EN    EN  
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 9.11.2011 
COM(2011) 1320 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT 
Accompanying the document 
Proposal for a Regulation  of The European Parliament and of the Council 
on a consumer programme 2014-2020 
{COM(2011) 707 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1321 final}  
 
EN 2 EN  
Disclaimer This Impact Assessment report commits only the Commission’s services involved in its 
preparation and the text is prepared as a ba sis for comment and does not prejudge the final 
form of any decision to be taken by the Commission 
 
 3TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... ................... 5  
2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AN D CONSULTATION OF THIRD PART IES ......................................... 5  
2.1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES ............................................................................................................................... ...... 5 
2.2. CONSULTATION AND SOURCE OF DATA ......................................................................................................... 6  
3. PROBLEM DE FINITI ON ............................................................................................................. ........... 9  
3.1. POLICY CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................... ........... 9  
3.2. DEFINING THE PROBLEM AND ITS CAUSES /EFFECTS ..................................................................................... 10  
i) Safety......................................................................................................................... ................................. 11  
ii) Consumer informatio n and educ ation............................................................................................. ........... 13  
iii) Consumer rights  and redress .................................................................................................... ................. 15  
iv) Enforcement of co nsumer rights ................................................................................................. ............... 16  
v) Conclusion: the focus of the actions  under the Consum er Programme ..................................................... 17  
3.3. NECESSITY AND EU ADDED -VALUE ............................................................................................................ 18  
Legal base..................................................................................................................... ...................................... 18  
Beneficiaries of the Programme ................................................................................................. ........................ 18  
i) Product safety ................................................................................................................. ........................... 18  
ii) Consumer education and information............................................................................................. ........... 19  
iii) Consumer rights  and redress .................................................................................................... ................. 21  
iv) Enforcement of co nsumer rights ................................................................................................. ............... 22  
4. POLICY OB JECTIV ES.............................................................................................................. ............ 23  
5. POLICY OPTIONS ................................................................................................................. ................ 25  
5.1. OVERVIEW OF BASELINE SCENARIO AND OPTIONS ...................................................................................... 25  
5.2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE OPTIONS .................................................................................................... 29  
i) Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance throughout the 
Union.......................................................................................................................... ................................ 29  
ii) Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of their rights, 
to develop the evidence base for consumer policy an d to provide support to consumer organisations..... 30  
iii) Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action and 
improving access to redress includin g alternative dis pute resolution ....................................................... 32  
iv) Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer ri ghts by strengthening cooperation between national 
enforcement bodies and by suppo rting consumers with advice.................................................................. 33  
6. ANALYSING TH E OPTI ONS .......................................................................................................... ..... 34  
7. COMPARING THE OPTIONS.......................................................................................................... .... 41 
8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION................................................................................................... 43  
ANNEX 1:  TABLE OF AC RONYMS .............................................................................................................. ... 45 
ANNEX 2:  TIMETABLE OF THE IM PACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................... 46  
ANNEX 3:  OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT 2007-2013 PROGRAMME .................................................... 47  
ANNEX 4:  DATA FROM THE EVALUATION OF THE 2007-2013 STRATEGY AND PROGRAMME . 49  
 
 
 4 
 
 51. INTRODUCTION  
The post-2013 Consumer Programme (hereafter the "Programme") will support the 
implementation of DG SANCO action in the fiel d of consumer policy from 2014 onwards. It 
builds on the results achieved thoug h the current (2007-2013) Programme. 
In line with the conclusions a nd recommendations from the result s of the mid-term evaluation of 
the current Programme, there will be a degree of  continuity between the current and future 
Programmes. The evaluation underlin es in particular th at consumer policy is relatively young at 
EU level and that continuity is key to achieving  impact. At the same time, the actions under the 
Programme will be refocused in line with the Eur ope 2020 priorities and to address issues which 
have grown in importance. 
An Overview of the current 2007-2013 Programme is presented in Annex 3. 
2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF THIRD PARTIES  
2.1. Procedural issues  
The ISG on consumer policy has served as the Steering Group for the evaluation of the current 
(2007-2013) Strategy and Programme and subseque ntly as the Steering Group for the impact 
assessment of the new Programme. It has met three times between February and July 2011. 
The services invited to the ISG on consum er policy were: SG, LS, AGRI, BEPA, BUDG, 
CLIMA, COMM, COMP, EAC, ECFIN, ELARG, EMPL, ENER, ENTR, ENV, ESTAT, HOME, INFSO, JUST, MARE, MARKT, M OVE, REGIO, RTD, TAXUD, TRADE. 
The timetable for the impact assessment is detailed in annex 1. 
The recommendations made by the Impact Assessment Board have been taken into account in the 
following way: more evidence has been added to  the chapter assessi ng the impact under the 
various actions; a new part has been added in the chapter relating to the problems definition, 
explaining how the actions to be undertaken have  been prioritised; a brief overview of the 
stakeholders' views has been incl uded; the problems linked to the administration of funds have 
been more clearly identified and solution highlight ed in the chapter on impact - however, this has 
not been done through a separate heading but under each relevant action in order to preserve the coherence of the document; an i ndicative table on broad fund dist ribution has been included in 
the chapter presenting the baseline scenario and options; the option 3 has been screened out and 
omitted from the impact section as requested; the chapters on the EU added-value and on necessity have been merged and shortened and th e description of the ba seline scenario extended. 
The additional technical comments submitted have also been addressed in the various chapters of 
the document (the requested information on the ex isting Programme has been added in an annex 
to limit the total length of the main document). 
 
 62.2. Consultation and source of data  
The four main sources of data underp inning this impact assessment are: 
i) Mid-term evaluation of th e 2007-2013 Strategy and Programme1 
The impact assessment makes use to a large extent  of the ex-post evaluation of the Programme of 
Community Action 2004-2007 and the mid-term  evaluation of the 2007-2013 Strategy and 
Programme where Member States  authorities (through the CPN2 and CPC3 networks), EU and 
national consumer organisations (through the E CCG) and some industry representatives were 
consulted, as well as some member s of the European Parliament. 
The results of these evaluations were transmitted to the Parliament, the Council, the Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on 25 March 2011. They were posted at 
the same time on DG Sanco Europa website. Th e main highlights are presented below. 
ii) Contributions from the consumer networks in  the context of the preparation of the future 
consumer policy  
Discussions with stakehol ders on several elements of the next  consumer policy took place at the 
Consumer Summit on 11-12 April 2011, entitled ""EU Consumer Policy: the way ahead". Six workshops have dealt respectively with data gath ering, enforcement, redress (Alternative Dispute 
Resolution), capacity building for consumer orga nisations, consumer information and consumer 
education. 
Input from consumer networks was requested: a discussion with the CPN members took place at 
the CPN meeting of 31 March 2011 and members we re invited to submit a dditional contributions 
in writing. Input from the CPC and the ECCG
4 was requested in April 2011. A discussion was 
subsequently organised at the ECCG meeting of June 2011. 
Contributions from the three main horizontal bu siness organisations (BusinessEurope, UEAPME 
and EuroCommerce) were requested in April 2011. 
Despite differences in focus, the contributio ns from national authorities and consumer 
organisations were generally supportive of the pr iority issues proposed by  DG Sanco relevant for 
the Programme. 
In particular, CPN members expressed support fo r the proposed priorities on consumer market 
monitoring, safety, enforcement (with several member s stressing to strengthen the efficiency of 
the CPC network), redress (including ADR), s upport to consumer organisations. Some CPN 
members called for more coordination on consumer  information and education. . Several CPN 
members expressed the view that the Programme should provide training for national consumer 
organisations but no direct funding. 
ECCG members also generally supported th e Commission proposal and insisted more 
particularly on the necessity to take into account the diffe rent conditions of consumer 
                                                 
1 The 2007-2013 Programme is the financial framework underpinning the 2007-2013 Strategy.  
2 CPN - Consumer Policy Network: informal network of high-level officials from Member States national 
administrations in charge of consumer policy 
3 CPC network - Consumer Protection Cooperation network of Member States national enforcement authorities 
4 ECCG - European Consumer Consultative Group, composed of European and national consumer organisations 
 
 7organisations across the EU. Several consumer or ganisations also specifically stressed the 
importance of consumer market monitoring  and consumer behaviour, and sustainable 
consumption. 
Business organisations generally agreed with  the priorities propos ed by the Commission, 
stressing that the right balance should be  struck between consumer protection and 
competitiveness (including of SMEs). They speci fically stressed the importance of consumer 
market monitoring. 
iii) Results of additional separate external evaluations  
Stakeholders were also consul ted on specific elements of the Programme in the context of: 
- the separate evaluation of the network of Eu ropean Consumer Centres (ECC-net) published in 
June 2011; 
- the consultation on the revision of the Genera l Product Safety Directive (GPSD), which was 
carried out in the second part  of 2010 and beginning of 2011. A stakeholders' conference was 
held on 1 December 2010. It gave participants the opportunity to discuss the results of the 
consultation and the Commission's proposals to improve the curren t legal framew ork in this 
field; 
- the separate evaluation on consumer educati on, information and cap acity building actions 
(Dolceta5, Europa Diary6, capacity building for national c onsumer organisations (TRACE), 
Masters course in consumer affairs)  to be finalised in September 2011. 
The main conclusions of these th ree specific evaluati ons are mentioned in the document where 
relevant. 
iv) Data and statistics from consumer market monitoring  
They mainly include the results from the Consum er Markets Scoreboards, market studies and in-
depth surveys (e.g. the empowerment  survey published on 11 April 20117). 
Main results from the evaluation of the 2007- 2013 Consumer Policy Strategy and Programme 
The ex-post evaluation of the 2004-2007 Programme  and the mid-term evaluation of the 2007-
2013 Strategy and Programme stress their added valu e, despite the fact that European consumer 
policy is a relatively new field and that the level of EU funding under the Programme is relatively 
small. It underlines that actions under the St rategy and Programmes cont ribute to the Europe 
2020 objectives of a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 
The results are globally positive with regard to th e relevance of the objectives of the Strategy and 
the Programme, their impacts and their added-valu e. It also concludes that the Programme will 
have long-term effects on consumer protection. 
                                                 
5 An online consumer information and education tool – see list of acronyms in annex 
6 A multi-lingual paper-based distributed to European schools since 2003-4 targeted at students aged 15-18, with a 
focus on consumer affairs and accompa nied by structured teachers’ reso urces and lesson plans. The 2011-12 
edition involved content from 21 Commission Departments, 4, 344,575 printed copies which were sent to 27,079 
schools in the EU-27, and in 23 languages. 
7 See the Eurobarometer N°342: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm ; Consumer Empowerment report 
and Index: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/facts_en.htm  
 
 8The evaluation makes apparent a certain divergence in views on the Strategy and the Programme 
between national authorities and consumer orga nisations, the former being more positive on the 
achievements of the Strategy and Programmes (ove rall 88% of national au thorities and 82% of 
consumer organisations believe that the current Strategy has made a large or moderate (medium 
positive) contribution to EU consumer policy initiatives). 
National authorities generally confirm that th e Strategy and Programme are complementary to 
national consumer policy. 
However, the evaluation concludes that emerging  social and environmental challenges are only 
partly addressed by the curre nt Strategy and Programme. 
More detailed data ar e presented in annex 4. 
On the specific actions undertaken under the Programme: 
i) Safety:  
- On product safety , coordination has increased between market surveillance authorities. The 
report recommends further strengthening surv eillance and enforcem ent through RAPEX, 
pursuing the efforts aimed at a ddressing the internati onal dimension of the safety of products 
and capitalising on the use of new technologies. 
ii) Consumer information and education:  
- Consumer market monitoring , the Consumer Market Scoreboard  and in-depth market studies 
have played an important role to support consum er policy. They play an essential role in the 
proper integration of consumer concerns into re levant EU policies and the design of effective 
legislation. The report also s uggests further developi ng the understanding of actual consumer 
behaviour. 
- Progress on consumer education  has been variable, in particular for Dolceta where there is a 
concern as regards the definition of the target audience , and consequently its effective 
dissemination. The report suggests consolidating education tools,  better defining Dolceta's 
target audience, its content and disseminatio n, and looking for syne rgies with national 
curricula. 
- The support provided through the Programme s to EU level and national consumer  
organisations  has been evaluated positively. The role of EU level organisations is seen as 
crucial for ensuring the repres entation of consumer intere sts in EU policy making. The 
reports suggests pursuing the training (capac ity building) provided to national consumer 
organisations, and examining the possibility  of providing courses at national level. 
iii) Consumer rights and redress:  
- The report points to the adde d value linked to the greater le vel of harmonisation brought by 
the legislative developments, either  finalised or still in the making. 
- The Programmes and the Strategy have been increasingly successful in the integration  of 
consumer policy into relevant EU  policies. The report suggests pu rsuing efforts in this field 
and to address new emerging challenges such as : issues linked to digitalisation, the move 
towards more sustainable patterns of consum ption, the vulnerability of consumers caused by 
the crisis. It also calls for a clarification vis- à-vis stakeholders of the role of the various 
Commission services on consumer issues. 
 
