Perceptions of performance: How European organizations experience EMAS registration

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 61-73

  Pedersen, Esben Rahbek ^a  

^a Department of International Economics and Management   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Benefits; Corporate social responsibility (CSR); Costs; EMAS; Environmental management systems (EMSs); Motives

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249820815     PISSN: 15353958     EISSN: 15353966     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/csr.118     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Babakri KA, Bennett RA, Franchetti M. 2003. Critical factors for implementing ISO 14001 standard in United States industrial companies. Journal of Cleaner Production 11(7): 749-752.
2. Banerjee SB. 2001. Managerial perceptions of corporate environmentalism: interpretations from industry and strategic implications for organizations. Journal of Management Studies 38(4): 489-513.
3. Bansal P, Roth K. 2000. Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal 43(4): 717-736.
4. Barney JB. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1): 99-120.
5. Barney JB. 1995. Looking inside for competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive 9(4): 49-61.
6. Biondi V, Frey M, Iraldo F. 2000. Environmental management systems and SMEs: motivations, opportunities and barriers related to EMAS and ISO 14001 implementation. Greener Management International 29: 55-69.
7. Burke L, Logsdon JM. 1996. How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning 29(4): 495-502.
8. Christensen P, Remmen A, Nielsen EH. 1999. Erfaringer med Miljøledelse i Danske Virksomheder, Miljøprojekt 486. Danish Environmental Protection Agency: Copenhagen.
9. Christian Aid. 2005. Behind the Mask: the Real Face of Corporate Social Responsibility. http://www.christianaid.org.uk/indepth/ 0401csr/csr_behindthemask.pdf [13 December 2005].
10. Copenhagen Zoo. 2005. Miljøredegørelse 2004. Copenhagen Zoo: Frederiksberg. http://www.zoo.dk/cms/page/zoo/02Om_Zoo/ 02Hvad_goer_Zoo/04Miljoe/01miljoredegorelse/Miljoredegorelse-2004.doc [13 December 2005].
11. Copenhagen Zoo. 2006. The Zoo as a Cultural Institution. Copenhagen Zoo: Frederiksberg. http://www.zoo.dk/cms/ showpage.asp?nodeid=90344 [20 February 2006].
12. The Economist. 2003. Virtues of vice: the rewards from investing in politically incorrect companies. The Economist 1 November: 91.
13. Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). 2005. EMAS Newsletter Issue 4. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/emas/ documents/brochure_en.htm [13 December 2005].
14. European Commission (EC). 2002. Communication from the Commission Concerning Corporate Social Responsibility: a Business Contribution to Sustainable Development. EC: Brussels. http://europa.eu.int/comm/ employment_social/soc-dial/csr/ csr2002_en.pdf [13 December 2005].
15. Florida R, Davison D. 2001. Gaining from green management: environmental management systems inside and outside the factory. California Management Review 43(3): 64-84.
16. Fox T. 2004. Corporate social responsibility and development: in quest of an agenda. Development 47(3): 29-36.
17. Freimann J, Walther M. 2001. The impacts of corporate environmental management systems: a comparison of EMAS and ISO 14001. Greener Management International 36: 91-103.
18. Grayson D, Hodges A. 2004. Corporate Social Opportunity! Seven Steps to Make Corporate Social Responsibility Work for Your Business. Greenleaf: Sheffield.
19. Griffin JJ, Mahon JF. 1997. The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society 36(1): 5-31.
20. Hamschmidt J, Dyllick T. 2001. ISO 14001 - profitable? Yes! But is it eco-effective? Greener Management International 34: 43-54.
21. Harari O. 1995. Why don't things change? American Management Association February: 30-32.
22. Hunton-Clarke L, Wehrmeyer W, Clift R, Mckeown P, King H. 2002. Employee participation in environmental initiatives: facilitating more environmentally conscious decision-making in innovation. Greener Management International 40: 45-56.
23. JP. 2002. Dyrene I zoo er til økologi. Jyllands-Posten (JP) 2 October: 12.
24. Kapstein EB. 2001. The corporate ethics crusade. Foreign Affairs 80(5): 105-119.
