive, there are strategic reasons. In Scope 3, for example, we see a clear correlation between the highest-emitting suppliers and those that pose higher supply-chain risk. Closer engagement helps decarbonise and reduce risk.

Key takeaways:

•    Ownership model enables long-term risk conversations and smoother implementation.
•    Adaptation focus is on nature-based solutions and community projects
•    Addressing water-stress is integrated into design guidance
•    Glasgow Declaration membership brings recognition, access, and alignment with a wider system-change agenda.