Don't Be Misled By an ISO 14001 Accreditation

If you are aware that the ISO 14001 accreditation refers to environment management schemes, you might blindly assume that the company that uses this to promote itself is more environmentally friendly than one who doesn’t. This may not be true. For a start, you should be aware of what the ISO does and does not allow. It does not allow a company to use the ISO logo and suggests that any company wanting to use a logo contact the certification body for permission to use theirs. The organisation itself does not do audits, assessments or issue certification. It also demands that the proper form is used when declaring the certification the company has been awarded. In this instance the proper designation is 'Certified to ISO 14001:2004'.

The ISO suggests that companies be careful not to place ISO 14001:2004 conformity marks on products or packaging in such a way that it gives the impression the product is certified. The accreditation is that a company has an environmental management scheme in place that acts to minimise the impact on the environment during the manufacturing process, the product itself should conform to other standards. Here in Britain they will be determined by UK or EU laws.

The ISO also states that the ISO 14001 accreditation should declare accurately the geographic scope of the certification. Comparing products like for like, a company certified in the USA or Europe will be adhering to stricter environmental laws than a company certified in south-east Asia. This is not a flaw in the ISO 14001:2004 standards, it is rather, the fact that the permissible levels of pollution or environmental impact are vastly different. It falls then on the consumer to make a decision on whether to spend the extra amount on the least environmentally damaging product or to go for the cheaper option, regardless of the environmental consequences.

It cost companies money to gain ISO 14001 accreditation and their primary reason for doing so is to be able to say that it is minimising its impact on the environment, thus appearing 'greener' and generating more sales. This is despite the fact the processes the company uses might still be highly destructive. This is still better news for the environment though, because a certified company has to comply with the guidelines, one of which requires on-going improvements and less environmental impact, therefore the processes used will get progressively 'greener', although possibly more expensive.

This is certainly more desirable for the environment than having an uncertified company that keeps on using the most cost effective way of producing its wares, or worse still, uses processes that increase the impact, allowing them to increase their through-put or profit margins.