textile finishing, book and magazine printing and computer manufacture). These
data were cleaned, aggregated (where necessary) and normalized, and analysed
using principal component analysis (to identify critical variables), and linear
multiple regression (more detail on analytical approaches in Tyteca et al. and
Wehrmeyer et al.).
Analysis confirmed that environmental performance can be adequately
reflected by a subset of the variables incorporated in the database. These results
have important implications for the statistical analysis carried out. Construction
of performance indicators, benchmarking and analysis of explanatory factors was
based on those variables that appeared to be both sufficiently available within the
dataset and were found to be significantly influential to the environmental
performance. The analyses that we were able to perform depended on the sector
analysed. Due to lack of data, no further analysis of the computer manufacturing
sector was possible. In some of the sectors (pulp and paper, fertilizer) with more
heterogeneous processes and products, analysis needed to be sensitive to the
problem of comparing apples and pears.
Correlation between Business, Management and Environmental
Variables
One aim of the MEPI study was to understand better underlying patterns in
business environmental performance. In particular, we were interested in
understanding whether there are relationships between aspects of business and
management performance and environmental performance (for instance, are
more profitable firms higher environmental performers?). Regression analyses
were carried out, using the reduced core variable sets only. All regressions were
conducted using environmental indicators normalized by ‘functional unit (FU)’.
Multiple linear regressions were carried out with stepwise entering of dependent
variables. A summary of the most significant results is shown in Table 4. The table
summarizes many results, a few of which are commented on below.
Rankings and Benchmarking
Firms may be ranked across three core environmental performance indicators,
for five MEPI sectors (book and magazine printing, electricity generation,
fertilizer production, pulp and paper manufacture and textile finishing). Company
rankings are a powerful way of using greater transparency in corporate
environmental performance to influence management decisions. However,
rankings of performance must be treated with caution. A lower rank does not
necessarily indicate poor environmental management. It may be explained by the
technological, market or regulatory constraints the firm operates within. For
example, its products may require a particularly energy-intensive production
process. Besides the company level, results were also obtained at the site level,
W. Wehrmeyer, D. Tyteca, and M. Wagner, How many (and which) indicators are necessary to
compare the environmental performance of companies? a sectoral and statistical answer, 7th
European Roundtable on Cleaner Production, Lund, Sweden, 2001.
Corporate Environmental Performance
177
data were cleaned, aggregated (where necessary) and normalized, and analysed
using principal component analysis (to identify critical variables), and linear
multiple regression (more detail on analytical approaches in Tyteca et al. and
Wehrmeyer et al.).
Analysis confirmed that environmental performance can be adequately
reflected by a subset of the variables incorporated in the database. These results
have important implications for the statistical analysis carried out. Construction
of performance indicators, benchmarking and analysis of explanatory factors was
based on those variables that appeared to be both sufficiently available within the
dataset and were found to be significantly influential to the environmental
performance. The analyses that we were able to perform depended on the sector
analysed. Due to lack of data, no further analysis of the computer manufacturing
sector was possible. In some of the sectors (pulp and paper, fertilizer) with more
heterogeneous processes and products, analysis needed to be sensitive to the
problem of comparing apples and pears.
Correlation between Business, Management and Environmental
Variables
One aim of the MEPI study was to understand better underlying patterns in
business environmental performance. In particular, we were interested in
understanding whether there are relationships between aspects of business and
management performance and environmental performance (for instance, are
more profitable firms higher environmental performers?). Regression analyses
were carried out, using the reduced core variable sets only. All regressions were
conducted using environmental indicators normalized by ‘functional unit (FU)’.
Multiple linear regressions were carried out with stepwise entering of dependent
variables. A summary of the most significant results is shown in Table 4. The table
summarizes many results, a few of which are commented on below.
Rankings and Benchmarking
Firms may be ranked across three core environmental performance indicators,
for five MEPI sectors (book and magazine printing, electricity generation,
fertilizer production, pulp and paper manufacture and textile finishing). Company
rankings are a powerful way of using greater transparency in corporate
environmental performance to influence management decisions. However,
rankings of performance must be treated with caution. A lower rank does not
necessarily indicate poor environmental management. It may be explained by the
technological, market or regulatory constraints the firm operates within. For
example, its products may require a particularly energy-intensive production
process. Besides the company level, results were also obtained at the site level,
W. Wehrmeyer, D. Tyteca, and M. Wagner, How many (and which) indicators are necessary to
compare the environmental performance of companies? a sectoral and statistical answer, 7th
European Roundtable on Cleaner Production, Lund, Sweden, 2001.
Corporate Environmental Performance
177