FEATURE
Value of ISO 14000 Management Systems Put to the Test Ten states begin a coordinated research project to evaluate environmental benefits of the new international standard. RONALD BEGLEY
ince last September, when the International Organization of Standards finalized the first part of its farreaching ISO 14000 series of standards governing voluntary environmental management systems (EMSs), people in business and government have been trying to determine how to use EMSs to make their jobs easier. Dozens of conference participants have trumpeted the benefits of getting onboard with ISO 14000 and presented the perils of being the only one on the block not to do so. Many businesses, however, have been waiting to see whether regulators will give them more regulatory flexibility in return for instituting a voluntary EM.. At the same time, state and federal regulators have been cautiously exploring the potential advantages of these systems for environmental regulation. Now an experiment is being done by an informal consortium of 10 states to determine how beneficial EMSs are, not just for businesses and regulators, but for the environment and the economy. Earlier this summer, the Multi-State Working Group on EMS began discussions with a wide variety of businesses about its plans and sought volunteers for pilot projects to test the effectiveness of EMSs. The group is made up of state regulators from Arizona, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin. Also involved are representatives from EPA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the University of North Carolina, Tulane Law School, the Environmental Law Institute, and the Washington, D.C.based law firm Sidley and Austin. The working group came together last fall when several state regulators realized they had similar interests in the new standards. "A lot of the states were asking the same questions about ISO 14000 and whether it might fit with our regulatory frameworks," said Robert Stephens, deputy director for science, pollution prevention, and technology in California EPA's Toxic Substance Controls Department and the person credited with forming the group. "We agreed there would be substantial value to our agencies to develop common objectives and get comparable data as we all set out to do some experiments." The group has developed a set of peer-reviewed criteria to measure the environmental and economic results of using a voluntary ISO 14000-based EMS. The common research methodology is designed to make results in one state comparable to those in another, according to John Villani, assistant professor of public policy analysis at the University of North Carolina. "The most exciting thing about this is having 10 states across the United States
S
3 6 4 A • VOL. 31, NO. 8, 1997 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
0013-936X/97/0931-364A$14.00/0 © 1997 American Chemical Society
Manufacturing plants, farms, and military bases are being considered for the pilot study sites investigating ISO 14000 environmental management systems impact on environmental performance.
cooperating on a good research design. Usually, public policy researchers look at things after the fact and analyze what happened. Here, the states are looking at this as a research opportunity." The pilot projects will be evaluated using three types of criteria. Environmental indicators include a facility's emissions and compliance record and a range of local environmental quality measures. Management process indicators include cost-benefit results of using an EMS, pollution prevention efforts, and the use of management frameworks such as Total Quality Management and ISO 9000. Stakeholder confidence indicators evaluate the involvement of third parties in defining successful outcomes. Still, the project is not a rigorous laboratory experiment. "Each of the 10 states has a lot of flexibility in how they run the pilots and which kinds of industries they include," said Villani. He cautions that the research challenge is intensified by the variety of businesses likely to be involved, from agricultural to manufacturing and public and private sectors. "With that kind of diversity, it's harder to do research," he said. Pilots to include industry, agriculture Each state hopes to conduct 5-10 pilot projects. Negotiations are under way with a variety of entities, from a North Carolina military base to Wisconsin potato farms to manufacturing and process industries, including automobile and equipment manufacturers as well as a metal coating and finishing plant. The long-term objective of the pilots is to understand the changes in the firms' environmental and economic performances and to see whether they will be cleaner or achieve the same degree of perfor-
mance more efficiently, said Villani. "We don't expect substantial environmental improvements in the first two years, but we want to see what kinds of decisions and what actions the facilities take toward that end when they have an EMS in place." Data collection and analysis are planned to be done at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Independent researchers, along with state agency staff, will be collecting the data and entering them into a central database. North Carolina researchers intend to issue periodic data updates on what the pilots are doing and findings analyses once results begin to show a pattern. It has not yet been decided when a pilot project or the overall project will be considered finished. Jeff Smoller, special assistant to the secretary of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and secretary of the working group, says Wisconsin is interested in ISO 14000 "because it has the potential to help us do a more effective and efficient job of protecting the environment while helping the economy." It is also consistent with the state's view that "accountable devolution" of authority to the states is more effective than a centralized commandand-control regulatory approach, which, Smoller says, addresses no more than 10% of the "opportunities and problems associated with the environment." "We don't know if [an ISO 14000 EMS] is a good thing or a bad thing, but we want to evaluate it against command and control," Smoller said. He believes that the latter approach ignores socioeconomic and institutional aspects of ecosystems, whereas ISO 14000 offers a more holistic approach geared toward sustainability. He adds that it may take five years to collect enough data to draw firm conclusions. VOL. 3 1 , NO. 8, 1997 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 3 6 5 A
