# EUR-Lex - 52012DC0698 - EN

*|*

# 52012DC0698

**GREEN PAPER An integrated parcel delivery market for the growth of e-commerce in the EU /* COM/2012/0698 final - 2012/ () */**

			*

			*

1. Introduction

E-commerce
is widely acknowledged as a key contributor to economic growth and increasing
employment levels across the European Union[1].
The Commission's Communication on e-commerce and online services[2] identifies the delivery of goods purchased
online as one of the top five priorities to boost e-commerce by 2015 and its
importance has been reiterated by the Council of the European Union and the
European Parliament[3].
Delivery is indeed critical as it has a substantial impact on facilitating e-commerce
trade and is a key element for building trust between sellers and buyers[4].

The
commercial and – more broadly speaking – economic relationship between
e-retailers and consumers is characterised by a series of complex logistics
operations. The term "delivery" as used in this document refers to
the shipment of physical goods ordered on line up to the point of final
delivery when they reach the end customer. Many operators play a role in this
delivery process. In this document they are referred to as 'delivery operators'
and they include: carriers, postal and express operators, and other logistics
providers. For the purpose of this Green Paper, parcel is defined here in the broadest
sense and includes all items weighing up to 30 kg[5].

The way
goods are purchased and delivered in Europe is undergoing a rapid and
fundamental change. As EU consumers increasingly look for and resort to online
purchases, notably across borders, there is a growing need for a delivery
system that meets their expectations and works smoothly to facilitate their
daily lives, thereby generating greater confidence in, and increased use of,
e-commerce[6].
The performance and affordability of the delivery system is also a key driver
of the sustainability of the business models of many SMEs and in particular of
their ability to serve their customers. As SMEs are the driving forces of
innovation and growth in Europe[7],
improving the overall delivery system for goods ordered online in Europe can be expected to yield very significant results in terms of growth and jobs[8].

Many
surveys and industry reports[9],
as well as interviews with various stakeholders conducted during the
preparation of this Green Paper converge and confirm the analysis of delivery
services as presented in the Communication on e-commerce and online services.

Cross-border
delivery is considered to be an obstacle by 57% of retailers[10], while 46.7% of consumers declare they
worry about the delivery in cross-border transactions. Delivery concerns and those
relating to products returns are the top two concerns of consumers in relation
to online shopping[11].
Delivery failure, damaged or lost items and high delivery costs are also among
the top ten concerns of consumers, contributing to low consumer confidence in
cross-border e-commerce. Confident consumers will be increasingly inclined to
buy on line if they are confident that their purchases will arrive in good
condition, within the announced time frame, and there are easy to use return
procedures in place[12].The
increased availability and use of new technologies offers a new range of
opportunities to improve the quality of delivery services as well as customers
satisfaction. The emergence and growth of social networks has also had a significant
impact on the way consumers interact with brands and buy goods on line.
Innovative means of electronic communication between e‑retailers, service
providers and customers can contribute to more efficient and convenient delivery
and return processes and higher quality perception. A better functioning
e-commerce market will deliver tangible mutual benefits to consumers and SMEs,
as well as all actors and industry sectors involved in e-commerce activity.

The
importance of shipment and delivery is further amplified in the international
context. As more consumers buy from Asia-Pacific and North America, and more
European e-retailers seek to export to these regions, trade flows between them
are rising sharply. In this context, shipping and delivery elements are even
more complex, evoke an additional set of concerns and security considerations and
represent a major challenge, but also a unique opportunity for the development
of European e-commerce, and notably for SMEs[13].

A more
appropriate design of the delivery chain for e-commerce in the EU would also have
positive implications for a number of policy areas such as:

Ø
Cohesion: making
e-commerce benefits accessible to all citizens and businesses, regardless of
their size, via well-functioning delivery operations across Europe.

Ø
Employment:
ensuring responsible employment conditions in the delivery sector, which
operates under intense pressures to reduce costs and increase flexibility.

Ø
Innovation: promoting
the widespread use of new information technologies in delivery systems having
immediate benefit for all citizens and businesses, and adapted to the new
social media environment.

Ø
Environment: promoting
sustainable development and optimised delivery logistics to allow for more
energy savings and an overall reduction of negative externalities.

Ø
Competitiveness of European industry:
building on the strengths of the European industry (e-retailers and delivery
operators) to promote investment in a European delivery network which faces
intense competition in the international environment.

This
Green Paper examines how the e-commerce and delivery markets in Europe are
evolving, explores what is required for the creation of a Single Market for
delivery, analyses the key challenges for the different actors, and highlights
the opportunities for improving the delivery process to the benefits of
citizens and businesses, in particular SMEs. On the basis of the information
gathered through the consultation, the Commission will identify more precisely
the issues to address and draw conclusions, in Spring 2013, as to the set of
actions to take for completing the single market for parcels.

2. Current
market situation and perspective
2.1
The European e-commerce market and the
importance of delivery

E-commerce
markets in the EU are highly diversified, and at different stages of maturity,
due to different consumer practices, taxation considerations, product
availability, broadband access and competitive delivery markets. The trading
profiles of national markets[14] also
have major implications for delivery[15]
while cross border delivery in Europe remains a challenge for consumers and
e-retailers[16]. In
addition, an efficient cross border delivery will sustain the growth potential
of new market niches, thanks to the "long tail" effect[17].

The
e-commerce market is evolving quickly and is increasingly demanding both in
terms of innovative business solutions and consumers expectations. The
delivery-related needs of the sector are increasingly diverse because of the growing
number of product segments covered (such as books, DVDs, clothing, small
electronic items, home electronics, furniture, household appliances) with
different value, different weights and size of packages. Social networks,
instant information technologies and the generalisation of mobile and handheld devices
have also heightened consumer expectations of solutions based on real time
information and flexible delivery options.

E-retailers
are under time pressure. New concepts and ideas need to be quickly implemented.
The viability and success of their business depends on the ability of the logistic
sector to deliver at low cost, and in a convenient manner[18].
This applies in particular to smaller players on the e-commerce market,
which neither have the bargaining power to obtain substantial discounts from
delivery operators, nor the capacity to invest in a logistics network of their
own. In an environment characterised by economies of scale, this risks reducing
their competitiveness vis-à-vis larger e-retailers, as consumers increasingly
expect "delivery for free" offers when buying online[19].

2.2 The European
delivery market

The EU
parcel market was estimated to be worth € 42.4 billion in 2008 with the
Business to Consumers segment representing 15 % of this market[20]. Over
the last 5 years, and due to the growth of e-commerce, the B2C segment of the
parcel and packet markets has grown rapidly. Estimates of today's volumes
indicate that this segment now represents between 20 % and 40% of total volumes
in more mature e-commerce markets such as the United Kingdom.

The
market is traditionally divided into express and standard parcel delivery.
However, these current definitions[21] do not
reflect the complexities and relative importance of the different offers
(standard, deferred, express or same day delivery, tracking, proof of delivery,
registered) and the reality of the e-commerce sector which also refers to the
use of packets (small items below 2kg).

Eurostat
estimates that over a quarter of all enterprises send e-commerce orders to
other EU countries. Of these, 23% are small enterprises, whilst this percentage
is 41% for large and 33% for medium enterprises[22].
Those small, infrequent customers who have low volumes and therefore have limited
bargaining power with operators are confronted with far fewer delivery options.
According to FTI estimations, published cross-border parcel prices (for non
account customers) charged by national postal operators are on average twice as
high as domestic prices.

Postal
networks only handle part of the parcel volumes (with
very different market shares per country)[23], and only a small
percentage (5 to 10 %) of these volumes is subject to the universal service
obligations under which Member
States need to ensure both national and cross-border basic package delivery at
all points in their territory at affordable prices for all users [24].
As those obligations were agreed long before the advent of e-commerce, there were
not designed with the specific objective of satisfying the current needs of
this fast developing sector. The parcel division of the postal networks has
been traditionally organised to move parcels between 2 to 30 kg, but without
the flexibility and capacity required by the growth of on line sales[25].
In recent years, some operators have nonetheless been able to reorganise their
parcel network, or are in the process of doing so, as they face high levels of
competition in this sector in their domestic market.

Express
operators have built their success and infrastructure on
a dedicated integrated network designed to deliver for the business to business
segment by offering premium services (speed, track and trace options).
Recognizing the opportunities of e-commerce growth and the lack of satisfactory
solutions for e-commerce players across Europe, they are now increasingly
active in the Business to Consumers segment.

Other
logistics players in the field - such as
consolidators, brokers, fulfilment services, third party logistics providers[26]
play an increasing role to fill in the gap between the e-commerce and delivery
operators in terms of innovation, flexibility, stock management, transport and
return of parcels. The solutions that they offer are not yet widely known, in
particular among SMEs. With more visibility they could play an increasing role
in facilitating logistics operations for e-retailers in the future. By
consolidating different sources of low volume, they could also be in a position
to obtain more favourable terms/deals for delivery that could then be passed on
to their contractors, and ultimately to consumers.

Some
niche players are emerging. These are the operators who
have designed specific solutions for a particular product segment (for example,
dedicated shipment and delivery services for clothes ordered on line). In
addition, more recently some leading e-retailers are also becoming
increasingly involved in logistic and delivery, and are expanding their
logistic services to include smaller e-retailers.

Parcel
kiosks (automated lockers where parcels are deposited
for the consumer to pick up using a special code) are being tested by operators
in different countries and their generalised use will depend on whether
consumers find them sufficiently convenient and if sufficient volumes are
delivered in this manner.

Relay
points (network of shops supported by a technological
platform where consumers can collect their parcels) have been used historically
for the distance selling segment. Those networks have been upgraded with new
information systems and form an alternative to more costly home delivery
services. Their success depends on local preferences and historical practices
but there are indications that they form a viable and promising alternative for
e-commerce delivery.

2.3 The
interconnection between e-commerce and delivery markets

Delivery
operators recognize the opportunities presented by e-commerce. Creating new
delivery models for the Business to Consumers segment may require significant
investment and an extensive re-design of their operations. However, operations
become complex[27]
when the goal is to reach all points in the territory against a background of
volumes that are inconsistent and hard to predict.

Additional
choices for final delivery, such as office delivery or at a neighbour's
residence are being offered, with better information and choice progressively
being introduced, thus allowing consumers to decide where and when they want to
receive parcels. Also some new business models are now emerging which offer
better services for return products.

Nevertheless,
these new solutions are slow to emerge and are still often accompanied by
costly added value features which are not always required. There is a demand
for individualised small packets, with simple tracking solutions[28] and affordable price[29] which is currently not being met.

From an
operational point of view, delivery services are complex and subject to many
constraints. Traditional parcel services (with basic features, and high cross
border charges) or high added value express operations (historically designed
for the Business to Business segment) are not yet adapted to the specific needs
created by the e-commerce world. Interconnection between postal operators in
cross border delivery is improving, notably through the European Parcel Group[30].
However, only a part of the flows are going through this channel, and no
alternative is offered for tracked packet services or non-priority parcels.

In
effect, two different worlds co-exist side by side, one is driven by marketing (e-commerce)
while the other (logistics) is driven by a series of operational demands. Both
have different business timeframes, different backgrounds, different usage of
IT systems and solutions and different performance indicators for their
businesses. Both e-commerce and delivery markets are therefore confronted with
major and fundamental challenges: the e-commerce model has not yet fully
stabilised while the logistic sector has yet to fully adapt to the requirements
and demands of e-commerce. In such a rapidly changing environment, investment
choices and decisions are difficult to make.

3. Key
challenges for the different actors
3.1 Consumer
experience and expectations

Consumers
want more convenient deliveries: more delivery options with the ability to
decide their preferred one, better advance information on the delivery process,
easier return procedures and user friendly services using new technologies to
anticipate delivery (smart phones, tablets, SMS alert)[31].
They expect more transparency with respect to the conditions under which their
orders are shipped and most notably when packages are delayed, damaged or lost.
At the same time, they expect transparency with regard to the clarity and comparability
of prices as well as the level of competition.

As a
receiver of goods, the consumer's decision to buy is heavily influenced by the
availability of free – or low cost – delivery (and return). Consumers also look
increasingly to other national markets, but the complexity of and lack of
transparency in cross border delivery is a major hurdle. As a sender of
parcels, and notably when they return the goods ordered, consumers represent a
relatively captive market, and high cost delivery is mentioned as one of the
main reasons for their dissatisfaction with on line shopping[32]. Overall,
the price factor remains the most dominant driver when it comes to choosing a
cross border delivery service option[33].

Convenience
varies between national markets and type of products delivered. Surveys of
consumer preferences show that convenience aspects may relate to the entire
delivery process.

For
example, a survey in the UK identified six main areas of customer preferences:
flexible delivery options, affordable delivery charges, flexibility on where
the order can be delivered, effective communication about their delivery, fast
fulfilment and a good doorstep experience[34]. In particular, the provision
of real time information is becoming increasingly important, notably for the
younger generation[35].
They want to be in control of their delivery, and expect to be offered tracking
and texting (i.e. SMS alert) solutions[36].

3.2 Challenges
faced by e-retailers when delivering goods to their customers

E-retailers
want to respond to the needs and expectations of consumers, with simple,
transparent, reliable shipping services[37]. They are acutely
aware of the fact that consumer feedback is heavily conditioned by the delivery
experience which in turn has a direct impact on their brand name and image.

