1999 Survey of Environmental Management Systems in South Africa

INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS

1999 Survey of Environmental Management Systems in South Africa

Thi s sur v ey w as conduct ed by t he KPMG Env ir onment al Unit and endor sed by t he Inst i t ut e of Dir ect or s in Sout her n A f r ica ( IoD) . The pr i mar y r esear cher s and aut hor s of t his r epor t ar e Wi lhel m A lhei t and Mil es Keogh, bot h Env i r onment al Mast er s st udent s at t he Univ er si t y of Cape Tow n’ s Env ir onment al and Geogr aphi cal Sciences Depar t ment , w ho w il l use t his r esear ch in par t ial f ul f i ll ment of t heir degr ee r equir ement s.

Ov er all gui dance f or t he sur v ey w as suppl ied by Way ne Vi sser , Manager of t he KPMG Env ir onment al Unit , and Shi r l ey But cher , UCT Super v isor . Val uabl e input w as al so giv en by Kost a Babi ch, Chair man of t he IoD Env ir onment al Por t f oli o Commi t t ee and Kar i n Ir et on, A ct ing Dir ect or of t he

Table of Contents

Introduction

Survey Objectives and Methodology

Overall Survey Response

Survey Analysis

ISO 14001 Interest by Sector

Practice and Procedures of EMS

Tools and Techniques in EMS

Financial Benefits and Costs of EMS

Problems Experienced with EMS

Overall Benefits of EMS

Conclusions

Annexure A—Survey Sample
Annexure B—Survey Questionnaire
Annexure C—Profile of Institute of Directors
Annexure D—Profile of KPMG Environmental Unit

13 16 17 18

Introduction

A growing number of South African (SA) businesses and organisations are moving beyond simple compliance with environmental regulations, having recognised sound management advantages to improving their environmental performance. They are proactively investing in environmental technologies, personnel, and policies, through implementation of formal Environmental Management Systems (EMSs).

As with the Environmental Impact Assessment methodology, simply going through the motions of introducing an EMS is no guarantee that pollution and other environmental impacts will be minimised. Rather, it demonstrates an organisation’s strategic commitment to environmental sustainability and increases its operational capacity to manage these impacts effectively.

Systems for managing an organisation’s environmental performance come in a variety of forms, and several voluntary standards have appeared in recent years, including for example the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development, the Chemical Industry’s

Responsible Care program, the CERES principles, the UNEP Cleaner Production

Declaration, BS7750, EMAS and the ISO 14000 series.

The most popular of these in the SA context is the ISO 14001 Environmental Management

Systems standard. This was confirmed by the 1997 KPMG-IEF Top Companies

Environmental Survey, in which 75% of those companies which were implementing an

EMS were following ISO 14001 as a guideline. By 1 January 1999, nearly twenty companies had certified with the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) against the requirements of this standard, with other certifying bodies adding a few more to this tally.

Despite the growing interest and importance of this field, however, there has been very little research into the status of EMS implementation in SA. This survey was commissioned to address this critical need.

Survey Objectives and Methodology

This study aims to understand how EMS has evolved since its introduction into SA, to identify trends in its future development, and to provide benchmark information to organisations who are using or plan to use EMS as a management tool. More s p e c i f i c a l l y, the survey asks:

n What approaches do SA companies take to managing environmental issues? n What standards and guidelines form the basis of EMS implementation in SA? n What are the typical components of SA companies’ EMSs? n What links have been made between environmental and financial management through the EMS? n What are the benefits of implementing and maintaining an EMS and what conditions improve its eff e c t i v e n e s s ? n What are the problems experienced in implementing and maintaining an EMS and what conditions impose these problems? n What does the future hold for EMS application in SA?

The research method adopted included the use of a structured questionnaire which was faxed or emailed to a predetermined sample of organisations during January and February 1999. The full questionnaire is included in Annexure B. The objectives of the research necessitated a focus on organisations that either have an established EMS or are in the process of implementing one. Hence, the following sources were used to derive a sample of org a n i s a t i o n s :

n The SABS list of companies which have been certified against the ISO 14001 (the EMS) standard. n The IEF member companies. n Companies that had indicated they have an EMS in previous KPMG environmental surveys. n Other organisations identified through KPMG’s environmental consulting e x p e r i e n c e .

Overall Survey Response

Of the 112 organisations initially identified in this manner, 29 were screened out either on the basis that they did not wish to participate, could not identify an appropriate environmental representative, or that they did not have a formal EMS. The resulting sample of 83 is likely to be indicative, rather than exhaustive, but nevertheless covers a broad spectrum of progressive organisations which utilise an EMS approach. A full sample list is included in Annexure A.

Of the final sample, 60 organisations (72%) responded timeously to the survey.

SA organisations comprised 85% of respondents, the remainder being companies with international headquarters.

Only 38% of respondents related the survey to an EMS for their entire org a n i s a t i o n , implying that EMS is still applied more frequently in a site- or region-specific m a n n e r.

The sample achieved a relatively evenly spread across those sectors in the SA economy which are associated with significant environmental impacts (figure 1). More than half (57%) represented the 3 high impact sectors of either Mining, Metals or Chemicals & Oils. The reasons why these industry sectors are placing more emphasis on EMS are likely to be that: n They consume large amounts of natural resources and produce significant volumes of (often hazardous) wastes. n They have been subject to environmental regulation and public pressure for longer and more stringently than other sectors. n They are typically export-oriented, and need to properly manage environmental impacts in order to ensure acceptability in international markets.

Figur e 1—Sect or al Repr esent at ion of Respondent s

Mining

23%

Chemical and Oil

22%

Metals

13%

Manufacturing & Industrial Holding

12%

Government & Services

12%

Agriculture, Food & Forestry

12%

Building, Construction & Allied

100

Survey Analysis

Approaches to environmental issues

The survey demonstrates that a diversity of approaches to environmental management are adopted by organisations (figure 2). The most common of these (49%) is the introduction of specific initiatives and projects. While this does not preclude the existence of an EMS, it serves to emphasize the issue-driven, “problem-fix” approach which still characterises environmental management in South Africa. This is likely to change as the more mature approach of integrated environmental management becomes more entrenched.

I n t e r e s t i n g l y, the most distinctive feature of the international companies was a higher propensity to implement integrated environment, health and safety (EHS) management systems. Other environmental guidelines mentioned were the IEF Code of Conduct, the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development and the U N C TAD Agenda 21 Programme.

Figur e 2 —A ppr oaches t o Or gani sat ional Management of Env i r onment al Issues

49%

Initiatives and Projects on Specific Issues

EMS based on ISO 14001, planning to certify

41%

EMS from internally defined standard

39%

Integrated Environment, Health & Safety

36%

EMS based on environmental principals

34%

ISO 14001 Certified EMS

32%

24%

EMS based on ISO 14001, but not planning to certify

12%

Response as and when required

100

ISO 14001

ISO 14001 is unequivocally recognised as the environmental management standard with an overwhelming 97% of organisations using this system as the basis for their EMS. Of these, 32% are already ISO 14001 certified, 41% are planning to certify and the remainder intend simply using the guideline informally. As mentioned p r e v i o u s l y, by the 1 January 1999, nearly 20 companies had certified with the SABS, with other certifying bodies adding a few more to this tally.

The most certified sector against ISO 14001 (figure 3a) is, to date, the Chemicals & Oils industry. However, this looks set to be overtaken by the Metals and Manufacturing & Industrial Holding sectors in the future, with the Agriculture, Food & Forestry close behind (figure 3b). Mining, off a low base due to its own legislated requirements for implementing Environmental Management Programmes since 1991, also looks set to convert to ISO 14001.

