Educating Students and Their Future Employers to Minimise Environmental and Climate Impacts Through Cost-Effective Environmental Management Strategies



Traditionally, internal views from UK businesses expect the maximisation of profits and delivery of value for the customer; the external view expects realistic profits and provision of employment. However, this view is changing, with customers increasingly demanding products and services that also demonstrate environmental responsibility and minimise climate impacts. Although the cause–effect relationship between business operations, negative environmental impacts and climate change is well established, there is now an enhanced appreciation that environmental challenges are systemic, interlinked and cannot be addressed in isolation. Despite the proliferation of ‘low-cost’ or ‘no-cost’ technological and behavioural opportunities, businesses struggle to realise opportunities that address these interlinked challenges, demonstrate environmental responsibility and minimise climate impacts, as they are embedded in economic systems in which improvement equals investment. Environmental improvement interventions have become synonymous with cost consumption rather than cost saving—frequently at odds with corporate financial strategies. In an attempt to change this view, support the mitigation of climate change through the reduction in environmental impacts and develop successful employment-ready graduates skilled in effective environmental improvement techniques, an innovative Environmental Strategy Module engaging postgraduate students in environmental management strategy design is taught at Coventry University. This offers students a more financially accessible approach to environmental improvement: a self-funding environmental management strategy created through the Environmental Value for Money Framework. This paper presents a conceptual study of the Environmental Value for Money Framework and its engagement of students as future employees in creating self-funded, economically viable environmental management strategies. It also offers this framework as a mechanism to encourage businesses to engage in carefully planned and economically viable strategic environmental improvements.


Environmental management strategy Environmental responsibility Environmental impacts Environmental Value for Money Framework 


