IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i3p283-d66076.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Patrícia Tourais

    (CENSE—Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Departamento de Ciências e Engenharia do Ambiente, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campus de Caparica, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal)

  • Nuno Videira

    (CENSE—Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Departamento de Ciências e Engenharia do Ambiente, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campus de Caparica, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal)

Abstract

The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) was established in 1993 in the European Union as a voluntary instrument facilitating the implementation of organisational environmental policies and management of environmental aspects. We present a comprehensive literature review on EMAS research, organized according to three broad questions: Why do organisations choose EMAS? How is the scheme implemented and adapted to organisational characteristics? And what results are achieved? We have built analysis matrices to critically review 80 articles published over the past two decades and to identify the recurrent research themes addressing each question. We found that the decision to adopt EMAS is motivated by a set of internal and external factors, compounded by the potential of an organisation to combine the scheme with other EMS standards and environmental management tools. These themes are the ones most extensively covered by existing literature. To answer the question on how organisations implement and adapt to the scheme, two themes have been identified covering EMS planning and operation issues and sectoral approaches. Results show that the focus has been put on development of methods for assessing the significance of environmental aspects, implementing environmental policies and developing indicators for tracking performance and elaborating environmental statements. The development of sectoral approaches that adapt EMAS to characteristics of different economic activity sectors is also emerging as a critical research development. Finally, the themes addressing results achieved with EMAS implementation have only recently surfaced in the literature. The achievement of sustained environmental performance improvements through EMAS adoption is both contested and supported in the reviewed studies. On the other hand, improvements in the relationships with stakeholders arise as one of the most important intangible outcomes of the scheme. We conclude our review by advancing a systematic set of future research opportunities in this field.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrícia Tourais & Nuno Videira, 2016. "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, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-25, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:283-:d:66076
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/3/283/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/3/283/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vassilis Stelios Tselentis, 2008. "Marina Environmental Review System: A methodology to assess environmental management in recreational ports," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1-2), pages 47-56.
    2. Bracke, Roeland & Verbeke, Tom & Dejonkheere, Veerle, 2008. "What Determines the Decision to Implement EMAS? A European Firm Level Study," Working Papers 2008/15, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    3. Ulrich Steger & Claudia Schindel & Helga Krapf, 2002. "The experience of EMAS in three European countries: a cultural and competitive analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(1), pages 32-42, January.
    4. Richard Perkins & Eric Neumayer, 2004. "Europeanisation and the Uneven Convergence of Environmental Policy: Explaining the Geography of EMAS," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 22(6), pages 881-897, December.
    5. Ziegler, Andreas & Seijas Nogareda, Jazmin, 2009. "Environmental management systems and technological environmental innovations: Exploring the causal relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 885-893, June.
    6. Roeland Bracke & Tom Verbeke & Veerle Dejonckheere, 2008. "What Determines the Decision to Implement EMAS? A European Firm Level Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(4), pages 499-518, December.
    7. Esther Albelda Pérez & Carmen Correa Ruiz & Francisco Carrasco Fenech, 2007. "Environmental management systems as an embedding mechanism: a research note," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 20(3), pages 403-422, June.
    8. Sara Emilsson & Olof Hjelm, 2005. "Development of the use of standardized environmental management systems (EMSs) in local authorities," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 144-156, September.
    9. Rennings, Klaus & Ziegler, Andreas & Ankele, Kathrin & Hoffmann, Esther, 2006. "The influence of different characteristics of the EU environmental management and auditing scheme on technical environmental innovations and economic performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 45-59, April.
    10. Andrew B. Whitford & Justin A. Tucker, 2012. "Focal Points in Public Policy: Evidence from Voluntary Regulation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(2), pages 281-299, March.
    11. Lannelongue, Gustavo & González-Benito, Javier, 2012. "Opportunism and environmental management systems: Certification as a smokescreen for stakeholders," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 11-22.
    12. Rita Jirillo & Andrea Rocchi & Olimpia Martucci, 2003. "EMAS and its local diffusion in Italy," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 40-49, March.
    13. T. Daddi & M. Magistrelli & M. Frey & F. Iraldo, 2011. "Do environmental management systems improve environmental performance? Empirical evidence from Italian companies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 845-862, October.
    14. Esben Rahbek Pedersen, 2007. "Perceptions of performance: how European organizations experience EMAS registration," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(2), pages 61-73, May.
    15. Ahsen, Anette von & Lange, Christoph & Pianowski, Mathias, 2004. "Corporate Environmental Reporting: Survey and Empirical Evidence," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 37791, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    16. Bruce Cockrean, 1997. "The local authority EMAS in the UK: the Sutton model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 11-13, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cosmina L. Voinea & Bas-Jan Hoogenberg & Cosmin Fratostiteanu & Hammad Bin Azam Hashmi, 2020. "The Relation between Environmental Management Systems and Environmental and Financial Performance in Emerging Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Ionut Viorel Herghiligiu & Ioan-Bogdan Robu & Marius Pislaru & Adrian Vilcu & Anca Laura Asandului & Silvia Avasilcăi & Catalin Balan, 2019. "Sustainable Environmental Management System Integration and Business Performance: A Balance Assessment Approach Using Fuzzy Logic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-30, September.
    3. Christin Seifert & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Who cares?—Stakeholder relevance for voluntary environmental management in hospitals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1786-1799, July.
    4. Frederic Marimon & Martí Casadesús, 2017. "Reasons to Adopt ISO 50001 Energy Management System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Hakan Karaosman & Gustavo Morales-Alonso & Alessandro Brun, 2016. "From a Systematic Literature Review to a Classification Framework: Sustainability Integration in Fashion Operations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    6. Ramin Gharizadeh Beiragh & Reza Alizadeh & Saeid Shafiei Kaleibari & Fausto Cavallaro & Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Romualdas Bausys & Abbas Mardani, 2020. "An integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for Sustainability Performance Assessment for Insurance Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    7. Sebastian Kretschmer & Sheena Dehm, 2021. "Sustainability Transitions in University Food Service—A Living Lab Approach of Locavore Meal Planning and Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-31, June.
    8. Antoni Fonseca i Casas & Pau Fonseca i Casas & Josep Casanovas, 2016. "Analysis of Applications to Improve the Energy Savings in Residential Buildings Based on Systemic Quality Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-18, October.
    9. Christin Seifert & Matthias Damert & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Environmental Management in German Hospitals—A Classification of Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Artitzar Erauskin‐Tolosa & Eugenio Zubeltzu‐Jaka & Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Olivier Boiral, 2020. "ISO 14001, EMAS and environmental performance: A meta‐analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1145-1159, March.
    11. Anne Bergmann, 2016. "The Link between Corporate Environmental and Corporate Financial Performance—Viewpoints from Practice and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-15, November.
    12. Christin Seifert, 2018. "The Barriers for Voluntary Environmental Management Systems—The Case of EMAS in Hospitals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Stefano Castelluccio & Claudio Comoglio & Silvia Fiore, 2022. "Environmental Performance Reporting and Assessment of the Biodegradable Waste Treatment Plants Registered to EMAS in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    14. Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Olivier Boiral & Alberto Díaz de Junguitu, 2020. "Environmental management certification and environmental performance: Greening or greenwashing?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2829-2841, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christin Seifert & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Who cares?—Stakeholder relevance for voluntary environmental management in hospitals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1786-1799, July.
    2. Fabio Montobbio & Ilaria Solito, 2018. "Does the Eco‐Management and Audit Scheme Foster Innovation in European Firms?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 82-99, January.
    3. Artitzar Erauskin‐Tolosa & Eugenio Zubeltzu‐Jaka & Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Olivier Boiral, 2020. "ISO 14001, EMAS and environmental performance: A meta‐analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1145-1159, March.
    4. Tiberio Daddi & Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & Luca Marrucci & Francesco Rizzi & Francesco Testa, 2021. "The effects of green supply chain management capability on the internalisation of environmental management systems and organisation performance," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 1241-1253, July.
    5. Roberto Merli & Michele Preziosi & Christian Ippolito, 2016. "Promoting Sustainability through EMS Application: A Survey Examining the Critical Factors about EMAS Registration in Italian Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Martin Thomas Falk & Eva Hagsten, 2020. "Time for carbon neutrality and other emission reduction measures at European airports," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1448-1464, March.
    7. Nicoletta Corrocher & Ilaria Solito, 2017. "How do firms capture value from environmental innovations? An empirical analysis on European SMEs," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 569-585, July.
    8. Stefan Borsky & Esther Blanco, 2014. "Setting one voluntary standard in a heterogeneous Europe - EMAS, corruption and stringency of environmental regulations," Working Papers 2014-29, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    9. Christin Seifert, 2018. "The Barriers for Voluntary Environmental Management Systems—The Case of EMAS in Hospitals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    10. Fabio Montobbio & Ilaria Solito, 2015. "Does EMAS foster innovation in European firms? An empirical investigation," SEEDS Working Papers 1615, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Sep 2015.
    11. Aschhoff, Birgit & Baier, Elisabeth & Crass, Dirk & Hud, Martin & Hünermund, Paul & Köhler, Christian & Peters, Bettina & Rammer, Christian & Schricke, Esther & Schubert, Torben & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Innovation in Germany - Results of the German CIS 2006 to 2010. Background report on the Innovation Surveys 2007, 2009 and 2011 of the Mannheim Innovation Panel," ZEW Dokumentationen 13-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Kube, Roland & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Löschel, Andreas & Massier, Philipp, 2019. "Do voluntary environmental programs reduce emissions? EMAS in the German manufacturing sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).
    13. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    14. Joana Costa, 2021. "Carrots or Sticks: Which Policies Matter the Most in Sustainable Resource Management?," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Sandro Montresor, 2012. "Environmental Innovations, Local Networks and Internationalization," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 697-734, November.
    16. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2009. "Performance environnementale et économique de l'entreprise," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 71-94.
    17. Marius Bulearca & Catalin Popescu, 2014. "Dimensions Of Sustainable Development In Extractive Industry," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 6, pages 165-170, December.
    18. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Nicolò Barbieri & Claudia Ghisetti & Marianna Gilli & Giovanni Marin & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "A Survey Of The Literature On Environmental Innovation Based On Main Path Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 596-623, July.
    19. Gregorio Martín‐de Castro & Javier Amores‐Salvadó & José E. Navas‐López, 2016. "Environmental Management Systems and Firm Performance: Improving Firm Environmental Policy through Stakeholder Engagement," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 243-256, July.
    20. Tariq, Adeel & Badir, Yuosre F. & Tariq, Waqas & Bhutta, Umair Saeed, 2017. "Drivers and consequences of green product and process innovation: A systematic review, conceptual framework, and future outlook," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 8-23.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:283-:d:66076. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.