A survey of the implementation status of environmental management systems in U.S. colleges and universities, and, An environmental management system implementation model for U.S. colleges and universities

A census of 925 U.S. colleges and universities offering masters and doctorate degrees was conducted in order to study the number of elements of an environmental management system as defined by ISO 14001 possessed by small, medium and large institutions. A 30% response rate was received with 273 responses included in the final data analysis. Overall, the number of ISO 14001 elements implemented among the 273 institutions ranged from 0 to 16, with a median of 12. There was no significant association between the number of elements implemented among institutions and the size of the institution (p = 0.18; Kruskal-Wallis test) or among USEPA regions (p = 0.12; Kruskal-Wallis test). The proportion of U.S. colleges and universities that reported having implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, defined by answering yes to all 16 elements, was 10% (95% C.I. 6.6%–14.1%); however 38% (95% C.I. 32.0%–43.8%) reported that they had implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, while 30.0% (95% C.I. 24.7%–35.9%) are planning to implement a comprehensive environmental management system within the next five years. Stratified analyses were performed by institution size, Carnegie Classification and job title. ^ The Osnabruck model, and another under development by the South Carolina Sustainable Universities Initiative, are the only two environmental management system models that have been proposed specifically for colleges and universities, although several guides are now available. The Environmental Management System Implementation Model for U.S. Colleges and Universities developed is an adaptation of the ISO 14001 standard and USEPA recommendations and has been tailored to U.S. colleges and universities for use in streamlining the implementation process. In using this implementation model created for the U.S. research and academic setting, it is hoped that these highly specialized institutions will be provided with a clearer and more cost-effective path towards the implementation of an EMS and greater compliance with local, state and federal environmental legislation. ^

Texas electronics waste management: A policy analysis for the 21st century

Electronic waste is a fairly new and largely unknown phenomenon. Accordingly, governments have only recently acknowledged electronic waste as a threat to the environment and public health. In attempting to mitigate the hazards associated with this rapidly growing toxic waste stream, governments at all levels have started to implement e-waste management programs. The legislation enacted to create these programs is based on extended producer responsibility or EPR policy. ^ EPR shifts the burden of final disposal of e-waste from the consumer or municipal solid waste system to the manufacturer of electronic equipment. Applying an EPR policy is intended to send signals up the production chain to the manufacturer. The desired outcome is to change the methods of production in order to reduce production outputs/inputs with the ultimate goal of changing product design. This thesis performs a policy analysis of the current e-waste policies at the federal and state level of government, focusing specifically on Texas e-waste policies. ^ The Texas e-waste law known, as HB 2714 or the Texas Computer TakeBack Law, requires manufacturers to provide individual consumers with a free and convenient method for returning their used computers to manufacturers. The law is based on individual producer responsibility and shared responsibility among consumer, retailers, recyclers, and the TCEQ. ^ Using a set of evaluation criteria created by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the Texas e-waste law was examined to determine its effectiveness at reducing the threat of e-waste in Texas. Based on the outcomes of the analysis certain recommendations were made for the legislature to incorporate into HB 2714. ^ The results of the policy analysis show that HB 2714 is a poorly constructed law and does not provide the desired results seen in other states with EPR policies. The TakeBack Law does little to change the collection methods of manufacturers and even less to change their production habits. If the e-waste problem is to be taken seriously, HB 2714 must be amended to reflect the proposed changes in this thesis.^