  1. Anonymous. (2017). Fork lift truck hire. Last Accessed September 19, 2017.
  2. Beckett, R., & Murray, P. (2000). Learning by auditing: A knowledge creating approach. The TQM Magazine, 12(2), 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beech, N., & MacIntosh, R. (2012). Managing change: Enquiry and action. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benn, S., & Dunphy, D. (2009). Action research as an approach to integrating sustainability into MBA programs: An exploratory study. Journal of Management Education, 33(3), 276–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgess, J. (2006). Blogging to learn, learning to blog. In A. Bruns & J. Jacobs (Eds.), Use of blogs (pp. 91–103). New York: Peter Lang Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Campos, L. (2012). Environmental management systems (EMS) for small companies: A study in Southern Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 32, 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carbon Trust. (2011). Heating control: Maximising comfort, minimising energy consumption. Last Accessed September 14, 2017.
  8. Carbon Trust. (2015). Guidance Note 10: Lighting—Energy technology list. Last Accessed September 14, 2017.
  9. Cashian, P., Clarke, J., & Richardson, M. (2015) Perspectives on: Employability. Is it time to move the employability debate on? Chartered Association of Business Schools: Last Accessed September 13, 2017.
  10. Cassells, S., & Lewis, K. (2017). Environmental management training for micro and small enterprises: The missing link? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 24(2), 297–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chan, Y., & Kantamaneni, R. (2015). Study on energy efficiency and energy saving potential in industry and on possible policy mechanisms. Brussels: ICF International.Google Scholar
  12. Clark, G. (1998). Maximising the benefits from work-based learning: The effectiveness of environmental audits. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 22(3), 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in higher education. York: Higher Education Academy.
  14. Corcoran, P., & Wals, A. (2004). Higher education and the challenge of sustainability: Problematics, promise, and practice. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crosthwaite, C., Cameron, I., Lant, P., & Litster, J. (2006). Balancing curriculum processes and content in a project centred curriculum: In pursuit of graduate attributes. Education for Chemical Engineers, 1(1), 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DEFRA. (2011). The economics of waste and waste policy. Last Accessed September 19, 2017.
  17. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Drayson, R. (2014). Employer attitudes towards, and skills for, sustainable development higher education academy. Last Accessed September 14, 2017.
  19. Ellison, N., & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1), 99–122.Google Scholar
  20. Envirowise. (2016). Reduce your water use and collect the savings. Last Accessed September 18, 2017.
  21. Ervin, D., Wu, J., Khanna, M., Jones, C., & Wirkkalas, T. (2012). Motivations and barriers to corporate environmental management. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 390–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. European Environment Agency. (2015). The European environment—State and outlook 2015. Last accessed October 28, 2017.
  23. Ferreira, A., Lopes, M., & Morais, J. (2006). Environmental management and audit schemes implementation as an educational tool for sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 973–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Finke, T., Gilchrist, A., & Mouzas, S. (2016). Why companies fail to respond to climate change: Collective inaction as an outcome of barriers to interaction. Industrial Marketing Management, 58, 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fothergill, J., Smith, D., & Payne, R. (2017). Driving sustainable resource management through ISO 14001. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  26. (2017). Waste costs. Last Accessed September 18, 2017.
  27. Graafland, J., & Smid, H. (2016). Environmental Impacts of SMEs and the effects of formal management tools: Evidence from EU’s largest survey. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 23(5), 297–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gynther, L., Mustonen, S., & Saarivirta, E. (2016). Policies and measures for promoting efficient electric motors in industry. Last Accessed September 19, 2017.
  29. Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Higher Education Academy. (2016). Higher education academy frame WORKS, 04 Essential frameworks for enhancing student success. Last Accessed September 16, 2017.
  31. HEFCE. (2013). Sustainable development in higher education: Consultation on a framework for HEFCE. Higher Education Funding Council for England. Last Accessed September 16, 2017.
  32. Hillary, R. (2004). Environmental management systems and the smaller enterprise. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(6), 561–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hillary, R., & Burr, P. (2011). Evidence-based Study into the Benefits of EMSs for SMEs. Last Accessed September 19, 2017.
  34. IEMA. (2014). Preparing for the perfect storm. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  35. Khalili, N., & Duecker, S. (2013). Application of multi-criteria decision analysis in design of sustainable environmental management system framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 188–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lambrechts, W., & Ceulemans, K. (2013). Sustainability assessment in higher education. Evaluating the use of the auditing instrument for sustainability in higher education (AISHE) in Belgium. In S. Caeiro, W. Leal Filho, C. Jabbour, & U. Azeiteiro (Eds.), Sustainability assessment tools in higher education institutions. Mapping trends and good practice around the world. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  37. Large, C. (2012). ISO14001: Loved by procurement, hated by SMEs. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  38. Laurinkari, J., & Tarvainen, M. (2017). The policies of inclusion. London: EHV Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. Moalosi, R., Molokwane, S., & Mothibedi, G. (2012). Using a design-orientated project to attain graduate attributes. Design and Technology Education, 17(1), 30–43.Google Scholar
  40. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Northern Ireland Environment Agency. (2017). Combined heat and power (CHP) benefits and opportunities for business. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  42. Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005) Educating the net generation. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  43. Panwar, R., Nybakk, E., Hansen, E., & Pinkse, J. (2016). The effect of small firms’ competitive strategies on their community and environmental engagement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129, 578–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pegg, A., Waldock, J., Hendy-Isaac, S., & Lawton, R. (2012). Pedagogy for employability. Last Accessed September 15, 2017.
  45. Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2004). The regulation dilemma: Cooperation and conflict in environmental governance. Public Administration Review, 64(2), 152–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Renewable Energy Hub. (2017). Micro combined heat and power microchip CHP information. Last Accessed September 19, 2017.
  47. Saidur, R. (2010). A review on electrical motors energy use and energy savings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(3), 877–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sharp, L. (2012). Green campuses: the road from little victories to systemic transformation. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(2), 128–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shrivastava, P., & Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 4, 936–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Studer, S., Tsang, S., Welford, R., & Hills, P. (2008). SMEs and voluntary environmental initiatives: A study of stakeholders’ perspectives in Hong Kong. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 51(2), 285–301.Google Scholar
  51. UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals learning objectives. Last Accessed September 22, 2017.
  52. United Nations. (2017). Sustainable development knowledge platform: Sustainable development goals. Last Accessed September 22, 2017.
  53. Viegas, C., Bond, A., Duarte Ribeiro, J., & Selig, P. (2013). A review of environmental monitoring and auditing in the context of risk: Unveiling the extent of a confused relationship. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Viegas, C., Bond, A., Vaz, C., Borchardt, M., Pereira, G., Selig, P., et al. (2016). Critical attributes of sustainability in higher education: A categorisation from literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 126, 260–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Waddock, S. (2007). Leadership integrity in a fractured knowledge world. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(4), 543–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wiek, A., Xiong, A., Brundiers, K., & van de Leeuw, S. (2014). Integrating problem-and project-based learning into sustainability programs. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 15(4), 431–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Worcester Business SchoolUniversity of WorcesterWorcesterUK
  2. 2.Coventry UniversityCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations