J. J. Keller® Compliance Network Logo
Start Experiencing Compliance Network for Free!
Update to Professional Trial!

Be Part of the Ultimate Safety & Compliance Community

Trending news, knowledge-building content, and more – all personalized to you!

Already have an account?
FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmat related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmat related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.
You'll also get exclusive access to:
TRY IT FREE TODAY
Already have an account? .

Identifying environmental management system stakeholders

Introduction

Protecting the environment is a of great interest in today’s world, and there is particular interest in business and industry’s commitment to environmental compliance. Because of this, it is now common that environmental programs address the concerns of a variety of stakeholders — employees, customers, shareholders, community members, and more. This Fact File provides suggested methods to identify who the key stakeholders are for an operation and how to best use that information in building a strong environmental management system (EMS).

Background

The concept of actively incorporating interest from the community or affected parties is not a new one to the environmental compliance world; it is a standard step in the issuing of permits and the rulemaking process. Historically, these efforts have been more focused on individual actions regarding one environmental program at a time. For example, a facility would have conversations with interested community members about a pending permitting action, but typically the discussions centered around only that one action.

More recently, the approach has changed, and environmental programs have been urged to take a holistic approach to identify stakeholder interests and proactively address their concerns. A factor that strongly influenced this shift was the 2015 update to the international standard for EMS, better known as the ISO 14001 standard. In this revision to the ISO 14001 standard, the requirements for identifying, engaging with, and reacting to input from “interested parties” were significantly increased. The growth of sustainability programs has also been consequential in companies’ efforts to seek and respond to community input. Two main elements of sustainability reporting are stakeholder engagement and transparency of information provided to interested parties.

No matter what the cause, EMS managers are increasingly being tasked with an active and intentional approach to engagement with stakeholders. The more comprehensively this is done, the bigger the benefit will be to an EMS.

3 steps to identifying stakeholders

  1. Think about interested parties in the context of two groups: Those internal to your organization and those that are external. By making this division it will help identify a wider range of interested parties. This is especially effective in identifying internal groups that have traditionally been more commonly overlooked as EMS stakeholders.
  2. Borrow the “SIPOC” approach often used in lean manufacturing process mapping. The term SIPOC is an acronym for supplier, inputs, process, outputs, customers. Using the approach, evaluate an EMS by looking specifically at each piece of the SIPOC process. For example, in asking who are the EMS “customers,” stakeholders such as regulators or company shareholders could be identified.
  3. Review records of recent EMS-related correspondence. These records will show who in the recent past has been interested in the EMS. The review may identify not just “community members” and interested parties but narrow that to a specific group or groups within the community.

Examples of interested parties include:

  • Regulators,
  • Tribal nations,
  • Employees and retirees,
  • Stockholders or investors,
  • Emergency responders,
  • Local community leaders and elected officials,
  • Customers,
  • Insurers,
  • Non-governmental organizations, and
  • The general public.

Why we identify interested parties

After interested parties have been identified, the next step is understanding what is driving those groups to be interested. Having a clear picture of what each stakeholder needs or expects from the EMS should drive program priorities. Many of these expectations are naturally built into environmental programs — for example, regulators have a need for accurate records. Other expectations are less intuitive, and the identification of stakeholders helps provide clarity. Understanding the perspective of each stakeholder should serve as the foundation for establishing EMS goals and objectives, will dictate what environmental impacts are priority for reduction, and can provide justification for resources being dedicated to EMS operation.

Applicable laws & regulations

None

Related definitions

None

Keys to remember

  1. Stakeholders interested in a facility’s EMS often cover a wide range of individuals and groups. These will be internal to the organization, such as employees, and external, including regulators and local governments.
  2. Thoroughly identifying all parties that are interested in a facility’s EMS is an important step toward being able to address the concerns and interests they have. The interest of different individuals and groups will help guide the goals and priorities of the site’s EMS.

Real world example

A facility was going through their initial ISO 14001 certification audit when the third-party auditor had a question about the interested parties the facility had identified. The business had identified several external interested groups and only two internal (employees and the in-house emergency response team), and the auditor felt something had been missed. In learning about the business, the auditor had learned that the company was privately held by three investors. While this meant there weren’t interested shareholders, the auditor believed the owning partners should be listed as an internal stakeholder and therefore be considered when looking at environmental impacts, programs resources, and setting program improvement goals. This was a minor non-conformance in the audit report and the facility was able to quickly make the update to their interested parties list and close the finding.