Figur e 3 b — ISO 14 00 1 Ex ist ing Cer t if icat i on by Sect or

38%

Metals

Manufacturing & Industrial Holding

57%

Chemical & Oil

62%

Agriculture, Food & Forestry

14%

Mining

14%

17%

Government & Services

Building, Construction & Allied

100

Fi gur e 3 b— ISO 1 40 01 Planned Cer t if icat ion by Sect or

63%

Metals

29%

Manufacturing & Industrial Holding

15%

Chemical & Oil

57%

Agriculture, Food & Forestry

50%

Mining

Government & Services

33%

25%

Building, Construction & Allied

100

Practices and procedures of EMS

The extensive use of ISO 14001 or another similar EMS guidelines has ensured a high level of implementation and consistency between respondents with regard to many of the basic elements of an EMS (figure 4). The cycle (order) of implementation of EMS components is reflected in the relatively high scores for the creation an Environmental Policy (86%), while Quantified Ta rgets against which to measure performance are still less common (68%) and environmental reporting, auditing, research and consultation are hardly mentioned. The low propensity to consider environmental donations or sponsorship as part of the EMS (42%) is surprising, but may reflect a healthy new focus on the core business implications of environmental issues, rather than the more superficial public relations or social responsibility approaches of the past.

Fi gur e 4 — Ty pical Element s of an EMS

Environmental Policy

86%

Detailed program for achieving stated targets

81%

Inventory of applicable laws / regulations

81%

Implementing technology

76%

Goals & objectives for future performance

76%

Workplace initiatives (eg recycling)

73%

Training for all appropriate personnel

73%

Management reviews of EMS

71%

Quantified targets

68%

Emergency response plan

68%

Donations or sponsorships

42%

25%

Other (eg reporting, auditing, research & consultations

100

Tools and techniques in EMS

The tools and techniques employed by organisations to address environmental issues (figure 5) suggest an evolutionary pattern in which companies gradually increase the level of responsibility and accountability which they are prepared to accept.

Hence, techniques which are related to legal compliance, namely environmental impact assessments (93%) and environmental management programmes (90%), are more commonly used than tools for internal control, such as internal environmental audits (83%) and environmental risk assessments (73%). Outwardly-directed responsibilities in the form of external environmental audits (53%) and public reporting (46%) are practiced even less, while more complex systems for accepting wider accountability are rare, for example life cycle assessment (22%), environmental accounting systems (20%) and eco-labelling (7%).

Fi gur e 5 – Tools and Techni ques t o suppor t EMS

Environmental Impact Assessments

93%

Environmental Management Programs

90%

83%

Internal Environmental Audits

73%

Environmental Risk or Hazard Assessment

53%

External Environmental Audits

46%

Public Environmental Reporting

Life Cycle Assessment

22%

Environmental Accounting System

20%

Eco Labelling

100

Financial benefits and costs of EMS

Only 25% of the organisations have financially quantified the benefits of their EMS, while 41% have quantified the costs. These low responses may reflect the misplaced perception that environmentally-related performance cannot be financially quantified.

More to the point, it reflects a lack of appropriate systems to achieve this goal. It is indicative that those organisations with an environmental accounting system showed a significantly higher quantification of benefits (38%) and costs (62%). The most commonly identified elements of environmental expenditure linked to EMS (figure 6) are people-related costs: training (46%), personnel (44%)and consultants (44%). Capital investments in process technology was also commonly cited (42%). Again, the low response may indicate the slow uptake of environmental accounting systems among sample organisations (only 20%).

Other examples of environmental expenditure included: awareness projects, environmental education (for local communities), research projects legal costs, conservation e fforts, operating costs with environmental implications (e.g. rehabilitation, waste management, pollution control, water management), testing equipment, plant closure, care & maintenance and environmental development expenditure.

Fi gur e 6 — Ty pes of Fi nanci al Cost s r elat ed t o EMS

46%

Training

Personnel

44%

Consultants

44%

Capital or Technology

42%

34%

Information Systems

Other

24%

15%

Sponsorships

100

Problems experienced with EMS

The most commonly perceived disadvantages or problems of EMS (Figure 7) have four themes: n Administrative - an increase in the demands placed upon administration (68%).

This is of concern, given that the ISO 14001 was meant to be designed to be less “paper and documentation intensive” than the ISO 9000 quality system s t a n d a r d s . n Financial viability - high costs (41%), anticipated poor return on investment (31%) and lack of resources (31%). n Internal support - resistance to change (39%), conflicts of interest within the o rganisation (20%) and lack of top management commitment (17%). n External factors - increased public expectations (20%) and lack of public interest in the org a n i s a t i o n ’s environmental performance (12%).

The fact that a third (31%) of respondents cite uncertainty of the benefits of an EMS (31%) is cause for concern and somewhat incongruous with the high response to the question about EMS benefits. Perhaps, internal communication of these benefits is more the issue at stake.

