Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 145, Issue 1, pp 367–381 | Cite as

The adoption of environmental and risk management practices: Relationships to environmental performance

  • Joseph Sarkis


The Strategic Goals Program sponsored by the United States Environmental Protection Agency which focuses on the Metal Finishing Industry is used to investigate some pertinent issues related to small manufacturing enterprises' environmental performance. Results from the initial years of this program are used to evaluate a number of hypotheses related to the relationship between environmental performance and adoption of environmental and risk management practices, especially among smaller organizations. The methodology uses unique structuring of data to determine temporal environmental performance using data envelopment analysis. Results show that early and increased investment in these practices and programs may not provide for better performance benefits. The findings have implications for environmental managers in smaller organizations and policy makers overseeing these types of organizations.


Environmental performance Manufacturing innovation Data envelopment analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Annandale, D., A. Morrison-Saunders, and G. Bouma. (2004). “The Impact of Voluntary Environmental Protection Instruments on Company Environmental Performance.” Business Strategy and the Environment 13(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banker, R.D., A. Charnes, and W.W. Cooper. (1984). “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science, 30, 1078–1092.Google Scholar
  3. Brockett, P.L. and B. Golany. (1996). “Using Rank Statistics for Determining Programmatic Efficiency Differences in Data Envelopment Analysis.” Management Science, 42(3), 466–472.Google Scholar
  4. Carmin, J., N. Darnall, and J. Homens. (2003). “Stakeholder Involvement in the Design of U.S. Voluntary Environmental Initiatives: Does Sponsorship Matter?” Policy Studies Journal, 31(4), 527–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cashore, B. and I. Vertinisky. (2000). Policy Networks and Firm Behaviors: Governance Systems and FirmGoogle Scholar
  6. Charnes, C., W.W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes. (1978). “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units.” European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cordeiro, J. and J. Sarkis. (1997). “Environmental Proactivism and Firm Performance: Evidence from Industry Analyst Forecasts.” Business Strategy and the Environment, 6(2), 104–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Castor, J.O. and J.J. Chrisman. (1995). “Order of Market Entry, Competitive Strategy, and Financial Performance.” Journal of Business Research, 33(2), 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DiMaggio, P.J. and W.W. Powell. (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerwin, D. and H. Kolodny. (1992). Management of Advanced Manufacturing Technology: Strategy, Organization and Innovation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  11. Gilbert, J.T. and P.H. Birnbaum-More. (1996). “Innovation Timing Advantages: From Economic Theory to Strategic Application.” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management (JET-M), 12(4), 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grosskopf, S. and V. Valdmanis. (1987). “Measuring Hospital Performance: A Non-Parametric Approach.” Journal of Health Economics, 6(2), 89–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hart, S. and G. Ahuja. (1996). “Does it Pay to be Green? An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Emission Reduction and Firm Performance.” Business Strategy and the Environment, 5, 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. King, A. and M. Lenox. (2001). “Does it Really Pay to be Green?” The Journal of Industrial Ecology, 5(1), 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Klassen, R.D. and C.P. McClaughlin. (1996). “The Impact of Environmental Management on Firm Performance.” Management Science, 42(8), 1199–1213.Google Scholar
  16. Klassen, R.D. and D.C. Whybark. (1999). “Environmental Management in Operations: The Selection of Environmental Technologies.” Decision Sciences, 30(3), 601–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. NCMS. (2000). Benchmarking Metal Finishing. National Center for Manufacturing Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  18. Nehrt, C. (1996). “Timing and Intensity Effects of Environmental Investments.” Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 535–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Melnyk, S.A., R.P. Sroufe, and R. Calantone. (2003). “Assessing the Impact of Environmental Management Systems on Corporate and Environmental Performance.” Journal of Operations Management, 21(3), 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Porter, M.E. and C. van der Linde. (1995). “Green and Competitive: Ending the Stalemate.” Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120–134.Google Scholar
  21. Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Rosenbloom, R.S. and M.A. Cusumano. (1987). “Technological Pioneering and Competitive Advantage: The Birth of the VCR Industry.” California Management Review, 29(4), 51–76.Google Scholar
  23. Rousseau, J.J. and J.H. Semple. (1995). “Radii of Classification Preservation in Data Envelopment Analysis: A Case Study of ‘Program Follow-Through.” Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46(8), 943–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Russo, M. and P. Fouts. (1997). “A Resource-Based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability.” Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sarkis, J. and J.J. Cordeiro. (2001). “An Empirical Evaluation of Environmental Efficiencies and Firm Performance: Pollution Prevention Versus End-of-pipe Practice.” European Journal of Operational Research, 135(1), 102–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Seiford, L.M. and J. Zhu. (1999a). “An Investigation of Returns to Scale in Data Envelopment Analysis.” OMEGA, 27(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Seiford, L.M. and J. Zhu. (1999b). “Profitability and Narketability of the Top 55 U.S. Commercial Banks.” Management Science, 45(9), 1270–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Song, X.M., C.A. Di Benedetto, and Y.L. Zhao. (1999). “Pioneering Advantages in Manufacturing and Service Industries: Empirical Evidence from Nine Countries.” Strategic Management Journal, 20(9), 811–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Szymanski, D.M., L.C. Troy, and S.G. Bharadwaj. (1995). “Order of Entry and Business Performance: An Empirical Synthesis and Reexamination.” Journal of Marketing, 59(4), 17–33.Google Scholar
  30. Tukker, A. (2004). “Eight Types of Product-Service System: Eight Ways to Sustainability? Experiences from Suspronet.” Business Strategy and the. Environment, 13(4), 246–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhu, Q.H. and J. Sarkis. (2004).“Relationships Between Operational Practices and Performance among Early Adopters of Green Supply Chain Management Practices in Chinese Manufacturing Enterprises.” Journal of Operations Management, 22(3), 265–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of ManagementClark UniversityWorcesterU.S.A

Personalised recommendations