 9- Consumer access to redress remains a problem. The report refers to the need to make progress 
on this issue and to increase consumer awareness about the means of redress. 
iv) Enforcement:  
- Under the Strategy and Programmes, cro ss-border enforcement cooperation has been 
strengthened through the network of enforcement authorities (C PC Network) and coordinated 
actions such as "sweeps". The report suggests further increasing the co ordination within the 
CPC Network and enforcement authorities. 
- The Strategy and Programmes have provide d increasing support to consumers who seek 
advice on disputes cross-border through the ne twork of European Consumer Centres (ECC-
net). However, the report suggest s increasing their visibility a nd hence consumers awareness. 
3. PROBLEM DEFINITION  
3.1. Policy context  
Links to Europe 2020 and flagships 
The Europe 2020 Strategy calls for the "citizens to be empowered to play a full role in the single 
market", which "requires strengthening their ab ility and confidence to buy goods and services 
cross-border, in particular on line".   
Only informed and empowered consumers are able to make the best choices for their own welfare 
and for the health of the economy, through in tensifying competition, innovation and the 
integration of the Single Mark et, thus supporting th e overarching goal of the Europe 2020 
Strategy. Leveraging the vast economic force of c onsumer expenditure (whi ch represents 56% of 
EU GDP) will make an important contribution to  meeting the EU objective of reigniting growth. 
This is confirmed by the 2011 Annual Growth Survey which identifies better consumer 
conditions as one of the drivers of growth. Consumer policy helps consumers navigate the 
extensive choice offered to them thereby prom oting businesses which are more efficient and 
innovative. 
Consumer policy will provide key contributions to the Digital Agenda flagship initiative 
(borderless and safe services and digital content markets, access, di gital literacy), social inclusion 
(taking into account the situa tion of the more vulnerable c onsumers), sustainable growth 
(sustainable consumption) and the importance of smart regulati on (consumer market monitoring 
as the basis for designing eff ective and targeted policies). 
Links to Single Market Act and other initiatives 
The Monti  report on the new strategy for the Single Market argues that "Consumers and 
consumer welfare should be at th e centre of the next stage of th e single market." It stresses the 
importance of empowering consumers, basing policie s on evidence and detecting markets failing 
consumers, the establishment of  a digital single market, redr ess (through Alternative Dispute 
Resolution and collective redress), product safety and standardisation. 
The Single Market Act  highlights a number of these consumer related issues, in particular redress 
(as a strategic initiative), pr oduct safety, and the development of problem solving tools. 
 
 10The 2010 Citizenship report, presen ted as a complementary initiative to the Single Market Act, 
identifies amongst others the absence of a singl e set of consumer protection rules, lack of 
awareness about existing means of redress and insu fficient means of redress as obstacles to fully 
realising European citizenship. 
The European Parliament issued several reports in 2010 including recommendations for the 
future of consumer policy: 
The Grech  report calls for a holistic approach putting consumers' interests at the heart of the 
Single Market. The report highlight s inter alia: the importance of an evidence base and market 
monitoring, the issue of product and services safety, the major role played by consumer 
organisations, improving the capacity of problem solving mechanisms, integrating consumers' 
interests into relevant EU policies and legisla tion, consumer protection in financial services, 
redress and consumer information. 
The Hedh  report stresses the importance of the evidence base (Scoreboard, studies, complaints) 
and enforcement in the consumer law and produc t safety (including ADR, sweeps, the need for 
resources for CPC and ECC). It also  highlights the need to include consumer interests into all EU 
policies and requests the Commission to publish an annual report on this  issue, the role of 
consumer organisations, the need to develop consumer education (including for adults), 
consumer information (including through web porta ls, reaching vulnerable consumers), the need 
to promote sustainable consumption. 
In the field of product safety, the Schaldemose  report (2011) calls upon the Member States and 
the Commission to deploy adequate resources for efficient market surveillance activities, emphasising that failing market surveillance could generate a distortion of competition, jeopardise consumers' safety and undermine citizen s' trust in the Single Market. The report also 
calls upon the Commission to further fund joint ma rket surveillance actions and to allocate 
sufficient resources to support fi nancially the creation of a plat form and/or an organisation 
supporting extended coordination between Member St ates. The report also urges the Commission 
to establish a public Consumer Product Safety Information Database, including a platform for 
complaints. 
In the context of the debate on the Single Market Act, the Kalniete
 report on "Governance and 
Partnership in the single Market" underlined the importance of the future proposal on Alternative 
Dispute Resolution (ADR).  
Finally, the Parliament is  preparing for October 2011 an own-initiative report  on the future 
consumer policy (rapporteur: Ms. Eva-Britt Sv ensson, replaced by Mr K. Triantaphyllides). 
3.2. Defining the problem and its causes/effects  
The objective to put consumers at the centre of  the Single Market by empowering them and 
strengthening their ability and confidence to buy goods and services (including cross-border) 
implies action at EU level, which needs to be  supported by a financial instrument. An active 
consumer protection policy is needed to help cons umers reap the benefits of the Single Market. 
Informed and empowered consumers drive market competition, innovation and strengthen the integration of the Single Market , which are the core of the Eu rope 2020 objectives. The added 
value of the consumer financial programme lies in  its capacity to tackle issues that cannot be 
effectively addressed at national level. For exam ple, activities to promot e cross-bord er shopping 
or to ensure an effective survei llance of product safety across the EU require action at EU level. 
 
 11The new Programme will support the future consumer policy placing EU citizens as empowered 
consumers at the centre of the Single Market and complement initiatives focussing on the supply 
side: Single Market Act, industr ial policy and product specific le gislation, digital agenda, and 
initiatives in the field of energy, resources e fficiency, sustainable c onsumption, transport. 
Encouraging and raising confidence of consumer s in cross-border purchases are especially 
important because cross-border online purchases are not catching up (9% in 2010, compared with 
8% in 2009 and 6% in 2008) w ith domestic e-commerce (36% in  2010, 34% in 2009, and 26% in 
2008) despite clear benefits in te rms of terms of savings and choice. Evidence shows that many 
concerns consumers may have a bout cross-border purchases can be overcome if consumers can 
be persuaded to make at least one cross-border  purchase. When asked whether consumers were 
confident in purchasing online cross-border, only 33% were equally confident in domestic and 
cross-border websites. However, among consumer s with experience of cross-border purchases, 
61% were equally confident in dom estic cross-border online shops.  
There is a need for some continuity between the current and future Programmes, in line with the 
conclusions/recommendations stemming from the re ports cited above and th e results of the mid-
term evaluation of the 2007-2013 Strategy and Programme which underlines that the policy is 
relatively young at EU leve l and that continuity is  key to achieving impact. 
At the same time, new societal challenges have grown in importanc e: the increased complexity of 
decision making (information overload; more re sponsibility shifted to  consumers following 
liberalisation; sophisticated produc ts, services and advertising), the need to move towards more 
sustainable patterns of consumption, the opportun ities and threats for consumers brought by the 
development of digitalisation, an increase in so cial exclusion and the number of vulnerable 
consumers and an ageing population. 
The main problems to be addressed through the funding of actions under the new Programme are 
the following: 
i) Safety 
Differences between Member States in enforci ng product safety legisl ation, the presence of 
unsafe products on the Singl e Market, risks linked to the gl obalisation of the production chain 
require the authorities to cooperate more effec tively in order to stop dangerous products from 
entering the Single Market and ensure adequate ac tion whenever such dangerous products appear 
on the market. 
The public consultation on the revision of the General Products Sa fety Directive (GPSD) 
demonstrated that differences in enforcing pr oduct safety legislation are causing problems for 
economic operators and consumers. It also s howed the difficulties Member States have in 
working together in the absence of a cl ear pan-European enforcement framework. 
The evaluation has confirmed the risks linked to  the globalisation of the production chain is a 
growing concern (about 70%  of dangerous products  notified in RAPEX originate from outside 
the EU). 
According to recent (2010) public consultation re sults, all stakeholders consider cooperation 
among Member States, including joint market surveillance actions, to be beneficial. An 
overwhelming majority of 90% of national mark et surveillance authorities, 90% of economic 
operators and 95% of other stak eholders agreed on the benefits  of cooperation of national 
authorities. Providing more financ ial support for joint actions wa s the most preferred way of 
 
 12improving market surveillance cooperation am ong Member States; 80% of national market 
surveillance authorities and 80% of other stak eholders were in support of this type of 
cooperation. A coordination platform at the EU level was the second most preferred way of 
improving cooperation among Member States; 55 % of  national market surveillance authorities, 
45% of economic operators, and 70 % of ot her stakeholders favoured this solution. 
Members of the European Parliament, as we ll as BEUC and ANEC, frequently ask the 
Commission about safety of services, considering al so the importance of the service sector in the 
internal market. The safety of services is par tly included in the scope of the pending revision of 
the General Product Safety Directiv e, but only as far as product- related risks are concerned and 
will be proposed to be included under the common rules. Secondly, knowledge base building 
continues to enable an informed discussion regarding what actions could be taken at the EU level 
regarding other aspect s of service safety. The test of EU ad ded value for any regulatory initiative 
is important, because as far as it has been possible to ascertain, the issue is more with the enforcement of the existing (national) ru les rather than the lack of rules. 
Total number of noti fications (2003-2010)
19932244
16991963
84710511605
468
1391866
671355
3887019241545
05001000150020002500
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 All notifications Serious risk notifications
 
Notifications per country of origin (%)
38%49%52%59% 60% 58%20% 21%22%20% 20%
17%23%20% 17%13%10%7%
10%12% 11% 13% 13%11%13% 15%
49%27%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Other
Unknown
EU-25/27 and EEA
China, including
Hong Kong
 
 
 13With regard to funding, the best solution found so  far by the participating Member State market 
surveillance officials for the coordination of jo int actions was the establishment of a foundation 
under national law. This however means it has no own resources and has difficulties to demonstrate its solvability. The upper limit of co -financing has also proven challenging where 
the number of participating Member States was counted per product categor y project, although in 
the overall program of projects the minimum numbe r of participating Member States for higher 
co-financing was easily reached. Therefore, a struct ure that allows the best possible value for co-
financing would be needed, with the necessary fl exibility and attractiveness for Member States. 
ii) Consumer information and education 
• Underdeveloped consumer markets monitoring:
 
There is a lack of robust and good quality data  and analysis on the f unctioning of the Single 
Market for consumers to help identify ne w sources of growth by improving consumer 
decision-making. 
The evaluation of the current Strategy and Prog ramme has highlighted the role played by 
consumer market monitoring and evidence ga thering, carried out through the Consumer 
Market Scoreboard and in-depth market studies, the integration of consumer interests into EU 
policies. 
Legislation affecting consumer s does not always properly take  into account their actual 
behaviour. Greater under standing of consumer behaviour would enable policy-makers to 
better achieve their objectives by designing "smart" interventions. 
The annual Consumer Markets Scoreboard rank s 50 consumer markets (which represent 60% 
of consumer expenditure) according to how well they perform for consumers with regard to 
comparability, trust, problems and complaints, and overall satisfaction. A number of markets 
with low ranking – e.g. retail electricity, bank fees, retail i nvestment – have been further 
analysed and remedies are being implemented . However, many potentially malfunctioning 
sectors for consumers have not yet been addresse d, e.g. mortgages, real estate services, some 
transport and telecommunication services, and new malfunctioni ng sectors may be identified 
as a result of future market screening exercises. 
• Insufficient capacity of consumer organisations , including lack of resources and expertise  
The importance of consumer organisations is  highlighted by the fact that 69% of EU 
consumers say that they have confidence in in dependent consumer organisations to protect 
their rights (against 63% trusting public authorities)8. However, the situation and recognition 
of consumer organisations vary  very significantly across EU Member States. According to 
the empowerment survey, 49% of respondents can mention the name of at least 1 consumer 
organisation in their country, but respondents in  the new Member States are less likely to 
know consumer organisations (40% vs 52%). According to the 5th Consumer Conditions 
Scoreboard, national public funding to cons umer organisations ranges from 2€ per 1,000 
inhabitants to 2,112€ per 1,000 inhab itants and is at the low end in most new Member States. 
                                                 
8 Eurobarometer "Consumer attitudes towards cross-bord er trade and consumer protection", September 2010. 
 
 14In addition, in most new Member States the perc entage of consumers wh o say that they have 
confidence in independent consumer organisations  to protect their rights is much lower, (e.g. 
35% in Bulgaria). 
Consumer organisations need support as public funding of consumer organisations in these 
countries is limited and in danger of being cut fu rther, partly due to limited experience of 
consumer policy, but also because many organisations still lack expertise. 
The current action on capacity bu ilding for national consumer or ganisations (TRACE training 
courses in EU policies (consumer, financial services, competition) and issues such as financial management) is evaluated positively esp ecially in terms of its  wide participation, 
relevance of course content and the value of  the networking opportunities it offers to 
participants. However to further improve effectiv eness, courses directed at training trainers, a 
more flexible approach to course design and a more cost-effective delivery mechanism, are needed. 
• Lack of transparent, comparable, re liable and user-friendly information
 for consumers, 
particularly for cross-border cases, as regards price, and quality (including the environmental 
impact); poor knowledge and understanding  of key consumer rights  and protection measures 
by consumers and retailers alike; the uncertain ty about the degree of  trustworthiness of 
"shortcuts" (such as information intermediaries) that are currently developing, in particular in 
the digital area (such as  comparison websites). 
Following liberalisation, consumers are confront ed with increasingly complex choices, for 
instance in the services area. 
According to the Consumer Empowerment report published in April 2011, less than half of 
consumers in the EU (44%) feel confident, kno wledgeable and protected as consumers. Only 
in seven Member States does a majo rity of consumers feel all three 9. 
The Consumer Empowerment report also demons trated that consumer awareness and skills 
are worryingly low (e.g. numerical skills, understanding of logos), as well as their knowledge of fundamental rights (such as cooling off periods, unfair commercial practices, laws 
applying for cross border transactions). 
Information plays a key role with regard to  the development of cr oss-border e-commerce: 
cross-border e-commerce continues to grow at  a sluggish pace (9% in  2010, compared with 
8% in 2009 and 6% in 2008), despite clear bene fits in terms of savings and choice as 
evidenced in earlier studies
10.   
With the development of dig italisation, consumers will be increasingly shopping on-line and 
researching products on-line (especially thro ugh smartphones and as members of social 
networks).  
Specific challenges for EU intervention re garding consumer information include the 
asymmetry of national consumer information, and the dynamics and speed of change in 
                                                 
9 NL, SE, DK, FI, IE, UK, BE. See the Eurobarometer N°342: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm  
Consumer Empowerment report and Index: http://ec.europa.eu/consum ers/strategy/facts_en.htm  
10 Source: 5th Consumer Market scoreboard, March 2011. 
 
 15information provision and updating. To enable cons umers to make optimal choices, they need 
trustworthy choice tools. While such tool s are becoming available on-line (such as 
comparison websites) the main challenge is to find relevant, accurate and reliable 
information. 
The fact that consumers are not readily able to access, control and use the information that 
businesses collect about them is an obstacle to improving informati on, lowering searching 
and switching costs, improving consumer choice, and promoting competition. 
• Inadequacy of current EU consumer education tools , especially with regards to the 
developments of the digital environment 
The evaluation of the consumer education, info rmation and capacity bu ilding actions pointed 
to the fact that the EU educat ion tools in their current, one-s ize-fits-all form are no longer 
adapted to consumer needs. The main problem s identified include overlaps of target groups, 
separate collection of informati on, the fact that the informati on update cycle is not responsive 
enough, and overly restrictive channels of dissemination (interne t portal and print). 
Over the past 10 years, information and technology models have evolved dramatically. 
Developments include increasing access to the In ternet across the EU-27, rapid expansion of 
e-Commerce in some but not all Member States , accompanied by associated developments in 
risks to consumers, the rapid emergence of  electronic communication forms and social 
networking tools across the EU, as well as progress in ICT usage in EU-27 schools.  
The evaluation has further concl uded that target groups of Dol ceta and the Diary overlap and 
may duplicate national resources, that they  are not sufficiently responsive to policy 
developments in terms of their updating cycle and that the channels used are too restrictive to 
be effective for all target groups.  
The evaluation recommends that future educa tion actions be built on current and future 
behavioural studies that shoul d help understand the dynamic consumer needs at EU level.  
In the medium-term, the development of a single, coherent pan –EU consumer information 
resource should be envisaged. This should be  done through engaging the user community in 
the process of building the information res ources, and in cooperation with DG INFSO and 
DG EAC. This should allow to build a dynami c and interactive community of good practice 
in consumer information and education, .in lin e with the objectives of active citizenship. 
iii) Consumer rights and redress 
The development or the adjustment of EU policie s requires studies that necessitate funding from 
the Programme (of the kind of the study car ried out on Online dispute Resolution). 
• Sub-optimal protection of consumer rights, in particular in cross-border situations:  
Only a third of EU consumers say they are e qually confident when ordering goods or services 
via the internet from sellers or providers in another Member Stat e of the EU than from sellers 
or providers in their own country11. 
                                                 
11 Eurobarometer "Consumer attitudes towards cross-bord er trade and consumer protection", September 2010. 
 
 16Six out of ten companies refr ain from selling to e-commerce cu stomers in another Member 
State, depriving consumers of choice and value. 
Outside the fully harmonised areas, the regulat ory fragmentation of consumer legislation 
creates difficulties both for consumers and busin ess seeking to take advantage of the Single 
Market.  
• Problems faced by consumers when trying to secure redress, notably in cross-border  
situations:  
The Empowerment report has shown that more th an one in five Europe ans has encountered a 
problem for which they had cause for complain t. The less educated and elderly are more 
reluctant to seek redress, although they  are no less likely to have problems. 
Awareness among consumers about the m eans of redress is insufficient. 
• Need to further improve the integration of consum er interests in EU poli cies (in line with art 
12 TFEU):  
The most important sectors and emerging challenges for consumers include: consumer 
choices in recently liberalise d or increasingly complex mark ets (e.g. energy, transport and 
telecommunications), issues linked to digita lisation (e.g. access to networks and content; 
privacy), moving towards more sustainable pa ttern of consumption, the issue of social 
exclusion/vulnerability exacerbated by the financial crisis12. 
Moreover, it is widely expected that in the co ming years, consumers will be faced with higher 
prices in, for instance, the en ergy and food sector. The proper functioning of these markets to 
the benefit of consumers is therefore a key concern. 
iv) Enforcement of consumer rights 
The evaluation of the current Strategy and Progr amme concluded that the efficiency of the 
CPC Network  could be further strengthened by imp roving the coordination of the network. 
Awareness about ECC-Net  among consumers is not high enough13 and a number of 
complaints brought to the ECCs by consumer s remain unresolved because traders do not 
reply to the ECCs, in the knowledge they are no t obliged to collaborate and that ECCs have 
no powers to enforce compliance14. 
                                                 
12 According to the 5th Consumer Conditions Scoreboard, the ability of consumers to afford the same goods and 
services continues to vary very significantly across the EU . The level of the adjusted gross disposable income of 
households per capita, measured in Purchasing Power Standards (PPS), which takes account of differences due to 
different price levels between countries, varies hugely, ranging from Latvia (9045) to Germany (23222). This 
gives a clear picture of the remaining challenge to harmonise consumer conditions within the single market.  
According to a study carried out on the functioning of retail electricity markets, 22% of respondents said they had 
some problems affording their electricity bill (these respondents either stated that they worry about paying their electricity bills but usually manage to do so, or that they sometimes cannot pay their electricity bills on time, or 
that they often cannot pay their electricity bills on time). In  three countries (NMS), the share is more than half of 
the respondents. 
13 Although it is the best known of EU networks (11% of EU consumers have heard about it against 2-6% for other 
EU networks such as SOLVIT, FIN-net), most consumers have not heard of it (external evaluation of ECC-Net, 
2011, page ix). 
14 In 2009, among closed cases, 29% indicated  "lack of agreement with the trader". 
 
 17With regard to funding rules,  the current system of annual calls for proposal creates an 
administrative burden besides the actual work of the ECCs. Moreover, there is a need for 
greater stability of the financing in order to develop better planning. Finally, more flexibility 
on the upper limit of co-financing would help to address co-financing issues at a time where 
national authorities face resources constraints. 
v) Conclusion: the focus of the ac tions under the Consumer Programme 
While the problems to be tackled by consumer  policy are of multiple kinds and of broad 
scale, as mentioned above, the relatively sma ll size of the Consumer Programme means that 
actions to be financed under this Programme have to be targeted  on specific areas where 
intervention at EU level can ma ke a difference and add value. 
The selected areas for actions are of three kinds : 
1) Actions corresponding to lega l obligations imposed  by the Treaty and the existing EU acquis 
in the field of consumer protection. 
• Financing the maintenance and proper func tioning of the RAPEX Network, of the CPC 
Network of enforcement authorities and of the cosmetics databases. 
2) Actions which are not or could not be undertak en at national level because of their EU level 
character: 
• Assisting consumers on cr oss-border issues by: 
- co-financing of the operation of the Netw ork of European Consumer Centres (ECCs). 
National authorities or consumer organisations  are usually not in a position to provide 
advice and support to consumer s on cross-border issues 
- establishing and opera tion of an ODR platform dealing also with cross-border cases 
• Developing cooperation with international pa rtners to deal with  the impact of the 
globalisation of the production chain on product safety 
• Supporting the production of EU-level co mparable consumer markets data for 
benchmarking between Member States a nd  input into EU-level policy-making 
• Ensuring an EU-level representation of cons umer interest by financially supporting EU-
level consumer organisations 
3) Actions complementing and enhancing the e fficiency of measures undertaken at national 
level: 
• Coordination and co-financing of joint actions  in the field of product safety and of 
consumer rights enforcement ("Sweeps") 
• Supporting awareness-raising campaigns on cons umer issues with Member States and 
other stakeholders and working with intermed iaries to contribute to the provisions of 
clear, transparent and reliab le information to consumers 
• Supporting the training nationa l consumer organisations, which would be much more 
costly at national level without economy of scale 
 
 18• Providing a platform for exchange and sharing of good practices in the field of consumer 
education. 
3.3. Necessity and EU added-value  
Legal base 
Article 169 of TFEU stipulates that  "in order to promote the intere sts of consumers and to ensure 
a high level of consumer protection, the Union sha ll contribute to protecting the health, safety and 
economic interests of consumers, as well as to promoting their right to  information, education 
and to organise themselves in or der to safeguard their interests." 
The attainment of these objectives can be en sured through measures which support, supplement 
and monitor the policy pursued by the Member States. 
Article 12 TFEU stipulates that "Consumer protection requirements shall be taken into account in 
defining and implementing other Union policies and activities". 
Beneficiaries of the Programme 
The beneficiaries of the Programme will be c onsumers, national authorities in charge of 
consumer protection  and consumer organisations, with th e overarching objec tive of improving 
the situation of consumers throughout the EU. 
The Programme will offer support to consumer organisations  at EU and national level, as well as 
Member States national authorities in ch arge of product safety and enforcement. 
The Programme will also de facto benefit reputable businesses, as  effective consumer policy 
supports the proper functioning of the Single Ma rket, rewards the most competitive companies 
and drives out rogue operators. Empowered cons umers are drivers of innovation and consumer 
policy will therefore support innovative business . Finally, economic operato rs will benefit from a 
level playing field based on clear rules and better coordinated enforcement. In this context, the 
Programme will contribute to s timulating the economic growth. 
The results of the mid-term ev aluation of the current Strategy and actions undertaken under the 
current Programme highlight the complementary na ture of EU and national consumer policy (cf. 
data in annex 2). While Member States are best  placed to implement most  aspect of consumer 
policies, a number of EU actions  can complement their action and assist them by reason of their 
scale or effects: 
i) Product safety 
(Action listed in the Single Market Act)  
The operation of the RAPEX system is one of  the obligations stemming from the General 
Product Safety Directive (GPSD) and Regul ation 765/2008. Without financial support, 
activities would not be undertaken at the neces sary level and frequency to improve market 
surveillance cooperation. 
Enforcement of product safety by Member States  requires coordination at the EU level, 
because markets and supply chains are ever more complex across Europe and the world. 
Action at EU level and cooperation through the GPSD network delivers better results than a 
 
 19series of individual actions by Member States since it fills information gaps, including using 
information collected by other c ountries, and avoids di sparities in the Singl e Market. This is 
essential to a genuinely level pl aying field for businesses. It pr oduces a consistent approach to 
the risks from consumer products and offers  consumers throughout the EU a high level of 
protection. 
9 out of 10 national aut horities believe that RAPEX is useful . This assessment is shared by 6 
out of 10 consumer organisations15. 
In the international context, RAPEX also supplies the EU good data to support demands 
made to China16, and more generally the basis for discus sions with third countries, to improve 
the quality and safety of produc ts coming from those countries placed on the EU market.  
Cosmetic products databases - CPNP & CosIng 
CPNP (Cosmetic Products Notification Portal) is an online datab ase developed in the 
context of the new cosmetic Re gulation 1223/2009 (Articles 13 a nd 16). This database 
w i l l  b e  u s e d  b y  t h e  c o s m e t i c  i n d u s t r y  t o  n o t i f y  s o m e  i n f o r m a t i o n about the cosmetic 
p r o d u c t s  t h e y  p l a c e  o n  t h e  E u r o p e a n  m a r k e t .  P a r t  o f  t h i s  i n f o r m ation will be made 
available to Member States competent authorities for the purpos e of market 
surveillance, market analysis, evaluation and consumer informat ion, and to European 
poison centres for the purposes of medical treatment in case of  poisoning. This database 
shall be available as from 11 January 2012 and its use will bec ome mandatory as from 
11 July 2013.  
CosIng is an electronic database  on cosmetic ingredient s that presents the applicable cosmetic 
legislation in an easy and user friendly way. It will facilitate the information and access by the 
competent authorities and by the indu stry to the relevant legislation. 
ii) Consumer education and information 
• Consumer market monitoring  
Only at EU level can comparable data collec tion and analysis be u ndertaken to provide 
overall analysis of the functioning of the demand-side of the Single Market. The peer 
comparison of national market performance will help national policymakers in their reform 
programmes and the establishment of benchmarks.  
 The Consumer Markets Scoreboard provides i ndicators of consumer conditions in different 
markets and in Member States. The in-depth market studies of failing consumer markets deliver robust analyses of the pol icy issues that need to be tackled at EU and/or national level 
                                                
 
15 Value of RAPEX (evaluation of 2007-2013 Programme): national authorities: around 90% moderately to very 
useful (close to 70% very useful). Consumer organisations: 60% useful (30% very useful). 
16 China is the country of origin in approximately 60 % of  the RAPEX notifications and in some categories (e.g. 
toys) the figure is even higher. To date, in total 5469  RAPEX notifications were submitted to Chinese authorities 
for a follow-up. So far, Chinese authorities have reported  conclusions of their investigations carried out with 
regard to 1,386 notifications; in 795 in vestigated cases, Chinese authorities d ecided to take restrictive measures, 
including an export ban. 
 
