Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system |
| |
| Authors: | Amelia Clarke Rosa Kouri |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, 1001 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G 1A5;2. Sierra Youth Coalition, 1 Nicholas St, Suite 406, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1N 7B7;1. National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, Department of Leisure and Recreation Management, Taiwan, ROC;2. National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, The Graduate Institute of Travel & Tourism Management, Taiwan, ROC;3. National Taiwan Normal University, Department of Geography, Taiwan, ROC;4. National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism, Department of Hotel Management, Taiwan, ROC;1. School of Business, Curtin University, CDT 250, MIRI 98009, Sarawak, Malaysia;2. Centre for Responsible Citizenship and Sustainability, School of Management and Governance, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia;3. Board of Studies in Business Administration, Department of Business Administration, Berhampur University, Berhampur University, 760007, Orissa, India;1. Department of Economics, Society, Politics, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Via Saffi 42, 61029 Urbino, Italy;2. Department of Economic Studies, University of G. d’Annunzio Chieti-Pescara, Viale Pindaro 42, 65127, Pescara, Italy;1. Department of Science and Technology, Universidade Aberta, Campus do Taguspark, Edifício Inovação I, 2740-122 Porto Salvo, Oeiras, Portugal;2. Centre for Functional Ecology, University of Coimbra, 3001-455 Coimbra, Portugal;3. CENSE – Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Department of Science and Environmental Engineering, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus da Caparica, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal;4. School of Science and the Environment, Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester, M15GDU, United Kingdom;1. University of São Paulo (USP), Trabalhador são-carlense Av., 400, São Carlos, 13566-590, São Paulo, Brazil;2. Production Engineering Department, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Brazil;3. Production Engineering Department, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Brazil;4. Department of Mathematical Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Brazil |
| |
| Abstract: | Universities considering integrating an environmental management system (EMS) have numerous decisions to consider. Should they pursue a formal certified model or an informal uncertified one? If informal is appropriate, which framework best meets their needs? Which environmental interactions are most important to manage? Are there any other sector-specific considerations? This article discusses six different campus EMS frameworks, three different categories of drivers, and the six unique features of a campus EMS, and offers suggestions on when each framework is best applied. The frameworks considered are from: ISO 14001; Higher Education 21 (UK); the EMS Self-Assessment Checklist (USA); the Auditing Instrument for Sustainability in Higher Education (Netherlands); the Osnabrück University model (Germany) and the Sustainable University model (Mexico). This article also draws upon the empirical experiences of Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
