Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Theoretical Study Between the Two Environmental Management Systems: Eco Management Audit Scheme – Emas - and ISO 14000

A Theoretical Study Between the Two Environmental Management Systems: Eco Management Audit Scheme... The concept of an environmental management system evolved in the early nineties. An environmental management system exists to help organizations minimize how their operations (processes etc.) negatively affect the environment (i.e. cause adverse changes to air, water, or land), comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements, and continually improve in the above. An environmental management system can also manage natural resources, and improve the reliability and credibility of the environmental policies. At the European level we have EMAS. The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is the EU's voluntary scheme designed for companies and other organisations committing themselves to evaluate, manage and improve their environmental performance. This was introduced by a European Union council regulation (No. 1836/29.06.1993), requiring implementation in all European Union Member States. EMAS was formally introduced in the United Kingdom in April 1995. ISO 14000 is an International Standard (1996) Applicable on an international scale. This paper aims to make a theoretical comparison between these two environmental management systems. Keywords: environmental management system, EMAS, ISO 14000, European Union . JEL Classification: Q2, O2, N5. 1. Introduction A management system is a system used to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objectives. It includes organizational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures and resources1. An environmental management system is a part of an organization's management system used to develop and implement its environmental policy and manage its environmental aspects1. According to the international standard, ISO 14001, an Environmental Management System (EMS) is "the part of the overall management system that includes organizational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes, and resources for developing, implementing, achieving, reviewing and maintaining the environmental policy2." Environmental management system (EMS) 3refers to the management of an organization's environmental programs in a comprehensive, systematic, planned and documented manner. It includes the organizational structure, planning and resources for developing, implementing and maintaining policy for environmental protection. The term can also refer to software systems for organizational environmental management. An Environmental Management System is defined by the EPA2 as "a set of processes and practices that enable an organization to reduce its environmental impacts and increase its operating efficiency." This focus on http://apo-tokyo.org/videoclips/resources/D1L2.pdf REGULATION (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001, Article 2(k), Definitions 3 http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism processes and practices is common to all EMSs, which are generally founded on the "Plan, Do Check, Act", (Figure 1). The British Standards Institute notes that an environmental management system (EMS) is: "the organisational structure, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for determining and implementing environmental policy." The concept of an environmental management system evolved in the early nineties and its origin can be traced back to 1972, when the United Nations organized a Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was launched. These early initiatives led to the establishment of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) and the adoption of the Montreal Protocol and Basel Convention. PLAN Policy Review Organization Objectives / Targets ACT Corrective action Systems reviews DO Records Process / continuous improvement CHECK Audits Figure 1. The model of an environmental system In 1992, the first Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro, which served to generate a global commitment to the environment (RMIT University). In the same year, BSI Group published the world's first environmental management systems standard, BS 7750. This supplied the template for the development of the ISO 14000 series in 1996, by the International Organization for Standardization which has representation from committees all over the world (ISO). As of 2010, ISO 14001 is now used by at least 223 149 organizations in 159 countries and economies4. In 1946, delegates from 25 countries met in London and decided to create a new international organization, of which the object would be "to facilitate the international coordination and unification of industrial standards". The new organization, ISO, officially began operations on 23 February 1947, in Geneva, Switzerland5. An Environmental Management System (EMS): Serves as a tool to improve environmental performance; Provides a systematic way of managing an organization's environmental affairs; Is the aspect of the organization's overall management structure that addresses immediate and long term impacts of its products, services and processes on the environment; Gives order and consistency for organizations to address environmental concerns through the allocation of resources, assignment of responsibility and ongoing evaluation of practices, procedures and processes; Focuses on continual improvement of the system. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm Potential Costs6 Internal Staff (manager) time Other employee time (Note: Internal labor costs represent the bulk of the EMS resources expended by most organizations) External Potential consulting assistance; Outside training of personnel. Potential Benefits Improved environmental performance; Enhanced compliance; Pollution prevention; Resource conservation; New customers/markets; Increased efficiency/reduced costs; Enhanced employee morale; Enhanced image with public, regulators, lenders, investors; Employee awareness of environmental issues and responsibilities. 2. About ISO 14000 and EMAS ISO 14000 represents a family of standards related to environmental management that exists to help organizations7 to: minimize how their operations (processes etc.) negatively affect the environment (i.e. cause adverse changes to air, water, or land), comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements, and continually improve in the above. ISO 14000 is similar to ISO 9000 quality management in that both pertain to the process of how a product is produced, rather than to the product itself. As with ISO 9000, certification is performed by third-party organizations rather than being awarded by ISO directly. The ISO 19011 audit standard applies when auditing for both 9000 and 14000 compliance at once. The requirements of ISO 14000 are an integral part of the European Union's Eco ­ Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). EMAS`s structure and material requirements are more demanding, foremost concerning performance improvement, legal compliance and reporting duties7. The Eco - Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a voluntary environmental management instrument, which was developed in 1993 by the European Commission. It enables organizations to assess, manage and continuously improve their environmental performance. The scheme is globally applicable and open to all types of private and public organizations. In order to register with EMAS, organizations must meet the requirements of the EU EMAS ­ Regulation8. a. The EMAS Regulation 1836/93 was first introduced in July 1993 as an environmental policy tool devised by the European Commission, in a step towards the Community's goal of sustainable development. The EMAS scheme was open for voluntary participation by organisations from April 1995, and its scope restricted participation to sites operating industrial activities. In 1996, the international environmental management system standard, EN ISO 14001:1996 was recognised as a step towards achieving EMAS. In 2001 the revised Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 (EMAS II) was adopted. Its main elements were9: b. the extension of the scope of EMAS to all sectors of economic activity including local authorities; http://www.epa.gov/ http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-Management_and_Audit_Scheme 9 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/tools Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism c. the integration of ISO 14001 as the environmental management system required by EMAS, so that progressing from ISO 14001 to EMAS is smoother and does not entail duplication; d. the adoption of a visible and recognisable EMAS logo to allow registered organisations to publicise their participation in EMAS more effectively; e. the involvement of employees in the implementation of EMAS; f. the strengthening of the role of the environmental statement to improve the transparency of communication of environmental performance between registered organisations and their stakeholders and the public; and g. a more thorough consideration of indirect effects including capital investments, administrative and planning decisions, procurement procedures, choice and composition of services (e.g. catering). In 2009 the EMAS Regulation has been revised and modified for the second time. Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 ("EMAS III") was published on 22 December 2009. The revised EMAS Regulation came into effect on 11 January 2010 (See FAQ on "New Provisions in EMAS" for additional information). Representatives from some fifty countries around the globe have agreed to the draft international standard (DIS) on environmental management systems (ISO/DIS 14001) issued by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The standard is based on the concept that the organization will periodically review and evaluate its environmental management system in order to identify opportunities for improvement and their implementation. Improvements in its environmental management system are intended to result in additional improvements in environmental performance. When the ISO standard is formally adopted, it is anticipated that existing national EMS standards, such as BS 7750 (UK), IS 310, (Ireland), NF X30 - 200 (France) and UNE 77 801(2)-94 (Spain) will be withdrawn and replaced by the single international EMS standard. Adoption by the European Council of ISO 14001 as the standard to implement Council Regulation EEC/1836/93 on a Community Environmental Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) was taken in 1993 became operational in 199510. It was originally restricted to companies in industrial sectors. With the first revision of the EMAS Regulation in 2001 (EMAS II), the scheme opened to all economic sectors including public and private services. In addition, EMAS II was strengthened by the integration of the environmental management requirements of ISO 14001; by adopting a new EMAS logo to signal engagement to stakeholders; and by considering more strongly indirect effects such as those related to financial services or administrative and planning decisions. The latest revision of EMAS came into effect on 11 January 2010 (EMAS III). With the introduction of EMAS III, the scheme is globally applicable and no longer limited to EU Member States. With EMAS III the EU also introduced obligatory Key Performance Indicators (KPI) in order to harmonize reporting on environmental performance. The objective for introducing the EMAS Regulation in July 1993 was to create another environmental policy tool to achieve the community's goal of sustainable development. As such, it is important that EMAS demonstrably generates positive externalities in the form of improved environmental performance and increased levels of regulatory compliance, leading to a lower environmental impact of registered organisations (Vernon, J., Peacock, M., Belin, A., Ganzleben, C., and Candell, M. 2009). All organizations listed in the EMAS-Register run an environmental management system according to the EMAS requirements. Because ISO 14001 is an integral part of EMAS, these organizations automatically comply with the requirements that the international standard demands as well. However, EMAS registered organizations fulfill requirements that go beyond the scope of ISO 14001. EMAS registered organizations demonstrate11: Credibility: the proper implementation of EMAS is assessed by qualified and independent environmental verifiers. Transparency: by periodically reporting on their environmental performance. Those reports include information on key performance indicators. The reports must be validated by an environmental verifier. Continuous improvement process: by committing themselves to continuous improvement of their actual environmental performance. This performance is also evaluated by an environmental verifier. ISO 14001 only requires improving the environmental management system itself. Compliance: by fully complying with applicable environmental legislation. Stakeholder engagement: by involving employees and other stakeholders in order to benefit from their commitment, ideas, skills and experiences. ISO 14001, Environmental Management System, Self-Assessment Checklist, March 1996, - Revised November 2000 to reflect numbering scheme of final standard - Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI), available at http://www.gemi.org/resources/iso_111.pdf 11 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/fs_iso_en.pdf Sheldon and Yoxon in 2006 wrote that in the 1980s, the market started to express a preference for environmental awareness as a corporate characteristic. No one would deny that the amount of environmental legislation has increased considerably since the period, though definitive figures are harder to agree upon. They continue that at the time of publication in 1979, British Standard BS 5750 was the world's first national standard on quality management systems, or indeed any type of management system. It provided a remarkably long ­ lasting model, and is still in use today as the international standard ISO 9000. In Europe, the European Commission decided to encourage the take ­ up of a similar, but in some ways more prescriptive, voluntary scheme by promoting something called the Eco Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). ISO 14001 and EMAS have done a lot to provide a focus of activity in the development of EMS. Zutshi, and Sohal in 2004 said that the ISO 14001 standard involves implementation and continuous improvement of five key elements: the environmental policy; the environmental plan; implementation and operation of programs to meet objectives and targets; checking and corrective action; and management review. Planning Checking & Corrective Action Implementation Continuous Improvement Environmental Policy Management Reviews Figure 2. The ISO 14001 EMS Model 12 The boxes shown in Figure 2 are considered to be the five major sections of the ISO 14001 EMS Model, and are described in the standard as follows13: Environmental Policy ­ Establishes and communicates an organization's position and commitment as it relates to energy and the environment. Planning ­ Identifies energy and environmental issues and requirements, and defines the initiatives and resources needed to achieve the environmental policy and economic goals. Implementation and Operations ­ Describes the procedures, programs and responsibilities necessary to implement the key initiatives to achieve goals. Checking and Corrective Action ­ Regularly monitors and assesses the effectiveness of energy and environmental management activities. Management Review ­ High-level evaluation of the management system as a whole to determine its overall effectiveness in terms of driving continual improvement and achieving business goals. Culley in 1998 wrote that over the past 20 years or so quality systems have become a major focus in business circles. A business' customer base is continually demanding better product at a lower cost and, in doing so, has forced executive management to rethink how they operate their business from top to bottom. He continued that apart from a few of the major corporations, a structured quality system early and was at best http://www.epa.gov/ems/ Rendell, E.G., McGinty, K.A. 2004. Environmental Management Systems A Guidebook for Improving Energy and Environmental Performance in Local Government. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism primitive and management was somewhat shortsighted to see the long term benefits. This short ­ term thinking has caused the United States to fall behind Europeans and Japanese in the quality of its manufacturing and in implementing ISO 9000. It has only been recently that US firms have begun to regain the competitive edge. Unfortunately, this "wait and see" approach to new ideas, standards, and methods of doing business has been the norm for US companies. It continues to dominate some of the thinking with the newly released ISO 14000 Environmental Management Standards. Emilsson, and Hjelm, in 2002, consider that an EMS is a continual cycle of planning, implementing, reviewing and improving the processes and actions that an organization undertakes to meet its business and environmental goals as well as legislative requirement. It is a system that manages the environmental performance of an organization, as well as other business benefits. It is purposed at making organizations more environmental proactive and efficient. Kaur in 2010 thinks that a management commitment, employee empowerment, feedback and review, and rewards are key elements in increasing employee motivation for successful implementation of an ISO14001 EMS and hence enhanced environmental performance. In 1995 Fredericks, and McCallum argue that ISO14000 may become the global passport for environmentally responsible business, just like ISO 9000 set the standard for Quality Management. ISO 14 000 certification may mean clear environmental goals and regular performance reports, but it is no guarantee of clean and efficient practices on the ground. They conclude that the standard is about management systems not about environmental pollution prevention or clean-up. Kaur concluded in 2010 that the rewards and employee willingness to try eco - initiatives scales suggest good internal consistency and adequate construct validity. In summary the research findings suggest that middle and lower levels employees in some of the leading environmentally proactive ISO14001 EMS companies in Malaysia are rarely rewarded for their environmental initiatives. Moreover given that employees' job appraisals rarely include an environmental category, the proposed employee willingness to try eco - initiatives evaluations could provide practitioners a tool to assess employees' performance evaluation According to EMAS Factsheet available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/, we emphasise the difference between EMAS and ISO 14000 is in the Table 1. Table 1. The difference between EMAS and ISO 14000 EMAS Status Under legal bases (EU Member States and EEA countries). Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council under public law. The entity to be registered shall not exceed the boundaries of the Member State, and it is intended to go towards entities and sites. Included commitment to continual improvement of environmental performance of the organization. Obligatory preliminary review, when is the first time that the organization sets its environmental status. Identification and evaluation of the environmental aspects (direct and indirect). Establishment of criteria for assessing the significance of the environmental aspects. Obligatory to demonstrate it. Required full legal compliance. There is a compliance-audit. EMAS External communication Open dialogue with the public. Public Environmental Statement (validated for verifiers) ISO 14000 Under no legal bases (International: world wide). ISO standard under private law. Does not go towards entities or sites. Does not include a commitment to the continual improvement of environmental performance but of the performance of the system. Initial review is recommended, but not required. Required only a procedure able to identify environmental aspects. Only commitment to comply with applicable legal requirements. There is no complianceaudit ISO 14000 Not open dialogue with the public. Only is required to respond to relevant communication from external interested parts. Control by public is not possible Organisation Environmental policy Initial environmental review Environmental aspects Legal compliance Continual improvement Management review Contractors and suppliers Employees involvement Internal environmental auditing Auditor Audits External verification Verification/ Certification Scope Authorities are informed Logo Required periodically improvement without a defined frequency Required an environmental performance in the management, but not through a performance audit Relevant procedures are communicated to contractors and suppliers No Included only system audit against the requirements of the standard Advised the independence of the auditor Check environmental system performance. No frequency required No Certifiers accredited according to EAC code No obligation No Required annual improvement Is wider and requires an evaluation of the environmental performance of the organization, based in a performance-audit Required influence over contractors and suppliers Active involvement of employees and their representatives Includes: system-audit, a performance-audit (= evaluation of environmental performance) and an environmental compliance-audit (= determination of legal compliance) Required the independence of the auditor Check for improvement of environmental performance. Frequency required: 3 year cycle during which all areas are verified at least once Accredited environmental verifiers Verifiers accredited according to NACE codes Obligation by Validation of Environmental Statement Yes The specification for EMAS is the same as for ISO 14001 with the exception that EMAS additionally requires an environmental report to be published, which is optional under ISO 14001, and places greater emphasis on pollution prevention and regulatory compliance. Regulatory bodies are consulted before a company is registered under EMAS and can object. From the point of view of Rojanschi, V., the comparison between the two environmental management systems, EMAS and ISO 14000 is in the table 2. Table 2. Comparison between the two environmental management systems (Rojanschi, V. et al.2004) EMAS Legislative regulation in the EU (1836/29.06.1993) Applicable only in EU Restricted to specific locations of industrial activity Requires initial assessment of the environmental impact Continuous improvement of environmental performance at the level of the best technology available at the moment Requires a public environmental declaration, allows the access to the environmental policy and program Frequency of implementation of environmental audit is max. 3 years EMS requires the existence of a register of the effects on the environment ISO 14000 International Standard (1996) Applicable on an international scale Applicable to products and services business, including nonindustrial activities (local administration) The preliminary environmental analysis is not required and it is only suggested in Appendix 4.2.1. of standard The continuous improvement of EMS is reflected by the increasing environmental performance Suggests external communication, but it is up to the company to decide the content of information, requires public access only to the environmental policy ISO does not specify how often the environmental audit must be carried out Not required Compared to ISO, EMAS Kolk5 adds in 2000: Independently verified environmental reporting; Forces choice of best available technology; Description of environmental impacts or effects. EMAS was initially used only for the manufacturing industry, energy production, waste management and mining, whereas ISO applies to all sectors. Furthermore, Jiang, and Bansal in 2001 consider that the credibility of ISO 14001certification can signal to outside stakeholders that the firm is committed to managing its environmental impacts and provide additional legitimacy benefits that an in-house EMS cannot. ISO 14001 is spread worldwide, Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism with Japan, Germany and the UK as the leaders of number of certifications. Only Germany and Austria recommends EMAS before ISO. There is an industry coalition in USA which is against ISO 14001 as a regulatory standard. US companies avoid ISO 14001 as they are afraid of it becoming a regulatory standard. Sheps concludes in 2008 that all management systems/standards are aimed to minimize business risks in the different areas they cover. In addition, ISO 14001 specifies management review after the "Check" step. Management review requires an organization's top managers to periodically review the EMS to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness14. A study made by Maier, and Vanstone, in 200515 shows that there are significant national variations in the implementation of both certified and uncertified environmental management systems (as illustrated in the graph below). The lowest levels are found in Hong Kong, Ireland and Singapore (over 50% have an inadequate EMS) and the highest in Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Denmark and Portugal (less than 5% with an inadequate EMS). Table 3. The percentage companies with EMAS or ISO 14001 certified sites Country Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hong Kong Ireland Italy Japan Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Singapore Spain Sweden Switzerland UK USA Total Percentage Companies with EMAS certified sites 0.0 57.1 27.3 0.0 22.2 45.5 8.0 59.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 0.0 7.1 0.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 28.6 6.3 2.2 6.7 Percentage Companies with ISO14001 certified sites 38.3 71.4 45.5 38.1 88.9 100.0 72.0 88.9 87.5 20.0 40.0 66.7 91.3 57.1 57.1 80.0 75.0 40.0 80.0 84.2 85.7 54.2 35.7 59.8 This study concluded that almost 60% of companies (59.8%) have adopted certified environmental management systems (EMAS or ISO 14001). Again wide variations can be seen in national adoption rates. Less than 40% of companies in Hong Kong, Australia, Canada and the US have sites certified to ISO14001. This contrasts with Japan and Finland where over 90% of companies have some ISO 14001 or EMAS certified sites. EMAS certification is less widespread than ISO 14001 even within Europe. In Belgium, Switzerland, Norway and Finland over a quarter of companies have some EMAS certified sites and in Austria and Germany over half the companies have some EMAS certification. There is a clear preference for ISO 14001 certification, either because of its global nature, thereby being more useful and more easily recognizable outside Europe or because the requirements of EMAS are more demanding than those of ISO 14001. http://www.epa.gov/ Maier, S., Vanstone, K., 2005. Do good environmental management systems lead to good environmental performance? Research briefing. Maier, and Vanstone believe that companies in the US, in particular, have historically been more tightly regulated. The high level of certification to ISO 14001 and EMAS standards in Germany is partly explained by the strong public awareness of environmental issues historically and the desire by companies to demonstrate a commitment to managing their environmental impacts. Some German companies also demand certified management systems from their suppliers, which supports the high adoption rate. The high adoption of ISO 14001 in Japan is primarily due to the country's experience with the quality standard ISO 9000. But EU reports show that since 2004, the number of organizations and sites with EMAS registrations in the EU increased steadily16. Since 2004 corporate registrations are possible and organizations can register all their sites under one registration number. In order to give a more accurate picture of EMAS development, the European Commission consequently started to collect information on the number of sites in 2004; this resulted in a documentation of a total of 7,773 sites certified according to EMAS in 2010. These reports reveal that while EMAS and ISO 14001 (Environmental Management Systems) share the same objective, EMAS goes beyond several ISO requirements. A comparison with statistics on ISO 14001 reveals that the popularity of EMAS is still relatively low: ISO reports a total of 89,237 certifications in Europe in 2009, with Spain, Italy, United Kingdom, Romania, Germany and Czech Republic in the top ten world-wide. EU reports show that growth in EMAS registrations was strongest in Southern European countries. The Member States which have a long-standing EMAS tradition such as Germany, Sweden, Austria and Denmark experienced a decline in the number of registrations from 2003 to 2010. This can be partly explained by the fact that demonstrating continuously improving environmental performance (as is required be the EMAS scheme) is difficult to achieve for organizations that have already been implementing EMAS for some time as compared to companies just entering the scheme. The decline of EMAS - registered organizations in these countries was offset mainly by the growth in Southern European countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain. These countries multiplied their numbers of EMAS - registered organizations by a factor ranging between three (Spain) and six (Greece). Burja in 2012 makes an analysis on the application of EMAS and he thinks that at the moment when Romania joined to European Union, the organizations registered with EMAS had had an increasing dynamic. In 2007 at the EU-27 level, EMAS had been implemented in 3,908 organizations and companies, by which 37.5% in Germany, 23.2% in Spain, 19.3% in Italy, 6.5% in Austria and very few in the other countries. In the same year, Romania appears with a single organization registered in EMAS system. In 2011 in EU there are 4,511 organizations which function with EMAS, the most being in Germany (29.8%). An important growth of number of organizations with EMAS was registered in Spain and Italy, with a weight of 27.4%, respectively 25.7% from the total European Union's organizations with EMAS. In 2011, Romania has only 5 organizations which implemented this environmental standard, according to the EMAS National Register. Burja shows that in Romania, in comparison with the situation from the other developed countries of EU, the number of EMAS certificated organizations is modest, within its economy is manifested a tendency of a strong increasing in the number of firms which had obtained certification on a management system in compliance with national and international standards. He thinks that for Romanian companies, practice and experience of EU's organizations which function with EMAS reveal the voluntary adoption of an environment management system as a possible modality of developing the sustainability level. Burja concludes that the increase of the number of Romanian organizations which function based on an environmental management system, efforts made for harmonization the national sectors policies with the environmental policy of EU, besides the advantages demonstrated through results obtained by those organizations which function for a long time based on transparency and responsibility principles for environment and society, all suggest that also in Romania there are real chances to increase competitiveness and sustainable performance. Paraschiv, Lang (Nemoianu), and Olaru (Lang) in 2011 show that the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a management tool for companies and other organizations to evaluate report and improve their environmental performance and it was taken into account when creating the eco-innovation composite index of Eco-Is. It is one of the reasons that keep Romania at the bottom of the EU-27 list of eco-innovating countries, as there are only 3 Romanian organizations with EMAS certification. They concluded that there are more and more companies active in the Romanian construction sector, whether multinationals or SMEs, which discovered the potential benefits of environmentally responsible innovation. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Sustainable_development__Consumption_and_production Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism Conclusions As companies began to formalize their approaches to pollution prevention and voluntarily adopt EMS, there was a growing recognition of the need to standardize such procedures. As a company integrates an environmental management system, it will improve its ability to meet customer needs and expectations. Both ISO 14000 and EMAS were developed to enable organizations to formulate policies and objectives within a structured management system framework, while simultaneously considering legislative requirements, relevant public issues and plant specific environmental concerns. The risks in implementing both the environmental management systems are the bureaucratic requirements and the big fees. References [1] Burja, V. 2012. Environmental Management Systems and Companies' Sustainable Performance in Romania. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 14(1). [2] Culley, W.C. 1998. Environmental and Quality Systems Integration. New York, Lewis Publishers. [3] Emilsson, S., and Hjelm, O. 2002. Implementation of standardised environmental management systems in Swedish local authorities: reasons, expectations and some outcomes, Environmental Science & Policy, Volume 5, Issue 6, December 2002, Pages 443­448. [4] Fredericks, I., and McCallum, D. 1995. International standards for environmental management systems: ISO14000, originally published in Canadian Environmental Protection. [5] Jiang, R.J., and Bansal, P. 2003. Seeing the need for ISO 14001, Journal of Management Studies, Volume 40, Issue 4, pages 1047­1067, June 2003 [6] Kaur, H. 2010. Do ISO 14001 EMS companies in Malaysia reward employees for environmental initiatives? Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism (JEMT) 2(2)/2010:98-108, ASERS Publishing. [7] Kolk, A. 2000. Economics of Environmental Management. Essex. United Kingdom. [8] Maier, S., Vanstone, K. 2005. Do good environmental management systems lead to good environmental performance?, Research briefing, Available from: http://www.eiris.org/files/researchpublic. [9] Paraschiv, D.M., Nemoianu, E.L. and Lang, C.A., 2012. Exploring eco-innovation trends in the European construction sector. Focus on Romania. The Romanian Economic Journal, XIV (42), pp.69-88. [10] Rendell, E.G., McGinty, K.A. 2004. Environmental Management Systems. A Guidebook for Improving Energy and Environmental Performance in Local Government, available at http://www.lgean.org/documents/ EMSGuidebookPA.pdf. [11] Rojanschi, V., Bran, F., Diaconu, S., Florian, G. Evaluarea impactului ecologic i auditul de mediu, Editura ASE, Bucureti, 2004. [12] Sheldon, C., and Yoxon, M. 2006. Environmental Management Systems: A Step-by-Step Guide to Implementation and Maintenance. Earthscan Publications, UK. [13] Sheps, I. 2008. QMS in future ­ ISO TC 176 Perspective. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology, 9, No. 3, 682-690. [14] Zutshi, A., and Sohal, A.S. 2004. Adoption and maintenance of environmental management systems: critical success factors. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 15/4: 399-419. [15] Vernon, J., Peacock, M., Belin, A., Ganzleben, C., and Candell, M. 2009. Final Report. Study on the Costs and Benefits of EMAS to Registered Organisations Study Contract No. 07.0307/2008/517800/ETU/G.2. *** ISO 14001, Environmental Management System, Self-Assessment Checklist, March 1996, -Revised November 2000 to reflect numbering scheme of final standard - Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI), available at: http://www.gemi.org/resources/iso_111.pdf *** International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm *** International Organization for Standardization. About the ISO Story. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/the_iso_story.htm. *** International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm *** EMAS I: Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93. *** British Standards Institute (1994) British Standard for Environmental Management Systems: BS7750 *** REGULATION (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19March 2001 *** http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Sustainable_development__Consumption_and_production *** http://apo-tokyo.org/videoclips/resources/D1L2.pdf *** http://www.epa.gov/ *** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_management_system *** http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 *** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-Management_and_Audit_Scheme *** http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/fs_iso_en.pdf http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism de Gruyter

A Theoretical Study Between the Two Environmental Management Systems: Eco Management Audit Scheme – Emas - and ISO 14000

Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/a-theoretical-study-between-the-two-environmental-management-systems-njqddm1n8P
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by the
ISSN
2068-7729
DOI
10.2478/v10260-012-0005-x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The concept of an environmental management system evolved in the early nineties. An environmental management system exists to help organizations minimize how their operations (processes etc.) negatively affect the environment (i.e. cause adverse changes to air, water, or land), comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements, and continually improve in the above. An environmental management system can also manage natural resources, and improve the reliability and credibility of the environmental policies. At the European level we have EMAS. The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is the EU's voluntary scheme designed for companies and other organisations committing themselves to evaluate, manage and improve their environmental performance. This was introduced by a European Union council regulation (No. 1836/29.06.1993), requiring implementation in all European Union Member States. EMAS was formally introduced in the United Kingdom in April 1995. ISO 14000 is an International Standard (1996) Applicable on an international scale. This paper aims to make a theoretical comparison between these two environmental management systems. Keywords: environmental management system, EMAS, ISO 14000, European Union . JEL Classification: Q2, O2, N5. 1. Introduction A management system is a system used to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objectives. It includes organizational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures and resources1. An environmental management system is a part of an organization's management system used to develop and implement its environmental policy and manage its environmental aspects1. According to the international standard, ISO 14001, an Environmental Management System (EMS) is "the part of the overall management system that includes organizational structure, planning activities, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes, and resources for developing, implementing, achieving, reviewing and maintaining the environmental policy2." Environmental management system (EMS) 3refers to the management of an organization's environmental programs in a comprehensive, systematic, planned and documented manner. It includes the organizational structure, planning and resources for developing, implementing and maintaining policy for environmental protection. The term can also refer to software systems for organizational environmental management. An Environmental Management System is defined by the EPA2 as "a set of processes and practices that enable an organization to reduce its environmental impacts and increase its operating efficiency." This focus on http://apo-tokyo.org/videoclips/resources/D1L2.pdf REGULATION (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001, Article 2(k), Definitions 3 http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism processes and practices is common to all EMSs, which are generally founded on the "Plan, Do Check, Act", (Figure 1). The British Standards Institute notes that an environmental management system (EMS) is: "the organisational structure, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for determining and implementing environmental policy." The concept of an environmental management system evolved in the early nineties and its origin can be traced back to 1972, when the United Nations organized a Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was launched. These early initiatives led to the establishment of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) and the adoption of the Montreal Protocol and Basel Convention. PLAN Policy Review Organization Objectives / Targets ACT Corrective action Systems reviews DO Records Process / continuous improvement CHECK Audits Figure 1. The model of an environmental system In 1992, the first Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro, which served to generate a global commitment to the environment (RMIT University). In the same year, BSI Group published the world's first environmental management systems standard, BS 7750. This supplied the template for the development of the ISO 14000 series in 1996, by the International Organization for Standardization which has representation from committees all over the world (ISO). As of 2010, ISO 14001 is now used by at least 223 149 organizations in 159 countries and economies4. In 1946, delegates from 25 countries met in London and decided to create a new international organization, of which the object would be "to facilitate the international coordination and unification of industrial standards". The new organization, ISO, officially began operations on 23 February 1947, in Geneva, Switzerland5. An Environmental Management System (EMS): Serves as a tool to improve environmental performance; Provides a systematic way of managing an organization's environmental affairs; Is the aspect of the organization's overall management structure that addresses immediate and long term impacts of its products, services and processes on the environment; Gives order and consistency for organizations to address environmental concerns through the allocation of resources, assignment of responsibility and ongoing evaluation of practices, procedures and processes; Focuses on continual improvement of the system. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm Potential Costs6 Internal Staff (manager) time Other employee time (Note: Internal labor costs represent the bulk of the EMS resources expended by most organizations) External Potential consulting assistance; Outside training of personnel. Potential Benefits Improved environmental performance; Enhanced compliance; Pollution prevention; Resource conservation; New customers/markets; Increased efficiency/reduced costs; Enhanced employee morale; Enhanced image with public, regulators, lenders, investors; Employee awareness of environmental issues and responsibilities. 2. About ISO 14000 and EMAS ISO 14000 represents a family of standards related to environmental management that exists to help organizations7 to: minimize how their operations (processes etc.) negatively affect the environment (i.e. cause adverse changes to air, water, or land), comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements, and continually improve in the above. ISO 14000 is similar to ISO 9000 quality management in that both pertain to the process of how a product is produced, rather than to the product itself. As with ISO 9000, certification is performed by third-party organizations rather than being awarded by ISO directly. The ISO 19011 audit standard applies when auditing for both 9000 and 14000 compliance at once. The requirements of ISO 14000 are an integral part of the European Union's Eco ­ Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). EMAS`s structure and material requirements are more demanding, foremost concerning performance improvement, legal compliance and reporting duties7. The Eco - Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a voluntary environmental management instrument, which was developed in 1993 by the European Commission. It enables organizations to assess, manage and continuously improve their environmental performance. The scheme is globally applicable and open to all types of private and public organizations. In order to register with EMAS, organizations must meet the requirements of the EU EMAS ­ Regulation8. a. The EMAS Regulation 1836/93 was first introduced in July 1993 as an environmental policy tool devised by the European Commission, in a step towards the Community's goal of sustainable development. The EMAS scheme was open for voluntary participation by organisations from April 1995, and its scope restricted participation to sites operating industrial activities. In 1996, the international environmental management system standard, EN ISO 14001:1996 was recognised as a step towards achieving EMAS. In 2001 the revised Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 (EMAS II) was adopted. Its main elements were9: b. the extension of the scope of EMAS to all sectors of economic activity including local authorities; http://www.epa.gov/ http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-Management_and_Audit_Scheme 9 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/tools Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism c. the integration of ISO 14001 as the environmental management system required by EMAS, so that progressing from ISO 14001 to EMAS is smoother and does not entail duplication; d. the adoption of a visible and recognisable EMAS logo to allow registered organisations to publicise their participation in EMAS more effectively; e. the involvement of employees in the implementation of EMAS; f. the strengthening of the role of the environmental statement to improve the transparency of communication of environmental performance between registered organisations and their stakeholders and the public; and g. a more thorough consideration of indirect effects including capital investments, administrative and planning decisions, procurement procedures, choice and composition of services (e.g. catering). In 2009 the EMAS Regulation has been revised and modified for the second time. Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 ("EMAS III") was published on 22 December 2009. The revised EMAS Regulation came into effect on 11 January 2010 (See FAQ on "New Provisions in EMAS" for additional information). Representatives from some fifty countries around the globe have agreed to the draft international standard (DIS) on environmental management systems (ISO/DIS 14001) issued by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). The standard is based on the concept that the organization will periodically review and evaluate its environmental management system in order to identify opportunities for improvement and their implementation. Improvements in its environmental management system are intended to result in additional improvements in environmental performance. When the ISO standard is formally adopted, it is anticipated that existing national EMS standards, such as BS 7750 (UK), IS 310, (Ireland), NF X30 - 200 (France) and UNE 77 801(2)-94 (Spain) will be withdrawn and replaced by the single international EMS standard. Adoption by the European Council of ISO 14001 as the standard to implement Council Regulation EEC/1836/93 on a Community Environmental Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) was taken in 1993 became operational in 199510. It was originally restricted to companies in industrial sectors. With the first revision of the EMAS Regulation in 2001 (EMAS II), the scheme opened to all economic sectors including public and private services. In addition, EMAS II was strengthened by the integration of the environmental management requirements of ISO 14001; by adopting a new EMAS logo to signal engagement to stakeholders; and by considering more strongly indirect effects such as those related to financial services or administrative and planning decisions. The latest revision of EMAS came into effect on 11 January 2010 (EMAS III). With the introduction of EMAS III, the scheme is globally applicable and no longer limited to EU Member States. With EMAS III the EU also introduced obligatory Key Performance Indicators (KPI) in order to harmonize reporting on environmental performance. The objective for introducing the EMAS Regulation in July 1993 was to create another environmental policy tool to achieve the community's goal of sustainable development. As such, it is important that EMAS demonstrably generates positive externalities in the form of improved environmental performance and increased levels of regulatory compliance, leading to a lower environmental impact of registered organisations (Vernon, J., Peacock, M., Belin, A., Ganzleben, C., and Candell, M. 2009). All organizations listed in the EMAS-Register run an environmental management system according to the EMAS requirements. Because ISO 14001 is an integral part of EMAS, these organizations automatically comply with the requirements that the international standard demands as well. However, EMAS registered organizations fulfill requirements that go beyond the scope of ISO 14001. EMAS registered organizations demonstrate11: Credibility: the proper implementation of EMAS is assessed by qualified and independent environmental verifiers. Transparency: by periodically reporting on their environmental performance. Those reports include information on key performance indicators. The reports must be validated by an environmental verifier. Continuous improvement process: by committing themselves to continuous improvement of their actual environmental performance. This performance is also evaluated by an environmental verifier. ISO 14001 only requires improving the environmental management system itself. Compliance: by fully complying with applicable environmental legislation. Stakeholder engagement: by involving employees and other stakeholders in order to benefit from their commitment, ideas, skills and experiences. ISO 14001, Environmental Management System, Self-Assessment Checklist, March 1996, - Revised November 2000 to reflect numbering scheme of final standard - Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI), available at http://www.gemi.org/resources/iso_111.pdf 11 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/fs_iso_en.pdf Sheldon and Yoxon in 2006 wrote that in the 1980s, the market started to express a preference for environmental awareness as a corporate characteristic. No one would deny that the amount of environmental legislation has increased considerably since the period, though definitive figures are harder to agree upon. They continue that at the time of publication in 1979, British Standard BS 5750 was the world's first national standard on quality management systems, or indeed any type of management system. It provided a remarkably long ­ lasting model, and is still in use today as the international standard ISO 9000. In Europe, the European Commission decided to encourage the take ­ up of a similar, but in some ways more prescriptive, voluntary scheme by promoting something called the Eco Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). ISO 14001 and EMAS have done a lot to provide a focus of activity in the development of EMS. Zutshi, and Sohal in 2004 said that the ISO 14001 standard involves implementation and continuous improvement of five key elements: the environmental policy; the environmental plan; implementation and operation of programs to meet objectives and targets; checking and corrective action; and management review. Planning Checking & Corrective Action Implementation Continuous Improvement Environmental Policy Management Reviews Figure 2. The ISO 14001 EMS Model 12 The boxes shown in Figure 2 are considered to be the five major sections of the ISO 14001 EMS Model, and are described in the standard as follows13: Environmental Policy ­ Establishes and communicates an organization's position and commitment as it relates to energy and the environment. Planning ­ Identifies energy and environmental issues and requirements, and defines the initiatives and resources needed to achieve the environmental policy and economic goals. Implementation and Operations ­ Describes the procedures, programs and responsibilities necessary to implement the key initiatives to achieve goals. Checking and Corrective Action ­ Regularly monitors and assesses the effectiveness of energy and environmental management activities. Management Review ­ High-level evaluation of the management system as a whole to determine its overall effectiveness in terms of driving continual improvement and achieving business goals. Culley in 1998 wrote that over the past 20 years or so quality systems have become a major focus in business circles. A business' customer base is continually demanding better product at a lower cost and, in doing so, has forced executive management to rethink how they operate their business from top to bottom. He continued that apart from a few of the major corporations, a structured quality system early and was at best http://www.epa.gov/ems/ Rendell, E.G., McGinty, K.A. 2004. Environmental Management Systems A Guidebook for Improving Energy and Environmental Performance in Local Government. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism primitive and management was somewhat shortsighted to see the long term benefits. This short ­ term thinking has caused the United States to fall behind Europeans and Japanese in the quality of its manufacturing and in implementing ISO 9000. It has only been recently that US firms have begun to regain the competitive edge. Unfortunately, this "wait and see" approach to new ideas, standards, and methods of doing business has been the norm for US companies. It continues to dominate some of the thinking with the newly released ISO 14000 Environmental Management Standards. Emilsson, and Hjelm, in 2002, consider that an EMS is a continual cycle of planning, implementing, reviewing and improving the processes and actions that an organization undertakes to meet its business and environmental goals as well as legislative requirement. It is a system that manages the environmental performance of an organization, as well as other business benefits. It is purposed at making organizations more environmental proactive and efficient. Kaur in 2010 thinks that a management commitment, employee empowerment, feedback and review, and rewards are key elements in increasing employee motivation for successful implementation of an ISO14001 EMS and hence enhanced environmental performance. In 1995 Fredericks, and McCallum argue that ISO14000 may become the global passport for environmentally responsible business, just like ISO 9000 set the standard for Quality Management. ISO 14 000 certification may mean clear environmental goals and regular performance reports, but it is no guarantee of clean and efficient practices on the ground. They conclude that the standard is about management systems not about environmental pollution prevention or clean-up. Kaur concluded in 2010 that the rewards and employee willingness to try eco - initiatives scales suggest good internal consistency and adequate construct validity. In summary the research findings suggest that middle and lower levels employees in some of the leading environmentally proactive ISO14001 EMS companies in Malaysia are rarely rewarded for their environmental initiatives. Moreover given that employees' job appraisals rarely include an environmental category, the proposed employee willingness to try eco - initiatives evaluations could provide practitioners a tool to assess employees' performance evaluation According to EMAS Factsheet available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/, we emphasise the difference between EMAS and ISO 14000 is in the Table 1. Table 1. The difference between EMAS and ISO 14000 EMAS Status Under legal bases (EU Member States and EEA countries). Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council under public law. The entity to be registered shall not exceed the boundaries of the Member State, and it is intended to go towards entities and sites. Included commitment to continual improvement of environmental performance of the organization. Obligatory preliminary review, when is the first time that the organization sets its environmental status. Identification and evaluation of the environmental aspects (direct and indirect). Establishment of criteria for assessing the significance of the environmental aspects. Obligatory to demonstrate it. Required full legal compliance. There is a compliance-audit. EMAS External communication Open dialogue with the public. Public Environmental Statement (validated for verifiers) ISO 14000 Under no legal bases (International: world wide). ISO standard under private law. Does not go towards entities or sites. Does not include a commitment to the continual improvement of environmental performance but of the performance of the system. Initial review is recommended, but not required. Required only a procedure able to identify environmental aspects. Only commitment to comply with applicable legal requirements. There is no complianceaudit ISO 14000 Not open dialogue with the public. Only is required to respond to relevant communication from external interested parts. Control by public is not possible Organisation Environmental policy Initial environmental review Environmental aspects Legal compliance Continual improvement Management review Contractors and suppliers Employees involvement Internal environmental auditing Auditor Audits External verification Verification/ Certification Scope Authorities are informed Logo Required periodically improvement without a defined frequency Required an environmental performance in the management, but not through a performance audit Relevant procedures are communicated to contractors and suppliers No Included only system audit against the requirements of the standard Advised the independence of the auditor Check environmental system performance. No frequency required No Certifiers accredited according to EAC code No obligation No Required annual improvement Is wider and requires an evaluation of the environmental performance of the organization, based in a performance-audit Required influence over contractors and suppliers Active involvement of employees and their representatives Includes: system-audit, a performance-audit (= evaluation of environmental performance) and an environmental compliance-audit (= determination of legal compliance) Required the independence of the auditor Check for improvement of environmental performance. Frequency required: 3 year cycle during which all areas are verified at least once Accredited environmental verifiers Verifiers accredited according to NACE codes Obligation by Validation of Environmental Statement Yes The specification for EMAS is the same as for ISO 14001 with the exception that EMAS additionally requires an environmental report to be published, which is optional under ISO 14001, and places greater emphasis on pollution prevention and regulatory compliance. Regulatory bodies are consulted before a company is registered under EMAS and can object. From the point of view of Rojanschi, V., the comparison between the two environmental management systems, EMAS and ISO 14000 is in the table 2. Table 2. Comparison between the two environmental management systems (Rojanschi, V. et al.2004) EMAS Legislative regulation in the EU (1836/29.06.1993) Applicable only in EU Restricted to specific locations of industrial activity Requires initial assessment of the environmental impact Continuous improvement of environmental performance at the level of the best technology available at the moment Requires a public environmental declaration, allows the access to the environmental policy and program Frequency of implementation of environmental audit is max. 3 years EMS requires the existence of a register of the effects on the environment ISO 14000 International Standard (1996) Applicable on an international scale Applicable to products and services business, including nonindustrial activities (local administration) The preliminary environmental analysis is not required and it is only suggested in Appendix 4.2.1. of standard The continuous improvement of EMS is reflected by the increasing environmental performance Suggests external communication, but it is up to the company to decide the content of information, requires public access only to the environmental policy ISO does not specify how often the environmental audit must be carried out Not required Compared to ISO, EMAS Kolk5 adds in 2000: Independently verified environmental reporting; Forces choice of best available technology; Description of environmental impacts or effects. EMAS was initially used only for the manufacturing industry, energy production, waste management and mining, whereas ISO applies to all sectors. Furthermore, Jiang, and Bansal in 2001 consider that the credibility of ISO 14001certification can signal to outside stakeholders that the firm is committed to managing its environmental impacts and provide additional legitimacy benefits that an in-house EMS cannot. ISO 14001 is spread worldwide, Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism with Japan, Germany and the UK as the leaders of number of certifications. Only Germany and Austria recommends EMAS before ISO. There is an industry coalition in USA which is against ISO 14001 as a regulatory standard. US companies avoid ISO 14001 as they are afraid of it becoming a regulatory standard. Sheps concludes in 2008 that all management systems/standards are aimed to minimize business risks in the different areas they cover. In addition, ISO 14001 specifies management review after the "Check" step. Management review requires an organization's top managers to periodically review the EMS to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness14. A study made by Maier, and Vanstone, in 200515 shows that there are significant national variations in the implementation of both certified and uncertified environmental management systems (as illustrated in the graph below). The lowest levels are found in Hong Kong, Ireland and Singapore (over 50% have an inadequate EMS) and the highest in Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Denmark and Portugal (less than 5% with an inadequate EMS). Table 3. The percentage companies with EMAS or ISO 14001 certified sites Country Australia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hong Kong Ireland Italy Japan Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Singapore Spain Sweden Switzerland UK USA Total Percentage Companies with EMAS certified sites 0.0 57.1 27.3 0.0 22.2 45.5 8.0 59.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 0.0 7.1 0.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 28.6 6.3 2.2 6.7 Percentage Companies with ISO14001 certified sites 38.3 71.4 45.5 38.1 88.9 100.0 72.0 88.9 87.5 20.0 40.0 66.7 91.3 57.1 57.1 80.0 75.0 40.0 80.0 84.2 85.7 54.2 35.7 59.8 This study concluded that almost 60% of companies (59.8%) have adopted certified environmental management systems (EMAS or ISO 14001). Again wide variations can be seen in national adoption rates. Less than 40% of companies in Hong Kong, Australia, Canada and the US have sites certified to ISO14001. This contrasts with Japan and Finland where over 90% of companies have some ISO 14001 or EMAS certified sites. EMAS certification is less widespread than ISO 14001 even within Europe. In Belgium, Switzerland, Norway and Finland over a quarter of companies have some EMAS certified sites and in Austria and Germany over half the companies have some EMAS certification. There is a clear preference for ISO 14001 certification, either because of its global nature, thereby being more useful and more easily recognizable outside Europe or because the requirements of EMAS are more demanding than those of ISO 14001. http://www.epa.gov/ Maier, S., Vanstone, K., 2005. Do good environmental management systems lead to good environmental performance? Research briefing. Maier, and Vanstone believe that companies in the US, in particular, have historically been more tightly regulated. The high level of certification to ISO 14001 and EMAS standards in Germany is partly explained by the strong public awareness of environmental issues historically and the desire by companies to demonstrate a commitment to managing their environmental impacts. Some German companies also demand certified management systems from their suppliers, which supports the high adoption rate. The high adoption of ISO 14001 in Japan is primarily due to the country's experience with the quality standard ISO 9000. But EU reports show that since 2004, the number of organizations and sites with EMAS registrations in the EU increased steadily16. Since 2004 corporate registrations are possible and organizations can register all their sites under one registration number. In order to give a more accurate picture of EMAS development, the European Commission consequently started to collect information on the number of sites in 2004; this resulted in a documentation of a total of 7,773 sites certified according to EMAS in 2010. These reports reveal that while EMAS and ISO 14001 (Environmental Management Systems) share the same objective, EMAS goes beyond several ISO requirements. A comparison with statistics on ISO 14001 reveals that the popularity of EMAS is still relatively low: ISO reports a total of 89,237 certifications in Europe in 2009, with Spain, Italy, United Kingdom, Romania, Germany and Czech Republic in the top ten world-wide. EU reports show that growth in EMAS registrations was strongest in Southern European countries. The Member States which have a long-standing EMAS tradition such as Germany, Sweden, Austria and Denmark experienced a decline in the number of registrations from 2003 to 2010. This can be partly explained by the fact that demonstrating continuously improving environmental performance (as is required be the EMAS scheme) is difficult to achieve for organizations that have already been implementing EMAS for some time as compared to companies just entering the scheme. The decline of EMAS - registered organizations in these countries was offset mainly by the growth in Southern European countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain. These countries multiplied their numbers of EMAS - registered organizations by a factor ranging between three (Spain) and six (Greece). Burja in 2012 makes an analysis on the application of EMAS and he thinks that at the moment when Romania joined to European Union, the organizations registered with EMAS had had an increasing dynamic. In 2007 at the EU-27 level, EMAS had been implemented in 3,908 organizations and companies, by which 37.5% in Germany, 23.2% in Spain, 19.3% in Italy, 6.5% in Austria and very few in the other countries. In the same year, Romania appears with a single organization registered in EMAS system. In 2011 in EU there are 4,511 organizations which function with EMAS, the most being in Germany (29.8%). An important growth of number of organizations with EMAS was registered in Spain and Italy, with a weight of 27.4%, respectively 25.7% from the total European Union's organizations with EMAS. In 2011, Romania has only 5 organizations which implemented this environmental standard, according to the EMAS National Register. Burja shows that in Romania, in comparison with the situation from the other developed countries of EU, the number of EMAS certificated organizations is modest, within its economy is manifested a tendency of a strong increasing in the number of firms which had obtained certification on a management system in compliance with national and international standards. He thinks that for Romanian companies, practice and experience of EU's organizations which function with EMAS reveal the voluntary adoption of an environment management system as a possible modality of developing the sustainability level. Burja concludes that the increase of the number of Romanian organizations which function based on an environmental management system, efforts made for harmonization the national sectors policies with the environmental policy of EU, besides the advantages demonstrated through results obtained by those organizations which function for a long time based on transparency and responsibility principles for environment and society, all suggest that also in Romania there are real chances to increase competitiveness and sustainable performance. Paraschiv, Lang (Nemoianu), and Olaru (Lang) in 2011 show that the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a management tool for companies and other organizations to evaluate report and improve their environmental performance and it was taken into account when creating the eco-innovation composite index of Eco-Is. It is one of the reasons that keep Romania at the bottom of the EU-27 list of eco-innovating countries, as there are only 3 Romanian organizations with EMAS certification. They concluded that there are more and more companies active in the Romanian construction sector, whether multinationals or SMEs, which discovered the potential benefits of environmentally responsible innovation. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Sustainable_development__Consumption_and_production Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism Conclusions As companies began to formalize their approaches to pollution prevention and voluntarily adopt EMS, there was a growing recognition of the need to standardize such procedures. As a company integrates an environmental management system, it will improve its ability to meet customer needs and expectations. Both ISO 14000 and EMAS were developed to enable organizations to formulate policies and objectives within a structured management system framework, while simultaneously considering legislative requirements, relevant public issues and plant specific environmental concerns. The risks in implementing both the environmental management systems are the bureaucratic requirements and the big fees. References [1] Burja, V. 2012. Environmental Management Systems and Companies' Sustainable Performance in Romania. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 14(1). [2] Culley, W.C. 1998. Environmental and Quality Systems Integration. New York, Lewis Publishers. [3] Emilsson, S., and Hjelm, O. 2002. Implementation of standardised environmental management systems in Swedish local authorities: reasons, expectations and some outcomes, Environmental Science & Policy, Volume 5, Issue 6, December 2002, Pages 443­448. [4] Fredericks, I., and McCallum, D. 1995. International standards for environmental management systems: ISO14000, originally published in Canadian Environmental Protection. [5] Jiang, R.J., and Bansal, P. 2003. Seeing the need for ISO 14001, Journal of Management Studies, Volume 40, Issue 4, pages 1047­1067, June 2003 [6] Kaur, H. 2010. Do ISO 14001 EMS companies in Malaysia reward employees for environmental initiatives? Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism (JEMT) 2(2)/2010:98-108, ASERS Publishing. [7] Kolk, A. 2000. Economics of Environmental Management. Essex. United Kingdom. [8] Maier, S., Vanstone, K. 2005. Do good environmental management systems lead to good environmental performance?, Research briefing, Available from: http://www.eiris.org/files/researchpublic. [9] Paraschiv, D.M., Nemoianu, E.L. and Lang, C.A., 2012. Exploring eco-innovation trends in the European construction sector. Focus on Romania. The Romanian Economic Journal, XIV (42), pp.69-88. [10] Rendell, E.G., McGinty, K.A. 2004. Environmental Management Systems. A Guidebook for Improving Energy and Environmental Performance in Local Government, available at http://www.lgean.org/documents/ EMSGuidebookPA.pdf. [11] Rojanschi, V., Bran, F., Diaconu, S., Florian, G. Evaluarea impactului ecologic i auditul de mediu, Editura ASE, Bucureti, 2004. [12] Sheldon, C., and Yoxon, M. 2006. Environmental Management Systems: A Step-by-Step Guide to Implementation and Maintenance. Earthscan Publications, UK. [13] Sheps, I. 2008. QMS in future ­ ISO TC 176 Perspective. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology, 9, No. 3, 682-690. [14] Zutshi, A., and Sohal, A.S. 2004. Adoption and maintenance of environmental management systems: critical success factors. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 15/4: 399-419. [15] Vernon, J., Peacock, M., Belin, A., Ganzleben, C., and Candell, M. 2009. Final Report. Study on the Costs and Benefits of EMAS to Registered Organisations Study Contract No. 07.0307/2008/517800/ETU/G.2. *** ISO 14001, Environmental Management System, Self-Assessment Checklist, March 1996, -Revised November 2000 to reflect numbering scheme of final standard - Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI), available at: http://www.gemi.org/resources/iso_111.pdf *** International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm *** International Organization for Standardization. About the ISO Story. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/the_iso_story.htm. *** International Organization for Standardization. Discover ISO: ISO's Origins. Available at: http://www.iso.org /iso/about/discover-iso_isos-origins.htm *** EMAS I: Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93. *** British Standards Institute (1994) British Standard for Environmental Management Systems: BS7750 *** REGULATION (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19March 2001 *** http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Sustainable_development__Consumption_and_production *** http://apo-tokyo.org/videoclips/resources/D1L2.pdf *** http://www.epa.gov/ *** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_management_system *** http://www.iso.org/iso/iso14000 *** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-Management_and_Audit_Scheme *** http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/fs_iso_en.pdf

Journal

Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism – de Gruyter

Published: Dec 1, 2012

There are no references for this article.