 20to make markets work for consumer. Policy- specific behavioural research and testing 
provides practical tools to develop smarter regulation.  
 In general, the data is designed to be sufficien tly robust and representative to be used not only 
at EU but also at national le vel, thereby delivering some EU-scale efficiency gains and 
enabling Member States' benchmarking. 
 The data and analyses are used to help design new policies, for example in e-commerce, a fast 
growing area bringing about  specific challenges for consumers in terms of trust, choice, etc.  
They are also used to implement legislation in areas that have a significant impact on 
household budget such as energy, tr ansport, or telecommunications. 
 9 out of 10 national authoriti es and consumer organisations  believe that the Consumer 
Markets Scoreboard is useful17. A number of Member States us e it as a basis for developing 
their own evidence-gathering tools. The added va lue of the consumer market monitoring tools 
was also highlighted in the context of the count ry studies of the mid- term evaluation of the 
2007-2013 Programme. 
The harmonised methodology for classifying and reporting consumer complaints in the 
Commission Recommendati on aims to provide data on a comp arable basis across the EU and 
between countries and help authorities to id entify better the problems consumers face. The 
possibility to compare complaints with other co untries will also be very useful in identifying 
EU-wide trends. 
• Support to consumer organisations  
The existence of EU-level consumer organisation s is a necessity to ensure that the consumer 
voice is heard in the preparation of EU initiatives, thus compen sating for the lack of balance 
with industry associations whic h enjoys vastly superi or resources. There is  a need for a strong 
and coherent representation from the consumer movement at EU level with a consolidated 
consumer input into EU policy-making, EU in stitutions and EU-level  dialogues (including 
international ones such as the Transa tlantic Consumer Dialogue – TACD).  
The financial support to BEUC - Bureau Eur opéen des Consommateurs (around 50% of its 
budget) contributes to the promotion of consumer  rights, mainly in the field of financial 
services, energy, health, safety, food, consumer redress, etc. While BEUC has progressively 
developed alternative source of  funding (membership fees, repl y to call for tender) these 
sources will not cover the whole f unding in the foreseeable future. 
As far as national consumer organisati ons are concerned, EU support should only 
complement national support. EU support leads to economy of scale by providing training to 
many national consumer organisations at the sa me time; fosters transfers of knowledge and 
experience and best practice shar ing between participants from different Member States, in 
particular between those with established consumer support, and others who are less 
advanced; offers opportunities to build trans-national netw orks between participants, 
including for mentoring and peer-review. 
                                                 
17 Value of Scoreboard (evaluation of 2007-2013 Programme): national authorities: more than 90% moderately to 
very useful (40% very useful, i.e. "we use them freque ntly"). Consumer organisations: 90% useful (25% very 
useful). 
 
 21A consumer is a good consumer in the Single Mark et only if he/she is a good consumer in the 
national market. The Commission action is theref ore complementary to that of the Member 
States. Moreover, since BEUC relies to a large extent on national consumer organisations to 
collect data, it is essential that these organisa tions have the capacity to provide an accurate 
image of the situation of national consumers. 
Support to national consumer organisations is to  enable them to play a role to articulate 
consumer concerns at national level so that policy-making at EU level accurately reflect the 
range of issues across th e EU. Improve empowerment of consumers, knowledge when 
making every-day decisions, helps national mark et and as a consequence EU Single Market. 
• Education and awareness-raising  
EU consumer information and education in itiatives increase c onsumer knowledge and 
confidence in cross-border tran sactions, thus supporting the co mpletion of the Single Market.  
EU action on consumer education should pr omote EU policy priorities (Europe 2020), 
legislative effort and give atten tion to cross-border transactions in the EU. It is also a means 
of exchanging and transferring good practices from one national context to another. It acts as 
an incentive for raising the overall level of consumer empowerment across the EU, with a 
positive effect on the competitiveness of the Si ngle Market. Insofar as targeting national 
audiences, they should be based on a needs analysis i.e. supporting and complementing 
efforts in Member States, and require inte rvention with variable geometry to avoid 
duplication, and even more importantly, to suppor t exchange of best pr actices and materials 
between Member States, in order to contribut e to the creation of a single, coherent and 
authoritative source or info rmation at EU level. 
iii) Consumer rights and redress 
• Ensuring high level of consumer protection  
Article 169 TFEU stipulates that  the EU to contribute should  contribute to protecting the 
health, safety and economic interest of consumers. 
• Integration/mainstreaming of consum er interest in other policy areas  
The integration of consumer interests is an obligation stemming from article 12 TFEU. 
• Redress  
The existing studies point to the need of stre ngthening means for consumers to resolve their 
disputes with traders. The lack of efficient ADR/ODR limits the potential of this means of 
dispute resolution and creates imbalances in th e effectiveness of handling consumer disputes 
in different Member States, in particular as  regards cross-border disputes. This situation 
affects consumers' confidence in sh opping across borders.  Both businesses18 and consumers 
clearly state that concerns about potential  redress problems in another Member State 
                                                 
18  In particular for SMEs since their limited administrative capacity would not allow them to pursue claims through 
judicial means. The availability of easy dispute resolution such as ADR could address such concerns of small and medium enterprise. 
 
 22discourage them from selling and buying acro ss borders and thus not fully reaping the 
potential benefits of internal market19. In this context; the Commission will consider 
initiatives in the field of Alternative Di spute Resolutions (ADR ) and On-line Dispute 
Resolution (ODR). 
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) will o ffer consumers and businesses a cheap, rapid 
and easy way of getting redress out-of-cour t throughout the EU. ADR schemes respecting 
core quality principles will be available for all disputes, thus ensuring a level playing field.  
Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): The ODR platform will allow national ADR schemes to 
handle cross-border disputes related to the online sale of goods or services more effectively, 
by handling the procedure entirely online. The financing of a European platform will allow 
having a co-ordinated approach and  create economies of scales and synergies both of which 
can only result from action at EU level. As a consequence, ADR, including ODR, is a key 
action in the Single Market Act. 
Out of the 35 000 cross-border consumer comp laints received by the ECC network in 2010, 
91% could not be referred to an ADR  scheme in another Member State20. 
iv) Enforcement of consumer rights 
• CPC Network (Consumer Protection Cooperation Network) : 
The Commission is tasked with the management  of the CPC network (network of national 
enforcement authorities). The CPC Regulatio n (No 2006/2004) provide s notably for joint 
projects, joint enforcement acti ons and exchange of officials. Cooperation between Member 
States' authorities improves the effectiveness a nd efficiency of market surveillance, thus 
ensuring better protection of the economic interests of European consumers. It contributes to 
ensuring a level playing field for business, boo sting growth and competitiveness in the Single 
Market. The organisation of joint actions betw een several Member Stat es (co-financed by the 
Programme and the Member States) is an  effective tool in this respect. 
Coordinated joint enforcement actions with the CPC Network  such as the "sweeps" are a very 
efficient way to tackle issues whic h have a cross-border EU dimension. 
• ECC-net (network of European Consumer Centres):  
The ECC-Net was established and is co-financed  at 50% by the Commission at an annual cost 
of around 4.6 million euros. It provides a Europ ean network informing consumers about their 
rights when shopping across-borders and supporting th em in seeking redre ss with a trader in 
another EU Member State (plus Iceland and Norway) when something goes wrong. National consumer associations do not help consumers in cross-border cases. The network covers all 
Member States and thus secure s EU-wide support for consumers. 
                                                
 
19  Reportedly, 1 in 20 consumers faced problems with cross-border purchases of goods or services, while 59% of 
traders said that an important obstacle to them selling cr oss-border is the potentially higher cost in resolving 
complaints and conflicts cross-border compared to domestically. 
20 ECC network, 2010 Annual Report 
 
 23In 2009, cross-border expenditure amounted to 175 billion euros in the EU. The amount spent 
by consumers on cross-border intern et shopping is estimated at 30 billion euros for the same 
year. In total, these expenditu res represent 1.75% of EU GDP. 
As the total detriment suffered by EU consumer s amounts to 0.4%, the detriment related to 
cross border shopping (including internet) can be estimated between 500 million and 1 billion 
euros. 
In 2010, ECCs handled over 71,000 cases (+15% compared to 2009). In total, the network 
helped consumers clarify their claims for an amount of 14 m illion euros, and the volume of 
cases handled by the network has increased by more than 25% over the last 5 years.  
The services of the ECCs present a positive cost-benefit balance. Every Euro invested helped 
consumers to settle 1.77 euro wo rth of complaints and contribut ed also to the establishment 
of level playing field for business operators. 
4. POLICY OBJECTIVES  
The Programme should support the general objective  of the future consumer policy which places 
the empowered consumer at the centre of the Single Market . European consumer policy 
supports and complements national policy by seeking to ensure European citizens can fully reap 
the benefits of the Single Mark et and that in so doing, their sa fety and economic interests are 
properly protected. The actions will suppor t the following four specific objectives : 
i) Safety:  to consolidate and enhanc e product safety through eff ective market surveillance 
throughout the Union. 
Ensure consumer product safety  (operation of the RAPEX ne twork, coordination of joint 
surveillance actions with Member States and of joint cross-border enforcement; cosmetics); develop international cooperation to deal with the globalisation of production chains; collect 
data and information on risk and safety aspects of services 
Operational objective: Increase the follow-up by national authorities to RAPEX notifications , both in terms of 
reactions to notifications and in terms of Member States reacting.  
Depending on the outcome of the revision of the General Product Safety Directive (GPSD) 
which might lead to a unification of market  surveillance for harmonised and non harmonised 
products, the scope of this obj ective will have to be adapted.  
ii) Information and education:
 to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of 
their rights, to develop the evidence base for consumer policy and to provide support to 
consumer organisations. 
Enhance consumer market monitoring  and understanding of consumer behaviour to better 
identify market malfunctioning and facilitate smarter policy design 
Increase awareness of consumers by provi ding them with the necessary information  and tools 
to take decisions which really are in their interest when confronted with the increased complexity of choices offered to individuals sa fe goods or services of their desired quality, 
including in terms of environmental sustai nability; strengthen consumer education in 
partnerships with Member States and other actor s, and ensure that in  line with Europe 2020,  
 
 24the actions SANCO develops are readily accessible not just to the target consumers, but to 
intermediaries who can focus th e information on specific groups, such as for example older or 
more vulnerable consumers in particular Member States. 
Support the consumer organisations  both at EU level (financial support to EU level consumer 
organisations) and at national level (i n particular through capacity building) 
Operational objectives: - Improve the comparability and reliability of data based on consumer complaints - Contribute to rise of consumer tr ust in cross-bord er transactions 
 
iii) Rights and redress:
 to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action 
and improving access to redress includ ing alternative dispute resolution. 
Further improve the integration  of consumer interests into all relevant EU policies 
Support the development of targeted legisl ative action at the appropriate level of 
harmonisation; secure access to redress , including through the support to the development of 
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) a nd on-line dispute re solution (ODR).  
Operational objectives: - Increase the number of  cross-border cases referred to ADR by the ECCs 
- Ensure the rapid uptak e of the ODR platform 
iv) Enforcement:
 to support enforcement of consumer  rights by strengthening cooperation 
between national enforcement bodies a nd by supporting consumers with advice. 
Strengthen the enforcement of consumer legi slation through the CPC-network, coordination 
of joint actions with Member States 
Increase the effectiveness of the ECCs action th at is related to provi sion of information on 
consumer rights and support in th e case of cross-border disputes. 
Operational objectives: - Increase the flow of information and cooperation within the CPC Network 
- Increase the number of contact s with consumers handled by ECCs 
These objectives are fully supportive to Europe  2020 as regards growth and competitiveness. 
They will integrate Europe 2020 specific concerns on: 
• digital agenda , by ensuring that also the development of new technologies (e.g. digitalisation) 
actually leads to increased consumer welfare; 
• sustainable growth , by increasing the involvement and par ticipation of consumers in a move 
towards more sustainable patterns of consumption; 
• social inclusion , by ensuring that the specific situation of vulnerable consumers and the need 
of an ageing population are taken into account; 
 
 25• smart regulation , with consumer market monitoring ac tions (Consumer Market Scoreboard, 
market studies) providing feedbacks on the po licies that deliver results and on emerging 
trends, thereby contributing to design smart, lean and targeted regulations. 
Of course, the ambition of the objectives of the Programme will have to be adapted once the 
amount of the budget available for consumer polic y is decided by the budgetary authorities. 
5. POLICY OPTIONS  
5.1. Overview of baseline s cenario and options  
Baseline scenario  
The baseline scenario corresponds to the option 1  for the initiatives under the 4 specific 
objectives (as presented in details below). Under this option, the majority of actions conducted 
under the 2007-2013 Programme are pursued, with some adaptation. Some actions are 
substantially reduced or no longer implemented because they are no longer relevant (less 
emphasis on information campaigns in new Memb er States following accession, stop of the 
Master programmes, no substantial development of  education tools), while some new actions are 
launched with a limited level of ambition (for instance on redress). It  corresponds to a budget 
equal to or lower than the one provided under the current Programme (156 millions euros over 7 years). 
The effects of the societal changes mentioned unde r 3.2 means that the impact of similar actions 
to those conducted under the 2007-2013 Programme w ill be affected or reduced: the approach on 
product safety needs to take into account the in creased globalisation of the production chain and 
the growing importance of services; initiatives relating to consumer information and education 
need to deal with the increased complexity of decision making (information overload; more 
responsibility shifted to consum ers following liberalisation; sophi sticated products, services and 
advertising) and support more strongly the necess ity to move towards more sustainable patterns 
of consumption, the specific ne eds of vulnerable and ageing c onsumers. The development of 
digitalisation, on-line shopping and intermedia ries (such as comparison websites) makes 
necessary the adaptation of consumer informa tion and enforcement initiatives (e.g. on-line 
Dispute Resolution). 
Although it is difficult to make forecast for the period 2014 and beyond, it is to be expected that 
the pressure on resources will continue among national administrations dealing with consumer policy issues, for instance on market surveillance and enforcement. 
Consumer organisations are in da nger of seeing fina ncial support by nationa l authorities being 
substantially cut, in partic ular in new Member States
21. 
In time of economic uncertainty, manufacturers cut corners and might more frequently have 
recourse to fraud, people tend to buy cheap er goods and be subject to scams. 
Other options:  
                                                 
21 BEUC report on "Reinforcing the Consumer Movement in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe (CESEE)", 
2011.  
 
 26When considering globally the elem ents under each of the four obj ectives of the programme, the 
other options can be summarised as follows: 
- The option 0  corresponds to the absolute minimum acti ons to be financed resulting from the 
legal obligations imposed by the Treaty and the existing EU acquis in the field of consumer 
protection. 
- The option 2  corresponds to a more ambitious appro ach in line with Commission priorities 
(Europe 2020, Single Market Act) and the on-goi ng reflection on the future of consumer 
policy22. The budget under this option is around 25 millions euros annually. 
- The option  3 would require an incr ease of budget compare to the current programme for 
additional actions on some of the components of  the programme such as: the development of 
a public consumer product safety database; redress: setting a f und to support the financing of 
cross-border redress actions. 
The Communication COM(2011)500 of 29/06/2011 allocated 175 millions (in constant 2011 
prices) to the Consumer Pr ogramme for the period 2014-2020. 
The option 3 which had been initially considered has therefore been discarded since it did not fit 
with this allocation. It is mentioned below in th e description of options but is not subsequently 
evaluated. 
Indicative table of funding distribution under the options:  
Change in level of funding as compared to the 2007-2010 period: 
= : approximately the same level of funding; 
 + / ++ : higher level of funding / substantially high level of funding; 
 - / - - : lower level of funding / substantially lower level of funding 
 
 2007-2010 average Option 1 Option 2 
i) Safety    
• RAPEX 2,300,000 = ++ 
• Cosmetics 0 ++ ++ 
ii) Information and education    
• Consumer market monitoring 3,000,000 = + 
• Consumer organisations 2,100,000 = + 
• Consumer education 3,800,000 -- - 
Refocused on new activities 
• Consumer information 1,100,000 -- - 
Refocused on new activities 
                                                 
22 which might take the form of a Consumer Agenda to be published in 2012. 
 
 27iii) Rights and redress    
• Preparation of legislation 700,000 - - 
• Redress 0 + ++ 
iv) Enforcement    
• CPC Network 500,000 = + 
• ECC Network 4,000,000 = ++ 
The data in the table are purely indicative  and cover the ma in actions only . 
The following activities financed under the C onsumer Programme 2007-2013 will be covered by 
other programmes during the period 2014-2020: fi nancial support to ANEC (DG Enterprise 
programme); activities relating to the Unfair  Commercial Practice (DG Justice programme). 
The methodology and interven tion logic are outlined in the chart on next page.  
 
 28

 
 295.2. Detailed description of the options  
In order to ensure flexibilit y, the options are presented for each of the four components. 
i) Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance 
throughout the Union 
The GPSD will be revised before 2014. 
RAPEX 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
Maintenance of the RAPEX system , which is a legal obligation. 
Cosmetic Products Notifications Portal (CPNP): the creation of this European database for 
cosmetic products is a legal requirement of Regulation 1223/2009 on cosmetic products. 
Option 1 (baseline):  
Ensure the stability and contin uity of the produc t safety system by defining a long-term 
perspective for the operation of the RAPE X network and the coordination of joint 
surveillance actions with Member States 
Pursue the development of international coope ration to deal with the globalisation of 
production chains. 
Co-financing from the EU cons umer policy budget to the Member  States has been (pending 
structural changes) between 50 and 70 % of the total costs of the joint actions, amounting 
annually to approximately 1.5 million euros. As such annual and project-based funding is not 
the most appropriate form, steps will be taken to put in plac e a more permanent coordination 
structure. 
Option 2 (additional):  
Improve the coordination of mark et surveillance activit ies through the creati on of an EU level 
coordination body. 
Note: The new market surveillance legisla tion resulting from the ongoing revision of the 
GPSD should define the specific instrument s by which such a body is funded and the 
appropriate funding should be made available. 
Raise the EU share of co-financing for jo int actions and exchange of officials. 
Study the opportunity of developing EU initia tives in the field of services safety. 
Option 3 (additional) – "screened out"  
Possible development of a public Consumer Pro duct Safety Information Database, including 
a platform for complaints. 
 
 30ii) Information and education: to improve cons umers' education, information and awareness 
of their rights, to develop the evidence base fo r consumer policy and to provide support to 
consumer organisations 
• Consumer markets monitoring 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
Stop all activities in the field of  consumer market monitoring. 
Option 1 (baseline):  
Pursue with the Consumer Markets Scoreboard and in-depth studies, adapting the frequency 
and markets coverage to the budget available. 
Support the Commission work in the field of behavioural economics on a relatively ad hoc 
basis. 
Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
Target the Consumer Markets Scoreboard to specific problem s in the functioning of the 
Single Market, which negatively affect consumers with a view to identifying solutions 
benefiting the consumer. 
Target studies and surveys with a view to pr oviding policy advice on subj ects with a bearing 
on consumer interests, across all policy areas. 
Use studies on behavioural economics to inform policy makers across policy areas on matters 
affecting consumer interest.  
Make the evidence gathering at EU level (inclu ding behavioural studies) available in a more 
systematic way to other Commission services and provide incentives for them to use it including through tailored-made approaches , which may suppose additional financing. 
Promote the use of EU data on consumers in Member States' policies. Option 3 (additional to option 2) – "screened out":
 
Systematically integrate requests from Me mbers States into data collection design. 
• Supporting consumer organisations 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
No financial support to consumer organisations. 
Option 1 (baseline):  
- Pursue the financial support to EU level c onsumer organisations, using whenever possible 
partnership agreements in order to  streamline financing procedures. 
- Pursue (and adapt) the support to capacity  building for national consumer organisations 
subject to a proper monitoring on the performance delivered.  Explore the po ssibility and 
value of organisation of training in Member States. Promote multipliers of expertise at a 
national level. 
 
 31- Work with national authorities to address the heterogeneity of the national consumer 
organisations standing (and their sometimes difficult situation, esp ecially in the new 
Member States). The solution most probably will not come from EU level funding but 
from proper recognition of the importance of consumer organisations at national level. 
Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
Support international coope ration between consumer organisations (e.g. TACD23) to mirror 
transatlantic enforcement cooperation. 
Option 3 (additional to option 1 or 2) – "screened out":  
Include the possibility to extend suppor t to EU level sect oral organisations. 
• Consumer information 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
Discontinue support to all activiti es in the field of consumer information, with the exception 
of Europa website, DG Health and Consumer  Newsletter and other in-house information 
products.  
Option 1 (baseline):  
Continue to support information campaigns on consumer rights exclusively for acceding 
Member States. 
Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
Support awareness-raising campai gns together with Member States, possibly associating 
other stakeholders. Such campaigns will co ntinue to involve E CCs, national consumer 
authorities and consumer organisations as appropriate. 
Develop new actions to increase  price transparency, stimulat e cross border price comparison, 
increase trust in price comparison results and usability of such data for consumers, product 
testing, and dissemination includ ing by mainstream media. Acti ons could include supporting: 
- the development of code of conduct/bes t practice guidelines for price comparison 
websites 
- guidance for the development of EU-wide multilingual price comparison and comparative 
testing websites 
- the development of EU guidelin es on price transparency (in services of general interest, 
on-line sales) 
- promoting the sharing of best practices on f acilitating access to information on complaints 
and other forms of consumer feedback about  bad business practices and enable cross 
border access to such data 
- the sharing of best practices on faci litating consumer access to personal data 
- facilitating EU-wide compara tive product testing and dissemi nation of this information 
                                                 
23 The Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) - forum of US and EU consumer organisations promoting joint 
consumer policy recommendations to the US government and the European Commission. 
 
 32These actions will take into account the specif ic needs of older and vulnerable consumers. 
• Consumer education 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
No financial support to cons umer education initiatives. 
Option 1 (baseline):  
Keep the existing tools but focus on a more se lective portfolio of activities. Prioritise 
DOLCETA and the Europa Diary in  terms of target users and information needs that are not 
met through existing EU or national information sources.  
Consider the extent to which DOLCETA can link to other information resources available at 
the national levels, and prioritise resources on th e identified ‘gaps’ in  consumer education.  
Option 2 (alternative):  
Re-focus the resources currently allocated se parately to DOLCETA and the Europa Diary 
(and TRACE) at two main activities: the develo pment of the content; and the dissemination 
of the content through different channels for education purposes depending on target 
audience. The development and dissemination of  the content will be consulted with the 
community of practice composed of consumer organisations and othe r stakeholders across 
Member States.  
It will be also supported by a network of stak eholders such as teachers, NGO's, social 
services etc. where the participants will co ntinuously share information, skills, and best 
practice. 
Option 3 (alternative) – "screened out":  
Re-develop DOLCETA to be a dynamic and comprehensive information and education 
resource available in all 21 official languages.  It would be updated at the same speed as 
national sites so that there is synchronicity of information.  
Make a multi-lingual Europa Diary available in pr inted form to all schools in the EU each 
year for all students in the 15- 18 year target group, and would be  linked link it to modern 
ICTs such as 3-G mobile phone apps and interactive tools using social networking. 
iii) Rights and redress: to cons olidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action 
and improving access to redress includ ing alternative dispute resolution 
• Supporting the preparation of consumer legislation 
The revision of existing legislation or the pr oposal of new legislation will be subject to a 
separate impact assessment  (specific studies might be needed to support such impact 
assessments). 
• Redress 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
No financial support to actions  in the field of redress. 
 
 33Option 1 (baseline):  
Raise consumer and business awareness of consum er rights and the means to resolve disputes 
and obtain compensation by various means (e.g. leaflets, video, social media). 
Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
Support ADR and on-line dispute resolution (ODR) schemes. Financing a platform, including 
for associated services such as translation. 
Option 3 (additional to option 2) – "screened out":  
Collective redress: look at th e feasibility to set up a fund to support the financing of cross-
border actions. 
iv) Enforcement: to support enforcement of co nsumer rights by strengthening cooperation 
between national enforcem ent bodies and by supporting consumers with advice 
• CPC – network of enforcement authorities 
The Commission will present a proposal for the revision of the CP C Regulation in 2014. 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
Only maintenance of the IT tool (in line  with the obligation stemming from the CPC 
Regulation). 
Option 1 (baseline):  
Pursue current level of cooperation through  the network, including one yearly Sweep 
exercise, common activities and work shops for the CPC authorities. 
Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
Raise financial support to devel op more frequent joint actions. 
In addition a follow-up exercise to every Sw eep where Member States or an external 
contractor could verify after a period of tim e whether the websites ch ecked in the past still 
comply with legal requirements.  
• European Consumer Centres network (ECC-net): 
Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending):  
End the co-financing of ECCs. Option 1 (baseline):
 
Strengthen the cooperation with enforc ement bodies (CPC-N etwork) through the 
establishment of agreements on e.g. informa tion sharing and eviden ce about complaints. 
Where applicable the ECC-Net could establish protocols for cooperation with CPC and with 
Alternative Dispute Resolution schemes, such as setting out procedures for referral to ADRs. 
The ECC-net is co-financed with grant by th e Commission and by Member States on a 50% 
basis. The possibility to replace the curren t system of annual grants by a framework 
partnership agreement (that would reduce the administrative burden an d allow the ECC-Net 
to undertake medium term forwar d planning) could be studied. 
 
