Environmental management systems – paper tiger or ... - Swerea

judiciouslampManagement

Nov 8, 2013 (3 years and 10 months ago)

193 views

Industrial Research Institutes in Sweden
Mats Zackrisson, IVF
Maria Enroth, IMT
Angelica Widing, IMT
Stockholm, December 2000
IRIS Eco-efficiency Group
Industrial research in
collaboration
Environmental
management systems

paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828
Assessment of the environmental and economic effectiveness
of ISO 14001 and EMAS. A survey based on questionnaires and
interviews with a total of 200 Swedish environment-certified
companies in 1999.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 1
Designation of the original report
Miljöledningssystem – papperstiger eller kraftfullt verktyg,
issued December 1999, in the publication series of
the respective institutes plus ordering addresses
IMT Project Report No 92
The Institute for Media Technology, IMT
Now; Research Corporation for Media and Communication Technology
Box 1243
SE-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Tel: +46(0)8-752 16 00. Fax: +46(0)8-752 68 00
E-mail: info@framkom.se
Website: www.framkom.se
IVF Publication 99830
IVF, The Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research
Argongatan 30
431 53 MÖLNDAL
Tel: 031-760 60 00. Fax: 031-27 61 30
E-mail: info@ivf.se
Website: www.ivf.se
SIK-Report No 664 (SR 664)
SIK – the Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology
Box 5401
402 29 GOTHENBURG
Tel:031-335 56 00. Fax: 031-83 37 82
E-mail: info@sik.se
Website: www.sik.se
Report 991029
Swedish Foundry Association
Box 2033
550 02 JÖNKÖPING
Tel: 036-30 12 00. Fax: 036-16 68 66
E-mail: info@gjuteriforeningen.se
Website: www.gjuteriforeningen.se
IVL Report B 1351
IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Ltd
Box 21060
100 31 STOCKHOLM
Tel: 08-598 563 00. Fax: 08-598 563 90
E-mail: info@ivl.se
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 2
IVF
Argongatan 30
SE-431 53 Mölndal
Sweden
Telephone: +46 (0)31-706 60 00
Fax: +46 (0)31-27 61 30
E-mail: info@ivf.se
Website: www.ivf.se
© The Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research
Production: Marianne Krathmann, IVF’s studio, Mölndal 2000
Copied: Copying department IVF, Mölndal
IVF Research Publication 00828 ISSN 0349 – 0653 ISRN IVF – S – 00/828 – SE
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 3
Abstract
Environmental Management Systems – Paper Tiger or Powerful Tool
In this study the environmental and economic efficiency of environmental manage-
ment systems according to the international standard ISO 14001 Environmental
management systems – Specification with guidance for use and the European
Union’s EMAS Environmental Management and Audit Scheme, have been evalu-
ated. The long-term objective of the study is to make the use of environmental
management systems (EMS) more efficient, both environmentally and economic-
ally. Nearly 200 Swedish companies have contributed with their experiences. The
study has been carried out as a joint project within the Industrial Research Institutes
in Sweden (IRIS) and financed by the Swedish Board for Industrial and Technical
Development (Nutek).
The study comprises a questionnaire to all ISO-certified and EMAS-registered
companies in Sweden (about 360 companies in November 1998) with a response
rate close to 50%. We also interviewed 19 companies that were randomly selected
from the 360 companies. The aim was to collect sufficient data to make it possible
to draw statistically representative conclusions.
Concerning the environmental efficiency of EMS the most important observa-
tions are:
• EMAS-registered companies seem to achieve better environmental performance
than companies with only ISO 14001.
• Most actions in connection with environmental objectives and targets deal with
the sources of environmental problems rather than the symptoms, i.e. source
reduction is more common than end-of-pipe solutions.
• Half the environmental objectives and targets would have been achieved even
without EMS.
• The most common area for environmental objectives and targets is waste.
However, the focus is not only sorting waste but also reducing waste, which
means more efficient use of resources.
• From an environmental and economic point of view it is desirable that there
should be more focus on the use and disposal phase of manufactured products.
One-third of the companies had a life cycle assessment (LCA) carried out on
some product.
• Environmental aspects are assessed in a number of different ways and the
assessment is considered difficult. Half the companies miss some of their most
important environmental aspects.
• Companies that use environmental indicators to monitor environmental objec-
tives and targets seem to achieve better environmental performance than others.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 4
Concerning the economic efficiency of EMS the most interesting observations are:
• The expenses for introducing and operating EMS are high but not unreasonably
so, save in the case of very small companies. Expenses are expected to decrease
in the future.
• A higher degree of coordination and integration of EMS with other management
systems is seen as a possible way to decrease costs.
• Half of all the environmental objectives and targets give payback within one
year through cost savings and/or increased revenue.
• The largest cost savings have been made through decreased expenditure on
energy, waste treatment and raw materials.
• Most of the companies think that their position on the market has been strength-
ened through EMS. One-third of the companies report increasing revenue due to
EMS.
The following topics should be given priority to make EMS more efficient:
• developing business intelligence in the companies in order to promote further
continuous updating on environmental issues.
• clarifying the process of identification and assessment of environmental aspects.
• streamlining and coordinating different management systems.
• improving the follow-up of environmental work.
• linking EMS to product design.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 5
Keywords
Environmental management system(s), ISO 14000, EMAS, environmental impact,
environmental performance, economy.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 6
Foreword
This report is a result of a study in which five of Sweden’s industrial research
institutes collaborated within the framework of IRIS Eco-efficiency Group. IRIS,
Industrial Research Institutes in Sweden, is the Institutes’ umbrella organisation.
The study was mainly financed by Nutek, the Swedish Board for Industrial and
Technical Development. The companies which contributed by way of their experi-
ences to the study assisted by giving their time.
The project group wishes to extend gratitude to those who made the study
possible, to Nutek with Göran Uebel as administrator and especially to all compa-
nies which contributed with their experiences. Fully 170 companies took the time
to answer our questionnaire, yielding a response rate of approximately 50% while
19 companies took part in a comprehensive interview.
For assistance with the English translation of the report, the project group
wishes to extend gratitude to the European Commission, in particular its Translation
Services.
The project group was composed of the following institutes and collaborators:
The Institute for Media Technology, IMT Angelica Widing, Åsa Abel,
Maria Enroth
The Swedish Institute of Production
Engineering Research, IVF Mats Zackrisson
The Swedish Institute for Food and
Biotechnology, SIK Pär Olsson
Swedish Foundry Association Ulf Gotthardsson
IVL Swedish Environmental Research
Institute Ltd Hans-Olof Marcus
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 7
Note to the reader
This publication has been set out as a scientific report. This means that a relatively
large amount of space has been devoted to clarifying how the study was carried out
(Method sections plus Annexes 1 and 9) and documenting the results (Results
sections plus Annexes 2-8 and 10).
The greatest benefit from the report is probably to be gained by beginning with
Chapter 6 (Discussion and conclusions), where the most interesting results are
summarised. Individual details can be explored in more depth by reference to other
chapters and the annexes. In Section 4.2.3 (Qualitative results), however, certain
results from the interviews are set out which are not discussed in Chapter 6.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 8
Table of contens
1 Introduction 9
2 Selection of companies 10
3 Questionnaire 15
3.1 Method 15
3.2 Results 16
4 Interviews 22
4.1 Method 22
4.2 Results 28
4.2.1 Actual selection of interview groups 28
4.2.2 Parameters 28
4.2.3 Qualitative results 38
5 Study of the literature 41
5.1 Assessment of environmental aspects 41
5.1.1 Background 41
5.1.2 Method 42
5.1.3 Results 42
5.2 Other Experiences 46
5.2.1 Standardisation and certification in brief 46
5.2.2 Other surveys 46
6 Discussion and conclusions 50
6.1 Assessment of EMS 50
6.1.1 Which factors in environmental work do companies experience as difficult?51
6.1.2 Do companies prioritise environmental aspects having a major environmental
impact in their work?51
6.1.3 Which procedures and methods are used to assess environmental aspects?53
6.1.4 Which actual environmental improvements have EMS achived?55
6.1.5 Costs, savings and revenue in connection with EMS 57
6.1.6 Other considerations 60
6.2 Development Potential 61
7 References 63
ANNEXES
Annex 1 Dispatch of the questionnaire and follow-up letters
Annex 2 Questionnaire results. All companies which replied (49%, 172 companies)
Annex 3 Questionnaire results. Large companies (with more than 100 employees)
Annex 4 Questionnaire results. Small companies (with less than 100 employees)
Annex 5 Questionnaire results. Industrial companies (Sector Code 02-45, 90)
Annex 6 Questionnaire results. Service and trade companies (Sector Code 50-74)
Annex 7 Questionnaire results. Companies certified in 1996-1997
Annex 8 Questionnaire results. Companies certified in 1998-1999
Annex 9 Basis of the interviews
Annex 10 Interviews, results
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 9
1 Introduction
The study entitled ‘Assessment and development of EMS’, Stage 1, was carried out
during the period November 1998 – October 1999.
The overall objective of the study is to support a development of EMS in which
continuous environmental improvement and increased cost efficiency can be
achieved.
The aim of Stage 1 was to assess the environmental and cost efficiency of the
EMS certified and registered to date in accordance with ISO 14001 and/or EMAS.
Through different types of inventory work, the objective has been to provide an
answer to questions which include the following:
1.Which factors in environmental work do companies experience as difficult?
2.Do companies prioritise environmental aspects having a major environmental
impact in their work?
3.Which procedures and methods are used to assess environmental aspects within
environmental management work?
4.Which actual environmental improvements have EMS achieved?
5.What is the cost of work in respect of EMS? Have financial savings been
possible?
The work mainly covered the following:
• Questionnaire
• Interviews
• Inventory by way of literature in respect of ways of working for the assessment
of environmental aspects.
In addition we considered, to some extent, experiences from standardisation and
certification work as well as other surveys of environmental management work.
The work was carried out by five industrial research institutes among which the
IMT (The Institute for Media Technology) was responsible for, among other things,
questionnaires and project management and the IVF (The Swedish Institute of
Production Engineering Research) for, among other things, interviews. Three other
institutes, the SIK (The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology), the Swed-
ish Foundry Association and the IVL (IVL Swedish Environmental Research
Institute Ltd) participated in interviews and joint project discussions and also acted
as valuable reference groups.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 10
2 Selection of companies
The selection is based on the companies which held certified EMS according to
ISO 14001 or EMAS in November 1998. Three different lists contained this
information: the ISO Guide, SIS [Swedish Standard Organisation] and
Challennium information. For different reasons, the lists were not identical – see
the example in Table 1.
Table 1 Certificate according to EMAS and ISO 14001 in November 1998

