Environmental performance assessment: perceptions of project managers on the relationship between operational and environmental performance indicators
There is a growing concern about environmental impacts resulting from construction activities. To help minimize the environmental impacts from construction, Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) have been advocated and in some cases, implemented. Within the construction industry, Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) forms one of the most important tools in monitoring and evaluating environmental performance. However, the relations between Environmental Operational Indicators (EOIs) (inputs) used in EPA and Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) (outputs) have not been tested and correlated, casting doubt on the reliability of these inputs. This paper attempts to develop a series of input (EOI) and output (EPI) indicators for EPA and measure their relations based on the perceptions of project managers. The results show that EOIs defined correlate strongly with EPIs. Therefore, EPA can help to identify areas for continuous improvement, and also provide an early indication of the environmental performance for an organization.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 24 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RCME20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Helen Lingard & Peter Graham & Guinevere Smithers, 2000. "Employee perceptions of the solid waste management system operating in a large Australian contracting organization: implications for company policy implementation," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 383-393.
- M. M. M. Teo & M. Loosemore, 2001. "A theory of waste behaviour in the construction industry," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(7), pages 741-751.
- Raymond Cole, 2000. "Building environmental assessment methods: assessing construction practices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 949-957.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:24:y:2006:i:3:p:287-299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.