Environmental Protection Programmes in Selected Polish Communities as the First Step Towards Sustainable Development

• Autorzy: Magdalena Kowalczyk

Warianty tytułu

Programy ochrony środowiska w wybranych polskich gminach jako pierwszy krok do zrównoważonego rozwoju

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

Cel: Artykuł koncentruje się na ocenie możliwości wykorzystania programów ochrony środowiska (POŚ) w polskich jednostkach samorządu terytorialnego jako narzędzia zarządzania i ochrony środowiska. W Polsce jednostki samorządu terytorialnego wszystkich szczebli są prawnie zobowiązane do przygotowania programów ochrony środowiska zgodnie z zasadą zrównoważonego rozwoju.
Metodyka: Jako narzędzie badawcze wykorzystano ankietę w celu określenia roli POŚ w jednostkach samorządu terytorialnego na poziomie gminy. W badaniu tym podjęto próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie: Czy programy ochrony środowiska są jedynie dokumentem, który jednostki samorządu terytorialnego są zobowiązane przygotować?
Wnioski: Wyniki tego badania pokazują, że świadomość gmin jest nadal bardzo niska. Gminy przygotowują POŚ, ale nie myślą o wykorzystaniu ich jako narzędzia długoterminowego zarządzania.
Oryginalność/wartość: Badania przyczyniają się do ukazania roli programów ochrony środowiska w zarządzaniu gminami w Polsce.
Ograniczenia badawcze: Ograniczeniem jest liczba respondentów, ponieważ badania objęły niewielką część gmin. Kolejnym ograniczeniem jest to, że w badaniach przedstawiono poglądy tylko jednej grupy interesariuszy - urzędników. (abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

Purpose: This paper assesses the possibility of using Environmental Protection Programmes (EPPs) in Polish local government as a tool to manage and protect the environment. In Poland, local government units (LGUs) at all levels are obligated by law to prepare EPPs in accordance with the principle of sustainable development.
Methodology: A survey was used as a research tool to determine the role of EPPs in LGUs at the community level. This research attempted to answer the following question: Are environmental protection programmes merely a document that communities are obligated to prepare?
Findings: The results of this research show that community awareness is still very low. Communities only prepare the EPPs, but they do not think about using them as a longterm management tool.
Originality/value: This research contributes to showing the role of EPPs in the management of communities in Poland.
Research limitations: A limitation of this research is the number of respondents, as it only included a small number of Polish communities. Another limitation is that this research presents only the view of one group of stakeholders - clerks. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Rozwój zrównoważony; Ochrona środowiska; Gmina; Programy ochrony środowiska

EN

Sustainable development; Environmental protection; District; Environmental programs

• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: 46
• Numer: nr 2
• Strony: 137-155