 34Option 2 (additional to option 1):  
The ECC-Net could put greater emphasis on consumer awareness campaigns of a preventive 
nature on cross border issues. 
The ECC-Net could be encouraged to make proactive and preventive approach towards 
targeted traders (within key se ctors) in order to raise thei r awareness about and compliance 
with consumers' rights via volun tary self-regulatory measures. 
The ECC-Net could provide support to the web-based platform for ODR. 
6. ANALYSING THE OPTIONS  
Overall impact on simplificatio n and reduction of burden 
The Programme is expected to have an im pact with regard to simplification by: 
- simplifying consumer market monitoring (with  Member States increasingly using results 
from the Consumer Market Scoreboard and th e market studies, including for benchmarking). 
This leads to a better unders tanding of consumers and busine ss and provides feedbacks on the 
policies that deliver results a nd on emerging trends, thereby cont ributing to design smart, lean 
and targeted EU policies. The cooperation with Member States on data collection is voluntary; 
- streamlining cooperation between Member St ates through exchange of information and 
experience (CPN, CPC), as well as  joint actions (RAPEX, sweeps); 
- ensuring a convergence in the implementation of  consumer policy, thus establishing a level 
playing field for business and simplifying life for consumers; 
- putting in place structured cooperation with  third countries (e.g. RAPEX China for the 
monitoring of unsafe products from China). 
The Programme incorporates  EEA and EFTA countries. 
By contributing to the improving of the functioning of the Singl e Market, the Programme will 
have a positive impact on businesses and SMEs in  particular. Some education tools are already 
used by SMEs. Using the ECCs as intermediaries might also help SMEs. 
The cooperation with the USA facilitates regulatory converg ence by common understanding and 
exchange of views. 
The tables below indicate, for each of the problem identified in section 3.2 above, to which extent 
the various options respond to this problem and contribute to achieving the objective. 
 
 35Impact: ---: much lower; --: lower; slightly lower; 0: baseline; + slightly higher; ++: higher; +++ much higher 
Cost: ---: much more expensive; --: more expensive; slightly mo re expensive; 0: baseline; + sl ightly less expensive; ++: less e xpensive; +++ much less expensive 
Impact/cost: ---: much lower; --: lower; slightly lower; 0: baseline; + slightly higher; ++: higher; +++ much higher 
  A NALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES  I MPACT  C OST IMPACT
/ COST  
Objective 1 - Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance throughout the Union 
The GPSD will be revised before 2014 .    
Option 0 (legal 
obligations 
only) Maintenance of the RAPEX network Maintenance of the system, discontinue joint surveillance actions.  
Establishment and maintenance of the Cosmetic  Products Notifications Portal (CPNP). --- + -- 
Option 1 
(baseline) Ensure the stability and continuity of the product safety 
system by defining a long-term perspective for the 
operation of the RAPEX network and the coordination of joint surveillance actions with Member States 
Pursue the development of international cooperation to 
deal with the globalisat ion of production chains. Under this option, the current system will be maintained; some streamlining in terms of 
procedures could take place, but no additional effort on enforcement. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional) Greater coordination of mark et surveillance activities 
through the creation of an EU level coordination body. 
Raise the EU share of co-financing for joint actions and 
exchange of officials. 
Study the opportunity of developing initiatives in the 
field of services safety. The creation of an EU level coordination body (not an Agency or any sort of EU body) is 
expected to lead to a streamlining of the funding procedures, better planning, coordination and 
information sharing between the authorities, as well as joint cross-border enforcement action. 
This would contribute to the reinforcement of safety levels throughout the EU and better 
functioning of the Single Market. 
The multi-annual framework for market su rveillance co-proposed by ENTR, SANCO and 
TAXUD should also provide fo r additional financial support to this objective.   
The importance of increased enforcement actions (and corresponding support from 
Commission) has been stressed by stakeholders in 2010 in the context of the public 
consultation on the review of the General Product Safety Directive. 
Joint actions lead to common understanding of ri sks and more surveillance activities on a given 
product (in line with what has been done in the past years on e.g. children clothing, lighters and 
baby walkers and helmets). +++ - ++ 
 
 
 36 
  A NALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES  I MPACT  C OST IMPACT
/ COST  
Objective 2 - Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of their rights, to develop  the evidence base for consumer 
policy and to provide support to consumer organisations     
 
• Consumer market monitoring     
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) Stop all consumer market monitoring activities  --- ++ - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Scoreboard and studies with current frequency 
and coverage 
Behavioural economic ad hoc support to policy 
design Under this option, the current data collection w ill be maintained (annual screening of 50 consumer 
markets, 2 in-depth market studies yearly), some smaller adaptation in terms of frequency or coverage 
could take place, but no additional market or consumer evidence c ould be collected. This minimal 
option would not properly address the need for tran slating the findings into smart policies. 
This minimal option would not leave room for new data needs that may arise as a result of future 
consumer trends and challenges. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional to 
1) Target Scoreboard and studies to specific 
problems in the functioning of the Single Market.  
Target studies and surveys with a view to 
providing policy advice on s ubjects with a bearing 
on consumer interests, across all policy areas. 
Tailor-made approach to provide support to other 
Commission services in cluding more developed 
behavioural aspects 
Look at possibilities to further increase the use of 
the data at national level. Under this option, the need to translate findings into smart policies will be better addressed. 
Including behavioural issues by testi ng different policy options is cruc ial for the success of priority 
policies with a consumer dimension since opinion and perception are not sufficient (as highlighted at 
the 2011 Consumer Summit). 
Impact of studies: 50 markets are screened annually with regard to how well they perform in terms of 
comparability, trust, problems and complaints, and over all satisfaction. Each year two in-depth market 
studies are carried out. A previous study on bank fees  led the banking industry to voluntarily develop a 
code to make bank fees more transparent. As a follow- up to a study on retail electricity, the regulators 
are developing guidelines on comparability of tari ffs and switching and the i ndustry helped developing a 
consumer-friendly bill. The results of a behavioural st udy on retail investment decisions will feed into 
the Commission's work on Packaged Retail Investment Products. Developing a tailor-made approach 
contributes to designing smarter po licies with a bigger impact (better up-take by consumers), focused 
on sectors linked to Europe 2020. 
Better understanding the growing gap between consum ers (need for in-depth studies on specific 
sectors and consumer groups: digital, ageing populat ion) addresses the need for better including the 
needs of specific groups of consum ers in policies (including vulnerabl e consumers). It contributes to 
strengthening the impact of policies affecting consumer s, including with regards to the move towards 
more sustainable patterns of consumption. 
Additional analysis of the data with a focus on bench marking national consumer policies, together with 
targeted discussions on these findings, will ensure t hat Member States make more use of the data 
when prioritising thei r national actions.  
Since the establishment of the Scoreboard, seve ral Member States have begun to use the Scoreboard 
data. For example, the Belgian authorities have set up a 'Consumption Observatory' within the ministry 
which will coordinate the national contributions to the consumer Scoreboard and ensure better use of 
the data. In this frame, the authorities also hav e regular meetings with the "Consumption Council", a 
body bringing together relevant national stakeholders,  to disseminate the findings and promote their ++ - + 
 
 37use. In the Netherlands, the consumer authorities are discussing the Scoreboard market data with the 
other relevant ministries (energy, transport, etc.) to  ensure that consumer interests are taken up in 
sectoral policy actions. In Finland, the main consum er research centre will prepare regular reports on 
the Finish data provided in the Scoreboard. The c onsumer authorities of Denmark, Sweden, the UK, 
the Netherlands and Norway are meeting regularly with the Commission to discuss their respective 
market monitoring exercises. Finally, more than half  of the Member States have started to implement 
the complaints recommendation and many use it  to prioritise enforcement activities.  
It involves some additional cost but the expected impac t of smarter consumer policies far outweighs the 
additional cost. 
 • Consumer organisations     
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) Discontinue support to cons umer organisations at 
EU and at national level No organised consumer voice and input into EU policy making. --- ++ - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Pursue the financial support to EU level consumer 
organisations, using whenever possible 
partnership agreements in order to streamline financing procedures. 
Pursue (and adapt) the support to capacity 
building for consumer national organisations 
subject to a proper moni toring of the performance 
delivered. Explore the possibility and value of 
organisation of training in Member States. 
Promote multipliers of expertise at a national level. 
Work with national authorities to address the 
heterogeneity of the national consumer organisations standing (and their sometimes 
difficult situation, especially in the new Member 
States).  
 The EU level organisations play a key role to c onvey consumer the voice into EU policy making and 
support national consumer organisations  especially in Member States having joined the EU after 2004. 
The use of partnership agreements has proved to  have a positive impact on the streamlining of the 
financing procedures under the 2007-2013 Progr amme and should be pursued under the new 
Programme. 
Capacity building for national consumer organisations is primarily the responsibility of Member States, 
but there is an EU interest in a strong consumer voice, including at national level, including for the 
proper functioning of the nat ional / single market.  
The recent evaluation on training courses organised in the framework of TRACE showed that was 
evidence that TRACE was helping build the capacity of  consumer organisations. For the future, it was 
recommended that the training courses will continue vi a new training models (such as blended learning) 
and train multipliers. 
According to the annual 2010 evaluation made by BEUC, 95% of the respondents among the 
participants to the TRACE courses indicated that the courses have had a large to medium impact on 
their daily work and organisations (highest satisfaction rates for t he courses on consumer law and 
financial capacity-building courses). 
Enlarging the target group for the training through the use of languages other than English (distance-
learning or courses in Member States), the combi nation of traditional and on-line courses and relying on 
multipliers will increase the impact. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional to 
1) Support international cooperation between 
consumer organisations (e.g. TACD) to mirror transatlantic enforcement cooperation. Relatively low budget and potentially positive impact but conditioned
 to equal support and political 
commitment from the US side. 
It would support a convergent regulatory approach to emerging consumer issues (for instance on 
nanotechnologies, digital and sustainability issues). ++ - + 
 • Consumer information      
 
 38Option 0 Stop all consumer information initiatives, except 
Europa website, DG SANCO newsletters and 
other in-house information products This option does not address the issues identified in terms of consumer information since dealing with 
e.g. cross-border on-line issues  requests EU intervention. -- + - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Information campaigns on consumer rights 
exclusively for acceding Member States This option is a minimal one, a necessary but one-o ff awareness-raising exercise for acceding Member 
States. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional to 
1) Support awareness-raising campaigns together 
with Member States, possibly associating other stakeholders. 
Develop guidance on price transparency, cross-
border price comparison and facilitate EU-wide product testing. Support the dissemination of 
information, including through mainstream media. This option supports the provision of information to consumers through the appropriate channels and 
the development of tools, thus contributing to incr easing consumers trust notably with regard to cross-
border e-commerce, and to the move towards more sustainable patterns of consumption. The use of 
appropriate channels of communicati on should allow reaching specific targets such as vulnerable and 
older consumers. 
Guidance on pricing should be target ed at national enforcement authorities (including regulators in 
liberalised industries) and aim at ensuring that info rmation are accurate, objective and easy to use. 
Private firms have not supplied sufficiently reliabl e cross-border comparison tools because there are 
legal and technical difficulties and, according to  some stakeholders, a desire to maintain a 
segmentation of the Single Market for commercial ("anti-competitive") ends. +++ -- + 
 • Consumer  education      
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) Stop all consumer education initiatives Completely stopping educat ion tools would lead to a loss of the resources invested unti l now into their 
development and the momentum that has been built up at various levels across Member States in 
school curricula regarding EU consumer issues. --- ++ - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Keep the existing tools but concentrate on a more 
selective portfolio of ac tivities. Prioritise 
DOLCETA and the Diary in terms of target users 
and information needs that are not met through 
existing EU or national information sources.  
Consider the extent to which DOLCETA can link 
to other information resources available at the 
national levels, and prioritise resources on the ‘gaps’.  This option will not address the overarching problem of uneven and duplicated information. The content 
update cycle would remain not frequent enough. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(alternative) Re-focus the resources currently allocated 
separately to DOLCETA and the Europa Diary 
(and TRACE) at two main activities: the 
development of the content; and the dissemination of the content through different 
channels for education purposes depending on 
target audience. The development and dissemination of the content  will be consulted with 
the community of practice composed of consumer 
organisations and other stakeholders across 
Member States.  
It will be also supported by a network of 
stakeholders such as teac hers, NGO's, social 
services etc.; where the participants will  This option addresses the issue of uneven and duplicat e information through the establishment of a 
single and coherent information resource.  
The variable geometry of this option will allow the update, when needed, such as with articles, news or 
consumer related issues.  
The content can be developed in new areas and will addr ess policy priorities such as media literacy or 
sustainable consumption.  
Synergies between education and information tools and partnerships with other actors would lead to 
savings in terms of resources (in particular with regard to content development). It will also enable to 
make consumer education interact with other  areas relevant for consumer protection. 
As regards the development and dissemination of  the content, stakeholders and the network of 
practitioners will have a constant opportunity to co mment on the content as it will be continuously 
updated.  ++ - + 
 
 39continuously share information, skills, and best 
practice. 
 The use of intermediaries and digital channels and content, should allow a broader dissemination that 
current tools like Dolceta. The use of more fl exible and adapted delivery channels will increase the 
impact.  
 
  A NALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES  I MPACT  C OST IMPACT
/ COST  
Objective 3 - Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action and improving access t o redress including alternative 
dispute resolution     
 • Support the preparation of consumer 
legislation The revision of existing legislation or the proposal of  new legislation will be subject to a separate impact 
assessment (specific studies might be needed to support such impact assessments ).    
 • Redress     
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) No awareness-raising ac tions, no support through 
ODR The lack of awareness among consumers and traders of the existence and opportunities offered by 
ADR would greatly limit the effectiveness of this tool.  -- + - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Raise consumer and business awareness of 
consumer rights and the means to resolve disputes and obtain compensation through ADR 
and ODR schemes. This is the minimum option following the expected establishment of ADR schemes by 2014. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional to 
1) Support ADR and on-line dispute resolution 
(ODR). Finance a platform, including for 
associated services such as translation. This option would entail additional non negligible cost, but the cost would be more than compensated 
by increased access to redress for consumers. 
All stakeholders (consumers, businesses) agree about t he advantages of ADR, in terms of efficiency 
and about the very substantial potential savings com pared to judicial proceedi ngs (e.g. 2011 Consumer 
Summit). ++ - + 
 
Objective 4 - Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer rights by strengthening cooperation between national enforcement bodies and by supporting 
consumers with advice     
 • CPC – network of enforcement 
authorities The Commission will present a proposal for the revision of the CPC Regulation in 2014     
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) Only the maintenance of the IT tool would be 
ensured (in line with the obligation stemming from 
the CPC Regulation). No common activities, no exchange of  officials, no Sweeps -- + - 
 
 40Option 1 
(baseline) Pursue current level of cooperation through the 
network, including one yearly Sweep exercise, 
common activities and workshops for CPC 
authorities 
 This option corresponds to maintaining current acti vity level (providing IT support and ensuring that 
Member States meet their legal obligation under CPC).  It does not address the need for strengthening 
enforcement. 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional 
to1) Raise the EU funding for more frequent joint 
actions. 
In addition a follow-up exercise to every Sweep 
where Member States or an external contractor could verify after a period of time whether the 
websites checked in the past still comply with 
legal requirements.  Under this option, we would work towards greate r uniformity of enforcement, the prioritisation of 
enforcement cases and an increased role of the Co mmission in coordinating the CPC (as requested by 
a number of Member States), thus exploiting bette r the full potential of the CPC network and achieving 
a bigger impact. 
It is expected to achieve similar or  higher rate of success than in the actions conducted so far across 
more sectors. 
- 2008 Sweep on ringtones: out of the 301 websites checked 70% were corrected after the enforcement 
phase. 
- 2009 Sweep on electronic goods: out of the 369 w ebsites checked, 84% complied after the 
enforcement phase. ++ - + 
 • European Consumer Centres network 
(ECC)     
Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) End to co-financing of ECC There would be no such action at the level of the Member States if the EU withdrew its engagement 
resulting in detriment to consumers in cross-border activity. 
The lack of consumer confidence to purchase cro ss-border would undermine the very essence of the 
Single Market. --- ++ - 
Option 1 
(baseline) Strengthen the cooperation with enforcement 
bodies through the establishment of agreements 
on e.g. information sharing and evidence about 
complaints. Where applicable the ECC-Net could establish protocols for cooperation with ADRs, 
such as setting out procedures for referral to 
ADRs. 
The current system of annual grants could be 
replaced by a framework partnership agreement.  
 Positive cost-benefit balance: 1.77 times its co st to tax payer (results of ECC evaluation) 
This option addresses the main shortcomings i dentified in the ECC evaluation with regard to 
enforcement. 
With regard to the co-financing process, fram ework partnership agreements would lead to a 
streamlining of procedures, reduce the administrativ e burden and provide greater stability conducive to 
better medium-term planning. It is expected that the number of cases handled by the ECCs (71,000 
cases in 2010, +15% compared to 2009) will further increase. 
 0 0 0 
Option 2 
(additional to 
1) The ECC-Net could put grater emphasis on 
consumer awareness campaigns of a preventive 
nature on cross-border issues. 
ECCs to make proactive and preventive approach 
towards targeted traders in order to raise their 
awareness about and compliance with consumers' rights via voluntary self-regulatory 
measures. Focussing more on complaints handling and launchi ng information campaigns on major cross-border 
consumer issues conducted through the whole ECC Network at the same time would contribute to 
raising awareness among consumers and thus reducing consumer detriment and the cost linked to 
corrective measures (e.g. redress). 
 +++ - ++ 
 
 
 417. COMPARING THE OPTIONS  
The choice of the preferred option under the f our objectives of the Programme is summarised 
below. 
• Safety: to consolidate and enhance pro duct safety through effective market 
surveillance throughout the Union 
Option 0, which entails maintaining the RA PEX notification system and setting up the 
cosmetics database (CPNP), has the lowest budgetary implications. However, its impact in terms of effective detection of unsafe produc ts on the market would not be satisfactory. 
Option 1 corresponds to maintaining the current  level of coordinatio n actions and joint 
surveillance. It provides more effective protect ion for consumers against unsafe products, but 
it does not to factor in the stakeholders' re quest for greater coor dination and increased 
enforcement.  
This issue is addressed in op tion 2, which allows for better pl anning and information sharing 
between authorities, as well as more eff ective enforcement action, including joint cross-
border enforcement. This option guarantees th e most effective use of the notification and 
surveillance system at EU level.  
• Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and 
awareness of their rights, to develop the evidence base for consumer policy and to provide support to consumer organisations 
Option 0 entails no action at EU level on info rmation and education, no consumer market 
monitoring activities and no support to consumer organisation s (which means in practice the 
likely disappearance of substantial and cohere nt consumer input into EU policy-making). 
Option 0 does not respond to th e needs expressed by policy make rs at national and EU level 
for more evidence based approach to consumer policy. 
Option 1 entails a minimum adaptation of current  consumer market monitoring activities. It 
ensures support to consumer organisations (f inancial support to EU level organisations, 
capacity-building for national ones) but it doe s not support international cooperation. This 
option does not address the issue of providing  consumer with information supporting the 
development of cross-border shopping and the need for an overhaul of consumer education 
initiatives (as highlighted in the separate ev aluation of consumer in formation and education 
actions). 
In contrast, option 2 envisages the development of a single and coherent information resource 
on consumer affairs at EU level and design interventions sensitive to the channels used by the target groups. It entails the development of tailor-made approach with regard to market 
monitoring and better understand ing of consumer behaviour to design smarter policies (better 
up-take by consumers), focused on sectors li nked to Europe 2020 and relating to emerging 
challenges (increased complexit y, digital, sustainability, ag eing population). While entailing 
medium budgetary costs, this option appears to best address the needs identified by the 
external evaluation of the information and edu cation tools and in term s of market monitoring. 
 
 42• Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory 
action and improving access to redress in cluding alternative dispute resolution 
Under option 0, consumers and business will not be made aware of the potential benefit of 
Alternative Dispute Resolution, thus limiting its  effectiveness. Option 1 addresses the issue 
of awareness-raising. 
Option 2 further enhances the effectivene ss of ADR through the development of on-line 
dispute resolution (ODR). This option appear s to be the most effective in passing to 
consumers the benefits of the savings brought  by ADR compared to judicial proceedings. 
• Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer rights by strengthening 
cooperation between national enforcemen t bodies and by supporting consumers 
with advice 
Option 0 corresponds to a minimum level of activities and coopera tion between national 
enforcement authorities and the disappearance of the ECC-net, the only network supporting 
consumers when shopping cross-border. Under op tion 1, the current level of activity is 
maintained both for the CPC and the ECC-netw ork while addressing the main shortcomings 
identified in the functioning of  the two networks. It would how ever not address the need for 
strengthened enforcement. 
Option 2 tackles this issue and better exploits  the potential of the tw o networks: increased 
coordination at EU level within the CPC (as re quested by Member States), leading to greater 
unity of enforcement and better prioritisati on of enforcement cases; strengthening the 
effectiveness of ECCs in line with expected increase of cross-border purchases. It is the 
preferred option. 
As a conclusion, option 0, which correspond to maintaining the minimum level of 
intervention imposed by the law and discontin uing a number of actions at EU level, would 
cause a reduction of EU support to consum er policy, and would contravene the EU 
commitments expressed notably in the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Single Market Act as 
well as the conclusions of the evaluation of the current Consumer Policy Strategy and the 
existing financial programme. It would fail to guarantee an adequate support to the future 
consumer policy currently under preparation. 
Option 1, corresponding to a budget equal to or lower than the current Programme, would not 
allow addressing satisfactorily the challenge s faced by consumers and consumer policy 
makers in the next years while option 3, co rresponding to a substantial increase of the 
consumer budget, may not be realistic and entails substantial additional costs not 
commensurate with the att ached additional benefits. 
Option 2 (corresponding to option 2 for each of  the actions) is the best option from a 
cost/benefit point of view. The budget under th is option would be around 25 millions euro 
(2011 constant prices) annually, which is in li ne with the proposed budget allocation for the 
consumer programme in the Communication COM(2011)500 of 29/06/2011. It also addresses 
the problems identified with regards to the ad ministration of funds: partnerships agreements, 
currently used for the s upport to EU consumer organisations,  could also be used for the co-
financing of ECCs; the creati on of an EU level coordinatio n body for market surveillance 
relating to safety should also lead to a stre amlining of the funding process in this area.. 
 
 43The possibility to use lump sums whenever pos sible will be examined so as to reduce the 
administrative burden. 
The management by the Executive Agency for Hea lth and Consumers also contributes to the 
streamlining of procedures in the management of the funding process. 
Under this option, the Programme will be able  to support the objectives of Europe 2020 and 
of the future consumer policy, focussing on sa fety, information and education, rights and 
redress and enforcement. 
8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
The Programme will foresee a mid-term and an ex-post evaluation at an appropriate date. 
The ex-post evaluation of the current (2007- 2013) Programme (foreseen before end 2015) 
will also provide useful elements for the implementation of the next Programme. 
A set of indicators has been defined for the 4 sp ecific objectives of the Programme to monitor 
its implementation. 
The objectives are indicative and the baseline will have to be adjusted with the 2013 values. 
As part of the mid-term evaluation or when necessary, the objectives will be reviewed to 
guard against the possibility of di minishing returns or capacity limits. 
Objective 1 : Safety - to consolidate and enhan ce product safety through effective 
market surveillance throughout the Union  
Indicator Source Current situation Target 
% of RAPEX notifications entailing at least one reaction (by other 
Member States) RAPEX 43% (843 
notifications) in 2010 Increase of 10% in 7 
years 
Ratio number of reactions / numbe r of notifications (serious 
risks)*  RAPEX 1.07. in 2010 Increase of 15% in 7 
years 
* a notification usually triggers several reactions  from authorities from other Member States 
Note : It is also envisaged in the context of the GPSD review (cur rently in technical drafting) 
that the legislation could require the publication by Member States of notices of all measures 
against dangerous products, whether they were  notified in RAPEX or not. Such information 
would enable the Commission to monitor product safety enforcement beyond RAPEX 
notifications and r eactions to them. 
Objective 2 : Information and education - to improve consumers' education, 
information and awareness of their ri ghts, to develop the evidence base 
for consumer policy and to provide support to consumer organisations  
Indicator Source Current situation Target  
Number of complaint bodies submitting complaints to the ECCRS ECCRS (European 
Consumer Complaints 
Registration system) na 60% of complaint 
bodies in 7 years 
Trust in cross-border transacti ons - % of consumers who are 
equally confident or more confident in making an internet 
purchase from sellers from another EU country Consumer 
Eurobarometer 37% in 2010 50% in 7 years  
 
 
 44Objective 3 : Rights and redress - to consolidate cons umer rights in particular through 
regulatory action and improving acce ss to redress including alternative 
dispute resolution  
Indicator Source Current situation  Target 
% of cross-border cases referred to ADR by ECCs Annual ECC report 9% in 2010 50% in 7 years 
Number of cases dealt with by the ODR plat form Database ODR plat form 17.500 (complaints 
received by ECCs related to e-commerce transactions) in 2010 38.500 (+120%) in 7 
years 
 
Objective 4 : Enforcement - to support enforc ement of consumer rights by 
strengthening cooperation between na tional enforcement bodies and by 
supporting consumers with advice  
Indicator Source Current situation  Target 
Level of information flow and cooperation within the CPC 
Network: 
- number of requests to exchange information between CPC 
authorities 
- number of requests for enforcement measures between CPC 
authorities 
- number of alerts within the CPC network CPC Network Database 
(CPCS) annualised averages 
of 2007-2010: 
- 129 
- 142 
 
- 63  
- increase of 40% in 7 
years 
- increase of 40% in 7 
years 
- increase of 30% in 7 
years 
Number of contacts with consumers handled by the European Consumer Centres (ECC) ECC report 71.000 in 2010 Increase of 50% in 7 
years 
 
