A d a p t a t i o n t o E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r e v e n t i v e R e g u l a t i o n
27
the literature, from which we have been able to extract the most relevant information.
Therefore, to avoid the problem of internal validity which customarily affects any case
analysis, we have used methodological triangulation, so that information obtained from
interviews has been complemented by observation and document review.
Case description
There follows a description of the more important findings of the case analyses of each
of the companies studied. This will be used later to make a comparative analysis.
Supplier CEDASA
CEDASA is a company founded in 1980 in Madrid (Spain), manufacturing electrical
equipment for automobiles (horns and relays). CEDASA currently has a factory with a
workforce of 268 people. The company manufactures nine million horns and twenty-two
million relays per year, with sales of approximately 36 million euros.
The company is totally cognizant of the new regulation (Directive 2000/53). Our
evaluation of the implications of the regulation for the company is that compliance with
the new regulation should become an objective. In practice, however, its undertaking will
be complicated. A significant example of this circumstance can be seen in the
manufacture of horns. According to the new regulation, automobile manufacturers will be
required to exclude from component manufacturing the use of lead, mercury, cadmium
and hexavalent chrome. One of the elements used to manufacture horns at CEDASA is
a metal ring which the company acquires from a supplier. Following the specifications of
the automobile manufacturer, CEDASA must supply them with information regarding the
primary components forming this ring. Supplier CEDASA, however, is exclusively
charged with moulding the material and, for this reason, must in turn request information
from its supplier, the next along the value chain. Finally, when the request reaches the
last supplier, distortions produced in the transmission of information are significant and it
is difficult to prove how reliable the information reaching CEDASA, in this case, is.
Another problem in complying with the new regulation is that, even with reliable
information, the clients are not equally committed to the natural environment. Not all
automobile manufacturers, however, are inclined to assume an increase in costs caused
by a measure to improve the environment.
With the aim of adapting to the new regulation’s requisites, the company had already
initiated several actions for obtaining ISO 14001 certification, such as distribution of
written documents, formalisation of processes to identify the regulatory requirements, the
periodic review of the objectives to achieve continuous improvement, the release of
environmental reports and the training of human resources in environmental issues.
Other actions have been recently implemented specifically to adapt the company to the
new regulation. Among them, the work in R&D to find alternatives in design aimed at
compliance with the requirements of the new regulation is (e.g. the use of the
International Material Data System). The departments charged with incorporating the
new regulation’s requirements and with the control of the actions implemented are the
Environmental Department (also the Quality Department) and the R&D Department’s
technical areas. In terms of challenges to the new regulation’s application, at least in this
company’s case, the most difficult is obtaining detailed information on the basic
substances composing a product and scepticism over the reliability of such reports.
Finally, in terms of the role of the public authorities, the company feels that they should
establish a means of control to help confirm the information obtained on components.