25. Kirkland L-H, Thompson D. 1999. Challenges in designing, implementing and operating an environmental management system. Business Strategy and the Environment 8(2): 128-143.
26. Klinkers L, Nelissen N. 1995. Environmental campaigning: how to promote employee participation in environmental policies. Greener Management International 10: 97-109.
27. Leonard-Barton D. 1992. Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal 13: 11-125.
28. Margolis JD, Walsh JP. 2001. People and Profits? - the Search for a Link Between a Company's Social and Financial Performance. Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ.
29. Melnyk SA, Sroufe RP, Calantone RJ. 2003. A model of site-specific antecedents of ISO 14001 certification. Production and Operations Management 12(3): 369-385.
30. Michael B. 2003. Corporate social responsibility in international development: an overview and critique. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10(3): 115-128.
31. Moir L. 2001. What do we mean by corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance 1(2): 16-22.
32. Morrow D, Rondinelli D. 2002. Adopting corporate environmental management systems: motivations and results of ISO 14001 and EMAS Certification. European Management Journal 20(2): 159-171.
33. Orlitzky M, Schmidt FL, Rynes SL. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies 24(3): 403-441.
34. Pedersen ER, Neergaard P. 2004. Rationale and results: companies' perception of costs and benefits regarding initiatives promoting corporate social responsibility (CSR). Paper prepared for the 20th EGOS Colloquium in Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2004, Sub-theme 18: Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Citizenship and Politics of Stakeholder Influence.
35. Poksinska B, Dahlgaard JJ, Eklund JAE. 2003. Implementing ISO 14000 in Sweden: motives benefits and comparisons with ISO 9000. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management 20(5): 585-606.
36. Porter ME, van der Linde C. 1995. Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review 73(5): 120-134.
37. Post JE, Preston LE, Sachs S. 2002. Redefining the Corporation: Stakeholder Management and Organizational Wealth. Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.
38. Prahalad CK, Hamel, G. 1990. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review 68(3): 79-91.
39. Quazi AM. 2003. Identifying the determinants of corporate managers' perceived social obligations. Management Decision 41(9): 822-831.
40. Rosen CM. 2001. Environmental strategy and competitive advantage: an introduction. California Management Review 43(3): 8-15.
41. Steger U. 2000. Environmental management systems: empirical evidence and further perspectives. European Management Journal 18(1): 23-37.
42. Strachan PA, Sinclair IM, Lal D. 2003. Managing ISO 14001 implementation in the United Kingdom continental shelf (UKCS). Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 10: 50-63.
43. Tuppen C. 2004. CSR and the Bottom Line. European Business Forum: London; 10-13.
44. Utting P. 2000. Business Responsibility for Sustainable Development. United Nations Research Institute for Sustainable Development (UNRISD): Geneva.
45. Vogel DJ. 2005. Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility. California Management Review 47(4): 19-45.
46. Waddock SA, Graves SB. 1997. The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal 18(4): 303-319.
47. Walley N, Whitehead B. 1994. It's not easy being green. Harvard Business Review 72(3): 46-52.
48. Warhurst A. 2005. Future roles of business in society: the expanding boundaries of corporate responsibility and a compelling case for partnership. Futures 37(2-3): 151-168.
49. Wernerfelt B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2): 171-180.
50. World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility: Meeting Changing Expectations. WBCSD: Geneva. http://www.wbcsd.ch/DocRoot/RGk80O49q8ErwmWXIwtF/CSRmeeting.pdf [13 December 2005].
51. World Economic Forum (WEF). 2003. Responding to the Leadership Challenge: Findings of a CEO Survey on Global Corporate Citizenship. WEF: Geneva. http://www.weforum.org/pdf/GCCI/Findings_of_CEO_survey_on_GCCI.pdf [13 December 2005].
52. Zutshi A, Sohal A. 2004. Environmental management system adoption by Australasian organizations: part 1: reasons, benefits and impediments. Technovation 24(4): 335-257.