Influence of Motivations for Seeking ISO 14001 Certification on Perceptions of EMS Effectiveness in...

Influence of Motivations for Seeking ISO 14001Certification on Perceptions of EMS Effectiveness inChinaGERALD E. FRYXELL*China Europe International Business School699 Hongfeng RoadPudong 201206Shanghai, China

CARLOS WING-HUNG LODepartment of Management and MarketingThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHung Hom, KowloonHong Kong (SAR)

SHAN SHAN CHUNGInstitute for Natural Resources and Environmental

ManagementHong Kong Baptist UniversityKowloon Tong, KowloonHong Kong (SAR)

ABSTRACT / This study examines the motivations of mainlandChinese facilities in seeking ISO 14001 certification and exam-ines the linkages between these motivations and self-reportsof the effectiveness of major environmental management sys-tem (EMS) components. In a sample of 128 facilities in Beijing,Shanghai, and Guangzhou, the main drivers for certification

were reported to be to ensure regulatory compliance, to en-hance the firm’s reputation, and to improve environmentalperformance, in that order. Although motivation to achievecost reductions were least emphasized, a broad range of mo-tivations appears to be considered in the decision to seek cer-tification to ISO 14001. Regression models linking these moti-vations to the EMS components suggests that internalmotivations have an influence on most EMS components. Oneinteresting exception to this, however, is that no significantrelationship was observed between internal motivations andthe promulgation of environmental objectives and targets. Therelationships associated with external motivations for certifica-tion (i.e., those in response to customer and other stakeholderpressures) and EMS components, on the other hand, areweaker and tend to occur earlier in the process cycle. No sig-nificant relationships were found between motivations to re-duce costs and perceptions of the effectiveness of EMS com-ponents. Overall, these findings suggest that ISO 14001, ascurrently being implemented in mainland China, may have amodestly useful role when used in combination with other pol-icy mechanisms to move the Chinese economy toward moresustainable practices. It is asserted that the ISO standardcould provide even greater benefits if Chinese registrars weremore proactive in developing EMS in conjunction with evenmore rigorous third-party audits.

Recently, business in China have come under sub-stantial pressure to improve their environmental per-formance. This is due to multiple, interrelated factors.First, natural capital in China is being depleted at a ratethat is bringing its economic consequences into espe-cially sharp relief (Xie 2001). Second, the economic“miracle” of China has greatly increased consumptionpatterns in regions with the highest population densi-ties. Although many industries have been able to mod-ernize along the way, others—especially those domi-nated by state-owned enterprises—continue to rely on

seriously outdated and polluting technologies to meetthis demand (Vermeer 1998; Liu 2000). Third, theprocess of globalization, in general, and China’s acces-sion to the World Trade Organization (WTO), in par-ticular, means that Chinese enterprises must begin toadhere to international environmental standards andrespond to other market pressures that focus on theenvironmental implications of products and services(Lo and Chung 2003). A final point is that press liber-alization related to environmental issues and the in-creased availability of information via the Internetabout environmental issues have also given the localcommunity and an emerging non-governmental orga-nization (NGO) sector a greater voice in these matters(Lo and Leung 1998, 2000) In response, the govern-ment has promulgated many new environmental regu-lations (although uniform enforcement remains weak),instituted various educational campaigns, experi-

KEY WORDS: Environment; China; International; Standards; Manage-ment; Systems

Published online March 23, 2004.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed, email:[email protected]

DOI: 10.1007/s00267-003-0106-2

Environmental Management Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 239–251 © 2004 Springer-Verlag New York, LLC

mented with the creation of various economic instru-ments, and promoted the adoption of voluntary envi-ronmental initiatives.

Given all of this, it should not be surprising thatmany firms in China have begun to show an interest inenvironmental management. Although companies areresponding in many ways (e.g., claiming to offer“green” products, improving relations with regulators,beautifying their facilities), one of the most popularand visible demonstrations of environmental respon-siveness is by obtaining a third-party certification to ISO14001 (Raines and others 2002).

Whereas such a rapid growth in ISO 14001 certifica-tions would appear to bode well for the environmentalperformance of economic enterprises in China, thereremains ample room for skepticism about whether ornot ISO 14001 certification actually improves environ-mental performance. Accordingly, this study has twoobjectives. The first is to identify the motivations forseeking ISO 14001 certification in China. Our secondobjective is to explore linkages between these motiva-tions and characteristics of the environmental manage-ment systems (EMSs) that have been implemented.The rapid growth in certifications clearly indicates thatsuch motivations are ample in China, and it raisesimportant questions about which motivations are driv-ing this phenomenon and whether some motivationslead to better EMS outcomes than others. This is animportant issue because China, like many other devel-oping countries, is placing considerable faith in suchvoluntary standards.

Literature Review

ISO 14001 is one of several available frameworkswithin which a facility may develop an EMS. The statedpurpose of the standard is “to support environmentalprotection and prevention of pollution in balance withsocioeconomic needs” (ISO 1996). It is also instructiveto examine what the standard does not purport to ac-complish. Specifically, it does not seek particular out-comes: “the adoption of this International Standard willnot in itself guarantee optimal environmental out-comes” (ISO 1996). By distancing itself from any out-come requirements, the best the standard can do is togenerically specify the elements of a system that shouldpermit the implementation of the priorities specified inthe environmental policy statement. Accordingly, anaudit is usually undertaken in order to demonstrate thepresence of such a system to others (although a facilitycan elect to “self-declare” this, if it so chooses). How-ever, if companies direct their EMS at easy goals (orthose they were going to attain anyway), implement the

EMS as merely a “paper exercise,” and/or the third-party audit process is undermined, then ISO 14001certifications may have little impact. Because these con-ditions may be open to question, the benefits of ISO14001 still remain largely an act of faith (Andrews andothers 2001).

Such faith needs to be displaced by knowledge be-cause so much depends on reversing the rate of envi-ronmental degradation in China. Although this is ob-viously critical for its residents, China’s environmentalproblems have truly global implications. As just oneexample, at present trends, China is expected to sur-pass the United States as the leading contributor ofgreenhouse gases (GHG) over the next 15–20 years(World Resources Institute 2001). To its credit, theChinese government has responded. For example, inthe tenth Five-Year Plan, RMB 700 billion (US$87 bil-lion) was budgeted for environmental projects, an in-crease of more than 100% over the previous 5 years(Fang 2001). Another potent signal is that the centralgovernment is aggressively tightening up on the en-forcement of its many pollution control regulations.Unfortunately, the implementation of these policieshas been uneven, especially in rural areas where theneed for economic development is given a higher pri-ority by local authorities. Nevertheless, the message isclear and it has not escaped the attention of managersthat more aggressive enforcement has led to the closureof 84,000 enterprises. As of result of this and the gov-ernment’s backing of ISO 14001, certifications in main-land China have increased very rapidly in recent years.By the end of 2001, there were 1085 ISO 14001 certifi-cations in China, up from 510 at the end of 2000—anannual growth rate of over 50% (ISO 2002).

Motivations for Certification to ISO 14001

Proponents of the standard (e.g., Harrington andKnight 1999; Tibor and Feldman 1996; Woodside 2000)have listed numerous reasons for why firms should seekcertification, such as (1) improved regulatory compli-ance, (2) increased market share and a potential forpremium pricing within certain market segments, (3)response to customer pressures and access to markets,(4) cost reductions from improved efficiencies, and (5)an enhanced reputation. Darnall and others (2002)classified the numerous motivations for implementingan EMS in terms of their antecedents (i.e., marketdriven, regulatory driven, and societal driven). In addi-tion, motivations for certification may also be derivedfrom internal factors involving strategic considerationsassociated with a resources-based view of its assets (Hart1995; Russo and Fouts 1997): an “enlightened” topmanagement (by virtue of values or learning process-

240 G. E. Fryxell and others

es), corporate culture (Egri and Herman 2000), or theactions of individual champions (Andersson and Bate-man 2000). Until recently, the literature on motivationsfor ISO certification remained largely normative, anec-dotal, and practitioner oriented. However, over the pastfew years, there has been an emergent body of empir-ical research related to this topic. This research haspredominantly been undertaken in large industrializedcountries in Europe, North America, and Japan.

One can get a sense of why firms seek certificationfrom examining the goals of EMSs. Steger (2000) re-viewed a number of empirical studies (most of themconducted in Germany and Austria) and offered thefollowing generalizations. First, many companies thatwere first-movers in obtaining an EMS certification hadactually set their environmental targets long beforeformalizing their EMS. Given this, the implementationof the standard appears to have had little actual effecton the directions the certified companies actually tookand suggests that certification was pursued for otherreasons. Second, most of the stated goals of EMS weredriven more by “commonsense” considerations of whatmight be “doable” and what might offer a quick pay-back, rather than by any in-depth analysis of what theenvironmental impact of the company’s activities mightbe. Finally, this study concluded that in granting certi-fication, most registrars appear to have adopted arather liberal position of granting certification if theEMS “described environmental goals at all.”

Thus, this study appears to reinforce some suspi-cions that certification may not redirect the activities ofa firm, but it does leave the possibility that an EMS mayhelp implement a facility’s preexisting environmentalintentions more effectively. It is relevant that most ofthese firms were already well beyond compliance andwere reducing their pollution levels anyway. Very fewstudies have looked at companies lacking a certifiedEMS, so that there is a selection bias in these studies.

In a rare study in the United States that examinedthe relationship between why facilities seek EMSs andoutcomes related to environmental performance. An-drews and others (2001) found positive relationshipsbetween their measures of environmental performanceand motivations to adopt an EMS for competitive andmarketing purposes. In comparison, facilities that im-plemented an EMS to appease regulators had morenegative outcomes. Although this study is informativeand based on unique data, the small size of the data-base (n � 27) would suggest that some caution isrequired in generalizing their findings. Using the samedata, Darnall and others (2000) found that motivationsfor certification in the United States appear to differ byownership structure.

In Europe, del Brio and others (2001) examinedmotivations for seeking certification and found that thestandard’s worldwide recognition and broad applicabil-ity were of paramount importance. However, this resultwas undoubtedly influenced by the purpose of thestudy, which sought to explain the choice of EMS stan-dards (i.e., ISO 14001 versus the Eco-Management Au-dit Scheme).

In the context of Asia, Welch and others (2002)found differences in motivations by industry and stageof development in a large sample of 721 Japanese fa-cilities. Early EMS adopters in this study appeared to beresponding to a vague sense of business opportunitiesrelated to environmental performance and generallyhad ample resources to pursue it. Somewhat lateradopters of the standard tended to be smaller, “lessgreen,” and driven by regulatory, competitive, and me-dia considerations. In Hong Kong (China), Chan andLi (2001) found that the most important motivatingfactor for seeking certification to ISO 14001 was toincrease market share and to demonstrate “good will.”Responding to direct pressure from the public, custom-ers, or employees appeared to be relatively unimpor-tant. Also in Hong Kong, Fryxell and Szeto (2002)found linkages between motivations for seeking certifi-cation and some aspects of the EMS facilities. In par-ticular, motivations to enhance reputation appeared tohave a positive influence on the quality of environmen-tal policy statements and the thoroughness with whichthe facility evaluated its environmental aspects and im-pact. Motivations to reduce costs were also related tothe latter methodology. However, regarding the adop-tion of ISO 14001 in Hong Kong, it should be notedthat enthusiasm for ISO 14001 certifications has beenfairly muted and that each of these studies had fewcertified firms upon which to draw their conclusions.

As noted earlier, we suspect that the mix of driversfor seeking ISO 14001 certification in mainland Chinais expected to be substantially different from theseother research settings. In their study of 19 certifiedfirms near Tianjin, Raines and others (2002) have re-ported findings that suggest that Chinese facilities seekcertification in order to demonstrate environmentalleadership and that they are much less concerned thanfacilities in more developed countries with conformingto the requirements of trading partners and in seekingregulatory relief. These results are somewhat surprisingin that the decision to pursue ISO certification in Chinais almost certainly dominated by regulatory and marketdrivers, with relatively less emphasis given to societaldrivers or internal capabilities. Moreover, it is expectedthat the relative motivations will vary by ownershipstructure, location, industry, and firm size. State-owned

ISO 14001 and EMS Effectiveness in China 241

enterprises would be highly influenced by governmentpolicies related to the environment, whereas most firmscapitalized by private interests would be more focusedon customer preferences, specifically those engaged inexporting to Western markets, where purchasingagents may give some weight to certification. Locationis a factor, as the administration of local environmentalprotection bureaus is highly decentralized in China andthere are differences in the cultures and compositionof local businesses. Industry is a major factor, as well; itis worth noting that the majority of ISO 14001 certifi-cations in China are for consumer electronics facilities(Chen 2001).

Relationships with EMS Components

As a system, an EMS is comprised of numerous,interrelated components of which six are explicitly con-sidered in this study: (1) environmental policy state-ments, (2) assessment of environmental aspects andimpact, (3) objectives and targets, (4) managementreview, (5) assessments of stakeholder expectations,and (6) adoption of life-cycle perspectives in the firm’soperations. Although not exhaustive, these compo-nents are sufficiently broad to allow an investigationinto the relationship of motivations for certification ona facility’s EMS. The policy statements and the derivedobjectives “anchor” the beginning of the plan, do,check, act (i.e., PDCA) cycle and the managementreview is the final step in this cycle. The assessments ofenvironmental aspects and impacts and stakeholderperspectives provide information on the current andpotential effects of a firm’s processes and the expecta-tions of relevant constituencies. The extent to whichlife-cycle perspectives have been incorporated into theEMS speaks to how the facility thinks broadly about theenvironmental implications of its activities (i.e., alongits activity chain) as well as its efforts to influencepractices both upstream and downstream. Each ofthese components will be briefly reviewed along withsome discussion about possible linkages to motivationsfor seeking certification.

