Conceptual development of a harmonised method for tracking change and evaluating policy in the agri-environment: The Agri-environmental Footprint Index

An aggregated farm-level index, the Agri-environmental Footprint Index (AFI), based on multiple criteria methods and representing a harmonised approach to evaluation of EU agri-environmental schemes is described. The index uses a common framework for the design and evaluation of policy that can be customised to locally relevant agri-environmental issues and circumstances. Evaluation can be strictly policy-focused, or broader and more holistic in that context-relevant assessment criteria that are not necessarily considered in the evaluated policy can nevertheless be incorporated. The Index structure is flexible, and can respond to diverse local needs. The process of Index construction is interactive, engaging farmers and other relevant stakeholders in a transparent decision-making process that can ensure acceptance of the outcome, help to forge an improved understanding of local agri-environmental priorities and potentially increase awareness of the critical role of farmers in environmental management. The structure of the AFI facilitates post-evaluation analysis of relative performance in different dimensions of the agri-environment, permitting identification of current strengths and weaknesses, and enabling future improvement in policy design. Quantification of the environmental impact of agriculture beyond the stated aims of policy using an 'unweighted' form of the AFI has potential as the basis of an ongoing system of environmental audit within a specified agricultural context. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Facilities management carbon footprints: an audit of critical elements of management and reporting

Concern for the environmental impact of organizations’ activities has led to the recognition and demand for organizations to manage and report on their carbon footprint. However, there is no limit as to the areas of carbon footprints required in such annual environmental reports. To deliver improvements in the quality of carbon footprint management and reporting, there is a need to identify the main elements of carbon footprint strategy that can be endorsed, supported and encouraged by facility managers. The study investigates carbon footprint elements managed and reported upon by facility manager in the UK. Drawing on a questionnaire survey of 256 facility managers in the UK, the key elements of carbon footprints identified in carbon footprint reports are examined. The findings indicate that the main elements are building energy consumption, waste disposal and water consumption. Business travel in terms of using public transport, air travel and company cars are also recognized as important targets and objectives for the carbon footprint strategy of several FM (facilities management) organizations.

The adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: a field study approach

This study investigates the logics or values that shape the social and environmental reporting (SER) and SER assurance (SERA) process. The influence of logics is observed through a study of the conceptualisation and operationalisation of the materiality concept by accounting and non-accounting assurors and their assurance statements. We gathered qualitative data from interviews with both accounting and non-accounting assurors. We analysed the interplay between old and new logics that are shaping materiality as a reporting concept in SER. SER is a rich field in which to study the dynamics of change because it is a voluntary, unregulated, qualitative reporting arena. It has a broad, stakeholder audience, where accounting and non-accounting organisations are in competition. There are three key findings. First, the introduction of a new, stakeholder logic has significantly changed the meaning and role of materiality. Second, a more versatile, performative, social understanding of materiality was portrayed by assurors, with a forward-looking rather than a historic focus. Third, competing logics have encouraged different beliefs about materiality, and practices, to develop. This influenced the way assurors theorised the concept and interpreted outcomes. A patchwork of localised understandings of materiality is developing. Policy implications both in SERA and also in financial audit are explored.