EMAS in Poland: performance, effectiveness, and future perspectives

• Autorzy: Szyszka B. , Matuszak-Flejszman A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Our article presents the results of studies on performance and effectiveness of the eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) system. Therefore, the aim of the article is to analyze the indicators monitored by the EMAS-registered organizations in Poland, to determine the strengths and areas for the implementation of corrective or improvement actions, and to develop recommendations in building effective environmental management systems, monitoring indicators, and revising the EMAS system. The research was conducted in 2013-15 on a group of organizations registered in the EMAS system in Poland. The conclusions of the research enabled us to develop recommendations on potential improvements to EMAS and proposals for amendments while auditing the regulation requirements. The recommendations have been prepared for various interested parties, taking into consideration their competence, powers, and capacity for implementing the suggested actions. These recommendations have been divided into three levels. The first group consists of recommendations at the level of the organization, the second group consists of recommendations at the national level, and the third group are the actions suggested for implementation at the international level.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 26
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: P.809-817,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Szyszka B.

• Department of Normalized Management Systems, Faculty of Commodity Science, Poznan University of Economics and Business, Poznan, Poland

autor

Matuszak-Flejszman A.

• Department of Normalized Management Systems, Faculty of Commodity Science, Poznan University of Economics and Business, Poznan, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. EN ISO 14001:2015, Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for use. 2015.
• 2. Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the voluntary participation by organizations in a Community ecomanagement and audit scheme (EMAS), repealing Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 and Commission Decisions 2001/681/EC and 2006/193/EC. 2009.
• 3. TESTA F., RIZZI F., DADDI T., GUSMEROTTI N.M., FREY M., IRALDO F. EMAS and ISO 14001: the Differences in Effectively Improving Environmental Performance. Journal of Cleaner Production. 68, 165, 2014.
• 4. IRALDO F., TESTA F., FREY M. Is an Environmental Management System able to Influence Environmental and Competitive Performance? The Case of the Eco-management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) in the European Union, Journal of Cleaner Production. 17 (16) 1444, 2009.
• 5. ARIMURA T., HIBIKI A., KATAYAMA H. Is a voluntary approach an effective environmental policy instrument? A case for environmental management systems. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 55 , 281, 2008.
• 6. IRALDO F., LANZINI P., MELIS M. How does EMAS Affect Organizations’ Effort and Competitive Rewards? Analysis of the Drivers, Barriers and Benefits Connected with the EU Scheme, IEFE Centre for Research on Energy and Environment Economics and Policy. Boccioni University. Milano. January 2010.
• 7. MONTEBIO F., SOLITO I. Does EMAS foster innovation in European firms? An empirical investigation. SEEDS Working Paper 16/2015 September 2015.
• 8. TOURAIS P., VIDEIRA N. Why, How and What do Organizations Achieve with the Implementation of Environmental Management Systems? Lessons from a Comprehensive Review on the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme. Sustainability. 8, 283. 2016.
• 9. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/EMASiso14001_high.pdf
• 10. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/pdf/factsheet/EMAS_revised_ISO14001.pdf
• 11. www.ec.europa.eu
• 12. KACZMAREK M., OLEJNIK I., SPRINGER A. Qualitative research. Methods and applications, CeDeWu, Warsaw, Poland. 2013.
• 13. KACZMARCZYK S. The application of marketing research. Marketing management and enterprise environment, PWE, Warsaw, Poland. 2007.
• 14. KACZMARCZYK S. Marketing Research. Methodical base, Polish Economic Publishing House, Warsaw. 2011.
• 15. CHURCHIL G.A. Marketing research. Methodological basis, PWN, Warsaw. 2002.
• 16. SKOULOUDIS A., JONES K., SFAKIANAKI E., LAZOUDI E., EVANGELINOS K. EMAS statement: Benign accountability or wishful thinking? Insights from the Greek EMAS registry. Journal of Environmental Management. Vol. 128, 1043-1049. 2013.
• 17. The Convention on Biological Diversity, dated. June 5 In 1992, signed in Rio de Janeiro (Journal of Laws of 2002 No. 184, item.1532).
• 18. SIENKIEWICZ J. Concepts of biodiversity – their dimensions and measures in the light of literature, Environmental Protection and Natural Resources, No. 45, 2010.
• 19. DEL BRIO J.A., FERNANDEZ E., JANQUERA B., VAZQUES C.J. Motivations for Adoptingthe ISO 14001 Standard: A Study of Spanish Industrial Companies, Environmental Quality Management, 10 (4), 13, 2001.
• 20. HERAS-SAIZABITOIA I., BOIRAL O., ARANA G. Renewing environmental certification in times of crisis. J. Clean. Prod. 115, 214–223. 2016.
• 21. ERKKO S., MELANEN M., MICKWITZ P. Eco-efficiency in the Finnish EMAS Reports – a Buzz Word?, Journal of Cleaner Production, 13 (8), 799, 2005.
• 22. SZYSZKA B., MATUSZAK-FLEJSZMAN A. EMAS – unfulfilled expectations and challenges associated with the planned publication of the new ISO 14001:2015, Sustainable Development, WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 168, 2015.
• 23. SZYSZKA B., MATUSZAK-FLEJSZMAN A. Barriers and unfulfilled expectations related to the implementation EMAS, Skrzypek E. (ed.), Quality as a success factor in the new economy, Publisher of Marie Curie Sklodowska (UMSC) in Lublin, Lublin. 2014.
• 24. DAY T., TOSEY P. Beyond SMART? A new framework for goal setting, The Curriculum Journal, 22 (4), 2011.
• 25. LEMKOWSKA M. Environmental Management System ISO 14001:2004 and the environmental risk insurance - An attempt to assess the relationship, Scientific Books, Publishing Poznan University of Economics, No. 166, Poznan. 2011.
• 26. LEMKOWSKA M. The role of insurance in indemnifikation anainst primary environmental damage, Economics and Environment, No. 2 (53), 2015.
• 27. FIGGE F., HAHN T., SCHALTEGGER S., WAGNER M. Sustainability Balanced Scorecard, Lüneburg, CSM. 2001.
• 28. FIGGE F., HAHN T., SCHALTEGGER S., WAGNER M. The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – Theory and Application of a Tool for Value-Based Sustainability Management, Centre for Sustainability Management, Conference „Corporate Social Responsibility – Governance for Sustainability”, Gothenburg. 2002.
• 29. DADDI T., MAGISTRELLI M., FREY M., IRALDO F. Do Environmental Management Systems Improve Environmental Performance? Empirical Evidence from Italian Companies, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 13 (5), 845, 2011.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15244/pjoes/65544