Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The Eco‐Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a voluntary environmental management scheme that combines management system requirements with external verification and public environmental reporting. Although EMAS was designed as a European instrument, participation remains uneven across countries, sectors and organisation types. This study analyses the current public EMAS register using reported registration years from 1995 to 2025. Because the public register does not provide a complete history of deregistrations or annual historical snapshots, the analysis does not reconstruct the full flow of EMAS adoption and exit over time. Instead, it examines the temporal composition and structural concentration of currently listed EMAS entries. Descriptive statistics, relative country level indicators, contingency tables and sensitivity analyses were used to assess differences by country, NACE activity and employment size class. The analysed dataset included 4333 entries after excluding incomplete 2026 records. Current EMAS entries were strongly concentrated in a small number of countries, with Italy, Germany, Spain, Austria and Slovakia accounting for almost 90% of entries. Sectoral concentration was also evident, especially in waste management, electricity production, construction and public administration. The medium and large organisations dominated the register, whereas micro enterprises remained weakly represented. The employment classes accounted for 60.2%, while the micro class accounted for 10.5%. Counts by reported registration year were highest for 2024 and 2025, at 323 and 391. These descriptive patterns changed little when each registration number was counted once. The findings provide a basis for further research on national differences and organisational capacity, which the register itself cannot explain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Głąb et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: