The use o Eco-e iciency Indica o s by En i onmen al F on unne Companies
Iñaki He as-Saiza bi o ia
Depa men o Managemen
Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y UPV-EHU
Ma ía Ga cía
Depa men o Applied Economics I
Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y UPV-EHU
Oli ie Boi al
Depa men o Managemen
Uni e si é La al
Albe o Díaz de Jungui u
Depa men o Applied Economics I
Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y UPV-EHU
Abs ac
Eco-e iciency is conside ed as a ele an p ac ice o co po a e sus ainabili y as his
concep add esses bo h en i onmen al and economic issues. Simila ly, eco-e icien
indica o s a e seen as use ul ins umen o co po a e en i onmen al managemen . The
li e a u e has s udied he use o eco-e icien indica o s by companies om di e en sec o s
o ac i i y bu he analysis o he use o eco-e icien indica o s by en i onmen al
on unne companies om di e se sec o s o ac i i y has been o e looked. The e o e, he
aim o his pape is o con ibu e o he li e a u e analysing he use o eco-e icien
indica o s by en i onmen al on unne companies. Fo ha pu pose he case o companies
egis e ed agains he Eco-Managemen and Audi Scheme (EMAS) is analysed, as he
adop ion o his scheme is associa ed o en i onmen al on unne companies in bo h
p ac i ione and schola ly li e a u es. Based on a con en analysis o hi d-pa y e i ied
en i onmen al s a emen s o 387 EMAS- egis e ed Spanish o ganiza ions, a gene al lack
o use o eco-e icien indica o s was ound. Mo e speci ically, he esul s show ha only
close o 39% o he 10,337 analysed indica o s we e calcula ed wi h minimum eco-
e iciency c i e ia o measu e co po a e en i onmen al pe o mance. Implica ions o
manage s, public policy make s as well as o he s akeholde s a e discussed.
Key wo ds: Eco-e iciency, Indica o s, Co po a e En i onmen al Managemen , Eco-
Managemen and Audi Scheme, EMAS, En i onmen al Repo ing.
Classi ica ion: Resea ch pape
He as-Saiza bi o ia, I., Ga cía, M., Boi al, O., & de Jungui u, A. D. (2020). The use o eco-e iciency indica o s
by en i onmen al on unne companies. Ecological Indica o s, 115, 106451.
This is he Accep ed Manusc ip e sion o a Published Wo k ha appea ed in inal o m in Ecological Indica o s 115 : (2020) / A . ID 106451.
To access he inal edi ed and published wo k see h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106451
© 2020. This manusc ip e sion is made a ailable unde he CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Acco ding o Long e al. (2015), eco-e iciency is de ined as he abili y o companies o
p oduce goods o se ices ei he by sa ing ene gy and esou ces, and/o by educing was e
and emissions. Eco-e iciency, unde s ood as a p oduc i i y imp o emen h ough he
minimiza ion o esou ce consump ion, was e and pollu ion, ‘appea s o be a s a egic
p io i y o imp o ing bo h compe i i eness and en i onmen al pe o mance’ (Kabongo
and Boi al, 2017, p. 956). Eco-e icien indica o s (EEIs) a e seen as use ul ins umen o
sus ainabili y analysis (Zhou e al., 2018) a di e en le els such as he co po a ion le el.
In he li e a u e, eco-e iciency a he co po a ion o i m le el ends o be calcula ed as he
a io o he alue o a p oduc o i s en i onmen al impac (e.g., Huppes and Ishikawa,
2005; Chen, 2009; Picazo-Tadeo e al., 2011).
The li e a u e has analysed he use o EEIs o di e en sec o s o ac i i y such as he ood
and be e age indus y (Maxime e al., 2006; Inga amo e al., 2009), he o es y sec o
(Koskela and Vehmas, 2012), he u ban anspo (Mo ia y and Wang, 2015), and he
building sec o (Ruschi e al., 2014). Ne e heless, he analysis o he use o EEIs by
en i onmen al on unne o leade companies om di e se sec o s o ac i i y has been
o e looked in he li e a u e, wi h he no able excep ion o he wo k o E kko e al. (2005)
published i een yea s ago wi h da a om 1999 o 2001 (see he nex sec ion o an analysis
o he main ou comes o his s udy).
