Comparative Analysis of the Environmental Performance …
721
promoting the improvement of environmental quality with respect to solid waste
management (Faitani 2017).
We applied eighteen indicators, grouped into four categories of analysis referring
to the different stages identified in the SWMP implementation process: (i) development indicators; (ii) actual indicators of implementation, (iii) monitoring indicators,
and (iv) communication throughout the entire process. Tables 3 and 4 show the
indicators with their corresponding scores and the equations for their calculation.
At each stage, for the calculation of the primary indicators, nominal values were
assigned according to the particular characteristics of each university. Next, the secondary indicators were calculated by means of Eqs. 1, 2 and 3 (Table 3). Finally,
these values allowed obtaining the environmental performance index, defined as the
sum of the three secondary indicators (Eq. 4).
With respect to the communication category, first, the primary indicators were
assigned nominal values of 1 and 0 to the options “performs” and “does not perform”,
respectively, and then the communication indicators were calculated according to the
equations of Table 4.
3 Results
The processes of development, implementation and monitoring of the SWMP at the
universities studied are summarized in Figs. 1 and 2.
The results obtained for the total environmental performance index are shown in
Fig. 3, where it can be seen that the UA has the best environmental performance,
taking into account the three stages, and that the UCh is the one with the worst
environmental performance. The analysis by stages allowed recognizing that they
have similar values in each stage, except for the UM in the monitoring stage, which
means that the universities studied present strategies and actions at the three stages,
whereas the UM has a deficit regarding the monitoring of the plan.
4 Development of the SWMP
At this stage, the SWMPs at the UA, UCh and UM are framed in policies and
plans related to environmental sustainability. At the UA, UM and UNGS, diagnoses
were made to identify the waste generated as well as its quantity and flow, and the
characterization of the waste resulting from these diagnoses allowed determining the
different separation categories at each university campus. In addition, at the UNGS
and UM, the diagnoses were implemented by activity areas in the campus, taking into
account the potential for waste recycling. At the UA, the diagnosis covered the entire
campus, quantifying recyclable waste but without specifying the waste categories
adopted in the study.
721
promoting the improvement of environmental quality with respect to solid waste
management (Faitani 2017).
We applied eighteen indicators, grouped into four categories of analysis referring
to the different stages identified in the SWMP implementation process: (i) development indicators; (ii) actual indicators of implementation, (iii) monitoring indicators,
and (iv) communication throughout the entire process. Tables 3 and 4 show the
indicators with their corresponding scores and the equations for their calculation.
At each stage, for the calculation of the primary indicators, nominal values were
assigned according to the particular characteristics of each university. Next, the secondary indicators were calculated by means of Eqs. 1, 2 and 3 (Table 3). Finally,
these values allowed obtaining the environmental performance index, defined as the
sum of the three secondary indicators (Eq. 4).
With respect to the communication category, first, the primary indicators were
assigned nominal values of 1 and 0 to the options “performs” and “does not perform”,
respectively, and then the communication indicators were calculated according to the
equations of Table 4.
3 Results
The processes of development, implementation and monitoring of the SWMP at the
universities studied are summarized in Figs. 1 and 2.
The results obtained for the total environmental performance index are shown in
Fig. 3, where it can be seen that the UA has the best environmental performance,
taking into account the three stages, and that the UCh is the one with the worst
environmental performance. The analysis by stages allowed recognizing that they
have similar values in each stage, except for the UM in the monitoring stage, which
means that the universities studied present strategies and actions at the three stages,
whereas the UM has a deficit regarding the monitoring of the plan.
4 Development of the SWMP
At this stage, the SWMPs at the UA, UCh and UM are framed in policies and
plans related to environmental sustainability. At the UA, UM and UNGS, diagnoses
were made to identify the waste generated as well as its quantity and flow, and the
characterization of the waste resulting from these diagnoses allowed determining the
different separation categories at each university campus. In addition, at the UNGS
and UM, the diagnoses were implemented by activity areas in the campus, taking into
account the potential for waste recycling. At the UA, the diagnosis covered the entire
campus, quantifying recyclable waste but without specifying the waste categories
adopted in the study.