Skip to article sections
Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to simulate the environmental cost reports preparation used to measure environmental performance in realizing eco-efficiency.

Design/methodology/approach

This research uses a descriptive case study by using environmental cost detail data from 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. The research object is PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) located in Madiun, East Java.

Findings

The result of the research shows that PT INKA (Persero) has not specifically made environmental cost report. It is found that the percentage of total environmental cost to operational cost tends to increase; the cost which gives the biggest distribution of total environmental cost is the prevention cost. By 2014, the effect of environmental costs on operating costs tended to decrease and during 2012–2014 PT INKA successfully maintained the blue star PROPER and the absence of environmental pollution reports.

Originality/value

PT INKA’s environmental performance is still well controlled and since its inception in 2014 PT INKA has succeeded in realizing the concept of eco-efficiency.

Environmental issues arise because of the interaction between economic and environment activities. The higher the intensity, the higher the impact on environment degradation (Idris, 2012). Therefore, environment issues have been a serious problem to be monitored and need a precautionary action from stakeholders. Environmental accounting or green accounting depicts an effort to combine the cost and benefit of environmental activities in economic decision making. The purpose of environmental accounting is to escalate the efficiency of environmental management in order to assess environment activities from the environmental cost and the economic benefit (Putri and Wardiha, 2013; in Moedjarnako and Frisko, 2013). To overcome the damage to the environment, the State Minister of Environment regulation Number 03 Year 2014 had ranked the firms’ environment performance through a program named Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation and Rating or PROPER.

PT INKA is a government-owned company that produces trains, carts and bogie. In its production process, PT INKA produces much waste which potentially contaminates the surrounding environment. Those wastes can be divided into three parts: solid waste (scrap, gram, wood, GFRP – glass fiber reinforced product), liquid waste (used engine oil, travomator oil) and air pollution. During 2002–2004, PT INKA has succeeded to maintain the blue star from PROPER assessment. There are some costs to maintain the blue star in order to keep environmental sustainability. PT INKA, however, has not reported those environmental expenditures. Actually, environmental expenditures have been combined with other expenses. Hence, it makes PT INKA unable to identify precisely what kinds of activities are related to environmental prevention expenditures. Therefore, PT INKA needs to provide an environmental cost report as an accountability report to stakeholders and as a tool in managerial decision making. This research uses a descriptive case study method to try to simulate and provide an environmental cost report separately from the existing one.

Based on the Act Number 32 Year 2009 for Protection and Environment Management, environment is a unit of all of objects, power, circumstances and mortals, including human beings and their behavior which influences the nature, continuity of life and human welfare and any other mortals. According to the Government Regulation Number 27 Year 1999, the environmental impact analysis (AMDAL) is a study to calculate the environmental impact resulting from business decision making. Every new business in Indonesia must commence with this AMDAL analysis concerning hazardous wastes (B3). Based on this regulation, businesses which produce hazardous waste must supervise and manage such wastes (Badar, 2006, p. 40). AMDAL has some benefits, such as:

  1. planning tool and business management as well as regional development;

  2. helping decision maker in environmental feasibility test from business or activity plan;

  3. giving feedback to detailed technical designs from business or activity plan;

  4. giving feedback to supervision and management plans from business or activity plans; and

  5. giving information to public about the impact of business or activity plans.

Environmental accounting is defined as a precaution, mitigation and or avoidance of environment impact, moving from some chances, start from repairs of events which caused disasters based on those events (Ikhsan, 2008, p. 14). Environmental accounting requires company awareness about potential environment problems resulting from the company’s operation, such as, production of waste and air pollution. Companies are responsible for overcoming waste problems by having company operational waste management which needs a special cost budget. Therefore, companies need to record environmental costs in their financial reports.

Companies have some advantages when they do environmental accounting, such as reducing expenditure by identifying and analyzing hidden costs. Environmental accounting provides important information related to additional costs from environmental issues by rechecking product costs and specific processes that may be hidden in overhead costs, so it can be used to make decisions. Environmental accounting may increase companies’ economic by increasing business performance. The increase of both economy and environment performance continually will affect not only customer satisfaction, but also investor satisfaction and regulation requirements (Figure 1).

Eco-efficiency stands for ecology and efficiency. This term was first introduced by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) in 1992. WBCSD defines eco-efficiency as “creating more goods and services with ever less use of resources, waste, and pollution” (Lehni and Pepper, 2000). By implementing eco-efficiency concepts, the companies will not merely emphasize profit from resulting products and services, but also profit from the impact of ecology by minimizing utilization of resources in production processes and lessening waste and pollution. Eco-efficiency implicates that increasing efficiency commences from environmental performance improvement. Eco-efficiency relates to the company activities in producing goods or services in an environmentally friendly manner, simultaneously reducing the negative impact on the environment, and reducing the resources’ consumption. In the developed countries in which the level of environmental concern has been relatively high, eco-efficiency is an emerging phenomenon. Physical and social environmental awareness is very strong at all levels because it will affect the performance of the company in the future.

The research method used is a descriptive case study in PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) which operates in train production and train overhaul. The research scope is limited only in identifying and classifying environmental costs based on activities, environmental statement processes and how environmental performance can be assessed by environmental cost and the company’s environmental condition.

Data resources collected are:

  1. Documents: audited financial statements of PT INKA years 2011–2014, budget realizations of K3LH Department years 2011–2014.

  2. Archive records: organization structure, PT INKA’s map, procedure of hazardous waste management, procedure of spilling hazardous waste handling, laboratory test result of waste, etc.

  3. Interviews: researcher performs direct interview with K3LH Department officers.

  4. Direct observations: in order to obtain information on type of waste produced by PT INKA, how it is handled and how the production process is conducted. The results of direct observation in the form of photo documentation.

  5. Preliminary survey: at this stage, researchers try to recognize the object of research, procedures and systems contained therein. Therefore, obtained a description of the company in general and specifically what can be used as the basis of input in writing this thesis.

  6. Field study: observation of research objects, documentation in the form of techniques of collecting and recording data obtained from the company related to the formulation of research problems. The data come from the Department of Accountancy and the Department of Environment PT INKA.

  7. In addition, online news is also used to gather news about the PROPER achieved by PT INKA for the period 2011–2014 and environmental pollution resulting from PT INKA.

  8. Identify activities and costs related to environmental management. Classify environmental costs based on four categories of environmental costs: prevention, detection, internal failure and external failure costs.

  9. Prepare an environmental financial statement by combining the classification of environmental costs with the environmental benefits identified and collected. The environmental financial statement is used as the basis for measuring environmental performance by calculating the distribution ratio of each category of environmental costs to total environmental costs then by comparison with environmental benefits as well as changes in environmental cost trends.

  10. Interpret the results of the analysis adjusted to the related theories so that it provides input for management in assessing the eco-efficiency derived from the improvement of environmental performance. Make conclusions on the results of research.

Types of waste identified:

  1. solid hazardous waste, such as hazardous contaminated cans (cans, drums, etc., waste from primer painting workshop department), used train batteries, car, forklift, dust ex-sand blasting, cartridge and so forth; and

  2. liquid hazardous waste, such as used oil and gross oil, and used fuel.

The procedures for handling waste, especially hazardous waste, adopted by PT INKA (Persero) are as follows:

  1. Segregation of waste.

    Hazardous waste is sorted according to the type of waste and disposed in the trash as follows:

    • Waste is stored in the garbage such as for cotton waste in contaminated gloves.

    • Waste is saved in bins, such as used lubricating oil, used diesel, used kerosene, used oil coolant, used oil, used thinner, ex-sand blasting, ex-sand blasting dust and used resin (see Table II).

    • Waste saved on the premises, such as contaminated cans, plasma cutting and gas cutting and glass fiber waste (see Table III).

    • Cartridge waste, used TL lamps, used batteries, ex contaminated drums, expired materials can be directly transported to waste temporary storage.

  2. Temporary storage of hazardous and toxic (B3) waste at a special location called B3 TPS:

    • The Environment Unit is responsible for the recording, preparing and reporting the waste balance sheet to the relevant agency.