Fi gur e 7—Pr oblems Ex per i enced w it h EMS

Increased Demands on Administration

68%

High Costs

41%

Resistance to Change

39%

Lack of Support fromAuthorities

37%

Anticipated poor return on Investment

31%

Uncertainty about benefits of EMS

31%

Lack of resources

31%

Increased public expectations

20%

Conflict of interest within organisation

20%

Lack of top management commitment

17%

Lack of public interest

12%

Other

12%

Inflexibility of EMS

Lack of anticipated improvement despite EMS

100

Overall benefits of EMS

The most commonly perceived advantages of EMS (figure 8) have three themes: n Managing risk - ensuring compliance with laws and regulations (95%), reducing unforeseen liabilities (88%), demonstrating due diligence (83%) and improving risk management, (80%).

n Public relations - improving the company’s image (88%) and improving the relationship with the public (88%). n Reducing impacts - improving environmental performance (88%).

Other benefits that were cited include: improving understanding of impacts through research, increasing environmental awareness of employees and stakeholders and more effective co-ordination within the org a n i s a t i o n .

It is interesting to note that ISO 14001 certified companies were more likely to cite the advantages of EMS in every category of benefit. The greatest differences are ensuring acceptability in international trade, meeting the expectations of vendors and suppliers, meeting the expectations of consumers and clients and demonstrating due diligence in environmental management.

Figur e 8 —Benef it s of EMS Implement at ion

Compliance with Laws / Regulations

95%

Improving Environmental Performance

88%

Reducing Unforseen Liabilities

88%

Improved Image

88%

Improving Relationship with Public

88%

Demonstrating Due Diligence

83%

Improving Risk Management

80%

71%

Controling costs through efficiency

Acceptability in International Trade

68%

Greater Market Share through “Greener” Practices

54%

Meet Consumer’s / Clients’ Expectations

47%

Meet Vendors’ / Suppliers’ Expectations

41%

Decreasing insurance premiums

39%

Other

14%

Conclusions

The survey demonstrates unequivocally that a significant number of large South African companies are relating environmental issues to their core business by designing and implementing EMSs. Individual organisations’ experiences of EMS, h o w e v e r, shows great diversity, whether in the guidelines used, techniques applied, elements included or associated problems, costs and benefits.

ISO 14001 has established itself as the undisputed EMS benchmark and looks set to drive significant change in high impact sectors like metals, manufacturing, agriculture, food, forestry and mining. Implementation of integrated environment, health and safety management systems will also likely increase, based on the trend being established by international org a n i s a t i o n s .

Environmental management remains poorly linked with financial management. This especially reflected the lack of financially quantified benefits and costs and the low incidence of environmental accounting systems currently in operation.

The motivation for SA organisations to invest in EMS is more driven by stakeholder pressure, public perceptions and regulatory compliance than by internal factors such the desire to increase the efficiency of resource use or achieve cost savings. Nevertheless, despite serious concerns about increased administrative load, numerous benefits of implementing EMS are widely recognised, not least of which is an improvement in environmental performance.

For more information please contact:

Cape Town office:

Johannesburg office

Wayne Vi s s e r PO Box 5564 Cape Town 8000 Tel: (021) 423 8940 Fax: (021) 423 8937/8

Shireen Naidoo Private Bag 9 Parkview 2122 ( 0 11) 647 7111 ( 0 11) 647 8000

E m a i l : w a y n e . v i s s e r @ k p m g m a i l . c o . z a s h i r e e n . n a i d o o @ k p m g m a i l . c o . z a

Website: http//www. k p m g . c o . z a

Annexure A—Survey Sample

AECI Ltd Alpha Ltd Anglo American Coal Corp Ltd Anglo American Corp of SA Ltd* Anglo American Platinum Corp Ltd (AMPLATS) Anglo Gold Ltd* Anglovaal Ltd Associated Chemical Enterprises Associated Manganese Mines of SA Ltd Associated Ore & Metal Mines Corp Ltd* Bayside Aluminium (ALUSAF (Pty) Ltd) Beatrix Mine Ltd* Bell Equipment Ltd Caltex Oil (SA) (Pty) Ltd Cape Metropolitan Council* Columbus Stainless Crown Mines Ltd CSIR (Internal Services) De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd1 De Beers Marine (Pty) Ltd Durban Metropolitan Council Elandsrand Gold Mining Co Ltd* Engen Ltd EnviroServ Holdings Ltd* Eskom* Foskor Ltd Gelvenor Textiles Highveld Steel and Vanadium Corporation Ltd Impala Platinum Ltd

Ingwe Coal Corp *
Iscor Mining (Iscor Ltd)
Iscor Steel (Iscor Ltd)
JCI Gold Ltd
Johannesburg Metropolitan Council
Kersaf Investments Ltd*
Knights Gold Mining Co Ltd*
Kohler Corrugated (Kohler Ltd)*
KWV Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Middelburg Ferrochrome
Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd
(MTN)
Mondi Ltd
Mossgas
Nampak Ltd*
Natal Portland Cement
NATCOS
National Chemical Products Ltd (Food
Ingredients)*
National Petroleum Refineries of SA (Pty)
Ltd (NATREF)
Nissan
Oryx Gold Holdings Ltd*
Palabora Mining Company Ltd*
Pick 'n Pay Holdings Ltd*
Polifin Ltd*
Pretorial Portland Cement Co Ltd (PPC)
Rand Water
Richards Bay Bulk Storage (Pty) Ltd
Richards Bay Minerals (Pty) Ltd
SA Forestry Co Ltd (SAFCOL)
Saldhana Steel (Pty) Ltd
Samancor Ltd
Sappi Ltd
Sasol Alpha Olefins*
Sasol Ltd2
Sasol Technology
Sentrachem Ltd*
Shell SA (Pty) Ltd
St Helena Gold Mines Ltd / Goldfields Ltd
Stellenbosch Farmers’ Winery Group Ltd
(SFW)*
Stilfontein Gold Mining Co Ltd*
T & N Holdings Ltd*
Telkom SA Ltd
Tisand (Pty) Ltd3
Tongaat-Hulett Ltd, The4
Toyota SA Ltd
Trans Natal Coal Corp Ltd*
Transnet Ltd*
Transvaal Sugar (Malenane Mill)
Umgeni Water
Unitrans Ltd*
Volkswagen of SA (Pty) Ltd
Western Areas Ltd
Western Deep Levels Ltd
Woolworths Holdings Ltd
York Timber Organisation Ltd, The
(YORKCOR)*

Notes:

*
1
2
3
4
These companies failed to complete and return the survey questionnaire.
Survey questionnaires were returned for De Beers Namaqualand Mines, De Beers Orapa Mine and Debswana.
Survey questionnaires were also returned for Sasol Chemical Industries and Sasol Coal.
Survey questionnaires were returned for Richards Bay Minerals.
Survey questionnaires were also returned for African Products Ltd, Moreland Developments Ltd, Hulett Aluminium and
Tongaat Textiles David Whitehead & Sons
Annexure B—Survey Questionnaire
1 .
How does your organisation manage environmental issues?
o
o
2 .
Through responses to environmental problems and issues
only as and when required
o
Environmental donations or sponsorship
Through several environmental initiatives and projects on
o
Recycling and energy saving in offices and site buildings
o
Implementing technology that has environmental benefits
o
A formulated and documented Environmental Policy
o
Maintaining a register of significant environmental
specific issues, e.g. recycling, donations or sponsorships
o
Through an EMS broadly based on environmental
principles such as the IEF code of conduct or the ICC
Business Charter for sustainable development
o
Which of the following practices or procedures form part of your
o rg a n i s a t i o n ’s EMS?
Through an EMS developed to an internally defined
e ffects or impacts of the org a n i s a t i o n ’s activities,
products or services
corporate standard
o
o
Through an integrated Environmental and Health and
Safety (EHS) management system
o
o
Through an EMS developed along external guidelines
such as ISO 14001 but not planning to certify to that
s t a n d a r d
o
Quantified targets against which to measure environ-
mental performance
o
Through an EMS developed along the ISO 14001 EMS
A program for achieving stated environmental objectives
and targets, specifying e.g. the designation of responsi-
bilities, allocation of resources and time frames
guidelines, with the aim of achieving certification to this
s t a n d a r d
o
Goals and objectives for future environmental
p e r f o r m a n c e
o
Through an EMS already certified against the ISO 14001
An inventory or register of relevant legislative and
regulatory requirements and procedures for updating these
EMS standard
o
A training program for all personnel involved in environ-
mental management or whose work may cause
significant environmental impacts
o
E m e rgency response plans or procedures based on a
comprehensive hazard assessment
o
Periodic management reviews of the suitability,
e ffectiveness and adequacy of environmental initiatives
and/or an EMS
o
Other (specify):
3 .
Which of the following techniques form part of your org a n i-
s a t i o n ’s approach to environmental issues?
o
Environmental impact assessments
o
Environmental management programs
o
Environmental risk or hazard assessments
4 .
Life cycle assessments
o
Eco labeling
Improving the overall level of environmental
o
Improving the environmental risk management system
o
Controlling costs through more efficient use of materials,
resources and energ y
o
Public environmental reporting
Environmental accounting system
o
Internal environmental audits
o
External environmental audits (by whom?):
o
Increasing assurance of compliance with environmental
Reducing the likelihood of unforeseen environmental
l i a b i l i t i e s
o
Demonstrating due diligence in environmental
m a n a g e m e n t
o
Have you quantified the financial benefits of your EMS?
o
6 .
o
legislation and regulations
o
o
5 .
What do you perceive to be the benefits of having implemented
and of maintaining your EMS?
p e r f o r m a n c e
o
o
7 .
Decreasing insurance premiums due to decreased
environmental risk
o
Yes (Financial benefits):
Potential increase in market share resulting from
‘ g r e e n e r’ practices, products and services
N o
Have you quantified the financial cost of your EMS?
o
Yes (Financial cost):
o
N o
P e r s o n n e l
o
Tr a i n i n g
o
Capital expenditure (i.e. process technology)
o
Information systems
o
S p o n s o r s h i p s
o
C o n s u l t a n t s
o
O t h e r :
Meeting the expectations of vendors and suppliers
o
Protecting and enhancing the org a n i s a t i o n ’s image
o
Meeting the expectations or buying preferences of
consumers or clients
What does this cost include?
o
o
o
Ensuring acceptability in international trade and relations
o
Improving the perceptions of the public and relationship
with the community
o
Other (specify):
8 .
What problems does your organisation experience in
implementing environmental initiatives and/or an EMS?
o
High investment costs
o
Poor measurable return on investment or lack of
anticipated cost savings
o
Lack of top management commitment
o
Uncertainty about the benefits of implementing an EMS
o
Resistance to change in current business activities
o
Lack of resources available for implementation
o
Lack of public or stakeholder interest in improved
environmental performance
o
Potential for increased expectations by public and
s t a k e h o l d e r s
o
Increased demands on administration and documentation
o
Perceived or actual inflexibly of an EMS
o
Lack of support, incentives and efficiency from
government and local authorities
o
Lack of improvement in environmental performance in
spite of implementing an EMS
o
Perceived conflicts of interest with other divisions, or
business or corporate goals
o
Other (specify):
Annexure C
Profile of Institute of Directors (IOD)
The Institute of Directors (IoD) was founded in London in
1903 and granted a Royal Charter by King Edward VII three
years later. The Southern African Division of the Institute was
formed in Johannesburg in 1960. Autonomy was obtained
from the United Kingdom in 1985 with the Institute of
Directors in Southern Africa established as an Association not
for Gain.
The IoD took the initiative in establishing what became
known as the King Committee on Corporate Governance and
is the prime motivator of good governance, business ethics,
and the fight against corruption in South Africa.
Corporate governance is the way in which business enterprises
are managed or governed. This included reporting to
shareholders and stakeholders. These reports should address
all material matters of significance to interested and aff e c t e d
parties, including the environment. Since publication of the
King Report at the end of 1994 there has been a discernible
improvement in the quality, transparency and comprehen-
siveness of company reports, which the IoD welcomes. This
Environmental Management Systems survey, with which the
IoD is pleased to be associated, further enhances good
stakeholder communication.
The IoD in Southern Africa is the only organisation in the
region which specifically represents directors and business
leaders of the free enterprise system as individuals.
Membership is widely representative of commerce, industry
and the business professions.
The IoD works to establish and maintain contact at the highest
level amongst business leaders providing a network of
individual members totalling 85 000 in over 50 countries
through affiliates which reach into every corner of business.
For more information please contact:
Despite the autonomy of the IoD in South Africa our members
enjoy affiliation with other Institutes and full reciprocity with
the use of all facilities provided by the IoD at its headquarters
at 116 Pall Mall, London. The facilities include excellent
meeting, office, conference and banqueting amenities,
secretarial services, a business information centre and
reference library as well as superb restaurants, bar and wine
b a r.
Richard S Wi l k i n s o n
Executive director
Institute of Directors in Southern Africa
P O Box 908
Parklands 2121
Tel: (011) 643 8086
Fax: (011) 484 1416
The majority of IoD activities are conducted via portfolio
committees, including director development, professional
standards, government liaison, functions, membership,
publicity and environmental responsibility.
The Environment Portfolio Committee meets regularly,
monitors and reports on pertinent environmental issues to
directors and produces frequent publications, in particular the
Green Leaf newsletter.
Environmental reporting
Annexure D
KPMG offers both consulting and assurance services to assist
o rganisations in the preparation, verification and promotion of
environmental reports.
Profile of KPMG Environmental Unit
Environmental reviews
KPMG is one of the largest auditing and business advisory
firms in the world, employing over 85 000 professional staff
in 155 countries.
KPMG performs independent third party reviews on environ-
mental impact assessments, environmental data systems,
environmental management systems and environmental
legal compliance.
A world of experience in environmental
management
Environmental assessments
K P M G ’s Environmental Unit embodies a number of critical
competencies which make it an ideal partner for org a n i s a t i o n s
developing and implementing high quality environmental
management systems (EMS) or requiring other environmental
services.
KPMG conducts environmental impact assessments and
environmental risk assessments in order to provide the basis
for sound environmental management by org a n i s a t i o n s .
Environmental auditing
KPMG has an International Environmental Network,
comprised of dedicated environmental practices in 27
countries on 4 continents employing 170 professionals.
K P M G ’s environmental professionals combine qualifications,
expertise and industrial experience in EMS, environmental
reporting, environmental science, environmental law, health,
safety and environmental management, research, marketing
and training.
KPMG conducts various forms of environmental auditing,
including legal compliance audits, EMS / ISO 14001 audits,
financial audit assists and health, safety and environmental
a u d i t s .
Environmental accounting
KPMG is pioneering the field of designing and implementing
environmental accounting systems. This includes creating the
environmental information systems capable of deriving
environmental costs and anticipating and providing for
environmental liabilities.
Environmental management systems
KPMG assists organisations in the design, implementation and
auditing of EMSs, including to ISO 14001 standards. KPMG
was the lead consultant to UNEP in the preparation of their
EMS Manual and has prepared an international EMS Test Kit
on behalf of the Dutch Ministry of the Environment.
Environmental due diligence investigations
KPMG assists companies involved in various financial
transactions, including mergers, acquisitions, takeovers and
stock market listings.
Environmental training
KPMG offers training in the fields of EMS, environmental
auditing and environmental and stakeholder reporting. The
three training courses on EMS include: The 50-point EMS
Introduction Plan; the 40-point EMS Improvement Plan; and
the 100-point EMS Quality Plan.
For more information please contact Wayne Visser on
telephone (021) 4 2 3 8940 or on email
w a y n e . v i s s e r @ k p m g m a i l . c o . z a .
For more information
This survey is available electronically on the KPMG website at http://www.kpmg.co.za.
Should you require more information, please contact Wayne Visser in our Cape Town off i c e
or Shireen Naidoo in our Johannesburg off i c e :
Cape Town office:
PO Box 5564
Cape Town 8000
Tel: (021) 423 8940
Fax: (021) 423 8937
Johannesburg office:
Private Bag 9
Parkview 2122
( 0 11) 647 7111
( 0 11) 647 8000
Email: wayne.visser@kpmgmail.co.za
s h i r e e n . n a i d o o @ k p m g m a i l . c o . z a
INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS