Assessing Environmental Impact in Environmental Information Systems: Measurements and Monitoring

  • Marina Erechtchoukova
  • Peter Khaiter
Part of the EcoProduction book series (ECOPROD)


An evaluation of an organization’s environmental performance has to be done using two general categories of indicators: (1) indicators describing management and operation performance; and (2) environmental condition indicators that reveal the organization’s impact on the environment. The latter cannot be done without systematic standardized observations and measurements conducted directly on the impacted environment. Integration of an organization’s environmental performance evaluation into the organization’s governance requires automated procedures for data collection and analysis. This chapter considers an organization’s environmental impact assessment with respect to water resources. It investigates formal approaches to temporal monitoring design producing sufficient data for the assessment and demonstrates how these approaches can be incorporated into organizational environmental information system.


Environmental performance evaluation Water quality Monitoring design Optimization 



The authors are grateful to anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful suggestions and helpful comments on the manuscript. Part of the research was done based on the data sets prepared in Hydrochemical Institute, the Russian Federation.


  1. Azzone G, Noci G, Manzini R, Welford R, Young CW (1996) Defining environmental performance indicators: an integrated framework. Bus Strateg Environ 5(2):69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennete M, James P (1999) ISO 14031 and the future of environmental performance evaluation. In: Bennett M, James P (eds) Sustainable measures: evaluation and reporting of environmental and social performance. Greenleaf Publisher, Sheffield, pp 76–97Google Scholar
  3. Cagno E, Tardini L, Trucco P (2007) EPIDesign: integrating corporate strategies into the development process of an environmental performance evaluation system. In: Sroufe R, Sarkis J (eds) Strategic sustainability. The state of the art in corporate environmental management systems. Greenleaf Publisher, Sheffield, pp 20–42Google Scholar
  4. Campolongo F, Saltelli A, Sørensen T, Tarantola S (2000) Hitchhiker’s guide to sensitivity analysis. In: Saltelli A, Chan K, Scott EM (eds) Sensitivity analysis. Wiley, Chichester, pp 15–47Google Scholar
  5. Christini G, Harzam MW, Mattews DH, Hendrickson C (2007) A comparison of environmental system components and practices. In: Sroufe R, Sarkis J (eds) Strategic sustainability. The state of the art in corporate environmental management systems. Greenleaf Publisher, Sheffield, pp 43–55Google Scholar
  6. Conn AR, Gould NIM, Toint PL (1997) A globally convergent augmented Lagrangian algorithm for optimization with general constraints and simple bounds. Math Comput 66(217):261–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cuadros-Rodriguez L, Hernandez Torres ME, Almansa Lopez E, Egea Gonzalez FJ, Arrebola Liebanas FJ, Martinez Vidal JL (2002) Assessment of uncertainty in pesticide multiresidue analytical methods: main sources and estimation. Anal Chim Acta 454:297–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Environment Canada (2005) Knowledge integration strategic division national environmental indicator series.
  9. Erechtchoukova MG, Khaiter PA (2009) Investigation of monitoring designs for water quality assessment In: Anderssen B et al (eds) 18th IMACS world congress—MODSIM09 international congress on modelling and simulation, 13–17 July 2009, Cairns, Australia, pp 3612–3618Google Scholar
  10. Erechtchoukova MG, Khaiter PA (2010) Efficiency criteria for water quality monitoring. In: Swayne DA, Yang W, Voinov AA, Rizzoli AE, Filatova T (eds) 2010 International congress on environmental modelling and software modelling for environment’s sake, fifth biennial meeting, 5 July 2010, Ottawa, Canada pp 272–279Google Scholar
  11. Erechtchoukova MG, Chen SY, Khaiter PA (2010) Investigation of environmental monitoring designs for corporate management information systems. In Teuteberg F, Marx Gomez J (eds) Corporate environmental management information systems: advancements and trends. IGI Publishing, Hershey, pp 138–154Google Scholar
  12. Erechtchoukova MG, Khaiter PA (2011) A model-driven approach to uncertainty reduction in environmental data. In: Golinska P, Fertsch M, Marx-Gomez J (eds) Information technology in environmental engineering: new trends and challenges. Springer, Berlin, pp 107–122Google Scholar
  13. Gleser LJ (1998) Assessing uncertainty in measurement. Stat Sci 13(3):277–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Groot S, Schilperoort T (1983) Optimization of water quality monitoring networks. Water Sci Technol 16:275–287Google Scholar
  15. Harmel RD, Cooper RJ, Slade RM, Haney R, Arnold JG (2006) Cumulative uncertainty in measured streamflow and water quality data for small watersheds. Trans ASABE 49(3):689–701Google Scholar
  16. International Organization for Standardization (1993) Guide to expression of uncertainty in measurement, 1st edn. International Standards Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  17. International Organization for Standardization (2004) Environmental management systems—requirements with guidance for use (ISO 14001:2004). International Organization for Standardization, Jersey CityGoogle Scholar
  18. Lopez-Fernandez MC, Serrano-Bedia AM (2007) Organizational consequences of implementing an ISO 14001 environmental management system: an empirical analysis. Organ Environ 20(4):440–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Oktem U, Lewis P, Donovan D, Hagan JR, Pace T (2007) EMS and sustainable development: a model and comparative studies of integration. In: Sroufe R, Sarkis J (eds) Strategic sustainability. The state of the art in corporate environmental management systems. Greenleaf Publisher, Sheffield, pp 56–75Google Scholar
  20. Overton WS, Stehman SV (1995) Design implications of anticipated data uses for comprehensive environmental monitoring programmes. Environ Ecol Stat 2:287–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Richardson JR, Berish CW (2003) Data and information issues in modelling for resource management decision making: communication is the key. In: Dale VH (ed) Ecological modelling for resource management. Springer, New York, pp 167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Verfallie HA, Bidwell R (2000) Measuring eco-efficiency. A guide to reporting company performance. World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Accessed 19 June 2009

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.York UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations