EMS at universities compared to industry

The step-wise approach to implementation of EMS (Figure 1-2) is applicable to industrial and public organisations. Also the application of the elements of ISO 14001 is similar in industry and universities. However, there are some important differences that are discussed in further detail below. These are for example:

• Different external and internal driving forces in industry and universities. The customer requirements are, for example, rather weak in universities compared to industry.

• Different management culture and organisation, including the attitude to education and training of the personnel.

• Focus on different environmental aspects. Indirect aspects of education and research are, for example, specific for universities.

Different driving forces Financial driving forces

One important driving force for industrial companies to implement EMS is to contribute to profits and to meet the customers’ requirements. However in universities there is a lack of financial incentives to implement EMS. The tax-based public funding for universities, which is based on Government allocation, has not increased proportionally with the increased number of students which now enter higher education. Most changes, for example, the implementation of the Governmental EMS Directive, are therefore expected to take place within a given financial frame. Further, the reduced public funding for research has also increased the financial burden on universities (Sammalisto & Brorson, 2006).

Students as driving forces

The role of university students, as driving forces for sustainable development, may be limited by the relatively short time they stay at the university and on the current attention (low or high) in society to environmental issues. Experiences from the case study in Gävle found considerable variations, from one student batch to another, as to their engagement in environmental issues.

In a broader perspective, there are, however, good examples where students’

involvement in sustainable development did contribute to positive changes

Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University

92

in universities. For example, student-initiated education for sustainable development (ESD) initiatives like CEMUS in Uppsala and DHO in the Netherlands. On the other hand, students, who are ‘buying’ an education can be seen as customers of universities. As the need in society for environmental competence increases, the external interest in students with a documented competence in environmental and sustainability issues is also likely to increase. Conversely, if students, based on their education, are more aware of issues related to sustainable development, they will choose companies that work more seriously with sustainable development and in turn, exercise a market pressure on their future employers.

Different management culture and organisation Different purposes of the organisation

There are several ways to describe organisations in a society. According to Forssell & Jansson (2000), the purpose of a company is to yield profits and to satisfy the owners’ and shareholders’ interests. Conversely, universities exist for the purpose of executing decisions, that is, providing higher education and research for the benefit of society. The target groups can also differ, customers and citizens respectively, although these roles can overlap.

Revenues are the mode of financing for companies, whilst primarily taxes fund public universities. Finally, the basic norms for companies and universities are efficiency and justice, respectively.

Management structures

The positive results of a change process, such as the implementation of an EMS, are often dependent on how well the change can be integrated in the regular structures of an organisation. Industrial companies are often organised in clear chains of command. In comparison to that, universities are characterised by unclear, or non-existent, management structure. This may sound negative, but such a structure may be well-suited for administration of education and research (Forssell & Jansson, 2000).

However, in an individualistic organisation, the implementation of EMS may be seen as a threat to ‘your’ personal expertise or to the loyalty of your specific discipline (Mulder & Jansen, 2006; Sammalisto & Brorson, 2006).

The role of top management in universities is therefore important in creating a vision for environmental improvements and to establish the understanding of the importance of change towards sustainable development. This, in turn, requires sensitivity and courage to take a

EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities

leadership position in an academic organisation with its culture of collegial decision-making.

Environmental training of employees

Implementation of an EMS means a significant change in an organisation. In both industry and in universities, the active and visible engagement and support from top management is essential (Sammalisto & Brorson, 2006;

Sammalisto, 2007a). This can be seen, for example, in training and communication, which play an important role in organisations in both sectors. This is done, both by making the staff aware of the EMS, as well as understanding the purpose of the change and what is now required of them.

The support can also be seen in appointing clear responsibilities and making available resources for those who are leading the implementation work (Sammalisto & Brorson, 2006).

The methods for training management, faculty and staff in both sectors are generally the same, but training in universities provides more of a challenge.

The participation in training for EMS, in industry, is seen as included in one’s regular tasks and it is possible to make participation compulsory. The higher participation in EMS training by the staff in the administrative departments of a university can be compared to the staff in companies; both groups can do it in the frame of their regular activities. From faculty there is a strong resistance to accept and participate in such activities in universities, in the name of academic freedom. Further, the time spent in training, which is not considered a priority, reduces the already limited time for education and research. The training must therefore mainly take place during regular meetings and be adjusted to the academic traditions of discussion and debate, and thus stimulate the creativity of faculty with minimum bureaucracy (Sammalisto, 2007a; Sammalisto & Brorson, 2006).

Follow-up

For industry, follow-up is a natural part of business, in order to be able to make quick changes and retain efficiency and competitiveness. A number of tools and management systems have consequently been developed for this purpose. Universities, often tied to the availability of public financing, are not in the same way subject to fast changes. This can also reduce their interest in follow-up. Furthermore, the fact that it is extremely unusual for the management of a university to receive any questions regarding their EMS process in relation to their budget dialogues, and that the only related

Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University

94

feedback comes in the not-so-widely-read Swedish EPA Report, do not constitute strong drivers for university management either.

Focus on different environmental aspects

Direct environmental aspects are likely to dominate in industry and in the service departments of universities. In the departments engaged in natural sciences, medicine and technology, it is also relatively easy to see the connection to the disciplines and their structured way to work (Sammalisto

& Lindhqvist, 2007). In departments dealing with social sciences, on the other hand, words and their definitions play an important role. The indirect aspects and dimensions of sustainable development, other than solely the environment, dominate. In this respect they are similar to R&D departments of industries and need more time to discuss and to see the relevant connections to sustainable development. From industry, universities can learn a more structured way to work, and see the opportunities of such an approach, instead of taking this as a threat. This does not need to compromise academic freedom or creativity. Industry, in their turn, can learn from universities how to work with other dimensions of sustainability and interactive training methods and evaluation.