Environmental Policies. The policy statement is themost proximal component to motivations for seekingcertification and is also the most likely to have the activeinvolvement of top management. Some characteristicsof effective policy statements are explicitly addressed inthe ISO 14001 document in the form of thresholds thatshould be met for certification. For example, environ-mental policies are to be publicly available, communi-cated within the organization, and have a measure ofspecificity to the type of organization. An effective pol-icy statement, then, would be one that is widely per-ceived as meeting and then going beyond these thresh-

olds (as required by the registrar). However, thequestion of registrar rigor is also relevant here, as theauthors have seen a number of policy statements fromcertified facilities in China that clearly do not meetthese thresholds. Thus, the linkages between motiva-tions and the environmental policies seem rather obvi-ous. An environmental policy statement written strictlyin response to customer pressures, for example (andwithout concern for the environment), may meet theISO 14001 above criteria specified in a legalistic senseand be sufficient for certification but not be perceivedas being very meaningful within the organization. Thus,in the broadest sense, motivations for seeking certifica-tion influence whether the policy statement is a “livingdocument” or simply a piece of paper. More specifi-cally, the content and priorities stated in the environ-mental policy are a manifestation of these intentions.

Environmental Aspects and Impact. Impacts and as-pects speak to how a firm is either affecting or couldpotentially affect the environment, respectively. In or-der to make this determination and set targets forimprovement under the ISO 14001 standard, a facilityneeds an effective methodology to identify its environ-mental aspects (those points where the firm’s opera-tions, including its upstream and downstream relation-ships, may potentially come into contact with theenvironment) and its environmental impact (the actualchanges on the environment resulting from the firm’soperations). The suggested indicators of effectivenessin this methodology are that the methodology to iden-tify environmental aspects should be reliable, relativelysimple, inclusive (i.e., consider all products, operations,and services), and utilize up-to-date information.Whereas facilities are required to have a methodologyfor this assessment, the standard is notably ambiguousin terms of how thorough such a methodology needs tobe or how far beyond the firm’s activities it shouldextend. As a result, a facility is given substantial latitudeto determine the scope of the audit (i.e., from a portionof a facility to an entire corporation). Firms seekingISO certification simply to obtain access to Westernmarkets, for example, may tightly define the bound-aries of the system to be certified and limit their con-sideration of aspects and impact along a tightly delim-ited activity chain. Thus, the scope and thoroughness ofthis methodology is likely to be shaped by the motiva-tions for seeking certification.

Objectives and Targets. The policy statement is in-tended to provide direction for the articulation of ob-jectives and targets that are relevant for the facility andthe industry in which it is. Objectives are intended todetermine more long-term and strategic directions,whereas targets are intended to capture the clear op-


erationalization of these objectives. Consequently, theobjectives and targets become the promises that a firmmakes and against which it will ultimately be audited atthe end of the certification period. In this regard, thestandard provides facilities with a great deal of latitudeto set their own direction. In theory, these promises aremeant to be both relevant (by being linked to the policyand the methodology for determining the facility’s en-vironmental aspects and impact) and somewhat chal-lenging. In practice, firms are free to establish theobjectives and targets that match their motivations.Moreover, as Steger (2000) noted, there is a tendencyfor registrars to be rather liberal in allowing facilities toset objectives and targets. Firms with little interest inactually improving their environmental performance,for example, can establish goals focusing on beautifyingthe plant entrance by planning trees and shrubs. At thesame time, the Steger (2000) study concluded that theenvironmental objectives and targets of many certifiedfirms actually precede the development of their EMS.Thus, the linkages between motivations for seekingcertification and the effectiveness of objectives and tar-gets may be attenuated.

Management Reviews. A philosophy of quality man-agement and methods has been imported into ISO14001 from ISO 9000. As a result, it is not surprisingthat measurement and evaluation are enshrined as im-portant hallmarks of an effective EMS. Generally speak-ing, this component of the EMS is considered effectivewhen the contents of review meetings are well commu-nicated, the focus of meetings is on improving thesystem, the findings (i.e., about noncompliance, fromvarious statistical charts and audit results) are reportedhonestly, and corrective actions follow. Motivations forobtaining ISO certification should have an impact onthe effectiveness of a management review, in part be-cause it is at this stage that upper management revisitsand evaluates its motivations for seeking certification.However, it seems likely that the effectiveness of man-agement review is likely to be most strongly related tomanagement commitment (supposedly a requirementfor certification but difficult to audit). Thus, the influ-ence of some external motivations (i.e., customer orother stakeholder pressures) for certification on theeffectiveness of a management review may be weak.

Stakeholder Assessments. The standard generally ac-knowledges that facilities should consider the views ofvarious “interested parties,” defined as any “individualor group concerned with or affected by the environ-mental performance of an organization” (ISO 1996),and that stakeholder pressures influence environmen-tal management practices (Henriques and Sadorsky1999). However, the standard says relatively little about

how such views should be gathered or how they shouldbe incorporated into the EMS. Indeed, most of theemphasis is on communications and external relations,rather than on listening to or acting upon such views.Thus, how a firm approaches the job of listening to theviews of interested parties and how genuinely it does sowill be influenced by its motivations for seeking an ISO14001 certification. Firms with an interest in mediarelations, for example, may place more weight on thisEMS component than one more interested in achievingcost reductions. Having said this, with the exception ofgreat sensitivity to government and customer expecta-tions, the evaluation of stakeholder views can best becalled a novel, yet emerging, concept in China. Cer-tainly, in the sense of monitoring community expecta-tions, this component of a firm’s EMS is probablynascent.

Adoption of a Life-Cycle Perspective. Similar to the pre-vious subsection on stakeholder analysis, an organiza-tion seeking certification is generally asked to considerthe implications of its activities both upstream (i.e.,with suppliers) and downstream (i.e., customers andend users). However, there are few requirements in thestandard for an organization to act beyond the limits towhich it “can [exercise] control or over which it can beexpected to have an influence” (ISO 1996). At the sametime, the concept of life-cycle analysis (LCA) is a po-tentially powerful tool for mitigating the environmentalimpact of one’s actions. Thus, a facility that has agenuine interest in improving environmental perfor-mance should place weight on using this tool. Firmsthat are also concerned with negative publicity may alsobe more concerned with the activities of their suppliers.

Taking the discussions of each major EMS compo-nent together, it is more generally hypothesized that:

H1: The effectiveness of major EMS components will be influenced bymotivations for certification.

Methodology

Data Collection and Sampling

The survey questions used in this study were basedon relevant portions of the ISO 14001 document (ISO1996), audit checklists (Johnson 1997; Woodside 2000),and items derived more generally from the literature.Some questions were further refined after in-depthinterviews with two practitioners.

This study was conducted in 2002 in three majorurban cities—Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou.There were three distinct stages in the collection of


data. In the first stage, a survey was administered withthe assistance of the environmental protection bureaus(EPBs) of each of the municipalities. These EPBs bothendorsed the study and made suggestions related to itscontent. The survey was sent to all ISO 14001-certifiedfacilities with at least 6 months of postcertification ex-perience. This was selected as the minimum periodwithin which companies could meaningfully reflect ontheir experience.

