Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Environmental auditing started developing at the beginning of 70s of the past century in the United States of America and in the Western Europe. In that period the developed countries were adopting the environmental legislation in order to reduce the harmful consequences of the companies' actions that had affected the environment. At the beginning the environmental auditing involved reviews of independent experts assessing whether companies operated in line with the demands of the environmental legislation. Presently the companies decide to undertake environmental audits in order to obtain an independent external assessment whether the management has created efficient environmental policy and provided for acceptable environmental attitude. The most important results of the environmental audits are recommendations how a company can reduce the damaging impacts on the environment in an efficient and cost-benefit manner, and how it can in a long-term save funds by using environment friendly technology. The implementation of the environmental audits is not obligatory for the companies never the less it shows high awareness of the companies on their social responsibilities and an overall attitude towards the environment. Greater awareness and understanding of environmental issues have led the supreme audit institutions (SAI) to recognise the key role of the state in defining appropriate measures for reducing the damaging consequences for the environment; for the efficient and effective solutions of environmental problems. The increasing concern has influenced the SAIs to introduce the environmental auditing in the public sector. Environmental auditing in the public sector encompasses independent and objective assessments whether:
the governments implement the international agreements on environmental protection, there is a complete and appropriate institutional framework for the efficient protection and preservation of the environment, there is an efficient control over the implementation of the national legislation in order to realise the set strategic objectives of protection and preservation of the environment, there is provided for the appropriate use of public funds for the assessment and for solving of the environmental problems.
the implementation of the adopted international responsibilities and conventions on the environment protection, the defining of the unambiguous and harmonised environmental legislation, the creation of the efficient and effective control mechanisms over the implementation of the national environmental legislation and environmental policy, the implementation of the national environmental programmes and to the allocation of public funds for the redressing the consequences of environmental problems, the efficient and economic use of public funds for the implementation of the central-government and local environmental programmes and for reducing the damaging consequences.
Environmental Audit and Regularity Auditing (2004), Sustainable Development: The Role of Supreme Audit Institutions (2004), Guidance on Conducting Audits of Activities with an Environmental Perspective (2001), The Audit of International Environmental Accords (2001) and How SAIs May Co-operate on the Audit of International Environmental Accords (1998).
The SAIs implement the environmental audits mainly on the following areas:
waste management, preservation of quality of water, soil, air and climate changes, preservation and protection of biotic diversity, managing the adverse health effect and sustainable development.
The INTOSAI Working Group on Environmental Auditing carried out several surveys at the SAIs (i.e. in 1993, 1996, 2000, 2003 and 2006) on the audit subject, types and methods of environmental audit implementation. Between 2000 and 2003 the most common audits implemented by SAIs were audits of environmental management in public sector, water management (i.e. drinking water supply, implementing measures for preservation of appropriate water quality of rivers, lakes and seas) and waste management. Among the implemented environmental audits the audits that prevailed were a combination of the regularity and performance audit. Most of the environmental performance audits referred to the assessment of the efficiency of the governmental control over the environmental legislation, the assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of the governmental environmental programmes and the assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the environmental management systems (EMS). Considering the fact that the environmental issues encompass the territory beyond the national borders, the SAIs have recognized the importance of the international co-operation when implementing environmental audits. Undertaking audits of a certain environmental issue in several countries at the same time provides the SAIs to benchmark the efficiency and effectiveness of the operations of the audited bodies.
1: Systems of environmental management is defined by ISO standard 14001 and EMAS (Eco-Management and Audit Scheme)
the regularity and performance audit of establishing the regional parks Snenik and Koevsko - Kolpa and of the implementation of the projects for preservation of wild animals and forests, the regularity and performance audit of the establishing the Zasavje Centre for Wast e Management in Unino, Hrastnik since October 2000 to the end of 2005, the audit of the appropriateness of the decision made by martno pri Litiji Municipality on waste disposal Ostri vrh near Logatec, the regularity and performance audit of the business operation of the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning in implementing environmental policy since 2000 to 2004.
What has the Court of Audit found out and what are the impacts of the environmental audits?
The most important audit findings of the environmental audits are:
the responsible audited entities did not create the institutional framework for the protection and preservation of the environment in the due time, the responsible audited entities did not prepare planned strategic documents for the environmental policy. There were no strategic documents which would identify objectives, actions, responsible people for their implementation and expected results and impacts for each area of environment protection, the responsible audited entities did not prepare and implement harmonised measures for the achievement of the planned objectives, instead the measures were in several cases contradictory and did not provide for the achievement of the objectives, the responsible audited entities did not provide for the co-ordination between the institutions that were also involved in the implementation of the environmental measures. Further more they did not co-ordinate nor monitor the implementation of measures, some of the national and governmental programmes of nature protection were not entirely implemented or not all of the objectives were reached, due to inconsistent implementation of the measures, the responsible audited entities did not provide the conditions for the implementation of the sustainable development on the areas where the environmental protection and co-ordinated development is very important.
The most important impact of the environmental audits as well as all other audits is the implementation of the remedial measures due to the found irregularities and inefficiencies. On the basis of the findings of the environmental audits the Court of Audit demanded form the audited bodies to prepare and adopt the strategic documents, to study the efficiency of the implementation of the environmental measures and to prepare a proposal for their co-ordinated implementation, to prepare guidelines for managing the protected areas. The implementation of the remedial measures is the most important mechanism that is used by the Court of Audit in order to provide for more efficient implementation of the environmental policy and the achievement of the objectives.
How does the Court of Audit plan to implement the environmental audits in the future?
Good understanding of the environmental problems, environmental legislation, responsibilities and organisation of institutions authorised for the implementation of the environmental policy is of key importance for the preparation of the proposals of the future environmental audits. The objective of the Court of Audit is to continue with the implementation of the environmental audits that shall present and study the key environmental issues in Slovenia and that shall provide for the solution and elimination of the environmental problems. On the basis of the risk analysis referred to each area of the environment protection the Court of Audit shall define a strategy of implementing the environmental audits. In this way it shall provide for the continuous auditing of the key audit issues. A special focus will be placed on the assessment whether Slovenia achieves the set objectives of the international environmental agreements, assessment of important local environment issues and assessment whether the users of public funds are environment friendly in their operation. An important challenge is the audit of the achievements of the sustainable development of Slovenia; this audit shall include almost all working areas of the State. The Court of Audit shall also in the future co-operate with other SAIs when implementing environmental audits. The purpose of such co-operation is to exchange audit experience in order to improve the audit implementation as well as to obtain understanding of the aspects, issues and solutions of the environmental problems in other countries and to define the principles of best practice on the area.
a proposal for a pre-audit, or as a proposal for an audit. In a pre-audit the auditor obtains, in particular, the information required for an assessment of the risks in the operations of the auditee or obtains other information required in order to decide whether to include the audit in the annual work programme of the Court of Audit. If the proposal is approved a plan for the implementation of a pre-audit is drawn up. When a report on the pre-audit has been compiled a proposal is issued on whether or not to commence an audit The audit begins with the formulation of a detailed plan. After it is approved a resolution is issued for carrying out an audit which is included in the work programme of the Court of Audit. This is followed by the performance of the audit at the auditee, a draft audit report is issued, disputed audit findings are cleared up with the auditee in a clarification meeting, a proposed audit report is compiled, the auditee has the opportunity to object to the findings of the audit, and the senate performs its work. The audit is concluded with the issuing of an audit report. The follow up is introduced if any important irregularities or inefficiencies by the user of public funds are found and it is not stated in the audit report that appropriate measures were taken during the audit to remove the irregularities or inefficiencies discovered. In that case the auditee must submit a response report to the Court of Audit. The response report must present the steps and actions undertaken to eliminate the irregularities and inefficiencies. The Court of Audit tests the credibility of the response report. If the Court assesses that remedial actions were not satisfactory and that the public fund user violated the obligation of operational efficiency, a request for action to be taken is issued and delivered to the authorised entity, which can take measures against the auditee. The body entity must decide on the measures necessary and report its decision to the Court of Audit within 30 days. If the user of public funds commits a severe violation of the obligation of operational efficiency, the President notifies the National Assembly. The relevant committee of the National Assembly reviews any severe violations in the presence of the auditee and adopts a decree on measures to be taken in such cases. In cases of severe violations of the obligation of operational efficiency, or if the auditee prevents or hinders the execution of the audit, the Court of Audit can issue a proposal for the dismissal of the responsible person and inform the media. If there is a suspicion of an offence having been committed the Court of Audit proposes a legal procedure or informs the relevant authorities.