CHAPTER 5SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSThis chapter presents the summary of findings, the conclusions arrived, and the recommendations made based on the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered.This study concentrated on how the selected personnel from Maynilad Water Services Inc. perceive the issues regarding the importance of environmental accounting and reporting environmental costs generated by the activity of the entity and presenting the associated financial information that can be used as a means of assessing corporate performance.This study made use of descriptive research method which is designed for the researchers to gather information about present existing conditions needed in the chosen field of study which reveals conditions or relationships that exist or do not exist, practices that prevails or do not prevail, processes that are going on otherwise, effects that are being felt or trends that are developing.This study is accomplished by the use of survey questionnaires conducted on August 24 to September 1, 2015 as a primary basis of data. The respondents of the study are thirty four personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports of Maynilad Water Services Inc. Statistical tools, such as frequency, percentage, ranking, weighted mean, Likert scale, and ANOVA, were used to facilitate the analysis of data collected.

Statement of the ProblemThis research entitled Environmental Accounting Disclosures: Closing the Gaps between the Management Perception and Environmental Practices of Maynilad Water Services Inc. aimed to determine how Maynilad Water Services Inc. reports environmental information and assesses its effects. Moreover, the perspective of Maynilad Water Services Inc., profile of the personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports, views of the respondents on the environmental business issues, and the views of the respondents on business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns were factored in. Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following:1.0 What is the perspective of Maynilad Water Services Inc. in terms of the following:1.1 Nature of the Business;1.2 Responsible Individuals in the Company Implementing Environmental Accounting;1.3 Products/Services Offered;1.4 Target Markets;1.5 Average Monthly Sales;1.6 Area of Distribution; and,1.7 Number of years of operation?2.0 What is the profile of the personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports of Maynilad Water Services Inc.in terms of the following:2.1 Age;2.2 Sex;2.3 Civil Status;2.4 Highest Educational Attainment;2.5 Length of Employment; and,2.6 Position held in the Company?3.0 What are the views of the respondents on the following environmental business issues:3.1 Environmental Policies and Regulations;3.2 Environmental accounting procedures and requirements; and,3.3 Companys Policy Advocacy?4.0 What are the views of the respondents on business issues on the following environmental accounting and reporting concerns:4.1 Accounting Concerns;4.2 Principles Application;4.3 Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report;4.4 Disclosures in Documentation;4.5 Reasons for Non-Disclosure;4.6 Disclosure Improvement;4.7 Management Decision-Making;4.8 Financial Performance; and,4.9 Competitive Advantage?5.0 Is there a significant difference between the profile of the personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports of Maynilad Water Services Inc.and the following lead variables:5.1 Views of the respondents on Environmental Business Issues; and,5.2 Views of the respondents on Business Issues on Environmental Accounting and Reporting Concerns?

Summary of FindingsAfter the data gathered have been interpreted and evaluated, this study resulted with the following findings:1. Perspective of Maynilad Water Services Inc.From the survey conducted by the researchers, 27 or 79.41% of the respondents agreed that Maynilad is a service company. As to responsible individual in the implementation of Environmental Accounting in the company, 32 or 94.12% answered that there is a separate department and 2 or 5.88% answered that only the top management is responsible for the said function. All of the respondents answered that the services they offered is water utility. All of the respondents agreed that they serve small and large companies and individuals for their target market, that they earn above P 5,000,000 for their average monthly sales, that they have a local area of distribution, and that the company has been in operation for about 10 19 years.2. Profile of the Personnel Involved in the Environmental Advocacies and Formulation of Environmental Reports ofthe Maynilad Water Services Inc.The study showed that out of 34 respondents, 41.18% falls under the age group of 25 to 29 years of age and is dominated by male which corresponds to 58.82%. A large percentage of the respondents forming 64.71% are single. Also, 88.24% of the respondents are Bachelors degree holders and 16 of them were already in the company for 5 to 10 years comprising 47.06% of the respondents. Most of the respondents or 91.18% are in the others category which is composed of (9) Supervisors, (9) Rank and File, (6) Jr. Manager, (4) Officer, (1) Administrative Staff, (1) Specialist and (1) Engineer.3. Views of the Personnel on Environmental Business IssuesIn the findings of the researchers, almost all of the questions in environmental policies and regulations were strongly agreed upon by the respondents having an average weighted mean of 4.57; the company carefully manages environmental risks has the highest weighted mean of 4.71 and the company has clearly defined indicators and strategies for their sustainable business practices with a weighted mean of 4.50 being the lowest.With regards to environmental accounting procedures and requirements, all the respondents agreed to all the questions having an average weighted mean of 4.51. Having a weighted mean of 4.71, the company today is capable of measuring environmental outcomes (e.g. annual energy use or gas emissions per unit etc.) had the highest point. On the other hand, the area with the lowest point was, when making financial decisions, the company is aware of environmental sustainable business practices with a weighted mean of 4.32. The companys policy advocacy had an average weighted mean of 4.50. The company promotes green awareness to stakeholders in the work place had the highest point with a weighted mean of 4.65. The company has highest priority objective in corporate sustainability in regulatory compliance, and the companys business environmental sustainability practices are crucial for business future success both have the lowest point with a weighted mean of 4.38.4. Views of the Personnel on Business Issues on Environmental Accounting and Reporting ConcernsAs to accounting concerns, the average weighted mean was 4.23. The company has ability to measure and report the effect of environmental footprint received the highest weighted mean of 4.59. The company has no quantifiability constraints with regards to environmental costs recording received the lowest mean of 3.94. The principles application had an average weighted mean of 4.26. The environmental department personnel (or any similar department) have a consensus as to what the environmental accounting principles are has the highest mean 4.53 while the environmental accounting system employed in the company is principle-based rather than procedural has the lowest mean 3.97. The disclosures in annual/financial report has an average weighted mean of 4.04. The company has ability to document the effect of environmental factors to financial performance has the highest weighted mean of 4.15 and 3.97 as the lowest weighted mean which tells that environmental costs and savings are properly disclosed qualitatively.As to disclosures in documentation, it has an average weighted mean of 4.39 of which compliance with regulatory bodies is embodied in the documentation has the highest mean of 4.44 and that the outcomes of the environmental efforts are paralleled to a pre-existing plan in an annual basis has the lowest mean of 4.35. Also the degree of correspondence between procedures and activities pursued by the company and the companys policies for corporate environmental responsibility is outlined in the documentation received the lowest mean of 4.35.The reasons for non-disclosure have an average weighted mean of 2.25. The companys lack of market (i.e. clients) environmental awareness has the highest mean of 2.59 while the companys lack of management commitments, priorities and support has the lowest mean of 2.03.The factors that require improvement when it comes to environmental disclosure have an average weighted mean of 3.78. The factor that got the highest mean is the public relations/media relations with a weighted mean of 3.85; whereas the corporate social responsibility function or environmental sustainability function got the lowest mean of 3.68.In the decision making, the average weighted mean is 4.18. In case of lack of environmental know-how, environmental experts or authorities are consulted first before commencement of an undertaking got the highest mean of 4.32 while the company has no significant organizational resistance to incorporating environment factors in decision making had the lowest mean of 4.00.The lowest point under financial performance is that environmental management efforts result to increased revenues, having a weighted mean of 3.85 while the highest point is that environmental cost (and potential savings) are not obscured in overheads nor overlooked with a weighted mean of 4.03. The average weighted mean is 3.93With respect to competitive advantage, all questions were agreed upon by the respondents with an average weighted mean of 4.29. According to the results, the areas having the highest weighted mean are environmental management efforts increase brand value/enhanced reputation with a weighted mean of 4.41. The environmental management efforts increase employee recruitment/retention received the lowest weighted mean of 4.09.