Local research organizations assisted in the collec-tion of data. They were as follows: in Beijing, the Centerfor Environmental Education and Communications (aunit with the State Environmental Protection Adminis-tration); in Shanghai, the Shanghai Academy of Envi-ronmental Science (a service organization of theShanghai Environmental Protection Bureau); and, inGuangzhou, the Guangzhou Research Institute of En-vironmental Protection Science (a service organizationof Guangzhou Environmental Protection Bureau). Thenumber of responses and response rates were, as fol-lows: in Beijing, 33 facilities (34% of those contacted);in Shanghai, 60 facilities (30%); and in Guangzhou, 35facilities (79%). All of the surveys were completed inChinese.

Measures

Motivations for Seeking Certification. The motivationsfor seeking an ISO 14001 certification were measuredby eight items. These items have been extracted from avariety of reasons proposed in the literature that havebeen put forth for obtaining ISO 14001 and conform tothe motivations for certification used by Darnall andothers (2002). All of the items were scored on a five-point, Likert-type scale, ranging from 5 � Most impor-tant to 1 � Unimportant. Each of these is listed inorder of descending importance, along with theirmeans and standard deviations (SD) (n � 128):

Motivation for Seeking Certification Mean SD

1. Ensuring regulatory compliance 4.59 0.6102. Enhancing the firm’s reputation. 4.56 0.6633. Improving environmental performance 4.43 0.6364. Increasing environmental risk

management capabilities4.12 0.793

5. Responding to customer requests andexpectations

3.90 0.958

6. Enhancing the capability of personnel 3.69 0.9407. Responding to pressure from stakeholder

groups3.69 1.008

8. Achieving cost reductions 3.44 1.089

Due to the large number of items and, possibly,because they were presented to the respondent to-gether, substantial intercorrelations among the re-sponses were observed. As a result, we sought greater

parsimony for these various motivations for certifica-tion through an analysis of principle components. Twocomponents emerged that accounted for 55% of thevariance among the items. The first component ap-peared to capture internal and relatively more proactivemotivations for seeking certification. It was comprisedof four items (loadings for the first and second compo-nent are given in parentheses after each item): (1)ensuring regulatory compliance (0.737; �0.097); (2)improving the firm’s environmental performance(0.792; �0.029); (3) increasing risk management capa-bility (0.711; 0.324); (4) enhancing the capability ofpersonnel (0.686; 0.373). This result appears to be arelatively satisfying empirical outcome. However, it issomewhat less clear that “compliance with legal stan-dards” is necessarily an internal motivation, as it isusually in response to external regulatory pressures.Indeed, most research has generally categorized this asan external driver (Darnall and others 2002; Andrewsand Amaral 2003). Nevertheless, given the problems ofregulatory enforcement in China, it seemed reasonable inthis context that many respondents could have viewed amotivation to bring a particular facility into full com-pliance as being more internal and proactive thanwould be the case in a place where regulatory enforce-ment was more uniform. For these reasons, and be-cause these items shared a substantial common vari-ance in the eyes of the respondents, they werecombined into a single scale that measures internal andmore proactive motivations for seeking ISO 14001 cer-tification (� � 0.742).

A second component involved a more passive re-sponse to external influences, including the followingitems: (1) responding to customer requests and ex-pectations (0.241; 0.769); (2) responding to pres-sures from other stakeholder groups (0.227; 0.725),and (3) enhancing the firm’s reputation (�0.119;0.653). These items appear to be oriented toward theappeasement of nonregulatory external constituen-cies. As earlier, these items were combined into asingle scale noting that its internal consistency is some-what more marginal (� � 0.674). The item associatedwith “achieving cost reductions,” however, loadedevenly on both factors (0.389; 0.348) and was retainedas a single item measure. Thus, subsequent to thisprocedure, there were three measures of motivationsfor seeking certification to ISO 14001: internally driven,in response to external pressures, and a desire to obtaincost savings.

The Effectiveness of an Environmental Management Sys-tem. Six scales associated with the respondents’ percep-tions of the effectiveness of EMS components served asthe dependent variables in this study. In each case, we


adopted various requirements and good practice guide-lines as specified in the ISO 14000 series of documentsand used a seven-point, Likert-type scale to assess thedegree to which the respondent agreed or did notagree with how well those requirements and guidelineshad been adhered to (1 � strongly disagree and 7 �strongly agree). Although variance in the adoption ofvarious “good practice” guidelines should not be anissue, variance in the adherence to requirements of thestandard should also be sufficient to incorporate theseelements. This is because the “requirements” of the ISO14001 standard are specified as thresholds that may beexceeded and are certainly open to interpretation (e.g.,the requirement that policy statements should be “avail-able to the public” has generally been minimally inter-preted as a willingness to show an interested party thepolicy if requested to do so) and because there appearsto be ample inconsistency in their actual implementa-tion (i.e., the authors of this study have frequently beendenied access).

These six scales were comprised of the followingitems: (1) the effectiveness of the environmental poli-cy—four items regarding the extent to which the policystatement is achievable, accessible by interested parties,well communicated within the facility’s operation, andappropriate to the scale and nature of the facility (� �0.813); (2) the effectiveness of the environmental as-pects and impact methodology—six items related towhether the method is reliable, implemented effec-tively, reviewed periodically, considers a broad scope ofproducts and activities, is kept up-to-date, and considersas many aspects as possible (� � 0.86); (3) the effec-tiveness of objectives and targets—three items relatedto whether the objectives and targets are linked toaspects and impact, are achievable and practical andwhether clear plans have been developed for their im-plementation (� � 0.818); (4) the effectiveness of themanagement review—five items related to the ade-quacy of management review meetings: communica-tion of the contents of meetings, time devoted to re-view, communication of audit results and correctiveactions taken in response to noncompliance (� �0.818); (5) the effectiveness of stakeholder assess-ments—six items that inquired as to whether the facilitywas actively seeking the opinions of stakeholders aboutoperations, was confident that they knew what stake-holders expect, and whether they had obtained usefulinformation that they did not know earlier. The refer-ent stakeholders for these questions were the commu-nity and employees (� � 0.851); and (6) the adoptionof life-cycle perspectives—five items related to whetherthe firm recommended EMSs to the suppliers, visitedsuppliers’ operations to evaluate their environmental

performance, used LCA in investigating environmentalaspects and impact, had tried to influence customers todecrease their environmental impact or risks, andchanged the designs of their product to minimize theirenvironmental impact (� � 0.678).

Control Variables. Three variables were incorporatedin the model as controls. (1) Facility size was measuredon an eight-point ordinal scale measuring variousranges of size in terms of the total number of employ-ees working within the facility. A survey conducted byLee (1998) on ISO 9000 reported that motivations forseeking certification varied by the size of facility. It alsoseems likely that the effectiveness of the components ofenvironmental management systems would be influ-enced by the availability of resources and by the com-munication problems associated with large organiza-tions. The mean for this variable was 5.01, whichcorresponded to the category of 401–600 employees.The mode, however, was the highest value (i.e., 8), as31 facilities reported having more than 1000 employ-ees. (2) Industry was measured categorically by con-structing three dummy variables. This attempt to con-trol for industry posed a challenge in that 46 of thefacilities were within a single category (i.e., consumerelectronics). As a result, one variable was created torepresent this one industry category. The remainingcases were dummy-coded as to whether they were inmanufacturing sectors or services. The reference cate-gory was “other,” which captured a broad mixture ofother organizational types. (3) The quality of the reg-istrar was measured by having various experts rankorder the registrars who had been closely involved withboth registrars and certification audits in China. We feltthat it was important to control for registrar qualitygiven both the suspicions that registration may not beespecially rigorous in this context and the relative im-portance attached to who grants the certification. Ac-cordingly, six such people were identified—two in eachof the locations (Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai).One is a senior official in the State EnvironmentalProtection Administration who is also a qualified exter-nal auditor of ISO EMS in China. Others were leadauditors of different EMS registrars and consultant bod-ies in mainland China. Each was sent the list and askedto rank each of the registrars listed in terms of theirreputation for quality. They were allowed to excluderegistrars of whom they did not have first-hand knowl-edge. Altogether, 22 different registrars had been used,with 1 registrar accounting for 24% of the certifica-tions. The second, third, and fourth most commonregistrars accounted for 15%, 9%, and 8%, respectively,with the remaining frequencies being widely dispersed.Overall, there was ample agreement among raters as to


the quality of the reputations of these registrars, asindicated by an intraclass correlation of 0.82.

Analysis

Regression models were estimated to obtain the co-efficients pertaining to the hypothesized relationships.A 0.05 confidence level was adopted in hypothesis test-ing; however, significance levels will be reported at boththe 0.10 and 0.05 confidence levels.

Results

The descriptive statistics are reported in Table 1.First, recalling that the motivations for seeking certifi-cation were measured on a five-point scale (5 � mostimportant; 4 � important), it appears that the respon-dents on average rated the items reflecting internalmotivations for seeking certification very highly (mean� 4.20). Similarly, the external motivations were appar-ently also important, although slightly less so (mean �4.06). Motivations for cost reductions were substantiallyless important in these samples (mean � 3.44).

These self-reports suggest that the respondents gen-erally had a very high regard for their EMS as imple-mented, with the assessments ranging from a low valueof 5.67 (adoption of life-cycle perspectives) to a high of6.20 (effectiveness of objectives and targets). Given thatthese measures are on a seven-point scale (values near6 would indicate “agreement” in the respondents’ opin-ion regarding the effectiveness of their EMS) and thatthe range of means is restricted does raise some con-cerns regarding the interpretation. Although it is cer-tainly possible that the EMSs being evaluated are simplyeffective, we doubt, for example, that life-cycle perspec-

tives have been quite so widely adopted in China. It isvery difficult to rule out that some respondents weretelling us what they thought to be proper or, alterna-tively, that they felt restrained from speaking negativelyof their EMS for fear that the survey would not beconfidential (as was promised). In sum, we suspect suchbiases have contributed, at least in part, to the elevatedassessments observed for these measures.

The single hypothesis in this study—that motivationsfor seeking certification to ISO 14001 are related toEMS components—is tested by the pattern of regres-sion coefficients reported in Table 2 and would besomewhat less vulnerable to such “desirability” biases.As is evident by the ample number of significant rela-tionships between motivations for certification and var-ious EMS components, the hypothesis is generally sup-ported. In other words, a firm’s reason for seekingcertification appears to have an influence on percep-tions of the EMS that is implemented.

A second, and related, conclusion is that the rela-tionship between motivations for seeking certificationand the self-reported measure of the effectiveness ofEMS components is stronger for firms that are internallymotivated than for firms that feel external pressures toobtain certification. Indeed, although five of six rela-tionships are observed between internal motivationsand EMS components, only three of the six relation-ships are significant for external influences, and thecoefficients are noticeably weaker.

Some exceptions to this expectation of a relation-ship between motivations and EMS outcomes are inter-esting. First, the lack of a significant relationship be-tween internal motivations and objectives and targets isinteresting. This may be related to the specific wording

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations for motivations for seeking an ISO 14001 certification, theeffectiveness of major EMS components, and environmental performancea

Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Facility size 5.01 2.26 1.002. Registrar reputation 11.90 3.65 0.18 1.003. Internal motivations for seeking

ISO 14001 certification4.20 0.57 0.11 �0.08 1.00

4. External motivations for seekingISO 14001 certification

4.06 0.67 0.14 0.07 0.38 1.005

4. Cost motivations for seekingISO 14001 certification

3.44 1.09 0.10 0.00 0.33 0.31 1.006

5. Effectiveness of policy statement 6.18 0.75 0.06 0.01 0.35 0.24 0.05 1.007. Effectiveness of EAI methodology 6.02 0.75 0.10 0.06 0.33 0.27 0.09 0.75 1.008. Effectiveness of objectives and targets 6.20 0.72 0.06 �0.05 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.51 0.62 1.009. Effectiveness of management review 5.71 1.00 0.01 0.05 0.38 0.18 0.07 0.60 0.72 0.41 1.0010. Effectiveness of stakeholder assessment 5.81 0.85 0.02 �0.02 0.35 0.17 0.10 0.36 0.40 0.27 0.39 1.0011. Adoption of life cycle perspectives 5.67 0.78 0.19 0.07 0.26 0.23 0.18 0.43 0.49 0.46 0.42 0.36 0.26

aCell entries are standardized coefficients; correlations that are significant at 95% or greater (two-tailed test) are underlined and in bold face.


of these items, which inquired about the relationship ofobjectives and targets to the assessment of aspects andimpacts, their achievability, and linkage to plans forimplementation. Given such component items, thisscale could have tenuous links to motivations if, forexample, the relationships of objectives and targets toaspects and plans for implementation are relativelymore “mechanical” procedures. However, we think itmore likely that internal motivations for certificationmay be unrelated to these perceptions of objectives andtargets because, as Steger (2000) noted, the promulga-tion of objectives and targets often precedes the decisionto seek certification. Another somewhat related possi-bility is that the objectives and targets set by firmsseeking initial certification are very conservative and“easy,” so as to have little to do with motivations. Thiscould be the case, for example, should the certifyingfacility not want to risk recertification for having beentoo ambitious in setting its goals.

It is also interesting to note that the relationshipsbetween external motivations (i.e., pressure from cus-tomers and other stakeholders) seem to fade from leftto right across Table 2. The dependent variables areroughly arrayed from left to right in terms of theirchronology in the PDCA cycle (i.e., the environmentalpolicies come early in the cycle and a managementreview at the end) and in terms of the rigor to whichthey are incorporated into a standard (i.e., clear re-quirements for policies with few, if any, rigorous expec-tations for stakeholder assessments or life-cycle perspec-tives). As a result, this could be an indication that whenexternal motivations provide the rationale for seeking

certification, these more visible and explicit elementsof the standard are the ones that get most of theattention. Motivations related to cost savings, however,had no significant relationships to the self-reports of theeffectiveness of EMS components.

It is noted in passing that only one significant rela-tionship involved the control variables, which were oth-erwise conspicuously inert in this study. Facilities in theservice sector are relatively less likely to perceive havingincorporated life-cycle considerations into their EMSs.This appears to conform to the relatively commonsenseobservation that issues of materials extraction (i.e., cra-dle) or disposal (i.e., grave) would be relatively lessimportant to service firms.

Discussion

One of the goals of this study was to understand whyfirms in China seek ISO 14001 certification. It wasfound that the strongest motivations involved were toensure regulatory compliance, enhance the firm’s rep-utation, and improve environmental performance, inthat order. Among the least important motivations wereto achieve cost reductions, to respond to stakeholderrequests, and to enhance the capacity of personnel.However, even these “less important” reasons receiveda measure of endorsement, as they were all reported asbeing at least “somewhat important” in the decision toseek ISO 14001 certification. Overall, these results con-form to the motivations for seeking certification foundin studies elsewhere (e.g., Florida and Davidson 2001;Morrow and Rondinelli 2002), but do contradict the

Table 2. Results of regression analysis for motivations for seeking an ISO 14001 certification and the effectivenessof system components

Independent variables Dependent Variables

Effectiveness ofenvironmentalpolicies

Effectivenessof assessmentof aspects andimpact

Effectivenessof objectivesand targets

Effectiveness ofmanagementreviews

Effectiveness ofstakeholderassessments

Extent oflife-cycleperspectives

Control variablesFirm size 0.036 0.076 0.074 �0.013 0.028 0.102Industry membership (dummy-coded)

D1 � other manufacturing 0.113 �0.037 �0.090 �0.079 0.090 �0.091D2 � consumer electronics �0.025 �0.146 �0.209 �0.172 �0.050 �0.014D3 � service 0.099 �0.062 �0.101 �0.055 0.034 �0..191

Registrar reputation �0.042 �0.063 0.065 �0.091 �0.033 �0.024Independent variables

Internal motivations for ISOcertification

0.335 0.276 0.106 0.390 0.356 0.177

External influences for ISOcertification

0.155 0.181 0.154 0.055 0.049 0.114

Cost motivations �0.116 �0.063 0.088 �0.062 �0.030 0.069Model information

R2 0.168 0.155 0.094 0.172 0.149 0.149

Note: Cell entries are standardized coefficients; coefficients significant at 95% or greater (two-tailed test) are bold and underlined.


rather tentative findings of Rains and others (2002),who found that exhibiting environmental leadershipwas paramount. This is undoubtedly due in part to thefact that “pressures from regulators” was edited fromthe Chinese version of their survey.

In the context of China, that the most importantreason for pursuing certification is to ensure regulatorycompliance is taken as a positive sign that these facili-ties do take compliance seriously (although it would bedifficult to imagine they would self-report otherwise). Itis also somewhat encouraging that these firms reportbeing concerned about their reputation for environ-mental performance and seek to improve it. Havingobserved this, it should be noted that there may be an“order effect” here because these are the early adoptersof the standard in China and it is possible that “secondmovers” may have a different motivational profile.Welch and others (2002) found that the motivationschanged over time in Japan. Indeed, in personal con-versations with environmental officials in China, we dofind ample concern that the motivations for seekingcertification are becoming more “instrumental” overtime and that that the rigor of ISO 14001 third-partyaudits is being undermined.

It is also noteworthy that achieving cost reductionswould rate as the least important reason, as there arecertainly ample opportunities in the standard to estab-lish goals that are compatible with cost reductions.Moreover, cost savings have been found in other studiesto be a comparatively strong motivation (e.g., Morrowand Rondinelli 2002). We would speculate, however,that the predominant view of ISO 14001 in China is thatobtaining certification is relatively costly to obtain. Thefact that many other cost factors (especially for laborand materials) are usually very modest may help toaccount for this. Moreover, cost savings can be realizedthrough many avenues and, at least for this group ofearly movers, the thought of potential returns from thisinvestment is likely to be dominated by other consider-ations.

Subsequent to the formation of these motivationsinto scales, internal motivations were found to be rela-tively more important then external drivers. It is alsorelevant to note that regulatory compliance loaded onthe internal factor in this sample. This would seem tobe a particularly interesting empirical outcome, as itsuggests that although the managers in this sample takeregulatory compliance seriously, they also see the deci-sion to comply as one that is taken internally. This hintsat continued enforcement gaps even among the man-agers in this sample. It is likely that this “voluntariness”of compliance would be even more pronounced innoncertified firms.

The second goal of this study was to explore therelationship between these motivations and percep-tions of EMS outcomes. Perhaps not too surprisingly,this study found that some motivations for certificationin China generally have a positive influence on theself-report of the effectiveness of EMS components, andno motivation was found to be negatively related tothese assessments. Stated in very general terms, thestronger the motivations for certification are, the morefavorably the EMS is evaluated. The one exception tothis rule seems to be that seeking certification to savecosts (the least favored reason for seeking certificationin China) appears to be inert in influencing the struc-ture of the EMS. It should also be underscored herethat the relationship between these self-reports and theactual effectiveness of EMS, although assumed to bepositive, may not be as strong as one might think, asthere are numerous reasons to suspect that these assess-ments could be positively biased. In addition, it is clearthat very much is left unexplained, as our models onlycaptured between 10% and 17% of the variance in thedependent variables.

Of the two major sources of motivations for certifi-cation, internal drivers appear to improve the perceivedeffectiveness of nearly all EMS components. The rela-tively simple and straightforward explanation for thisfinding is that facilities that see the EMS as a tool tohelp them attain worthy and desired internal goals willimpart greater value to it. This, in turn, will lead toperceptions of a better, and more effectively imple-mented, EMS. Indeed, it is interesting in this respect tonote that the only EMS component that was not relatedto internal motivations was the perceived effectivenessof objectives and targets. As noted by Steger (2000), itwould appear that many firms seeking ISO 14001 prob-ably know what their objectives and targets are before-hand. Thus, should the fundamental decision on ob-jectives and targets largely precede a decision to seekcertification, this could attenuate this relationship.Thus, this is not to suggest that firms with internalmotivations would not have more ambitious or chal-lenging environmentally related objectives and targets(indeed, we suspect they do), but merely that the ISO14001 certification, by itself, has relatively less effect onthe perceived effectiveness of objectives and targets. Amore parsimonious conclusion would be that firms thathave a sincere interest in using ISO 14001 as a vehicleto improve their environmental performance will seethemselves as having developed and implemented abetter EMS to do so.

In comparison, firms that seek certification becauseof external pressures, such as customer requests, pres-sures from other stakeholders, or, more generally, to


enhance their reputation, have somewhat weaker link-ages to the self-evaluations of the effectiveness of EMScomponents. That external motivations should be re-lated to the perceived effectiveness of the policy state-ments should perhaps not be too surprising, becausethese are accessible to the public and could probably beexamined by any customer or interested stakeholder. Itis also interesting to observe that the reported effective-ness of the methodology for understanding aspects andimpact should be positively influenced by external mo-tivations. This may be a reflection of the fact that thesefirms were probably less familiar with environmentalissues and concerns in the first place and thus may havereceived relatively more education from the process ofgetting ready for certification. The third relationshiptied to external motivations is the reported effective-ness of objectives and targets. Indeed, this is the onlyrelationship that is stronger for external motivationsthan internal motivations. If our previous reasoning isvalid that objectives and targets probably precede thedecision to seek certification for internally motivatedfacilities, then it seems plausible that external drivers(and especially those driven by customers) most likelyput some objectives and targets on the agendas of firmsthat would not otherwise have appeared. However, ex-ternally motivated facilities do not appear to go muchbeyond the minimum requirements for certification, asno relationships involving stakeholder assessments ofthe incorporation of life-cycle perspectives into theEMS were found. In addition, less thought seems tohave been given to follow-through, as no relationshipswere observed with perceptions of the effectiveness ofmanagement reviews.

Other variables in this study warrant additional com-ment, but largely because of their inability to accountfor any variance in the EMS components. Perhaps themost surprising in this regard is that the reputation ofthe registrars was found to have not even a hint of arelationship to the EMS components. This is surprisingbecause one would assume that the EMS they are cer-tifying should be positively influenced by a registrar ofhigh repute. One explanation for this lack of effect isthat our measure of reputation was poor; however, thestudy did use six raters who expressed a high level ofagreement. Given what would seem to be a good mea-sure, we believe a plausible explanation is that certifi-cation registrars only certify that the EMS of a facilitymeets the threshold requirements of the standard andnot that the EMS is particularly good or bad. It is alsopossible, but impossible to verify from this study, thatthe registration process itself is suspect. Another expla-nation, albeit a less plausible one in our opinion, couldbe that registrar reputation does have a positive influ-

ence on the actual effectiveness of EMS components,but it is for some reason that the respondent has failedto give credit to this factor.

Based on these findings, some speculation is war-ranted about what might be done to improve the effec-tiveness of the ISO 14001 standard in China. The pre-vious discussion would seem to suggest that a review ofthe registration process may be fruitful. In particular,we believe that registrars in China should assume moreof an active, if not “evangelical,” role in promotinggood practices and in gently educating managers aboutbenefits of a well-implemented EMS. Such registrarsshould also be more demanding on firms to set mean-ingful objectives and targets and meet them as a pre-condition for continuation. This is certainly possible inChina, as most of the registrations are units withingovernment agencies.

We also believe that although ISO 14001 may bemodestly important in what it does, it should not beconsidered a panacea for China’s environmental prob-lems and must be promoted in concert with otherpolicy mechanisms that guide firms toward more sus-tainable practices. In particular, the promotion of ISO14001 in conjunction with various economic instru-ments that can create greater internal motivations forseeking certification would seem to be order. For ex-ample, utilities would find more reasons to reduce SO2

emissions within the framework of their EMS under thethreat of higher taxes or if they were permitted toparticipate in a tradable permit scheme. Although thegovernment also has the capability to directly influencemany of the most polluting state-owned enterprises andmany joint ventures and private companies are subjectto the influence of major customers, a much greaterchallenge will be to influence the practices with a mul-titude of SMEs. In aggregate, these firms have a greaterimpact on the environment, have little interest in pur-suing an ISO 14001 certification, and pose regulatorychallenges. In addition, as pointed out by Costanza andothers (1997), sustainable development must involvesubstantially more profound considerations regardingdistributional equity, economic scale, and the incorpo-ration of uncertainty into managerial decision-makingwhich cannot be addressed through such mechanismsas international standards and economic instrumentsalone.

One limitation of this study has already been dis-cussed. It is possible that a number of response biasesmay have made their way into this study. In our opin-ion, this is reflected in what appear to be unreasonablyhigh values accorded to both the motivations for seek-ing certification and the evaluations of effectiveness. Inparticular, it should be emphasized that our measures


of the effectiveness of various EMS components werebased on self-reports of how closely the respondentsperceived their firms to be adhering to various ISO14000 requirements and guidelines. Although theseassessments likely have some positive relationship to theactual effectiveness of the components, these biases doseriously attenuate such a linkage. For example, it islikely that many of the respondents in this study mayhave been organizationally responsible in some way forthe certification process. Thus, a combination of prideand concern about reporting any shortcomings of theEMS that they may come to regret later must be takeninto account when interpreting these findings.

Second, in a study, in which all the data were takenfrom one source by survey, the influence of mono-method bias looms high. That is to say, the relation-ships among variables could be the result of the respon-dents answering questions in a similar manner due totheir presentation (i.e., method) or by some otherspurious influence (i.e., a “halo” effect extending tomultiple evaluations). Although this is difficult to ruleout, such influences do not appear to have been veryactive in this study because of the negative correlationsbetween environmental performance and the elementsof the system. If anything, one would have expectedsuch a bias to manifest itself in that manner. In addi-tion, most of our findings are comparative and involveprofessional evaluations of general attitudes.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this study examined the reasons whyfirms in China seek ISO 14001 certification and ex-plored the relationship between why firms seek an ISO14001 certification and the effectiveness of various com-ponents of the implemented EMS. On the surface, theresults would seem to bode well for ISO certifications,as the facilities in the sample appeared to endorse abroad range of motivations for seeking certificationand the primary reasons given were encouraging. In-deed, given the importance of China for the globalenvironment, it is heartening to find that the dominantreasons are rather nobles ones (viz. to ensure compli-ance with regulations, to improve the firm’s reputation,and to improve environmental performance). How-ever, as pointed out repeatedly in this study, such an“endorsement” of the standard must consider the like-lihood of ample bias in these self-reports. Moreover,the study appears to hint at problems with the registra-tion process, as no relationships were found betweenregistration quality and these assessments of the effec-tiveness of EMS. The implication is that the selection of

the registrar may be more important as “window dress-ing” than for substantive improvement in the EMS.

This study also lent empirical support to a growingbody of research that seems to indicate that firms thatseek certification as a result of their internal compassreport more effective EMS components, with the ex-ception of objectives and targets. This weaker relation-ship with objectives and targets is likely due to the factthat firms that are internally motivated have probablyformulated at least a basic framework of objectives andtargets well before the decision to seek certification.Thus, facilities that have clear internal reasons for de-veloping and implementing a good EMS will reporthaving done so. On the other hand, increases in theexternal drivers may lead to reports of marginal im-provements in the more visible components of an EMS.Some new environmentally related objectives may alsoresult, but these may have a less positive effect overalldue to insufficient follow-through and because not allEMS system elements are effected. A general tighteningup of the requirements of the standard in terms ofdisclosure requirements and a more “evangelical” auditprocess could help enhance the environmental perfor-mance of these firms, as would bundling ISO 14001with other policy mechanisms. Regardless of the pathtaken, it is probably safe to say that any attempt tomeaningfully address the extent of environmental dam-age in China will require a “broad spectrum” of effortsand that ISO 14001 would seem to have an important,but probably only supporting, role to play.

AcknowledgmentsThe research for this paper is partially funded by the

project “Antecedents and Consequences of ISO 1400ICertification in the PRC” of the Research Grant Coun-cil of the Hong Kong special Administrative Region(RGC No.: PolyU 5229/)1H). The authors would liketo thank the two anonymous reviewers for constructivecomments on an earlier version of the paper.

Literature Cited

Andersson, L. M., and T. S. Bateman. 2000. Individual envi-ronmental initiative: Championing natural environmentalissues in U.S. business organizations. Academy of ManagementJournal 43:548–570.

Andrews, R. N. L., and D. Amaral. 2003. Environmental man-agement systems: Do they improve performance? Final re-port of the national database on environmental manage-ment systems pilot project. Department of Public Policy,Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Andrews, R. N. L., N. Darnall, D. R. Gallagher, S. T. Keiner, E.Feldman, M. L. Mitchell, D. Amaral, and J. Jacoby. 2001.


Environmental management systems: History, theory andimplementation research. Pages 31–60 in C. Coglianese,and J. Nash. (Eds.), Regulating from the inside: Can envi-ronmental management systems achieve policy goals?. Re-sources for the Future Press, Washington, DC.

Chan, K. Y., and X. D. Li. 2001. A study of the implementationof ISO14001 environmental management systems in HongKong. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management44:589–601.

Chen, Y. P. 2001. Situation report of ISO14000 in China.Pages 11–23 in Proceedings of the symposium on the im-plementation and development for ISO14000 forum on theWTO entry and strategy of environmental management,15–17 October 2001, Beijing.

Gostanza, R., J. Cumberland, H. Daly, R. Goodland, and R.Norgaard. 1997. An introduction to ecological economics.St. Lucie Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

Darnall, N., D. R. Gallegher, and R. N. L. Andrews. 2000.Environmental management systems: Opportunities for im-proved environmental and business strategy. EnvironmentalQuality Management 9:1–9.

Del Brio, J. A., E. Fernandez, B. Junquera, and C. J. Vazquez.2001. Motivations for adopting the ISO 14001 standard: Astudy of Spanish industrial companies. Environmental QualityManagement, Summer: 10(4) 13–28.

Egri, C. R., and S. Herman. 2000. Leadership in the NorthAmerican environmental sector: Values, leadership styles,and contexts of environmental leaders and their organiza-tions. Academy of Management Journal 43:561–604.

Fang, Z. 2001. An investigation on the future of using foreigncapital in environmental protection during the Tenth Five-Year period. China Environmental News, February:12.

Florida, R., and D. Davidson. 2001. Why do firms adopt envi-ronmental practices (and do they make a difference). Pages82–104 in C. Coglianese, and J. Nash. Eds, Regulating fromthe inside: Can environmental management systemsachieve policy goals?. Resources for the Future Press, Wash-ington, DC.

Fryxell, G. E., and A. Szeto. 2002. The influence of motiva-tions for seeking ISO certification on EMS effectiveness: Anempirical study of certified facilities in Hong Kong. Journalof Environmental Management 65:223–238.

Harrington, H. J., and A. Knight. 1999. ISO 14000 Implemen-tation—Upgrading your EMS effectively. McGraw-Hill, NewYork.

Hart, S. L. 1995. A natural resource-based view of the firm.Academy of Management Review 20:986–1014.

Henriques, I., and P. Sadorsky. 1999. The relationship be-tween environmental commitment and managerial percep-tions of stakeholder importance. Academy of ManagementJournal 42:89–99.

ISO, International Organization for Standardization 1996.14001—Environmental management systems: Specificationwith guidance for use. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland.

ISO, International Organization for Standardization 2002.The ISO survey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000: Eleventh cycleup to and including 31 December 2001. ISO, Geneva,Switzerland.

Johnson, G. P. 1997. The ISO 14000 EMS audit handbook. St.Lucie Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

Lee, T. Y. 1998. The development of ISO 9000 certificationand the future of quality management: A survey of certifiedfirms in Hong Kong. International Journal of Quality andReliability Management 15:162–177.

Liu, Y. 2000. On the reform of state-owned enterprises andenvironmental protection. China Environmental Management1:6–8, (In Chinese).

Lo, C. W. H., and S. S. Chung. 2003. China’s green challengesin the 21st century. Pages 719–769 in J. Y. S. Cheng Eds,China’s challenges in the twenty-first century. City Univer-sity Press, Hong Kong, China.

Lo, C. W. H., Leung, S.W. (1998) �Environmental protectionand popular environmental consciousness in China� pages501–541 in Joseph Y.S. Cheung (ed.) China Review 1998.The Chineese University Press, Hong Kong.

Lo, C.W.H., Leung, S.W. (2000) �Environmental agency andpublic opinion in Guangzhou: The limits of a popularapproach to environmental governance� The China Quar-terly 163: 677–704.

Morrow, D., and D. A. Rondinelli. 2002. Adopting environ-mental management systems: Motivations and results ofISO 14001 and EMAS certification. European ManagementJournal 20:159–171.

Raines, S. S., T. Rong, and X. Fei. 2002. Costs, benefits, andmotivations for ISO 14001 adoption in China and aroundthe world. Chinese Public Administration Review 1:239–252.

Russo, M. V., and P. A. Fouts. 1997. A resource-based perspec-tive on corporate environmental performance and profit-ability. Academy of Management Journal 40:534–559.

Steger, U. 2000. Environmental management systems: Empir-ical evidence and further perspectives. European Manage-ment Journal 18:23–37.

Tibor, T., and I. Feldman. 1996. The development of ISO14000, ISO 14000—A guide to the new environmental man-agement standards. Irwin, Burr Ridge, Illinois.

Vermeer, E. B. 1998. Industrial pollution in China and reme-dial policies. The China Quarterly 156:952–985.

Welch, E. W., Y. Mori, and M. Aoyagi-Usui. 2002. Voluntaryadoption of ISO 14001 in Japan: Mechanisms, stages andeffects. Business Strategy and the Environment 11:43–62.

Woodside, G. 2000. ISO 14001 auditing manual. McGraw-Hill,New York.

World Resources Institute 2001. World Resources 2000–2001:People and ecosystems: The fraying web of life. WorldResources Institute, Washington, DC.

Xie, Z. 2001. Environmental situation and countermeasures innew century. Environmental Protection 9:3–7, (In Chinese).


Influence of Motivations for Seeking ISO 14001 Certification on Perceptions of EMS Effectiveness in...

Documents

Transcript of Influence of Motivations for Seeking ISO 14001 Certification on Perceptions of EMS Effectiveness in...