IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5025-d799543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Industrial Sectors’ Perceptions about the Benefits of Implementing ISO 14001 Standard: MANOVA and Discriminant Analysis Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Saleh Alsulamy

    (Architecture and Planning Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia)

  • Shaik Dawood

    (Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mohamed Rafik

    (Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia)

  • Mohamed Mansour

    (Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia
    Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt)

Abstract

The most frequent drawback of ISO 14001 observed in existing studies relates to the cost of certification and implementation process. This drawback requires scaling the benefits of adopting the standard to assign organizations limited resources based on each benefit scale. This paper reports the first research results that scale the benefits of adopting the standard. A quantitative method was adopted, where data were collected using a questionnaire survey. A total of 120 respondents were recruited from organizations operating in six industrial sectors to take part in the study. MANOVA and discriminant analysis methodologies were used to analyze the 14 most cited benefits in the literature on adopting the standard. A novel feature of our approach is the comprehensive statistical analysis of the collected data, which yields robust results due to assumption satisfaction. The results demonstrated that the mean vector of the benefits was not equal per each sector. Environmental management and indicator dimensions can discriminate sectors more than the environmental awareness dimension. This study provides insights into the necessity of assessing the benefits of ISO 14001 adaptation that helps organizations allocate their limited resources optimally and support the listing of standard key performance indicators in ISO 14001. In addition, it calls for combining ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001:2015, and ISO 45001:2018 in one standard.

Suggested Citation

  • Saleh Alsulamy & Shaik Dawood & Mohamed Rafik & Mohamed Mansour, 2022. "Industrial Sectors’ Perceptions about the Benefits of Implementing ISO 14001 Standard: MANOVA and Discriminant Analysis Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5025-:d:799543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5025/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5025/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sime Curkovic & Robert Sroufe, 2011. "Using ISO 14001 to promote a sustainable supply chain strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 71-93, February.
    2. Peter A. Strachan & Ivor McKay Sinclair & David Lal, 2003. "Managing ISO 14001 implementation in the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS)," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 50-63, March.
    3. McGuire, William, 2014. "The effect of ISO 14001 on environmental regulatory compliance in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 254-264.
    4. Aravind, Deepa & Christmann, Petra, 2011. "Decoupling of Standard Implementation from Certification: Does Quality of ISO 14001 Implementation Affect Facilities’ Environmental Performance?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 73-102, January.
    5. Olivier Boiral, 2007. "Corporate Greening Through ISO 14001: A Rational Myth?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 127-146, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yan Chen & Zijin Wang & Jaime Ortiz, 2023. "A Sustainable Digital Ecosystem: Digital Servitization Transformation and Digital Infrastructure Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Marie-France Waxin & Aaron Bartholomew & Fang Zhao & Ayesha Siddiqi, 2023. "Drivers, Challenges and Outcomes of Environmental Management System Implementation in Public Sector Organizations: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-20, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pablo Arocena & Raquel Orcos & Fedaous Zouaghi, 2021. "The impact of ISO 14001 on firm environmental and economic performance: The moderating role of size and environmental awareness," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 955-967, February.
    2. Hammad Riaz & Abubakr Saeed & Muhammad Saad Baloch & Nasrullah & Zeeshan Ahmad Khan, 2019. "Valuation of Environmental Management Standard ISO 14001: Evidence from an Emerging Market," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Marco Pesce & Chenyi Shi & Andrea Critto & Xiaohui Wang & Antonio Marcomini, 2018. "SWOT Analysis of the Application of International Standard ISO 14001 in the Chinese Context. A Case Study of Guangdong Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Rocio Carrillo-Labella & Fatiha Fort & Manuel Parras-Rosa, 2020. "Motives, Barriers, and Expected Benefits of ISO 14001 in the Agri-Food Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Hammad Riaz & Abubakr Saeed, 2020. "Impact of environmental policy on firm's market performance: The case of ISO 14001," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 681-693, March.
    6. Rebecca Edwards & Graham Smith & Milena Büchs, 2013. "Environmental Management Systems and the Third Sector: Exploring Weak Adoption in the UK," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 119-133, February.
    7. Sabina Scarpellini & Jesus Valero‐Gil & José M. Moneva & Michele Andreaus, 2020. "Environmental management capabilities for a “circular eco‐innovation”," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 1850-1864, July.
    8. Mark Anthony Camilleri, 2022. "The rationale for ISO 14001 certification: A systematic review and a cost–benefit analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 1067-1083, July.
    9. Ionut Viorel Herghiligiu & Ioan-Bogdan Robu & Marius Pislaru & Adrian Vilcu & Anca Laura Asandului & Silvia Avasilcăi & Catalin Balan, 2019. "Sustainable Environmental Management System Integration and Business Performance: A Balance Assessment Approach Using Fuzzy Logic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-30, September.
    10. Eduardo Duque‐Grisales & Javier Aguilera‐Caracuel & Jaime Guerrero‐Villegas & Encarnación García‐Sánchez, 2020. "Does green innovation affect the financial performance of Multilatinas? The moderating role of ISO 14001 and R&D investment," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3286-3302, December.
    11. Shawn Pope & Arild Wæraas, 2016. "CSR-Washing is Rare: A Conceptual Framework, Literature Review, and Critique," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 173-193, August.
    12. Ying Zhang & Hongfei Ruan & Guiyao Tang & Li Tong, 2021. "Power of sustainable development: Does environmental management system certification affect a firm's access to finance?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 3772-3788, December.
    13. Sang M. Lee & Yonghwi Noh & Donghyun Choi & Jin Sung Rha, 2017. "Environmental Policy Performances for Sustainable Development: From the Perspective of ISO 14001 Certification," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 108-120, March.
    14. Luca Marrucci & Tiberio Daddi, 2022. "The contribution of the Eco‐Management and Audit Scheme to the environmental performance of manufacturing organisations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1347-1357, May.
    15. Jing Wang & Yunshi Mao, 2020. "Pains and gains of environmental management system certification for the sustainable development of manufacturing companies: Heterogeneous effects of industry peer learning," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 2092-2109, July.
    16. Laurence Vigneau & Michael Humphreys & Jeremy Moon, 2015. "How Do Firms Comply with International Sustainability Standards? Processes and Consequences of Adopting the Global Reporting Initiative," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 469-486, October.
    17. Elisabet Garrido & Consuelo González & Raquel Orcos, 2020. "ISO 14001 and CO2 emissions: An analysis of the contingent role of country features," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 698-710, February.
    18. Yonghwi Noh, 2019. "The Effects of Corporate Green Efforts for Sustainability: An Event Study Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    19. Iñaki Heras‐Saizarbitoria & German Arana & Olivier Boiral, 2016. "Outcomes of Environmental Management Systems: the Role of Motivations and Firms’ Characteristics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8), pages 545-559, December.
    20. Marie-France Waxin & Sandra L. Knuteson & Aaron Bartholomew, 2019. "Outcomes and Key Factors of Success for ISO 14001 Certification: Evidence from an Emerging Arab Gulf Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5025-:d:799543. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.