PROGRESS IN TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH, VOL.
3, 3–15 (1997)
Environmental Auditing: An
Approach Towards Monitoring
the Environmental Impacts in
Tourism Destinations, with
Reference to the Case of Molyvos
Dimitrios Diamantis1* and John Westlake2
1
International Centre for Tourism and Hospitality Research, University of
Bournemouth, PO Box 2816, Poole, BH12 5YT, UK
2
Department of Management Studies, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2
5XH, UK
ABSTRACT
Environmental Auditing (EA) is a management
tool which determines the actual and potential
environmental impacts of both public and
private sector activities. This technique
assesses the magnitude, level and importance
of environmental impacts caused by tourism
development. Environmental auditing is based
on environmentally responsible actions which
when applied by tourism destination
authorities, is a measure of their
environmental commitment. Therefore, by
utilizing environmental auditing in the
world’s tourism destinations, measures of a
more proactive nature can be implemented
within their localities. The application of the
technique, as demonstrated in the case of
Molyvos on the Greek island of Mytilini,
appears to be significant for a destination’s
environmental practices. An overall
assessment of Molyvos’s environmental
elements such as water and waste, and an
evaluation of the performance of
environmental indicators was carried out in
order to determine the ‘baseline’
environmental conditions in the resort. Thus,
the procedure formed the basis for an ongoing
environmental management activity,
contributing to the sustainable tourism
* Correspondence to: D. Diamantis
CCC 1077–3509/97/010003–13 $17.50
development of the destination. © 1997 by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 24 October 1995; Accepted 13 May 1996
Prog. Tourism Hospitality Res. 3, 3–15 (1997)
No. of Figures: 2 No. of Tables: 4 No. of Refs: 56
Keywords: environmental auditing; monitoring;
environmental impacts
INTRODUCTION
C
ertain uncontrolled human activities are
depleting, and in the worst cases, con-
taminating the world’s environmental
resources (Tolba, 1992). Results from studies of
environmental elements, such as the evaluation
of water quality or the performance of waste
management programmes, have exposed
environmental threats and prompted a global
environmental warning (OECD, 1991a; Da
Cunha, 1992; Eurostat, 1991). During the 1980s
and 1990s, recognition of these weaknesses
through an environmental conservation manage-
ment movement has led to the concept of
sustainability (Goodall and Stabler, 1992; Bartel-
mus, 1994). In particular, in 1987 the Brundtland
report established the concept as being associ-
ated with every action or plan for development
in the future (WCED 1987). This concept, which
embodies the prevention of careless use of
natural resources was further accepted in the
United Nation’s conference in Rio de Janeiro in
© 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

4 D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
1992. Participants in this meeting postulated that
the environment had become a major concern at
local, national and international level and
approved a global environmental action pro-
gramme, the so-called Agenda 21 (UN, 1993).
These concerns affect the tourism industry, as
the environment is used by the industry as a core
supplier of products (Mathieson and Wall, 1982;
WTO/UNEP, 1983; CEC, 1993; Goodall, 1992;
Goodall, 1994a; Archer and Cooper, 1994). Con-
sidering that tourism should be “developed and
maintained in an area (community, environment)
in such a manner and at such a scale that it
remains viable over an indefinite period and
does not degrade or alter the environment
(human and physical) in which it exists to such a
degree that it prohibits the successful develop-
ment and well being of other activities and
processes” (Butler, 1993:29), then the sustainable
manner of all tourism activities is apparent for
the future of tourism.
In this respect, a framework for action
(Agenda 21), developed by the World Travel and
Tourism Council with the World Tourism Organ-
isation and the Earth Council, identifies the
priority areas for a sustainable tourism pro-
gramme. Agenda 21 for tourism proposes twelve
guiding principles for sustainable development
(WTTC/WTO/EC, 1995; WTO, 1995). In partic-
ular, the seventh principle explains that
environmental protection has to be an integral
part of tourism development (WTTC/WTO/EC,
1995:35; WTO, 1995:3). In order to achieve this
protection, environmental management tech-
niques are required.
A fundamental environmental management
technique which is discussed in this paper is
environmental auditing and its application. An
overview of environmental auditing, which
includes its methodological procedures and its
framework, is presented in a way so that
destinations can detect the need to control and
monitor environmental impacts. A case study of
Molyvos, a resort on the Greek island of Mytilini,
is outlined, with the application of environ-
mental auditing developed through an analysis
of certain environmental elements, their policy
criteria, and destination management issues. A
key recommendation of the research is that
destination authorities should consider this man-
agement tool in order to establish a continuous
environmental management programme within
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
their localities.
AN OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL
AUDITING FOR PRIVATE SECTOR
ACTIVITIES
Environmental auditing was first implemented
in the late 1960s and 1970s in the USA and
Canada as a result of new legislative require-
ments, exemplified by the stringent national and
international standards set by the Canadian
Government (Ledgerwood et al, 1992). In
Europe, its use was introduced in the 1980s
through US subsidiary companies, which had
exercised the technique in their activities. The
definition of the concept, proposed by the Inter-
national Chamber of Commerce in the World
Industry Conference on Environmental Manage-
ment is:
”A management tool comprising a system-
atic, documented, periodic and objective
evaluation of how well environmental orga-
nisation, management and equipment are
performing with an aim of helping to
safeguard the environment by:
a) Facilitating management control of
environmental practices;
b) Assessing compliance with the company
policies, which would include meeting reg-
ulatory requirements” (UNEP/IEO,
1989:100).
However, companies often confuse auditing
with terms such as assessments, reviews, sur-
veys or evaluation (Hunt, 1994). This breadth of
terminology should not alter the purpose of
environmental auditing, which is to act as a core
part of the environmental management system.
This is further recognised by the Institute of
Internal Auditors’ Research Foundation in the
USA which suggests that: “EA is an integral part
of an environmental management system
whereby management determines whether the
organisation’s environmental control systems are
adequate to ensure compliance with regulatory
and internal policies” (IIARF, 1993:xi).
Similarly, at the European level, the European
Community has introduced a voluntary scheme
for good environmental management practices-
the Eco-Management and Auditing Scheme. The
overall objective of the regulation is to promote
continuous environmental performance
improvements of companies’ activities, by com-

Environmental Auditing
miting them to undertake seven action steps. In
the fifth step environmental auditing is deter-
mined as a tool which can establish measures of
the environmental management system, as well
as ensuring that environmental activities con-
form to the firm’s environmental programme
(OJEC, 1993). In overall terms, whether it is part
of an environmental management system or
applied independently, EA is an important tech-
nique which determines and analyses the
environmental performance of organisations.
The different types of environmental auditing
and their applicability in the manufacturing
industry as well as in tourism have been well
documented (Goodall, 1992; Goodall, 1994a;
Goodall, 1994b; Goodall, 1995; Ledgerwood et al,
1992; UNEP/IEO, 1989; IIARF, 1993; Stabler and
Goodall, 1993; Elkington, 1990; Bailey and
Hobbs, 1990; Welford and Gouldson, 1993; Chris-
tensen and Nielsen, 1993; WTTERC, 1993;
WTTERC, 1994). Currently, the limitations of the
application of environmental auditing are that it
tends to be treated as a one-off exercise and does
not always follow the requirements of environ-
mental state laws or company policies (Hunt,
1994; Goodall, 1995). Environmental auditing
should be a continuous exercise so that long term
benefits can be revealed. The major advantage in
the use of an audit is the protection of the
environment through cost-effective compliance,
not only with the regional and national laws and
regulations but also with the company’s stan-
dards and policies. Additionally, it encourages
employee awareness of environmental issues,
and requires management of a company to be
responsible for creating environmental training
programmes (Goodall, 1992; Goodall, 1994a;
Goodall, 1994b; Goodall, 1995; UNEP/IEO, 1989;
Buhr, 1991). Furthermore, the auditing of private
sector activities contributes to the public sector’s
environmental management practices. In
instances where the technique is applied in
tourism destinations, the management of the
area can minimise some of the serious negative
environmental impacts caused by tourism
development.
LOCAL AUTHORITY OR MUNICIPALITY
PRACTICES AT THE DESTINATION
The relationship between tourism and the envi-
ronment in destinations is seldom symbiotic, and
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
5
often antagonistic. Many resorts suffer a variety
of negative environmental impacts, while con-
sumers often insist on non-environmentally-
damaged areas for their holidays. It is essential
that preventative actions are implemented so
that destinations can demonstrate their environ-
mental responsibility and remain viable
(McCool, 1994; Pigram, 1990; Filion et al, 1994;
WTO, 1992; Ceballos-Lascurain, 1993; Prosser,
1994; Goodall, 1995). Here, the destination
authority’s role in reconciling the ideas with
actions is crucial. Stewart (1993) refers to local
authorities or municipalities in destinations as
stewards of natural resources, responsible for
how resources are utilised. Additionally, their
strategic planning role allows them to determine
the scope of the policy criteria of their territorial
activities. Therefore their roles, as stewards and
strategic planners, permit them to undertake
considerable steps to encourage awareness
through the use of an environmental auditing
technique (Dean, 1991).
Looking at tourism destinations, there are few
cases to illustrate local authorities which have
conducted auditing procedures or have intro-
duced an environmental management system, of
which EA is a core element. An example of the
implementation of environmental auditing is
provided by the so-called Medcities network, set
up in Barcelona (Spain) in November 1991. The
aim of this network of eighteen Mediterranean
countries is to operate a common framework of
environmental management activities. The effort
is put into implementing EA in five of the
network cities, supported by their environmental
plans. The cities are: Sousse in Tunisia, Tripoli/El
Mina in Lebanon, Oran in Algeria, Tangier in
Morocco, and Limassol in Cyprus. The environ-
mental auditing of the five cities, two of which
are popular tourist resorts, Limassol and Tangier,
contributes towards safeguarding the environ-
ment in the Mediterranean.
The adoption of such a technique for assessing
the environmental impacts at the destination is a
necessary one. For the local authority in the
resort, environmental auditing is:
”A management tool comprising a system-
atic, documented, periodic and objective
evaluation of the performance of the organi-
sation, management system and equipment
designed to protect the environment, with

6 D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
the aim of:
i) facilitating management control of prac-
tices which may have an impact on the
environment; and
ii) assessing compliance with the local
authority’s environmental policies” (CGEF,
1993:145).
The main purpose of environmental auditing
in the destination is to evaluate the environ-
mental performance of existing activities, in
other words the actual and potential environmental
impacts. With the application of EA, the measures
exercised as a result of the audit, such as the
control of industrial waste, the increase of
recycling practices, and the improvement of
environmental quality, can benefit the manage-
ment of an area.
Similarly it allows the local authority to
establish Environmental Quality Standards
(EQS) for the whole resort in the areas of water
quality or waste criteria (Stabler and Goodall,
Figure 1. The environmental commitment of destinations
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1993). It can further request Environmental
Performance Standards (EPS) for private sector
activities looking at for example, the sewage
disposal of tourism enterprises (Stabler and
Goodall, 1993) or energy consumption measures.
Moreover, it allows the component parts of the
destination to be assessed focusing on their
environmental impacts (see Figure 1).
With the operation of environmental auditing
at a destination, the attractions, access, ancillary
services and aspects of the ‘wholistic’ environ-
ment, benefit from EQS and green policies. The
limitations of establishing a general environ-
mental management approach are derived from
the fact that the resort is comprised of a mix of
small, medium and large business enterprises,
which are unlikely to develop their EPS due to:
(a) The limited financial resources which do
not permit them to undertake environmental
management programmes; and
(b) The low degree of awareness of environ-

Environmental Auditing
mental issues and/or co-operation with local
authority practices.
Despite this, it is believed that when environ-
mental management is applied within the resort,
in the light of a continuous application of
environmental auditing, pressure can be
imposed upon tourism enterprises and their
environmental compatibility can be realised. In
overall terms, the possibility for the private
sector to assist the authority’s environmental
efforts increases.
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES OF
ENVIRONMENTAL AUDITING IN
DESTINATIONS
Environmental Auditing Methodology
The initial task of the destination’s managing
authority is to pre-comprehend the type as well
as the methodology of an audit which is to be
undertaken. At this stage, three main considera-
tions influence the complicated nature of
research for environmental auditing:
(1) There is the inherent difficulty of selecting
a methodology, as “there is no uniform method-
ology for environmental auditing” (Bailey et al,
1992:4). In order to assist in the selection of a
methodology, a guide can be established based on
four categories to allow the flow of information
of the field work to be grouped:
(a) the actual environmental elements such
as water and waste and their description;
(b) the conditions of environmental indica-
tors;
(c) the environmental impacts which are
cited within the latter two categories; and
(d) the predictions or changes of environ-
mental elements due to further development.
This topic guide can assist in the construction of
types of audit and in improving the effectiveness
as well as the timing of the research.
(2) The identification of the environmental
indicators which are to be considered in the
auditing process is problematic. Research in this
field still appears to be at the stage of formulat-
ing a common set of indicators. Environmental
indicators are the instrumental tools used to
measure environmental performance (OECD,
1991b, 1993; Opschoor and Costanza, 1994), yet
there is no agreement on their common identi-
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
7
fication or measurement. For instance, the
indicators for freshwater and marine resources,
waste, biodiversity and social response are mis-
leading, with the only exception being those
corresponding to meteorological conditions and
air quality (OECD, 1993; UNEP and RIVM,
1994).
The complexity of these limitations affects the
selection process of indicators to be included in
environmental audits. This leads to the use of the
current available core set of indicators as the
only empirically-valid alternative. In this context
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) highlights three main
indicators (OECD, 1994:9):
(i) Indicators of environmental pressure
(which measure the impact on the environment
caused by human actions);
(ii) Indicators of environmental conditions
(which correspond to the quality and quantity
aspects of natural resources as well as to the
quality elements of the environment); and
(iii) Response indicators (which represent an
assessment of the society’s response and concern
for the environment).
(3) The selection of the types of environmental
auditing is also a consideration. In this instance
the local authority’s type of environmental audit
is based on the State of Environment report
(SOE) and Internal Audit (IA), with its sub-
components of Policy Impact Assessment (PIA)
and Management Audit (MA) and can be con-
sidered in the methodology selection (LGMB,
1991).
State of Environment Report
The state of environment report presents an
evaluation of the local environmental conditions
and a description of the environmental impacts
of the Access, Attractions, Amenities and Aspects of
the ‘wholistic’ environment (Figure 1). When
constructing this report the first stages to be
conducted are the identification of the key
environmental elements in the destination and
their indicators. Therefore, the report has to
detail all the conditions of the selected environ-
mental elements, supported by primary and
secondary research of environmental informa-
tion (LGMB, 1991; Dean, 1991). In other words,
the report has to illustrate the results of the first,

8 D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
second and third category of the methodological
guide.
Internal Audit
The internal audit examines the environmental
behaviour of the local authority or the munici-
pality. The audit seeks ways of distributing
resources with the aim of introducing priorities
and comprehensive plans for managing the
environmental impacts (LGMB, 1991). Addition-
ally, the outcome of the fourth category of the
methodological guide can be elaborated, in order
to forecast the impact of any future development
on the environment of the destination. Generally
speaking, the construction of an IA can be seen
through two components (LGMB, 1991):
I) Policy Impact Assessment
The potential aim of policy impact assessment
is to review the activities of the local authority
and to undertake their description and appraisal
together with the strategic environmental actions
of the authority (LGMB, 1991). It usually focuses
on the analysis of the authority’s services and its
practices, in other words, it assesses the Ancillary
services of the destination (Figure 1). Addition-
ally, appraisal of the impacts is usually
conducted under three main types: the checklist
approach, comprehensive audit or environ-
mental impact matrix, and issue audit (LGMB,
1991).
II) Management Audit
Under this audit, the management issues of
the authority, for instance staff training, financial
procedures and strategic plans, often fall into its
framework (LGMB, 1991).
IMPLEMENTING THE TYPES OF
ENVIRONMENTAL AUDITING: THE CASE
OF MOLYVOS
In this section of the paper, the benefits of the
technique of environmental auditing are demon-
strated on the Greek island of Mytilini and
specifically in the town of Molyvos which is the
destination chosen to introduce the significance
of environmental practices associated with tour-
ist activities.
Description of the Destination
The municipality of Molyvos or Mithymna is at
the north end of the Greek island of Mytilini. The
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
district is formed by the seaside town of Molyvos
and the areas of Kampos (Valley) and Eftalou
(Figure 2). The total area of the district is about
28 square kilometres. Approximately a third of it
is populated (built environment) and the remain-
der is covered by arable land and olive trees. Its
population, of approximately 1,400 is employed
mainly in the tourism sector. The tourism market
mix of Molyvos is largely comprised of package
tour groups (86%), while the resort’s hotel
infrastructure in 1994 contained 3,600 bed units.
State of Environment Report
The environmental auditing of Molyvos has
achieved the description of certain environ-
mental elements, as well as other factors, as
follows (Diamantis, 1994):
1) Socio-economic 2) Natural resources;
structure;
3) Land use; 4) Water;
5) Sewage; 6) Waste management;
7) Air Quality; 8) Noise pollution; and
9) Energy.
Looking here at two aspects of the environ-
mental analysis, the following part of the paper
focuses on water and waste management, and
the assessment of their conditions in order to
demonstrate their actual and potential environ-
mental impacts. In the section covering water the
focus is on the public supply with the use of the
variables of ‘gross’ volume or pressure indicator
and the state indicator being applied to the
quality of water. For waste, the emphasis is on
municipal waste with the use of the municipal
waste indicator and a state indicator for landfill
practices.
The Water Element
In the area of Molyvos, the hydrological system
used is the so-called “drainage basin” system of
the mountain (Lepetimnos) torrent. The basin
stretches into an area of 19.7 km2, with altitudes
ranging between 0 metres near the sea up to 900
metres near the mountain of Lepetimnos. The
water supply of the drainage basin mainly
occurs from rain. Rainfall average in 1993 was
estimated at 725mm per year, of which the
amount of water infiltrating into the acquifers
was 294,375m3 (Diamantis, 1994). The drainage

Environmental Auditing
basin system discharges into the sea, and also
supplies three boreholes and drilling in the area
of Kampos which provide 2,043m3 of water per
day. The destination’s water distribution system
(WDS) serves the town of Molyvos and the
surrounding areas of Kampos and Eftalou, by
water pipes. Most of the pipes are made from
asbestos, iron, and cement.
Briefly, an analysis of the water network
revealed the following impacts (Diamantis,
1994):
(a) The water distribution system showed
leakages when the ‘gross’ volume or pressure
indicator was determined. The water consump-
tion of the destination from 1988 to 1993 has
Figure 2. Location map of Molyvos
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
9
shown a steady increase. Seasonal variations in
water consumption occur within the tourist
season, reaching its peak in July, August and
September, and showing a decline in October.
The total water consumption in 1993 was
238,497m3, a 14% increase since 1989 (Table 1).
The average yearly consumption for the year in
question (1993) was 653m3/ day. During the
tourist season in the summer (July-September)
the average daily consumption reached 1 ,200m3.
Despite the surplus of water in both cases
(1390m3 during the year and 843m3 in the
summer months), there is insufficient water to
meet the needs of both the host population and
the tourist.
(b) The WDS was constructed in the 1950s to
 10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
Table 1. Water Consumption in Molyvos (m3).

Months Consumption
1988 1989 1993

January–March 33,568 22,581 24,300

April–June 37,991 63,202 68,280
July–September 84,002 89,137 110,408
October–December 34,211 34,211 35,509
Total 189,772 209,131 238,497
Increase % 10.2 14.0

accommodate the needs of 2,000 people, yet with (Table 2).

the development of tourism in the area it has to
supply the requirements of 5,000 during the
tourism season. In the same season the WDS
faces erosion from the water pressure due to the
additional consumption.
(c) The two storage reservoirs are placed
inappropriately at an altitude of 103 metres,
where most of the areas supplied by water are
positioned between 0-30 metres, thus causing
high pressure and over consumption.
Looking at the water quality in the destination a
twofold picture can be illustrated. The water
quality results are judged to be of good standard,
when a comparison is made with the EC Direc-
tive for water quality 80/778 (OJEC, 1980).
However, attention can be focused on the chlo-
ride content which contains a concentration of
7.70mg/l greater than that of the EC guide level
The water quality sample illustrated in Table 2
was extracted from the borehole situated 200
metres from the Aegean coast and demonstrated
the development of a situation where sea water
is infiltrating into the ground and in the bore-
hole.
Moreover, after one day of regular pumping of
water, the conductivity of water in the same
borehole, reached the total figure of 2,600 ms/
cm, in comparison to 830 ms/cm which had
occurred on a day when there was no pumping
of water. As a result, over-pumping can cause
significant environmental problems for the qual-
ity aspects of the water, where in comparison
with the EC Directive 80/778 and the guide level
given for this, it should be 400ms/cm (OJEC,
1980). These results thus propound the need for
timely management of water pumping, and in
particular the closure of the borehole.

Table 2. Water Quality of Molyvos in Comparison with the EC Directive

80/778.

Ionic Content Results EC Guide EC MAC EC MRC Check

mg/litre Level 1* 2*
mg/litre mg/litre

Calcium (Ca) 55.10 100 — — Good

Magnesium (Mg) 10.80 30 50 — Good
Sodium (Na) 25.70 20 150 — Good
Potassium (K) 2.34 10 12 — Good
Alkalinity (HCO3) 165.30 — — 30 Good
Chloride (Cl) 207.70 253* — — Poor
Sulphates (SO4) 49.50 25 250 — Good

1*
Maximum Admissible Concentration.
2*
Minimum Required Concentration.
3*
Approximation concentration above which effects might occur is 200
mg/l.

Environmental Auditing
Turning to bathing water, its standard was
found to be excellent, as the beach of Molyvos
has been awarded an EC Blue Flag for its ‘clean
waters’. In this respect, a continuous bathing
water monitoring programme ensures that the
bathing water quality remains high.
The Waste Element
There are two main types of waste in the area,
‘controlled waste’ which includes litter from
offices and hotels, together with ‘special waste’,
in the form of clinical waste and waste oils from
the two factories in the district. According to the
municipality’s estimate, the value of the daily
amount of waste per person is approximately
1.08 kg during the off-peak tourist season in
comparison with 1.72 kg which is generated
during the summer months (July-September).
This results in an average of 8.6 tons per day for
the summer and 1.512 tons per day for the rest of
the year. Such a diversity of waste generation can
also be noted in the waste composition data
which was determined according to eleven
waste types. In particular, during the tourism
season, 64.9% of the waste was made from paper
and plastic, while during the other months, 31%
was of these types of waste (Table 3). Thus, the
need for particular waste management measures
is underlined, in order to minimise waste, paper
and plastic, by introducing recycling schemes.
Municipal waste is collected by only one lorry
with a total carrying capacity of six tons. Addi-
tionally, two horses collect the waste from the
narrow paved streets of the town, which is then
Table 3. Molyvos Waste Composition.
Types of waste
1. Glass and glass products
2. Cartons and carton cases
3. Paper and paper products
4. Wood and related products
5. Plastic and plastic products
6. Tires and rubber products
7. Clothes and textiles
8. Metal and metal products
9. Organic products
10. Garden waste branches
11. Other
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
11
transferred on to a lorry, and subsequently
transported to the landfill for disposal. The
collection frequency in Molyvos ranges from
twice a week in the winter, to six times a week
during the tourism season. The majority of
household waste is collected in plastic bags, and
to a lesser degree paper bags, which are stored
either in plastic bins or in the few metallic
dumpsters.
In general, the municipality has not demon-
strated a policy of the three “Rs” (Reduce, Reuse,
Recycle) and has yet to incorporate any envir-
onmentally sound principles. Additionally, two
main incidents were observed regarding the
landfill disposal practices. First, the waste is
either incinerated or dumped into the landfill,
which is not separated into household waste and
special waste, highlighting non compliance with
the EC Directive 91/156 on waste as it neglects to
use methods which do not harm the environ-
ment (OJEC, 1991). Second, the pollution caused
by the landfill disposal practices will affect the
quality of underground water. This is because
the landfill site is situated close to the mountain
of Lepetimnos, where the process of natural
water supply begins.
Internal Audit
I) Policy Impact Assessment
In the foregoing case study of Molyvos, the
appraisal of environmental effects was con-
ducted through the checklist approach and
Leopold’s matrix (Westman, 1985; LGMB, 1991;
Diamantis, 1994:204-208). For instance, the
Tourism season Rest of the year
3.4% 2.1%
11.8% 10.2%
32.5% 15.3%
0.4% 10.4%
32.4% 15.7%
0.1% 0.5%
1.3% 20.7%
1.2% 12.2%
16.6% 4.3%
0.2% 7.7%
0.1% 0.9%

12
magnitude of the impact on the checklist was
based on seven types of scoring from 2 3
(Catastrophic) to + 3 (Very Positive). This is a
subjective interpretation of environmental per-
formance in the resort, an example of which can
be seen from the water and waste elements
(Table 4).
Green strategic actions were proposed for the
short and medium term. The municipality’s roles
of measuring the average water consumption of
hotels and other catering establishments, and of
exercising better control over the management of
the pumping system in order to minimise the
water conductivity, were among the recom-
mendations relating to the water. For the waste
element, the investigation into the hydrological
and geological conditions in and around the
landfill, the introduction of recycling schemes,
and the purchase of a leachate collection system
to minimise the environmental impacts from the
landfill, were cited as green recommendations.
II) Management Audit
In the Molyvos case, the emergent issues for
the short term relating to the environment are as
follows:
(1) the establishment of a green committee
and the employment of an environmental co-
ordinator in the destination to handle the
environmental aspects of the authority;
(2) the practice of environmental management
training seminars tailored to interested parties,
especially to tourism-related enterprises;
(3) the creation of a tourism committee which
Table 4. Water and Waste Elements Checklist.
Water
Pumping system management
Quality of water for human consumption
Water distribution system
Water consumption efficiency
Bathing water quality
Waste
Waste during the tourism season (summer period)
Sufficient supply of dumpsters
Three Rs activities
Air pollution from landfill operations
Waste collection
Landfill use
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
has to press for the adoption of green action
plans and environmental performance standards
by the service sector; and
(4) the instigation of the noise acoustic plan
and the introduction of an environmental man-
agement system within the destination.
The decision-making procedures and manage-
ment issues of Molyvos and destinations in
general, can be best achieved by safeguarding
their strengths whilst minimising their weak-
nesses and threats through regular
environmental auditing practices. Inevitably, by
realising that there is a commitment to protecting
the fragile environment and that tourism prod-
ucts have to incorporate an environnmental
sound component (Frangially, 1990), environ-
mental auditing can contribute to the successful
monitoring and minimisation of negative
environmental impacts and to the effective en-
vironmental management of the destination.
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The environmental practices of the world’s larg-
est industry during the decade of the 1990s and
beyond have to be associated with the immeas-
urable tasks of sustainable actions. Experience in
previous years suggests that when over-develop-
ment occurs, the antagonistic relationship
between tourism and the environment appears
with serious implications for the availability of
resources. This indicates that sustainable use of
resources and environmental management pro-
grammes are needed in order to nourish hopes of
Present Situation
22
0
22
22
+3
22
21
23
22
21
21

Environmental Auditing
the coexistence between tourism and its main
supplier, the environment. While the protection
of the environment is a global issue, its imple-
mentation can be seen as a local and regional
concern and one which inevitably places destina-
tions at the forefront of daily environmental
management.
Therefore, actors and participants in the tour-
ism industry have to take crucial responsibility
for the sustainable basis of tourism as “it is
necessary to determine precisely what that basis
is and how it can be managed . . . ” (Butler,
1991:208). Additionally, a sustainable basis of
tourism needs to be associated with the synthesis
of three values:
(a) the value of existence of a resource, which
is the satisfaction gained that the resource is
preserved;
(b) the option value, which is the choice of
considering the preserved area in the future;
and
(c) the quest value, which is the satisfaction
which derives from minimum resource usage, in
the light of the benefits of future generations
(Pigram, 1990:3–4).
At the heart of the latter responsibilities lies the
application of environmental auditing which
develops environmental management controls
through continuous monitoring of the destina-
tion’s environmental elements. The case study of
Molyvos acknowledges the contradictions which
appear in the destination, from the number of
negative environmental impacts which have
occured mainly from the over-development of
tourism in the area. Problems which contributed
to the downturn included: the poor water and
waste infrastructure; the lack of timely manage-
ment of the water distribution system; and
inappropriate waste generation and disposal
practices. Presenting the other elements of the
environmental auditing findings, such as elec-
tricity wastage; the notion of avoiding the use of
renewable energy resources; the strong possibil-
ity of a connection between water and the
sewage system; the use of a septic tank with
absorbtion pit by many hotels for their solid
waste disposal practices, have all stressed the
need for the use of environmental auditing.
Thus, the implementation of EA warrants four
core benefits:
(a) The creation of a comprehensive and rep-
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
13
resentative profile of the performance of the five
‘As’, Attractions, Access, Amenities, Ancillary serv-
ices and Aspects of the ’wholistic’ environment,
focusing on the actual and potential environ-
mental impacts;
(b) the quality of the environment and the
protection of resources can be achieved with the
long term targets and objectives based on EA
practices;
(c) pressure is brought on the tourism busi-
nesses of the destination, to follow the area’s
general environmental policy; and
(d) approaches to destination planning and
development can be formalised as a result of
environmental auditing.
The factor which could provide a barrier
against the implementation of environmental
auditing, is that “tourism is an activity, being
based on interactions of particular destinations
and so requires coordination and the cooperation
of the various providers both public and private
small and large . . ” (Westlake, 1992:2). Therefore,
in the event of management not considering the
environmental auditing procedure, the overall
future of tourism is without an enchanced
awareness for the environment. A beneficial
situation arises when an environmental auditing
approach is practised, as in the case of Molyvos,
which describes the environmental elements and
assesses the destination’s components. Addition-
ally, it provides major outcomes, EQS and green
policies for the ancillary services, access, attrac-
tions, and aspects of the ’wholistic’ environment
while pressurising the private sector to exercise
auditing and green approaches. In overall terms,
an achievable idea exists, such that with an
application of environmental auditing, impacts
can be monitored and environmental commit-
ment and compatibility practised. Without any
doubt the fragile environment benefits from an
impact amelioration in the destination, as well as
in the tourism industry as a whole.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the constructive
criticism of the two referees.
REFERENCES
Archer, B., and Cooper, C., (1994), “The positive and
negative impacts of tourism” in W. Theobald (eds),

14
Global Tourism, the Next Decade, Butterworth-Heine-
mann, Oxford, 73–91.
Bailey, J., and Hobbs, V., (1990), “A proposed frame-
work EIA for auditing”, Journal of Environmental
Management, Vol 31(2), 163–172.
Bailey, J., Hobbs, V., and Saunders, A., (1992),
“Environmental auditing: artificial waterway devel-
opments in Western Australia”, Journal of
Environmental Management, Vol 34, 1–13.
Bartelmus, P., (1994), Environmental, Growth and Devel-
opment, the Concept and Strategies of Sustainability,
Routledge, London.
Buhr, N., (1991), “The environmental audit: who needs
it?”, Business Quarterly, Vol 55(3), 27–32.
Butler, R. W., (1991), “Tourism, environment and
sustainable development”, Environmental Conserva-
tion, Vol 18(3), 201–209.
Butler, R. W., (1993), “Tourism—An Evolutionary
Perspective”, in J. Nelson, R. Butler and G. Wall
(eds), Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitor-
ing, Planning, Managing, Department of Geography
Publication Series, No 37 and Heritage Resources
Centre Joint Publication No 1, University of Water-
loo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 27–43.
Ceballos-Lascurain, H., (1993), “Overview on ecotour-
ism around the world: IUCN’s ecotourism
programme”, in 1993 World Congress on Adventure
Travel and Ecotourism, Adventure Travel Society,
Englewood, Colorado, 219–222.
Central and Government Environmental Forum,
(1993), A Guide to the Eco-Management and Audit
Scheme for UK Local Government, HMSO, London.
Christensen, P. and Nielsen, E. H., (1993), “Environ-
mental audits clean technologies and environmental
protection in Denmark”, European Environment,
Vol 3, Part 2, 18–22.
Commission of the European Communities, (1993),
Taking Account of Environment in Tourism Develop-
ment, Directorate-General XXIII-Tourism Unit,
Luxembourg, CEC.
Da Cunha, L. V., (1992), “Water Resources in Europe”,
in European Common Garden, Towards the Meeting of a
Common Environmental Policy, Straasbourg, 17–20
May, 159–193.
Dean, G., (1991), “Environmental audits in public
sector”, in S. Thompson and R. Thrievel (eds),
Environmental Auditing, Working Paper, No. 130,
Oxford Polytechnic, Oxford.
Diamantis, D., (1994), Environmental Auditing and
Impact Analysis in Molyvos, Mytilini, Greece, MSc
Dissertation, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Elkington, J., (1990), The Environmental Audit: a Green
Filter for Company Policies, Plants, Process and Prod-
ucts, Sustainability/WWF, London, UK.
Eurostat, (1991), Environmental Statistics, Luxem-
bourg.
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
D. Diamantis and J. Westlake
Filion, F. L., Foley, J. P., and Jacquemont, A. J., (1994),
“The Economics of Global Ecotourism”, in M.
Munasinghe & J. McNeely (eds), Protected Area
Economics & Policy, Linking Conservation & Sustain-
able Development, World Bank, Washington, D.C,
235–252.
Frangially, F., (1990), Closing Statement of Deputy
Secretary-General of WTO in Seminar on the Integra-
tion of Tourism in Europe, Istanbul, Turkey, 7–9 May,
WTO, Madrid, 86–95.
Goodall, B., (1992), “Environmental auditing for tour-
ism”, in C. Cooper and A. Lockwood (eds), Progress
in Tourism Recreation & Hospitality Management, Vol
4, Belhaven Press, London, 60–74.
Goodall B., and Stabler, M., (1992), “Environmental
auditing in the quest for sustainable tourism: the
destination perspective”, in Conference Proceedings:
Tourism in Europe, Newcastle Polytechnic, 8–10 July,
Gl-G13.
Goodall, B., (1994a), “Environmental auditing” in S.
Witt and L. Moutinho (eds), Tourism Marketing and
Management Handbook, Second edition, Prentice
Hall, Hemel Hempstead, 113–119.
Goodall, B., (1994b), “Environmental auditing: current
best practice (with special reference to British
tourism firms)”, in A. Seaton, C. Jenkins, R. Wood, P.
Dieke, M. Bennett, L. MacLellan and R. Smith (eds),
Tourism, the State of the Art, John Wiley, London,
655–664.
Goodall, B., (1995), ‘’Environmental auditing: a tool
for assessing the environmental performance of
tourism firms”, The Geographical Journal, Vol
161(1), 29–37.
Hunt, D., (1994), “Management of environmental
matters” in Manapro Management of Environmental
Protection, Institution of Chemical Engineers, War-
wickshire, UK. 1–25.
Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation,
(1993), The Role of Internal Auditors in Environmental
Issues, Atlanta, USA, IIARF.
Ledgerwood, G., Street, E., and Therivel, R., (1992),
The Environmental Audit and Business Strategy, A Total
Quality Approach, Financial Times/Pitman Publish-
ing, London.
Local Government Management Board, (1991), Envi-
ronmental Auditing in Local Government, Arndale
House, Luton, UK, LGMB.
Mathieson. A., and Wall, G., (1982), Tourism, Economic,
Physical and Social Impacts, Longman, London.
McCool, S. F., (1994), “Planning for sustainable nature
dependent tourism development: the limits of
acceptable change system”, Tourism Recreation
Research, Vol 19(2), 51–55.
Official Journal of European Communities, (1980),
Directive Relating to Quality of Water Intended for
Human Consumption, Council Directive 80/778, L 229/

Environmental Auditing
11, OJEC.
Official Journal of European Communities, (1991),
Directive amending Directive 75/442/EEC on Waste,
Council Directive 91/156, L 78/32, OJEC.
Official Journal of European Communities, (1993),
Council Regulation on Eco-Management and Audit
Scheme, Council Directive 1836/93, L 168/
1–168/19. OJEC.
Opschoor, J. B., and Costanza, R., (1994), “Environ-
mental Performance Indicators, Environmental
Space and the Preservation of Ecosystem Health”,
Paper given at the Workshop on Globol Environmental
Change and Sustainable Development in Europe, Wup-
pertal Institute, 9–10 June, Wuppertal, Germany.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
opment, (1991a), The State of Environment, OECD,
Paris.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
opment, (1991b), Environmental Indicators: a
Preliminary Set, OECD, Paris.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
opment, (1993), Group on the State of Environment
Workshop on Indicators for Use in Environmental
Performance Reviews, Draft Synthesis Report, OECD,
Paris.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-
opment, (1994), Environmental Indicators, OECD Core
Set, OECD, Paris.
Pigram, J., (1990), “Sustainable tourism-policy con-
siderations”. The Journal of Tourism Studies, Vol 1(2),
2–9.
Prosser, R., (1994), “Societal change and the growth in
alternative tourism”, in E. Cater and G. Lowman
(eds), Ecotourism a Sustainable Option?, John Wiley,
Chichester, 19–37.
Stabler, M. J., and Goodall, B., (1993), “Environmental
auditing in the planning for sustainable island
tourism”, Paper given at the International Conference
on Sustainable Tourism in Islands and Small States,
Foundation for International Studies, University of
Malta, 18–20 November, Valleta, Malta.
Stewart. M. C., (1993), “Sustainable Tourism Develop-
ment & Marine Conservation Regimes”, Ocean &
Coastal Management, Vol 20(3), 201–217.
Tolba, M., (1992), Saving Our Planet, Challenges and
Hopes, UNEP, Chapman & Hall, London.
United Nations, (1993), The Global Partnership for
10991603, 1997, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1603(199703)3:1<3::AID-PTH44>3.0.CO;2-J by Gavle University College, Wiley Online Library on [21/04/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
15
Environment and Development, Post Rio Edition, New
York.
United Nations Environmental Programme/Industry
and Environment Office, (1989), “Environmental
auditing”, Report of UNEP/IEO Workshop, 10–11
January Paris, 99–102.
United Nations Environmental Programme and
Research for Man and Environment, (1994), An
Overview of Environmental Indicators: State of the art
perspective, UNEP and RIVM, Nairobi.
Welford, R. and Gouldson, A., (1993), Environmental
Management and Business Strategy, Pitman, London.
Westlake, J., (1992), “Planning for tourism at local
level: maintaining the balance with the environ-
ment, Britain as an example”, in Proceedings of
International Conference Tourism and the Environment,
Molyvos, Mytilini, Greece, 23–24 October.
Westman, W., (1985), Ecology Impact Assessment and
Environmental Planning, John Wiley, New York
131–167.
World Commission on Environment and Develop-
ment, (WCED: the Brundtland Commission), (1987),
Our Common Future, Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
World Tourism Organisation and United Nations
Environmental Programme, (1983), Workshop on
Environmental Aspects of Tourism, WTO/UNEP,
Madrid.
World Tourism Organisation, (1992), An Intergrated
Approach to Resort Development, WTO, Madrid.
World Tourism Organisation, (1995), Sustainable Tour-
ism Development, Background paper by WTO
Secretariat in WTO Asian Tourism Conference,
Technical Session, Islamabad, Pakistan, 13 January,
WTO, Madrid, 1–11.
World Travel and Tourism Council/World Tourism
Organisation/Earth Council, (1995), Agenda 21 for
the Travel and Tourism Industry-Towards Environmen-
tally Sustainable Development, WTTC/WTO/EC,
Oxford.
World Travel and Tourism Environmental Research
Centre, (1993), Travel and Tourism Environment and
Development Review, WTTERC, Oxford.
World Travel and Tourism Environmental Research
Centre, (1994), Travel and Tourism Environment and
Development Review, WTTERC, Oxford.