The analysis o he use o EEIs by en i onmen al leade companies is ele an o a leas
wo easons. Fi s , as unde lined by Ch is mann (2000), a g owing body o schola ly
esea ch on co po a e en i onmen al managemen ocuses on iden i ying bes p ac ices
aimed a educing he nega i e impac o companies on he na u al en i onmen and a
con ibu ing o hei compe i i e ad an age. Acco ding o Ma hews (2003), compa ing
en i onmen al p ac ices ‘ o ind leade s and lagge s in en i onmen al pe o mance is
essen ial o mo ing businesses close o e ec i e p ac ices’ (Ma hews, 2003; p. 95).
Simila ly, in he schola ly li e a u e (e.g. Al es and Medei os, 2015; Passe i and Tenucci,
2016) eco-e iciency is conside ed as an impo an bes p ac ice o co po a e sus ainabili y
in a ious s udies, as his concep add esses bo h en i onmen al and economic issues,
which is essen ial o mos companies. F om his pe spec i e, he ocus on he use o EEIs
by on unne companies migh con ibu e o his body o li e a u e. Second, om a mo e
p ac ical pe spec i e, he ocus on on unne companies, as i is also he case o bes
en i onmen al p ac ices o bes -in-class cases, migh se e as a guide o co po a e
sus ainabili y benchma king. In he li e a u e, en i onmen al benchma king has been
poin ed ou as a key aspec o aise awa eness and a enues o imp o emen o co po a e
en i onmen al managemen om bo h he heo e ical (e.g., Ch is mann, 2000; Sa kis,
2003) and p ac ical pe spec i es (e.g., Taylo e al., 2003; Siwa and Ha izan, 2009; Ve ie
e al., 2014; Tuokuu e al., 2019).
Taking he gap e idenced in he li e a u e in o accoun , he aim o his wo k is o shed ligh
on he use o EEIs by en i onmen al on unne companies. Fo ha pu pose, he analysis
will ocused on he Eco-Managemen and Audi Scheme (EMAS)- egis e ed companies.
Bo h in he p ac i ione (e.g., Hilla y, 2017) and schola ly li e a u es (e.g., Bonilla-P iego
and A ilés-Palacios, 2008), s anda ds and schemes such as EMAS ha e been associa ed o
en i onmen al on unne companies. These companies a e supposed o implemen
o ganisa ional en i onmen al managemen p ac ices aimed a he con inuous imp o emen
o hei en i onmen al pe o mance (Pe osillo e al., 2012).
The emainde o his pape is o ganized as ollows: i s , he li e a u e e iew is ca ied
ou and he esea ch ques ion is de ined. Second, he analysis me hods a e p esen ed. Thi d,
he esul s o he con en analysis o EMAS- egis e ed companies’ s a emen s a e
desc ibed. Finally, he conclusions a e p esen ed and he con ibu ions made by his
esea ch a e iden i ied.
1. In oduc ion
The eco-e iciency concep o companies was de eloped by he Wo ld Business Council
o Sus ainable De elopmen (WBCSD) in he ea ly 1990s (Maxime e al., 2006). E kko
e al. (2005) de ined i as a combina ion o economic and en i onmen al e iciencies,
exp essed by he ollowing a io om he company’s pe spec i e:
Eco − e iciency = economic alue (added)
en i onmen al impac (added)
As unde lined by E kko e al. (2005), apa om he p oposal made by he WBCSD,
di e en measu emen al e na i es o EEIs ha e been p oposed by di e en o ganiza ions,
such as he In e na ional O ganiza ion o S anda diza ion (ISO), he Uni ed Na ions
En i onmen P og amme (UNEP), and he Uni ed Na ions Con e ence on T ade and
De elopmen (UNCTAD). Fo example, he key aspec o he ISO 14031 s anda d is o
desc ibe and discuss in de ail he ype o indica o s aimed a measu ing he en i onmen al
pe o mance o companies (Chang and Tsai, 2015). As unde lined by E kko e al. (2005),
despi e EEIs being seen as a co po a e in e nal managemen ool, he WBCSD sugges s o
epo hese indica o s as pa o a company’s en i onmen al epo .
The schola ly li e a u e has analysed he use o EEIs o di e en sec o s o ac i i y (e.g.,
Maxime e al., 2006; Inga amo e al., 2009; Koskela and Vehmas, 2012; Wang and
Mo ia y, 2015; Ruschi e al., 2014). Fo example, Rönnlund (2016) de eloped a
amewo k o EEIs as an en i onmen al sus ainabili y benchma king ool o p oduc s
om he me allu gical indus y. Simila ly, Maxime e al. (2006) analysed EEIs o build a
amewo k o he Canadian ood and be e age indus y and Inga amo e al. (2009) s udied
he EEIs o a se o co po a ions in A gen ina and Mexico om he suga cane p ocessing
indus y. Simila ly, i could be also men ioned ha Wang e al. (2016) analysed he
applica ions o hese indica o s o he Chinese cemen -based ma e ials indus y.
Su p isingly, as s a ed p e iously, only he wo k o E kko e al. (2005) has ocused on
en i onmen al on unne s, mo e speci ically EMAS- egis e ed companies. The EMAS
scheme is he mos demanding e e ence sys em o adop En i onmen al Managemen
Sys ems (EMSs) in companies. The EMAS scheme was launched in 1993 as a ool o sel -
egula ion in addi ion o compulso y public egula ions (Tes a e al., 2014; Daddi e al.,
2018). As unde lined by Mon obbio and Soli o (2018), acco ding o he p e ailing
schola ly li e a u e, se e al ad an ages a e associa ed wi h he adop ion o EMSs, including
he posi i e impac on en i onmen al pe o mance, ene gy e iciency, sel - epo ed
echnical and o ganiza ional inno a ions, egula o y compliance, human capi al, ma ke
pe o mance, and he i m’s image pe o mance.
Gene ally speaking, he EMAS scheme is associa ed o on unne companies, as i is seen
as he s ic e exis ing sys em o leas o wo easons (Daddi e al., 2011; Chia ini, 2017;
He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2016, 2020). Fi s , EMAS equi es a clea compliance o
en i onmen al laws and egula ions in a con inuous en i onmen al imp o emen
pe spec i e, which has no been he case o o he EMS schemes o s anda ds (e.g. ISO
14001) as unde lined in he li e a u e (e.g. Mo ow and Rondinelli, 2002; Blackman, 2012;
He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2016). Second, he EMAS- egis e ed companies mus publish
annually an en i onmen al s a emen including hei de ailed co po a e en i onmen al
indica o s e i ied and alida ed by an independen hi d-pa y (Daddi e al., 2011; Tes a
e al., 2018). The ela ionship be ween en i onmen al epo ing p ac ices and sus ainabili y
pe o mance imp o emen has been widely deba ed in he li e a u e. Acco ding o he
olun a y disclosu e heo y, ‘companies wi h be e en i onmen al pe o mance due o an
unobse able p oac i e en i onmen al s a egy ha e an incen i e o use disclosu e o signal
his s a egy o in es o s and o he ele an s akeholde s’ (Cho e al. 2012, p. 489-90). The
disclosu es included in he EMAS s a emen makes i possible o a egis e ed company o
in o m hei s akeholde s. Companies can be d i en by he need o dis inguish hemsel es
2. Li e a u e e iew and esea ch ques ion
om poo -pe o ming compe i o s and o imp o e hei epu a ion by showing publicly
ha d- o-imi a e sus ainabili y s a egies. Due o he abo emen ioned and o he simila
aspec s, EMAS- egis e ed companies a e seen as en i onmen al on unne s (e.g.,
Naw ocka and Pa ke , 2009; Gal ez-Ma os e al., 2013; Mon obbio and Soli o, 2018).
Indeed, egula o y au ho i ies a a ious le els a e o e ing possible con ol elie o
en i onmen al on unne s (Naw ocka and Pa ke , 2009; Tes a e al., 2016).
As unde lined by E kko e al. (2005), despi e eco-e iciency being no men ioned among
he objec i es o EMAS, i could be assumed ha his a he simple no ion migh be
included in he en i onmen al p ac ices o EMAS- egis e ed i ms o a leas h ee easons.
Fi s , mos o he EMAS- egis e ed companies ecei e he help o ex e nal consul an s
specialized in he implemen a ion o EMSs (Ammenbe g, 2003). Second, en i onmen al
s a emen s a e alida ed by an ex e nal e i ie (He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2020) and his
ype o ac i i y is aimed a p o iding eliabili y and legi ima ion in he eyes o he di e en
s akeholde s (Boi al and Gend on 2011; He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2013). Thi d, he EMAS
equi emen s on en i onmen al indica o s lead o a be e acking o cos s and bene i s
ela ed o en i onmen al p ac ices, which leads o a be e con ol and measu emen o eco-
e iciency (Hen i e al., 2014; He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2011).
In hei analysis o he en i onmen al s a emen s o 40 Finnish companies mos ly om he
pulp and pape indus y, E kko e al. (2005) epo ed a e y weak use o EEIs by EMAS-
egis e ed o ganiza ions. Ne e heless, his analysis was ca ied ou in he ea ly yea s o
he EMAS scheme dissemina ion ( he analysed s a emen s we e issued be ween 1999 and
2001). Fu he mo e, he de elopmen o he EMAS ce i ica ion owa ds a mo e de ailed
and pe haps mo e demanding scheme has o be conside ed. Fo example, he la es e sion
o his scheme—EMAS III, which came in o o ce in 2010—included some ele an
changes, one o he mos no ewo hy being he inclusion o Sec o al Re e ence Documen s
(SRDs) (He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2020). These SRDs p opose benchma ks and bes
p ac ices o en i onmen al managemen , including speci ic guides o implemen EEIs.
The e o e, as jus i ied be o e, ying o con ibu e o ill he gap ound in he li e a u e, his
s udy aims o espond o he ollowing esea ch ques ion: A e EEIs used in en i onmen al
on unne companies such as he EMAS- egis e ed companies?
3. Me hods
In o de o answe he esea ch ques ion, an explo a o y empi ical s udy was planned. The
s udy ocused on Spain, one o he Eu opean Union membe s a es whe e EMAS has been
mos widely dissemina ed in bo h absolu e and ela i e e ms (He as-Saiza bi o ia e al.,
2015). The da a o 387 EMAS- egis e ed companies was ob ained om he EU EMAS
Helpdesk se ice o he Eu opean Commission. The EMAS s a emen s we e ob ained om
he websi es o hese egis e ed companies.
In o de o gi e a b oad and ich pic u e o he use o EEIs by he EMAS- egis e ed
companies, he analysis was ca ied ou in wo s ages. As unde lined by Mülle and S u m,
EEIs ‘a e mos use ul and meaning ul i hey a e disclosed o e ime’ (Mülle and S u m,
2001, p. 15). The i s s age was pe o med in 2013 and he second one six yea s la e , in
2019. In he i s s age, 160 s a emen s om he same amoun o companies we e analysed.
In he second s age, 227 s a emen s/companies we e analysed. Table 1 summa izes he
numbe o companies and indica o s analysed as well as hei sec o al b eakdown. O e all,
he en i onmen al s a emen s o 387 companies om six sec o s o ac i i y and 10,337
indica o s disclosed by hese companies we e analysed. These six sec o s o ac i i y we e
chosen due o hei high en i onmen al impac and hei high numbe o EMAS egis a ion
(He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2015). The s a emen s analysed in he i s s age anged om
2007 o 2009, while he s a emen s analysed in he second s age anged om 2015 o 2018.
Acco ding o he EMAS scheme, he en i onmen al s a emen s a e public and he e o e
anyone should ha e access o hem easily and ee o cha ge. Mos o he s a emen s we e
ob ained om he companies’ websi es. Howe e , some o hem we e mo e di icul o
ob ain, as (su p isingly) he companies did no publish hem on hei websi es. In hese
cases, we eques ed hem by e-mail o elephone. O hese companies, h ee we e eluc an
o p o ide us wi h hei en i onmen al s a emen s.
All he s a emen s e ie ed we e published as PDF documen s. The documen s scanned as
images we e con e ed o ex h ough an OCR so wa e. O e all, he inal sample o ex
analysed ep esen s app oxima ely 5,000 single-spaced pages. This in o ma ion was
ex ac ed, ca ego ized and analysed by wo esea che s using an analysis g id. The
quali a i e and quan i a i e in o ma ion o each EMAS s a emen was compiled in a se
o Excel sp eadshee s. The in o ma ion was hen e iewed sepa a ely by a hi d esea che
wi h an assessmen p o ocol, as ecommended in specialis li e a u e on he subjec , in o de
o imp o e he alidi y and eliabili y o he analysis (Sch eie , 2012). The in o ma ion was
analysed using desc ip i e s a is ical echniques oge he wi h con en analysis me hod, a
p ocess o sys ema ically classi ying he collec ed da a (S emle , 2001; Sch eie , 2012).
