Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Environmental performance indicators: a study on ISO 14001 certied

companies
Lucila M.S. Campos a, *, Daiane Aparecida de Melo Heizen b, Miguel Angel Verdinelli c,
Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel a
a
Federal University of Santa Catarina, Department of Production Engineering and Systems, Campus Trindade, 88.040-900, Florianopolis, SC, Brazil
b
Federal Institute of Santa Catarina, Getlio Vargas Avenue, 830, Centro, 89.251-000, Jaragua
do Sul, SC, Brazil
c
Universidade do Vale do Itaja, Uruguay Street, 458, Centro, 88.302-202, Itaja, SC, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Environmental management system has become one of the main tools used by companies to handle the
Received 3 July 2014 environmental aspects and the impacts that their activities have on the environment. In this context, this
Received in revised form work aims to demonstrate the results of a survey that identies a set of indicators of environmental
12 December 2014
performance to continuously manage and improve the environmental and performance management of
Accepted 5 March 2015
Available online 19 March 2015
ISO 14001 certied companies in the Southern region of Brazil. This research is descriptive as well as
quantitative and adopted two methods for factor analysis, the analysis of multiple correspondences and
the principal components analysis as well as a method of classication, the cluster analysis. Several
Keywords:
Environmental performance indicators
companies monitor the environmental and performance management of the industrial pulp and paper/
Environmental management system furniture/wood and textile sectors using indicators of environmental performance. As expected, orga-
EMS nizations from the services sector do not use such indicators. The results from cluster analysis also
ISO 14001 showed that legal and other requirements and environmental aspects are the both more representative
Survey research requirements. Finally, there is a great concern for companies to meet the legal requirements as well as
the conservation of environmental resources.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction in this direction (e.g. cleaner production, eco-efciency and life

Since the beginning of the 1980s, environmental concerns have
been incorporated into the strategic and operational decisions
taken by companies. Pollution caused by operation activities is
viewed as an undesirable consequence that is no longer endorsed
by many organizations. While many businesses have traditionally
resisted changes brought about by government legislation and
pressure from the public, many rms, through reluctant adoption
or willing change, have found that a pro-environment stance can
enhance a number of goals (Inman, 2002).
As a consequence, the importance of managing environmental
activities to prevent negative aspects and impacts on the environ-
ment has been highlighted. Among the diverse environmental
management practices that rms have implemented in recent years
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: lucila.campos@ufsc.br (L.M.S. Campos), dheinzen@ifsc.edu.br
(D.A. de Melo Heizen), nupad@univali.br (M.A. Verdinelli), paulo.cauchick@ufsc.br
(P.A. Cauchick Miguel).
cycle assessment), the environmental management systems (EMS)
have been the focus of much attention (Campos, 2012).
In the past two decades there have been a number of studies
devoted to EMS and its diffusion. Some research has focused on
motivations for the standard's implementation (Morrow and
Rondinelli, 2002; Bansal and Hunter, 2003; Gonza
lez-Benito and
Gonza
lez-Benito, 2005; Chan and Wong, 2006; Boiral, 2007;
Gavronski et al., 2008; Prajogo et al., 2012), while others have
concentrated on the effects that these systems have on rms'
environmental, operational and nancial performance (Klassen and
McLaughlin, 1996; Melnyk et al., 2003). Studies have also empha-
sized that improvements in the organization's environmental per-
formance are benecial (Porter and Van der Linde, 1995; Bonifant
and Ratcliff, 1994; Link and Naveh, 2006; Lopez-Gamero et al.,
2010). These benets are not only for the environment but also for
the company's overall performance.
One particular research area that has drawn a lot of attention is
the diffusion of ISO 14001 (To and Lee, 2014). A signicant body of
literature on this research area has been available, offering insights

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.019
0959-6526/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
into how ISO 14001 diffuses at the country level (Casadesus et al.,
2008; Delmas, 2002; Lagodimos et al., 2007; Qi et al., 2011;
Trierweiller et al., 2013), regional level (Delmas, 2002), and global
level (Albuquerque et al., 2007; Corbett and Kirsch, 2001; Nishitani,
2010; Viadiu et al., 2006).
A second phase focused in studies devoted to the development
of frameworks and methods to support EMS decision-making,
namely the evaluation and selection of different EMS alternatives.
To this end, different approaches have been proposed, such as
multicriteria techniques (Hui et al., 2001; Petroni, 2001;
Sambasivan and Fei, 2008), hybrid models combining mathemat-
ical programming, and other methods (Tsai and Chou, 2009; Celik,
2009). All of them are based on different sets of technical and
economic criteria in order to support decision-making (Guerrero-
Baena et al., 2014).
Even though research on EMS has an extensive literature, there
is still lack of in-depth investigation of internal dynamics in
maintaining ISO 14001 environmental management system
(Balzarova and Castka, 2008). The deployment of an EMS does not
assure the effectiveness of environmental management (Rondinelli
and Vastag, 2000; Melnyk et al., 2003; Campos, 2012). The
continuous monitoring of critical points of the system is also
necessary, and these points are generally particular to each type of
organization. Some studies (e.g. Poksinska et al., 2003; Balzarova
and Castka, 2008) advocate that indicators of environmental per-
formance are not directly linked to the maintenance of EMS.
However, companies that do not use a set of EMS performance
indicators may not be managing their own environmental system
(Henri and Journeault, 2008; Nawrocka and Parker, 2009). Thus,
they must continuously assess the environmental performance to
assure success either in developed or developing nations.
The academic community has witnessed a strong interest in the
BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa context. This
justies Brazil as focused of the present study. The country is
considered one of the most promising developing nations,
responsible for approximately 30% of Latin America's gross do-
mestic product (GDP). BRICS0 countries in general have been
improving the number of companies certied by ISO 14001 from
1999 until 2010 (ISO, 2010) an, Brazil is the country with the most
companies under the environmental management system ISO
14001 (2004) in Latin America. According to the same database
(ISO, 2010), the number of certications has grown year by year in
the country (from 1999 to 2010). Likewise, the interested in
research related to ISO 14001 diffusion in Brazil has also been
disseminated (Silva and Medeiros, 2004; Oliveira et al., 2010;
Jabbour, 2010, 2013b; Trierweiller et al., 2013; Ferenhof et al.,
2014). By examining the Brazilian scenario, a study conducted by
Silva and Medeiros (2004) also shows that the number of com-
panies adopting environmental practices has increased each year.
Nevertheless, most of these companies have insufcient knowledge
about environmental management systems and do not evaluate
their environmental performance.
In this context, this work aims to demonstrate a set of EMS in-
dicators of performance used by companies certied by ISO 14001
in the Southern region of Brazil. This region was choose because is
one of the most important and industrialized region of this country.
A question is this sense is then proposed: what are the key envi-
ronmental performance indicators used by companies to manage
their EMS certication according to ISO 14001? To address this
question, this work is organized as follows. Firstly, it provides a
short literature review of environmental management systems and
performance indicators. Secondly, research methods are described.
Thirdly, survey results are presented and discussed and, nally,
some conclusions are drawn and recommendations for future
studies are offered.
287
2. Theoretical framework
Certied EMS have been highlighted in the literature among the
various practices of environmental management adopted by major
companies over the last years, such as (Link and Naveh, 2006;
Viadiu et al., 2006; Albuquerque et al., 2007): cleaner production,
eco-efciency, and the evaluation of the life cycle of products,
among others. An EMS is part of the management system of an
organization that aims to manage the environmental aspects
related to its activities, products and services (Perotto et al., 2008;
Campos and Melo, 2008). From the normative point of view, ISO
14001 (ISO, 2004) denes an EMS as a set of inter-related elements,
a part of an organization's management system, used to develop
and implement its environmental policy and manage its environ-
mental aspects. Standards and procedures can be used by the or-
ganization to put an EMS into operation. The three best-known
standards are the EMAS, the BS 7750 and the ISO 14001 (ISO, 2004).
The BS 7750 was developed in the United Kingdom and pub-
lished in 1994. It is a certication of British Standard Institute that
presents specications for the development, implementation, and
maintenance of an EMS to ensure and demonstrate conformity
with the statements of the company with regards to its environ-
mental policy, objectives and goals. The BS 7750 served as a basis
for the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to
launch the ISO 14001 in 1996. According to British Standard Insti-
tute website, since 2004 the BS 7750 was replaced by BS EN ISO
14001: 2004.
The European Eco-Management and Audit Scheme System
(EMAS) was adopted by the European Union Council (EC) in June,
1993. It has been opened to volunteer participation by companies
since April 1995. A new version of this standard was published in
November, 2009 (EC e N 1221/2009 of the European Parliament
and Council). The primary objective of EMAS is to promote the
continuous improvement of the environmental performance of
industrial activities. It also aims to: (i) establish and implement
environmental policies, management programs and organizational
systems; (ii) conduct a periodical evaluation of performance of the
elements that are part of the regulations; and (iii) to inform the
community about the organization's environmental performance.
It allows European Union companies that develop industrial ac-
tivities to obtain registrations of their units with an EC commission.
An ofcial European Union document containing a list of all
registered units is published annually. A registration is considered a
certicate of good environmental performance for those com-
panies that obtain it.
The ISO 14001 is an international environmental standard that
species requirements related to an EMS to allow the organization
to devise its policy and objectives while considering the legal re-
quirements and information concerning signicant environmental
impacts. A rst version was launched in 1996, and a second one was
launched in 2004 after some changes. Since the launch of the rst
version of the ISO 14001, the number of certied companies in the
world has continuously grown (Bansal and Hunter, 2003; Balzarova
and Castka, 2008).
Despite the EMAS have arisen before, undoubtedly the ISO
14001 gained more notoriety and has become the EMS standard
most worldwide applied. Regarding environmental performance
and different standards (EMAS or ISO 14001), Testa et al. (2014), for
instance, investigated the impacts of EMAS and ISO 14001 on the
reduction of carbonic anhydride emissions on 229 energy intensive
plants in Italy. The results suggested that the implementation of an
environmental management system in energy intensive industries
has a clear inuence on environmental performance both in the
short and in the long term, but a different effect of ISO 14001 and
EMAS on environmental performance occurs.
288 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
Until 2012, 285,844 companies were certied in 165 countries
(ISO, 2012). The number of studies that investigated the global
spread of the standard (e.g. Corbett and Kirsch, 2001; Gavronski
et al., 2008; To and Lee, 2014) and the adoption of environmental
management systems in various countries also increased during
this time. These countries included the USA (Babakri et al., 2003),

Slovenia (Selih, 2007), Spain (Rodrguez et al., 2007, 2011), China
(Hui et al., 2001; Zeng et al., 2005; Qi et al., 2011), Germany
(Morrow and Rondinelli, 2002), Australia (Zutshi and Sohal, 2004),
Turkey (Turk, 2009), Brazil (Avila
and Paiva, 2006; Pombo and
Magrini, 2008; Gavronski et al., 2008; Campos, 2012; Trierweiller
et al., 2013), Japan (Nakamura et al., 2001), among others.
Particularly in Brazil, the evolution and interest in EMS subject
have been growing in the past two decades. In a rst phase, the rst
papers were related to a general overview of the system (Silva and
Medeiros, 2004; Pombo and Magrini, 2008), performance results


(Avila and Paiva, 2006; Oliveira et al., 2010), or motivations and
benets (Gavronski et al., 2008) of the EMS implementation in the
country.
Then in a second phase some concern on the adoption of
environmental practices in ISO 14001 certied companies can be
observe (Oliveira and Pinheiro, 2009; Gavronski et al., 2013; Teles
et al., 2014), the evolution and disclosure of EMS (Jabbour, 2010;
Trierweiller et al., 2013), the use and integration with other man-
agement systems (Oliveira, 2013; Jabbour et al., 2014), and link with
tools like lean manufacturing (Jabbour et al., 2013a). Moreover,
some research regarding the relation between EMS and environ-
mental performance can be identied (Campos and Melo, 2008;
Jabbour et al., 2013a, 2014), the EMSs and protability (Ferron
et al., 2012), and if environmental practices is a competitive prior-
ity for Brazilian companies (Jabbour et al., 2012).
A strong line of research in Brazil has been the one that deals
with the relationship between environmental management in ISO
14001 certied companies and human resources environmental
training (Jabbour et al., 2008; Jabbour and Santos, 2008a, 2008b;
Teixeira et al., 2012; Jabbour, 2013a, 2013b; Jabbour et al., 2013b).
There has also been a line of studies on the application of EMS in
the context of small and medium-sized companies (Campos, 2012;
Ferenhof et al., 2014).
The reasons for implementing an EMS vary (Campos, 2012).
Most motivations are related to external factors, such as the orga-
nization's image, market-related advantages, the demands of the
market and/or customer, or seeking improved stakeholder
communication (Hillary, 2004; Potoski and Prakash, 2004). How-
ever, internal factors also are reasons, such as the emergence of
response, improved information ows (Potoski and Prakash, 2004;
Gavronski et al., 2008), employee motivation, waste reduction,
increased operational efciency (Boudouropoulos and
Arvanitoyannis, 1999) as well as nancial and organizational ben-
ets (Hillary, 2004).
Other publications demonstrate the main benets introduced
by the adoption of an EMS: gaining new markets and customers
(Zutshi and Sohal, 2004; Delmas, 2002), improvement in the
quality of organizational management (Lawrence et al., 2002), and
intangible benets, such as (Delmas, 2002; Zutshi and Sohal, 2004):
improved internal and external process communication, employee
motivation, and organizational image.
The certication is a voluntarily process of structured commu-
nication that informs a company's stakeholders about its environ-
mental management (Melnyk et al., 2003). In summary, an
organization seeks certication when a company:
 feels compelled to meet the economic demands or when the
change is market-driven;
 possesses a high capacity and the necessary competencies to
obtain the certicate (in other words, the effort would not be
excessive);
 holds adequate knowledge about the standard, the impacts of
their activities (internal and external), and identies certica-
tion as a strategic action for the organization.
A number of works have focused their research on the deni-
tion, importance, characteristics, objectives or benets of perfor-
mance measurement indicators (e.g. Adriaanse, 1993; Hronec,
1994; Tunstall, 1994; Hammond et al., 1995; Kaplan and Norton,
2000). Environmental indicators are considered instrumental
concepts that must be added to the objectives of society. Collabo-
rations between academics and practitioners become indispens-
able in addition to government and institutions in order to analyze
the environmental data and it to propose timely environmental
policies (Daz-Moreno, 1999). Each indicator should be related to a
particular environmental problem (Manteiga, 2000). Thus, the in-
dicator of an environmental system responds to a generic and
entirely social interest e the sustainability of development. The
indicators of environmental performance are directly or indirectly
measured from environmental quality, and they express the per-
formance of the surrounding companies (Tocchetto and Tocchetto,
2004). The authors add that these indicators are used to evaluate
and present the trends of conditions for a given environment. They
also allow for checking the effectiveness of deployed actions and to
compare them with those obtained by competing companies.
The ISO 14031 standard is a conceptual reference to the selec-
tion of environmental performance indicators e Environmental
Management e environmental performance evaluation guidelines
e that has been used in Europe since 1999. This standard specif-
ically addresses the guidelines for environmental performance
evaluation and the adoption of indicators; it lists more than 100 of
these guidelines. ISO 14031 (ISO, 2013) describes two general cat-
egories of indicators to be considered when evaluating the envi-
ronmental performance:
 Environmental condition indicators provide data and informa-
tion about the local, regional, national or global conditions of
environmental quality. The measurements carried out according
to environmental standards and rules established by the legal
standards and devices.
 Environmental performance indicators provide data and infor-
mation about the organization's environmental performance
and are classied in two types: (i) managerial, which provide
information about the management efforts that positively in-
uence the environmental performance of the organization as a
whole, and (ii) operational, which provide information related
to the environmental performance on the operation of the
production process.
In this context, the present work was guided by the theoretical
studies of the management and evaluation of environmental per-
formance as well as the types of performance indicators, leading to
the following research questions: what are the key environmental
performance indicators used by companies to manage their EMS
certication according to ISO 14001? In addition, are there simi-
larities between the indicators used by companies in the same in-
dustry? To address those questions, next section describes the
research procedures employed in this study.
3. Research methods
The present research can be characterized as descriptive based
on Pinsonneault and Kraemer (1993). It was carried out via
 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
survey-based research by following guidelines in the literature
(Forza, 2002). The study is considered as an exploratory because
it addresses a subject that is relatively unexplored in the inter-
national literature (environmental performance indicators within
the context of ISO 14001 companies). The data were gathered
using a questionnaire sent to a set of companies with an ISO
14001 certication in Southern Brazil (State of Santa Catarina).
The Southern region is the second most industrialized in the
country. The companies are from the State of Santa Catarina,
which is one of the fastest growing industrial territories in the
nation. Another relevant aspect in the investigated context is the
changes of environmental legislation in emerging countries (such
as China and Brazil part of the so-called BRIC - Brazil, Russia,
India, and China), that will affect organizational managers
(Gunasekarana et al., 2014).
The study sample contained 73 organizations, which were
included in the Brazilian National Institute of Standards,
Metrology and Quality (INMETRO), where secondary data were
accessed to retrieve contact data from the organizations. The
companies belonged to different industrial sectors. After con-
tacting the companies, some of them no longer complied with ISO
14001 certication. So, the sample size was reduced to 62
companies.
The survey instrument was a 9-page questionnaire with opened
and closed questions that could be completed in about 20 min.
After constructing the questionnaire considering the literature, the
instrument was pilot-tested. Data were collected by answering it in
online. To gather data, all companies were contacted by telephone
before e-mailing the website link. The response rate was 63% (39
companies), which is an adequate response rate according to Forza
(2002).
For data analysis, a multivariate analysis was applied to analyze
the data with a two-factorial model. The rst used a multiple cor-
respondence analysis (MCA) because the scale was semantic in
nature, which inhibited the application of other methods that
require quantitative variables (Hair Jr. et al., 2010). The MCA was
used in all types or categories indicated by the respondents. For
each question, the following options were available: never use,
rarely use, frequently use, and always use.
In the second analysis, some questions related to the re-
quirements of ISO 14001 were selected for further cluster analysis.
A number of environmental indicators adopted by companies to
monitor their EMS was used to analyze the data. Principal com-
ponents analysis (PCA) was applied to evaluate the relationship
between the variables and the likeness or similarity among com-
panies, as established by Tabachnick and Fidell (2001). For the
cluster analysis, the PCA extracts a number of factors. Five factors
were chosen because they represented 93.94% of the variance. The
clusters were obtained using Ward's joining method (Hair Jr. et al.,
2010), and the Euclidian distance was chosen as measure of
resemblance or similarity allowing for the creation of a
dendrogram.
4. Results and discussion
The results of this study are presented as follows. Firstly, the
prole of the companies is outlined, followed by the performance
indicators checked by the ISO 14001 requirement using the results
of the Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA). Because of the
type of requirements, the indicators may be operational or mana-
gerial. Principal Components Analysis and Cluster are secondly
presented. Finally, a correlation among the main groups of com-
panies, predominant industrial sectors, and standard requirements
with key indicators are highlighted.
289
4.1. Demographics of companies
Twenty industrial sectors registered in a database (RMAI, 2005)
were used to dene the economic sectors. Ten companies from 20
economic sectors answered the questionnaire, as summarized in
Table 1.
The individual who answered the questionnaire was usually the
Management System Coordinator, with the larger number of an-
swers (22). Others included: production managers (06), environ-
mental analysts (05), internal consulting people (03), industrial
engineers (02), and technical assistants (01). Based on the answers,
most respondents (72%) were directly related to the environmental
management department. Moreover, an expressive number of re-
spondents participated in the critical analysis of the environmental
management system (EMS) of the company. It is worth mentioning
that green teams are frequently considered in the state-of-the-art
literature as an essential factor for companies aiming to imple-
ment and improve environmental management approaches and
practices (Jabbour et al., 2013b). Therefore, the involvement of the
respondents in the critical analysis and their knowledge of the
environmental management system can be considered as key
points for maintaining the EMS.
Concerning the number of employees, the data collection in-
strument considered three groups for classication purposes, as
shown in Table 2: small size companies, medium size, and large size
companies. As can be seen in Table 2, the majority of respondents
are medium-sized companies.
The results showed in Table 2 corroborated ndings from other
similar study (Oliveira et al., 2010). Oliveira et al. (2010) veried the
benets and difculties of Environmental Management Systems
based on ISO 14001 at companies in the state of Sa ~o Paulo, Brazil.
Similarly, the major respondents were also medium-sized com-
panies (43,5%).
The origin of most respondents were national (56%), followed by
multinational companies (33%). Companies with mixed capital (8%)
and government companies (3%) were also represented in the
sample. Concerning the ISO 14001 certication, the major part of
the companies was certied between 2001 and 2002, as showed in
Table 3. Oliveira et al. (2010) found a similar result. Their sample
shows a concentration of certication of companies in Sa ~o Paulo
around 2001 and 2003.
The BVQI (Bureau Veritas) stands out as the preferred certifying
body (48%), followed by DNV e Det Norske Veritas (12%). The
BRTV and the ABS Quality Evaluations are the third most popular
certifying body (with 8% of companies).
4.2. Main environmental performance indicators according to
standard requirements
Data analyses have shown that seven requirements stand out for
most companies that always and/or frequently monitor
Table 1
Economic sectors surveyed.
Economic sector Respondents
Paper and cellulose/furniture/wood 19%
Services 13%
Food 10%
Electric and electronic home appliances 10%
Metallurgy 10%
Tobacco 10%
Textile 10%
Petrochemical 8%
Civil construction 5%
Transport 5%
290 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296

Table 2 indicators for seven requirements, i.e. those most commonly used
Number of employees in companies. by certied companies and that contribute to effectiveness of the
N of employees Respondents EMS. Thus, those were further veried. The ve performance in-
Fewer than 100 18%
dicators for each requirement that had the highest frequency of
From 100 to 1000 59% always and frequently were then selected. For example, the ten
More than 1000 23% most commonly used indicators were selected for the 4.3.1.
Environmental Aspects requirement.
The following tables show the main indicators and how to
Table 3 measure them: Table 4 (4.3.2 Legal and other requirements),
ISO 14001 certication per year (n 62 Table 5 (4.4.2 Competence, training and awareness), Table 6 (4.4.7
companies). Emergency preparedness and response), Table 7 (4.5.2 Evaluation
Year Percentage of legal and other requirements), Table 8 (4.5.3 Nonconformity,
1998 5%
Corrective Action and Preventive Action), Table 9 (4.5.1 Monitoring
1999 10% and Measurement), and Table 10 (4.3.1 Environmental Aspects).
2000 13% These results are discussed in sequence by considering the size of
2001 20% companies as well as the economic industrial sectors that stood out
2002 18%
for their use of indicators.
2003 15%
2004 10% The performance indicators showed in the previous tables is
2005 3% relevant to be highlighted. Boog and Bizzo (2003) argue that the use
2006 5% of performance indicators as management tools demonstrates the
effectiveness of the organization to ensure clear operational and
environmental conditions. The demonstration of these conditions
environmental performance. These requirements were: 4.3.2. Legal directs the efforts of companies towards preventive environmental
and other requirements; 4.4.2. Competence, training and aware- actions and/or corrective ones. Nevertheless, a performance indi-
ness; 4.4.7. Emergence, preparedness and response; 4.5.2. Evalua- cator system should be deployed based on the organization's
tion of compliance; 4.5.3. Non-conformances, corrective and mission and related to strategies via the identication of critical
preventive action; 4.3.1. Environmental aspects; and 4.5.1. Moni- success factors of its business. This requirement may be a barrier for
toring and measurement. the use of indicators in small businesses (Campos, 2012) because
Companies most often use indicators of the performance re- they are the more systematically used by medium and large
quirements that are more directly associated with legal re- companies.
quirements (emergency preparedness and response, assessment of Finally, the results obtained via the correspondence technique
legal and other requirements and environmental aspects). This show that companies in the pulp and paper/furniture/wood, textile,
nding is corroborated by Donaire (1994), who argues that the electrical/electronics and tobacco industries always used the
internalization of environmental variables by companies is the performance indicators. However, the services sector, petrochem-
result of external inuences from the environmental legislation, ical industry, construction industry and transportation industry do
and from the pressures demanded by the national and interna- not use and/or rarely use most of the performance indicators. These
tional community, which results in internal repercussions for or- last ndings differ from the previous one if the environmental
ganizations (Balzarova and Castka, 2008). impact of companies activities from those sectors were considered.
Considering the large amount of indicator requirements for ISO An unexpected result were from petrochemical companies since
14001 (total of 188), this work emphasizes the key performance these organizations do not adopt performance indicators. As well-

Table 4
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.3.2.

Environmental-managerial performance indicators How to assess

Compliance with the legislation Total of items required by legislation/total number of times that legislation
has not been followed  100
Number of complaints reported regarding the environment Total of complaints reported to the company regarding the environment
Number of legal non-conformities registered Total of legal non-conformities registered per year (includes nes, lings,
contaminations)
Legal parameters regarding the discharge of efuents required by legislation Total of legal parameters (includes DBO, DQO, phosphorus, fecal coliforms,
total coliforms, etc.)
Number of accidents occurred throughout company history Total of employee accidents throughout company history
Industrial sectors: Civil construction; Tobacco; Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Food; Metallurgy and Electric/Electric-Electronic.

Table 5
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.4.2.

Managerial environmental performance indicators How to assess

Investment in activities for environmental awareness Total of investments destined to activities of environmental awareness
Occupational safety percentage (Number of accidents at work/total employees)  100
Employee satisfaction percentage General result of the employee satisfaction research
Employee's educational index {(5  total of doctors) (3  total of masters) (2  total of specialists)
(1  total of graduate employees)/total of employees}
Investment in training and development per employee Total of resources applied in training and development/n of employee
Industrial sectors: Metallurgy; Electric/Electric-Electronic; Petrochemical and Textile.
 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296 291

Table 6
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.4.7.

Managerial environmental performance indicators How to assess

Number of emergency simulations carried out (ISO 14031)i Total of emergency simulations carried out during the year
Emergency action plans Total of implanted emergency action plans
Response to emergencies Total of fast responses to environmental accidents
Communication of risks Total of communications about the environmental risks of the company
Number of emergencies attended Total of emergencies attended per year
Sectors: Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Electric/Electric-Electronic and Textile.

Table 7
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.5.2.

Managerial environmental performance indicators How to assess

Time to answer or correct environmental accidents (ISO 14031)
Level of compliance with regulations (ISO 14031)
Level of compliance by service companies with company requirements and
expectancies in contracts (ISO 14031)
Number of positive and negative reports regarding the company's environmental
activities
Number of external environment initiatives reported to support the company
Sectors: Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Metallurgy and Textile.
Total time to answer or correct environmental accidents in the year/number
of environmental incidents in the year
(Number of complied regulations/Total number of regulations)  100
(Total of compliance with company requirements and expectancies in
contracts/Total of services carried out)  100
Sum of the printed reports (positive negative)
Sum of the external environment initiatives

Table 8
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.5.3.

Managerial environmental performance indicators How to assess

Number of identied corrective actions that have ended or those that have not yet
ended (ISO 14031)
Number and type of non-compliance incidences with national or international
standards in force
Number of non-conformities detected during internal audits
Number of corrective and preventive actions started
Percentage of effectiveness of non-conformities, corrective and preventive actions started
Industrial sectors: Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Electric/Electric-Electronic;
Petrochemical and Tobacco.
Total of corrective actions identied in the year
Total of non-compliance incidences with national or international
standards in force during the year (per type)
Total of non-conformities received in SGA internal audits
Total of corrective and preventive action reports started
(Total of effective actions/total of actions started)  100

Table 9
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.5.1.

Operational environmental performance Indicators How to assess

Number of defective products (ISO 14031) (Total of defective products/total of products produced)  100
Number of energy units consumed during product use (ISO 14031) Total of energy units consumed during product use
Amount of fuel consumed (ISO 14031) Total of fuel consumed in the year
Total of electric energy Total of monthly electric energy consumed in Mwh per ton of produced proles
Volume of water consumed Total of the monthly volume of water consumed in m3 per ton of produced proles
Industrial sectors: Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Electric/Electric-Electronic and Tobacco.

Table 10
Main performance indicators of requirement 4.3.1.

Operational environmental performance Indicators How to assess

Amount of energy used per year or per product unit (ISO 14031) Total energy used per year or per product unit
Amount of waste for disposal (ISO 14031) Total of waste for monthly disposal
Amount of waste stored on-site (ISO 14031) Total of waste stored on-site monthly
Noise measured at a location (ISO 14031) Total of noise measured per location
Recycling of waste Total waste recycled monthly
Consumption of raw materials Total of raw materials used monthly
Production of solid waste Total of solid waste produced monthly
Physical and chemical qualities of efuents Verify compliance with legislation (administrative rule SSMA 05/89)
Amount of acquired electricity Total amount of electricity acquired monthly
Total energy consumption Total of monthly energy
Industrial sectors: Paper and Cellulose/Furniture; Electric/Electric-Electronic; Petrochemical and Textile.
292 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
know, this is a highly impactful sector due to the nature of its op-
erations, as the pulp and paper/furniture/wood, textile, electrical/
electronics and tobacco industries.
4.3. Analysis of principal components (ACP) and groups of
companies
The analysis veried that the rst two factors regained 78.81% of
the inertia of the system, which was sufcient to be included in the
study. When predicting the variables shown in Fig. 1, the main plan
(performance indicators by requirement of the standard) indicated
positive correlations between the majorities of indicators, as
demonstrated by the acute angles between the vectors that
represent the variable. An angle of approximately 90 between the
indicators Non-conformances, Corrective Action and Preventive
Action (NCACP), Emergency Preparedness and Response (PRAE)
and Legal and other requirements (RLEO) denotes a lack of as-
sociation among these indicators. In other words, the uctuations
in the number of indicators that a company uses for NCACP, for
example, does not depend on the number of indicators used for
PRAE and RLEO, which are interrelated. The indicators Non-con-
formances, Corrective Action and Preventive Action (NCACP) were
also veried to have higher correlation with the indicator Moni-
toring and Measurement (MOME), followed by Operational
Control (COPE).
A cluster analysis was then conducted from factorial scores of
companies, including the rst ve factors that accounted for 93.43%
of the variance. The group constitution was obtained by the com-
bined Ward method, and the Euclidian distance measure of simi-
larity or likeness was chosen to generate the dendrogram showed
in Fig. 2.
Using the distance of combination 8 as the cutting line for the
interpretation, the grouping of six companies was veried (high-
lighted with colors (in the web version) in Fig. 2). This result shows
that the rst group consisted of twelve companies (E24 to E6) and,
thus, it was the most homogeneous compared to the remaining.
Fig. 1. Projection of the variables. Environmental Policy (PAMB); Legal and other re-
quirements (RLEO); Objectives, Targets and Programs (OMEP); Resources, Functions,
Responsibility and Authority (RFRA); Competence, training and awareness (CTEC);
Communication (COMU); Emergence, preparedness and response (PRAE); Evaluation
of compliance (ARLO); Non-conformances, corrective and preventive action (NCACP);
Environmental aspects (AAMB); Operational Control (COPE); Monitoring and mea-
surement (MOME).
Source: Research data.
This group primarily consisted of the industrial paper and cellulose/
furniture/wood sector (E11, E12, E25, E37, and E38), which was
represented by only 2 companies, number 22 and 30 in another
group. This group highlights companies that always or
frequently use most of the performance indicators required by
the standard.
The third group formed exclusively by two companies (E8 and
E9) in the transport industry that uses a minimum amount of
environmental performance indicators required by the standard
was also emphasized. The remaining groups are represented by the
tobacco, electricity/electro-electronics/electronic, petrochemical
and provision of services industry, which use a small number of
performance indicators required by the standard compared to the
rst group, as discussed earlier.
The group analysis (dendogram in Fig. 2) considered six groups
of companies (G1 a G6) and industrial prioritized sectors related to
standard requirements and main environmental indicators. The
criterions to select the indicators were the top three most
frequently adopted by the groups of companies. However, in some
groups the indicators had the same frequency. Therefore, those
were described as having the same value.
Table 11 shows the industry sectors, the standard requirements,
and a list of the key performance indicators most frequently used
by companies, as grouped by cluster analysis.
In the rst group of companies (G1) ve sectors are represented.
The last two, which belong to the food industry and tobacco, has the
same number of companies. Therefore, they share the same posi-
tion. It is noteworthy that this group most frequently used three
performance indicators of a single standard requirement: Legal and
other requirements (RLEO). This means that such companies are
concerned primarily with monitoring indicators basically related to
the legal demands.
The second group (G2) primarily consists of the tobacco in-
dustry, followed by service sectors and food industry. Those sector
have the same number of companies and monitor 15 performance
indicators more frequently. It was not possible to select only the
three main indicators because there is no predominance of any of
them since all have the same percentage of frequency of use. These
indicators belong to four standard requirements: RLEO (Legal and
other requirements), CTEC (Competence, training and awareness),
NCACP (Non-conformances, corrective and preventive action) and
AAMB (Environmental aspects).
The third (G3) and fth (G5) group, stand out because they are
formed by only one industrial sector, namely: transportation and
petrochemicals respectively. The transport sector more frequently
uses two main performance indicators from the requirements RLEO
(Legal and other requirements) and CTEC (Competence, training
and awareness). Once again, this result show the concern for
compliance with legislation and environmental awareness. For this
group (G3) the third most frequent was not selected because of
having many indicators with the same percentage of use. The
petrochemical sector pointed out four most used indicators (of
which the last two have the same percentage of use) related to
RLEO (Legal and other requirements), ARLO (Evaluation of
compliance) and AAMB (Environmental aspects).
When analyzing the fourth group of companies (G4) the three
main performance indicators concern the requirements: AAMB
(Environmental aspects) and MOME (Monitoring and measure-
ment). They are frequently used for six industry sectors, with the
same number of companies in some sectors. From the data shown
in Table 11, it is possible to conclude that this group is concerned
about the environment, primarily by controlling energy resources
and water.
Finally, the sixth group of companies (G6) is formed mainly by
the service sector, followed by the metallurgical industries, food
 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
Fig. 2. Dendrogram of companies from factorial scores of ACP. The numbers after the letter E represent the companies' respondents (from 1 to 39) and sector (from 1 to 10). The
following industries were included: 1 paper and cellulose/furniture/wood; 2 food; 3 civil construction; 4 Electricity/electric-electronic/electronic; 5 metallurgy;
6 provision of services; 7 textile; 8 transport; 9 tobacco; 10 petrochemical.
Source: Research data.
and textile, which have the same number of companies. These
organizations employ a large number of performance indicators,
but there is no predominance of any one. Therefore, it was not
possible to select the top three considering the frequency of use.
Indicators listed in Table 11 are from the following requirements:
CTEC (Competence, training and awareness), PRAE (Emergence,
preparedness and response), NCACP (Non-conformances, correc-
tive and preventive action) and AAMB (Environmental aspects).
Finally, one can clain that the overall picture in Table 11 suggests
that the requirements RLEO (Legal and other requirements) and
AAMB (Environmental aspects) were most commonly used. This
demonstrated that the company concern is centered in complying
to the legal requirements in addition to the conservation of envi-
ronmental resources, which may be considered as basic.
5. Conclusions
This work presented the results of a survey that sought to
determine the set of environmental performance indicators that
have been used by companies certied by ISO 14001 in Southern of
Brazil. This work intended to contribute to the environment com-
munity that addresses this subject and companies that want to
manage and continually improve their EMS.
The data analysis indicated three different sets of requirements
for the standard. The rst group is characterized by a higher
number of companies and/or sectors that always or often use
most of the indicators (standard requirements: 4.3.2 Legal and
other requirements; 4.3.3 Objectives, goals and programs; 4.4.7
Emergency preparedness and response; 4.5.3 Nonconformity,
corrective action and preventive action, and 4.3.1.environmental
aspects). Companies most frequently use performance indicators
that are directly associated with legal requirements, possibly
because companies are forced to meet the environmental
regulations.
293
The second group is characterized by a higher number of com-
panies that do not or rarely use most of the performance in-
dicators (standard requirements: 4.4.3 Communication, and 4.4.6
Control operational). Apparently, these requirements are more
qualitatively monitored while considering that the standard does
not require the company to systematically monitor or measure all
of the requisites of the standard. Nevertheless, this requires more
in-depth studies.
The third group was formed exclusively by the requirement
4.5.1 Monitoring and Measurement. This group was characterized
by an apparent uncertainty regarding the use of operational in-
dicators. Four of the 10 industrial sectors claimed they always or
often use most of the indicators listed. Likewise, four of the 10
industrial sectors stated they rarely or never use the same in-
dicators. Nevertheless, the analysis of the sectors themselves has
not shown a discrepancy. The set of sectors that checked always
or often used consists of paper and pulp companies as well as the
furniture/wood, textile, electrical/electronic and tobacco industries,
which have greater control of their activities because they are un-
der more pressure from society. The transport, services and con-
struction sectors suffer less pressure.
The data also indicate that the pulp and paper/furniture/wood
and textiles sectors of the Southern of Brazil generally consist of
companies that encompass some sort of monitoring of their EMS
using environmental performance indicators. This trend can be
attributed to the fact that these two sectors were pioneers in
seeking to certify their EMS. The companies in the services sectors
are the least likely to use indicators, probably because its features
are less polluting.
From cluster analysis, groups of companies related to the in-
dustrial sectors, the standard requirements and a summary of the
key performance indicators used more frequently were also iden-
tied. Legal and other requirements (RLEO) and Environmental
Aspects (AAMB) are the requirements most representative. In
addition, there should be a concern for companies to meet the legal
294 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296

Table 11
Main groups of companies by sectors, standard requirements, and performance indicators most frequently used.

Groups of Priority sectors Requirements of the standard Name of the main indicators used
companies

G1 1 Paper and RLEO 1 Compliance with the legislation

cellulose/furniture/wood 2 Number of legal non-conformities registered
2 Metallurgy 3 Legal parameters regarding the discharge of efuents required by legislation
3 Textile
4 Food
4 Tobacco
G2 1 Tobacco RLEO/CTEC/NCACP/AAMB 1
Compliance with the legislation
2 Provision of services 2
Number of complaints reported regarding the environment
2 Food 3
Number of legal non-conformities registered
4
Legal parameters regarding the discharge of efuents required by legislation
5
Occupational safety percentage
6
Investment in training and development per employee
7
Number of identied corrective actions that have ended or those that have
not yet ended
8 Number and type of non-compliance incidences with national or
international standards in force
9 Number of non-conformities detected during internal audits
10 Number of corrective and preventive actions started
11 Percentage of effectiveness of non-conformities, corrective and
preventive actions started
12 Amount of waste for disposal
13 Recycling of waste
14 Production of solid waste
15 Physical and chemical qualities of efuents
G3 1 Transport RLEO/CTEC 1 Compliance with the legislation
2 Investment in activities for environmental awareness
G4 1 Electricity/electric-electronic/ AAMB/MOME 1 Total energy consumption
electronic 2 Total of electric energy
2 Paper and cellulose/furniture/ 3 Volume of water consumed
wood
2 Provision of services
2 Civil construction
3 Textile
3 Food
G5 1 Petrochemical RLEO/ARLO/AAMB 1 Number of legal non-conformities registered
2 Number of accidents occurred throughout company history
3 Time to answer or correct environmental accidents
4 Total energy consumption
G6 1 Provision of services CTEC/PRAE/NCACP/AAMB 1 Occupational safety percentage
2 Metallurgy; 2 Number of emergency simulations carried out
2 Food 3 Number of emergencies attended
2 Textile 4 Number of identied corrective actions that have ended or those
that have not yet ended
5 Number of non-conformities detected during internal audits
6 Number of corrective and preventive actions started
7 Percentage of effectiveness of non-conformities, corrective and
preventive actions started
8 Amount of energy used per year or per product unit
9 Amount of waste for disposal
10 Amount of waste stored on-site
11 Noise measured at a location
12 Recycling of waste
13 Consumption of raw materials
14 Production of solid waste
15 Amount of acquired electricity
16 Total energy consumption

Requirements of the standard: Legal and other requirements (RLEO); Competence, training and awareness (CTEC); Non-conformances, corrective and preventive action
(NCACP); Environmental aspects (AAMB); Monitoring and measurement (MOME); Evaluation of compliance (ARLO); Emergence, preparedness and response (PRAE).

requirements as well as the conservation of environmental re-
sources, which is, in fact, a conrmatory result.
Finally, this work does suffer from limitations when conducting
this research. A limited number of companies answered the ques-
tionnaire, primarily because it was long to some extent. Moreover,
the application includes one state (Santa Catarina) in a developing
country, although it is relevant in the in the Southern of Brazil. This
limitation does not invalidate the present study, since the results
can be added to previous studies on ISO 14000. Future studies
should consider increase the external validity by expand the survey
to other parts of the nation.
References
Adriaanse, A., 1993. Environmental Policy Performance Indicators. General of
Environment of the Dutch Ministry of Housing, VROM, The Hague.
Albuquerque, P., Bronnenberg, B.J., Corbett, C.J., 2007. A Spatiotemporal analysis of
the global diffusion of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 certication. Manag. Sci. 53 (3),
451e468.
 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296


Avila, G.J., Paiva, E.L., 2006. Processos operacionais e resultados de empresas bra-
sileiras apo
s a certicaa ~o ambiental ISO14001. Gest~ ao Produ~ ao 13 (3),
475e487.
Babakri, K.A., Bennet, R.A., Franchetti, M., 2003. Critical factors for implementing
ISO 14001 standard in United States industrial companies. J. Clean. Prod. 11,
749e752.
Balzarova, M.A., Castka, P., 2008. Underlying mechanisms in the maintenance of ISO
14001 environmental management system. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1949e1957.
Bansal, P., Hunter, T., 2003. Strategic explanations for the early adoption of ISO
14001. J. Bus. Ethics 46, 289e299.
Boiral, O., 2007. Corporate greening through ISO 14001: a rational myth? Organ. Sci.
18 (1), 127e146.
Bonifant, B., Ratcliff, I., 1994. Competitive Implications of Environmental Regula-
tions in the Pulp and Paper Industry. Management Institute for the Environ-
ment and Business, Washington DC.
Boog, E.G., Bizzo, W.A., 2003. Utiliza~ ao de indicadores ambientais como instru-
mento para gesta ~o de desempenho ambiental em empresas certicadas com a
ISO 14001 (Paper presented at the annual meeting for the SIMPEP, Bauru/SP/
Brazil, November).
Boudouropoulos, I., Arvanitoyannis, I., 1999. Current state and advances in the
implementation of ISO 14000 by the food industries: comparison of ISO 14000
to ISO 9000 to other environmental programs. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 9,
395e408.
Campos, L.M.S., 2012. Environmental management systems (EMS) for small com-
panies: a study in Southern Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 32, 141e147.
Campos, L.M.S., Melo, D.A., 2008. Indicadores de desempenho dos Sistemas de
Gesta ~o Ambiental (SGA): uma pesquisa teo
rica. Produa
~o 18 (3), 540e555.
Casadesus, M., Marimon, F., Heras, I., 2008. ISO 14001 diffusion after the success of
the ISO 9001 model. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (16), 1741e1754.
Celik, M., 2009. A hybrid design methodology for structuring an Integrated Envi-
ronmental Management System (IEMS) for shipping business. J. Environ.
Manag. 90, 1469e1475.
Chan, E.S.W., Wong, S.C.K., 2006. Motivations for ISO 14001 in the hotel industry.
Tour. Manag. 27 (3), 481e492.
Corbett, C.J., Kirsch, D.A., 2001. International diffusion of ISO 14000 certication.
Prod. Oper. Manag. 10, 327e338.
Delmas, M.A., 2002. The diffusion of environmental management standards in
Europe and the United States: an institutional perspective. Policy Sci. 35,
91e119.
Daz-Moreno, A.B., 1999. Possibilidades metodolo
gicas de aplicacio

n de indicadores
ambientales a nvel municipal. Rev. Estud. Ambient. 1 (1), 77e95.
Donaire, D., 1994. Considera~ ao sobre a vari
avel ambiental na empresa. Rev. Adm.
Empres. 34 (2), 68e77.
Ferenhof, H.A., Vignochi, L., Selig, P.M., Lezana, A.G.R., Campos, L.M.S., 2014. Envi-
ronmental management systems in small and medium-sized enterprises: an
analysis and systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 77, 44e53.
Ferron, R.T., Funchal, B., Nossa, V., Teixeira, A.J.C., 2012. Braz. Adm. Rev. 9, 78e94.
Forza, C., 2002. Survey research in operations management: a process-based
perspective. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 22 (2), 152e194.
Gavronski, I., Ferrer, G., Paiva, E.L., 2008. ISO 14001 certication in Brazil: motiva-
tions and benets. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 87e94.
Gavronski, I., Paiva, E.L., Teixeira, R., Andrade, M.C.F., 2013. ISO 14001 certied
plants in Brazil e taxonomy and practices. J. Clean. Prod. 39, 32e41.
Gonza
lez-Benito, J., Gonz

2005. A study of the motivations for the
alez-Benito, O.,
environmental transformation of companies. Ind. Mark. Manag. 34 (5),
462e475.
Guerrero-Baena, M.D., Go
mez-Limo
n, J.A., Fruet, J.D., 2014. A multicriteria
method for environmental management system selection: an intellectual
capital approach. J. Clean. Prod. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.079.
Gunasekarana, A., Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.S., 2014. Managing organizations for
sustainable development in emerging countries: an introduction. Int. J. Sustain.
Dev. World Ecol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2014.915439.
Hair Jr, F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson, R.E., Black, W.C., 2010. Ana
lise Multivariada de
Dados. Bookman.
Hammond, A., Adriaanse, A., Rodenburg, E., Bryant, D., Woodward, R., 1995. Envi-
ronmental Indicators: a Systematic Approach to Measuring and Reporting on
Environmental Policy Performance in the Context of Sustainable Development.
World Resources Institute Publications, Baltimore.
Henri, J.-F., Journeault, M., 2008. Environmental performance indicators: an empirical
study of Canadian manufacturing rms. J. Environ. Manag. 87, 165e176.
Hillary, R., 2004. Environmental management systems and the smaller enterprise.
J. Clean. Prod. 12, 561e569.
Hronec, S.M., 1994. Sinais Vitais. MakronBooks, Sa ~o Paulo.
Hui, I.K., Chan, A., Pun, K.F., 2001. A study of the environmental management system
practices. J. Clean. Prod. 9, 241e256.
Inman, R.A., 2002. Implications of environmental management for operations
management. Prod. Plan. Control: Manag. Oper. 13 (1), 47e55.
ISO 14001, 2004. Environmental Management Systems e Requirements with
Guidance for Use. International Organization for Standardization.
ISO 14031, 2013. Environmental Management e Environmental Performance
Evaluation e Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
ISO/Survey, 2010. The ISO Survey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14001 Certicates. Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization.
295
ISO/Survey, 2012. The ISO Survey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14001 Certicates. Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization.
Jabbour, C.J.C., 2010. Non-linear pathways of corporate environmental manage-
ment: a survey of ISO 14001-certied companies in Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 18,
1222e1225.
Jabbour, C.J.C., 2013a. Environmental training in organisations: from a
literature review to a framework for future research. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 74,
144e155.
Jabbour, C.J.C., 2013b. Environmental training and environmental management
maturity of Brazilian companies with ISO14001: empirical evidence. J. Clean.
Prod. 96, 331e338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.039.
Jabbour, C.J.C., da Silva, E.M., Paiva, E.L., Santos, F.C.A., 2012. Environmental man-
agement in Brazil: is it a completely competitive priority? J. Clean. Prod. 21,
11e22.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., 2008a. Relationships between human resource di-
mensions and environmental management in companies: proposal of a model.
J. Clean. Prod. 16, 51e58.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., 2008b. The central role of human resource manage-
ment in the search for sustainable organizations. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 19,
2133e2154.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., Nagano, M.S., 2008. Environmental management
system and human resource practices: is there a link between them in four
Brazilian companies? J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1922e1925.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.S., Govindan, K., Teixeira, A.A., Freitas, W.R.S., 2013a.
Environmental management and operational performance
in automotive companies in Brazil: the role of human resource management
and lean manufacturing. J. Clean. Prod. 47, 129e140.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., Fonseca, S.A., Nagano, M.S., 2013b. Green teams: un-
derstanding their roles in the environmental management of companies
located in Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 46, 58e66.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.S., Latan, H., Teixeira, A.A., Oliveira, J.H.C., 2014. Quality
management, environmental management maturity, green supply chain prac-
tices and green performance of Brazilian companies with ISO 14001 certica-
tion: direct and indirect effects. Transp. Res. Part E 67, 39e51.
Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P., 2000. Organiza~ ao Orientada para a Estrate
gia. Campus,
Rio de Janeiro.
Klassen, R.D., McLaughlin, C.P., 1996. The impact of environmental management on
rm performance. Manag. Sci. 42 (8), 1199e1214.
Lagodimos, A.G., Chountalas, P.T., Chatzi, K., 2007. The state of ISO 14001 certi-
cation in Greece. J. Clean. Prod. 15 (18), 1743e1754.
Lawrence, L., Andrews, D., Ralph, B., France, C., 2002. Identifying and assessing
environmental impacts: Investigating ISO 14001 approaches. TQM Mag. 14,
43e51.
Link, S., Naveh, E., 2006. Standardization and discretion: does the environmental
standard ISO 14001 Lead to performance benets? IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 53
(4), 508e519.
Lopez-Gamero, M.D., Molina-Azorin, J.F., Claver-Cortes, E., 2010. The potential of
environmental regulation to change managerial perception, environmental
management, competitiveness and nancial performance. J. Clean. Prod. 18,
963e974.
Manteiga, L., 2000. Los indicadores ambientales como instrumiento para el desar-
rollo de la poltica ambiental y su integracio
n en otras polticas. In: Estadsticas
Y Medio Ambiente. Instituto de Estadstica de Andalucia, Junta de Andalucia.
Sivilla.
Melnyk, S.A., Sroufe, R.P., Calantone, R.J., 2003. A model of site-specic antecedents
of ISO 14001 Certication. Prod. Oper. Manag. 12 (3), 369e385.
Morrow, D., Rondinelli, D., 2002. Adopting corporate environmental management
systems: motivations and results of ISO 14001 and EMAS certication. Eur.
Manag. J. 20, 159e171.
Nakamura, M., Takahashi, T., Vertinsky, H., 2001. Why Japanese Firms choose to
certify: a study of managerial responses to environmental issues. J. Environ.
Econ. Manag. 42, 23e52.
Nawrocka, D., Parker, T., 2009. Finding the connection: environmental management
systems and environmental performance. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 601e607.
Nishitani, K., 2010. Demand for ISO 14001 adoption in the global supply chain: an
empirical analysis focusing on environmentally conscious markets. Resour.
Energy Econ. 32 (3), 395e407.
Oliveira, O.J., 2013. Guidelines for the integration of certiable management sys-
tems in industrial companies. J. Clean. Prod. 57, 124e133.
Oliveira, O.J., Pinheiro, C.R.M.S., 2009. Best practices for the implantation of ISO
14001 norms: a study of change management in two industrial companies in
the Midwest region of the state of S~ ao Paulo e Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 17 (9),
883e885.
Oliveira, O.J., Serra, J.R., Salgado, M.H., 2010. Does ISO 14001 work in Brazil? J. Clean.
Prod. 18, 1797e1806.
Perotto, E., Canziani, R., Marchesi, R., Butelli, P., 2008. Environmental performance,
indicators and measurement uncertainty in EMS context: a case study. J. Clean.
Prod. 16, 517e530.
Petroni, A., 2001. Developing a methodology for analysis of benets and short-
comings of ISO 14001 registration: lessons from experience of a large ma-
chinery manufacturer. J. Clean. Prod. 9, 351e364.
Pinsonneault, A., Kraemer, K.L., 1993. Survey research methodology in management
information systems: an assessment. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 10 (2), 75e106.
296 L.M.S. Campos et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 99 (2015) 286e296
Poksinska, B., Dahlgaard, J.J., Eklund, J.A.E., 2003. Implementing ISO 14000 in
Sweden: motives, benets and comparisons with ISO 9000. Int. J. Qual. Reliab.
Manag. 20 (5), 585e606.
Pombo, F.R., Magrini, A., 2008. Panorama de aplicaa ~o da norma ISO 14001 no
Brasil. Gesta ~o Produa~o 15 (1), 1e10.
Porter, M.E., Van Der Linde, C., 1995. Green and competitive: ending the statement.
Harv. Bus. Rev. 73 (5), 120e134.
Potoski, M., Prakash, A., 2004. Regulatory convergence in nongovernmental regimes?
Cross-national adoption of ISO 14001 certications. J. Polit. 66, 885e905.
Prajogo, D., Tang, A.K.Y., Lai, K.H., 2012. Do rms get what they want from ISO 14001
adoption?: an Australian perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 33, 117e126.
Qi, G.Y., Zeng, S.X., Tam, C.M., Yin, H.T., Wu, J.F., Dai, Z.H., 2011. Diffusion of ISO
14001 environmental management systems in China: rethinking on stake-
holders' roles. J. Clean. Prod. 19, 1250e1256.
RMAI e Revista Meio Ambiente Industrial, 2005. Homenagem a  marca histo
rica das
2000 certicao ~es em conformidade com a ISO 14001. Year X, 55th ed.
Rodrguez, G., Alegre, F.J., Martnez, G., 2007. The contribution of environmental
management systems to the management of construction and demolition
waste: the case of the Autonomous Community of Madrid (Spain). Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 50, 334e349.
Rodrguez, G., Alegre, F.J., Martnez, G., 2011. Evaluation of environmental
management resources (ISO 14001) at civil engineering construction work-
sites: a case study of the community of Madrid. J. Environ. Manag. 92,
1858e1866.
Rondinelli, D., Vastag, G., 2000. Panacea, common sense, or just a Label?
The value of ISO 14001 environmental management systems. Eur. Manag. J. 18
(5), 499e510.
Sambasivan, M., Fei, N.Y., 2008. Evaluation of critical success factors of imple-
mentation of ISO 14001 using analytic hierarchy process (AHP): a case study
from Malaysia. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1424e1433.

Selih, J., 2007. Environmental management systems and construction SMEs: a case
study for Slovenia. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 13 (3), 217e226.
Silva, G.C.S., Medeiros, D.D., 2004. Environmental management in Brazilian com-
panies. Manag. Environ. Qual. 15 (4), 380e388.
Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 2001. Using Multivariate Statistics, fourth ed. Allyn and
Bacon, Boston, MA.
Teixeira, A.A., Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.S., 2012. Relationship between green
management and environmental training in companies located in Brazil: a
theoretical framework and cases studies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 318e329.
Teles, C.D., Ribeiro, J.L.D., Tinoco, M.A.C., ten Caten, C.S., 2014. Characterization
of the adoption of environmental management practices in large
Brazilian companies. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 256e264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2014.08.048.
Testa, F., Rizzi, F., Daddi, T., Gusmerotti, N.M., Frey, M., Iraldo, F., 2014. EMAS and ISO
14001: the differences in effectively improving environmental performance. J.
Clean. Prod. 68, 165e173.
To, W.M., Lee, P.K.C., 2014. Diffusion of ISO 14001 environmental management
system: global, regional and country-level analyses. J. Clean. Prod. 66, 489e498.
Tocchetto, M.R.L., Tocchetto, A.L., 2004. Indicadores de desempenho ambiental para
empresas com atividade galva ^nica. In: Congresso Acade ^mico sobre o Meio
Ambiente e Desenvolvimento. CADMA, Rio de Janeiro.
Trierweiller, A.C., Peixe, B.C.S., Tezza, R., Bornia, A.C., Campos, L.M.S., 2013.
Measuring environmental management disclosure in industries in Brazil with
Item Response Theory. J. Clean. Prod. 47, 298e305.
Tsai, W.-H., Chou, W.-C., 2009. Selecting management systems for sustainable
development in SMEs: a novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and
ZOGP. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 1444e1458.
Tunstall, D., 1994. Developing and using indicators of sustainable development in
Africa: an overview. In: Thematic Workshop on Indicators of Sustainable
Development, Banjul, Gambia, May 16e18.
Turk, A.M., 2009. The benets associated with ISO 14001 certication for con-
struction rms: turkish case. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 559e569.
Viadiu, F.M., Fa, M.C., Saizarbitoria, I.H., 2006. ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 standards: an
international diffusion model. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 26 (2), 141e165.
Zeng, S.X., Tam, C.M., Tam, V.W.Y., Deng, Z.M., 2005. Towards implementation of ISO
14001 environmental management systems in selected industries in China.
J. Clean. Prod. 13, 645e656.
Zutshi, A., Sohal, A., 2004. Adoption and maintenance of environmental manage-
ment systems: critical success factors. Manag. Environ. Qual. 15 (4), 399e419.