ISO 14001, EMAS, OR BS 8555: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR UK BUSINESSES

By

Bo Chen Thesis presented in part-fulfilment of the degree of Master of Science in accordance

with the regulations of the University of East Anglia School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia University Plain Norwich NR4 7TJ August 2004 © 2004 Bo Chen This copy of the dissertation has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognize that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation from the dissertation, nor any information derived therefrom, may be published without the author’s prior written consent. Moreover, it is supplied on the understanding that it represents an internal University document and that neither the University nor the author are responsible for the factual or interpretative correctness of the dissertation.

Contents

List of Figures Ⅰ

List of Tables Ⅱ

Abstract Ⅲ

Acknowledgements Ⅳ

1. Introduction 1

2. Literature Review

2.1 Business and the Environment

2.1.1 Identification of Business 3

2.1.2 Environmental Impacts of Different Businesses 4

2.1.3 Strategy towards environmental impact 5

2.2 Environmental Management Systems

2.2.1 Environmental Management Systems 6

2.2.2 Stages of Standardized EMS 8

2.2.3 Why develop an EMS 10

2.3 ISO 14001

2.3.1 Background information of ISO 14001 11

2.3.2 Stages for implementing ISO 14001 12

2.3.3 Current situation of ISO 14001 14

2.4 EMAS

2.4.1 Background information of EMAS 15

2.4.2 Stages for implementing EMAS 16

2.4.3 Current situation of EMAS 18

2.5 BS 8555

2.5.1 Background information of BS 8555 18

2.5.2 Structure of BS 8555 19

2.5.3 The use of BS8555 22

2.6 The UK business

2.6.1 General information of the UK businesses 23

2.6.2 EMS implementation in SMEs 25

2.6.3 Drivers and Barriers of EMS implementation in SMEs 26

3. Methodology

3.1 Introduction 28

3.2 Criteria of suitable EMS 29

3.3 the most suitable EMS 32

4. Results

4.1 Easy to start implementation 33

4.2 Costs are relatively lower 34

4.3 Benefits are relatively higher 35

4.4 Environmental performance are continuously improved 36

4.5 Legal compliance 38

4.6 Implementation is easy to control 39

4.7 Easy to get assistance 40

4.8 Good recognition system 42

4.9 Other criteria 43

5. Discussion

5.1 Comparison results 45

5.1.1 Characteristics of ISO 14001 45

5.1.2 Characteristics of EMAS 47

5.1.3 Characteristics of BS 8555 48

5.2 ISO 14001, EMAS or BS 8555? 50

5.3 Gap analysis and further study recommendation 51

6. Conclusion 52

References 54

List of Figures

Figure 2.1: Cycle of continual improvement 8

Figure 2.2: Stages of a typical environmental management system 9

Figure 2.3: Five steps of ISO 14001 14

Figure 2.4: Seven stages of phase 1 in BS 8555 20

Figure 2.5: overall process for phased implementation 21

Figure 2.6: Share of enterprises, employment and turnover by size of enterprise, UK

24

Figure 2.7: VAT registered businesses by industry sector, per cent, UK 25

Figure 3.1: Process of methodology 32

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Benefits of improved environmental management 10

Table 2.2 Stakeholders of SMEs 27

Table 3.1: Criteria of suitable EMS 29

Table 4.1: Comparison on easy to start implementation 33

Table 4.2: Comparison on costs 34

Table 4.3: Comparison on implementation benefits 35

Table 4.4: Comparison on environmental performance continual improvement 36

Table 4.5: Comparison on legal compliance 38

Table 4.6: Comparison on the control of implementation process 39

Table 4.7: Comparison on assistance 40

Table 4.8: Comparison on recognition system 42

Table 4.9: Comparison on other criteria 43

Abstract

The number of companies certified an Environmental Management System (EMS) in

the UK is continuously increased in the last few years. Most of the participants choose

the international standard ISO 14001 or the EU regulation EMAS as their EMS.

However, with the appearance of the new British standard - BS8555, UK businesses

need to think about which one of these three EMSs is most applicable.

Ten criteria have been created in order to identify the most applicable EMS for UK

businesses. These criteria include the costs and benefits of the EMS implementation,

whether it is easy to start for companies and easy to be control during the

implementation process, legal compliance, environmental performance evaluation,

and compatibility of the EMS etc.

Through the comparison between three EMSs, advantages and disadvantages of each

EMS were defined. Simply EMAS is more difficult for small and medium-sized

enterprise (SME) to implement. ISO 14001 is relatively easier to implement but it has

fewer requirements and may cause potential problem in the implementation process.

The BS 8555 combines some of the advantages from the other two EMSs and with its

staged approach makes the SMEs easier to start implementing and finally achieve ISO

14001 certification or the EMAS registration.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my parents for their financial support to my study. Thanks to my

girl friend Xiyun Zhi for her encourage throughout the year. Special thanks to Jon

Gurr my supervisor for his persistent advice and supports.

1. Introduction

Environmental management system (EMS) is one of the most important tools

available for the purpose of making the organisations more environmentally proactive

and efficient (Emilsson, 2002). Through the establishing of an EMS, the company can

demonstrate to clients and the public that they take environmental impacts seriously.

In addition, an efficient EMS also can improve company’s operation process and

brings economic benefits. Nowadays more and more companies have realized the

importance of the EMS and engaged in the EMS implementation practice.

Since the first EMS standard (BS 7750) developed by the British Standard Institute

(BSI) in 1992, different countries and organisations have developed their own EMSs.

Among them, probably the most famous two are the international standard ISO 14001

developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the EU

regulation the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). Many of the UK

companies have certified their EMS under these two systems, and many others are

planning to do so. However, in 2003 the BSI published their new British standard -

BS 8555, which provides a staged approach for the UK businesses especially the

small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) to implement the EMS. This new standard

brings the UK businesses a new choice.

The purpose of this study was to identify which one of these three EMSs (i.e. ISO

14001, EMAS, and BS 8555) is more applicable for most of the UK businesses. It is

important that EMS participants have a clear understanding which EMS can meets

their demands. Choosing the right EMS can not only save the implementation costs,

avoid the troubles, but also get satisfactory implementation results. On the contrary,

unsuitable EMS causes difficulties during the implementation and even leads fail

achieving the implementation aims.

In order to identify the most applicable EMS, each of the EMSs as well as their

relevant literatures was examined in the literature review chapter. In addition, the

characteristics of the UK businesses also were examined in that chapter. Followed

with methodology chapter in which ten criteria for the most suitable EMS have been

created. In the results chapter the advantages and disadvantages of each EMS were

identified through a contrastive method based on the criteria. Finally, based on the

characteristic of the UK businesses, the most applicable was identified in the

discussion chapter.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Business and the Environment

2.1.1 Identification of Business

Business has experienced dramatic change since the beginning of the Industrial

Revolution which took place in Western Europe two hundred years ago (Blair, 2001).

New businesses appeared such as chemical industry, motor industry, and retail

industry; new technology was applied in everywhere; and new market was opened all

over the world. All these changes of business area caused environmental impacts

which totally different from two hundred years ago. In order to discuss the

environmental impact of business we have to answer a basic question: what is

business nowadays?

Strictly speaking, business is the range of commercial organizations and their

activities that characterize the way in which trading is conducted in a capitalist

economy (Blair, 2001). However, commonly the words “industry” and “business” are

used interchangeably and this is the case in this article. Business with the same

meaning of industry which is seen as the collection of firms who operate essentially

the same series of processes that result in a related set of products (whether tangible

products or services) that a third party wishes to buy (Blair, 2001).

By convention, industries are divided into primary, secondary and tertiary industries.

Primary industries include fishing, forestry, agriculture and the extractive industries

(essentially, the quarrying and mining of minerals). They involve the collection,

harvesting and exploitation of resources directly produced by physical processes.

Secondary industries are the manufacturing industries. They take raw materials and by

a variety of processes produce tangible goods by adding value to the raw materials.

The tertiary industries produce services, for either individuals or for other

organizations. The way in which primary, secondary and tertiary industries effect the

environment are seen as being sufficiently different to warrant separate analysis.

2.1.2 Environmental Impacts of Different Businesses

The environmental impacts of different industrial sectors vary enormously (Welford,

1998). For example, the oil industry may cause serious environmental impacts while

the retail industry has less direct impacts to the environment. This is because the oil

industry belongs primary industries while retail industry belongs tertiary industries

and the characteristics of these two industrial categories are totally different.

Because of their intimate relationship with the environment, the primary industries

have a widespread and significant environmental impact. Firstly, they cause high

pollution. For example, oil and gas flares, which happened in oil industry, contribute

to global warming. Additionally, oil spills can cause great localized harm to marine

ecosystems. Secondly, the primary industries generate considerable wastes. The fossil

fuel and mining industries are the main culprits in waste generation. However, the

wastes of factory farming also should not be neglected. Thirdly, farming and forestry

of the primary industries have the greatest overall impact on habitats because they

occupy the greatest areas of land. The type of farming or forest has a profound

influence on the nature of flora and fauna of a region. Finally, farming and forestry

also has significant landscape impacts because they form important landscapes in

much of the developed world.

Manufacturing is the core of the secondary industries. Raw materials and components

are brought together and manufactured into either end product or a component for

some other manufacturing process. Manufacturing processes consume huge amount of

energy and inevitably produce waste products and pollution. Waste is seen as part of

the process, whereas pollution is seen as an inevitable consequence of the process that

should not happen in the perfect industrial process but which, in practice, results in

the degradation of some physical resource. This is most usually the air, watercourses

or the ground. Sound and visual impact may also be included under the broad banner

of pollution. In addition to the manufacture process, the products itself also cause

environmental impact during its delivery, use and disposal.

Tertiary industries or so-called service businesses received relatively little attention on

their environmental impacts. This may be because in comparison to primary or

secondary industries they appear to depend far less on physical resources and they

often deal with a more intangible product. However, the environmental impact of

tertiary industries is less obvious but does not mean that it does not exist. For example,

compared to an oil refinery, a supermarket seems to be much less environmental

impact but it is not without impact. The transfer of goods within the supermarket

chain, and the customers travel to the store especially those suburban stores all cause

air pollution. Other environmental impacts which tertiary industries cause include

energy consumption in heating, lighting and equipment, pollution through the travel

of their employees and clients, produce waste from canteens, consume waster and

materials and certainly produce large volumes of paper waste.

2.1.3 Strategy towards environmental impact

Since the 1960s, there has been a growing interest in the environment, or more

specifically in the damage being done to the environment (Welford, 1998). During the

first two decades, it was felt that growth and development and protection of the

environment could not go hand in hand. Hence most of the theories that developed

during this period were anti-growth. However, the 1980s witnessed a shift in thinking.

The concept of ‘zero growth’ was replaced by sustainable development which has

been broadly accepted nowadays.

Sustainable development, in its simplest form, is defined as development that meets

the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on Environment and

Development, 1987). It implies that it is possible to make development and

environmental protection compatible. However, the old ways of development which

cause pollution and atmospheric damage, disrupts traditional ways of living, destroys

ecosystems and feeds more and more power into international oligopolistic industrial

structures must be changed into sustainable ways (Welford, 1998). The Brundtland

Report, commissioned by the United Nations to examine long-term environmental

strategies, argued that this would require quite radical changes in economic practices

throughout the world.

As an ultimate objective, the concept of sustainable development is immensely

valuable. However, strategies are needed to translate conceptual theories of what

sustainable development means into practical ways of achieving it over time within

the corporate context. Firms clearly have a role to play in the development of

substitutes for non-renewable resources and innovations which reduce waste and use

energy more efficiently. They also have a role in processing those materials in a way

which brings about environmental improvements. Additionally, Firms have the

opportunity for considering both the use and disposal of the product during the design

period. In order to achieve these goals, companies must seek to develop management

strategies which will improve their environmental performance (Welford, 1998).

2.2 Environmental management systems

2.2.1 Environmental management systems

Many companies have adopted environmental policies and carried out environmental

audits or reviews in response to legislative pressures, green marketing opportunities,

increased public pressure, ethical concerns and the commitment of local and central

government (Netherwood, 1998). However, companies still be faced with a problem

of finding a systematic way of implementing commitments to environmental

management within their existing organizational structure. In practical, one tool which

companies have generally accepted to facilitate implementation of environmental

policy is an environmental management system (EMS).

An EMS is defined by the British Standards Institute (BSI) as: the organizational

structure, responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for

determining and implementing environmental policy (Netherwood, 1998). Similar

definitions are found in the EU eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) and ISO

14001. Not like legislation, EMS is a voluntary tool which can help companies to

control environmental impact caused by their operations (Roberts, 1998).

Despite the fact that different companies may develop different environment

management system, usually there are some common steps can be found in these

EMSs. This is because most of them were designed based on the steps of quality

management system such as ISO 9000 (Netherwood, 1998). Therefore, it is possible

to create a standard for environmental management systems in order to ensure a

certain quality for the EMS, and to encourage organizations to improve their

environmental performance.

In the last few years a number of voluntary environmental management schemes have

been developed. The standard-BS 7750- was published by BSI in March 1992 and

was the world’s first environmental management system standard. At the same time

that BSI began work on BS 7750, the European Commission was setting out its

proposal for an eco-audit scheme and it was from this proposal that EMAS eventually

emerged in 1993. In the same year of EMAS publishing, the activity relating to

environmental management system standardization began on the international scene.

And after a development time of a little under three years, ISO 14000 series were

published in October 1996.

The standardized environmental management systems are voluntary and are designed

to be externally verified by nationally accredited bodies, in a similar way as the

quality standard ISO 9000. It is argued that companies which register with the

schemes, gaining the EMAS and ISO14001 accreditation, will experience added value

such as market advantages, and legal compliance (Netherwood, 1998).

2.2.2 Stages of Standardized EMS

Environmental management systems are very much related to quality management

systems. They are mechanisms that provide for a systematic and cyclical process of

continual improvement. As can be seen in Figure 2.1, the cycle itself begins with

planning for a desired outcome (i.e. improved environmental performance),

implementing that plan, checking to see if the plan is working and finally correcting

and improving the plan based on observations form the checking process. Logically

then, if the original outcome desired remains the same, a system of this nature will, by

default, generate increments of progress that continually move toward the desired

outcome (Roberts, 1998).

Plan

Act Continual Improvement Do

Check

Figure 2.1: Cycle of continual improvement

Source: Roberts, 1998

In order for an company to achieve environmental performance through a

management loop as mentioned above, it will need to define responsibilities for

environmental management, deploy resources to ensure that action is taken on

environmental issues, train staff to become aware of their environmental

responsibilities, monitor environmental performance and audit and review the system

of achieving environmental improvement. The basis of all of this activity is an

organizational commitment to continual environmental improvement and an

environmental policy (Netherwood, 1998). The stages of a typical environmental

management system were shown in Figure2.2.

Organizational commitment to environmental management

Adoption of an environmental policy

Review/audit of environmental effects

Revision of environmental policy

Implementation of environmental training programme

Allocation of environmental responsibility

Setting of environmental objectives and targets

Development of action plan to achieve environmental objectives and targets

Operational control

Audit of performance in relation to targets

Audit of the effectiveness of the management programme

Review of the management system

Corrective action

Report environmental performance internally and externally

Figure2.2: Stages of a typical environmental management system

Source: Netherwood, 1998

2.2.3 Why develop an EMS?

Develop an EMS within a company will definitely cost resources such as time, human

resource, and money (Bansal, 2002). Such costs become more apparent when a

company applies certification for their EMS. Furthermore, it has been suggested that

EMS and the standards will just add another layer of bureaucracy for the company. So

why do a company need an environmental management system? The answer is

creating a successful EMS could bring more benefits than the costs.

The advantages of improved environmental management can be divided into two

broad categories (Roberts, 1998). The first category addresses the fact that improved

environmental management is good for our planet and a fundamental requirement of

global sustainability. This is because respecting that present business patterns are

fundamentally unsustainable, improved environmental management will serve at least

to move our business patterns towards sustainability. The second category, which

seems have a more direct relationship with companies, addresses the fact that

improved environmental management could benefit the company a lot. The table 2.1

lists some of the benefits.

1.Save company’s costs.

2.Environmental targets not just set but met.

3.Procedures in place to ensure legislative compliance.

4.Improved public image and increased market opportunities.

5.Viewed more favourably by the regulator and the financial sector.

Table 2.1: Benefits of improved environmental management

Source: Roberts, 1998

2.3 ISO 14001

2.3.1 Background information of ISO 14001

ISO 14000 is a series of international standards for environmental management. In

order to satisfy the increasing demand of establishing international environmental

management standard, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) started to

develop it in 1993 and after nearly three year’s development, ISO published this series

of standards (ISO 14001 and ISO 14004) in October 1996. It is the first such series of

standards that allows organizations from around the world to pursue environmental

efforts and measure performance according to internationally accepted criteria

(Roberts, 1998).

The 14000series consists of over a dozen separate standards. But all these standards

are fallen under two categories: specification standards and guidance standards (Krut,

1998). ISO specification standards are prescriptive documents: they describe what a

company must do or not do in order to get certification. ISO 14001 is a blueprint for

the company’s environmental management system, and it is the only specification

standard in the ISO 14000 series. It describes how a company might manage and

control its organizational system so that it measures, controls and continually

improves the environmental aspects of its operations (Krut, 1998).

ISO 14001 is intended to be applicable to ‘all types and sizes of organizations and to

accommodate diverse geographical, cultural and social conditions’ (ISO, 1996). The

overall aim of both ISO 14001 and the other standards in the 14000 series is to

support environmental protection and the prevention of pollution in harmony with

socio-economic needs. ISO 14001 applies to any organization that wishes to improve

and demonstrate its environmental performance to others through the presence of a

certified environmental management system (Roberts, 1998).

With the exception of requiring the commitment to continual improvement and

commitment to comply with relevant legislation and regulation, ISO 14001 does not

prescribe environmental performance requirements. ISO 14001 specifies the

requirements of the management system itself, which, if maintained properly, will

improvement environmental performance by reducing impacts such as air emissions

and wastewater effluents (Roberts, 1998).

2.3.2 Stages for implementing ISO 14001

The elements of ISO 14001 are organized around five steps (Welford, 1998):

1. Environmental policy

2. Planning

3. Implementation and operation

4. Checking and corrective action

5. Management review

Each step is briefly described below.

Environmental policy

Environmental policy is a formal and documented set of principles and intentions with

respect to the environment. Essentially, the environmental policy is the guiding

document for corporate environmental improvement and adherence to it is

fundamental to the integrity and success of the entire EMS (Roberts, 1998). A policy

must contain commitments to:

* Continual improvement;

* Prevention of pollution; and

* Complying with relevant environmental legislation and other relevant requirements.

Planning

The company must then set itself objectives and targets relating to its three policy

commitments and devise a plan to meet these objectives and targets. Here the

environmental objectives are the broad goals that your organization sets in order to

improve environmental performance while environmental targets are set performance

measurements that must be met to realize a given objective. All environmental

objectives must have at least one target (usually more) and all targets must relate

directly to a stated objective (Roberts, 1998).

Implementation and operation

Having devised its plan, the organization must then put in place the various elements

necessary for its successful implementation and operation.

Checking and corrective action

Having implemented its plan, the organization must then check to see whether it has

been successful in meeting its objectives and targets. If any have not been met, then

corrective action must be taken. The entire management system must be periodically

audited to see that it meets the requirements of the standard (Welford, 1998).

Management review

Management must periodically review the system to ensure its continuing

effectiveness and suitability. Changes are made to the system as and when necessary.

The figure 2.3 shows the five steps of ISO 14001

Continual Improvement

Environmental Policy

Management Review

Planning

Implementation Checking and and Operation

Corrective Action

Figure2.3: Five steps of ISO 14001

Source: BS EN ISO 14001, 1996

2.3.3 Current situation of ISO 14001

ISO 14001 is a specification standard, i.e. it consists of a set of requirements for

establishing and maintaining an environmental management system. By complying

with these requirements an organization can demonstrate to the outside world that is

has an appropriate and effective management system in place. One way in which a

company can demonstrate that is by ‘self-declaration’. This means that the company

checks its own compliance with the requirements. However, a company may feel that

it carries more weight with the outside world if its compliance with the requirements

of ISO 14001 is checked by an independent third party. This third checking is known

as ‘certification’ (Welford, 1998).

Up to the end of 2002, at least 49,462 ISO 14001 certificates had been issued in 118

countries, an increase of 12,697 certificates (+ 34,54%) over the end of 2001 when the

total stood at 36,765 in 112 countries (ISO, 2004). Another survey shows the increase

of this number is continuous in the next year. Up to December of 2003, there are

61,287 certificates had been issued around the world, an increase of 11,825

certificates can be seen in that year (ISO world, 2004).

The accreditation body in the UK is the United Kingdom Accreditation Service

(UKAS), which is recognized by the UK government as the national body for

providing national accreditation of certification bodies and of measurement and

sampling.

2.4 EMAS

2.4.1 Background information of EMAS

EMAS - the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme, is a voluntary initiative designed

for companies and other organizations to evaluate, report, and improve their

environmental performance. It should be highlight that EMAS is a European Union

Regulation, which applied within the European Union and the European Economic

Area (EEA) — Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. An increasing number of

candidate countries are also implementing the scheme in preparation for their

accession to the EU (EMAS, 2004). The scheme has been available for participation

by companies since 1995 (Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93 of 29 June 1993)

and was originally restricted to companies in industrial sectors.

The aim of EMAS is to recognize and reward those organizations that go beyond

minimum legal compliance and continuously improve their environmental

performance (EMAS-UK, 2004). In addition, it is a requirement of the scheme that

participating organizations regularly produce a public environmental statement that

reports on their environmental performance. It is this voluntary publication of

environmental information, whose accuracy and reliability has been independently

checked by an environmental verifier, that gives EMAS and those organizations that

participate enhanced credibility and recognition.

In June 1997 The Commission undertook a 5-year review of EMAS, taking into

account experience gained during its operation. The final revised Regulation

(Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19

March 2001) published in April 2001, is often referred to as EMAS II. This new

Regulation has been open to all economic sectors including public and private

services. In addition, EMAS II was strengthened by the integration of EN/ISO 14001

as the environmental management system required by EMAS; by adopting an

attractive EMAS logo to signal EMAS registration to the outside world; and by

considering more strongly indirect effects such as those related to financial services or

administrative and planning decisions.

2.4.2 Stages for implementing EMAS

The objective of EMAS shall be to promote continual improvements in the

environmental performance of organizations by (EMAS, 2001):

(a) The establishment and implementation of environmental management systems by

organizations as described in Annex I

(b) The systematic, objective and periodic evaluation of the performance of such

systems as described in Annex I

(c) The provision of information on environmental performance and an open dialogue

with the public and other interested parties

(d) The active involvement of employees in the organization and appropriate initial

and advanced training that makes active participation in the tasks referred to under (a)

possible. Where they so request, any employee representatives shall also be involved.

In order to get the EMAS registration an organization should go through the following

steps (EMAS, 2004):

1. Conduct an environmental review

Consider all environmental impacts of the organization’s activities: production

processes, products and services, assessment methods, the legal framework as well as

existing environmental management practices and procedures.

2. Establish an environmental management system (EMS)

Based upon the results of the environmental review, establish an effective

environmental management system aimed at achieving the organization’s

environmental policy as defined by the top management. The management system

needs to define responsibilities, objectives, means, operational procedures, training

needs, monitoring and communication systems.

3. Carry out an environmental audit

Assess the management system in place and the organization’s environmental

performance in light of the organization’s environmental policy and programme as

well as of legal requirements.

4. Prepare an environmental statement

The environmental statement should specify the results that have been achieved

against the environmental objectives of the organization. It should also lay down the

means by which the organization plans to continuously improve its environmental

performance.

5. Get independent verification by an EMAS verifier

An EMAS verifier accredited with an EMAS Accreditation Body (UKAS in UK) of a

Member State must examine and verify the environmental review, EMS, and audit

procedure as well as the environmental statement.

6. Register with the Competent Body of the Member State

The validated environmental statement must be sent to the appropriate EMAS

Competent Body for registration and be made publicly available.

2.4.3 Current situation of EMAS

The number of companies registered under EMAS is far less than ISO 14001

certifications in UK. Until May 2003, 78 companies have achieved EMAS

registration (ENDS Report 342, 2003). EMAS goes one step further than ISO 14001.

The most visible difference is the need under these regulations for organizations to

make public available for their environmental policy, objectives and targets and also

their performance against the targets. Each member state appoints its competent body,

which for the UK is the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment

(EEDA, 2004).

2.5. British Standard BS 8555

2.5.1 Background information of BS 8555

BS 8555 (Environmental management systems - Guide to the phased implementation

of an environmental management system including the use of environmental

performance evaluation) is a new British standard published by the British Standard

Institute (BSI) in April 2003. The aim of BS 8555 is to provide guidance to all type of

companies but particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to achieve

externally certified environmental management systems using a phased rather than

all-or-nothing approach to implementation (ENDS 340, 2003). This new standard is

drafted based on a three-years’ project- the Acorn Trust's supply chain project.

Project Acorn was a UK based nation-wide project to help SMEs to grow and develop

their own environmental performance controls, built around the specific needs of their

own business. The project ran between 2001 - 2003 and spent the time producing and

refining a six-stage model that could ultimately take a company towards ISO 14001

certification or EMAS if they wished (The Acorn Trust, 2004).

Acorn relies on larger "mentor" companies to introduce their suppliers to the scheme.

The project's website identifies 14 organisations which are now pursuing the Acorn

approach in their supply chains. They range across sectors including finance, utilities,

manufacturing, retail and telecoms. The scheme offers a five-level approach to

implementing an environmental management system compatible with the

international standard ISO14001, and a sixth level compatible with European standard

EMAS (ENDS 337,2003).

An important outcome of the project - a new standard, BS 8555 - is released by the

British Standards Institution in April 2003. The standard takes the form of guidance

towards achieving ISO14001 or EMAS. It is not a certifiable specification in itself.

However, the accreditation service UKAS is understood to be considering some form

of recognition (ENDS 337,2003).

2.5.2 Structure of BS 8555

The phased EMS implementation approach used by BS 8555 and piloted through

Project Acorn breaks down the process of installing a formal EMS into five levels. A

sixth level allows organisations to develop systems, with the possibility of seeking

recognition against the internationally accepted EMS standard, ISO 14001, or

registering under the European EMAS Regulation.

The phased process is designed around a generic environmental management system,

but also in line with ISO 14001 and EMAS. In addition it is one of the aims of the

guidance in the standard to develop environmental performance indicators (EPIs) to

reflect the environmental aspects of activities, products or service delivery. These

EPIs can be used within the context of an EMS and as part of other performance

evaluation and reporting frameworks. The six Phases of the standard are:

1. Commitment and Establishing the Baseline.

2. Identifying and Ensuring Compliance with Legal, and other Requirements.

3. Developing Objectives, Targets and Programmes.

4. Implementation and Operation of the Environmental Management System.

5. Checking, Audit and Review.

6. Environmental Management System Acknowledgement.

Figure 2.4 illustrates the overall process for phased implementation.

Each of the six Phases has been divided into a number of key Stages. For example,

Phase 1 be has been divided into 7 Stages which shows below. For each of the Stages,

achievement criteria have been defined which the organisation will work towards, and

in turn from the basis of the assessment for each Phase.

Stage 1

Gaining and maintaining Stage 6 Management commitment Stage 7

Training awareness Initiation of and the initiation continual of culture change improvement

Stage 2 Baseline

assessment

Stage3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Developing a draft Developing Developing an initial environmental environment draft environmental

Policy indicators management system Implementation plan

Phase 1 audit

Figure 2.4: Seven stages of phase 1 in BS 8555

Source: BS 8555, 2003

At Phase 6, meeting all the achievement criteria from the previous Phases will place

the organisation in a position to be assessed for certification to ISO 14001. Likewise,

at Phase 6, Stage 6, meeting all of the achievement criteria will place the organisation

in a position to apply for EMAS registration.

Phase 1

Commitment and establishing the baseline

Phase 1 audit

Phase 2 Identifying and ensuring compliance

with legal and other requirements Phase 2

audit

Phase 3 Developing objectives, targets and

programmes

Phase 3 audit

Phase 4 Implementation and operation of the Environmental management system

Phase 4 audit

Phase 5 Checking, audit and review

Phase 5 audit

Phase 6

Environmental Management system acknowledgement

Secoond partly auditing and Preparing for Supply chain acknowledgement EMAS registration

Preparing for external Management system

Assessment (BS EN ISO 14001)

Figure 2.5: overall process for phased implementation

Source: BS 8555, 2003

2.5.3 The use of BS8555

At each level of the BS 8555 implementation process, key individuals from the

implementing company can seek focused training, or use the tools available in the

standard so that they can develop their organisation’s environmental performance

controls and associated indicators. These will allow them to track and report

(internally or externally) on their organisation’s environmental performance over time,

and benchmark performance in critical areas (The Acorn Trust, 2004).

After each phase of the scheme has been implemented, the organisation can either

assess themselves through internal audits, allow major customers to assess them

against the appropriate phase criteria or be assessed by a third party to ensure that the

requirements of each phase have been met. The organisation may also choose to wait

until two or more levels have been completed. Whatever they choose, a certificate can

be issued following successful external assessment, so the company can demonstrate

progress to its key customers and other interested stakeholders.

As part of Phase 6, the organisation can choose to have an additional audit to ensure

that the organisation’s EMS meets all of the requirements of ISO 14001; if successful

the organisation would receive an ISO 14001 certificate. Additionally the

organisation’s environmental performance data can be verified and the management

system audited against the requirements of EMAS.

Organisations can enter the model described in the standard at any Phase — but they

will need to bear in mind that a later date they may need to provide evidence that they

have already completed the elements of the model included in each of the previous

Phases. For example, an organisation that has already conducted a baseline

assessment and a comprehensive assessment of its legal (and other) obligations could

enter the model at Phase 3, but they should be prepared to undertake an audit at some

stage that confirms that all the requirements of Phase’s 1 and 2 have been met.

For some organisations, particularly micro-companies, a full EMS may not be

appropriate. In this situation, organisations can choose to stay at a specific phase and

not progress to a full formal EMS or ISO 14001 certification. The company would

still need to be re-audited periodically to ensure that it is continuing to meet the

requirements of the relevant Phase and is able to demonstrate continual improvement

in its environmental performance. They may want to publish an environmental report

or make environmental performance data available to their key customers.

2.6 The UK Businesses

2.6.1 General information of the UK businesses

The UK government recognises that enterprise is a vital contributor to the health of

our economy and to diversity of opportunity in our society (SBS, 2004). Enterprise

boosts productivity, increases competition and innovation, creates employment and

prosperity, and revitalises our communities. A dynamic small business community is

central to enterprise in the UK.

The statistical definition of a small business is a business with fewer than 50

employees. However, the SBS has a wider role, and also supports medium sized

enterprises - those with 50 to 249 employees (SBS, 2004).

There are almost 3.8 million small businesses in the UK (SBS, 2004). They come in

many shapes and sizes: from high-growth start-ups to ‘lifestyle’ businesses and social

enterprises. Together they account for over 99% of the total number of UK firms and

generate 52% of total turnover. They employ 12.6 million people, representing 56%

of the private sector workforce (SBS, 2004), see figure 2.6. They form part of the

bedrock of local communities, contributing to both economic prosperity and social

cohesion in towns and in rural areas.

Figure 2.6: Share of enterprises, employment and turnover by size of enterprise, UK

Source: SBS, 2004

Despite the tremendous contribution of SMEs, they are also bringing significant

environmental impacts. It is estimated that SMEs generate about 60% of commercial

waste and as much as 80% of pollution incidents in England and Wales alone

(SME-nvironment, 2003).

Businesses have different legal forms. Around a quarter of businesses are companies

(incorporated business), where one or more people are employed as company

directors. However, the majority of businesses are un-incorporated – they are owned

and managed by self-employed people, either on their own or in partnership.

Two sectors dominate the UK business population (SBS, 2004)

Half of the 1.7 million VAT registered enterprises in the UK are in just two sectors-

the business services sector (real estate, renting and business activities), and

wholesale, retail and repairs (Figure 2.7). Over a third of all new VAT registrations in

2002 were in business services - this sector has seen the most growth, from 314

thousand enterprises in 1994 to 500 thousand enterprises in 2003 (SBS, 2003a).

Figure 2.7: VAT registered businesses by industry sector, per cent, UK

Source: SBS, 2004

2.6.2 EMS implementation in SMEs

Generally speaking, the smaller the business the less time and resource will be

available to address environmental issues (SME-nvironment, 2003). The

SME-nvironment 2003 survey of more than 8,000 small and medium-sized UK

businesses reveals that many of them have a poor understanding of the effects of their

activities on the environment and want more information and advice on green issues.

The survey shows that more than half of medium-sized businesses (50-250 employees)

have an environmental policy in place, while only a fifth of the smallest businesses

can say the same (SME-nvironment, 2003). And it’s a similar picture when it comes

to introducing practical environmental measures, with 44% of medium-sized

businesses having taken positive steps compared to only 20% of micro businesses.

As to the EMS implementation, there were 76 EMAS registered companies in the UK,

and almost 3,000 ISO 14001 certified organisations in the UK by 2003 (Position

statement, 2003). These numbers shows how few businesses are involved in formal

EMS implementation. The survey shows almost the same results: a tiny 3% of

businesses asked across all sizes and sectors have an accredited environmental

management system (EMS) in place and only a further 1% has any plans to introduce

one.

The low uptake may partly be a result of ignorance about what an EMS is and the

potential benefits and costs entailed (SME-nvironment, 2003).

•The larger the business the more likely they were to have introduced an EMS.

Fourteen percent of businesses with 50-250 employees have an EMS compared with 3

per cent of businesses with 0-9 employees.

• The Mining and Quarrying sector is most likely to have implemented an EMS - 22%

of businesses asked had done so. The sectors that are least likely to have implemented

an EMS are Construction (1%), Land Transport (1%) and Printing and Publishing

(1%).

2.6.3 Drivers and Barriers of EMS implementation in SMEs

SMEs face internal and external barriers when seeking to address their environmental

issues and adopt and implement EMSs, but it is the internal barriers that initially have

the more significant role in impeding progress (Hillary, 1999). Negative company

culture towards the environment and the disassociation between positive

environmental attitudes and taking action cause the uptake of environmental

performance improvements and EMS adoption to stumble at the first hurdle (Hillary,

1999).

On top of this general culture of inaction on the environment, SMEs are also very

sceptical of the benefits to be gained from making environmental improvements

(Hillary, 1999). In many cases, especially for the smaller organisations, low

awareness and the absence of pressure from customers (the most important driver for

environmental improvements and EMS adoption) and insufficient other drivers mean

that no efforts are made to address environmental issues (Hillary, 1999). SMEs also

face the problem of locating, and having the time to locate, good quality advice and

information.

Once a SME has embarked on EMS implementation the process is often interrupted

and resources are frequently diverted to core business activities (Hillary, 1999). It is

the lack of human resources, not financial ones, which SMEs find most difficult to

secure and maintain for EMS implementation. The more multifunctional the staff, as

is common in micro and small companies, the more likely the process of

implementation will be interrupted. Some studies indicate that SMEs, once on the

route to certified EMSs, face inconsistency and high charges in the certification

system.

SMEs are subjected to a variety of stakeholder pressures related to their

environmental performance and their adoption of EMSs.

Top 5 Stakeholders Other Important Stakeholders

1. Customers 2. Local Government 3. Local community 4. Regulators 5. Employees

• Insurers • General public • Suppliers • Larger companies • Banks

Table 2.2 Stakeholders of SMEs

Source: Hillary, 1999

Customer and supply chain are also prominent in driving SMEs environmental

improvements (Hillary, 1999). However the regulator and local authorities exert

greater influence on the general environmental performance of SMEs, in particular

medium-sized enterprises, than customers.

3. Methodology

3.1 Introduction

The general objective of this research is to analyze the advantages and disadvantages

of three environmental management systems in order to find the most suitable system

for the UK business area. The three chosen EMSs are two most popular EMSs at

present i.e. the international environmental management standard ISO 14001 and the

EU regulation EMAS and the new published British standard BS 8555.

Although there are almost 8 years since the first publication of ISO 14001 and even

one more year for EMAS, there are still many doubts and misunderstanding about

them within the UK as well as EU businesses. On the other hand, small businesses are

facing internal and external barriers when they were pushed into the EMS

implementation practice. These are main reasons for SMEs stopped in front of the

EMS implementation (Hillary, 1999). According to ENDS report, EMS initiatives are

not reaching SMEs which take up 99% of the EU's 20 million non-primary sector

private enterprises (ENDS Report 349, 2004).

However, European countries have already realized this problem and different

initiatives have been explored trying to improve the EMS implementation. The new

British standard BS 8555 is one of the good examples which drawn from the UK

supply chain program i.e. Acorn Project. It adopts a staged approach in order to help

SMEs to implement EMS easily. We have already seen some positive results of it.

Nevertheless, whether it is more suitable for the UK business than its former EMSs is

still a problem.

Although overall number of EMAS registered sites/organisations of UK is readily

available, on the basis of the available data it is much more difficult to make further

distinctions (notably in terms of size-class). This difficulty applies a fortiori to EN

ISO 14001 certifications. Finally, any meaningful, UK data on new EMS i.e. BS 8555

do not seem to exist at all. Therefore, qualitative analysis will be the method of this

research.

3.2 Criteria of suitable EMS

The main methods of this research were literature review and a comparison between

ISO 14001, EMAS, and BS 8555. Through the review of three EMSs and relevant

literatures about their implementation experiences, a set of criteria has been created.

Then a comparison was carried out, based on these criteria, to weight these EMSs and

subsequently define the most suitable system for UK businesses.

1. Easy to start implementation

2. Costs are relatively low

3. Benefits are relatively high

4. Environmental performance are continuously improved

5. Legal compliance

6. Implementation process is easy to be control

7. Easy to get assistance

8. Good accreditation system

9. Compatible with other systems

10. Easy to diffuse

Table 3.1: Criteria of suitable EMS

1. Easy to start implementation

For those who are planning to implement an EMS, they all facing a problem: how to

start it? It is especially stubborn for SMEs who usually has less experience of

environmental management system. An easy start can eliminate hesitate and increase

involvement.

2. Costs are relatively low

Pursuit of profit is the ultimate aim of business. Therefore, decision on whether

implement an EMS largely depend on how much it costs. The cost here means not

only money but also time and human resource which are all very limited for SMEs.

Therefore, lower cost can definitely attract more potential participants.

3. Benefits are relatively high

One of the reasons for EMS implementation is the benefits EMS can provides to its

users. Hilary 1999 categorized the benefits of EMS implementation for SMEs as

organisational benefits, financial benefits, people benefits, Commercial Benefits,

Environmental Benefits, and Communication Benefits. Different EMS can provide

different benefits and the more benefits the more participants.

4. Environmental performance are continuously improved

The ultimate aim of EMS is to control the participant’s environmental impacts

(Welford, 1998). Therefore implementation an EMS is not just establishing an EMS

and maintenance it but through the EMS to improve the company’s environmental

performance continuously. The one who meets this criteria better can be seen as more

suitable for businesses.

5. Legal compliance

Make sure the legal compliance is one of the basic functions of a successful EMS.

Businesses through EMS implementation should reduce the chance of conflict with

environmental legislation and regulation and thus make the company work more

efficiency.

6. Implementation process is easy to be control

EMS implementation is easy to be interrupted due to some more important factors

such as economic profits. Therefore, flexibility is very important for a successful

EMS. A clear structure of each stage of EMS implementation process and sufficient

control to each stage is preferable to participants.

7. Easy to get assistance

Most of the companies find it is difficult to solve all the problems during the EMS

implementation by themselves. It is necessary to get some kind of assistance form

outside. Hence, a good EMS needs a good mechanism to guide its user and easy to get

help from outside.

8. Mature accreditation system

Mature accreditation system is necessary in order to make sure the creditability of

EMS implementation. Creditability is receiving more and more concerns form EMS

participant, stakeholders as well as the competitors (ENDS Report 353, 2004). Whit

the support and guidance form accreditation body, EMS implementation can be

carried out under a proper way and be accepted by more and more companies.

9. Compatible with other systems

In additional to EMS, there are several other management systems such quality

management systems and health and safe management systems. Study shows that

compatible with other systems can cause more involvement (Best Report, 2004).

Besides, compatible with other EMSs also need to be considered because a better

compatible system has more opportunities.

10. Easy to diffuse

Diffuse here means whether an EMS is easy to be used in certain industry sector.

Studies have already focused on the implementation of EMS in certain industry

sectors on the assumption that such approach is better for the involvement of EMS

implementation, especially for SMEs.

3.3 The most suitable EMS

Given the criteria of a suitable EMS for the UK businesses, especially for SMEs, three

EMSs i.e. ISO 14001, EMAS and BS 8555 were analyzed through a comparison

based on the criteria in order to find out which one meets the most criteria. Through

such comparison, each EMS’s advantages and disadvantages can be defined which

also considered as important results. The Figure 3.1 shows the process of the

methodology of this research.

Literature review

Creat criteria for suitable EMS

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

Advantages and disadvantages of each EMS

Suitable EMS

Figure 3.1: Process of methodology

4. Results

4.1 Easy to start implementation Easy to start implementation

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Assistance to help SMEs engage

Financial support from government

Financial support from government

Acorn Project

2. Specific drivers for implementation

No No Supply chain pressure

3. Easy to accept for SMEs

Less requirement More requirement Staged approach toward ISO 14001 and EMAS

Table 4.1: Comparison on easy to start implementation

As SMEs accounts almost 99% of the UK businesses, it is very important to attract

SMEs into EMS implementation practice. However, due to the characteristic of SMEs,

an easy start is needed to improve the implementation. The criteria can be divide into

three sub-criteria as Assistance to help SMEs engage; Drivers for implementation; and

Easy to accept for SMEs.

As table 4.1 shows, BS 8555 can help SMEs engaging the EMS implementation

through the Acorn Project which focus on the supply chain system. For those SMEs

who want to implement an EMS, usually they will find it is difficult to start since lack

of basic information and knowledge about EMS. The Acorn Project can solve this

problem by offering them a good start point. ENDS Report has already shown the

positive results of the Acorn Project. To date, 35 SMEs have successfully achieved

certification to ISO14001 through Project Acorn, with a further 15 working towards

stage 3 and 140 toward stage 2 (Best Project, 2004).

According to Hilary 1999, customer is the main driver for SMEs to implement EMS.

Compare with other two EMSs, BS 8555 considers the demands of supply chain and

satisfies both suppliers and customer. Thus, SMEs driven by supply chain pressure are

easier to chose BS 8555 as their EMS.

Requirement is also an important factor to attract SMEs to engage EMS

implementation. As EMAS require environmental statement for public available, it

may frighten SMEs (Hilary, 1999). However, BS 8555 uses a staged approach which

is easier for SMEs to accept as they can stop at any stage and get certification for

what they have already done.

4.2 Costs are relatively lower Costs are relatively low

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Implementation costs

Lower cost (Only reporting environmental policy)

Higher cost on reporting system (Environmental Statement)

Depend on organization’s choice (ISO 14001 or EMAS)

2. Certification Costs

Depend on the scale of organisation

Depend on the scale of organisation

Additional costs (Internal phases need to be certified)

3. Maintenance costs

Frequency of audits not specified; Document maintenance can be simplified if there is a ISO system already

Higher cost for regular audits (within every three years) and annual environmental statement verification

Depend on organization’s choice (ISO 14001 or EMAS)

Table 4.2: Comparison on costs

The cost here means not only money but also human resource and time. As to the

implementation, EMAS has the higher cost than ISO 14001 for the reason of its

reporting system i.e. environmental statement. According to Clausen 2002, publishing

environmental statement accounts for about 19% of total EMAS implementation cost

while ISO 14001 just need publish its environmental policy which usually is one

paper long.

For the maintenance costs it mainly from the documents maintenance and regular

audit. EMAS costs higher than ISO 14001 because it specifies the audit cycle

frequency is not to exceed three years and an annual verification of environmental

statement while ISO 14001 not specify. Additionally, Firms with ISO 9001 systems in

place will find that the auditing required by both standards for both certification and

maintenance can be combined (Bogner, 2002).

As to the cost of certification, although there is no literature about the costs of BS

8555, BS 8555 probably cost higher because it is a staged system and need

certification for its 6 internal phases. Besides, there is significant cost if organisation

moves towards final ISO 14001 certification or EMAS registration.

4.3 Benefits are relatively higher Benefits are relatively higher

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Financial benefits

Global market opportunity

Reduce cost of none compliance

Save costs if the organisation don’t want a formal EMS

2. Organisational benefits

Internal benefits higher than outside benefits

Better relationship to stakeholders

Better relationship to customers

3. Environmental benefits

Focus on system itself not environment

Better environmental performance

Focus on environment

Table 4.3: Comparison on implementation benefits

As to the financial benefits, because ISO 14001 is an international standard which be

accepted by most of the countries it brings the global opportunity to the organisation.

EMAS can bring cost reduction through its legal compliance while BS 8555 can save

more costs because it can be stopped at any stage and avoid wastes for the stages

organisation do want to go.

Compare with EMAS on organisational benefits, ISO 14001 emphasize internal

benefits such as management efficiency more than outside benefits. EMAS can create

better outside relationship with stakeholder and authorities through its reporting

system. While BS 8555 can bring suppliers and customers together through the Acorn

Project therefore create better supply chain relationship.

To environmental benefits, EMAS has better environmental feedback. IRIS 2000

finds that “EMAS registered companies seem to achieve a better environmental

performance than companies with only ISO 14001.” It is probably because the

certification process of the IS0 14001 standard covers only the management system;

in the EMAS scheme the information dealing with emissions and environmental

impacts is also checked (Honkasalo, 1998). By using indicators and performance

evaluation techniques based on ISO 14031, BS 8555 paying particular attention to the

environmental performance (Gascoigne, 2002).

4.4 Environmental performance are continuously improved Environmental performance continual improved

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Emphasis Emphasize EMS itself and assume good EMS means good environment

Emphasize EMS and continuous environmental improvement

Emphasize EMS and environmental evaluation

2. Review and auditing

Examine the company’s EMS and operations No requirement for IER

Examine the company’s EMS and environmental aspects; IER required

It monitors environmental performance over time, IER required

3. Actual results Worse than EMAS

Better environmental performance

Lack of literature

Table 4.4: Comparison on environmental performance continual improvement

EMAS emphasizes environmental sides much more strict than ISO 14001. EMAS

annex 1 shows the requirement that environmental policy should includes a

commitment to continual improvement and prevention of pollution (EMAS, 2001).

However, ISO 14001 does not have such requirement because it simply assumes that

good EMS leads to good environmental performance. BS 8555 also emphasizes the

environmental performance improvement and there is one stage (Phase5 stage 4) for

improving environmental performance (BS 8555, 2003).

EMAS also identify environmental effects through carrying out the initial

environmental review (IRE) which is a compulsory part of EMAS while ISO 14001

has no such demand. Additionally, the identification of environmental effects must

include specified areas concern, as defined in EMAS while ISO 14001 no such

restriction. Furthermore, during the auditing process, EMAS require EMS as well as

environmental aspects are checked. This is the same as BS 8555 which monitors

improvements in environmental performance over time, and gives organisations

evidence of their progress along the way that they can show to existing and potential

customers (Gascoigne, 2002), while ISO 14001 has no such requirement.

To the actual results of environmental performance improvement, EMAS cause better

environmental performance than ISO 14001. IRIS 2000 finds that “EMAS registered

companies seem to achieve a better environmental performance than companies with

only ISO 14001.” There are no literatures about environmental effects of BS 8555

available but positive results probably can be gained in the future.

4.5 Legal compliance Legal compliance

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Description in the standards

Environmental policy should include Legal compliance commitment

Identification legal requirements; show evidence for compliance; and procedures in place

Identify legal requirements; check and ongoing compliance and indicators developing

2. Restriction during the implementation process

No restriction can be found

Regulators can request withdrawal of registration at non-compliant sites

Phase 2 audit

3. Actual results Non-compliance can be found

Environmental Agency has more faith in EMAS

No literature available

Table 4.5: Comparison on legal compliance

EMAS has an emphasis on legal compliance. EMAS 2001 describe this in its Annex1

B that organisations shall be able to demonstrate that (a) they have identified all

relevant environmental legislation; (b) provide for legal compliance with

environmental legislation; and (c) have procedures in place that enable the

organisation to meet these requirements on an ongoing basis. Like EMAS, BS 8555

also emphasis legal compliance and spend one entire phase (Phase 2) to make sure the

legal requirements can be defined, checked, and keeping complied. In addition, BS

8555 ask organisation to develop compliance indicators. Compare with EMAS and

BS 8555, ISO 14001 just need a legal compliance commitment in organisation’s

environmental policy.

Both EMAS and BS 8555 have some kind of restriction focus on legal compliance

during the EMS implementation. For EMAS, it allows regulators to request

withdrawal of registration at non-compliant sites (ENDS 332, 2002). For BS 8555, at

the end of each phase there is an audit and fail to satisfy the successful criteria will

lead to EMS implementation process stop. Therefore, organisation who chooses BS

8555 must show their legal compliance in order to move on phase 3.

Although study shows that industrial sites with certified environmental management

systems (EMSs) are no more likely to comply with legal requirements than sites

without them (ENDS 332, 2002). Environmental Agency has more confidence in

working with EMAS than with ISO14001 on legal compliance problem (ENDS

Report 327, 2002). As to BS 8555, it is too early to draw any conclusion about its

legal compliance effects.

4.6 Implementation is easy to control Implementation is easy to control

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Resource control

Resource consume continuously

Resource consume continuously

Each phase is manageable as a separate investment project

2. Process control Once audit only Once audit only Each phase has an audit process plus an final formal audit in phase 5

3. Destination control

Only ISO 14001 Only EMAS registration

Stop at early phase or towards supply chain acknowledge, ISO 14001 or EMAS

Table 4.6: Comparison on the control of implementation process

BS 8555 divides the EMS into five clearly distinguishable, consecutive phases. Such

staged approaches allow companies to progress towards a full EMS (either EN ISO

14001/ISO 14001 or EMAS, certified if so required) at a pace best suited to their

resources (Best Report, 2004). The interest for an SME lies especially in the planning

advantages in terms of resources, as each phase is manageable as a separate

investment project and can be better planned in time. Differ from BS 8555, resource

consumes of ISO 14001 and EMAS are all continuous and difficult for organisations

to control.

As to implementation process control, at the end of each phase of BS 8555 there is an

audit needed to check whether the phase is finished satisfactory. Such checking

mechanism provides organisations opportunity to control their EMS implementation

under correct condition. In addition, there is a system and performance audit in phase

5 which provides overall review of the various elements of the EMS. This is the same

function as the audit process of ISO 14001 and EMAS.

Another control BS 8555 brings to organisations is destination control. While ISO

14001 and EMAS just move towards their only destination respectively, organisations

who choose BS 8555 can choose stop at each phase and get some kind of certification

or move to phase 6 which leads to three other destinations: supply chain acknowledge;

ISO 14001 certification; and EMAS registration. Therefore, organisations can control

their EMS destination during the first 5 phases.

4.7 Easy to get assistance Easy to get assistance

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Internal assistance

ISO 14004 Requirement of assistance for SMEs can be found in the regulation

List of supporting tools and techniques for each stage

2. External assistance

Finical assistance and information support

Finical assistance and information support (e.g. EMAS Tool Kit)

Supply chain mentor (the Acorn Project)

Table 4.7: Comparison on assistance

Internal assistance here means information assistance which organisations can get

form EMS standards. Organisations choose ISO 14001can get help form its additional

guidance - ISO 14004 i.e. Environmental management system – General guidelines

on principles, systems and supporting techniques. For those who choose BS 8555, the

standard attached with a useful table which lists supporting tools and techniques for

each stage of implementation. As to EMAS, its only requires its Member States to

establishing or promoting technical assistance measures for users but no attached

documents can offer help.

In order to promote EMS implementation especially focus on SMEs, various external

assistances are available for organisations. Some kinds of finical and information

supports are available for ISO and EMAS participators. For example, Internet-based

support tools, such as websites or databases, are used as a source of technical

information by almost every country (Best Report, 2004). Networks such as the UK

Green Business Clubs, EnviroWise and the on-line EMAS Tool Kit can offer

technical information or implementation supports. Differ form ISO and EMAS, BS

8555 seek assistance form its supply chain program (the Acorn Project), a good

example can be found form the UK construction sector. It combines sector-specificity

with the mentoring capacity of the supply chain, i.e. a “vertical network” (Best Report,

2004).

4.8 Good recognition system Recognition system

ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. External checking

Competent certifier

Competent verifier

Phases audits only require internal audit, system audit can be conducted by internal or external auditor

2. Accreditation system

UKAS UKAS Still under consideration

Table 4.8: Comparison on recognition system

Welford 1998 points out that external audit carry more weight. Therefore, the system

with external audit has higher recognition. Both ISO 14001 and EMAS are formal

EMSs and need external audit in order to get ISO 14001 certification or EMAS

registration. There are competent auditors responsible for this activity i.e. competent

certifiers for ISO 14001 certification and competent verifiers for EMAS verification.

However, BS 8555 does not have very strict requirement about external checking. The

phase audits are all internal audits which conducted by the organisation itself.

Although there is a system and performance audit which is different in scope and

nature from the phase audits (BS 8555, 2003), it can be conducted by either internal

or external auditors.

In order to improve the recognition of ISO 14001 certification and EMAS registration,

the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) is pointed as the national body

for the accreditation of independent environmental certifiers and verifiers and for the

supervision of their activities. The BS 8555 takes the form of guidance towards

achieving ISO14001 or EMAS. It is not a certifiable specification in itself. Therefore,

it has no accreditation system for itself.

However, the accreditation service UKAS is understood to be considering some forms

of recognition for BS 8555 (ENDS Report 337, 2003). Following a feasibility study of

the options, it has therefore been proposed to develop an accredited 'inspection'

scheme for BS 8555 which will enable formal recognition to be given of the stages

completed (Best Report, 2004).

4.9 Other criteria ISO 14001 EMAS BS 8555

1. Compatible with other systems

ISO 9001 quality management system

EMAS II integrated ISO 14001 as its environmental management system

Towards ISO 14001 or EMAS

2. Easy to diffuse No literature found

No literature found

Diffuse through supply chain

Table 4.9: Comparison on other criteria

One reason against EMAS is the belief that ISO 14001 can be easier integrated with

ISO 9001 management system and therefore certainly raises efficiency (Best Report,

2004). This reason should be removed by the integration of elements of ISO 14 001 in

EMAS II. The BS8555 towards achieving ISO 14001 and EMAS after phase 5.

Therefore, the compatibility with these two systems should be no doubt.

There is considerable sectoral variation in the uptake of EMSs, including amongst

SMEs. Whilst in some sectors the prevalence of formal EMSs is comparatively high

(e.g. metal products, chemicals, food and beverages), in others (e.g. the extractive

industry) it is much lower (Best Report, 2004). Against this background, BS 8555

offers a good means through the Acorn Project to diffuse the EMS within supply

chain. Positive results have already been found in the UK construction sector.

However, relevant literature about ISO 14001 and EMAS is unavailable.

7. Discussion

7.1 Comparison results

The comparison of this research is based on the criteria and relevant sub-criteria

which have been created in order to identify the suitable EMS for UK businesses.

From the comparison element we can see that ISO 14001, EMAS, or BS 8555 have

their own advantages and disadvantages when they are compared to each other.

Although such differences were not shown in a quantitative way in this research, they

are significant enough for UK businesses to take note of during the period of their

EMS implementation.

7.1.1 Characteristics of ISO 14001

The international EMS standard – ISO 14001 is currently the most popular

environmental management system. Many of the UK’s corporations (either big,

medium, or small) have certified their EMS under the ISO 14000 standards during the

past several years, and many other companies are in the process of doing so.

The reason why most companies prefer ISO 14001 is because it is better in many

areas than its main competitor - EMAS. First of all, according to the comparison, the

implementation of ISO 14001 is relatively cheaper and costs less time and human

resource, therefore make users making it affordable. Because of the fewer

requirements, such as environmental reporting to the public, and an annual external

audit, organisations that adopt ISO 14001 can save more costs than those who choose

EMAS. It is very important for businesses, especially SMEs, since usually they do not

have enough money to engage in EMS implementation.

Another reason for choosing ISO 14001 is its international standard status. As an

international standard ISO 14001 is recognized by most of the countries around the

world and therefore bring the organisations the global market opportunities. For

example, the UK suppliers who have ISO 14001 certifications can be accepted by

customers around the world while those registered with EMAS probably only can be

accepted within European Union. This is because EMAS is only a EU regulation and

unfamiliar or unaccepted by non-EU countries (Whitelaw, 1997).

Furthermore, ISO 14001 has relatively longer implementation history (8 years). On

the one side, there is plenty of experience that can be gained from those who have

already obtained ISO 14001 certification. In addition, assistance from external sources

such as the Internet is usually easily accessible. On the other side, ISO 14001 has an

accreditation system (the UKAS) in place, which has improved its credibility and

makes organisations confident enough to implement this standard.

The ISO 14001 also has many shortcomings. The most often heard criticism is that

ISO 14001 certification does not measure the actual environmental performance of a

plant or company (Krut and Gleckman, 1998). Although there is a guideline (ISO

14031) for environmental performance evaluation, it has no requirement to assess

whether the organisation’s environmental performance achieves continuous

improvement. The ISO 14001 standard simply assumes that a good environmental

management system will, if they are implemented effectively, lead to continuous

environmental performance improvement. However, many people argue that such an

assumption is not correct (Rondinell, 2000) and the best way is adopting external

verification to make sure such improvement actually occurs.

The other shortcomings of ISO 14001 include less emphasis on legal compliance and

a low emphasis on making information publicly available. Compared with EMAS and

BS 8555, ISO 14001 pays less attention on legal compliance. In other words, an

organisation’s risk of conflicting with legal requirements is higher than EMAS and

BS 8555 since they ask more in order to make sure the legal compliance is adhere to.

The organisations certified with ISO 14001 only need publish their environmental

policy which appears not to satisfy most stakeholders and, it often follows poorer

working relationships.

7.1.2 Characteristics of EMAS

Although EMAS is not as popular as ISO 14001, it is a strong competitor to ISO

14001 in the EMS implementation market. Even though they have a competitive

relationship they are by no means totally different. Inedde, EMAS is very similar in

many areas with ISO 14001. Both of them use the ‘plan – do – check – act’ cycle to

structure the main body of the EMS. They also have several stages same either in

name or function. In short, the requirements of ISO 14001 have been recognized

under EMAS as corresponding to certain of the management system requirements of

EMAS since 1997 (Welford, 1998) and integrated into EMAS II during the EMAS

revision EMAS (Clausen, 2002).

Except for the compatibility of these two systems, EMAS has its own edge as an EMS.

EMAS follows the steps of ISO 14001 but goes beyond ISO 14001. It has stricter

requirements in environmental performance evaluation, the auditing cycle, and legal

compliance. Besides, as a very important part of EMAS, reporting system i.e.

environmental report must be available to the public and needs external auditing

annually. All these rigorous requirements make sure the aim of EMS implementation

can be achieved. Much literature shows that organisations choose EMAS registration

have better environmental performance than those choose ISO 14001 certification

(Clausen, 2002).

Although it has a distinct edge over ISO 14001, EMAS also has obvious limitations.

Most of all limitations are the higher cost for implementation. The additional costs of

environmental reporting makes many SMEs frightened and changes them adopting

ISO 14001. The geographical limitation of EMAS is also a problem because EMAS is

only valid within EU countries. The “world wide validity” is an important reason for

some organisations to choose ISO 14001 certification. Another reason against EMAS

is put forward by Hillary (1999), who argues that there is a “fear of de-registration for

minor breaches of legislation”, which makes EMAS an unattractive proposition for

many firms.

7.1.3 Characteristics of BS 8555

First of all, BS 8555 is a British standard which means it has a formal status among

some other ways (such as the way of EMS club) to promote the EMS implementation.

On the other hand, unlike the formal EMS (ISO 14001 and EMAS), BS 8555 as a

national standard is probably more suitable for the UK businesses. The reason for this

is because during its creating process, it considered in some detail the characteristics

of UK businesses. Therefore, it aims to provide EMS implementation guidance for all

organizations but particularly SMEs. However, since SMEs’ environmental impacts

are a universal problem around the EU, BS 8555 can also be adopted by other

countries and maybe influence the subsequent development of ISO 14001 and EMAS

as its precursor BS 7750 (the first EMS standard) appears to have done.

The most distinct character of BS 8555 from ISO 14001 and EMAS is its staged

approach. It breaks down the whole EMS implementation process into five phases and

followed with phase six which towards ISO 14001 certification or EMAS registration.

Such a staged approach can provide companies with an easy way to start

implementation and let them control the whole implementation process under the pace

they prefer. This is particularly important for SMEs as their resources are usually

limited. Besides, for those who do have interest in completing the whole EMS process,

it is also a good choice. BS 8555 is not the only staged approach available at this

moment. The others include: the 3 - phased EMS implementation scheme in Ireland,

“e+5” in Spain and “On the Way to EMAS with ISO 14001” in Sweden (Best Report,

2004).

Another merit of BS 8555 is its clear relationship to ISO 14001 and EMAS. Instead of

a completely different standard, BS 8555 is more like a helpful approach for those

who want to get ISO 14001 certification or EMAS registration but which is not as

well-equipped as a large company in terms of money, time and human resource.

Therefore, choosing BS 8555 will not conflict with the ultimate aim of ISO 14001

certification or EMAS registration. On the contrary, it will helpful in promoting the

ISO 14001 and EMAS implementation.

The BS 8555 is a output of the UK supply chain project (Acorn Project). In fact, the

Acorn Project is not only the origin of BS 8555 but also can be used to popularize it.

The SMEs involved in the Acorn Project are all using this staged EMS

implementation approach and get outside assistance from bigger companies (the

customers, so called ‘mentor’). Through the project, most of the companies

successfully became involved in EMS implementation and have moved towards ISO

14001 or EMAS.

Compared with ISO 14001 and EMAS, BS 8555 is a very young system. It inevitably

has some shortcomings. The most serious barrier for its spread is lacking an

appropriate recognition system. Because BS 8555 has five phases before starting on

ISO 14001 certification and EMAS verification it needs some formal recognition for

each of these five phases. But such a recognition system is still under development.

The other problem is a current lack of implementation experience; however, time will

ease this issue. Unlike ISO 14001 or EMAS, which have longer implementation

histories, BS 8555 has only just been created. Therefore, both the participant and

external auditor as well as authorities all need to explore the best implementation

methods.

7.2 ISO 14001, EMAS or BS 8555?

From the comparison between ISO 14001, EMAS, and BS 8555 we can see that each

of these three systems has their own advantages and disadvantages. So which one is

more suitable for the UK businesses in their EMS implementation? Choosing the most

appropriate system needs a comprehensive consideration about not only the

characteristics of each system but also the reason and purpose of the organisation’s

EMS implementation requirements. Therefore, different companies may need

different EMS. However, according to the characteristics of the UK business, there

are two categories: the big enterprises, which is a small part of the UK business but

have plenty of resource for EMS implementation, and the SMEs, which is the

majority of the UK business but generally lacks motivation and resources for EMS

implementation.

To those who have plenty of resources to carry out EMS implementation EMAS

could be a good choice. EMAS is compatible with ISO 14001 and has most of the

advantages of ISO 14001; however it go beyond ISO 14001 in several areas such as

continuous environmental performance improvement, legal compliance, and

environmental reporting. Therefore it makes sure organisations can achieve their

environmental objectives. ISO 14001 is relatively easier to implement but it has some

obvious shortcomings. If organisations could really establish an efficient ISO 14001

system and make it continuous improvement, it also can get the same results as

EMAS.

As to the majority of the UK business, choosing ISO 14001 and EMAS directly seems

not to be appropriate. From this research we can see that BS 8555 is a good choice for

most SMEs who want to start EMS implementation but usually do not have enough

resources. BS 8555 can satisfy different demands of SMEs’ and help them

continuously move towards ISO 14001 certification or EMAS registration. In short,

SMEs are better to choose BS 8555 to get a start of with their EMS implementation

and to be able to stop at any phase to take a break until they feel the right time is come

to go forward. Such a way can make sure SMEs can have enough motivation to move

forward until they achieve formal EMS recognition.

7.3 Gap analysis and further study recommendation

The analysis of BS 8555 standard in this research is mainly based on the standard

itself. This is because finding relevant literature is very difficulty at this moment as it

is a new standard with only one-year history. This problem causes uncertainty of the

actual effects of this standard. Some barriers for implementing the standard may be

neglected because of simple analysis of the document.

Another problem of this research is the valid term of the results. Both ISO 14001 and

EMAS have some shortcomings and thus limited their implementation. Researchers

and developers have already realized this and planning to carry out revision in the

next few years (Best Report, 2004). If ISO 14001 or EMAS adopted the staged

approach the same as BS 8555, it is not easy to say which one of these three systems

is better and the results of this research may be not valid at that time.

In order to get better results, further research can use other methods such interview

and questionnaire to get the actual implementation experiences of BS 8555. In

addition, future research should avoid looking at the SME sector as a whole. More

detailed research should be done to examine the suitability of BS 8555 in certain

industry sector.

8. Conclusion

This research focuses on the EMS implementation activities within the UK business

area, trying to find out the best EMS currently available for the participants. The

literature review shows three EMSs are now available for the UK businesses i.e. the

international environmental management standard ISO 14001, the European

regulation – EMAS, and the UK standard BS 8555. The fact that the majority of

companies choose the ISO 14001 certification as their EMS implementation aim

means this international standard dominates the EMS implementation market at

present. The EMAS implementation situation is not as optimistic as the ISO 14001 as

just a few companies choose it as their EMS. The new British standard provides the

business sector with a new choice, and some positive results have already been shown

form from the supply chain program, the Acorn Project.

Different systems have different advantages and disadvantages compared with each

other during the implementation process. Some of these advantages or disadvantages

have significant effects when businesses choose the EMS for their implementation.

Therefore, based on the literature review, ten criteria have been created in order to

identify these characteristics. These criteria include whether it is easy to start

implementation, the costs and benefits of implementation, environmental performance

improvement, legal compliance, the control of the implementation process, assistance

with implementation, the accreditation system, compatibility with other systems, and

the ability to diffusion in certain industry sector. Most of the criteria have several

sub-criteria which aim to help the identification of the advantages and disadvantages.

Comparisons were used to find out which system is better than others for each criteria.

These comparisons are based on two analyses: the ISO 14001 standard, the EMAS

regulation, and the BS 8555 standard and literatures about EMS implementation.

From the comparisons we can see that the ISO 14001 standard is relatively easy to

start implementing and costs less. It has a mature accreditation system and it is easy to

get help during the implementation process. In addition, the compatibility with the

quality management system, ISO 9000:2000, is also an advantage. However, the ISO

14001 has fewer implementation benefits. It is also not good at making sure the legal

compliance and environmental performance continuous improvement occurs.

The EMAS regulation is compatible with ISO 14001 but has more requirements.

Therefore, it is not easy for organisations to start and it costs more to implement. But

it has the advantages such as legal compliance, continuous environmental

performance improvement and mature accreditation system. The new British standard

BS 8555 extracted the advantages from its former systems. The staged approach

makes it easier to get started and is flexible in the implementation process. The

emphasis of legal compliance makes it more confident in on the legal side. The

environmental performance evaluation requirements make sure the environmental

performance can be improved continuously. The most serious problem of the BS 8555

there is no good accreditation system available at this moment and therefore cause the

lower credibility of its inter phases.

Based on the comparisons between these three EMSs, further discussion were carried

out in order to analyze the applicability of each system. The majority (99%) of the UK

businesses are SMEs which lack the resources and motivations for the EMS

implementation. The EMAS is too burdensome to implement in SMEs although it is

better in terms of environmental performance and legal compliance etc. The ISO

14001 standard is the most popular system for the SMEs because it is relatively cheap

and easy for SMEs to implement. However, the new British standard - BS 8555 seems

to have a bright future. It introduced the staged approach into the EMS

implementation and moves towards the ISO 14001 certification and EMAS

registration. With the establishment of accreditation system, the BS 8555 will be

accepted by more and more SMEs and promote the EMS implementation within UK

businesses.

References

Bansal, P. and Bogner, w. (2002), “Deciding on ISO 14001: Economics, Institutions,

and Context”, Long Range Planning 35 (2002) 269-290

Best Report, (2004) “Public Policy Initiatives to Promote The Uptake of

Environmental Management Systems In Small And Medium-Sized Enterprises – Final

Report of The Best Project Expert Group” European Commission January 2004

Blair, Alasdair and Hitchcock, David (2001). “Environment and Business” published

by Routledge, London

BS 8555, (2003) “Environmental management systems – Guide to the phased

implementation of an environmental management system including the use of

environmental performance evaluation”, BSI, 2003

Clausen, J., Keil, M. and Jungwirth, M. (2002) “The State of EMAS in the EU

Eco-Management as a Tool for Sustainable Development Literature Study” Brussels

June 2002

EEDA, (2004) East of England Development Agency website:

http://www.eeda.org.uk visited in 21/06/04.

EMAS, (2001) “Regulation (EU) No 761/2001 of The European Parliament And of

The Council – allowing voluntary participation by organisations in a Community

eco-management and audit scheme”, Official Journal of the European Communities,

April 2001

EMAS, (2004) European Commission EMAS Site:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/emas/index_en.htm visited in 21/06/04

EMAS-UK, (2004) EMAS UK website:

http://www.emas.org.uk/aboutemas/mainframe.htm visited in 22/06/04

Emilsson, S. and Hjelm O. (2002) “Implementation of standardised environmental

management systems in Swedish local authorities: reasons, expectations and some

outcomes” Environmental Science & Policy 5 (2002) 443–448

ENDS Report 332, (2002) “Compliance study delivers blow to ISO14001” ENDS

Report 332, September 2002, pp 3-4

ENDS Report 332, (2002) “Tackling a crisis of confidence in ISO14001” ENDS

Report 327, April 2002, pp 31-33

ENDS, Report 337 (2003) ‘New standard guides SMEs to better performance’ form

ENDS Report website: http://www.endsreport.com, visited in 29/06/2004.

ENDS, Report 340 (2003) ‘Management systems for SMEs’ form ENDS Report

website: http://www.endsreport.com, visited in 29/06/2004.

ENDS, Report 342 (2003) ‘Regulators place EMS auditors under the magnifying glass’

form ENDS Report website: http://www.endsreport.com, visited in 17/06/2004.

ENDS, Report 354 (2004) ‘UKAS moves to strengthen EMS accreditation’ form ENDS

Report website: http://www.endsreport.com, visited in 15/07/2004.

Hillary, (1999) ‘Evaluation of Study Reports on the Barriers, Opportunities and

Drivers for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises in the Adoption of Environmental

Management Systems’ form DTI website: http://www.dti.gov.uk, visited in

05/07/2004

Honkasalo, A. (1998) “The EMAS scheme: a management tool and instrument of

environmental policy”, Journal of Cleaner Production 6 (1998) 119-128

IRIS Eco-Efficiency Group (IRIS 2000): “Environmental Management Systems –

paper tiger or powerful tool”. Stockholm.

ISO (1996), ‘ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems- Specifications with

guidance for use’ Geneva, 1996

ISO (2004), ‘The ISO survey’ ISO website: www.iso.org, visited in 18/06/04.

ISO world (2004), ISO world website: www.ecology.or.jp, visited in 18/06/04.

Krut, R. and Gleckman, H. (1998), ‘ISO 14001 a Missed Opportunity for Sustainable

Global Industrial Development’ Earthscan Publications Ltd, London

Netherwood, Alan (1998), ‘Environmental Management Systems’ in ‘Corporate

Environmental Management’ Welford, Richard edited, Earthscan Publications Ltd,

London.

Position statement, (2003) ‘Environmental Management Systems: Position Statement’

from website of environmental agency: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk,

visited in 05/07/2004

Roberts, H. and Robinson, G. (1998), ‘ISO 14001 EMS Implementation Handbook’

Butford technical publishing, Bodenham, Hereford.

Rondinell, D. and Vastag, G. (2000), ‘Panacea, Common Sense, or Just a Label? The

Value of ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems’ European Management

Journal Vol.18, No.5, pp.499–510, 2000

SBS, (2004) ‘Government Action Plan for Small Business’ from the website of small

business services: http://www.sbs.org.uk, visited in 06/07/2004

SME-nvironment, (2003) ‘SME-nvironment 2003 a survey to assess environmental

behaviours among smaller UK businesses’ from the website of NetRegs:

http://www.netregs.gov.uk, visited in 05/07/2004

The Acorn Trust, (2004) the website of The Acorn Trust: http://www.theacorntrust.org,

visited in 29/06/2004.

Welford, Richard (1998). ‘Environmental Issues and Corporate Environmental

Management” in “Corporate Environmental Management’, revised edition in 1998,

Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, Page13-32

Whitelaw, Ken (1997), ‘ISO 14001 Environmental System Handbook’ Reed

Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd, 1997

World Commission on Environment and Development, (1987) ‘Our Common Future’

(The Brundtland Report) OUP, Oxford