The main indings o his analysis a e summa ized in he nex sec ion.
Table 1. Sec o al b eakdown o analysed o ganiza ions and indica o s by ieldwo k s age
2013 2018 To al
Sec o No. Fi ms No. Indica o s No. Fi ms No. Indica o s No. Fi ms No. Indica o s
Chemical 24 743 24 1,118 48 1,861
Building 37 658 39 894 76 1,552
Food &
Be e age
14 507 28 995 42 1,502
P in ing 11 402 14 218 25 620
Tou ism 64 1,683 112 2,647 176 4,330
Re ail T ade 10 220 10 252 20 472
To al 160 4,213 227 6,124 387 10,337
Sou ce: p epa ed by he au ho s.
4. Resul s
Figu e 1 and Table 2 summa ize some o he main indings o he analysis. Wi h ega d o
he analysis, i has o be highligh ed ha he case was elimina ed o hose indica o s o
en i onmen al aspec s ha make i mo e di icul o use in an eco-e icien pe spec i e.
This is he case o he en i onmen al impac p oduced by he main enance o speci ic
acili ies. Fo example, he swimming pools in ho els ( ou ism sec o ) equi e a cons an
consump ion o esou ces o i s co ec use (e.g., pH alues, BOD5 measu ed as mgO2/L,
suspended solids measu ed as mg/L), ega dless o he numbe o gues s.
Figu e 1. Use o EEIs by sec o o ac i i y and s age o he analysis
Sou ce: p epa ed by he au ho s. No e: ‘To al’ co esponds o he wo s ages, wi h he p opo ions a e
calcula ed ela ed o he o al ammoun o he indica o s and no as an a e age o he a e ages wo s ages.
In Table 2 he z- es (Z1 and Z2) o sample p opo ions we e used o iden i y he s a is ical
di e ences be ween he wo s ages o he analysis (Z1) —2013 and 2018— and he sec o al
b eakdown among he six indus ies(Z2).
The Z1- es esul s o he wo s ages showed s ong suppo o he hypo hesys o di e en
p opo ion o EEIs ela ed o he ‘To al’ e e ence ca ego y, o he case o he Tou ism
and Re ail T ade indus ies (p < 0.01), ma ginal suppo o he Cons uc ion and Food and
Be e age indus ies (p < 0.05), and weak suppo o P in ing (p < 0.1). The esul also
showed a signi ican di e ence (p < 0.01) in he p opo ion o EEIs be ween 2013 and 2018
o he whole sample. The Z2- es analised he sec o al b eakdown, compa ing he ‘To al’
e e ece ca ego y again s he analysed sec o s. The Z2- es esul s indica ed ha he
p opo ion o EEIs o he e e ence ca ego y was signi ican ly di e en in h ee o he six
analysed indus ies(p < 0.01).
Table 2. S a is ical signi icance analysis o he use o EEIs by sec o and s age
% o EEIs o he o al numbe o indica o s analysed
2013
2018 Signi .
(Z1- alue)
To al ( wo
s ages)
Signi .
(Z2- alue)
Chemical 36.20% 35.18% 0.45 35.39% -3.24***
Building 37.84% 43.18% -2.11** 40.92% 1.79*
Food & Be e age 28.99% 34.65% -2.21** 32.74% -5.28***
P in ing 39.00% 47.02% -1.93* 41.82% 1.78*
Tou ism 25.25% 53.87% -18.56*** 41.22% 2.80***
Re ail T ade 30.00% 46.50% -3.67*** 38.81% -0.03
To al 32.88% 43.40% -10.77*** 38.87% Re e ence Ca ego y
Sou ce: p epa ed by he au ho s. ‘To al’ co esponds o he wo s ages and he p opo ions a e calcula ed
ela ed o he o al amoun o he indica o s and no as an a e age o he a e ages wo s ages. Z- es con as s
whe he di e ences be ween s ages (Z1) and indus ies(Z2) a e s a is ically signi ican . * , **and *** ep esen
s a is ical signi icance a he 10%, 5% and 1% signi icance le els, espec i ely
Simila ly, an imp o emen in he use o EEIs be ween he wo pe iods in which he analysis
was pe o med can be obse ed. On a e age, he e has been an imp o emen in he use o
EEIs om an a e age o 32.88% in 2013 o 43.40% in 2018. On a sec o al basis, he
imp o emen expe ienced by companies om he Tou ism sec o (wi h a mo e han 28
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
Chemical Building Food & Be e age P in ing Tou ism Re ail T ade To al
2013 2018 To al
pe cen age poin imp o emen ) should be highligh ed. Con e sely, he companies o he
Chemical sec o had expe ienced a one pe cen age poin wo sening and he Food &
Be e age sec o had expe ienced a low imp o emen o 5 pe cen age poin s.
Howe e , i he a e age da a o he use o EEIs is analysed, he esul s a e weak, bo h in
2013 and 2018, conside ing ha he analysed companies a e leading companies in e ms o
en i onmen al awa eness and in oduc ion o en i onmen al p ac ices. I should be
emembe ed ha hese p ac ices ha e no only been e alua ed by he in e nal s a o he
companies analysed, bu he en i onmen al objec i es and indica o s included in he
en i onmen al s a emen s ha is made public ha e also been e i ied by an expe ienced
ex e nal pa y.
Beyond his desc ip i e analysis, a se o good and bad p ac ices o he use o EEIs has
been summa ized om he analysis made wi h he en i onmen al s a emen s (please see
Table 3). The ‘good p ac ices’ e e o he use o minimum eco-e iciency c i e ia o he
de ini ion o indica o s, while he bad ones ep esen a ew illus a i e examples o he
absence o his ype o c i e ia. In o he wo ds, he ‘good p ac ices’ included in Table 3
show he app op ia e measu emen uni s ha allow o epo he da a in a compa able and
anspa en way, which is no he case o he measu emen uni s used in he bad p ac ices.
All he companies in he sample show basic en i onmen al pe o mance indica o s in hei
en i onmen al s a emen s (ene gy consump ion, consump ion o ma e ials, wa e
consump ion, gene a ion o was e, e c.). As minimum ‘good p ac ices’ in he de ini ion o
indica o s, hose in which he en i onmen al impac is measu ed in ela ion o he
p oduc ion igu es should be unde lined. This is he case o many companies in he
Chemical and he Food and Be e age sec o s whe e he EEIs a e de ined in ela ion o hei
p oduc ion (in physical uni s). Fo example, wa e consump ion de ined as he amoun o
wa e consumed in m3 pe on o p oduc ion (m3/ p oduc ion), elec ici y consump ion
de ined as megawa hou s pe on o p oduc ion (MW⋅h/ p oduc ion), o was e gene a ed
measu ed in kilog ams pe on o p oduc ion (kg/ p oduc ion). Likewise, i should be
poin ed ou ha since he EMAS egula ion allows, o con iden iali y easons, he
p o ision o da a e e ing o p oduc ion as index numbe s (assigning he alue 100 o a
e e ence yea ), app oxima ely 30% o he companies analysed in hese wo sec o s used
hese index numbe s. Ob iously, he use o his kind o indica o s gi es e y poo
in o ma ion on he e olu ion o he en i onmen al pe o mance o he companies analysed.
Table 3. Examples o good and bad p ac ices iden i ied in he analysis (selec ion)
Tou ism Chemical Re ail T ade
Scope
Good
P ac ices
Bad
P ac ices
Good P ac ices
Bad
P ac ices
Good P ac ices Bad
P ac ices
Wa e
consump ion
L/gues
⋅
nigh
To al m3 m3/p oduc ion m3/yea
m3/employee o
housands o
cus ome s
To al m3
Elec. Powe
consump ion kW
⋅
h/s ay To al kW
⋅
h kW
⋅
h/p oduc i
on kW
⋅
h kW
⋅
h/employee
o opening hou s
kW
⋅
h
Gas
consump ion kg
⋅
m3/s ay To al kg
⋅
m3
GJ/p oduc ion GJ kg/cus ome To al kg
Diesel
consump ion L/s ay To al kg kW
⋅
h/p oduc i
on kW
⋅
h L/100km
( ehicles) L
Consump ion
o ba e ies,
ae osols, e c.
kg o
uni s/s ay
To al kg o
uni s /p oduc ion To al kg/employee o
cus ome To al kg
Pape
consump ion kg/s ay To al kg /p oduc ion To al kg/cus ome To al
kg/cen e
GHG
emissions CO2eq/s ay
CO2eq CO2eq/p oduc
ion /employee
Was e kg/s ay To al kg /p oduc ion To al kg/employee o
cus ome To al kg
Sou ce: p epa ed by he au ho s.
In he Building, P in ing and Re ail T ade sec o s, mos o he indica o s ha inco po a e a
minimum eco-e iciency c i e ion a e de ined in ela ion o he numbe o employees: o
example CO2 emissions (CO2eq/employee) o diesel consump ion (GJ/employee) pe
employee. In he Tou ism sec o , he EEIs a e mainly de ined in ela ion o he numbe o
s ays in he accommoda ions: o example, gas consump ion (kW⋅h/s ay) o elec ici y
consump ion (kW⋅h/s ay) pe s ay. As examples o ‘good p ac ices,’ i should e e o a se
o indica o s de ined in ela ion o he u no e o he company (e.g., pape consump ion
in /million €), he numbe o cus ome s (e.g., packaging consump ion in /clien ), and he
numbe o opening hou s (e.g., elec ici y consump ion in kW⋅h/opening hou s). O he
examples o good p ac ices a e as ollows: pe cen age o ene gy consump ion gene a ed by
enewable ene gy sou ces o indica o s such as he weigh o a gi en package pe o al
weigh o he p oduc .
I is wo h men ioning ha none o he companies analysed used he added alue as a
denomina o o calcula ing he EEIs, despi e he ac ha he EMAS scheme es ablishes i
as a igu e o indica e he o e all annual p oduc ion in he calcula ion o he indica o s
(EMAS, 2019). Likewise, some au ho s such as Mülle and S u m (2001) ecommend i ,
as he ‘ alue added is he mos app op ia e inancial i em’ (Mülle and S u m, 2001, p.31).
Simila ly, in he en i onmen al s a emen s analysed, eco-e iciency c i e ia in he
de ini ion o basic en i onmen al pe o mance indica o s we e equen ly comple ely
absen o he mos o he s a emen s analysed. As illus a i e examples, we can men ion
he cases in which wa e consump ion is exp essed only in m3, o he amoun o was e
gene a ed exp essed only in ons, o he amoun o CO2 emi ed in o he a mosphe e
measu ed in kg/yea o as a concen a ion (mg/m3 o ppm).
In wo o he en i onmen al s a emen s analysed, i was ound ha he companies ha e
c ea ed hei own composi e indica o s. This is he case o a weigh ed index ha an EMAS-
egis e ed company calls he ‘Global Emissions Index’ in which i conside s oge he some
emissions in o he a mosphe e, some discha ges in o wa e , he gene a ion o haza dous
and non-haza dous was e, and hei eco e y. I is in e es ing o no e ha he weigh ing
ac o s used a e in e sely p opo ional o hose o he h esholds es ablished in he Spanish
Regis e o Emissions and Pollu an Sou ces (known as PRTR in Spain). The second case
is an indica o named by he company as ‘IndicA’ based on he audi by poin s. I should
be no ed ha in nei he case does he me hodology used in he cons uc ion o hese
indica o s appea in he en i onmen al s a emen s o p o ide a clea explana ion o he
i ems e alua ed. As a esul , i is impossible o know whe he he eco-e iciency c i e ia
ha e been used o hei calcula ion.
Finally, in o de o be e con ex ualize he poo pe o mance o EMAS- egis e ed
companies, i is also in e es ing o shed ligh on he use by he analysed companies o he
SRDs published in EMAS III o de ine hei indica o s. Companies analysed in he i s
s age o he ieldwo k ha e o be excluded om his analysis, since hei en i onmen al
s a emen s we e published be o e he implemen a ion o he SRDs. Companies analysed in
he second s age should show an imp o emen in ela ion o hese guidelines. Howe e , in
he con en analysis ca ied ou , his in luence was no de ec ed in he companies analysed
in he second s age.
Table 4. Examples o guides o implemen EEIs by he SRD o he Tou ism sec o
En i onmen al pe o mance indica o
Benchma k o excellence
Wa e consump ion pe gues -nigh
(L/gues
⋅
nigh )
Wa e consump ion, and associa ed ene gy
consump ion o wa e hea ing, o ≤ 100 L
and 3.0 kW⋅h pe gues -nigh , espec i ely,
o ensui e gues ba h ooms
Ene gy consump ion o wa e hea ing
(kW
⋅
h/gues
⋅
nigh )
See abo e
Flow a es o showe s, ba h oom aps,
u inals, and oile lushes (L/min o L/ lush)
Showe low a e ≤ 7 L/min, ba h oom ap
low a e ≤ 6 L/min (≤ 4 L/min o new aps),
a e age e ec i e oile lush ≤ 4.5 L,
ins alla ion o wa e less u inals
Sou ce: p epa ed by he au ho s based on S yles e al. (2013).
Fo example, as summa ized in Table 4, he SRD o he Tou ism sec o de ined a se o
EEIs as a de ailed guide and e e ence benchma k o he adop ion o an EMS in a ho el
acili y. Su p isingly, among he 112 cases analysed, only one company seemed o ook
ad an age o he use o he men ioned SRD as a guide o implemen EEIs.
5. Discussion and conclusions
The analysis ound a weak use o EEIs in EMAS- egis e ed companies, which in he
li e a u e a e assumed o be on unne companies in e ms o hei en i onmen al
awa eness, p ac ices, and pe o mance. I was ound ha only up o 42% o he analysed
10,337 indica o s we e calcula ed using minimum eco-e iciency p inciples. This igu e
imp o ed sligh ly be ween he wo empo al s ages o he analysis ( om 2013 o 2018),
conside ing he de elopmen o he EMAS ce i ica ion owa ds a mo e consis en and
de ailed scheme o implemen en i onmen al p ac ices in companies om an EMS.
In o he wo ds, his s udy shows ha , e en in he case o o ganisa ions conside ed as
leading o on unning companies, he concep o eco-e iciency is poo ly used in hei
EMS. The s udy con i ms he p e ious esul s ob ained by E kko e al. (2005) o Finnish
companies om he pulp and pape indus y, o which hey epo ed a e y weak use o
EEIs. Su p isingly, his analysis ca ied ou in 2013 and 2018 con i ms he esul s o his
Finnish s udy ca ied ou in he ea ly yea s o he EMAS scheme dissemina ion wo decades
ago. The p esen analysis also shows ha an ex e nally- e i ied EMS is no a gua an ee o
he capaci y o ce i ied companies o con ibu e o hei en i onmen al pe o mance by he
use o EEIs.
This a icle con ibu es o he li e a u e in se e al ways. Fi s , i con ibu es o ga he
e idence o he limi ed use o EEIs by companies, e en in he case o i ms ha a e
supposed o be among he leade s o on unne s in e ms o en i onmen al managemen
beha iou s. Second, i also con ibu es o he c i ical li e a u e abou he eal p ac ical
impac s o he implemen a ion o ce i iable s anda d-based EMSs (e.g., Boi al, 2007;
He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2013; Tes a e al., 2018; He as-Saiza bi o ia e al., 2020).
Acco ding o a ecen sys ema ic li e a u e e iew in he ield o olun a y ce i iable
s anda ds o EMSs (Boi al e al., 2018), al hough he con en ional schola ly li e a u e is
op imis ic wi h ega d o he impac s o hese ce i iable s anda ds o schemes such as
EMAS, he e is an inc easing body o schola ly li e a u e ha ques ions hei e ec i eness.
This a icle cons i u es ano he example o hese doub s. Mo e speci ically, he limi ed use
o EEIs may be indica i e o he lack o in e nalisa ion o EMSs in o ganisa ions ha ha e
adop ed ce i iable s anda ds such as EMAS. Gi en he c i ical impo ance o he economic
implica ions associa ed wi h co po a e sus ainabili y and he need o ind a balance be ween
economic and en i onmen al objec i es (Sa kis and Co dei o, 2009; Beckmann e al.,
2014; Van de Byl and Slawinski, 2015), i can be assumed ha companies subs an ially
