T HE MODEL FOR THE STUDY

Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University

32

areas are also relevant for evaluation of environmental policy instruments, which is a new idea for those working in the environmental field”.

3.1.6 Theory-based evaluation research for studies of EMS

Based on the above discussion, “the sequence of various effects which can

‘reasonably’ be linked together” that was formulated in Papers I and II, can now be expressed in a model in terms of intervention theory without a need of reconstruction based on the amendment of the Higher Education Act (Gysen et al., 2002; Fitz-Gibbon & Morris, 1996). It is based on the staircase model of learning (cognitive – affective – conative) order, which means that knowledge comes first and results in attitude change, which is a precondition for action (Vedung, 1997; Weiss, 1997).

The theory describes the sequence of events and changes that should occur in order for the intended outcomes to take place, and forms an appreciation of the effectiveness of the intervention (Vedung 1997; Fitz-Gibbon & Morris, 1996;

Gysen et al., 2002). Although intervention theories describing phenomena such as environmental management system implementation or integration of sustainable development in all university activities are likely to vary in details in different universities, they are based on common assumptions about the sequence of steps that are needed to reach the outcome.

The assumed causal chain provides a number of data-collection points, interim markers or proxies for the study. As it is impossible to capture the whole process, these interim markers provide an “indication” whether the policy intervention is taking place according to the constructed theory. In other words, even though it is not possible now to directly study the ultimate impact, as it is going to take place in the future, it is possible to study the steps taken to reach the goal in the assumed sequence of events.

EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities

sustainable development in society forms the input for the intervention, while the conversion of the input took place in an inquiry process by a government commission (SOU 1996:112) and resulted in the output of the intervention: the Government Directives on EMS implementation to public agencies (Ministry of Environment, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001a, 2001b).

The Government Directives were based on the assumption that an environmental management system (EMS) could be used as a tool to support development towards a more environmentally sustainable society.

This idea was developed further in the amendment of the Higher Education Act in 2006. This amendment indicated that universities should in all their activities work so that present and future generations are assured a healthy and good environment, economic and social welfare, and justice.

The assumptions of the development process, from environmental manage-ment system towards a more sustainable society, are described in the model in Figure 3-2. This model, which has been used to provide structure to the study of the EMS implementation in a university context, can also illustrate the intervention theory and be used to provide structure to the evaluation.

Figure 3-2. Model for the study of SD implementation and integration in university context via EMS.

Source: Combined from Sammalisto & Arvidsson (2005) and Vedung (1997, p. 5).

The interim markers function as proxies of the effectiveness of the Government intervention. They indicate whether the intervention of EMS implementation is stimulating change at a university. They are further seen as an indication of the environmental or sustainability effectiveness of the

Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University

34

intervention (Gysen et al., 2002, p. 14). The interim markers used in this study are presented below.

Output: The Government Directives are assumed to be the output of the intervention in universities, which establish the EMS process and without which, the process would, in most cases, not have started. But there can be other driving forces to the process as well. These factors cause universities to start implementing EMS in the next stage and are studied in Paper I as the first interim marker:

a. driving forces including the role of the Government Directives.

Outcome 1: The implementation of the EMS system is the first outcome within the university organisation. This outcome can be different in different universities, where some do not react in any way, while others introduce elaborate systems and strive for certification of their EMS. The structure of a standardised EMS follows the Plan-Do-Check-Act model and includes the following steps according to ISO 14001: management decision, initial review, policy, planning, implementation and operation, checking and management review. The development of these steps is directly connected to the management decision to implement EMS. Without such a decision, their development is very difficult to motivate. Environmental coordinators then have a key role to play in the implementation process. EMS, according to ISO 14001, also has in its structure repetitive institutionalised evaluations in checking, audits and management review. These are done on an annual basis and are expected to be the drivers for continuous improvement.

Papers I, II and V provide data for the following interim markers:

b. the position of the environmental coordinator;

c. work within the ISO 14001 structure;

d. identification of significant environmental aspects;

e. work with direct and indirect aspects within the EMS; and f. existence of a policy for or including sustainable development.

Outcome 2: Management, faculty and staff need to be trained so that they will have the basic knowledge and awareness of why they should work within the EMS, how the system works, and how they, in the functions they occupy, can contribute to the environmental and sustainability goals of the university. Training and communication are integral parts of implementation and operation of an EMS, and without a decision of EMS implementation substantive training of this kind is unlikely to take place.

EMS – a Way towards SD in Universities

As university faculty and staff are trained, their awareness of their own role increases and they can take action to make changes in their own work.

Without training and communication in connection to EMS, it is difficult to see that this would take place. The management decisions have bearing both on direct and indirect impacts. Everyone is responsible for contributing to the campus management, which results in direct impacts and which constitutes the main impact for non-teaching staff. The main contribution for faculty, dealing primarily with education and research, comes through indirect environmental impacts. The study of the following interim markers is presented in Paper III:

g. participation in environmental training within the EMS;

h. perception of faculty and staff of the connection of EMS to own tasks;

i. appreciation of faculty and staff of how their own tasks have been affected;

j. view of faculty and staff of how they can contribute to sustainable development;

k. motivation of faculty and staff to contribute to the environmental activities of the university; and

l. perception by faculty and staff of personal responsibility for the environmental activities of the university.

Outcome 3: As awareness increases, faculty can integrate environmental and sustainable development content in their courses and research projects.

However, they may need some tools to start the process. An example of this is the procedure for classification of courses and research projects at the University of Gävle, studied in detail during this research. Without such routines included within an EMS, it is less likely that a high level of penetration of such activities will take place. Both faculty and staff also have a possibility to reduce the negative direct impacts of campus management.

The actions of the faculty and staff are assumed to result in increased knowledge, awareness and change in attitude amongst students. Paper IV presents the results of a study consisting of the following interim markers:

m. the level of classification of courses and research applications;

n. type of explanation for the classification; and o. experience of lecturers in making the classifications.

Outcomes 4 and 5: Based on what they learn during their studies, students who graduate from university will make various decisions in both their professional and private spheres that will have bearing on achieving SD.

Without an EMS-like process in a university, it is not likely that a structured

Kaisu Sammalisto, IIIEE, Lund University

36

integration of SD, based on the requirements of the Swedish Higher Education Act, would take place. However, students will make the most of the significant decisions in their future careers and these will be affected by their whole life experience, and cannot therefore be led back only to for example a particular course while attending university. These outcomes remain to be seen in the future, but are discussed in Chapter 6.

The interim markers studied in each of the appended papers are presented in Figure 3-3 below.

Figure 3-3. Flow chart for the study with interim markers in the EMS structure.

The numbers in the figure refer to the corresponding chapters in the ISO 14001 environmental management systems standard.