Assessing eco-environmental performance of agricultural production in OECD countries : combination of soil surface, soil system and farm gate methods of nutrient auditing

Nitrogen balance is increasingly used as an indicator of the environmental performance of agricultural sector in national, international, and global contexts. There are three main methods of accounting the national nitrogen balance: farm gate, soil surface, and soil system. OECD (2008) recently reported the nitrogen and phosphorus balances for member countries for the 1985 - 2004 period using the soil surface method. The farm gate and soil system methods were also used in some international projects. Some studies have provided the comparison among these methods and the conclusion is mixed. The motivation of this present paper was to combine these three methods to provide a more detailed auditing of the nitrogen balance and flows for national agricultural production. In addition, the present paper also provided a new strategy of using reliable international and national data sources to calculate nitrogen balance using the farm gate method. The empirical study focused on the nitrogen balance of OECD countries for the period from 1985 to 2003. The N surplus sent to the total environment of OECD surged dramatically in early 1980s, gradually decreased during 1990s but exhibited an increasing trends in early 2000s. The overall N efficiency however fluctuated without a clear increasing trend. The eco-environmental ranking shows that Australia and Ireland were the worst while Korea and Greece were the best.

Environmental reporting and its relation to corporate environmental performance

This study examines how both the level and the nature of environmental information voluntarily disclosed by Australian firms relate to their underlying environmental performance. Disclosure is scored using an index developed by Clarkson et al. (2008) based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Guidelines and the environmental performance measure is based on emission data available from the National Pollutant Inventory (NPI). The sample consists of 51 firms that reported to the NPI in both 2002 and 2006. The findings are as follows. First, descriptive statistics indicate that while there was modest improvement in disclosure between 2002 and 2006, the highest disclosure score obtained was just slightly in excess of 50% of the maximum available based on the GRI Guidelines. Second, the results consistently indicate that not only do firms with a higher pollution propensity disclose more environmental information; they also rely on disclosures that the GRI views as inherently more objective and verifiable. Taken together, these results suggest that concerns regarding the reliability of voluntary environmental disclosures in the Australian context remain valid and thereby potentially signal a need for both enhanced mandatory reporting requirements and improved enforcement. In this regard, our study also informs regulatory policy on mandatory disclosures of environmental performance.

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) application auditing

Background WSUD implementation in the Gold Coast City Council area commenced more than a decade ago. As a result, Council is expected to be in possession of WSUD assets valued at over tens of million dollars. The Gold Coast City Council is responsible for the maintenance and long-term management of these WSUD assets. Any shortcoming in implementation of best WSUD practices can potentially result in substantial liabilities and ineffective expenditure for the Council in addition to reduced efficiencies and outcomes. This highlights the importance of periodic auditing of WSUD implementation. Project scope The overall study entailed the following tasks: * A state-of-the-art literature review of the conceptual hydraulic and water quality treatment principles, current state of knowledge in relation to industry standards, best practice and identification of knowledge gaps in relation to maintenance and management practices and potential barriers to the implementation of WSUD. * Council stakeholder interviews to understand current practical issues in relation to the implementation of WSUD and the process of WSUD application from development application approval to asset management. * Field auditing of selected WSUD systems for condition assessment and identification of possible strengths and weaknesses in implementation. * Review of the Land Development Guidelines in order to identify any gaps and to propose recommendations for improvement. Conclusions Given below is a consolidated summary of the findings of the study undertaken. State-of-the-art literature review Though the conceptual framework for WSUD implementation is well established, the underlying theoretical knowledge underpinning the treatment processes and maintenance regimes and life cycle costing are still not well understood. Essentially, these are the recurring themes in the literature, namely, the inadequate understanding of treatment processes and lack of guidance to ensure specificity of maintenance regimes and life cycle costing of WSUDs. The fundamental barriers to successful WSUD implementation are: * Lack of knowledge transfer – This essentially relates to the lack of appropriate dissemination of research outcomes and the common absence of protocols for knowledge transfer within the same organisation. * Cultural barriers – These relate to social and institutional factors, including institutional inertia and the lack of clear understanding of the benefits. * Fragmented responsibilities – This results from poor administrative integration within local councils in relation to WSUDs. * Technical barriers – These relate to lack of knowledge on operational and maintenance practices which is compounded by model limitations and the lack of long-term quantitative performance evaluation data. * Lack of engineering standards – Despite the availability of numerous guidelines which are non-enforceable and can sometimes be confusing, there is a need for stringent engineering standards. The knowledge gaps in relation to WSUDs are only closing very slowly. Some of the common knowledge gaps identified in recent publications have been recognised almost a decade ago. The key knowledge gaps identified in the published literature are: * lack of knowledge on operational and maintenance practices; * lack of reliable methodology for identifying life cycle issues including costs; * lack of technical knowledge on system performance; * lack of guidance on retrofitting in existing developments. Based on the review of barriers to WSUD implementation and current knowledge gaps, the following were identified as core areas for further investigation: * performance evaluation of WSUD devices to enhance model development and to assess their viability in the context of environmental, economic and social drivers; establishing realistic life cycle costs to strengthen maintenance and asset management practices; * development of guidelines specific to retrofitting in view of the unique challenges posed by existing urban precincts together with guidance to ensure site specificity; establishment of a process for knowledge translation for enhancing currently available best practice guidelines; * identification of drivers and overcoming of barriers in the areas of institutional fragmentation, knowledge gaps and awareness of WSUD practices. GCCC stakeholder interviews Fourteen staff members involved in WSUD systems management in the Gold Coast City Council, representing four Directorates were interviewed using a standard questionnaire. The primary issues identified by the stakeholders were: * standardisation of WSUD terminology; * clear protocols for safeguarding devices during the construction phase; * engagement of all council stakeholders in the WSUD process from the initial phase; * limitations in the Land Development Guidelines; * ensuring public safety through design; * system siting to avoid conflicts with environmental and public use of open space; * provision of adequate access for maintenance; * integration of social and ecosystem issues to ensure long-term viability of systems in relation to both, vandalism and visual recreation; * lack of performance monitoring and inadequacy of the maintenance budget; * lack of technical training for staff involved in WSUD design approvals and maintenance; incentives for developers for acting responsibly in stormwater management. Field auditing of WSUD systems A representative cross section of WSUD systems in the Gold Coast were audited in the field. The following strengths and weaknesses in WSUD implementation were noted: * The implementation of WSUD systems in the field is not consistent. * The concerns raised by the stakeholders during the interviews in relation to WSUD implementation was validated from the observations from the field auditing, particularly in relation to the following: * safeguarding of devices during the construction phase * public safety * accessibility for maintenance * lack of performance monitoring by Council to assess system performance * inadequate maintenance of existing systems to suit site specific requirements. * A treatment train approach is not being consistently adopted. * Most of the systems audited have satisfactorily catered for public safety. Accessibility for maintenance has been satisfactorily catered for in most of the systems that were audited. * Systems are being commissioned prior to construction activities being substantially completed. * The hydraulic design of most systems appears to be satisfactory. * The design intent of the systems is not always clear. Review of Land Development Guidelines The Land Development Guidelines (TDG) was extensively reviewed and the following primary issues were noted in relation to WSUD implementation: * the LDG appears to have been prepared primarily to provide guidance to developers. It is not clear to what extent the guidelines are applicable to Council staff involved in WSUD maintenance and management; * Section 13 is very voluminous and appears to be a compilation of a series of individual documents resulting in difficulties in locating specific information, a lack of integration and duplication of information; * the LDG has been developed with a primary focus on new urban precinct development and the retrofitting of systems in existing developments has not been specifically discussed; * WSUDs are discussed in two different sections in the LDG and it is not clear which section takes precedence as there are inconsistencies between the two sections; there is inconsistent terminology being used; * there is a need for consolidation of information provided in different sections in the LDG; * there are inconsistencies in the design criteria provided; * there is a need for regular updating of the LDG to ensure that the information provided encompasses the state-of-the-art; * there is limited guidance provided for the preparation of maintenance plans and life cycle costing to assist developers in asset handover and to assist Council staff in assessment. * Based on these observations, eleven recommendations have been provided which are discussed below. Additionally, the stakeholder provided the following specific comments during the interviews in relation to the LDG: * lack of flexibility to cover the different stages of the life cycle of the systems; * no differentiation in projects undertaken by developers and Council; * inadequate information with regards to safety issues such as maximum standing water depth, fencing and safety barriers and public access; * lack of detailed design criteria in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, safety, amenity, environment, surrounding uses and impacts on surroundings; * inadequate information regarding maintenance requirements specific to the assessment and compliance phases; * recommendations for plantings are based primarily on landscape requirements rather than pollutant uptake capability. Recommendations With regards to the Land Development Guidelines, the following specific recommendations are provided: 1. the relevant sections and their extent of applicability to Council should be clearly identified; 2. integration of the different subsections within Section 13 and re-formatting the document for easy reference; 3. the maintenance guidelines provided in Section 13 should be translated to a maintenance manual for guidance of Council staff; 4. should consider extending the Guidelines to specifically encompass retrofitting of WSUD systems to existing urban precincts; 5. Section 3 needs to be revised to be made consistent with Section 13, to ensure priority for WSUD practices in urban precincts and to move away from conventional stormwater drainage design such as kerb and channelling; 6. it would also be good to specify as to which Section takes predominance in relation to stormwater drainage. It is expected that Section 13 would take predominance over the other sections in the LDG; 7. terminology needs to be made consistent to avoid confusion among developers and Council staff. Water Sensitive Urban Design is the term commonly used in Australia for stormwater quality treatment, rather than Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices. This once again underlines the need for ensuring consistency between Section 3 and Section 13; 8. it would also be good if there is a glossary of commonly used terms in relation to WSUD for use by all stakeholders and which should also be reflected in the LDG; 9. consolidation of all WSUD information into one section should be considered together with appropriate indicators in other LDG Sections regarding the availability of WSUD information. Ensuring consistency in the information provided is implied; 10. Section 13 should be updated at regular intervals to ensure the incorporation of the latest in research outcomes and incorporating criteria and guidance based on the state-of-the-art knowledge. The updating could be undertaken, say, in five year cycles. This would help to overcome the current lack of knowledge transfer; 11. the Council should consider commissioning specialised studies to extend the current knowledge base in relation to WSUD maintenance and life cycle costing. Additionally, Recommendation 10 is also applicable in this instance. The following additional recommendations are made based on the state-of-the-art literature review, stakeholder interviews and field auditing of WSUD systems: 1. Performance monitoring of existing systems to assess improvements to water quality, identify modifications and enhancements to improve performance; 2. Appropriate and monitored maintenance during different phases of development of built assets over time is needed to investigate the most appropriate time/phase of development to commission the final WSUD asset. 3. Undertake focussed investigations in the areas of WSUD maintenance and asset management in order to establish more realistic life cycle costs of systems and maintenance schedules; 4. the engagement of all relevant Council stakeholders from the initial stage of concept planning through to asset handover, and ongoing monitoring. This close engagement of internal stakeholders will assist in building a greater understanding of responsibilities and contribute to overcoming constraints imposed by fragmented responsibilities; 5. the undertaking of a public education program to inform the community of the benefits and ecosystem functions of WSUD systems; 6. technical training to impart state-of-the-art knowledge to staff involved in the approval of designs and maintenance and management of WSUD projects; 7. during the construction phase, it is important to ensure that appropriate measures to safeguard WSUD devices are implemented; 8. risks associated with potential public access to open water zones should be minimised with the application of appropriate safety measures; 9. system siting should ensure that potential conflicts are avoided with respect to public and ecosystem needs; 10. integration of social and ecosystem issues to ensure long-term viability of systems; provide incentives to developers who are proactive and responsible in the area of stormwater management.

Do stakeholders or social obligations drive corporate social and environmental responsibility reporting? Managerial views from a developing country

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to explore senior managers’ perception and motivations of corporate social and environmental responsibility (CSER) reporting in the context of a developing country, Bangladesh. Design/methodology/approach – In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 senior managers of companies listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange. Publicly available annual reports of these companies were also analysed. Findings – The results indicate that senior managers perceive CSER reporting as a social obligation. The study finds that the managers focus mostly on child labour, human resources/rights, responsible products/services, health education, sports and community engagement activities as part of the social obligations. Interviewees identify a lack of a regulatory framework along with socio-cultural and religious factors as contributing to the low level of disclosures. These findings suggest that CSER reporting is not merely stakeholder-driven, but rather country-specific social and environmental issues play an important role in relation to CSER reporting practices. Research limitations/implications – This paper contributes to engagement-based studies by focussing on CSER reporting practices in developing countries and are useful for academics, practitioners and policymakers in understanding the reasons behind CSER reporting in developing countries. Originality/value – This paper addresses a literature “gap” in the empirical study of CSER reporting in a developing country, such as Bangladesh. This study fills a gap in the existing literature to understand managers’ motivations for CSER reporting in a developing country context. Managerial perceptions on CSER issues are largely unexplored in developing countries.

In Situ Observation of the Thermal Decomposition of Weddelite by Heating Stage Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy

The morphological and chemical changes occurring during the thermal decomposition of weddelite, CaC2O4·2H2O, have been followed in real time in a heating stage attached to an Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope operating at a pressure of 2 Torr, with a heating rate of 10 °C/min and an equilibration time of approximately 10 min. The dehydration step around 120 °C and the loss of CO around 425 °C do not involve changes in morphology, but changes in the composition were observed. The final reaction of CaCO3 to CaO while evolving CO2 around 600 °C involved the formation of chains of very small oxide particles pseudomorphic to the original oxalate crystals. The change in chemical composition could only be observed after cooling the sample to 350 °C because of the effects of thermal radiation.