The green management system ISO14001 has delivered positive change within the building products supply chain balancing environmental societal and economic benefits. It can however sometimes be employed more cynically, it has the potential to mislead at cost to both the environment and the housing sector.
“ISO14001 has delivered transformative change and for the most part positive change but fundamentally, the targets that manufacturers have to achieve to reduce environmental impact are set by the businesses themselves and this can give them license to ignore those elements that have less commercial appeal.”, says Bruce Rowell, Head of SHEQ and Technical, the Commercial Window Group.
ISO14001 was introduced in 1996 as green management tool to support businesses and other organisations to reduce their impact on the environment through more efficient use of resources. In practical terms this has tended to focus on efforts to reduce energy and water consumption alongside waste minimisation.
Bruce continues: “Let’s be very clear about this, ISO14001 has delivered huge environmental benefits and alongside that, significant business efficiencies. It is a very, very good thing. But and there is a but, it’s not entirely transparent and that leaves what has been achieved by an organisation open to an element of misinterpretation by those looking at it from the outside. Having the badge is only part of the story”
This seems to stem from two factors. The first is the way ISO14001 operates in practical terms, the second appears to be the way that the social and new build housing sectors have chosen to define their relationship with it. Under either, there can be both an environmental and financial price to pay.
Bruce explains: “A business has to be able to demonstrate that it meets regulatory requirements, that it keeps a legal register and monitors its compliance. However, after a company has carried out an environmental impact assessment under ISO14001 it’s then up to the business to decide what aspect or aspects of that assessment to focus on and how much to change them by if the targets are not laid out in law or are regulatory.
“It’s perfectly acceptable under ISO14001 to identify half a dozen areas for improvement but only pursue one or two of them and virtually ignore the rest, providing that a commitment is in place to ongoing measurement and some nominal commitment to improvement.
“If you want to do a comparison between two companies you need to look much deeper, because nine times out of ten you’ll be comparing apples with pears.”
Clearly this has a number of ramifications. For all their talk of environmental commitments suppliers will ultimately be motivated by the impact those commitments have on their bottom line. For example, against a context of spiralling energy prices it is little surprise that energy reduction frequently appears on the list of company commitments under ISO14001.
“There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that”, says Bruce, “energy reduction is a priority for many manufacturers including us, but it becomes a little more uncomfortable when businesses can set their own targets and ‘cherry pick’ those areas to tackle, perhaps ignoring areas of operation where they exert a significant or costly environmental impact but not a financial one.”
This represents the challenge for social housing specifiers and house builders. Unless they are prepared to delve deeper and see what a supplier has actually done to secure it, ISO14001, although exercising a positive influence on many manufacturers, adds only limited value.
“Housing specifiers really need to sit down and consider their own drivers. ISO14001 will give them points under BREEAM. Now if it is just that to them, essentially a tick box exercise then that’s fine.
“In seeing ISO14001 in this way, however, they are missing an opportunity to exercise a positive environmental influence in their procurement choices.”
While this is evidently a question of internal ‘ethics’ there is also a potentially more costly aspect to the sector’s relationship with accreditation.
Bruce continues: “Developers and specifiers need to be clear that ISO14001 is a commitment by a supplier to measure and manage a single element or elements of their operational impact on the environment. It is not a mark of product quality or service or a standard of performance in any way.”
Seeing ISO14001 erroneously as such would clearly have impacts for the housing sector. Bruce extends this warning to ISO9001, quality management. “The same applies to ISO9001, it’s a commitment to put a quality management system in place, to measure and hopefully improve performance.
“It’s not a comparison of product performance.”
So, is ISO14001 fundamentally flawed? Bruce suggests not but argues the housing sector might want to consider redefining its relationship with it.
“From our perspective as a manufacturer and specialist installer of commercial windows and doors, it’s a hugely valuable business tool.
“We have made our operation better for the environment but in doing so it is better for staff and going hand-in hand with operational efficiency it’s been better for the bottom line and the value proposition that we can offer housebuilders and social housing providers.
“It’s a management tool and that’s a good thing because of if you’re not managing something you’re not in control of it.
“Is it better for specifiers, developers and the social housing sector? Well, it’s certainly better than not having it at all but it won’t deliver real value unless the sector commits to look deeper and understand what its suppliers are actually delivering.”
ISO14001: a genuine environmental commitment
The Commercial Window Group has deployed ISO14001 to drive efficiency throughout our operation, improving product quality alongside the delivery of manufacturing and environmental efficiencies.
This includes the launch of our recycling scheme, collecting, recovering, recycling, and re-extruding post-consumer PVC-U, through our systems partner Profile 22 and Epwin Window Systems– exclusively in the UK.
Also putting in place a new post-consumer glass recycling programme with Saint-Gobain UK & Ireland, the schemes are driving up recycling rates in the window and door industry as well as increasing the recycled content of next generation products, lowering CO2 emissions.
Although still in the pilot phase the scheme has had a sizeable impact, collecting 40 tonnes of PVC-U in the first six months, with an ambition to collect in excess of 250 tonnes per year by the end of this year.
Ultimately rolled out across the UK it gives the Commercial Window Group nationwide coverage, with projections to divert more than 300 tonnes of post-consumer PVC-U and over 1000 tonnes of glass per annum from the waste stream.
The Commercial Window Group also put a manufacturing Scrap Reduction Scheme into place at the start of 2024.
This involves a multi-faceted strategy which combines software and increased transparency across our operation and more effective integration of maintenance cycles, to increase product quality and its first-time through rate.
The ultimate ambition is to cut manufacturing scrap by 50% this year, while driving up efficiencies within our business, which we’re passing onto housebuilders and social housing providers in savings.
We have also committed to lower our carbon footprint and are currently developing a robust process for measurement with a strong focus on lowering our Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. Steps include new LED lighting, low energy consoles, and a switch where possible to renewable energy including the introduction of new solar panels.
For more information on the Commercial Window Group’s next generation high performance window and door ranges and our regional delivery partners call 01234 567890 or email [email protected]