    • Hazardous waste shall be recorded in logbook; for every three months B3 shall be reported to the Ministry of Environment, Environment Agency of East Java Province, and Madiun City Environmental Office. This type of waste is stored for up to 90 days.

  3. Logistics Manager 1 is responsible for the disposal of hazardous and toxic (B3) waste materials to third parties in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

In December 2011, as a result of PROPER assessment conducted by the Ministry of Environment, PT INKA (Persero) received a black star for environmental management, especially in the management of air emission quality from the grit blasting process. From that assessment, PT INKA (Persero) received a sanction in the form of announcement to public and dismissal of credit by bank for its reputation. In 2013, PT INKA had been routinely tested for one-time chimney emissions and air analysis conducted twice a year. Wastewater testing has been routinely conducted since 2012, which is conducted annually four times a year.

Environmental costs incurred are recorded as an expense of the K3LH Department and classified as administrative and general expenses in the income statement of the company. Such expenses include: employee expenses; general expenses; service charges; taxes, fees and levies; depreciation and amortization expense; maintenance expenses; education and training expenses; and research and development expenses.

PT INKA (Persero) has not made a specific environmental cost report. Costs associated with environmental costs are accounted for under administrative and general expenses. The environmental costs consisted of the following:

  1. Cost of nuisance permit: these costs incurred to protect residents in the area around the plant who are affected by the disruption of factory activity, such as noise, vibration, smell and emissions. The Interference License permit is submitted to local government of Madiun and extended annually.

  2. Coordination fee with environmental division team: these costs incurred in coordination with the team from the Madiun City Department of the Environment.

  3. Facility maintenance fees: these costs are non-routine and are used to maintain facilities and equipment in the management of hazardous and toxic waste, such as, the maintenance of powder trolleys, purchase of plastic bags for waste, septic tank construction, maintenance of material warehouse and so on.

  4. Cost of treatment of oil waste: oil waste treatment cost is for waste process management by PT Logam Jaya Abadi. The resulting oil waste is processed to change the characteristics and composition to eliminate or reduce the toxicity.

  5. Cost of handling B3 waste: these costs incurred in the process of transportation and disposal of B3 waste by third parties, PT Logam Jaya Abadi.

  6. Cost of wastewater test: this cost is to monitor the quality of wastewater (effluent) of the company’s activities in order to avoid environmental pollution. This domestic wastewater test is conducted by Environmental Laboratory of Perum Jasa Tirta I.

  7. Cost of air analysis and stack emissions: the costs of air analysis and stack emissions are issued in order to fulfill the data of quality standard, performance evaluation of pollution control equipment, research and so on. Tests for air analysis and stack emissions were conducted by PT Envilab Indonesia.

  8. PROPER audit fee: these costs are expended as expenditure for the company’s performance assessment of its environmental management by the Ministry of Environment. This audit aims to check whether the management, control and environmental monitoring contained in PT INKA (Persero) are appropriate for rating.

  9. Cleaning and maintaining protected forest: these costs are incurred for clearance and maintenance of the protected forest located within the plant area. This forest serves to absorb emissions released by mills and dust particles from grid blasting and pigmentation processes.

  10. Officer’s salary fee 5R: this fee is incurred for the welfare of the 5R officers. This officer position was established in 2014, who was responsible for overseeing the production process in order to avoid waste and maintain or add 5R signs that are considered less.

  11. Employee education and training costs: this fee is incurred for the education and training of K3LH Department employees. Programs followed such as environmental socialization, guidance and environmental monitoring and so on.

Table I shows environmental costs of PT INKA (Persero) compared to Hansen and Mowen’s standard.

Meanwhile, the total of issued environmental costs by PT INKA is indicated in Table II.

The environmental cost reports at PT INKA (Persero) in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 are shown in Tables III–VI.

Having simulated the environmental cost report at PT INKA (Persero), it is necessary to create a relative distribution pattern of environmental costs. The goal is to determine the environmental improvements that need to be emphasized. The relative distribution pattern of environmental costs is measured by the total cost of each activity divided by the total operational costs as shown in Table VII.

If the environmental cost trend diagram is broken down into categories, then the environmental cost trend diagram per category will be obtained. The environmental cost per category trend diagram is useful in monitoring and controlling environmental costs seen by the type of environmental activity. The trend diagram of the per-environment environmental costs can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2 shows the increase or decrease of environmental cost per category to the operational cost of the company. It shows that prevention costs increased from 2011 to 2014. Prevention costs of 0.15 percent in 2011 then moved up to 0.17 percent in 2012, then in 2013 to 0.34 percent and by 2014 0.38 percent. The increase in prevention activities was due to improvements in prevention activities, such as facility maintenance activities, procurement of self-protective equipment, refilling of APAR tubes and the establishment of a 5R team that served as a supervisory team in 2014.

The detection activity also moved up from 2011 to 2014; in 2011 to 0.004 percent, in 2012 to 0.006 percent, in 2013 to 0.071 percent and by 2014 to 0.08 percent. This was due to the activities undertaken on the recommendation of the 2011 PROPER results such as domestic wastewater test as well as chimney and ambient air emissions test.

In addition, activity in internal failure and external failure indicated fluctuating movement. Internal failure events in 2011 amounted to 0 percent, in 2012 0.054 percent, in 2013 0.091 percent and in 2014 to 0.053 percent. The increases that occurred between the years 2011 and 2013 were due to B3 waste management activities that originally in 2011 had no cooperation with third parties in the management of B3 waste, but starting in 2012 had been in cooperation with third parties in the management of B3 waste. In the year 2014 the internal failure activity tended to decrease because B3 waste was produced less than the previous year.

The external failure activity in 2011 showed the percentage of 0.006 percent, the year 2012 by 0.003 percent, the year 2013 by 0.04 percent and the year 2014 about 0 percent. The decline occurring in 2014 was due to the absence of protected forest conservation activities. It showed that environmental management activities conducted by PT INKA (Persero) had been running quite optimally.

In terms of environment, PT INKA (Persero) has regularly tested the waste generated. It aims to control a good quality standard and prevent the occurrence of environmental pollution. In addition, PT INKA (Persero) also conducts an audit of the company’s environmental performance by the Ministry of Environment commonly referred to as PROPER. Thus, PT INKA (Persero) has been able to apply eco-efficiency concepts that are ecologically or environmentally sound and can produce goods and services while reducing negative environmental impacts.

Some limitations of this research are:

  1. The researcher did not obtain the recommendation of PROPER 2011 assessment from PT INKA (Persero). Researchers used recommendations from internet sources.

  2. The researcher did not obtain the environmental benefit data obtained from the savings activities in the production process and recycling the waste generated, so that the environmental benefits obtained by the company could not be calculated.

PT INKA (Persero) has not specifically prepared an environmental cost report. From the results of the preparation of the environmental cost report, it is found that the combination of prevention activity and detection activity had greater value and percentage compared with the combination of internal failure activity and external failure. Therefore, it can be concluded that the company provides more investment in prevention and detection activities so that the wastes generated do not pollute the internal and external environments.

In previous years the proportion of environmental costs to total operational costs continued to increase from 2011 to 2013. This was caused by the recommendation of PROPER result in 2011 that management of B3 waste be handed over to the third party. Ecological or environmental efficiency can be seen from the absence of environmental pollution and its impact caused by management of waste. Finally, it can be said that the concept of eco-efficiency has been met by PT INKA (Persero) started in 2014.

Badar
,
Z.A.
(
2006
), “
Pengelolaan Limbah Bahan Berbahaya Beracun di Rumah Sakit Umum Daerah Cut Meutia Lhokseumawe
”,
thesis, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan
.
Hansen
,
D.R.
and
Mowen
,
M.M.
(
2009
),
Management Accounting
, (8th ed.) ,
Thomson South Western
.
Idris
(
2012
), “
Akuntansi Lingkungan Sebagai Instrumen Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab Perusahaan Terhadap Lingkungan di Era Green Market
”,
Eco-Entrepreneurship Seminar & Call for Paper “Improving Performance by Improving Environment”
.
Ikhsan
,
A.
(
2008
),
Akuntansi Lingkungan dan Pengungkapannya
,
Graha Ilmu
,
Yogyakarta
.
Lehni
,
M.
and
Pepper
,
J.
(
2000
),
Eco-Efficiency: Creating More Value with Less Impact
,
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
,
North Yorkshire
.
Moedjarnako
,
E.C.
and
Frisko
,
D.
(
2013
), “
Pengelolaan Biaya Lingkungan Dalam Upaya Minimalisasi Limbah PT Wonosari Jaya Suarabaya
”,
Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Universitas Surabaya
, Vol.
2
No.
1
, pp.
1
-
13
.
Putri
,
P.S.A.
and
Wardiha
,
M.W.
(
2013
), “
Identification problems in the implementation plan of appropriate technology for water and sanitation using FGD approach case study: Kampong Sodana, Sumba Island, East Nusa Tenggara Project
”,
Procedia Environmental Sciences
, Vol.
17
No.
2013
, pp.
984
-
991
.
Hidup
(
2014
),
Peraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 20th 2014 tentang PROPER
,
available at:
http://proper.menlh.go.id/portal/filebox/Peraturan%20Menteri%20LH%20Nomor%203%20TH%202014%20Tentang%20PROPER.PDF
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
1982
), “
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 4 Tahun 1982 tentang Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/cms/images/files/1022.pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
1999
), “
Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia No. 27 Tahun tentang Analisis mengenai Dampak Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://prokum.esdm.go.id/pp/1999/PP%2027%20Tahun%201999.pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
2009
), “
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 32 Tahun tentang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://175.184.234.138/p3es/uploads/unduhan/UU_32_Tahun_2009_%28PPLH%29. pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hilton
,
R.W.
and
Platt
,
D.E.
(
2011
),
Managerial Accounting Global Edition
, (9th ed.) ,
The McGraw-Hill Companies
,
New York, NY
.
Ikhsan
,
A.
(
2009
), “Akuntansi Manajemen Lingkungan”, in
Pertama
,
E.
(Ed.),
Halaman, Graha Ilmu
,
Yogyakarta
, pp.
1
-
380
.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan
(
2014
), “
Publikasi PROPER 2014
”,
available at:
http://proper.menlh.go.id/portal/pubpdf/Publikasi%20PROPER%202014.pdf
(accessed
 January 31, 2016).
Kusumaningtias
,
R.
(
2013
), “
Green accounting, Mengapa dan Bagaimana?
”,
Proceeding Seminar Nasional dan Call for Papers SANCAL
.
Mowen
,
M.M.
,
Hansen
,
D.R.
and
Heitger
,
D.L.
(
2012
),
Managerial Accounting: The Cornerstone of Business Decisions
, (International ed.) ,
Cengage Learning
,
South Western
.
Murni
,
S.
(
2001
), “
Akuntansi Sosial: Suatu Tinjauan Mengenai Pengakuan, Pengukuran dan Pelaporan Externalities dalam Laporan Keuangan
”,
Jurnal Akuntansi dan Investasi
, Vol.
2
No.
1
, pp.
27
-
44
.
Republik Indonesia
(
2014
),
“Peraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 03 Tahun tentang Program Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan”
.
Santoso
,
H.F.
(
2012
), “
Akuntansi Lingkungan Tinjauan Terhadap Sistem Informasi Akuntansi Manajemen Atas Biaya Lingkungan
”,
Jurnal Akuntansi
, Vol.
12
, No.
2
, pp.
635
-
654
.
Satrio
,
B.R.
(
2011
), “
Simulasi Penerapan Dan Pelaporan Biaya lingkungan Sebagai Dasar Pengukuran Kinerja Lingkungan Pada PT
”,
Skripsi tidak diterbitkan, Petrokimia Gresik, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya
.
Soegianto
,
A.
(
2005
),
Ilmu lingkungan
,
Airlangga University Press
,
Surabaya
.
Tijani
,
A.
and
Hamadi
,
F.
(
2013
), “
Quantifying and accounting for environmental costs by the avoidance cost’s method: the case of a Tunisian firm
”,
Journal of Accounting and Auditing: Research and Practice
, Vol.
2013
, pp.
1
-
14
.
Tsalis
,
R.
(
2011
), “
Pelaporan dan Analisis Biaya Lingkungan Untuk Mencapai Ekoefisiensi (Studi Kasus Pada Pabrik Gula Watoetoelis)
”,
Skripsi tidak diterbitkan, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya
.
WBCSD
(
2000
), “
Eco-efficiency: creating value with less impact
”,
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, available at:
www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/eco_efficiency_creating_more_value.pdf
(accessed
 January 31, 2015).
Published in Asian Journal of Accounting Research. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Data & Figures

