تاثیر متقابل سیستم های مدیریت زیست محیطی و ETS اتحادیه اروپا : یافته ها برای صنعت کاغذ و خمیر کاغذ ایتالیایی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|6488||2013||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||8638 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : European Management Journal, Volume 31, Issue 1, February 2013, Pages 16–26
The European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is designed to be a flexible and efficient mechanism to encourage carbon-intensive industries to reduce CO2 emissions cost-effectively. Similarly, Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) are well-established tools designed to improve the efficiency of the environmental performance of companies. Up to now, knowledge of the mutual influences of strategic planning, ETS management and EMSs is still incomplete, and their implications are not fully understood. This study tries to identify whether the involvement of a firm in the ETS with the adoption of an EMS favors the generation of corporate strategic synergies in terms of organizational management and environmental planning. Due to a relatively short time frame and the need for exploratory research, a multiple case study emerged as the most suitable approach. Hence various Italian pulp and paper companies involved in the EU ETS were interviewed and analyzed. We found that organizations that integrate ETS management and EMS tend to establish satisfactory standards and procedures that are relevant for environmental monitoring and compliance. However not all ETS-related activities are integrated into EMSs. In addition, despite some mutual synergies, these are not sufficient for determining corporate environmental planning.
The European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is considered a flexible policy instrument to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in order to achieve Kyoto’s reduction targets. The ETS is a market-based policy instrument based on the cap-and-trade system which offers, in theory, the opportunity to meet environmental targets in the most cost-effective way. In other words, setting a cap on the permitted amount of emissions, corresponding to allocated allowances, and introducing a market for allowances grant flexibilities to companies to define their strategy (Rogge, Schneider, & Hoffmann, 2011a). Then, in equilibrium, the market price of carbon is supposed to reflect the scarcity of allowances and the marginal abatement costs which are equalized across companies. Therefore, overall abatement costs are minimized (Tietenberg, 2006). This possibility of tailoring a cost-effective strategy to meet the carbon emission targets implies at the same time the opportunity for a company to protect competitiveness and shareholder value. But developing such a strategy and day-to-day business decisions requires a rethinking of information flows, capital expenditure and organizational changes (Sandoff & Schaad, 2009). In fact, on the one hand, a successful implementation of a carbon market implies multiple challenges (e.g. to improve monitoring, control and planning skills, to achieve long-term predictability of carbon prices, etc.). On the other hand, it would allow a predictability of investments, which would result in an efficient participants’ management of investments, i.e. to manage resources, roles and responsibilities to define whether to invest in new equipment to reduce carbon emissions, or to buy additional allowances (Egenhofer, 2007). In fact, the price for allowances also sets monetary incentives to adopt new solutions for energy-efficient and carbon-efficient improvements. But the price of allowances is practically influenced by the ETS design, e.g. rules of allowance allocations, cap definition, and use of credits from other Kyoto Mechanisms (Schleich, Rogge, & Betz, 2009). In other words, by avoiding its distorted implementation (e.g. the potential effects of the allocation of allowances for free to new entrants, banning banking between different trading phases, etc.) and price volatility, the ETS is expected to provide incentives to innovation (European Commission, 2005, Rogge et al., 2011b and Schleich et al., 2009). Hence, in order to effectively manage this system, companies are expected to implement cross-functional activities (Sandoff & Schaad, 2009), or develop useful and specific interdisciplinary functions. Correspondently, an Environmental Management System (EMS) is considered a beneficial tool for organizations that wish to integrate environmental management in the overall corporate management system, not only to comply with existing regulations but also to take into account and eventually respond to changing knowledge and technology (Bansal & Bogner, 2002). Additionally, it is beneficial in order to implement better organization and documentation of environmental activities and procedures (Morrow & Rondinelli, 2002). Even though the relationship between the implementation of an EMS and environmental innovation is still unclear (Ziegler & Seijas Nogareda, 2009), some authors reported a positive influence of an EMS on environmental innovation (Radonjic and Tominc, 2006 and Radonjic and Tominc, 2007), together with environmental regulation and organizational changes, and on detecting cost-saving potential by reducing information deficit (Horbach, 2008), especially in the case of EMSs in maturity stage (Rennings, Ziegler, Ankele, & Hoffmann, 2006). Against this background, this paper aims to analyze the mutual influence of environmental voluntary regulation and the ETS in terms of organizational management and environmental planning. In fact, it is still unclear whether ETS-related activities are allocated to existent departments and functions; for example, to those involved in EMSs, or companies setting up new ones. To this end, we provide an analysis of how ETS management has been implemented in companies adopting an EMS. In detail, the analysis focuses on the identification of the persons in charge of ETS-related activities within companies having EMSs. Another objective of the research is understanding whether the ETS is able to influence corporate organization and to trigger investment planning to a greater extent than a pre-existing EMS program. We addressed these questions by carrying out a multiple case study of the Italian pulp and paper industry. This industry has been very receptive to environmental voluntary regulations (see, as an example, the project Life PIONEER “Paper Industry Operating in Network: an Experiment for Emas Revision”, 2003–2006), and features organizations with installations representing the most important European emitters in terms of emission size. In fact, installations according to the Community Independent Transaction Log’s classification are classified in five categories: zero emitters (0 kt CO2-eq), mini (<25 kt CO2-eq), small (25–50 kt CO2-eq), medium (50–500 kt CO2-eq) and large (>500 kt CO2-eq). While mini installations under 10,000 tCO2/year (about 3400 participants) represent 32% of the total number of installations covered by the EU ETS, their emissions amount to nearly 1% of the emissions covered by the ETS; installations under 25,000 tCO2/year represent 55% of the total but emit only 2.4% of all the EU ETS emissions (Egenhofer, 2007). Italian pulp and paper installations feature mini, small and medium sized installations. Because the aim of our research was to explore the generation of synergies at corporate strategic level in terms of organizational management and environmental planning between the ETS and EMSs, and to explain causal relationships, a qualitative approach seemed appropriate (Yin, 2002). This paper is structured as follows: the following section presents a critical review of the literature on the EU ETS and on the environmental voluntary regulation; grounding on the resulting open research questions, the next two sections introduce the case study methodology and present our findings respectively; finally, the last section discusses these findings and concludes with research and policy recommendations.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
We tried to analyze the mutual influence of EMS and the ETS in terms of the impact on organizational management and environmental planning. Thus, we highlighted how ETS management has been implemented in some companies adopting an EMS, and if/how the ETS has been able to trigger more investment planning than in a pre-existing EMS program. Firstly, we found that the theoretically predicted integration of ETS-related activities into corporate EMS is essentially confirmed by the experiences we investigated. We learned that it is possible to distinguish different axes of integration. These axes mainly refer to carbon emission monitoring, compliance procedures, regulation monitoring, and documentation. Our findings confirm and extend Amundsen’s insights (2000) of the joint management of energy with the environment, and Wagner’s findings (2008) about a positive relationship between energy management and EMSs. Sandoff and Schaad (2009) recognized the role of environmental departments in various ETS-related activities, but their work does not explicitly include an analysis on EMSs. Our study reveals that the interaction between the ETS and EMSs in setting corporate roles and responsibilities cannot be neglected. We discovered that allowance trading and related market monitoring are basically assigned to qualified personnel for companies with many installations, or to administrative and finance personnel for companies with few installations. This distinction in the assignation of ETS-related activities highlighted the distribution of roles and responsibilities, and enabled us to make a classification between the different sets of ETS-related activities included in overall ETS management. According to this classification, activities of ETS management can refer to financial allowance management (FAM) and physical CO2-emission management (PEM). Indeed, FAM includes trading strategy, allowance trading and allowance market monitoring, which are activities generally assigned to administrative and finance departments, or to specific personnel. Similarly, PEM includes carbon emission monitoring, compliance procedures, regulation monitoring, documentation reporting, and verification, which are generally assigned to technicians within an EMS. Our findings would seem to indicate that, even under EMS and ETS integration, FAM and PEM tend to reflect independent corporate dynamics and, thus, should not be considered as a unique field of organizational investigation. This distinction, which serves to gain further insights into organizational changes in respect of the investigation made by Sandoff and Schaad (2009), derives from the analysis of companies with an EMS. However, further research may be necessary to verify its validity for companies without an EMS. Furthermore, if management involvement, in our cases executive management, can be considered as a proxy of the importance of the ETS and the willingness to take related actions (Sandoff & Schaad, 2009), transferring activities to (internal or external) qualified personnel, such as transferring FAM to qualified personnel with multidisciplinary competences, can be a sign of the willingness of the board to use informed decisions (e.g. about allowance prices) for tailoring a cost-effective strategy. This would mean not only complying with environmental regulations, but also seizing the opportunity that the carbon market offers. Another important insight arising from our study is that companies integrating PEM in an EMS would establish satisfactory standards and procedures for GHG emission monitoring and compliance. In fact, the integration of PEM in an EMS reflects the priority that companies tend to give to technical and organizational aspects rather than to financial opportunities, which are often considered uncertain. As a consequence, one of the most frequently implemented items is the establishment of specific procedures (i.e. the definition of roles, responsibilities and operational instructions) such as those regarding non-compliance management, audit implementation, controlling, monitoring and reporting, or items even more specifically related to the EU ETS regulation (e.g. communications to third party auditors, etc.). On the cost determinants, the integration of PEM in an EMS appears not to imply additional costs, with the exception of firms that decide to employ additional personnel, because these costs are generally absorbed by, and integrated in, other environmental activities. This is mainly due to the fact that often the implementation of an EMS already implies investments in terms of control and monitoring. From a contrasting point of view, with the relationship between EMS implementation and trade investments being weak, enhancing FAM capabilities so as to manage new tasks linked to allowance market tends to imply additional costs in terms of personnel re-qualification and/or new recruitment of administrative, finance or other qualified staff. Further insights are provided by our exploration into the mutual effects of the ETS and EMSs on environmental planning. In accordance with previous research, we would expect that, on the one hand, the involvement of a company in the EU ETS, plus the implementation of an EMS, would trigger investments in technological change and innovations. On the other, the EU ETS would trigger investment planning on carbon reduction to a greater extent than a pre-existing EMS program. However, we found that investments in technological innovation to reduce carbon emissions are still limited, and investments tend to be mainly focused on market-available technologies for core processes. This is due to the innovation risks and the related high initial investment costs of technological boundaries. From this perspective, the volatility of CO2 prices is still a critical issue in ETS implementation, since financial uncertainties usually deter from both technical and organizational innovation. In addition, the most frequent actions within environmental planning regarding the improvement of production processes, and energy efficiency or energy production, are considered as the safest ways to achieve cost reductions. These investments already appear to be typical components of EMS programs. In fact, they had often been planned before the EU ETS came into force. This is why we can conclude that until now the EU ETS has not been able to trigger additional investment in technological innovation, despite the presence of an EMS. This is because in environmental planning, other variables (e.g. entity of investment and focus on core markets) appear to prevail over seizing opportunities from the ETS market. A possible reason for that could reside in the fact that allowance prices in the first two phases have been volatile and sometimes very low, therefore resulting in a weak incentive to implement energy efficiency and innovation (Mansanet-Bataller et al., 2011 and Schleich et al., 2009). We believe our findings have some important implications for business management and policy makers. In fact, we found that companies involved in the EU ETS benefit from the presence of an EMS, both in terms of organizational and technological investment oriented to carbon reduction. Regarding the latter, it is worth noting that the commitment to continuously improving environmental performances often implies CO2 emissions reductions. Accordingly, although not mandatory, industries that are expected to manage the EU ETS could count on EMS implementations to acquire knowledge and skills to boost ETS-PE activities in phase 3 (2013–2020), and to set satisfactory procedures and monitoring systems. However, since synergies between ETS and EMSs in terms of FAM to date are not significantly developed, companies should count on qualified personnel typically not covered in the implementation of an EMS to catch the opportunities offered by the carbon market. In terms of policy implications, given that the stimulus to invest in innovation can be easily achieved through regulation enforcements (e.g. reducing the carbon cap, auctioning allowances, etc.), this would potentially affect the international competitiveness of pulp and paper companies. A good complementary policy could be the improvement of the efficiency of ETS management through the promotion of EMSs in these companies. In so doing, special attention has to be paid to spreading awareness towards the financial opportunities that arise from the implementation of market-based mechanisms. Policy makers, therefore, have to consider the design and planning of ad hoc training courses as mandatory and not optional. However, this study is not without its limitations. In fact, our analysis of the selected case studies enabled us to define a conceptual model that could be further improved by focusing on other sectors. Furthermore, the fact that our case installations are based in Italy, even though five companies also manage installations in other countries, means that it would be useful to investigate whether companies from other countries experience the same dynamics. Finally, while our qualitative approach helped us to shed light on an unexplored research field, the causal relationships that we formulated could be usefully considered for further validation and generalization through statistical surveys.