|
||||||
|
|
Making Business Sense of Environmental ComplianceReprint 4137; Spring 2000, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 91–100
Companies lose money because they treat pollution control and plant operations as separate concerns. In this article, the author outlines five strategic, cost-saving approaches involving the coordination of these two issues.
A truly integrated, holistic approach to environmental compliance and production concerns requires a plant-wide perspective that simultaneously reviews new regulations, plant operations, emerging technologies, changing markets, and fluctuations in product demand. In this type of holistic approach, the environment becomes a criterion for making business decisions, and business needs become criteria for making environmental decisions.
In most firms, the division of responsibilities among departments creates a rift between production and environmental considerations. But the author advises that managers must force themselves to make decisions differently. For example, using a holistic approach, a company might simulate plant operations, try out various financial models, and apply alternative cost-allocation methods to reveal a product's true environmental cost.
The author describes five cases that illustrate the use of integrated strategies to assess cost-effective compliance options. Four of the strategies are based on real-life enforcement cases in which noncompliance orientations either lost money or didn't realize the expected gains. The fifth strategy is a proactive, integrated approach that resulted in cost savings by eliminating the need for an entire pollution-prevention project.
To save production and compliance costs, managers and environmental engineers must collaboratively:
is president of Policy Planning & Evaluation, Inc., an environmental consulting firm in Herndon, Virginia. Contact him at jasbinder@pipeline.com.
Academic pricing and volume discount information
|
|