Figure 1

The relation of internal and external function

Figure 1

The relation of internal and external function

Close modal
Figure 2

Environmental cost trend per category of 2011–2014

Figure 2

Environmental cost trend per category of 2011–2014

Close modal
Table II

Environmental activity

NumberCostsYear 2011 (Rp)Year 2012 (Rp)Year 2013 (Rp)Year 2014 (Rp)
 1.HO interference permit fees95,666,224143,499,336143,499,336143,499,336
 2.Facilities maintenance fee22,450,00012,845,49513,352,000
 3.5R team payroll costs57,915,000
 4.Socialization cost of LH121,400
 5.Cost of monitoring and fostering of LH500,000
 6.The cost of making 5R signs1,650,00026,217,750
 7.Cost of procurement of personal protective equipment8,800,000
 8.PROPER audit fee3,198,0009,601,700
 9.Cost of domestic wastewater test4,992,5006,813,0005,612,700
10.Emissions and ambient air test costs25,150,00056,690,000
11.Cost of oil transformer treatment20,000,00020,835,000
12.B3 waste handling cost24,613,21232,536,99641,753,320
13.The cost of clearing protected forests4,500,0002,600,00025,910,000
14.APAR recharge cost20,400,00029,880,00057,060,000

Source: PT INKA (Persero) Accounting Department Internal Data processed

Table III

PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) environmental costs report year 2011

Environmental cost% Total environmental cost% Total operating cost
Prevention costs
HO interference permit feesRp95,666,224  
Facilities maintenance feeRp22,450,000  
The cost of making 5R signRp1,650,000  
Recharge charge APARRp20,400,000  
Total cost of preventionRp140,166,22494.790.15
Cost of detection
Cost coordination with LH teamRp3,198,000  
Total cost of detectionRp3,198,0002.160.004
Internal failure fee
Total cost of internal failureRp0  
External failure fee
Clearing protected forest expensesRp4,500,000  
Total cost of external failureRp4,500,0003.050.006
Total environmental costRp147,864,224 0.16

Note: Description: operating cost year 2011 in amount of Rp 89,662,678,671

Table I

Environmental cost identification

NumberDescriptionExample based on Hansen and Mowen (2009) PT INKA (Persero)
1.Prevention activity1. Evaluate and select supplier1. Environment socialization cost
  2. Evaluate and select tools to control pollution2. Monitoring and maintaining living environment cost
  3. Designing process3. Welfare cost in a form of wage and salary
  4. Designing product4. Safety cost
  5. Implementing environment study5. Signs procurement
  6. Auditing environmental risks6. APAR recharge cost
  7. Develop environment system management 
  8. Recycling products 
  9. Obtain ISO 14001 certificate 
2.Detection activity1. Auditing environmental activities1. Pollution level measurement cost: stack emission, ambient air, domestic wastewater
  2. Checking on the process and product2. PROPER audit team cost
  3. Develop environment performance measure 
  4. Testing pollution 
  5. Verification environment performance to the supplier 
  6. Measure the pollution level 
3.Internal1. Operating pollution prevention tool1. B3 waste handling cost
 Failure activity2. Managing the waste2. Oil travo treatment cost
  3. Maintain the policy equipment 
  4. Obtain facility license to produce waste 
  5. Recycling the residual 
4.External failure activity1. Cleaning the polluted lake1. Biodiversity protection: the cost of maintaining a protected forest
  2. Cleaning the poured up oil 
Table IV

PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) environmental costs report year 2012

Environmental cost% Total environmental cost% Total operating cost
Prevention costs
HO interference permit feesRp143,499,336  
Total cost of preventionRp143,499,33673.350.17
Cost of detection
Cost of domestic wastewater testRp4,922,500  
Total cost of detectionRp4,922,5002.520.006
Internal failure fee
Cost of oil transformer treatmentRp20,000,000  
B3 waste handling costRp24,613,212  
Total cost of internal failureRp446,13222.800.054
External failure fee
Clearing protected forestRp2,600,000  
Total cost of external failureRp2,600,0001.330.003
Total environmental costRp195,635,048 0.23

Note: Description: operating cost year 2012 in amount of Rp 80,346,309,830

Table V

PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) environmental costs report year 2013

Environmental cost% Total environmental cost% Total operating cost
Prevention costs
HO interference permit feesRp143,499,336  
Facilities maintenance feeRp12,845,495  
The cost of making 5R signRp8,800,000  
Recharge charge APARRp29,890,000  
Total cost of preventionRp190,024,83161.70.34
Cost of detection
Cost coordination with LH teamRp25,150,000  
Total cost of detectionRp9,601,700  
Internal failure feeRp6,813,000  
Total cost of internal failureRp41,564,70013.160.071
External failure fee
Clearing protected forestRp20,835,000  
Total cost of external failureRp31,536,996  
Total environmental costRp53,371,99616.90.091
Prevention costs
HO interference permit feesRp25,910,000  
Facilities maintenance feeRp25,910,0008.240.04
The cost of making 5R signRp315,871,527 0.54

Note: Description: operating cost year 2013 in amount of Rp 53,338,540,790

Table VI

PT Industri Kereta Api (Persero) environmental costs report year 2014

Environmental cost% Total environmental cost% Total operation cost
Prevention costs
HO interference permit feesRp143,499,336  
Facilities maintenance feeRp13,532,000  
5R team payroll costsRp57,915,000  
Socialization of the environmentRp121,400  
Monitoring and environmental coachingRp500,000  
Creation of 5R beamsRp26,217,750  
Recharge APARRp57,060,000  
Total cost of preventionRp298,845,48674.170.38
Cost of detection
Chimney and air emission test costsRp56,690,000  
Cost of domestic wastewater auditRp5,612,700  
Total cost of detectionRp61,302,70013.160.071
Internal failure fee
B3 waste handling costRp41,573,320  
Total cost of internal failureRp41,573,32010.360.053
Total cost of external failureRp0  
Total environmental costRp402,901,506 0.51

Note: Description: operating cost year 2014 in amount of Rp 78,232,228,508

Table VII

Relative distribution pattern of environmental cost

Percentage toward the operational cost
Cost based on activityYear 2011Year 2012Year 2013Year 2014
Prevention0.150.170.340.38
Detection0.0040.0060.0710.08
Internal failure00.0540.0910.053
External failure0.0060.0030.040
Total0.160.230.540.51

Supplements

References

Badar
,
Z.A.
(
2006
), “
Pengelolaan Limbah Bahan Berbahaya Beracun di Rumah Sakit Umum Daerah Cut Meutia Lhokseumawe
”,
thesis, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan
.
Hansen
,
D.R.
and
Mowen
,
M.M.
(
2009
),
Management Accounting
, (8th ed.) ,
Thomson South Western
.
Idris
(
2012
), “
Akuntansi Lingkungan Sebagai Instrumen Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab Perusahaan Terhadap Lingkungan di Era Green Market
”,
Eco-Entrepreneurship Seminar & Call for Paper “Improving Performance by Improving Environment”
.
Ikhsan
,
A.
(
2008
),
Akuntansi Lingkungan dan Pengungkapannya
,
Graha Ilmu
,
Yogyakarta
.
Lehni
,
M.
and
Pepper
,
J.
(
2000
),
Eco-Efficiency: Creating More Value with Less Impact
,
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
,
North Yorkshire
.
Moedjarnako
,
E.C.
and
Frisko
,
D.
(
2013
), “
Pengelolaan Biaya Lingkungan Dalam Upaya Minimalisasi Limbah PT Wonosari Jaya Suarabaya
”,
Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Universitas Surabaya
, Vol.
2
No.
1
, pp.
1
-
13
.
Putri
,
P.S.A.
and
Wardiha
,
M.W.
(
2013
), “
Identification problems in the implementation plan of appropriate technology for water and sanitation using FGD approach case study: Kampong Sodana, Sumba Island, East Nusa Tenggara Project
”,
Procedia Environmental Sciences
, Vol.
17
No.
2013
, pp.
984
-
991
.
Hidup
(
2014
),
Peraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 20th 2014 tentang PROPER
,
available at:
http://proper.menlh.go.id/portal/filebox/Peraturan%20Menteri%20LH%20Nomor%203%20TH%202014%20Tentang%20PROPER.PDF
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
1982
), “
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 4 Tahun 1982 tentang Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://sipongi.menlhk.go.id/cms/images/files/1022.pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
1999
), “
Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia No. 27 Tahun tentang Analisis mengenai Dampak Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://prokum.esdm.go.id/pp/1999/PP%2027%20Tahun%201999.pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hidup
(
2009
), “
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 32 Tahun tentang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup
”,
available at:
http://175.184.234.138/p3es/uploads/unduhan/UU_32_Tahun_2009_%28PPLH%29. pdf
(accessed
 November 1, 2015).
Hilton
,
R.W.
and
Platt
,
D.E.
(
2011
),
Managerial Accounting Global Edition
, (9th ed.) ,
The McGraw-Hill Companies
,
New York, NY
.
Ikhsan
,
A.
(
2009
), “Akuntansi Manajemen Lingkungan”, in
Pertama
,
E.
(Ed.),
Halaman, Graha Ilmu
,
Yogyakarta
, pp.
1
-
380
.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan
(
2014
), “
Publikasi PROPER 2014
”,
available at:
http://proper.menlh.go.id/portal/pubpdf/Publikasi%20PROPER%202014.pdf
(accessed
 January 31, 2016).
Kusumaningtias
,
R.
(
2013
), “
Green accounting, Mengapa dan Bagaimana?
”,
Proceeding Seminar Nasional dan Call for Papers SANCAL
.
Mowen
,
M.M.
,
Hansen
,
D.R.
and
Heitger
,
D.L.
(
2012
),
Managerial Accounting: The Cornerstone of Business Decisions
, (International ed.) ,
Cengage Learning
,
South Western
.
Murni
,
S.
(
2001
), “
Akuntansi Sosial: Suatu Tinjauan Mengenai Pengakuan, Pengukuran dan Pelaporan Externalities dalam Laporan Keuangan
”,
Jurnal Akuntansi dan Investasi
, Vol.
2
No.
1
, pp.
27
-
44
.
Republik Indonesia
(
2014
),
“Peraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 03 Tahun tentang Program Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan”
.
Santoso
,
H.F.
(
2012
), “
Akuntansi Lingkungan Tinjauan Terhadap Sistem Informasi Akuntansi Manajemen Atas Biaya Lingkungan
”,
Jurnal Akuntansi
, Vol.
12
, No.
2
, pp.
635
-
654
.
Satrio
,
B.R.
(
2011
), “
Simulasi Penerapan Dan Pelaporan Biaya lingkungan Sebagai Dasar Pengukuran Kinerja Lingkungan Pada PT
”,
Skripsi tidak diterbitkan, Petrokimia Gresik, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya
.
Soegianto
,
A.
(
2005
),
Ilmu lingkungan
,
Airlangga University Press
,
Surabaya
.
Tijani
,
A.
and
Hamadi
,
F.
(
2013
), “
Quantifying and accounting for environmental costs by the avoidance cost’s method: the case of a Tunisian firm
”,
Journal of Accounting and Auditing: Research and Practice
, Vol.
2013
, pp.
1
-
14
.
Tsalis
,
R.
(
2011
), “
Pelaporan dan Analisis Biaya Lingkungan Untuk Mencapai Ekoefisiensi (Studi Kasus Pada Pabrik Gula Watoetoelis)
”,
Skripsi tidak diterbitkan, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya
.
WBCSD
(
2000
), “
Eco-efficiency: creating value with less impact
”,
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, available at:
www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/eco_efficiency_creating_more_value.pdf
(accessed
 January 31, 2015).

Languages

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal