Socio-environmental management in micro and small industries of Pau dos Ferros-RN

Paiva, Francisco Cleiton da Silva; Giesta, Lílian Caporlíngua

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • Gest. Prod. 26 (2) • 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X2984-19 copy

Socio-environmental management in micro and small industries of Pau dos Ferros-RN

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the perception managers of micro and small industries in the city of Pau dos Ferros, RN about environmental practices. To this end, it was sought to verify whether these companies use the environmental management, identifying its practices and pointing motivations, barriers, and opportunities for its implementation; also it was intended to describe the positive and negative consequences perceived by some managers from the existing social and environmental practices, and identify their knowledge on the subject. The paper presents a theoretical approach to Sustainability and Sustainable Development, Environmental Management and Social Responsibility, Micro and Small Enterprises, specific aspects related to industrial activity and environmental management related to that segment. It is qualitative and descriptive research with field research and the collection instrument was through interviews with managers of micro and small industries in the city, followed by an interpretive analysis based on the data obtained. Research has shown that all respondents have awareness about the importance of the environment, and most of them develop some environmental practices, mainly focused on the energy and water savings, and some performing reuse of materials. Social-oriented stocks are scarce and are not directly related to the environmental strategy of the company. Most of the companies did not consider difficult to invest or develop environmental initiatives, although they realized that this requires incentives from the governments, which does not occur with any of the companies interviewed. Most of the managers understand that environmental actions generate positive impacts for companies, such as cost reduction, image enhancement, increased competitiveness and profitability, hardly realizing negatives aspects. In addition, respondents felt that their companies even being micro or small, have an importance for the community, mainly due to the generation of employment and income, vital to the development of the city and region.

Keywords:
Social and environmental responsibility; Perception; Corporate sustainability; Socio-environmental practices

COMPANY/ SEGMENT	PRACTICES	MOTIVATIONS/ CONSTRAINTS/OPPORTUNITIES	MANAGER'S CONCEPTIONS	CONSEQUENCES
Enterprise ‘A” – Food /Bakery	• Use of paper bags (not used); • Use of electric ovens; • Separation of waste; • Water and energy saving; • Community actions, donations.	• Lack of structure; • Lack of environmental awareness of the population; • High energy costs; • Economic and personal motivations; • Few customers care about the environment.	• Well-defined conception of Socio-environmental Responsibility; •Unprepared perception about Sustainability; • Understands the importance of the environment.	•Increased competitiveness, positive image return and increased sales; • Good value for money.
Enterprise “B” – Print shops and communication	• Water and energy saving; • Donations of materials to the community; • Participation in Institutes of Support to Cancer Carriers. • Economic motivation.	• Economic motivation; • Absence of incentives from governments; • Consumers do not care about the environment.	• Has not formally structured the response on Sustainability and Social and Environmental Responsibility.	• Reduction of costs; • Increase of competitiveness and sales; • Improvement of the company image.
Enterprise “C” – Communication, Print shops and	• Separation of waste; • Donation of materials for handicrafts; • Partnerships with institutions.	• Personal motivation and entrepreneurial awareness; • Lack of government incentive; • Considers it difficult to continue environmental actions	• Understands the environment as important and possible to be working; • Articulated knowledge on socio-environmental issues.	• Improve the company image; • Increased competitiveness and sales; • Consumer preference.
Enterprise “D” – Communication and print shop	• Water and energy saving; • You have already tried to perform selective collection, but it was not successful.	• Lack of skilled labor; • Difficulty in capital; • Lack of support from the Government; • Lack of environmental culture; • Considers environmental products still expensive.	• Well formulated perception of socio-environmental issues.	• It realizes that socio-environmental practices do not bring benefits to companies.
Enterprise “E” – Food	• Water and energy saving; • reverse logistic; • Support to Institutions to Support Cancer Patients; • Library for employees; • Lack of enterprise initiative.	• Difficulties inherent in the size of the company; • Formally structured the response on Sustainability and Social and Environmental Responsibility.	• Formally structured the response on Sustainability and Social and Environmental Responsibility.	• Recognition before other companies; • Ease of markets; • Consumer preference.
Enterprise “F” – Glazing, marble and metallurgy.	• Separation of waste; • Water and energy saving.	• Lack of working capital; • Lack of information on environmental actions.	• Has not formally structured the response on socio-environmental issues.	• Increase in sales; • Environmental actions generate expenses.
Enterprise “G” – Cleaning products in general	• Concern about liquid effluents; • Produce packaging from recycling; • Separation of materials; • Donation of products to institutions.	• Financial problems and lack of capital; • Lack of government incentive; • Costly environmental actions.	• Has not formally structured the response on socio-environmental issues; • Perceives the market already concerned with socio-environmental issues.	• Positive return on sales.
Enterprise “H” – construction	• Concern with the soil; • Concern about the separation of waste and its destination • Water economy.	• Excessive bureaucracy in organs; • Lack of partnership with environmental agencies.	• Well formulated perception of socio-environmental issues.	• Improves image vis-à-vis consumers; • Increased competitiveness and sales.
Enterprise “I” – Print shop and communication	• Energy saving; • Separation of materials and their donation; • Actions in partnership with the City Hall.	• Personal motivation; • Cost savings.	• Well formulated perception of socio-environmental issues.	. • Increased competitiveness and sales; • Important strategic factor; • Loyalty to customers.
Enterprise “J” - Manufacture of wooden furniture	• Separation of wood waste and its donation; •Energy saving; • Community actions.	• High cost of raw material; • Consumers do not care about the environment.	• Partially formulated perception on socio-environmental issues.	• It works as company propaganda; • Environmental actions depend on spending.
Enterprise ‘K”- Construction	• Avoid waste of materials; • Water economy.	• Difficulty in investing in the environment at high cost; • Consumers do not care about the environment.	• Articulated knowledge on socio-environmental issues.	• Reduction of costs; • Increased competitiveness and sales.
Enterprise “L” – Construction	• Environmental concern in buildings; • Separation of waste and collection of debris; • Donation of trees.	• High taxes and lack of government incentive; • Low participation of society.	• Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues.	• Increases personal motivation; • Improves corporate image; • Increased competitiveness.
Enterprise “M”- Food/Bakery	• Use of paper and cloth bags (not used); • Separation of materials; • Water and energy saving; • Shares with charities.	• Personal motivation; • Notion of responsibility; • Sale of materials can be sold; • Lack of incentives.	• Articulated knowledge on socio-environmental issues.	• Society sees the company differently; • Positive financial impact.
Enterprise “N” – Construction	• Collection of waste and proper disposal; • Water economy; • Use of environmentally friendly materials and products.	• Environmental awareness of the manager; • Lack of financial resources; • Lack of skilled labor, high costs and many taxes; • Considers it expensive to invest in the environment; • Few consumers with environmental awareness.	• Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues.	• Negative short-term financial impact of costs; • Positive long-term consequences for increased sales and competitiveness.
Enterprise “O” – Food/bakery	• Water and energy saving; • Leftovers from food used in raising animals; • Donation of food to religious institutions.	• Need for incentives; • Customers without environmental awareness.	• Has not formally structured the response on socio-environmental issues.	• You do not notice any positive or negative effects.
Enterprise “P” – Manufacture of wooden furniture.	• Remains of wood materials are donated; •Energy saving.	• Understands that consumers are already concerned about the environment; • Absence of government incentives.	Has not formally structured the response on socio-environmental issues.	• Financial return, through increased sales and competitiveness.
Enterprise “Q” – Print shop and communication	• Water and energy saving; • Separation of metals and fabrics are sold; • Voluntary action in partnership with institutions.	• Consumers do not care about the environment; • Absence of public policies to encourage socio-environmental actions; • Understands that tax incentives motivate social and environmental actions.	• Articulated knowledge on socio-environmental issues; • Socio-environmental actions only show a different concern on the part of the companies;	• Water scarcity motivates the conscious use of the resource; • Companies become better viewed by society; • View as an extra cost to businesses.
Enterprise “R”- Manufacture of fitness and gym equipment	• Remains of materials are donated or used for recycling; • Manufacture of objects from the remaining material; •Energy saving.	• Lack of knowledge on the part of organizations; • High cost of socio-environmental actions; • Customers with environmental concern.	• Understand that actions depend on the area of activity of the company; • Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues.	• Improved customer perception of the company; • Increased confidence and loyalty; • Increase in sales and financial return; • Environmental actions, such as recycling, have a positive effect on the company and on society.
Enterprise “S” – Food, meat products and derivatives	• Water and energy saving; • Treatment and reuse of water.	• Lack of skilled labor; • Considers it complex to invest in the environment in function of the expenses; • Consumers already care about the environmental issue; • Increased environmental awareness of the company.	• Articulated knowledge on socio-environmental issues; • Understand that companies invest in the environment by collecting the organs.	• Not to notice a positive impact on sales, due to the local culture; • Reuse of water brings positive impacts, by reducing costs.
Enterprise “T”-Ice making	• Concern about water consumption, the main raw material of production; • Separation of materials for later recycling; •Energy saving; • It develops actions of donations.	• Excessive bureaucracy and difficulty in bank credit; • Motivation for corporate environmental awareness; • Does not consider it difficult to develop socio-environmental actions.	• Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues; • Associates environment with quality of life.	• Awareness of people; • Positive financial impact with increased sales and • cost savings.
Enterprise “U”- Food, pizza manufacturing and other products	• Separation of waste; • Organic vegetable in the company; • Water and energy saving; • Volunteer actions; • Social action with the philanthropic institution.	• Personal and business motivation; • Absence of incentives; • Cost savings.	• Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues.	• Financial return for the sale of separate cans; • Contribute to a just, conscious and balanced society; • It generates value and credibility for the company; • Positive financial impact.
Enterprise “V” – Manufacture of wooden and stainless steel furniture.	• Separation of debris from materials and wood dust that is destined for recycling; •Energy saving; • Absence of incentives.	• Small company; • Does not consider it difficult to develop environmental actions; • Partially formulated perception on socio-environmental issues.	• Partially formulated perception on socio-environmental issues.	• Environmental benefit, with use of materials; • Increased sales and image of the company.
Enterprise W” – Manufacture of glass, aluminum and PVC materials	•Selection and separation of materials; •Donation of materials; •Energy saving; •Volunteer actions.	• Personal perception of the importance of the environment; • It perceives lack of knowledge on the part of the entrepreneurs.	• Formally structured the response on social and environmental issues.	• Improves quality of life; • Improve the company image.
Enterprise “X” – Food/Bakery	• Water and energy saving; • Separation of materials and subsequent donation; •Volunteer actions with charities.	• Personal motivation for social actions; • Considers it difficult to develop environmental actions; • Lack of awareness in the business environment.	• Has not formally structured the response on socio-environmental issues.	• Differential decision for purchased consumers; • Increases sales.

Universidade Federal de São Carlos Departamento de Engenharia de Produção , Caixa Postal 676 , 13.565-905 São Carlos SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3351 8471 - São Carlos - SP - Brazil
E-mail: gp@dep.ufscar.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Source: Prepared by the author. Field research (2015).