|
MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING WEB |
|
Hammer, B. and C. H. Stinson. 1995. Managerial accounting and environmental compliance costs. Journal of Cost Management (Summer): 4-10. Summary by Anthony CunhaMaster of Accountancy Program University of South Florida, Summer 2002 |
Environmental costs incurred and avoided
have grown significantly over time. Some companies are no longer able to apply
environmental cost to general overhead as they used to. In the past,
environmental cost were accumulated for the company as a whole and then placed
in the general overhead account and allocated to products with a general cost
driver. As environmental costs have risen, many companies now find it necessary
to accurately allocate environmental cost to the products that caused them.
As companies feel pressure from consumers
and competitors to lower cost while maintaining profits they have found a
greater need to accurately allocate environmental cost. There also has been a
growing need to trace compliance cost that governmental regulations have caused.
These costs, including such items as permit fees, compliance and filing cost,
training of personal, and others has been so large in recent years that they can
make up a significant cost in some industries. As these environmental and
compliance cost rise comparative to other cost, accurate assignment of them will
become even more important.
The authors state that one of the most
important things that accountants can do when working with environmental cost is
to identify and distinguish between preventable environmental cost and
unavoidable environmental cost. By identifying preventable environmental cost,
companies are more likely to adopt measures that would reduce pollution levels
when they also can be seen to cut cost. Companies need to take into
consideration if the cost benefits of tracing environmental cost outweigh the
actual cost.
Another reason for the growing need for
accurate accounting of environmental cost is due to state and federal
regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) draft guidelines on waste
minimization programs propose that all hazardous waste generators should charge
“fully loaded” waste management cost to departments and managers. This would
include cost such as liability, compliance and oversight. Some states require
that companies prepare plans that compare current cost with those of pollution
reducing alternatives. The state of Washington requires that companies describe
the accounting system they use to record cost that are related to hazardous
material use and hazardous waste generation.
The authors state that most of the cost that
companies incur related to environmental issues are related to either
state or federal regulation compliance cost. The Occupational Safety and Health
Act (OSHA) for instance requires that companies give right to know training to
workers on the handling of chemicals. There also are many more examples of
governmental acts and agencies that require information or accounting
information on various aspects of waste handling, chemical handling, or other
environmental issues. Some of the larger cost are often traced to actual
activities, but many other costs such as compliance and oversight cost are often
assigned to general overhead and then allocated with a generic driver across the
complete plant, process, or company. These costs can be accurately allocated
though if the cost drivers used have a reliable correlation with the action that
caused the incurrence of the cost in first place.
The authors talk also about the high
compliance cost that are incurred when hazardous materials are used in a
products manufacturing process. Because of this companies often compare the cost
of current processes and pollution-preventing alternatives. When companies start
to make these comparisons they must determine first what the relationship is
between the hazardous material used and the costs that are associated with them.
Then they need to determine if the costs can be avoided by alternative
pollution-preventing processes. Some costs such as filing and record keeping are
incurred if any hazardous materials are used. Other costs such as worker
training, oversight cost, inspection, and
right to know cost can be reduced as material usage is reduced. If a company
actually produces hazardous waste another cost is produced. This cost is often a
step function based on the volume of materials produced that triggers different
levels of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) compliance. Plants that
are considered “small-quantity generators” (less than 100 kilograms per
month) are exempt from RCRA reporting. Those that produce more are faced with
increasing reporting requirements, while those that are considered “treatment,
storage, and disposal” (TSD) face the most extreme reporting requirements.
When companies have a centralized management
system they often find it easier to collect and analyze environmental cost. When
they have decentralized management though, they need to be sure to align middle
management goals in relation to environmental cost with those of senior
management. One way that some companies address this situation is by the
creation of an across the company environmental committee to oversee the
complete company environmental planning process. Also many companies find that
they must align management compensation and evaluation with the end goals of the
company regarding both environmental affairs and other issues. Also companies
need to be careful that the evaluation process does not promote inappropriate
behavior. One Seattle area company planned to start tracing waste disposal fees
to specific processes rather than aggregating them. They became worried though
that supervisors may begin to report only a portion of the actual waste produced
and then illegally dump the remaining waste in an attempt to keep cost under
control. Because of situations like this companies need to be sure that
evaluation and compensation promote proper accounting and compliance. Also, new
U.S. Sentencing Commission proposed guidelines would allow for sentences of
officers of corporations convicted of federal environmental offences to get
reduced sentences if an environmental compliance program was already in effect.
By modifying both the accounting of environmental cost to better trace cost to the processes that cause them and proper management incentives can lead companies to better manage and control cost associated with environmental compliance and waste management.
| Cost Management Main Page | Environmental Cost Main Page | Social Accounting Main Page |