IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijefaa/v9y2017i8p118-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using a Balanced Scorecard Approach to Measure Environmental Performance: A Proposed Model

Author

Listed:
  • Inaam M. Al-Zwyalif

Abstract

Environmental aspects have been recognized by today¡¯s organizations as the most important components of value creation that would contribute to the achievement of the goals and success in the future. The purpose of this study is to propose an Environmental Balanced Scorecard (EBSC) model to evaluate environmental performance in business organizations. It also aims to illustrate how the environmental performance aspects can integrate into the Balanced Scorecard (BSC). To achieve the goals of the study, the descriptive analytical approach was adopted for its suitability for the purpose of the study. An EBSC model was developed to evaluate environmental performance with proposed four perspectives and environmental strategic objectives within each perspective. The four perspectives are the customer, internal process, learning and growth and financial. The proposed model will help managers not only to evaluate the environmental performance, but also to plan, manage and control organization¡¯s environmental activities. In addition, it can serve as a template for the organizations which aims to create environmental awareness and pursue environmental sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Inaam M. Al-Zwyalif, 2017. "Using a Balanced Scorecard Approach to Measure Environmental Performance: A Proposed Model," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(8), pages 118-126, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijefaa:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:118-126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijef/article/view/68685/37715
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijef/article/view/68685
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Idalina Dias‐Sardinha & Lucas Reijnders, 2005. "Evaluating environmental and social performance of large Portuguese companies: a balanced scorecard approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 73-91, March.
    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. Fernandes, João Paulo, 2019. "Developing viable, adjustable strategies for planning and management—A methodological approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 563-572.

    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. Nurisyal Muhamad & Sofiah Md Auzair & Amizawati Mohd Amir & Md Daud Ismail, 2016. "Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System," EuroEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 3(12), pages 182-199, JUNE.
    2. Aapo Länsiluoto & Marko Järvenpää, 2008. "Environmental and performance management forces," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(3), pages 184-206, October.
    3. Jau-Yang Liu, 2018. "An Internal Control System that Includes Corporate Social Responsibility for Social Sustainability in the New Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Regina F. Bento & Lasse Mertins & Lourdes F. White, 2017. "Ideology and the Balanced Scorecard: An Empirical Exploration of the Tension Between Shareholder Value Maximization and Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(4), pages 769-789, June.
    5. Chaiyawit Muangmee & Zdzisława Dacko-Pikiewicz & Nusanee Meekaewkunchorn & Nuttapon Kassakorn & Bilal Khalid, 2021. "Green Entrepreneurial Orientation and Green Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs)," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Nurisyal Muhamad & Sofiah Md Auzair & Amizawati Mohd Amir & Md Daud Ismail, 2016. "Measuring Sustainability Performance Measurement System," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 12(3), pages 182-199, JUNE.
    7. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2016. "The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of Architectures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 193-221, January.
    8. Journeault, Marc & De Rongé, Yves & Henri, Jean-François, 2016. "Levers of eco-control and competitive environmental strategy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 316-340.
    9. Marc J. Epstein & Sally K. Widener, 2011. "Facilitating sustainable development decisions: measuring stakeholder reactions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 107-123, February.
    10. Ali Saleh Alshebami & Abdullah Hamoud Ali Seraj & Ibrahim A. Elshaer & Abdullah Sultan Al Shammre & Salem Handhal Al Marri & Abdalwali Lutfi & Mostafa Aboulnour Salem & Ashraf Mahrous Nour Zaher, 2023. "Improving Social Performance through Innovative Small Green Businesses: Knowledge Sharing and Green Entrepreneurial Intention as Antecedents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Kaveh Asiaei & Nick Bontis & Omid Barani & Ruzita Jusoh, 2021. "Corporate social responsibility and sustainability performance measurement systems: implications for organizational performance," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 85-126, March.
    12. Länsiluoto, Aapo & Järvenpää, Marko, 2010. "Greening the balanced scorecard," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 385-395, July.
    13. Cory Searcy, 2012. "Corporate Sustainability Performance Measurement Systems: A Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 239-253, May.
    14. Ivo Hristov & Antonio Chirico & Andrea Appolloni, 2019. "Sustainability Value Creation, Survival, and Growth of the Company: A Critical Perspective in the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Abdulhamid Rahuma & Sami Fethi, 2022. "A new approach to evaluate environmental strategy: Empirical evidence from international petroleum companies using the balanced scorecard model," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3152-3165, November.
    16. Dumitrascu Mihaela & Feleagã Liliana & Feleagã Niculae, 2014. "Green Banking In Romania," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 617-624, July.
    17. Manuel Castelo Branco & Catarina Delgado, 2011. "Research on corporate social responsibility and disclosure in Portugal," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 7(2), pages 202-217, July.
    18. Andrea Urbinati & Davide Chiaroni & Paolo Maccarrone & Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Federico Frattini, 2022. "A multidimensional scorecard of KPIs for retrofit measures of buildings: A systematic literature review," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 1968-1979, November.
    19. Chiara Mio & Antonio Costantini & Silvia Panfilo, 2022. "Performance measurement tools for sustainable business: A systematic literature review on the sustainability balanced scorecard use," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 367-384, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    environmental performance; evaluation; balanced scorecard;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:ijefaa:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:118-126. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.