ISO Guide

SIS

Challenium

Companies with EMAS certificate


86

118

121

Companies with ISO 14001
certificate

315

311

360

Two contributory reasons for the differences seem to be that:
• The lists are based (at least as far as ISO 14001 is concerned) on the certifying
body reporting to the organisations which maintain the lists. The lack of report-
ing or the absence of reporting agreements may be a source of error.
• The lists use certificates or plants which are covered by certificates differently.
Since the ISO Guide’s list seemed to be the one which most consistently reported
certificates (in contrast to plants which are covered by certificates), this list was
taken as the starting-point. The ISO Guide’s list was supplemented by information
from the SIS list. The resulting list contained 370 companies with certificates for
ISO 14001 and/or EMAS. The corresponding figure at that point in time was 370
for SIS and 410 for Challennium.
The list containing 370 certified companies was supplemented by a sector code,
the number of employees and address information using the National Postal Serv-
ice’s address register. This information was found only in the case of 338 compa-
nies. Through further detective work, a list was drawn up with more or less com-
plete information containing 360 companies. It is these 360 companies which the
assessment covers. Figures 1, 2 and 3 plus Table 2 illustrate the distribution of
environmental certificates within different sectors and company sizes for the 360
companies.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 11
Figure 1 Number of employees in environment-certified companies in November 1998.
Figure 2 Swedish companies broken down by size according to SCB 1998.
Note that the scale in Figure 2 is logarithmic.

360 environment-certified Swedish companies broken down
by size
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1-4

5-9

10-19

20-49

50-99

100-

199

200-

499

> 500

Unknown

No. of companies


All Swedish companies 1998 broken down by size
1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

1-4

5-9

10-19

20-49

50-99

100-199

200-499

500-

No. of employees

No. of companies

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 12
Table 2 Environment-certified companies broken down by sector according to the sector codes
defined in the Swedish standard SNI 92
1
.
1
SNI 92 is coordinated with NACE Rev.1 and ISIC rev.3.
SNI
Sector
Code
Designation No. of
companies
02 Forestry 4
14 Other mineral extraction industry 4
15 Manufacture of food products and beverages 6
17 Manufacture of textiles 2
18 Manufacture of textile and fur products 2
19 Manufacture of leather and leather products 3
20 Manufacture of wood and products of wood,
rattan and cork
17
21 Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products 32
22 Graphic arts industry 20
23 Mineral oil industry 2
24 Chemical industry 24
25 Manufacture of rubber and plastics products 15
26 Stone, clay and glass industry 7
27 Steelworks and metal works 7
28 Manufacture of metal goods (excluding machinery
and apparatus)
58
29 Machine industry 14
31 Other electrical industry 8
32 Manufacture of telecommunications products 3
33 Manufacture of medical equipment, instruments,
photographs, optics, clocks and watches
1
34 Manufacture of motor vehicles and coachworks 8
36 Manufacture of furniture; other manufacturing 7
37 Recycling industry 1
40 Electricity, gas and thermal power stations 8
45 Construction 7
50 Trading and servicing of cars, service stations 8
51 Agency and wholesale trading (excluding cars) 41
52 Retailing 1
55 Hotels and restaurants 3
60 Land transport companies 5
63 Travel agencies and transport arrangement 7
66 Insurance companies 1
70 Real estate agencies and real estate management

2
71 Rental firms 1
72 IT consultants and computer service bureaux 1
73 Research and development 2
74 Other company service firms 21
90 Sewage treatment works, waste disposal
installations, public cleansing departments
7
Total:

360

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 13
Figure 3 Sector breakdown for environment-certified companies. Current sector codes (according to
SNI 92) are stated in decreasing order.
Before assessing the questionnaire results and selecting companies for interview,
the 360 companies were divided into two groups: industry and service/trade. Fur-
ther sub-divisions were discussed but not proceeded with. Aspects which were
discussed in connection with the selection included the knowledge of the different
sectors at the collaborating institutes and the normal distribution of ‘measurement
parameters’ among the population, which is important for the conclusions drawn to
be applicable to the entire population. The breakdown by size into the respective
groups is shown in Figure 4.

360 environment
-
certified Swedish companies broken down
by sector
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

No. of companies

28

51

21

24

74

22

20

25

29

31

34

40

50

26

27

36

45

63

90

15

60

2

14

19

32

55

17

18

23

70

73

33

37

52

66

71

72

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 14
Figure 4 Number of employees within the respective groups (SNI codes are shown in brackets).
The selection was made by a random draw in which an attempt was made to
achieve a representative distribution between the two groups on the one hand and
between small and large companies within the respective group on the other. In
that connection the choice was guided according to Table 3. Companies with an
unknown number of employees were added to the companies with more than 100
employees within the respective group. The actual draw was made using random
numbers in Excel.
Table 3 Control of the selection of companies for interview.
Number of
employees
Service and trade
(SNI Code 50-74)

Industry
(SNI Code 02-45,
90)
<100 63 120
>100 34 143
Total 97 263
Number of interviews 5 15
Of which large companies

2 8
Of which small companies

3 7


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Service

and

trade

(50-74)

Industry

(02-45,

90)

No. of companies

<100

>100

Unknown

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 15
3 Questionnaire
3.1 Method
As stated earlier, the aim of the study is enhanced environmental improvement and
cost effectiveness in companies with certified environmental management systems.
As a method for elucidating the companies’ environmental management work, a
questionnaire was devised as part of the project. A written questionnaire provides a
picture of a relatively large number of companies’ environmental management work
and is thus powerful. On the other hand, a questionnaire ought not to be too com-
prehensive if a high response rate is sought. Questionnaires therefore usually only
provide opportunity of addressing issues in a lucid way. In this case the question-
naire comprised 16 questions with the objective of obtaining answers to the follow-
ing specific questions:
a) Why has the company chosen to introduce an EMS?
b) Which factors has the company taken into account when assessing environmen-
tal aspects and which environmental aspects does the company deem to be
significant?
c) Which types of environmental objectives and targets have been drawn up?
d) Which actual environmental improvements has the environmental work accom-
plished and how is environmental work reported externally?
e) What is the cost of work on the EMS? Have financial savings been made or
market gains been achievable?
f) Which factors in environmental work do the companies experience as being
difficult?
These questions clarify some of the issues to be addressed by the study as a whole.
The questionnaire was sent out to a total of 360 companies with an ISO 14001
certificate and/or EMAS registration in Sweden in November 1998. A total of 354
companies were traced (for example, some companies had ceased trading). The
dispatch of the questionnaire and follow-up letter, which was repeated once, is
recorded in Annex 1.
When the material was analysed, the companies were divided into different
groups to make comparison possible:
• All companies
• Large companies (with more than 100 employees)
• Small companies (with less than 100 employees)
• Industrial companies
• Service and trade companies
• Companies which received a certificate in 1996 or 1997
• Companies which received a certificate in 1998 or 1999
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 16
3.2 Results
Of the total of 354 companies which received the questionnaire, 172 (49%) replied.
The number of replies from companies of different sizes largely reflects the number
of certified companies within the respective groups – see Figure 5. Large compa-
nies are, however, represented to a greater extent than smaller ones, in relation to
the size breakdown of all environment-certified companies in November 1998 – see
Figure 1. The largest company which replied has a total of 100 000 employees. In
general, it may be said that of the companies which did reply, the majority received
the certificate in 1997/1998 (roughly 80%), although companies certified in 1996
and 1999 are also represented. Of the companies which replied, 55% must hold an
environmental permit to operate and 13% must notify the authorities about their
operations on environmental grounds.
Figure 5 Number of employees in the companies which responded to the questionnaire
2
A description of the questionnaire result follows. In Annexes 2-8 there are compila-
tions of results for the different groupings studied. To make things easier for the
reader, the replies to all the multiple-choice questions in the Annexes have been
arranged having regard to the number of replies.
a) Why the companies chose to introduce an EMS
The three primary reasons for introducing an EMS are as follows in the case of all
the company groups (the percentage figure shows the proportion of companies
which stated relevant alternatives – only one alternative was stated):
• Competitive advantages (53 %)
• Owner requirements (27 %)
• Requirements from customers (18 %)
Of the alternatives which could be stated, requirements from financiers come last.
0

10

20

30

40

50

1-4

5-9

10-19

20-49

50-99

100-

199

200-

499

500-

1000

>1000

Number of employees
No. of companies

2
Size breakdown based on the companies’ own information, in contrast to the data used when selecting
the companies – see Figure
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 17
b) Assessment of which environmental aspects are significant
When assessing the company’s environmental aspects, the majority of the compa-
nies took account of the following (the percentage figure shows the proportion of
companies which stated relevant alternatives – several alternative could be stated):
• Air discharges (73 %)
• Legal requirements (68 %)
• Quantity and type of waste (67 %)
• Water discharges (67 %)
• Waste handling (50 %)
• Type of resource (46 %)
‘Type of resource’ denotes finite or renewable resources. The environmental
impact of products during use, recycling capacity, the result of LCA and customers’
requirements are taken account of by fewer. No major difference is noted attribut-
able to the company group considered.
The environmental aspects deemed significant are mainly the following (the
percentage figure shows the proportion of companies which stated relevant alterna-
tives – several alternatives could be stated):
• Energy consumption (71 %)
• Waste (69 %)
• Goods transport (67 %)
• Emissions from the plant (62 %)
• Chemical management (55 %)
• Input goods/raw materials (55 %)
Travel to and from work and business trips are more unusual as significant environ-
mental aspects. Service and trade companies distinguish themselves by emissions
from the plant not being so common, whereas business trips end far up on the
prioritisation list in quite a few cases.
35% of companies had an LCA carried out for one or more of their products.
Of the large companies, 51% carried out an LCA while 17% of the small companies
did. Industrial companies carried out an LCA to a greater extent than service and
trade companies. Table 4 shows the number of companies within the respective
sector/product group which carried out an LCA.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 18
Table 4 Number of companies which carried out LCAs in different sectors
c) Different types of environmental targets
Environmental targets within the following areas are the most common (the per-
centage figure shows the proportion of companies which stated relevant alternatives
– several alternatives could be stated):
• Waste (78 %)
• Energy use (73 %)
• Emissions from the plant (62 %)
• Goods transport (49 %)
• Chemical management (48 %)
• Input goods/raw materials (48 %)
The areas within which the companies set environmental targets accordingly tie in
well on the whole with the areas regarded as significant environmental aspects.
Sector
Code
Designation No. of
companies
which
carried out
LCAs
28 Manufacture of metal goods (excluding machinery
and apparatus)
11
21 Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products 9
22 Graphic arts industry 4
24 Chemical industry 4
25 Manufacturing of rubber and plastics products 4
29 Machine industry 4
20 Manufacture of wood and products of wood, rattan
and cork
3
31 Other electrical industry 3
45 Construction 3
51 Agency and wholesale trading (excluding cars) 3
26 Stone, clay and glass industry 2
27 Steelworks and metalworks 2
17 Manufacture of textiles 1
34 Manufacture of motor vehicle and coachworks 1
36 Manufacture of furniture; other manufacturing 1
50 Trading and servicing of cars, service stations 1
63 Travel agencies and transport arrangement 1
73 Research and development 1
74 Other company service firms 1
90 Sewage treatment works, waste disposal
installations, public cleansing departments
1
Total:

60

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 19
d) Actual environmental improvements and external reporting of
environmental work
In response to the question as to which are the three greatest environment-improv-
ing measures which have been carried out, many replies included better waste
sorting, less waste, safer handling of chemicals, lower energy consumption and less
discharge. There were also answers concerning better control and organisation.
Some companies referred to the prioritisation of input goods/raw materials with
environmental labels and the development of products better adapted to the envi-
ronment.
In response to the question as to the extent to which EMS reduced environ-
mental impact from the company on a scale from 1 to 6, 63% replied 3 or 4 – see
Figure 6.
We investigated whether companies which carried out an LCA, or arranged for
one, experienced reduced environmental impact to a greater extent than others, but
this was not the case.
Figure 6 Companies’ assessment of the extent to which environmental impact from the
company diminished as a result of EMS. Recorded on a scale from 1-6, where 1 corresponds to
‘not at all’ and 6 to ‘to a very great extent.’
As regards the question concerning the environmental information reported other
than an environmental report to the authority, 94% answered ‘environmental policy’
and 57% ‘environmental targets’. Other information, such as environmental aspects,
environmental management programmes and material and energy consumption is
publicly reported by around 30% of companies. Barely 30% report environmental
indicators publicly although such figures are used internally by 55% of companies.
A large proportion of the large companies report so-called hard facts, such as energy
consumption, discharge, waste, etc.
Reduced environmental impact
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3 4 5 6
Scale 1-6
No.
of
cos
.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 20
e) Costs, savings and market benefits
The introduction of EMS cost an average of some 360 man-days plus SEK 280 000
by way of consultant and certification expences per company.
3
Here a striking
difference is noted between large and small companies – see also Table 5. Accord-
ing to regression analysis, however, there is no linear correlation between the
number of employees and the internal work put in for the introduction of EMS.
Table 5 Costs for the introduction of EMS in different groups of companies. Large companies have
more than100 employees and small ones less than 100. Industrial companies are taken to be
covered by Sector Codes 02-45 and 90, service/trade companies by Sector Code 50-74.
If we consider the year the certificate was received, it is apparent that the costs
increase the longer the EMS has existed. This indicates that the question may
unfortunately have been misinterpreted in certain cases, in other words that all costs
were reckoned to date and not just the actual introduction of the system. It may
also depend on the fact that more work was required to introduce the EMS when the
standard was newly issued.
In response to the question as to which were the three greatest cost savings
which environmental management led to, many answers included reduced costs for
energy, waste handling, raw materials and transport.
Approximately 30% of the companies stated they could demonstrate increased
revenue as a result of the environmental management work. On a scale from 1 to 6,
60% of the companies stated 4 or 5 in relation to how the market position has been
improved – see also Figure 7.
3
Only 70% of companies answered this question. One company reported a considerably higher cost than
others, which probably covers the introduction of more certificates and it was therefore removed from this
part of the analysis.

Company group

Internal work
(man-days)


Consultancy
expences
(SEK ‘000)


Certification
expenses
(SEK ‘000)

min ave-
rage
max min aver-
age
max min ave-
rage
max
Total
20
362

2760

0
166
2200

15
111
600








Large
companies
30
518

2760

0
209
2200

25
146
600

Small
companies
20
169

600 0
115
600 15
70
255









Industrial
companies
20
394

2760

0
174
2200

15
113
600

Service &
trade
20
238

1500

0
133
500 20
104
500


Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 21
Figure 7 Companies’ assessment of improved market position as a result of the EMS, on a scale from
1-6 in which 1 corresponds to ‘not at all’ and 6 to‘to a very great extent.’
f) Difficulties and development opportunities
Most companies mentioned difficulties within the following areas (the percentage
figure shows the proportion of companies which stated relevant alternatives –
several alternative could be stated):
• Significant environmental aspects (49 %)
• Environmental legislation (40 %)
• Environmental targets (29 %)
• Nonconformance handling (26 %)
Auditing, the management review and external communication are, by contrast,
aspects which very few had problems with. As regards difficulties and development
opportunities there are no major differences between the various groups of compa-
nies.
In reply to the question as to which aids should be needed to make continual
improvement possible, the answer is as follows (the percentage figure shows the
proportion of companies which stated relevant alternatives – several alternatives
could be stated):
• Environmental performance indicators (37 %)
• Life cycle assessment (30 %)
• Better knowledge about company operations (23 %)
• Environmental product declarations (19 %)
• Other (19 %)
Improved market position
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1 2 3 4 5 6
Scale 1-6
No. of cos.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 22
4 Interviews
4.1 Method
The selection of companies for interview is described in Chapter 2.
Selected companies were first approached by telephone. Written information
was sent as necessary. The agreed date, time and conditions for interview (it was
promised, among other things, that no published information should allow indi-
vidual companies to be traced) were confirmed in writing.
The interviews were conducted with the person responsible for the environment,
the environmental coordinator or the equivalent in the company. Three hours were
assigned for each interview, although in the event the time varied from two to five
hours.
The interviews were conducted using a basis – see Annex 9 – which were also
used to document the results of the interview. Interviewed companies were sent this
interview record subsequently and were asked to correct any errors.
The main aim of the studies as a whole was to assess the environmental and cost
effectiveness of EMS certified to date according to ISO 14001 and EMAS. In the
interviews, answers were sought in the first instance to Questions 2-5:
1.Which factors in environmental work do companies experience as difficult?
2.Do companies prioritise environmental aspects having a major environmental
impact in their work?
3.Which procedures and methods are used to assess environmental aspects within
environmental management work?
4.Which actual environmental improvements has the EMS achieved?
5.What is the cost of work in respect of EMS? Have financial savings been possi-
ble?
Secondly, background reasons were sought, such as why companies did not
prioritise correctly if they did not do so.
To analyse the results, the interview results were converted to the parameters
recorded in Table 6. The criteria used for the ‘conversion’ are only for this purpose
and must categorically not be viewed as recommendations for criteria in an EMS. It
must further be added that the interview material is more comprehensive than
selected parameters reflect.
When replies were given in terms of working hours when we asked for Kronor,
we reckoned on a salary cost of SEK 500/hour for qualified staff.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 23
Table 6 Interviews. Description of data parameters.
Parameter Unit Remarks
1. Number of
employees
number of
employees in
the year
Measurement of the size of the companies
interviewed. The measure refers to how many
employees are covered by the certificate.

2. Yearly
turnover
Yearly turnover
in SEK million
Measurement of the size of the companies
interviewed. The measure refers to yearly turnover
of those parts of the company covered by the
certificate.
3. EMAS
Emas/No Describes whether the company is EMAS- registered
or not.
4. EMS age
number of
years
Measurement of the age of the EMS reckoned from
the date the certificate or registration was received to
30.6.1999.
5. ISO 9000
ISO 9001/ISO
9002/No
Describes whether there are quality systems and if
so which type. ISO 9001 entails own product
development taking place.
6. Activity
Industry/Other Describes whether the undertaking belongs to the
industry or to the service/trade group (other).
7. Sub-
contractors
Subcont./No The companies are either mainly (more than 50%)
sub-contractors or supply mainly end-users.
8. Subcontract
work
Subcont./No Describes whether the company engages at least
50% in subcontracting, in other words the processing
of others’ products.
9. Environ-
mental impact
from plant
Permit, Notify,
Nothing
Indicates the degree of environmental impact from
the plant by providing information whether the
company has a permit or is obliged to notify the
authorities, according to the Environment Protection
Act.

10. Reason for
introduction
Legislation,
Competition,
Customer
requirements,
Owner
requirement,
Financier req’t,
Employee req’t
Other
Describes the main reason for the introduction of
EMS.
11. Identification
errror
I-error/No Describes whether important mistakes have been
made in identifying environmental aspects. The
criterion for ‘important’ in this study is that the
environmental aspect has both a major
environmental impact and a considerable effect on
the financial result and that the company agrees that
a mistake has been made. Journeys to and from
work, which nearly all missed, were for example not
considered an identification error despite them often
having a major environmental impact on account of
having little effect on the company’s financial result.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 24
Parameter Unit Remarks
12. Environ-
mental
assessment
system I
Points/Qualitative
This parameter attempts to characterise the methods
used for the environmental assessment of
environmental aspects. With Points it is considered
that points are assigned for different aspects of the
relevant environmental aspect and makes some form
of summation which forms the basis for determining
whether the environmental aspect is to be regarded
as significant or not. Qualitative methods can be
anything from free discussions to methods where
criteria are laid down beforehand and are to be met
in order for the environmental aspect to be regarded
as significant.
13. Environ-
mental
assessment
system II
Envt./Envt.+ectech
[economy/technology]
This parameter is the reply to the question: Is a
distinction made between environmental assessment
and prioritisation with regard to economy and
technology? It is very common for account to be
taken of improvement potential (technology) at this
stage despite the fact that this must not be done,
according to existing written routines. The reply
considers intended action.
14. Environ-
mental
assessment
error
EA-error/No Describes whether ‘important’ mistakes are made
when assessing environmental aspects. The
criterion for ‘important’ in this study is that the
environmental aspect should have both a major
environmental impact and a considerable effect on
the financial result, and that the company agrees
that a mistake has been made. Mistakes relating to
goods transport (for industry) and energy
consumption were considered to be errors, whereas
errors relating to journeys to and from work were not.

15. When legal
requirements

With environment
/Separate
Describes when account is taken of legal require-
ments in dealing with environmental aspects - in
connection with the environmental assessment or at
separate stages.
16. Number of
significant
environ-
mental
aspects
number of formulated
significant
environmental aspects

Measurement of how many significant environmental

aspects have been formulated.

17. Number of
environ-
mental
targets
highest number of
objectives or targets
Measurement of the number of environmental
targets reckoned as the highest number of
environmental objectives or environmental targets.
18. Test results
% ‘correctly’ assessed
environmental aspects

Describes the extent to which the companies’
methods are capable of ranking environmentally five
described environmental aspects in a way which is
‘correct' according to the basis of the interview - see
Annex 9.
19. Number of
declared
targets
number of declared
targets
Gives the number of targets which the coming 13
parameters are calculated for.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 25
Parameter Unit Remarks
20. Target area
production
% related to the
plant and
upstream
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that affect own manufacture and sub-
contractors’ manufacture.
21. Target area
transport
% related to
transport of
goods,
business trips,
travel to/from
work
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that affect different kinds of transport.

22. Target area
product
% related to
product use or
disposal
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that affect own product’s or own service’s
environmental impact during use or disposal.

23. Target attack
method
% source
reduction
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets attempt to reduce the source of the problem,
for example by reducing consumption, re-using
material, etc. The opposite are so-called end-of-pipe
solutions, such as chimneys and waste recycling.
24. Target
measure
investigation
% of targets
which entail
investigation
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that entails investigations of different kinds.
25. Target
measure
training
% of targets
which entail
training
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that provides for training of different kinds.

26. Target
measure
investment
% of targets
which entail
physical invest-
ments
Describes how great a proportion of the declared
targets that entails investments in physical
equipment.

27. Target one-
off cost
mean value in
SEK ‘000
Describes mean cost for the investigations, training,
investments etc. included in the declared targets (if a
range was stated, the mean has been calculated).
28. Target pay-
back
% of targets
with maximum
one year’s
payback
Describes the proportion of the declared targets
where revenue and/or savings exceed, or are
expected to exceed, costs as early as one year later.
If substantial revenue is expected in relation to costs,
it has, for example, been assumed that the
repayment time is less than one year.


29. Target
payback
cause
% of 1 year’s
payback that is
solely due to
revenue
increase
Describes the reason for payback, according to the
above, being achieved already after one year. The
percentage figure states the proportion of the targets
with 1 year’s payback according to above where the
cause is solely increased revenue.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 26
Parameter Unit Remarks
30.Target
follow-up
% relative
measures
Attempts to give a quality measurement of the
monitoring of environmental targets by providing a
mean value for all declared targets as per the
following:
100% = measure related to something relevant, e.g.
production size. Relation to years has only been
accepted when this is considered relevant.
50% = non-related measure, e.g. the number of
chemical products.
0 % = only verification of that measures/activities
have been carried out.
No value has been calculated for companies having
less than 3 targets.
31.Target results

physical
To what extent
has emission or
resource
reduction been
achieved:
0%=no physical
set targets,
50%= physical
set targets,
100%=physical
reached
targets. Mean
average for all
targets.
Gives one quality rating for the results of the
environmental target work by explaining to what
extent emission or resource reduction has been
achieved. Targets such as ”introduce a waste sorting
system", that have been reached but where there is
no quantitative target, are considered to be 50%. An
ambitious target that has been partly reached is
considered to be 90%. No value has been calculated
for companies having less than 3 targets. Note that
work with indirect environmental effects through for
example staff training, is not rewarded by this
parameter.
32. Target cause

% which would
be achieved
without EMS
Describes, in percentage terms, how many of the
declared targets that would be achieved even if the
company was not EMS-certified.
33.Management
commitment
25%=poor,
50%=fair,
75%=good,
100%=v. good
Describes management’s commitment in environ-
mental work on the stated scale.


34. Staff
commitment
25%=poor,
50%=fair,
75%=good,
100%=v. good
Describes the staff’s commitment in environmental
work on the stated scale.

35.General staff
training
hours per
employee
States how many hours’ general environmental
training and training on the system each employee
received on average.

36.Customer
interest in
’green’
products
Positive/Indiffer-
ent/Negative/
Don’t know
Describes the customers’ interest in ‘green’ products
or services.
37.
Willingness to
pay for’green’
products
Willing/not/don’t
know
Describes the customers’ willingness to pay more for
‘green’ products or services.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 27
Parameter Unit Remarks
38. Why not
EMAS?
Cost/No
demand/Have
EMAS/Other
Describes an answer to the question: Why not
EMAS registration? Those who stated more than
one reason have been classified under Other.
39. Internal work
for system
operation
hours per year Measure of how much time the companies devote
to maintaining and operating EMS (document
handling, audits, etc. but not work on environmental
targets).
40. Non-target-
linked training
hours per year Measurement of how much time the companies
devote to training every year which has nothing to
do with environmental targets (there may, for
example, be newly employed staff having to
undergo the general environmental training which
all received when the system was designed and
introduced - see General staff training above).
41. External
audits
SEK ‘000 per
year
Measurement of how many Kronor per year the
company pays each year for external audits.

42. Document-
handling
Electronic/Paper Describes whether document handling, in other
words amendment handling, is done electronically
or manually.
43. Steering
documents
Number Measurement of how many steering documents are
contained in the EMS. In those cases where the
EMS uses, or refers to, documents in the quality
system, these have not been included.
44. Coordin-
ation with
Q-system

Much’>30%’,
Little ‘2-30%, No
‘<2%’
Describes the extent of coordination of
environmental and quality systems on the stated
scale.
45. Coordination
with health
and safety
systems

Much’>30%’,
Little ‘2-30%, No
‘<2%’
Describes the extent of coordination of
environmental and health and safety systems (i.e.
external and internal environment) on the stated
scale.
46. More
coordination
planned
Yes/No Describes whether more coordination with the
health and safety system is planned or not. The
question has not been asked explicitly.

To investigate the correlation between different parameters, such as whether the
environmental result can be expected to be better the longer the certificate is held or
whether EMAS registration is possessed, various statistical methods have been
used.
In the case of two continuous parameters like Target result physical and EMS
age, regression analysis was used. An F-value under 0.05 here gives 95% certainty
for the model to be true. This is then described in the text as a (statistically signifi-
cant) correlation existing.
When a continuous parameter like Target result physical is compared between
two groups, for example EMAS-registered and non-EMAS registered companies, a
dual t-test for different variances was carried out. A P-value under 0.05 here gives
95% certainty in the difference between the mean values for the two groups. This is
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 28
then described in the results section as a statistically significant difference existing
between the mean values. The validity of correlations found is discussed in Chap-
ter 6 (Discussion and conclusions).
The statistical methods used presuppose that data are normally distributed for
the whole of the group which the survey applies to, in other words all (or the
defined groups of) environment-certified Swedish companies. This is not certain,
but it seems more likely that data should be normally distributed than that they
should not.
4.2 Results
The results set out below are based on the data in Annex 10.
4.2.1 Actual selection of interview groups
One of the 20 companies randomly selected for interview did not consider to have
time for it, so the finally valid number stopped at 19 companies. Organisational
changes, unclear points in the scope of the environmental certificate, etc. further
resulted in the actual breakdown between small and large companies not being quite
as planned. Table 7 shows the actual selection for interviews in terms of numbers
and percentages (planned selection within brackets).
Table 7 Actual selection of interview groups
The part-group represented by large companies in the service or trade sector com-
prises only one company and is therefore too small for the special reporting of the
result for this group to be of interest. This applies to a certain extent also in the case
of the group represented by small companies in the service and trade sector, hence
the recording of part-groups below is in the first instance concentrated on industrial
companies or service and trade. The impact of company size has been investigated
as a continuous parameter.
4.2.2 Parameters
The results for the parameters explained in Table 6 are set out in Table 8 below.
Where correlations or differences between parameters were tested, this was stated.
The correlation tests are not, however, stated for parameters 1-9, which contain
general information on the companies.
Number of
employees

Service and trade (50-
74)
Industry (02-45,
90)
<100, small
companies
4, (3), 21% 8, (7), 42%
>100, large
companies
1, (2), 5% 6, (8), 32%
Total 5 (5) 14 (15)
Grand total 19 (20)

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 29
Table 8 Interviews – results for individual parameters.
Parameter Results
1. Number of
employees
The smallest company interviewed has 14 employees and the largest
525. The median value is 65 employees while the mean value is 123.
See also the section Actual selection of interview groups above.
2. Yearly
turnover
Yearly turnover varies between SEK 11.5 and 1 000 million.

3. EMAS
26% possess EMAS registration (as well as 14001 certificate). This
figure ties in well with the percentage rate of EMAS registrations
among the 360 companies from which interviewed companies were
randomly selected. Three of the five EMAS registrations were among
the large industrial companies.
4. EMS age
Age of EMS reckoned from the date the certificate was received varies
from just under a year to nearly three years. The mean age is two
years and the median 1.6.
5. ISO 9000 The majority – 90% - have an ISO 9000 certificate (52% ISO 9002 and
37% ISO 9001). The two companies which do not have an ISO 9000
certificate are within the service and trade group.
As regards the breakdown of ISO 9000 types between industrial
companies, the larger companies have ISO 9001 to a greater extent
(which means they have their own product development), while ISO
9002 dominates in the case of the smaller industrial companies.
6. Activity
See the section Actual selection of interview groups above.
7. Sub-
contractors
Most companies (68%) supply mainly end-users. Half the large
industrial companies are mainly subcontractors, while the smaller
industrial companies deliver to end-users to a greater extent (75%).
8. Subcontract
work
Only 10% of companies in the group engage mainly in subcontracting.

9. Environ-
mental
impact from
plant
Most (68%) companies need an environmental permit or are obliged to
notify the authorities on environmental grounds (42% permit, 26%
needs to notify). As regards industrial companies, fully 86% need a
permit or need to notify.
10. Reason for
introduction

Most state competitive advantages (42%) and customer requirements
(21%) as the main reason for the introduction of EMS.
11. Identific-
ation error
A minor proportion (26%) of the companies failed to identify some
environmental aspect that would have been of significance to the
company.
12.Environ-
mental
assess-
ment
system I
Most (68%) companies make a qualitative environmental assessment
of environmental aspects, while the remaining 32% use some form of
points system. No appreciable differences exist between large and
small companies or between industry and service/trade. Those which
conducted a qualitative assessment achieved a better result in the
assessment test conducted at the interviews, parameter Test result.
The difference is significant according to the T-test - see Figure 8. On
the other hand, there is no correlation, according to the T-test,
between the parameter Environmental assessment system I and the
environmental results (parameter Target results physical), or the
environmental targets' financial profitability (parameter Target
payback).

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 30
Parameter Results
13. Environ-
mental
assess-
ment
system II
Roughly half (53%) of the companies state that they divide between
the environmental assessment of environmental aspects and the
prioritisation of these with regard to economy and technology. Half
thus deliberately mix together environmental assessment and
prioritisation with regard to economy and technology.
There is no correlation, according to the T-test, between companies
mixing or not mixing environmental assessment with economy and
technology and the result of the assessment test conducted at the
interview, parameter Test result.
Nor is there any correlation, according to the T-test, between the
parameter Environment assessment system II and the environmental
results (parameter Target results physical), or the environmental
targets' financial profitability (parameter Target payback).
14. Environ-
mental
assessment
error
A minor proportion (32%) of the companies failed to assess some
environmental aspect as significant although the aspect was of great
importance to the company. According to the T-test, there is no
correlation between this parameter and the result of the assessment
test carried out at the interviews, the parameter Test result.
15. When legal
require-
ments
Most (90%) of the companies take account of any legal requirements
in connection with the environmental assessment being carried out.
The remaining 10% have a separate stage for taking account of legal
requirements.
16. Number of
significant
environ-
mental
aspects
The number of significant environmental aspects per company varies
between 1 and 50. The mean figure is 14, the median 7.

17. Number of
environ-
mental
targets
The number of environmental targets per company (reckoned as the
highest number of envi
ronmental objectives and environmental
targets) varies between 3 and 30. The mean figure is 9, the median 6.


18. Test results

The test results vary between 80 and 0% correct replies. The mean
value is 45% while the median is 40%. There are no signifi cant
differences between the groups.
According to the T-test there is no difference between the test results
and whether companies were responsible for errors in the
environmental assessment, the parameter Environmental assessment
errors, or between the test results and whether companies mix or do
not mix environmental assessment with priorization with regard to
economy and technology, parameter Environmental Assessment
System II.
On the other hand, the companies which carry out a qualitative
environmental assessment - see parameter Environmental
Assessment System I – achieve a better result. The difference is
significant according to the T-test - see Figure 8.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 31
Parameter Results
19. Number of
declared
targets
The number of declared targets at the interviews varies between
2 and 5.

20. Target area

production
Most of the companies’ targets (mean figure 72%, median 80%) focus
on problems in own or subcontractors’ activity. Corresponding
percentage rates for industrial companies only are mean 83%,
median 80%. There are no significant differences between large and
small industrial companies.
Companies in the service and trade sector have, as expected,
considerably fewer targets within the area of production, mean 41%,
median 38%. The difference between industrial companies and
service and trade companies is significant according to the T-test.
21. Target area
transport
Only a few of the companies’ targets (mean 10%, median 0%) focus
on transport. There are no significant differences between large and
small companies or between industry and service/trade.
22. Target area
product
Few of the companies’ targets (mean 18%, median 0%) focus on
problems relating to the use and disposal of own products.
Corresponding percentage rates for industrial companies only are
mean 8%, median 0%. There are no significant differences between
large and small industrial companies.
Nor are there differences, according to the T-t
est, between companies
which have ISO 9001 (and thus own product development) and the
others. The same applies to those which are subcontractors or those
which supply end-users.
Companies in the service and trade sector are seemingly more
inclined to work on product-related targets, mean 45%, median 60%.
However, the difference is not significant according to the T-test.
According to regression analysis there is no statistically significant
correlation between the parameter Target area product and the
targets’ economic profitability, parameter Target payback.
23. Target
attack
method
A major part of the companies’ targets, mean figure 77%, deals with
so-called source reduction. There are no significant differences
between industry and service/trade.
24. Target
measure
investig-
ation
Roughly half, mean figure 49%, of the companies’ targets entail
investigations. Corresponding percentages for industrial companies
only are 56% mean and 55% median.
Companies in the service and trade sector apparently investigate
somewhat less, mean 31%, median 40%. However, the difference is
not significant according to the T-test.
25. Target
measure
training
Nearly half (mean 42%, median 50%) of the companies’ targets entail
training. Corresponding percentages for industrial companies only are
56% mean and 55% median.

26. Target
measure
investment
Not fully half, mean 42%, of the companies’ targets entail investments
in physical equipment. Corresponding percentages for industrial
companies alone are mean 53%, median 40%. There are no
significant differences between large and small industrial companies.
Companies in the service and trade sector invest less, mean 12%,
median 0%, according to the T-test.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 32
Parameter Results
27. Target one-
off cost
One-off costs for environmental targets vary widely, from SEK 880 000
to SEK 0 per target on average for the respective companies. The
mean value is SEK 110 000/target and the median SEK 42 000/target.

There are no statistically significant differences in one-off costs for
environmental targets between industry and service/trade, or between
EMAS companies and those without EMAS, or between those which
have or do not have an environment permit (parameter Environmental
impact from plant), according to the T-test.
Nor is there any statistically significant correlation (according to
regression analysis) between one-off costs for environmental targets
and the result of environmental target work (parameter Target result
physical), or the number of employees.
28. Target pay-
back
More than half (mean 59%, median 60%) of all environmental targets
yield, or are expected to yield, a financial surplus already after one
year. No significant differences exist between large and small
industrial companies or between industry and service/trade. The
variation between individual companies is, however, great, 0 to 100%.

There are no statistically significant differences (according to the T-
test) in how profitable environmental targets are, or are expected to
be, in the case of those companies responsible for errors in
identification or the environmental assessment of environmental
aspects compared with companies which were not.
Further, there are no differences, according to the T-test, in the
environmental targets‘ financial profitability between companies which
use qualitative systems for environmental assessment compared with
those using points systems for that purpose, parameter Environmental
assessment system I.
Nor are there any differences, according to the T-test, in the
environmental targets’ financial profitability between companies which
mix environment and economy and technology in the environmental
assessment compared with those which do not, Parameter
Environmental assessment system II.
According to regression analysis, there is no statistically significant
correlation between the environmental targets’ economic profitability
and the result of environmental target work (parameter Target
physical). The same applies in the case of the parameter Target area
product.
29. Target
payback
cause
Fully half (mean 52%, median 66%) of the financially profitable targets
as per above are such exclusively because they yield or are being
expected to yield increased revenue. On the other hand, it is the case
that the other half, or just under half (of somewhat more than half of all
environmental targets) rapidly reaches profitability thanks to cost
savings (plus any revenue which has also increased).
There are no significant differences between large and small industrial
companies or between industries and service/trade. The variation
between individual companies is, however, wide: 0 to 100%.
30.Target
follow-up
The quality measurement of target monitoring gives a mean value of
61% for all company targets. There are no significant differences
between large and small industrial companies or between industries
and service/trade. The variation between individual companies (and
targets) is, however, wide: 0 to 100%.
According to regression analysis, there is a correlation between the
parameter Target follow-up and the parameter Target result physical,
see Figure 9.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 33


Parameter Results
31.Target
results
physical
The quality measurement of the result of target work gives a mean
value of 66% for all company targets. The variation between individual
companies (and targets) is, however, wide: 10 to 100%.
In the case of industrial companies only, the mean is 70% and the
median 69%. There are no significant differences between large and
small industrial companies. As expected, companies in the service
and trade sector have a poorer quality of environmental work than
industrial companies with this measurement, mean 53%, median 67%.
However, the difference is not significant according to the T-test.
Nor are there any statistically significant differences (according to the
T-test) in the result of environmental work in the case of companies
responsible for errors in identification or the environmental
assessment of environmental aspects compared with the companies
which were not.
Nor are there any statistically significant differences or correlations
between the result of environmental work (parameter Target result
physical) and the parameters Environmental assessment system I,
Environmental assessment system II, EMS age, Management
commitment, Staff commitment, Target one-off cost, Willingness to
pay for ‘green’ products, General staff training or Target payback.
According to regression analysis there is a correlation between
environmental work and the parameter Target follow-up, see Figure 9.

The companies which have EMAS have, according to the T-test, on
average a better environmental result (according to the parameter
Target result physical) compared with the companies which do not
have EMAS, mean 80% and 57%, see Figure 10, where the standard
deviation has been drawn as error columns.
32. Target
cause
Half of all targets would probably have been achieved even if
companies did not certify environmental management work. There are
no significant differences between large and small companies or
between industry and service/trade. The variation between individual
companies is, however, great; some would not have carried out any of
their environmental targets while others would have carried out all of
them.
33.Manage-
ment
commitment

Management commitment in environmental management work is on
average stated to be good. No significant differences between large
and small industrial companies or between industry and service/trade.
The variation between individual companies is between fair and very
good. There is no statistically significant correlation (according to
regression analysis) between management commitment and the result
of environment target work (parameter Target result physical).
The parameter has also been tested for correlation with the length of
general environmental training but no correlation can be established.
34. Staff
commitment

Staff commitment in environmental management work is on average
considered to be good. No significant differences between large and
small industrial companies or between industry and service/trade. The
variation between individual companies is between fair and very good.
There is no statistically significant correlation (according to regression
analysis) between staff commitment and the result of environment
target work (parameter Target result physical).
The parameter has also been tested for correlation with the length of
general environmental training but no correlation can be established.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 34
Parameter Results
35.General
staff training

The length of general environmental training varies between 104 and
3 hours per employee. The maximum value does, however, diverge
sharply. The next largest value is 12 hours per employee. The
median value is 6 hours per employee. Apart from the sharply
diverging value, there are no significant differences between large
and small industrial companies or between industry and service/trade.

This parameter has also been tested for correlation with the
commitment of management and staff (with and without the sharply
deviating value) but no correlation can be established.
Nor is there any statistically significant correlation (according to
regression analysis) between length of general staff training and the
result of environmental target work (parameter Target result physical).

36.Customer
interest in
’green’
products
Nearly all companies (89%) state that customers are interested in
environmental adaptation of the companies’ products or services.
Two of the small industrial companies do not know how customers
relate to this.
37. Willingness
to pay for
’green’
products
Almost half (42%) of companies state that their customers are
prepared to pay more for at least some ‘green’ products or services.
35% of industrial companies do not know customers’ wishes
regarding payment, while all companies in the service/trade sector do.
32% of companies think their customers do not wish to pay more for
‘green’ products or services.
There is no statistically significant difference (according to the T-test)
in the result of target work (parameter Target result physical) between
the companies whose customers are prepared to pay more for ‘green’
compared with others.
38. Why not
EMAS?
The commonest reason not to register the company for EMAS is
stated to be cost. All 42% of those which do not have EMAS and
answered the question put forward this reason.
39. Internal
work for
system
operation
How much time companies devote to maintaining and operating EMS
varies widely, from 1 800 hours/year to 200 hours/year. The mean
value is 896 hours/year, the median 775 hours/year. A correlation
between company size (number of employees) and the system
operation cost exists according to regression analysis, see Figure 11.

However, there are no statistically significant differences or correlation
between system operation cost and the parameters EMAS, Document
handling, Steering documents, Coordination with Q-system, Target
follow-up, Activity, Environmental impact from plant or EMS age,
according to the T-test or regression analysis.
40. Non-target-
linked
training
How much time companies devote to training which does not have
anything to do with environmental targets varies widely, from 640
hours to 0 hours. The mean value is 86 hours /year, the median 0
hours/year. Data range so widely that conclusions can hardly be
drawn.
41. External
audits
How much companies pay yearly for follow-up audits varies widely,
from SEK 130 000 to 12 000/year. The mean value is SEK 51
000/year and the median SEK 50 000/year.
As expected, there is a strong correlation (according to regression
analysis) between the cost of follow-up audits and company size
(parameter Number of employees), see Figure 12.
However, there are no statistically significant differences or correlation
between external audits cost and the parameters EMAS, Document
handling, Steering documents, Coordination with Q-system, Target
follow-up, Activity, Environmental impact from plant or EMS age,
according to the T-test or regression analysis.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 35
Parameter Results
42. Document-
handling
The majority of companies (79%) still have manual document
handling, in other words amendment handling is done manually.
There are no significant differences between large and small industrial
companies or between industry and service/trade.
Nor can any statistically significant difference be discerned between
system operation cost (parameter Internal work for system operation)
for those which have manual document handling compared with those
which have electronic document handling, according to the T-test.
The same applies to the cost of follow-up audits, parameter External
audits.
43. Steering
documents
How many steering documents go into the EMS varies widely, from
100 to 10. The mean value is 36, the median 25.
There is no question of finding any statistically significant difference
(according to regression analysis) between the number of steering
documents and system operating cost (parameter Internal work for
system operation). By contrast, industrial companies have on
average more steering documents than companies in the service and
trade sector, mean 42 compared with a mean of 18, according to the
T-test.
44. 44. Coordin
-
ation with
Q-system

If we disregard those companies which do not have a certified quality
system, far-reaching coordination takes place between environment
and quality systems in most companies (65%). 29% have some form
of coordination and only one company hardly coordinates
environment and quality systems at all.
No statistically significant difference can be found between system
operation cost (parameter Internal work for system operation) in the
case of those which have far-reaching coordination compared with
those which do not coordinate so much, according to the T-test. The
same applies to the cost in respect of follow-up audits, parameter
External audits.
45. Coordin-

tion with
health and
safety
systems

Far-reaching coordination between environmental and health and
safety systems (in other words outer and inner environment) takes
place only in 32% of companies. 26% have some form of
coordination, while 42% of companies hardly coordinate the
environment and health and safety systems at all. There are no
statistically significant differences between large and small companies
according to the T-test.
46. More
coordination
planned
Nearly half (42%) of companies have spontaneously reported that
they are trying for more coordination with quality and health and
safety systems, despite the fact that this question was not asked.
Only one company reported it was not planning any increased system
coordination.

Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 36
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Qualitative Points
Test result %
Some of the most interesting results are given below in graphic form in Figures 8
to 12.
Figure 8 Companies which carry out a qualitative environmental assessment achieved a better result in
the ‘environmental assessment test’ (parameter Test result) in the interviews by comparison
with those companies using a points system.
Figure 9 Correlation between how well environmental targets are followed up with relative measures
(parameter Target follow-up) and the result in environmental terms, rated using the parameter
Target results physical.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Target achievement %
Target result physical %
Target – env. result
Est’d Target – env. result
Linear (Est’d Target – env. result )
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 37
Figure 10 Correlation between EMAS and the result in environmental terms, rated using the parameter
Target results physical.
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Without EMAS With EMAS
Target result physical %

Figure 11 Correlation between system operation costs and number of employees.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
No. of employees
Internal work for sys. operation, hrs/
yr
Internal work for sys. oper’n
Est’d Internal work for sys.
operation
Linear (
Est’d Internal work for sys.
op
operation)
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 38
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
No. of employees
External audits, SEK ‘000/yr
External audits
Est’d External audits
Linear (Est’d External audits)
Figure 12 Correlation between costs for external follow-up audits and number of employees.
4.2.3 Qualitative results
Certain information is difficult to convert satisfactorily to parameters. Accordingly
a number of questions/subjects are described below in a more qualitative way. As
regards the examples of environmental targets and market gains, only the most
impressive targets have been documented.
Complaints to auditors
Complaints to the auditors of certification bodies are made relatively often. What
may be involved are:
• ‘Excess requirements’ in the documentation.
• Auditors who require targets for all significant environmental aspects, which
leads to defensive assessments of environmental aspects, in other words some-
thing deemed difficult to deal with is not brought out in the open.
• Auditors who account targets not reached as nonconformances, which leads to
extremely cautious target formulations.
• Constantly getting new auditors who are specialists within different environmen-
tal areas. One time all that is involved is drainage while another time it is only
diffuse air discharges.
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 39
Environmental results
Examples of different targets which the companies interviewed carried out, or are
carrying out, are:
• A product-related target yields yearly savings of 30 GWh of fuel, 15 000 tonnes
of CO
2
, 3.6 tonnes of sulphur and 20 tonnes of NO
x
.
• A company aims to reduce the proportion of scrap metal by 20% over 5 years,
which should lead to savings of more than 300 tonnes of sheet metal and a
corresponding quantity of scrap.
• A trading company aims to reduce distances by 15% per customer visit, which
also gives 15% less driving time per customer visit.
• A major industrial company has increased the number of waste fractions from 6
to 14, which gave more orderliness and not insignificant environmental and
financial savings since approximately 20 000 tonnes of material are handled per
year.
• An industrial company has removed all chlorous paraffins (1 200 tonnes) and all
lead (96 tonnes) from products, which has contributed towards maintaining the
market position on a dwindling market.
• An industrial company has developed an entirely PVC-free range which gives
major market gains.
• An industrial company has reduced its own transport consignments by 79% or
80 000 lorry kilometres.
• An industrial company has products labelled with the Nordic Swan, which gives
major market gains.
• An industrial company reckons to save SEK 90 000 per year by improving the
handling of paste and reducing the amount of wastage by 20%, or 75 kg.
• A trading company is applying a smaller profit margin to goods with environ-
ment labels to stimulate sales.
• An industrial company has halved the number of chemical products (from 100 to
50) and the quantity of deposited waste (from 400 m
3
to 190 m
3
).
• An industrial company has reduced water consumption by 17%; this also re-
duced the need for chemical detergents and made the hanging of goods in the
paint shop more efficient.
• A service company has gone from using 3% to 100% renewable energy in two
years.
• A service company has almost doubled energy efficiency (turnover/energy) in
three years.
• A company is carrying out an environmental reference project within heating,
water and sanitation with which considerable market gains can be seen.
• An industrial company is using Swan labelled paper for 95% of its requirements
(252 out of 265 tonnes).
Environmental management systems – paper tiger or powerful tool
IVF Research Publication 00828 40