Twórcy

autor

Magdalena Kowalczyk

• Poznań University of Economics and Business

Bibliografia

• Adams C.A., Muir S., Hoque Z. (2014), Measurement of sustainability performance in the public sector. Sustainability Accounting, "Management and Policy Journal", 5 (1), pp. 46-67.
• Alonso A.D., Sakellarios N., Alexander N., O'Brien, S. (2018), Corporate social responsibility in a burgeoning industry: A stakeholder analysis, "Journal of Strategy and Management", 11 (1), pp. 112-130.
• Andade Ch. (2020), The limitations on online surveys, "Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine" 42 (6), pp. 575-576.
• Angiola N., Bianchi P., Corvino A. (2015), The integration of best environmental management practices in corporate strategy: Empirical evidence from Italian local governments, "International Journal of Public Administration", 38 (7), pp. 510-520.
• Armstrong M., Baron M. (1998). Performance management handbook, IPM, London.
• Babbie E. (2008), Podstawy badań społecznych, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Ball I. (2012), New development: Transparency in the public sector, "Public Money and Management", 32 (1), pp. 35-40.
• Ball A., Bebbington J. (2008), Accounting and reporting for sustainable development in public service organizations, "Public Money and Management", 28 (6), pp. 323-326.
• Bellringer A., Ball A., Craig R. (2011), Reasons for sustainability reporting by New Zealand local governments, Sustainability Accounting, "Management and Policy Journal", 2 (1), pp. 126-138.
• Burritt R.L., Schaltegger S. (2010), Sustainability accounting and reporting: Fad or trend? Accounting, "Auditing and Accountability Journal", 23 (7), pp. 829-846.
• Carvalho D.S., Fidélis T. (2009), Confronting environmental perceptions of local populations and local authorities, "Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal", 20 (5), pp. 538-550.
• Dahlman C.J. (1979), The problem of externality, "The Journal of Law and Economics", 22 (1), pp. 141-162.
• Debbarma J., Choi Y. (2022), A taxonomy of green governance: A qualitative and quantitative analysis towards sustainable development, "Sustainable Cities and Society", 79, article number 103693.
• De Vries M., Nemec J. (2013). Public sector reform: An overview of recent literature and research on NPM and alternative paths, "International Journal of Public Sector Management", 26 (1), pp. 4-16.
• Donaldson T., Preston L.E. (1995), The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications, "The Academy of Management Review", 20 (1), pp. 65-91.
• Farneti F., Guthrie J. (2009), Sustainability reporting by Australian public sector organisations: Why they report, "Accounting Forum", 33, pp. 89-98.
• Fauchald O.K., Gulbrandsen L.H. (2012), The Norwegian reform of protected area management: a grand experiment with delegation of authority?, "Local Environment", 17 (2), pp. 203-222.
• Gaia S., Jones M.J. (2019), Biodiversity reporting for governmental organisations: Evidence from English local councils, "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal", 33 (1), pp. 1-31.
• Hood C. (1991), A public management for all seasons?, "Public Administration (Gestión Pública) ", 69, pp. 3-19.
• Hossain M.M. (2018), Sustainability reporting by Australian local government authorities, "Local Government Studies", 44 (4), pp. 577-600.
• Johnson V.E., Brennan, L.L. (2015), Examining the impact of technology on social responsibility practices, [in:] In Re-Imaging Business Ethics: Meaningful Solutions for a Global Economy, vol. 4, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 107-123.
• Kamal M., Weerakkody V., Irani Z. (2011), Analyzing the role of stakeholders in the adoption of technology integration solutions in UK local government: An exploratory study, "Government Information Quarterly", 28 (2), pp. 200-210.
• Khojastehpour M., Shams S.M.R. (2019), Addressing the complexity of stakeholder management in international ecological setting: A CSR approach, "Journal of Business Research", 119 (C), pp. 302-309.
• Kloot L. (1999), Performance measurement and accountability in Victorian Local Government, "International Journal of Public Sector Management", 12 (7), pp. 565-583.
• Kowalczyk M. (2018), Mierniki niefinansowe w pomierze dokonań jednostek samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu, Poznań.
• Kowalczyk M. (2021), Zrównoważony rozwój miast na prawach powiatu w Polsce w świetle wybranych wskaźników środowiskowych, "Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości", 45 (2), pp. 69-83.
• Kraosodomska J., Zarzycka E. (2020), Niefinansowe kluczowe wskaźniki efektywności: regulacje i wytyczne a praktyka przedsiębiorstw, "Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości", 108 (164), pp. 115-132.
• Kulin J., Johansson Sevä I. (2019), The role of government in protecting the environment: Quality of government and the translation of normative views about government responsibility into spending preferences, "International Journal of Sociology", 49 (2), pp. 110-129.
• Laihonen H. (2017), Principles of performance dialogue in public administration, "International Journal of Public Sector Management", 30 (5), pp. 414-428.
• Laszlo C., Zhexembayeva N. (2011), Embedding sustainability. The next big competitive advantage, Stanford Business Book, Stanford.
• Lehmann C., Delbard O., Lange S. (2022), Green growth, a-growth or degrowth? Investigating the attitudes of environmental protection specialists at the German Environment Agency, "Journal of Cleaner Production", 336, article number 130306.
• Lima Ribeiro V. P., Aibar Guzman C. (2010), Determinants of environmental accounting practices in local entities: Evidence from Portugal, "Social Responsibility Journal", 6 (3), pp. 404-419.
• Long K., Wang, Y., Zhao Y., Chen L. (2015), Who are the stakeholders and how do they respond to a local government payments for ecosystem services program in a developed area: A case study from Suzhou, China, "Habitat International", 49, pp. 1-9.
• Mensah J. (2019), Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review, "Cogent Social Sciences", 5 (1).
• Malakar K., Lu Ch. (2021), Measuring sustainability as distance to ideal position of economy, society and environment: application to China's provincial water resources, "Journal of Environmental Management", 292, article number 112742.
• Miles S. (2017), Stakeholder theory classification: Definitions and essential contestability, Springer Netherlands, pp. 21-47.
• Ministry of the Environment (2015), Guidelines for the development of voivodeship, poviat and communal environmental protection programs, pp. 1-30.
• Mir M.Z., Chatterjee B., Taplin R. (2015), Political competition and environmental reporting: Evidence from New Zealand local governments, "Asian Review of Accounting", 23 (1), pp. 17-38.
• Montecalvo, M., Ferenti, F., de Villiers, C. (2018). The potential of integrated reporting to enhance sustainability reporting in the public sector, "Public Money and Management", 38 (5), pp. 365-374.
• Moynihan D. P., Padney S. K. (2010), The big question for performance management: Why do managers use performance information?, "Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory", 20 (4), pp. 849-866.
• Otto-Zimmermann K. (2012), From Rio to Rio +20: the changing role of local governments in the context of current global governance, "Local Environment", 17 (5), pp. 511-516.
• Panya N., Poboon Ch., Phoochinda W., Teungfung R. (2018), The performance of the environmental management of local governments in Thailand, "Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences", 39, pp. 33-41.
• Peters B. G. (2002), The changing nature of public administration: From easy answers to hard questions, "Asian Journal of Public Administration", 24 (2), pp. 153-183.
• Pickvance C. (2002), Local economic situation, local environmental mobilization and local government environmental policy in Hungary, "Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning", 4 (1), pp. 87-99.
• Pollitt C. (2018), Performance management 40 years on: A review. Some key decisions and consequences, "Public Money and Management", 38 (3), pp. 167-174.
• Qian W., Burritt R. (2007), Environmental accounting for waste management: A study of local governments in Australia, "Environmentalist", 27 (1), pp. 143-154.
• Radin T.J. (2015), From imagination to realization: A legal foundation for stakeholders theory, in Re-Imaging Business Ethics: Meaningful Solutions for a Global Economy, "Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations", 4, pp. 31-49.
• Ribeiro V.P.L., Guzmán C.A., da Silva Monteiro S.M., Guzmán B.A. (2012), Determining factors of environmental management practices in Portuguese local entities, "Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal", 23 (5), pp. 486-502.
• Richter U. H., Dow K.E. (2017), Stakeholder theory: A deliberative perspective, "Business Ethics", 26 (4), pp. 428-442.
• Rose J., Flak L.S., Sæbø Ø. (2018), Stakeholder theory for the E-government context: Framing a value-oriented normative core, "Government Information Quarterly", 35 (3), pp. 362-374.
• Rowley J. (2014), Designing and using research questionnaires, "Management Research Review", 37 (3), pp. 308-330.
• Russel S., Milne M. J., Dey C. (2017), Accounts of nature and the nature of accounts, Accounting, "Auditing and Accountability Journal", 30 (7), pp. 1426-1458.
• Savage A., Gilbert E., Rowlands J., Cataldo A.J. (2001), Environmental disclosure in annual reports: A legitimacy theory perspective, "South African Journal of Accounting Research", 15 (1), pp. 19-48.
• Sobol A. (2008), Governance barriers to local sustainable development in Poland, "Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal", 19 (2), pp. 194-203.
• Suškevičs M., Tillemann K., Külvik M. (2013), Assessing the relevance of stakeholder analysis for national ecological network governance: The case of the Green Network in Estonia, "Journal for Nature Conservation", 21 (4), pp. 206-213.
• Synówka-Bejenka E. (2017), Potencjał turystyczny województw Polski, "Wiadomości Statystyczne", 7 (674), pp. 78-92.
• Taherdoost H. (2016), Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research, "International Journal of Academic Research in Management", 5 (3), pp. 28-36.
• Tevapitak K., Helmsing A.H.J. (2019), The interaction between local governments and stakeholders in environmental management: The case of water pollution by SMEs in Thailand, "Journal of Environmental Management", 247, pp. 840-848.
• Upadhyay N., Brinkmann R. (2010), Green local governments in Florida: Assessment of sustainability performance, "Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy", 6 (1), pp. 18-27.
• Uyar A., Kuzey C., Kilic M. (2019), Testing the spillover effects of sustainability reporting: Evidence from the public sector, "International Journal of Public Administration", 44 (3), pp. 231-240.
• Williams B.R. (2015), The local government accountants' perspective on sustainability, "Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal", 6 (2), pp. 267-287.
• Zeemering E.S. (2018), Sustainability management, strategy and reform in local government, "Public Management Review", 20 (1), pp. 136-153.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0015.8813