5. RESULTS
5.2 EMS IMPLEMENTATION
Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University
66
not participate in the study. The respondents represent the large universities, as well as, the smaller ones. They represent the universities with a broad profile (wide variety of academic disciplines), and, the ones with more targeted or narrow specialisation fields. As the community of environmental coordinators and managers in Sweden is fairly limited, it is possible for a person, active in this field for a number of years, to create an overall picture of the various universities and the situation concerning the implementation of environmental management systems.
It is more difficult to analyze, whether the persons responsible for the environmental management reports (1999 and 2000) and the respondents to the surveys (2003 and 2006) are able to fully judge the real drivers and barriers for the implementation of environmental management systems. In all cases, it is clear that such a question will reflect the subjective evaluation of the respondents – the persons filling in the survey forms and, in the case of the environmental management reports, the persons responsible for drafting the reports, with a certain influence from persons in top management who are responsible for signing the reports. However, it does not seem likely that the issue would be seen as a sensitive question when addressed in the environmental management reports or in the surveys.
Consequently, there is little reason to suspect a specific bias as to the answers. The fact that several of the drivers however changed magnitude between 1999 and 2000, in less than one year, must be interpreted as an illustration of the difficulty to precisely determine what the leading drivers and barriers are for such a complex process (in this case the implementation of EMS in universities).
EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities
factual nature. Consequently, it was also possible to compare with information supplied in other reports and informational materials, such as university web-sites.
A remaining concern is the risk pertaining to the different interpretations of terminology, which, for instance, can be seen in the way environmental training for staff has been put forward as an indirect environmental aspect by some respondents in the 2003 survey. This problem is, however, deemed by the author as not influencing the main picture to a very high degree.
When it comes to the number and composition of the survey respondents, the same conclusions as above are relevant. There is no significant reason to assume that the universities that answered the surveys will differ significantly from other universities in Sweden who did not participate in the survey.
5.2.1 Environmental coordinators
Environmental coordinators or managers often lead and coordinate the work within the implementation of an EMS. Therefore it is interesting to study the connection between how the environmental work is organised, and where the environmental coordinator is placed within a university’s organisation. Two main patterns emerge: the coordinator has a function or presence in the building or service department, or works in an administrative position in the president’s office. Having the goal of EMS certification increases the likelihood of the environmental coordinator being located in the president’s office (Sammalisto & Arvidsson, 2005). This also provides one possible explanation for whether a university will limit the EMS work to greening the campus, which primarily works in relation to the direct environmental effects. Or, on the other hand, whether the environmental coordinator will take a more strategic approach and also focus on the integration of sustainability within the curricula and research.
5.2.2 Working within the ISO 14001 structure
Making a hierarchy of priorities, by identifying significant environmental aspects, (based on an initial environmental review) is a key task when implementing an EMS, since it enables an organisation to focus on its most significant environmental impacts. It illustrates how the organisation is able to take advantage of the EMS cycle, that is, the structured approach devised by the system. The environmental policy should, according to the ISO
Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University
68
14001 standard, be specific for an organisation, be based on its significant environmental aspects, and show the overall intentions of the organisation.
Here some universities deviated from a structured EMS approach, for example by creating a policy, objectives and targets without first making an environmental review and without prioritising their environmental aspects accordingly (Sammalisto, 2004, p. 8).
Figure 5-3 illustrates the progress of EMS implementation in the Swedish public universities in 2003. By that year, 97% of the universities had created environmental policies, but 13% of them had done so without first prioritising their environmental aspects. During the period of the study, (1999-2003) only 9% of universities had revised their environmental policy and 16% their choice of relevant environmental aspects (Sammalisto, 2004).
Universities were also slow to begin conducting environmental audits, which are required periodically in an ISO 14001 certified system. The main reason to engage in audits was an aim for certification, in which 10% of universities either had or were aiming at (Sammalisto & Arvidsson, 2005; see Figure 5-4).
Figure 5-3. The EMS progress as reported by 27 Swedish public universities in 2003.
Source: Sammalisto (2004).
EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities
University Direc
tive year Annual report for 2003 Performed review Significant aspects Environmental policy Environmental objectives Environmental targets Training faculty and staff Training management EMS in Strategic plans Internal audits Third party audits Certified/Aims at certification Revised aspects/review 2003 Revised policy
Lund University 1997 1
Stockholm University 1997 1
Göteborg University 1998 1 2004
Umeå University 1998 1
Linköping University 1998 1
Royal Institute of Technology 1998 1
Mid Sweden University 1998 1 resting
Mälardalen University 1998 1 1999
University of Gävle 1998 1 2004
Uppsala University 1999 1
Karolinska Institutet 1999 1
Karlstad University 1999 1
Växjö University 1999 1
Örebro University 1999 1
Kalmar University 1999 1
University of Borås 1999 1
Halmstad University 1999 1
Kristianstad University 1999 1
University of Skövde 1999 1
Malmö University 2000 1
Gotland University 2000 1
University West in Sweden 2000 1
Stockholm Institute of Education 2000 1
Södertörn University 2000
Luleå University of Technology 2001 1
Blekinge Institute of Technology 2001 1
Dalarna University 2001 1
Stockholm University of Physical Ed. and Sports 2001 1
University College of Dance 2001
University College of Film, Radio, TV and Theatre 2001 University of Arts, Crafts and Design 2001 1
Royal University of Fine Arts 2001 1
The Royal University of Music in Stockholm 2001 1
University of Opera 2001 1
University of Acting in Stockholm 2001 1
Figure 5-4. Progress in EMS implementation in Swedish universities in 2003 Source: Annual environmental management reports for 2003
In 2006 all universities indicated having an environmental policy. Of this, 47% had a policy for, or including, sustainable development. 77% of all these policies included education and research (Sammalisto, 2007a).
Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University
70
5.2.3 Identifying significant environmental aspects
As described above in Section 5.2.2, identifying significant environmental aspects, out of the organisation’s all environmental aspects, is the basis for finding the priorities for activities within an organisation’s EMS. The most frequently identified significant environmental aspects for the year 2003 (cf.
also Figure 5-5), as well as the results for the direct environmental aspects in 2006, are described below. The results for the indirect aspects are presented in connection to Outcome 3 in Section 5.4.
The work with direct environmental aspects, such as use of energy, travel and transportation, waste and waste management, purchase and procurement, use of paper, chemicals and hazardous waste, which were initially classified as the most significant environmental aspects, appeared at first to be no problem for universities. However, it soon turned out that there were little available data outside of the financial, employment and student statistics, which was required in annual reporting already for a long time. Even legal environmental requirements concerning universities were mainly unknown (Sammalisto, 2004, p. 5).
Figure 5-5: Prioritised environmental direct and indirect aspects as classified and reported by 27 universities in 2003.
Source: Sammalisto (2004). The designation of environmental training for staff as indirect environmental aspect was made by a few universities in their reports.
All universities reported working with the direct environmental aspects within their EMS in 2006. As illustrated in Figure 5-6 most universities can
EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities
report a reduced use of energy for heating, cooling and electricity, and a reduced use of paper by between 10% and 31% from 2001 to 2006. This was mainly due to double-sided copying and printing. Reduced amounts of unsorted waste, due to improved waste management and increased recycling, are also reported. For instance, the waste handling costs of the University of Gävle were reduced by over 50% from 2005 to 2006 (Högskolan i Gävle, 2007). Improved handling of chemicals, transport arrangements and environmental requirements in procurement are also reported (Sammalisto, 2007a; Swedish EPA, 2006).
Figure 5-6. Percentage of universities reporting improvements in various direct environ-mental aspects due to EMS based on replies from 17 (45%) of Swedish universities.
Source: Sammalisto (2007a).