Implementing an environmental management system (EMS) and getting it certified by an accrediting agency like the International Standards Organization (ISO) takes a big investment of corporate resources. Is it worth it? Last week, we looked at the impact of
having a certified EMS on a company's financial performance. Now, let's consider the impact on environmental performance. Does having a certified EMS really make a company "green"?

Rebutting Skepticism about ISO 14001

The ISO environmental standard has been criticized as a public relations figleaf for polluters. Corporations that adopt ISO don't really care about the environment, the argument goes. They just care about their public reputations. Such skepticism comes not just from environmentalists but from regulators and even environmental professionals.

The credibility problem stems in part from the fact that ISO 14001 is a voluntary rather than a legislatively mandated standard. The irony of this criticism is that the environmental criteria a company must meet to achieve ISO certification are far more stringent than the requirements of anti-pollution laws. Consequently, all things being equal, you'd expect companies that have adopted an ISO-certified EMS to have superior environmental performance; you'd also expect them to get into legal trouble less often than non-ISO companies do.

If we can show that both of these assumptions stand up, it would provide a powerful rebuttal to the skeptics. But do they? Let's take each assumption one at a time.

ISO 14001 & Environmental Performance

Are ISO companies "greener" than non-ISO companies? It's a simple question. But there aren't many studies examining the link between ISO certification and environmental performance. Here's an overview of some of the studies that do exist:

• A 2000 survey of Swiss companies found that 60% of ISO-certified companies reported some decrease in materials and energy flows relative to production. But only 10% experienced "strong" decreases; 40% of ISO companies reported no or even diminished environmental performance (Hamschmidt).
• An assessment made in 2000 of the environmental reports of the world's 10 biggest pharmaceutical manufacturers indicated that implementing an EMS had led to improvements in waste reduction, resource conservation and hazardous emissions (Berry & Rondinelli).
• A 2001 U.S. study of 316 facilities in the electronics industry found that ISO facilities had reduced their toxic emissions below TRI (Toxics Release Inventory) reporting thresholds more often than had their non-certified peers. Having an EMS was a significant predictor of improved environmental performance regarding toxic emissions, the study found (Russo).
• Another U.S. study from the same year reached the opposite conclusion. The study author examined TRI data of companies in the automobile and light truck assembly sector and found no significant differences in toxic emissions between ISO and non-ISO facilities (Matthews).
• A 2001 survey of 580 Pennsylvania corporations found that ISO facilities were much more likely than non-ISO companies to report improvements in recycling, air emission reduction and solid waste reduction (Florida & Davison).
• A 2002 survey of Fortune 500 firms found that having an EMS led to lower toxic emissions per unit output, especially for firms that had high pollution intensity before adopting the EMS. The existence of an EMS also resulted in reductions in both off-site transfers and on-site releases per unit output, but not in hazardous air pollutants per unit output (Anton et al.).

Does ISO Equate to 'Green'?

The problem with the studies is that they're limited in scope and rely on data reported by the companies themselves. Researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) have attempted to take the study of the link between ISO certification and performance to the next level by forming a national database of businesses and government agencies that have adopted an EMS.

The UNC's 2003 study, which breaks down environmental performance by measurable indicators, is the most advanced research so far done on how ISO companies perform. But, alas, the results are mixed and inconclusive, at least in terms of environmental performance (Andrews).

The bottom line: The evidence suggests but doesn't conclusively prove that ISO certification does improve environmental performance.

Conclusion

We have one more question to answer: Does implementing an ISO-certified EMS improve a company's compliance with regulatory standards? The policy of SafetyXChange is to limit series to a maximum of four installments. On the other hand, we also try to keep the articles short. In this case, I'm going to put brevity ahead of consistency. So we'll wrap up the series next week.

Story Tools:  Email This Post  Print This Post Top