5. Difference between Profiles of Personnel Involved in the Environmental Advocacies and Formulation of Environmental Reports and the Lead Variables

5.1 Their views on environmental business issues5.1.1 As to AgeThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements and Companys Policy Advocacy have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of Environmental Policies and Regulations, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.5.1.2 As to SexThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Quality Environmental Policies and Regulations and Companys Policy Advocacy have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis5.1.3 As to Civil StatusThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Environmental Policies and Regulations, Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements, and Companys Policy Advocacy have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis.

5.1.4 As to Highest Educational AttainmentThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Environmental Policies and Regulations, Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements, and Companys Policy Advocacy have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis.5.1.5 As to Length of EmploymentThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Environmental Policies and Regulations, Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements, and Companys Policy Advocacy, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.5.1.6 As to Position in the CompanyThe study shows that the environmental business issues of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Environmental Policies and Regulations, Environmental Accounting Procedures and Requirements, and Companys Policy Advocacy, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.

5.2 Business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns5.2.1 As to AgeThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Accounting Concerns, Principles Application, and Disclosures in Documentation have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report, Reasons for Non-Disclosure, Disclosure Improvement, Management Decision-Making, Financial Performance, and Competitive Advantage, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.5.2.2 As to SexThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Accounting Concerns and Reasons for Non-Disclosure have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of the Principles Application, Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report Reasons for Non-Disclosure, Disclosures in Documentation, Disclosure Improvement, Management Decision-Making, Financial Performance, and Competitive Advantage, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.5.2.3 As to Civil StatusThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Accounting Concerns, Principles Application, Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report, Disclosures in Documentation, Disclosure Improvement, Management Decision-Making, and Competitive Advantage have a computed F that is more than the Table value and therefore, rejecting the null hypothesis. While on the part of, Reasons for Non-Disclosure and Financial Performance, the computed F is less than the Table value, hence accepting the null hypothesis.5.2.4 As to Highest Educational AttainmentThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Accounting Concerns, Principles Application, Disclosures in Documentation, Management Decision-Making and Financial Performance have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of the Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report, Reasons for Non-Disclosure, Disclosure Improvement, and Competitive Advantage, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis..5.2.5 As to Length of EmploymentThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Principles Application and Management Decision-Making have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of the Accounting Concerns, Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report, Disclosures in Documentation, Reasons for Non-Disclosure, Disclosure Improvement, Financial Performance, and Competitive Advantage, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis. From the above table, almost all have significant difference with the Business Issues on Environmental Accounting and Reporting Concerns. It means that the differences between the means are great enough to allow the researcher to say that they are different.5.2.6 As to Position in the CompanyThe study shows that the business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns of Maynilad Water Services Inc. namely, Disclosure Improvement have a computed F that is less than the Table value and therefore, accepting the null hypothesis. While on the part of Accounting Concerns, Principles Application, Disclosures in Annual/Financial Report, Disclosures in Documentation, Reasons for Non-Disclosure, Management Decision-Making, Financial Performance, and Competitive Advantage, the computed F is more than the Table value, hence rejecting the null hypothesis.

ConclusionsBased on the summary of findings, the following conclusions were drawn by the researchers:1. Perspective of Maynilad Water Services Inc.The study shows that most of the respondents perceived the nature of the business as services, a separate department is responsible in the implementation of environmental accounting in the company, water utility is the service offered, the target markets are small but growth-oriented companies, large companies, and individuals, average monthly sales are more than P5,000,000, the area of distribution is local, and that the companys operations ranges from 10 up to 19 years.2. Profile of the Personnel Involved in the Environmental Advocacies and Formulation of Environmental Reports ofthe Maynilad Water Services Inc.The study shows that most of the respondents are in the age bracket of 25-29 years old, male, single, Bachelors degree earners, employed in the company from 5 to 10 years, and the position in the company are in the others category composed of Supervisors, Rank and File, Jr. Manager, Officer, Admin. Staff, Specialist and Engineer.3. Views of the Personnel on Environmental Business IssuesAs to environmental policies and regulations, the respondents strongly agreed to 5 variables presented in the survey material with weighted means of 4.53, 4.59, 4.53, 4.71, and 4.59; and agreed to 1 variable with a weighted mean of 4.50.As to environmental accounting procedures and requirements, the respondents agreed to 4 variables presented in the survey material with weighted means of 4.32, 4.47, 4.44, and 4.47; and strongly agreed to 3 variables with weighted means of 4.62, 4.71, and 4.56.As to companys control companys policy advocacy, the respondents agreed to 5 variables with weighted means of 4.38, 4.50, and 4.38; and strongly agreed to 2 variables with weighted means of 4.65 and 4.59.4. Views of the Personnel on Business Issues on Environmental Accounting and Reporting ConcernsAs regards accounting concerns, 6 variables presented in the survey material were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 4.41, 4.29, 4.03, 3.94, 4.24, and 4.09; and 1 variable was strongly agreed upon with a weighted mean of 4.59. With respect to principles application, 4 variables presented in the survey material were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 4.44, 3.97, 4.12, and 4.26; and 1 variable was strongly agreed upon with a weighted mean of 4.53. Under disclosures in annual/financial report, all 6 variables presented in the survey material were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 4.00, 3.97, 4.15, 4.00, 4.06, and 4.06. As to disclosures in documentation, the respondents agreed to all 5 variables presented in the survey material with weighted means of 4.41, 4.41, 4.44, 4.35, and 4.35. With regards to reasons for non-disclosure, the respondents disagreed to 6 variables with weighted means of 2.18, 2.03, 2.21, 2.35, 2.18, and 2.21; and the respondents are undecided as to 1 variable with a weighted mean of 2.59.All 5 factors that require improvement when it comes to environmental disclosure were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 3.68, 3.76, 3.85, 3.82, and 3.76. All 5 management decision-making variables presented in the survey material were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 4.18, 4.00, 4.21, 4.18, and 4.32. Under financial performance, all 5 variables were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 3.85, 3.91, 3.94, 4.03, and 3.91.With respect to competitive advantage, all 5 variables were agreed upon by the respondents with weighted means of 4.41, 4.35, 4.09, 4.29, and 4.32. 5. Difference between Profile of Personnel Involved in the Environmental Advocacies and Formulation of Environmental Reports and the Lead Variables; their views on environmental business issues and business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns.The study showed that there was no significant difference between the profile of personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports and their views on environmental business issues when respondents were grouped in terms of 4 variables namely age, sex, civil status, and highest educational attainment while there was a significant difference in terms of 2 variables namely length of employment and position in the company. Thus, there was no significant difference between the profile of personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports and business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns.The study showed that there was significant difference between the profile of personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports and business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns when respondents were grouped in terms of 5 variables namely age, sex, civil status, length of employment, and position in the company while there was no significant difference in terms of 1 variable which is highest educational attainment. Thus, there was a significant difference between the profile of personnel involved in the environmental advocacies and formulation of environmental reports and business issues on environmental accounting and reporting concerns.

RecommendationsBased on the summary of findings and the conclusions drawn, the researchers arrived at the following recommendations for the management:Improve the environmental disclosure strategies of the company by strengthening the environmental sustainability function.Narrow the gap between the environmental stewardship function and corporate profitability through eliminating quantifiability constraints with regards to environmental costs recording and alleviating organizational resistance to incorporating environment factors in decision making. Enhance the stakeholders consciousness about environmental practices of the company through substantiating the companys business environmental sustainability practices.Increase managements people involvement in the companys environmental efforts through creating a relationship between the outcomes of the environmental efforts and a pre-existing plan in an annual basis.

105