Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system

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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cleaner production 2009-07, Vol.17 (11), p.971-984
Hauptverfasser: Clarke, Amelia, Kouri, Rosa
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 984
container_issue 11
container_start_page 971
container_title Journal of cleaner production
container_volume 17
creator Clarke, Amelia
Kouri, Rosa
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.02.019
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_34725478</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959652609000614</els_id><sourcerecordid>20754049</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-996d92369986e5ddbed2c409d056f5126e3e3277395e6d3394e7d8c9b77f288e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_QdiTt13zsUk2J5HiF1S86DmkyWzNspvUZFvov3dLe-9pGHjel5kHoXuCK4KJeOyqzvawSbGiGKsK0woTdYFmpJGqJLIRl2iGFVel4FRco5ucO4yJxLKeoc_Fb4zZh3VhQmE2U8kmeTNCsQ1-Byn7cV_EVNjY97CGAsLOpxgGCKPpi8EEs4bDUuR9HmG4RVet6TPcneYc_by-fC_ey-XX28fieVlaJslYKiWcokwo1Qjgzq3AUVtj5TAXLSdUAANGpWSKg3CMqRqka6xaSdnSpgE2Rw_H3unevy3kUQ8-W-h7EyBus2a1pLyWzVmQYslrXKsJ5EfQpphzglZPHgaT9ppgfbCsO32yrA-WNaZ6sjzlno45mN7deUg6Ww_BgvMJ7Khd9Gca_gEjPIml</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20754049</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Clarke, Amelia ; Kouri, Rosa</creator><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Amelia ; Kouri, Rosa</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-6526</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1786</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.02.019</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Aspects ; Campus ; Drivers ; EMS ; Environmental management systems ; Higher education ; Roles ; University</subject><ispartof>Journal of cleaner production, 2009-07, Vol.17 (11), p.971-984</ispartof><rights>2009 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-996d92369986e5ddbed2c409d056f5126e3e3277395e6d3394e7d8c9b77f288e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-996d92369986e5ddbed2c409d056f5126e3e3277395e6d3394e7d8c9b77f288e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652609000614$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Amelia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kouri, Rosa</creatorcontrib><title>Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system</title><title>Journal of cleaner production</title><description>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.</description><subject>Aspects</subject><subject>Campus</subject><subject>Drivers</subject><subject>EMS</subject><subject>Environmental management systems</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Roles</subject><subject>University</subject><issn>0959-6526</issn><issn>1879-1786</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_QdiTt13zsUk2J5HiF1S86DmkyWzNspvUZFvov3dLe-9pGHjel5kHoXuCK4KJeOyqzvawSbGiGKsK0woTdYFmpJGqJLIRl2iGFVel4FRco5ucO4yJxLKeoc_Fb4zZh3VhQmE2U8kmeTNCsQ1-Byn7cV_EVNjY97CGAsLOpxgGCKPpi8EEs4bDUuR9HmG4RVet6TPcneYc_by-fC_ey-XX28fieVlaJslYKiWcokwo1Qjgzq3AUVtj5TAXLSdUAANGpWSKg3CMqRqka6xaSdnSpgE2Rw_H3unevy3kUQ8-W-h7EyBus2a1pLyWzVmQYslrXKsJ5EfQpphzglZPHgaT9ppgfbCsO32yrA-WNaZ6sjzlno45mN7deUg6Ww_BgvMJ7Khd9Gca_gEjPIml</recordid><startdate>20090701</startdate><enddate>20090701</enddate><creator>Clarke, Amelia</creator><creator>Kouri, Rosa</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JG9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090701</creationdate><title>Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system</title><author>Clarke, Amelia ; Kouri, Rosa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-996d92369986e5ddbed2c409d056f5126e3e3277395e6d3394e7d8c9b77f288e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Aspects</topic><topic>Campus</topic><topic>Drivers</topic><topic>EMS</topic><topic>Environmental management systems</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Roles</topic><topic>University</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Amelia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kouri, Rosa</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Clarke, Amelia</au><au>Kouri, Rosa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cleaner production</jtitle><date>2009-07-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>971</spage><epage>984</epage><pages>971-984</pages><issn>0959-6526</issn><eissn>1879-1786</eissn><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.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.02.019</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-6526
ispartof Journal of cleaner production, 2009-07, Vol.17 (11), p.971-984
issn 0959-6526
1879-1786
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_34725478
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Aspects
Campus
Drivers
EMS
Environmental management systems
Higher education
Roles
University
title Choosing an appropriate university or college environmental management system
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T22%3A29%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Choosing%20an%20appropriate%20university%20or%20college%20environmental%20management%20system&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cleaner%20production&rft.au=Clarke,%20Amelia&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=971&rft.epage=984&rft.pages=971-984&rft.issn=0959-6526&rft.eissn=1879-1786&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.02.019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20754049%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20754049&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0959652609000614&rfr_iscdi=true