Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2008)401 - Community Ecolabel scheme - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2008)401 - Community Ecolabel scheme. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2008)401  |
| date | 02-07-2008 |
1.1. Objective
The overall objective of this Regulation is to encourage the sustainable production and consumption of products, and the sustainable provision and use of services, by setting benchmarks for the good environmental performance of products and services, based on the top performers in the market. By guiding consumers towards them, the Ecolabel logo should promote those products and services that have met these benchmarks compared to others in the same category.
These benchmarks will also be used for developing and implementing other environmental policy tools, where consistency within the single market is desirable, such as for providing environmental criteria for public purchasers to use and giving recommendations on potential future minimum standards for products.
1.2. General context
According to Article 20 of the Ecolabel Regulation i, the EU Ecolabel scheme, which has been in place since 1992, has to be reviewed and the Commission must then propose any appropriate amendments to the Regulation. As highlighted in different reports published by the European Environment Agency and others, the state of the environment gives rise to increasing concerns. Global warming is just one – and currently the most prominent – issue in this context but there are many others such as biodiversity, air and water pollution or ozone depletion.
A more detailed description of the policy background and a justification of the choice of instrument is provided in the impact assessment.
1.3. Existing Community provisions
The Proposal is designed to replace Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 on a revised Community Ecolabel award scheme.
1.4. Consistency with other policies and rules
This proposal for a Ecolabel scheme is well linked and integrated into the wider Sustainable Consumption and Production policy framework of the European Commission. There is a need for reducing the negative impacts of production and consumption patterns on the environment, health and natural resources. It is a high priority for the Commission to set an overall framework for an integrated implementation of a mix of instruments aimed at reducing this negative impact on the environment, health and natural resources. As discussed in the impact assessment, a multi-criteria, third-party accredited ecolabel based on life cycle thinking i can constitute an important element of such a mix of SCP policy instruments, and the importance of an ecolabel scheme has already been emphasised in earlier policy documents such as the Commission's Communication on Integrated Product Policy i and the 6th Environmental Action Programme i.
Contents
Consultations
The Ecolabel review and impact assessment process began in February 2002, with the launch of a large-scale evaluation study on the Ecolabel i. In addition to the review, a number of stakeholder consultations have taken place culminating in a public internet consultation at the beginning of 2007.
The results of the consultations were fed into the Impact assessment and are summarised below.
2.2. Impact assessment
Potential benefits of the Ecolabel scheme:
Within a single market, a single set of guidelines benchmarking the environmental credibility of products is the logical way forward, as opposed to having different benchmarks in each Member State. An EU-wide scheme makes it easier for businesses wishing to market more environmentally friendly products within the EU and it means consumers can purchase so-called greener products, wherever they are, safe in the knowledge that these products share common environmental credentials. The EU Ecolabel is the only formal scheme for the entire internal market - existing national or regional ecolabel schemes cover it only in part.
If consumers, as well as private and public purchasers, are to take environmental criteria into consideration when they choose their products and services in the market, it is important that they can find easily understandable and credible criteria to enable them to distinguish the truly green products from their competitors. Ecolabels can play an important role in any package of measures aiming at promoting development and sales of greener products; they set a clear benchmark for the market and, for example, ecolabel criteria can also be included in calls for tender in green public procurement.
Success of the current scheme:
The Ecolabel evaluation and consultation showed that at micro-level, the scheme is successful, as it helps to improve the environmental performance of participating organisations. The consultation also showed that the original idea behind the scheme remains valid and desirable from the EU policy perspective. It gives EU consumers an environmental certification they can trust and it can give businesses the opportunity to use one label for all their pan-European or global marketing.
The EU Ecolabel also provides a useful benchmark of environmental performance in other ways:
– The EVER study i confirms that the EU Ecolabel criteria are used even by non-participating companies, with more than half of such companies interviewed declaring that they to use the Ecolabel to benchmark their environmental performance, even when they do not apply for the label.
– Under the Eco-design Directive for energy-using products i, any product which has been awarded the Ecolabel is automatically considered as compliant with the implementing measures.
– EU Ecolabel criteria have also been used by other ecolabel schemes like the Austrian Ecolabel or the Nordic Swan. Both have chosen to directly adopt the EU criteria word-for-word for some of their own product groups.
However, while the scheme has experienced growth recently in the number of companies holding licences, there are still only 26 products groups established and around 500 companies producing Ecolabel products. With total sales of Ecolabelled products of more than €1 billion per year, this represents a very small fraction of the potential EU market.
Proposed approach:
The impact assessment shows that the current scheme is not achieving its objectives as it suffers from low awareness of the label and low uptake by industry, resulting from overly bureaucratic processes and management.
The following package of measures was therefore proposed for the modification and simplification of the scheme:
– Design the Regulation to fit better with other sustainable production and consumption actions
– Open up the scope of the label
– Introduce measures to encourage harmonisation with other ecolabelling schemes.
– More product groups / quicker criteria development
– Introduce a template for criteria documents to ensure they are more user-friendly
– Incorporate guidance for Green Public Purchasing into criteria development
– Abolition of the annual fees and simplification of assessment procedures
– Peer review for Competent Bodies
– Boost marketing
– Propose mandatory environmental performance standards for products
– simplify criteria documents, focusing more on the most significant environmental impacts of products, while keeping the ambition levels high.
Expected results/objectives:
This revision of the Ecolabel is aimed at giving the EU Ecolabel:
– High awareness, understanding and respect in the EU-27 and around the world. The medium-term benchmark for success should be that the Ecolabel is recognised by consumers and by companies throughout the EU.
– Criteria are for the products and services where the Ecolabel can provide the most benefits, especially product groups with a substantial environmental impact and therefore with high potential for improvement. (Moving from 25 product groups to 40 -50 by 2015)
– Many more Ecolabel products on the shelves for consumers to choose from. (With a 10% market share in product groups covered by the label)
– Criteria documents which can easily be used by public purchasers.
– An Ecolabel very well harmonised with other labels, globally and nationally.
– An Ecolabel that can be attained by companies with limited costs and efforts for them while still maintaining a high ambition in order to ensure credibility of the label with consumers and environmental groups.
3.1. Legal basis
The instrument is clearly motivated by environmental policy considerations as laid down in Article 175 ECT. This was already the legal basis of Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 on a revised Community Ecolabel award scheme.
3.2. Subsidiarity and proportionality
This proposal for a Ecolabel Regulation sets the framework for setting benchmarks at the EU level for the good environmental performance of products based on technical criteria. The proposal then provides a framework for companies wishing to demonstrate that they meet the criteria to do so under the supervision of Member States.
3.3. Choice of instruments
A Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council appears to be the obvious choice, given the need for clear and common rules on the operation of the scheme throughout the Community. In the past the European Ecolabel award scheme had always been based on Regulations (No 880/1992 and No 1980/2000). There is no change in the framework conditions for the operation of the scheme that would justify a change of instrument.
See financial fiches in annex.
5. Additional Information
5.1. Simplification
This proposal delivers the relevant commitment undertaken in the Commission's Simplification Rolling Programme, see COM (2008)33.
It is not possible to quantify the total administrative costs, including costs to public authorities of administering the scheme, because we are dealing with a voluntary instrument where costs to a large extent depend on the uptake by industry and the associated costs of market surveillance of the conformity of those using the label.
It is also possible to look at the impact of the selected micro-options on the administrative costs of individual procedures. It also needs to be emphasised that according to the strict Commission definition of administrative costs, the Ecolabel Regulation does not impose any administrative costs on companies because it is a voluntary scheme where companies are free or not to participate.
Design Regulation to better fit into the other sustainable production and consumption actions of the Commission will mean that synergies between different product related policy instruments can be enhanced and therefore mean that there is a harmonisation of the framework in which criteria are presented. This will reduce the administrative burden on companies.
Introducing measures to encourage harmonisation with other ecolabelling schemes: For companies wishing to apply for more than one ecolabel, harmonising measures can only reduce their administrative burden. Costs of tests could be reduced by 100% if one label is already held as no additional testing or verification would be required. This reduced financial burden may be particularly interesting for small and medium sized enterprises.
More product groups / quicker criteria development: Simplified procedure for criteria development would reduce costs for all parties involved (less meetings to attend) but development of more product groups clearly has an associated cost.
One of the aspects of the option 'modify the scheme' will be allowing work that has already been done by others to be used more easily by the Ecolabel – for example by Member States' national labels, by the Global Ecolabelling Network or in the context of other Commission work such as that of the Energy Using Products Directive or new Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan. This will save time and money because developing Ecolabel criteria in isolation will be avoided.
Introduce a template for criteria documents to ensure they are more user-friendly: Making criteria documents standardised and more user-friendly will mean reduced administrative burden for companies and purchasing bodies using criteria for technical specifications.
Incorporate guidance for Green Public Purchasing into criteria development: As already indicated in the previous point, procurement officers will have easier access to EU-wide harmonised criteria and companies will have a level playing field if the same criteria are used across Europe in technical specifications for contracts. Member States will also save money because the same criteria can be used for eco-labelling and public purchasing.
Abolition of annual fees: The current direct income for competent bodies from fees is around €1million per year in EU 27. This direct income will be lost if fees are abolished, however the administrative burden will be reduced for companies. The administrative savings could be around half a man-day per year for a company, along with the benefit of not having to pay an annual fee. For Member States, the administrative burden of operating the scheme will remain the same as the work required to administer and undertake assessment and verification in the current scheme will be equal to the work required to undertake market surveillance under the new proposals. Simpler criteria should, however, help to reduce the administration required.
5.2. Repeal of existing legislation
The existing Ecolabel Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 will be repealed.
5.3. Review/ revision / sunset clause
A review clause is included.