They
need more options, which a more competitive delivery market (i.e. one with more
actors providing different offers and alternative delivery options) should be
in a position to offer them. They may have specific delivery needs for
particular products (e.g. medicines, fresh products, or high value goods). Yet
even in the most competitive markets, the gap between marketing driven
e-commerce offers and operation-driven logistics processes still persists.

The
logistics part is critical to the sustainability of the business of
e-retailers, and notably SMEs. The availability of affordable and efficient
delivery solutions is particularly relevant for those SMEs and micro-companies
that operate from remote areas or peripheral regions.

In a
very competitive environment, pressure on prices is a key determinant of who
gains market share. SMEs looking for revenue earning opportunities across
borders are heavily dependent on an integrated European delivery system which
has yet to emerge. They are looking for growth in other national markets but
are confronted with higher costs, greater complexity and a lack of transparency
when it comes to cross border shipment[38]. Large sellers are far
better placed to negotiate tariffs and conditions with delivery operators.

Both
large and small e-retailers need more flexibility from delivery services in
general, and notably in terms of carriers' capacity and level of technological
innovation. E-retailers have a specific challenge during peak periods such as before
Christmas where carriers' capacity may not be sufficient to meet demand. This
is a major issue for growth and sales, due to the importance of this period for
annual turnover.

E-retailers
increasingly want to be in control of the shipment/delivery process, and are
entering into partnerships with delivery operators. Whether they choose to keep
the management of logistics operations in house or sub contract it, they still
need far more information and transparency from their delivery service
providers. They also need more commonly agreed performance indicators for their
shipments to help adapt their business models to real time needs (management of
stocks, payment, returns).

Further
development of their businesses is hindered by the absence of a delivery
network structured around their specific needs (as opposed to a mere adaptation
of the historical parcel or express logistic models). More integration is
needed to avail of growth opportunities. Better sharing of information and more
flexible solutions to respond to their marketing offers would greatly improve
their operations.

3.3 Challenges
faced by delivery operators

Delivery
operators are all those actors who play a part in the shipment of goods ordered
on line up to the final delivery to the consumer and include e.g. carriers,
parcel and logistics operators, other logistics services providers, postal and
express operators for the Business to Consumers segment. The logistics sector
traditionally operates with low profit margins within a high fixed cost structure.
Delivery operators are under enormous pressure from big e-retailers (large
senders) to negotiate low tariffs.

On the
other hand, delivery operators need sustainable tariffs in the long term to be
able to cope with the high fixed costs of their network[39]. The negotiated price regimes granted to
large senders cannot be extended to senders with low volumes, let alone to
individual consumers.

Delivery
operators are increasingly confronted with the demands of e-retailers to offer,
within a very short period of time, new services and options, at low cost.
However, they need time to adapt their logistics operations which are complex
and subject to many external constraints. The degree of flexibility which is
expected from them (and their workforce) is also very demanding.

Moreover,
the lack of integration between the electronic communication systems of
enterprises along the transport and logistics chain is a key stumbling block,
notably for smaller shippers, and seriously limits their choices regarding the available
transport and logistics choices. Increased interoperability could speed-up
information exchange, ease consolidation of transport needs, parcel delivery
and invoicing, facilitate co-modal transport and reduce administrative and IT
implementation costs[40].

4. The
adequacy of the current regulatory and institutional framework

The
delivery sector is subject to a variety of rules and regulations which have an
effect on the way shipping and delivery can be arranged. The most relevant ones
are described and assessed below:

·
The Postal Directive[41]:
The provisions of the Postal Directive are focused on guaranteeing a (basic)
universal postal service. Most of its provisions are only applicable to the small
part of the parcel market which falls under the universal service obligation (around
10% of parcel volumes) [42].

The
rules concerning the provision of a (minimum) quality standard, principles
concerning costs and prices, price regulation, and information and data
collection, are directly and in most cases exclusively linked to the universal
services obligation (USO).

A
few provisions – notably Article 19 on complaint procedures - allow for
additional regulatory measures concerning parcel delivery outside the scope of
the USO. Those provisions could in theory be appropriate for addressing
concerns relating to quality of service. However, most of the problems which
have been identified (inappropriate delivery times, lack of pick up/collection
services, track-and-trace options and return procedures; lack of clarity concerning
liability in cases of loss, theft, damage or delay and lack of
transparency/information on services), would not be covered. In conclusion, the
current regulatory framework for postal services is not designed to address the
needs of consumers who buy online.

·
The consumer protection framework:
Further improvements with regard to quality of service and consumer protection
(notably in the area of online shopping) are to be expected following the full application
of national rules implementing the Consumer Rights Directive (CRD) by 13 June
2014. Several provisions of the CRD will increase information and transparency,
such as (a) the elimination of hidden charges and greater price transparency
for distance and off-premises contracts;(b) a longer period for the right of
withdrawal (14 days); (c) better refund rights (e.g. reimbursement of delivery
costs where applicable); (d) the possibility for the consumer to use a model
withdrawal form (where contact details and returning address have to be clearly
specified); (e) clear information requirements concerning the costs of return
of the purchased item in case of a withdrawal.

The
CRD will also have an impact on parcel delivery services, because these
services, specifically with regard to the delivery of items to consumers, form
part of the distance and off-premises contracts covered by the CRD. The CRD,
once implemented, has the potential to increase consumer confidence in
cross-border purchases. It does not, however, address concerns about parcel
delivery prices; nor does the CRD provide a basis for clarifying the potential
liability of delivery operators or for additional quality features
(track-and-trace options, pick up/collection services, etc.) which online
consumers might expect.

The
proposal for a Regulation on a Common European Sales Law (CESL)[43] establishes a self-standing uniform set of
contract rules applicable in cross-border B2C and B2B contracts. It contains
rules on delivery of goods and digital contents, in particular for sales contracts
which involve the carriage of goods by a carrier. These rules would only apply
when the Common European Sales Law is chosen by the parties. Like the Consumer
Rights Directive, a future CESL will not address parcel delivery concerns
relating to excessive prices or certain quality features.

The
new Commission proposal for alternative dispute resolution[44] (ADR) for consumer disputes aim to further
improve consumer protection in terms of dispute resolution. Existing provisions
on consumer protection dealing with (postal) parcel delivery (Article 19 of the
Postal Services Directive) will be further enhanced by the ADR legislation[45].

·
Competition law: Prices
of parcel delivery outside the universal service are not subject to
sector-specific regulation, but are subject to competition law. Articles 101
and 102 of the TFEU are directly applicable. In the intra-EU cross-border
parcel market, EU competition law (here: Article 102 TFEU) would for example be
violated if a dominant (cross-border) parcel delivery operator would engage in predatory
commercial behaviour in order to prevent entry to the cross-border parcel
market.

Article
101 TFEU prohibits any agreement between undertakings which may affect trade
between Member States and which has as its object or effect the prevention,
restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market.

·
Within certain limits, the delivery sector is
also subject to the provisions of the Services Directive[46] and
respective national implementing measures. The following two aspects deserve
special emphasis in the context of e-commerce and related delivery:

o
In its Article 20, paragraph 2, the Services
Directive contains a prohibition of discrimination in the general conditions of
access to a service on the basis of the place of residence of the recipient. It
thus seeks to facilitate the delivery of services on a cross-border basis. On 8
June 2012, the Commission services issued guidance on the application of this
obligation of non-discrimination by national authorities[47].
This should result in enhanced transparency on the application of delivery
restrictions (in advance of the obligation laid down in Article 8 of the
European Consumer Rights Directive) and reduce consumer frustrations when being
denied a supply on grounds of residence. The guidance also clarifies that the
argument by a business that there are no options for delivery can rarely be
invoked as a legitimate reason to refuse supply of a purchased good to a given Member State because of the existence of basic universal postal services.

o
Article 22 of the Services Directive, which
relates to information requirements for service providers, aims to ensure that
particular information is always provided in an easily accessible manner to the
service recipients (e.g. name and contact details of the provider; general
terms and conditions; price of the service).

·
Transport and
logistics-related issues at EU and international level are covered by a number
of rules, notably in the context of the completion of an internal market for
transport, environmental (e.g. de-carbonisation of the supply chain, reducing
air pollution from motor vehicles) and security issues. Key policy initiatives are
set out in the Commission's White Paper "Roadmap to a Single European
Transport Area" and the upcoming e-freight initiative[48].

·
Other relevant rules that
may affect the sector include those dealing with issues such as urban planning,
market surveillance, VAT, working conditions, and, in the case of external
trade, customs, security and other international issues:

o
Urban planning: Recently many Member States have
started to introduce specific rules on traffic in city centres (or even beyond
these areas) in order to, for example, reduce air pollution as part of their
broader policy on better air quality[49]
or to preserve their cultural heritage. Such national rules may affect the
business solutions of delivery operators who need to adjust their collection
and delivery times to time-slots available or even to ensure delivery by other
means (e.g. bikes) as urban traffic may be prohibited at certain times.

o
Market surveillance for products: the delivery
sector is also subject to market surveillance provisions[50]. They apply irrespective of the
distribution channel, including distance and electronic selling, and make
provision for controls of products entering the EU market by customs and market
surveillance authorities. For example, where the market surveillance
authorities find that a product entering the EU through a delivery operator
does not comply with EU legislation, the authorities must take appropriate
action, which may, if necessary, include prohibiting the product's being placed
on the market. This has a direct impact on the delivery operator which may have
to return the products or which, in some cases, may find themselves in a
situation in which the products are destroyed by market surveillance
authorities.

o
VAT: National VAT rules and rates may have an
influence on purchasers and on the choice of delivery services. If a delivery
service is part of public postal services, it will be VAT exempt, if not, users
of such services (may) have to bear VAT costs[51].
VAT rates for delivery services also vary across Member States. This may have
an impact on intra-EU trade flows.

o
Working conditions: Delivery sector is
traditionally regarded as a labour intensive one, where the largest share of
costs relates to the final mile delivery itself. In view of this, many "pay
for the delivery service" solutions have developed in the delivery sector
(e.g. fixed charge for delivery; pay per piece delivered), depending also on
the applicable regulatory framework[52].

o
Customs and other international issues: There is
variety of other rules resulting from either international trade agreements or
EU law, which may have an impact on cross-border delivery solutions, including
intra-EU flows. For example, delivery operators exporting to and importing from
third countries are subject to customs procedures and security requirements
that result from international agreements (e.g. rules of the Universal Postal
Union (UPU); rules of ICAO) or from the EU law (e.g. Community Customs Code[53];
Regulation 2320/2002 on air aviation security).

o
Furthermore, national postal operators are
subject to specific rules of the Universal Postal Union.

Questions:
the regulatory and institutional framework for the EU parcel delivery market

1) For
the purpose of this Green Paper, 'parcel' is defined in the broadest sense and
includes all items weighing up to 30 kg. Are there particular elements which in
you view are of crucial relevance for the qualification as 'parcel' in the
context of the ambition to achieve a more integrated, well-performing parcel
delivery market in the EU[54]?

2) Is,
and if so to what extent, the existing framework an obstacle to the creation of
a truly integrated European parcel delivery market that meets the needs and
expectations of e-retailers, consumers and workers in the sector?

3) What
are the top three challenges posed by the regulatory framework? What could be done
to help you respond, in the short and long term, to these challenges?

4) Do
you consider there are regulatory gaps or a need for additional
measures/regulation? If so, please specify.

5. Towards
a truly integrated EU parcel delivery market

Based
on an analysis of the existing regulatory and institutional framework, the
following chapters will focus on three main issues that are considered
instrumental in creating an integrated EU parcel delivery market that provides
both e-retailers and their customers with the delivery solutions that they need:

·
Convenience: Greater convenience and
transparency for consumers[55].

·
Costs: More cost effective delivery solutions
notably cross border.

·
Interoperability: A greater level of
interoperability between operators along the delivery chain, and better
coordination between e-retailers and delivery operators.

In the
following sections, different aspects of these three objectives are being
tested in order to best identify possible solutions towards improving the
current situation. In addition, consideration is given to evaluating the extent
to which efficient markets might be able to deliver desired results, or whether
changes to the current supervisory or regulatory framework might have to be
envisaged.

5.1 Improving
consumer experience and convenience
5.1.1
Increase transparency

When
shopping on line, one would expect customers to be provided with more
information about possible delivery options, their associated prices and
service levels, and the practical modalities of delivery (i.e. time and place
of delivery)[56].

During
and after the delivery process, customers should be able to share their judgement
on the actual quality of the delivery services received. More transparent
information about the actual performance of deliveries, especially for
cross-border purchases, can serve several purposes. First and foremost, it will
allow consumers to make more informed choices for their subsequent purchases,
choosing – where this is possible – the delivery option that they most trust
and that are best suited to their needs. Second, enhanced transparency will
also create an incentive for delivery operators to further improve their
performance. Third, opening up this delivery "black box" will also
help change customer perception of actual delivery performance in cases where
such perception has been erroneous or unrealistic.

Different
options are being tested to increase transparency with respect to delivery
performance for packets and parcels.

Questions:
improving consumer experience and convenience- more transparency

5) Information
on delivery options and modalities

a)         Which
information[57] should
be made available to consumers on the e-retailer's website (name and contact
details of the delivery operator(s), the delivery price, the time and place of
delivery, information about complaint handling, track and trace options, return
options)?

b)         Taking
into account the risk of information overload, what could be done to provide consumers
at the right moment with clear, transparent and comparable information on delivery?

6) Information
on the quality/performance of delivery

a)
Performance indicators
relate, for instance, to the speed of delivery, the geographic coverage of the
delivery operator, delays, damaged or lost items. How can such
performance-related information be measured and gathered? Would publishing the
results of such performance indicators create added value for consumers? Is there
a need to develop standards to monitor such performance levels?

b)
Would trust labels (e.g. a certificate
given by an industry association that the delivery process of an operator can
be trusted as they meet requirements based on best practice) offer a more
efficient way to increase consumers' confidence?

c)
Would ISO certification of a quality
process aiming at efficient delivery be an appropriate tool to increase
consumers' confidence?

7) Independent
supervision:

Who should take the lead to
monitor performance: an industry organisation, an independent body, a
regulator?

5.1.2
 Providing better service and more safeguards to
consumers

While
consumers attach importance to the delivery of their parcels, they do not
necessarily know much about the type of delivery operator providing delivery
services. What matters most to them is, to whom they can turn when they have
questions about delivery and who will give them quick answers and accurate
information. This is particularly relevant in cross-border situations, which
usually involve several delivery operators.

The
existing regulatory framework only covers part of the delivery needs of
consumers buying on line. The EU Postal Services Directive was not designed for
the e-commerce environment, and postal operators are only one of the numerous
actors in parcel delivery. The Consumer Rights Directive provides for many
safeguards for consumers buying on line such as the notification of price,
delivery delays and return process. Specific issues with delivery may remain a
concern for consumers and more specific safeguards may be needed.

The
current universal postal service only provides a 'safety net' for occasional
senders of parcels. Some stakeholders have argued that the growth of e-commerce
in the B2C segment and the importance of a convenient last mile delivery might require
a new definition (of universal service) which needs to be more closely aligned
with on-line consumer expectations. Such a "new" universal service
should meet the demands of consumers in terms of a minimum level of convenience
– notably in terms of information on the delivery process and options for
returning items – and meet the demands of e-retailers in terms of tracking and
affordability of their marketing offer. It is argued that, when consumers want
features that go beyond such minimum quality standards; markets would offer
alternative options and services to meet those more advanced needs.

Questions:
increasing consumer experience and convenience – better services and more
safeguards

8) Possible
need and scope of a universal delivery service for parcels:

a)
Is there a need for a new universal service
obligation to address the ubiquity, affordability and quality of parcel
delivery services?

b)
If so, what could be the main characteristics of
this 'new' universal service (in terms of service levels, convenience and
affordability)?

c)
From a delivery operator perspective, do you
think a universal (parcel) service would be feasible in terms of cost/profitability?
If so, at what level?

d)
What would be the best tools to implement such a
concept (e.g. guidelines; revision of the Postal Directive; new regulatory
instrument with enhanced powers of the national regulatory authorities)?

9) Improving
consumer experience

a)
Taking into account the existing set of consumer
rights, how could consumer concerns and complaints about delivery be addressed
most effectively[58]?

b)
Do you have any concerns about liability regimes[59] in the event of lost or damaged parcels?
What could be done to improve the situation?

c)
Could the e-commerce industry and delivery operators
come up with more proactive solutions to better respond to consumers? What actions
could be taken quickly to improve the situation in the short term? Which medium
to long term solutions could be envisaged?

5.2 More
cost effective and competitive delivery solutions

Consumers
and e-retailers consider generally current price levels to be too high. By
contrast, operators argue that they already work with low margins and that sustainable
prices are necessary to ensure their long-term economic viability.

5.2.1
Controlling costs

As
outlined above, prices for cross-border parcels are considered too high in
particular for senders of small volumes. This section explores options that might
enhance the cost efficiency of delivery services, which would allow for cost
reductions to be passed on to the users of these services.

Cost structures
vary considerably between operators, as geographical and individual factors
(such as density, volumes, timing constraints) may differ. Published tariffs
are typically based on average weight, insurance levels and speed, but these do
not necessarily match actual costs incurred by operators[60]. B2C
delivery, notably for packets, is considered costly by delivery operators.
Solutions envisaged to ensure the success of the first delivery attempt (such
as more up-to-date address database, pre-information on delivery) can reduce
extra costs. A different design of delivery operations (such as relay points or
parcel kiosks) may also have the potential to limit the costs of delivery.

Increased
consolidation of small volumes, notably from SMEs, also offers the potential
for overall cost reduction. More synergies between operators would generate increased
efficiency in a market driven by economies of scale. In the cross border
context, they would also enhance the fluidity of parcel flows.

Questions:
more cost effective and competitive delivery solutions- controlling costs

10) Different
options could be envisaged to control costs:

a)
Are there any outstanding examples of, or best
practices for alternative delivery solutions allowing for a reduction of costs?

b)
Are there any outstanding examples of best
practices to increase efficiency[61]?

c)
What type of technology can or could reduce the
cost of delivery?

d)
What could be done, in your view, to remove or alleviate
current regulatory constraints without putting the attainment of their
underlying objectives at risk[62]?

5.2.2
Competitive but sustainable prices

The
need for sustainable tariffs

Parcel
operators are concerned by potential increases in costs which might have to be
reflected in higher prices to customers. At the
same time, consumers are getting used to "free
shipping" offers, as a result of which they might underestimate the true
operational and societal costs linked to delivery operations.

Large
e-retailers are able to negotiate tariffs because of their volumes. The
pressure on margins of operators may be significant, whilst these operators
need to make new investments to adapt their operations to the demands of
e-commerce.

The
notion of "sustainability" of prices in this section refers to prices
that would reflect the true costs of the underlying service arising both to
service providers (i.e. ensuring their long-term profitability) and to society
at large (e.g. in environmental and social terms) – on the assumption, however,
that national and cross-border delivery markets are sufficiently competitive
and hence efficient.

Questions: competitive but sustainable prices –
sustainability and transparency of tariffs

11) Sustainability
of tariffs:

a)
Do you think that the current level of tariffs
charged to consumers for home delivery is sustainable in the medium and long
term? If not, what should be done to mitigate this?

b)
Should the actual cost of delivery incurred by
e-retailers be made more transparent to consumers? If so why?

c)
Should the true costs of delivery to the society
at large be made more transparent? If so why? And how?

More
competitive delivery markets

Consumers
often perceive the choice of delivery solutions to be very limited due to the
lack of transparency of the market, and the actual state – or perceived state –
of competition on the market. In some cases, the relevant delivery markets may
be dominated by a small number of operators whose behaviour prevents
e-retailers and consumers from reaping the full benefits of truly competitive
markets.

Specific
ex ante regulatory solutions could be envisaged to the benefit of consumers by
making delivery markets competitive on a sustainable basis.

Questions: competitive
but sustainable prices - more competitive delivery markets

12) Level
of competition in delivery markets:

a)
In which markets, or market segments would more
competition be essential?

b)
Publishing price comparisons would provide more
clarity to consumers and SMEs. How could this be done? What would be the pro
and cons?

13) Oversight
and regulation:

Ex ante regulatory measures (such as
transparency obligations, obligations to provide access to delivery networks,
and obligation for tariffs to be cost oriented, etc.) imposed on delivery
operators with significant market power can lead to more competitive markets.

a)
Which would be the relevant markets to consider
in this respect?

b)
What are the specificities of cross-border
operations which could justify cost constraints? Please specify.

c)
Should the regulator have more information on
cost accounting data of operators to better assess the cost-price structure of
packets and parcels?

d)
Should regulators and/or competition authorities
play a more active role in overseeing the national markets or market segments
concerned?

More
competitive prices for cross border delivery services

Prices
for cross border services are a particular concern for consumers and
e-retailers, notably SMEs. Tariffs vary significantly[63], even for orders containing the same range
of goods and sent to the same destination. Hence there is a need to identify
solutions to limit the impact on delivery prices of crossing border and to
close the existing gap between the domestic and the cross-border price, where
it is not objectively justified.

Questions: competitive but sustainable prices -
more competitive prices for cross border delivery services

14) How
can more competitive and transparent cross-border tariffs be ensured?

a)
Should it be left to market forces to provide
the tariff levels and levels of transparency that are demanded by e-retailers
and consumers?

b)
Would more regulatory supervision contribute to
achieving sustainable prices for consumers?

c)
Do you think that applying some type of price
cap for single piece cross border packets and parcels would be a feasible and
effective option to address the needs of e-retailers and consumers? What would be
the impact of such a price cap on market offer and competition?

5.3 Improving
interoperability along the delivery chain

More
transparency and better partnerships are required in order to address the need
of e-retailers, to better understand what constitutes best logistic and
delivery practices and to effectively communicate the delivery options that are
available to consumers. Successful partnership within and between these two
sectors will be decisive for the future of e-commerce.

5.3.1
Investment to increase the use of technology

A more
generalised use of tracking could empower clients, enabling them to dictate the
place and time of delivery. This would improve the success rate of first delivery
attempts and thus bring down costs. At the same time, e-retailers would obtain
appropriate and pertinent information, and would thereby be in a position to
better manage stocks, optimize refund and return processes and simplify
administration processes.

Questions: improving interoperability -
investing in technology

15) Levels
of investment required:

a)
To what extent is it possible to evaluate, both
at micro and macro level, the approximate cost of a generalised track and trace
system for parcels? Which would be the most relevant parameters to take into
account?

b)
What specific pilot projects for delivery of
e-commerce products could be promoted, possibly within broader programmes aimed
at fostering investment in information and communication technologies[64]?

5.3.2
Enhanced partnerships between e-retailers and
delivery operators

Operators
tend to focus on their big clients with large volumes and have less incentive
to invest in marketing their services to smaller shippers, although they would
in principle have the potential to increase their business. Also, e-retailers
are not always aware of possible alternative solutions and available offers.

Questions: improving interoperability - enhanced
partnerships

16) Partnerships
and cooperation:

a)
Is better co-operation between e-retailers and
delivery operators likely to increase the interoperability of operations? If
yes, what specifically could retailers and operators do to build new or improve
existing partnerships?

b)
Should contingency capacities be jointly
developed to deal with peak periods? If yes, how could this be done?

c)
Would you need the services of facilitators and
third party logistics providers? How can those –new or existing- services develop,
become better known and more visible?

5.3.3
Interconnected networks and platforms

E-retailers depend on the completion of the Single
market for the delivery of e-commerce purchases. The lack of integration and
the inability to transfer data between different information systems is a major
hurdle to cross-border trade[65], and
significant investments will be needed to adapt current systems.

However,
when postal operators shipping goods internationally were put under pressure by
airlines and customs authorities to meet higher security standards after the
identification of significant security risks, they were successful in finding
solutions to exchange the required data. A similar effort may be necessary to
ensure that e-commerce needs are addressed in a joined up fashion with
e-retailers.

The
Commission services have already launched a number of demonstration actions aiming
to improve the competitiveness of the transport and logistics sector in Europe, through the smart use of
information technologies and connect, in particular smaller enterprises to
digital transport and logistics value chains[66].

Questions:
improving interoperability - interconnection

17) Better
interconnection:

a)
Could logistics platforms[67] for
groups of operators better meet the needs of e-retailers? If yes, how?

b)
Could an industry task force[68]
contribute to promoting innovation and increasing             the use of new
technologies to facilitate greater level of interconnection? If so, how?

c)
Should the processes used to return goods (both domestically
and cross border) be improved? If so, how?

d)
Are interoperability requirements and the
promotion of new technologies difficult for SMEs operating in the delivery
chain? What actions could help mitigate such difficulties?

e)
What are (if any) the main three actions which
could improve interoperability across EU borders for moving goods ordered on
line[69]? What could be done to improve the situation in the
short term, what initiatives could be taken in the medium to long term? Also what
needs to be done to improve interoperability at the international level?

6. Governance
for an integrated European parcel delivery market

The
future landscape of European e-commerce will be shaped notably by the delivery
capacities and networks which will be put in place in the near future. These
changes and their impact on the e-commerce sector need to be monitored, and
efforts to promote an efficient and sustainable European delivery environment
for e-commerce orders should be co-ordinated.

Some
actors already have platforms for co-ordination, for example the European
Parcel Group[70] which
brings together incumbent postal operators. As for regulators, the European
Regulators Group for Postal services[71] aims at
facilitating coordination and cooperation between independent national
regulatory authorities with a view to ensuring the consistent application of
the Postal Services Directive. Currently their activities and roles do not
cover the full range of e-commerce activity. New fora could play a role in
building a single European delivery market for e-commerce.

More
focused cooperation, supervision and enforcement is needed to push the coordination
of efforts to promote the delivery sector for e-commerce. This will add to the
momentum to facilitate improved delivery of e-commerce goods.

Questions:
governance

18) Are
there areas which could be effectively tackled by the industry to address the issues
identified in this Green Paper? How could this be promoted[72]? How to involve both e-commerce
and delivery industry associations?

19) How
should current governance aspects of standardisation and interoperability[73] be addressed? Is there
a need to increase involvement of representatives of e-commerce, notably SMEs,
and consumers?

7. Follow
up and next steps:

All
interested parties are invited to submit their views in response to the above
questions. Contributions should be sent at the latest by 15 February 2013 to
the following addresses:

markt-delivery@ec.europa.eu

or

European
Commission

DG
Internal Market and Services

On line
services unit

Rue de
la Loi 200

1049 Brussels

Contributions
do not need to cover all questions raised in this Green Paper. Accordingly,
please indicate clearly the questions to which your contribution relates. If
possible, please give specific arguments for or against the options and
approaches presented in the paper. In your contribution, you are also invited
to give views on whether there are any other aspects/issues that need to be
addressed to achieve an integrated parcel delivery market in the European Union.

Contributions
will be published on the website of DG Internal Market and Services. The
responses received will be available in the Commission website unless
confidentiality is specifically requested.

As a
follow up to this Green Paper and on the basis of the responses received, the
Commission will identify, in spring 2013, the set of actions to be taken to
complete the single market for parcels.

[1] The internet economy has
brought about 21% of the growth in GDP in the last five years. It also
generates 2.6 jobs for every job cut and at times accounts for 25% of net
employment creation (COM (2011) 942 final).

[2] "A coherent framework for building trust in the
Digital Single Market for e-commerce and online services", COM (2011) 942
final.

[3] Council of the EU, Conclusions on the Digital Single Market
and Governance of the Single Market, 31 May 2012; Resolution (P7_TA82010)0320) of 21 September 2010 on completing the internal
market for e-commerce.

[4] 42 % of online businesses in UK prioritize improved
delivery services compared to 18% for investment in faster broadband.

[5] In short, any small items and
goods that can be handled by one person.

[6] 66% of all "cart abandonments" are due to
delivery factors, '2011 consumer trends in multi-channel retailing', by Royal
Mail.

[7] According to estimates from FTI Consulting, small retailers
account for 22% of cross-border e-commerce volumes. Eurostat estimates that
over a quarter of all enterprises send e-commerce orders to other EU countries:
of these, 23% are small enterprises, 41% are large and 33% are medium
enterprises.

[8] A study carried out by Civic Consulting estimates that the
EU is missing out on the potential of e-commerce: the total welfare
gains for EU consumers from a hypothetical situation where the share of
e-commerce in total retailing would be 15% (instead of the
2010 level of 3.5%) is estimated to amount to 204.5 billion Euros per year or 1.7%
of EU GDP.

[9] "Focus on the Future" by BCG, May 2012; IMRG;
ACSEL; "Intra-community cross-border parcel delivery", FTI 2011; Set
of national On line barometers by E-bay; "The evolution of the European
Postal market since 1997", ITA/ WIK 2009; IPC Cross border E-commerce
report 2010, Eurobarometer, "Consumer market study on the functioning of
e-commerce and Internet marketing and selling techniques in the retail of goods",
Civic 2011.

[10] Eurobarometer, Business
attitude Towards cross-border sales and consumer protection, Analytical report,
Flash Eurobarometer 224, July 2008, Chapter 2, section 2.1, page 21.

[11] "Consumer market study on the
functioning of e-commerce and Internet marketing and selling techniques in the
retail of goods", Civic Consulting, September 2011, pages 132, 40.

[12] A recent UK survey indicates that almost 65% of the respondents mentioned that the risk of failed
delivery (due to no-one at home to receive the item) would prevent them from
shopping online. Too vague timeslots and the risk that the item may not arrive
on time are also a concern for about 43% of the respondents ("A study of
online fulfilment requirements", IMRG UK Consumer Home Delivery Review
2012).

[13] Communication
"Small Business, Big World — a new partnership to help SMEs seize global
opportunities" COM(2011) 702 final.

[14] E-commerce in the Nordics 2012, Postnord.

[15] Different models are in place for cross border shipments
notably via co-operation between national postal services, via direct injection
into the national postal system or via other agreements with logistic
operators.

[16] In the EU-27 only 9% of EU consumers and 18%[16]
of EU retailers use cross-border e-commerce; 48% of consumers reported they are
more confident in buying online domestically than cross-border (European
Commission, Consumer Conditions Scoreboard, Consumers at home in the single
market, March 2011).

[17]
The total sales of products for which demand is low or whose sales volume is
low can equal or exceed the market shares of best-selling
products if sellers can offer a wider choice.

[18]
For example, 57% of retailers consider cross-border delivery an obstacle (Flash
Eurobarometer 224, July 2008). 78% of eBay sellers identify delivery costs as
the main obstacle to cross-border e-commerce, 42% refer to bad quality of
delivery services (FreshMinds, Crossborder trade survey in the UK, Germany and France).

[19] In a survey in the UK, free delivery was the most-cited
factor by 67% of respondents for making them continuing or increase their usage
of an e-retailer (Delivery Matters, 2011 Consumer Trends in multi-channel
retailing _Royal Mail).

[20] ITA/WIK 2009. These figures refer to 2008 and include
parcel and express market. Another study from IPC indicates the value of the EU
CEP market in 2008 to be €37.38 billion (excluding packets) while the B2C
segment represented 26% of the total EU CEP market.

[21]
In the Postal Directive
(Directive 97/67/EC, as amended by Directives 2002/39/EC and 2008/6/EC), items
of correspondence or documents up to 2 kg are considered as letter, goods up to
20 kg are considered to be parcels.

[22] Eurostat (Isoc_ec_ebuyn2) Fig 11.

[23] Universal Service Provider’s market share varies
significantly across member states: less than 10% in Member States like Bulgaria, Spain, the UK; between 10%-15% in Member States like Hungary or Italy; and more than 25% in Member States such as the Czech Republic Denmark, France,
Estonia- The Evolution of the European Postal Market since 1997, ITA/ WIK 2009.

[24] See Chapter 4 for more information on the Postal Services
Directive.

[25] And notably for consumers and SMEs: the lack of a low cost
option for packets (below 2 kg); service features such as track and trace
options exist but may be offered only in combination with higher added value
features.

[26] Third party logistics provide assistance to customers for
outsourced services for part, or all of their logistics (such as, pick and pack,
warehousing, documentation, labelling procedures and distribution). Online brokers and parcel consolidators offer
discounts on single shipments by integrators, or national operators.

[27] Volumes estimations and capacity planning, time schedules
where volumes, routes as well as consumer expectations have to be taken into
account.

[28] A
survey by IRMG for their UK Consumer Home Delivery Review 2012, showed that 85%
of the respondents listed access to online tracking information as the single
most important way to make deliveries more convenient ("IRMG UK Consumer
Home Delivery Review 2012 – a study of online fulfilment requirements").
In a 2011 survey on European e-commerce conducted by Accenture for the European
Retail Round Table, supply chain and delivery issues are identified as a
barrier to market entry by 34% of the respondents, while 42% of the respondents
indicated shipping infrastructure problems (European Cross-border E-commerce –
the challenge of achieving profitable growth", Accenture January 2012).

[29] FTI (2011); Civic Consulting (2011);
Mystery Shopping Evaluation of Cross-Border e-commerce in the EU (2009).

[30] Postal operators delivering their priority parcel products
through the European Parcel Group's integrated delivery network benefit from a
track-and-trace system and an automated customer service system linking each
postal operator’s call centres.

[31] A number of surveys have been undertaken to identify the
needs of consumers vis-à-vis the delivery of goods ordered on line. For
example, "Home delivery in the UK 2011" by Snow Valley, IPC Cross
border E-commerce report 2010; IRMG (2012), CIVIC (2011).

[32] A study on consumer experiences with online shopping shows
that the majority of problems consumers experience when buying goods concern
delivery: long delivery times (28% of consumers reporting a problem), damaged
product delivered (20%), non-delivery (17%), wrong product delivered (14%), and
delivery costs or final price was higher than displayed on website (7%).

[33] IPC Cross border e-commerce report.

[34] The 2011 online retail delivery report, Snow Valley.

[35] Consumer Focus.

[36] More and more UK consumers would like to receive a text to
confirm information on delivery status: 80% of online shoppers say they like to
receive updates at every stage of the delivery, Delivery matters, 2011.

[37] IPC Cross border E-commerce report 2010.

[38] Top 2 barriers to cross border shipping in France are the
high cost of shipping (78%) and poor shipping services (42%), compared to 28%
for lack of demand, or 12% for cultural differences (eBay report).

[39] Including the costs for renewing the fleet in order to keep
it updated to meet environmental standards.

[40] As in the demonstration action DiSCwise, (http://www.discwise.eu/).

[41] Directive 97/67/EC, as amended by Directives 2002/39/EC and
2008/6/EC.

[42] Only 36% of the parcel market is held by
universal service providers; and of those 36% only a small amount fall under
the universal service obligations. The minimum requirements in the Postal Directive
entail the provision of over the counter or basic parcel services. Minimum
universal service obligations are spelled out in article 3 of the Directive but
Member States can go beyond these requirements.

[43] COM (2011) 635final
11.10.2011.

[44]
Commission
proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation
(EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR),
COM(2011) 793 final adopted on 29 November 2011.

[45]
Article 19 of the
Postal Directive calls upon Member States to encourage the development of
independent out-of-court schemes for the resolution of disputes.

[46] Directive 2006/123/EC.

[47] http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/docs/servicesdir/implementation/report/SWD_2012_146_en.pdf.

[48] EC-White Paper: Roadmap
to a Single European Transport Area, COM(2011) 144 final and the e-Freight
initiative: http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/2013_move_001_e_freight.pdf.

[49] For example, Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe, OJ L 152, 11 June 2008 provides for a regulatory framework in relation to air
quality objectives in the EU.

[50] As laid down in Regulation
(EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008
setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating
to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 and
Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety.

[51] More on the scope of VAT exemption in the postal sector:
see the preliminary ruling of the CJEU in case C-357/07, The Queen, on the
application of TNT Post UK Ltd v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue
and Customs, ECR [2009] I – 03025, paragraphs 36 – 40.

[52] For example, point 19 of
Article 2 of the Postal Services Directive identifies compliance with the terms
and conditions of employment as one of the possible essential requirements for
the postal service providers when applying for the authorization.

[53] Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of the
Council of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, OJ L 302,
19.10.1992.

[54]
Please note that
your replies to the subsequent questions should at any rate be based on the
definition as set out in the Green Paper.

[55] 47% of consumers indicate that the lack of delivery
convenience may prevent them from shopping online (Consumer Focus research on
consumer needs, November 2010).

[56] In addition to the
requirements in EU consumer legislation that oblige traders to provide clear
and transparent information to consumers, notably their rights to withdraw from
distance contracts.

[57] In addition to the information requirements in the EU
consumer legislation and the Services and the E-commerce Directives
(2006/123/EC and 2000/31/EC).

[58] See Article 19 of the Postal Service Directive establishing
transparent complaint procedures, mediation services and alternative dispute
resolution systems.

[59] On the specific subject of multimodal liability, the
Commission is awaiting the outcome of the ratification process of the Rotterdam
Rules by Member States.

[60] For cost allocation purposes, "weight, insurance
levels and speed" are not necessarily cost drivers which are associated
with all postal activities (collection, transport, sorting and delivery). Additionally,
the allocation of common costs to the various postal products usually involves
the use of a general allocator (such as EPMU – Equally proportionate mark-up
price), where the different cost attributes such as weight are not directly
relevant. This means that this cost calculation based on the above mentioned
cost allocation principles does not necessarily yield the same result as using
weight, or other single attributes, as a proxy for cost.

[61] E.g. an increased level of harmonisation of delivery process,
efficiency gains, consolidation and sharing facilities at local logistic hubs. See
also e-Freight initiative: http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/2013_move_001_e_freight.pdf.

[62] See Chapter 4 on the current regulatory framework.

[63] FTI, CIVIC (2011), Eurobarometer, Accenture "European
cross border e-commerce" (2011), YouGov Psychonomics "Mystery
Shopping Evaluation of Cross-Border e-commerce in the EU" (2009). YouGov Psychonomics
reports that the delivery price charged by e-commerce and distant vendors to
consumers is on average twice as high for cross-border than for domestic
deliveries: the average cost of shipping for domestic offers was €8 whereas for
cross-border it was €16.

[64] Competitiveness and Innovation
Framework Programme, Digital Convergence Operational Programme, or other
initiatives to develop specific technologies, such as, the use of Radio
Frequency Identification Data.

[65] On the one hand, there are differences between domestic and
cross-border IT platforms, which may even differ for those delivery operators
which have a cross-border presence in the EU. On the other hand, there is
information which could be shared between e-retailers and delivery operators so
as to improve capacity planning on both sides. For example, e-retailers have
the data regarding the products bought online and know when and how much will
be put in the delivery pipeline. As for returns, it could be useful for
e-retailers to be informed about the volume and time of returns in real-time,
which would allow for proactive customer care and for effective stock
management.

[66] The DiSCwise project (http://www.discwise.eu/), funded by DG ENTR,
aims to get stakeholders more connected, by assisting their integration into
efficient co-modal supply chains. It allows transport & logistics service
users and providers, in particular SMEs, to more easily participate in
transport planning and execution, making use of sustainable transport
alternatives.

[67] Ideally, those platforms would streamline delivery for
e-commerce, integrate logistic services with shared information systems,
improve coordination, and use a common or agreed carrier for delivery (limiting
environmental impact and facilitate handling of returns and management of
stocks).

[68] An example of such a task force was the former US Mailing
Industry Task Force which was created in the 90's and brought together senior
technology officers from key industry stakeholders to find innovative and
intelligent solutions to better deliver mail.

[69] Currently about 30% of online shoppers in the UK indicate they buy goods from foreign websites (also outside Europe). The intra -EU average for on
line cross border is at around 10 %. Against that background, the importance of
agreeing on European and international standards and ensuring a higher degree
of connectivity becomes clear, notably for SMEs and consumers who are
disproportionally affected.

[70] See footnote 17.

[71] Commission Decision 2010/C217/07.

[72] For example, the promotion of best practices, partnership
agreements, codes of conduct; standards for electronic data transfers, labels,
address databases; developing a European delivery label.

[73] At present, standardisation issues are dealt with in the
CEN Technical Committee for postal services, and interoperability issues among
some postal operators are handled by the European Parcel Group.