Measure and Evaluate Sustainable Development

The following provide examples of sustainability-related measurement systems:

Carbon Neutral Assessment: The term “Carbon Neutral” is a branded standard that has been established for voluntary actions to address matters related to climate change. Carbon Neutral status can be applied to entire companies, events, products, and services, and represents the point at which greenhouse gas emissions have been assessed, reduced where possible, and the remaining non-reducible emissions offset through energy efficiency, high-quality renewable energy or forestry projects. An independent auditing process is used to assess the application of the Carbon Neutral standard by organisations. [6]

Sustainable Economic Growth: Sustainable growth is described by the following formulae: It occurs when the (change in the economy) / (resource use) is greater than the growth in the economy, and this is also greater than the (change in the economy) / (workforce numbers) or d(Y/L) < dY < d(Y/R), where: Y = the size of an economy, dY = growth in the economy, L = the number of employed persons, Y/L = per capita production, R = resource use, and Y/R is the resource productivity of the economy. This measure provides a yardstick for measuring sustainability. If the inequality formula is found to be true then growth is sustainable; if the formula is not true then current growth is not sustainable. [7]

Triple Bottom Line Reporting (TBL): TBL (or Sustainability Reporting) measures and reports on business performance by focusing on three areas: financial profitability, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility. TBL provides a framework for businesses to focus on multi-dimensional goals, and to comply with social demands for greater business accountability and sustainable development.

Product Waste Minimisation and Environmental Release Levels: Greater environmental awareness is challenging organisations to re-examine their operational processes, products, and services. For competitive reasons, organisations strive to develop and provide products with little environmental impact. They seek products that can be recycled, reused, or disposed of safely. Organisations need to be able to respond to these challenges quickly and effectively, in order to remain competitive. Current practices for minimising or eliminating waste involve a wide range of initiatives to make sure valuable materials are not squandered. In addition, organisational processes are investigated for their potential to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills. Leading organisations often set ambitious “zero-waste” goals, which attempt to virtually eliminate waste bins by ensuring that waste is reused or recycled.

The following are examples of specific measures that organisations may use to assess the impact of their sustainability endeavours:

Product Waste: i.e. the quantity of product waste disposed of as a percentage of the total quantity of product produced for a given period, or the total quantity of waste disposed of for a given period, or the total time dedicated to waste disposal per period. Product waste may include by-products that are partly redeemable.

Waste Streams: i.e. the number of waste streams. This measure is useful for the analysis of waste within an organisation. Before a policy to reduce overall waste can be effective, all waste streams need to be identified. As these streams are eventually reduced and “dammed”, the number of streams is reduced as an indicator of progress. Waste streams can be found in any process, for instance, handling losses, cleaning losses, process losses, storage, materials handling, pumping, treatment, and even management waste, associated with decision-cycle times and production delays.

Cost of Waste, or Waste Disposal, or Handling: i.e. cost of waste or total waste handling/ treatment costs per quarter or year. This measure can be used to assess waste costs. The measure could be customised to assess many different types of waste, for example the cost of disposal, the cost of rejected materials, rework, in-process scrap, and returns.

Supplier/Contractor Waste/Recycling Rate: i.e. the percentage of raw materials supplied with recycled content per year, or the amount and type of wastes generated by suppliers during the previous period, or the number of waste minimisation initiatives implemented by—or in cooperation with—suppliers per year or during the previous period. This measure tracks the progress of suppliers (or supplier-related initiatives) in reducing waste or in supplying more environmentally friendly products, materials, and services.

Utility and Fossil Fuel Consumption: i.e. the total cost of utilities used per period, or the total quantity of energy consumed from all sources within the manufacturing processes (in joules per unit of manufactured output), or the ratio of the total energy or fuel consumption to the volume of total production and per employee, or the percentage of renewable and non-renewable raw materials turned into product and scrap per quarter or year, or the level of raw materials and energy inputs per unit of production per quarter or year. These measures provide the means for assessing overall utility and energy use.

Product Design for Re-Use and Recycling, or Product Stewardship: i.e. the volume of recyclable or re-used packaging as a percentage of total packaging content used per quarter or year during the previous period, or the number of product units taken back for recycling or re-manufacture per quarter or year during previous period, or the percentage of total product offering designed for recycling or re-use per year versus previous period, or the weight of packaging materials used per volume or weight of product output. These measures quantify the commitment of organisations to protect the environment.

Environmental Spending: i.e. the level of R&D expenditure devoted to projects, activities or processes with environmental significance during a given period, or the expenditure on “clean” production technologies and equipment as a percentage of total equipment costs during a previous given period, or the percentage of company annual sales revenue devoted to community and industry-sponsored pollution prevention and environmental protection programmes or activities during a previous given period. This is a measure of the investment into, and therefore commitment made toward, protecting the environment.

Environmental Risk Level: i.e. the rating of environmental risk (process or material). Organisations with a strong focus on waste and environmental issues often rate such risk in terms of the “worst case scenario” of environmental impact of processes or materials. This can be used when assessing the suitability of those under consideration for inclusion or replacement. The rating should take account of all factors, including potential clean-up costs, regulatory body fines and re-compliance costs, time, reputation, disposal costs, and re-training costs. All of these factors can be combined to classify a process, material or activity with a risk level, which can then be used in the decision-making process when considering changes.

Environmental Risk – Total Potential Liability: i.e. a rating of total potential environmental risk in terms of cost (processes or material, or total of all risks). This measurement can be used to track progress in reducing the environmental impacts—or potential impacts—of processes within an organisation. The rating should take account of all factors, including clean-up costs, regulatory body fines and re-compliance costs, time, reputation, and re-training costs.

Environmental Compliance Performance – Punitive Actions: i.e. the number and type of environmentally-related legal or regulatory actions brought against the company during a previous period, or the number and cost of environmentally-related penalties and judgements levied for regulatory or legislative non-compliance during a previous period. This measure provides an indication of an organisation’s environmental performance, and in particular the number of actions or penalties resulting from non-compliance

Environmental Initiatives – Success: i.e. cost savings due to improved environmental management as a percentage of total sales costs plus savings. This measure provides management with an indication of the cost effectiveness of environmental initiatives. 

Self-Assessments

Self-assessments can be used to find out how effective organisations are at implementing various strategies, tools or techniques. Figure 5, see below, provides an example of one of BPIR’s sustainability self-assessment tools.

Recommendation – a score of less than 14 indicates that action should be taken immediately.

Figure 5: How Eco-friendly is Your Product Design? Find out now by completing the self-assessment (the full self-assessment can be found by members in the Self-Assessment area on BPIR.com).

_________________________________________________________

You are reading a Management Brief Report in html-format. Become a member of the BPIR to receive a new report in PDF-format every month (see examples: Benchmarking & Business Excellence). PDF-format can be saved on your hard drive, emailed to work colleagues, and are much easier to read and print out!.. For BPIR updates and best practices sign up to our FREE newsletter.