Official certification of full-fledged ISO 14000 programs is not necessary for facilities that run pilot projects, but their EMSs must adhere to the standard's EMS principles and environmental performance evaluation specifications as determined by each state's regulators. The states go beyond the requirements of ISO 14000 to include greater emphasis on public participation and pollution prevention, two areas that the standard is often criticized as short-changing. On the federal level, several EPA programs are developing criteria to measure environmental performance, including EMS. One of them is in the Office of Water, which is granting money to eight states that support pilot projects using ISO 14000-based EMS in water pollution control. Five of these states are in the Multi-State Working Group, according to Jim Home, special assistant to the director of the Office of Wastewater Management. "We're providing funding for states to integrate the use of EMS, with ISO 14000 as a baseline, into their water programs." The states must ensure mat "We don't EMSs include measurable perforobjectives and targets that adknow if [an ISO dress continual improvement of vironmental performance pollution 14000 EMS] is prevention and compliance The Ofa good thing or fice of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance plans to rpnnrt to Ada bad thing, ministrator Carol Browner how
but we want to
it c p p c
voliintary EMS fitting into enfnrrpand compliance evaluate it Joseph Cascio, vice president for environmental management at the against Global Environment and Technology Foundation, Annandale, Va., says command and many companies are backing off from earlier declarations that regulators control." would have to show flexibility before developing interest in ISO 14000. —Jeff Smoller, "Now we're seeing major organizaWisconsin tions saying they want to do this for its own sake and for the efficiencies Department of it brings. And a number of customNatural ers are making noises about wantResources ing their suppliers to have an EMS although not necessarily ISO 14000" By Cascio's count only 25 facilities in the United States have been officially registered as meeting ISO 14000 requirements the same number as in Holland Bv comparison Germany has 800 and Japan has 250 But Cascio says that behind the numbers lie increasing and still-Hevelnning levels nf interest and activirv in the Unitpd Statps Ppnnsvlvania environmental regulators have made statements in the nast about vnlnntary FMSs leading to a IPSs burdensnme remilatnrv regimp But Meredith Hill, director of program operations for the Office of Pollution Prevention and Compliance Assistance within the state's Department of Environmental Protection, says regulatory flexibility is not an immediate concern of the upcoming pilot projects "Companies need to look at the value to them of doing it in terms of tremendous cost savings r*omm I I —
nity involvement and public recognition " 3 6 6 A • VOL. 31, NO. 8, 1997 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
nior attorney, pointed out that the value of the pilot projects will be that "regulated entities won't have to reinvent the wheel in terms of how they'll measure an EMS pilot project to show it's a good idea. There may not be a lot else in it for companies right now." Still, according to California's Stephens, "What I hear most often now [from businesses] is that the value of ISO 14000 is substantially less without regulatory consideration." He emphasizes that no healthbased emissions standards will be changed. "But if a facility's management can figure out more efficient ways of achieving those standards and alternative ways to monitor and report, that's on the table." EPA's Home says that if projects like the one in the Office of Water succeed, "down the road, there may possibly be more flexibility in regulatory oversight."
Encouraging public participation Public participation is one frequently mentioned safeguard in granting flexibility. The Office of Water program, for instance, asks states to consult with "interested stakeholders to determine the type and timing of incentives and flexibility that would be appropriate to offer facilities that implement EMS," according to the Jan. 21, 1997, Federal Register notice that announced the program. There is a danger that shifting away from regulation and toward public participation in the form of "site-by-site deal making" may result in less environmental protection, said Jerry Speir, director of the Institute for Environmental Law and Policy at Tulane Law School and a working group member. Although he calls the group's efforts conscientious and in good faith, he questions the trade-offs involved in regulatory flexibility and increased public participation in setting de facto environmental rules. "The local residents who get involved in these stakeholder meetings have real jobs and kids. They're not getting paid like all the lawyers and consultants at those meetings They Icicle the full range of expertise to a.n~ alyze and judge these projects. Isn't that what we pay state and federal regulators for?" The Wisconsin state legislature is considering legislation that would allow DNR to grant flexibility in such administrative requirements as monitoring, testing, record keeping, notification, and reporting. The proposed changes apply across the spectrum of media—air, water, and land—but do not alter basic environmental standards, according to Smoller. He adds that any flexibility should benefit the state agency and businesses, relieving some of the workload. Still, Smoller said, "Companies should make their decision about EMS based on business reasons. Regulatory flexibility should not be at the head of their list, although it should be on their list." He notes that for voluntary EMSs to truly catch on, business, government, and stakeholders need to see benefits. He emphasizes that voluntary EMSs will not replace existing regulatory frameworks, but will be a "second track." "We're plowing new ground. No one's been here before." Ronald Begley is a freelance journalist based in Arlington, Va. He is former Washington Bureau Chiefat Chemical Week magazine.