 45ANNEX  1: T ABLE OF ACRONYMS  
 
 ANEC " The European consumer voice in st andardisation". This organisation 
represents the European consumer interest in the creation of technical standards, especially those developed to support the implementation of European laws and public policies 
ADR:  Alternative Dispute Resolution 
BEUC Bureau Européen des Unions de C onsommateurs (European Consumers’ 
Organisation). BEUC acts as an umbrel la for national consumer organisation 
in Brussels. Its main task is to represent our members and defend the interests of all Europe’s consumers 
CPC Net:  Consumer Protection Cooperation Netw ork, composed of Member States 
national enforcement authorities 
CPN:  Consumer Policy Network - informal network of high-level officials from 
Member States national administrati ons in charge of consumer policy 
DOLCETA Development of On Line Consumer Education Tool for Adults -  an online 
consumer information and education tool created in 2002, targeted at 
teachers in adult education as well as primary and secondary and the general 
public. A multi-lingual website, DOLCETA  contains information such as 
consumer rights and product safety, as well as teaching re sources (including 
lesson plans) in consumer education topics 
ECC:  European Consumer Centres - the ne twork of European Consumer Centres 
provides EU consumers with advice on their rights and helps them with 
disputes with traders in  other Member States 
ECCG:  European Consumer Consultative Group - composed of European and 
national consumer organisations. It is the Commission's main forum to 
consult consumer organisations  
GPSD:  General Product Safety Directive 
ODR:  On-line Dispute Resolution 
RAPEX:  EU rapid alert system for all dange rous consumer products (with the 
exception of food, pharmaceuti cal and medical devices) 
TRACE : Training courses designed to help bu ild the capacity of European consumer 
organisations, fully funded from the EU budget 
 
 46ANNEX  2: T IMETABLE OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
 
- 11 February: first meeting  of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG 
- March: report to EP and Council on the re sults of the mid-term  evaluation of 2007-2013 
Strategy and Programme 
- 11-12 April: 2011 Consumer Summit (input from stakeholders on specific items) 
- 3 May: second meeting  of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG  
- April/May/June: consultation of stakeholde rs, through the consumer networks: national 
authorities through CPN (Consumer Protect ion Network) and CPC (enforcement 
authorities); consumer organisations thr ough ECCG (European Consumer Consultative 
Group). 
- July: input from the results of the evalua tion of consumer information, education and 
capacity building actions 
- 13 July: third meeting  of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG 
- Before 3 August: transmission of the im pact assessment report to the IA Board 
- 7 September: IA Board meeting - October: ISC on the new Consumer Programme - November / December: adoption by the College  of the new Programme as a package with 
other financial frameworks 
 
 47ANNEX  3: O VERVIEW OF THE CURRENT 2007-2013  PROGRAMME  
 
The Programme of Community Action in  the field of consumer policy 2007-201324 has two 
operational objectives: 
• Objective I - to ensure a high level of c onsumer protection, nota bly through improved 
evidence, better consultation a nd better representation of consumers’ interests, and 
• Objective II - to ensure the effective application of the rules, notably through 
enforcement cooperation, information, education and redress. 
These objectives have been pursued through a combination of 11 actions. Concrete actions 
and budget allocations have been established in  annual work plans, wh ich are adopted by the 
Commission after consultation of a Member States committee. 
In addition to priorities already addressed in  earlier programmes, such as involvement of 
consumer organisations in policy making an d better enforcement, the Programme 2007 to 
2013 addresses the need to develop the eviden ce base, to integrate consumer policy more 
actively into other EU policies, and to reinforce the cooperation with Member States on market surveillance. 
The total budget allocation for the 7 years pe riod is set at 156.8 million euros: 136.6 million 
euros of operational budget and 20.2 million eu ros for technical and administrative 
assistance, including for the functioning of the Executive Agency). The yearly average of the 
operational budget is 20 million €. 
Grants and contracts under the Programm e 2007 – 2013 have been implemented by the 
Commission and since 2008 by the Executive  Agency for Health and Consumers
25 on a 
centralised basis. Grants  were given to support 
• joint actions by the Community and competent authorities from Member States and 
EFTA/EEA third countries fo r the support of the European Consumer Centres ("ECC-
net), joint enforcement actions in the area  of safety and of Consumer Protection 
Cooperation ("CPC"), and the exchange of enforcement officials (maximum level of 
co-financing: 50 %) 
• the functioning of EU-level consumer organi sations (maximum level of co-financing: 
50%) and EU-level consumer organisations representing consumer  interests in the 
development of standards for products and services at Community level (maximum level of co-financing: 95 %) 
                                                
 
24 OJ L 2006/404, page 39 – Decision No  1926/2006/EC of 18 December 2006 
25 Commission Decision 2008/544/EC of 20 June 2008 amending Decision 2004/858/EC in order to transform 
the "Executive Agency for the Public Health Prog ramme" into the "Executive Agency for Health and 
Consumers" and to extend the Agency's implementation tasks to the management of the Consumer programme for 2007 – 2013 
 
 48• the development of European Master Degr ee courses in consumer issues (maximum 
level of co-financing: 85 %), including scholarships for students and teachers 
To simplify the management of grants, use was made of flat rates wherever possible (mainly 
to cover overheads, travel and subsistence allowances) and Partnership agreements for four years were established in 2010 with EU-level consumer organisations. 
 
Summary of estimated operational budget 2011 per objective and action 
OBJECTIVE I - To ensure a high level of consumer protection, notably through an 
improved evidence basis, better consul tation and better representation of 
consumers' interests. 8 850 000
Action 1 . Knowledge base economic interest  
Action 2 . Knowledge base safety  4 940 000
Action 3 . Support for scientific advice  330 000
Action 4 . Preparation of legislation  230 000
Action 5 . European consumer organisations  1 350 000
Action 6 . Community consumer organisations for standardisation  1 300 000
Action 7. Capacity building for consumer organisations.  700 000
OBJECTIVE II - To ensure the effective app lication of consumer protection rules, in 
particular through enforcement cooperation, in formation, education and redress. 11 290 000
Action 8 . Joint actions GPSD and CPC  
Action 9 . Transposition (notably UCP and CPC)  2 555 000
Action 10 . Information, advice and redress  5 705 000
Action 11 . Consumer education  3 030 000
TOTAL 20 140 000
 
 
 
 49ANNEX  4: D ATA FROM THE EVALUATION OF THE 2007-2013  STRATEGY AND 
PROGRAMME  
 
Methodology and evaluation issues 
Three main sources of data have been used in carrying out these evaluations: 
- a literature review, - collection of numerical data and - consultations, including discussions with ke y stakeholders in the European Parliament, 
Commission services, EU organisations repres enting the different stakeholder interests, 
Member State authorities and national consumer  organisations. This includes meetings as 
part of four country case studies. 
The criteria used in the evaluations includ e effectiveness, relevance, efficiency/cost-
effectiveness, sustainability, external and intern al coherence, synergies, EU added value and 
overall impacts (expected and unexpected). 
There are some intrinsic limitations to the evalua tion, in particular the difficulty of isolating 
the effects of EU consumer policy from the ge neral economic and social context since, for 
instance, consumer confidence is subject to the in fluence of many factors;  the fact that impact 
of actions such as consumer empowerment are very long term; the numerous actors involved; 
and the fact that some actions are at an early stage of implementation. 
Success in meeting the objectives:
 
- Stakeholders consider th at the current Strategy  has globally met its objectives: between 
70 and 80% of national authoriti es and consumer organisations  believe that the Strategy 
has made a moderately to very succe ssful contribution to wards its objectives26, with the 
exception of redress and, to a lesser extent, of the objective of putting consumers at the 
heart of other EU policies and regulation (around 50%). 
- The current Programme  has been considered successful in  meeting most of its objectives: 
For 8 out of 10 actions, around 70% of Member  states were positive on the degree to 
which the Programme 2007-2013 has addressed th e need of consumers (moderate to large 
success), with the exception of redress. Consumer organisations believe that the Programme has had a moderate to large success for 6 out of 10 actions, and a limited 
success for the 4 others. 
Impact:
 
- 88% of national authorities a nd 82% of consumer organisati ons believe that the current 
Strategy  has made a large or moderate contribut ion to EU consumer policy initiatives. 
                                                 
26 Better monitoring of consumer markets and national consumer policies; Better consumer protection 
regulation; Better redress; Better informed and educated  consumers; Putting consumers at the heart of other 
EU policies and regulation 
 
 50- 86% of national authorities a nd 52% of consumer organisati ons believe that the current 
Programme  has made a (medium to large) positive impact. This result is better than for 
the previous Programme (for which 70% of national authorities thought the impact was 
positive and 54% of consumer organisations  thought the impact was low positive). 
This conclusion is confirmed when evaluating the impact by actions, with the majority of 
Member States believing that the actions th e Programme to date have had a large to 
moderate positive impact on consumer protection27, with the exception of redress. The 
majority of consumer organisations also be lieve that the actions under the Programme 
have had a large positive impact on consumer protection28. 
Sustainability:  
- 82% of national authorities a nd 70% of consumer organisati ons believe that the actions 
under the Programme will have a long term effect (up to 10 years) on consumer 
protection, safety, empowerment and education. 
Complementarity to actions at national level:  
- 9 national authorities out of 10 believe th at the actions undertak en under the current 
Programme are complementary to their national consumer policy. 
- The majority of national authorities (55%) be lieve that Member States are increasingly 
taking over or multiplying actions launched unde r the current Programme at national level 
(examples highlighted by respondents include: enforcement of consumer protection rules, 
actions relating to product safety, developi ng redress system, informing and educating 
consumers). However, almost half of cons umer organisations do not share this view 
(some of them highlight the gap betw een EU and national consumer policy). 
Addressing the new social and environmental challenges:  
- According to national authorities and consum er organisations, the new environmental and 
social challenges (ageing populat ion, climate change, limited na tural resources and social 
exclusion) are only partly addressed by the current Strategy. Similarly, 50% of consumer 
organisations (and 32% of Memb er States authorities) think that the current Programme 
should address other or emerging needs. 
Success in meeting the objectives:  
- Stakeholders consider th at the current Strategy  has globally met its objectives: between 
70 and 80% of national authoriti es and consumer organisations  believe that the Strategy 
has made a moderately to very succe ssful contribution to wards its objectives29, with the 
                                                 
27 For 6 put of 10 actions, at least 40% thought that the actions had a large positive impact with around a further 
30% indicating that the impact had been moderately positive 
28 For 6 actions out of 10, a majority of consumer organi sations think that the positive impact has been large (20 
to 30% moderately large). 
29 Better monitoring of consumer markets and national consumer policies; Better consumer protection 
regulation; Better redress; Better informed and educated  consumers; Putting consumers at the heart of other 
EU policies and regulation 
 
 51exception of redress and, to a lesser extent, of the objective of putting consumers at the 
heart of other EU policies and regulation (around 50%). 
- The current Programme  has been considered successful in  meeting most of its objectives: 
For 8 out of 10 actions, around 70% of Member  states were positive on the degree to 
which the Programme 2007-2013 has addressed th e need of consumers (moderate to large 
success), with the exception of redress. Consumer organisations believe that the Programme has had a moderate to large success for 6 out of 10 actions, and a limited 
success for the 4 others. 
Main results on the various componen ts of the Strategy and Programme 
i) Integration
 
- The work on integration  of consumer interest into other EU policies is seen to have 
progressed under the current Strategy. Integra tion activities are considered as very 
positive, with a high added-value. These activities are supported by the evidence gathered through consumer market monitoring. 
- Stakeholders have however pointed at some c onfusion about the role and responsibility of 
the respective commission services and EU ne tworks in the field of consumer policy. 
ii) Consumer market monitoring
 
Both national authorities and consumer orga nisations strongly beli eve that the current 
Strategy has been successful with regard to better monitoring of consumer markets 
(Scoreboards and related studies)30. They also believe (national au thorities to a larger degree 
than consumer organisations however) that th e current Programme has, in this field, 
successfully addressed the needs31.  
Both national authorities and consumer orga nisations believe that consumer market 
monitoring has a positive impact, with a substantial proportion believing that this impact is 
large. There is a slightly upward tren d compared to the previous Programme32. 
- Consumer market monitoring is an essential to ol to support the inte gration of consumer 
interest into other EU policies. 
- Behavioural economics will play a key role when dealing with increasingly important 
issues such as moving towards more sustainable patterns of consumption. 
                                                 
30 Strategy 2007-2013: national auth orities: around 90% moderately to very successful (around 35% very 
successful). Consumer organisations: around 80% m oderately to very successful (around 35% very 
successful). 
31 Programme 2007-2013: Addressing needs: national au thorities: 75% moderate to  large success (more than 
25% large). Consumer organi sations: 55% moderate to large success (20% large) 
32 Evaluation of the impact of the current action under the current Prog ramme (mid-term evaluation results): 
national authorities: 80% moderate to large impact (35% large). Consumer organisations: 70% moderate to 
large impact (more than 45% la rge). Programme 2004-20 07: national authorities: 77% (46% large); 
Consumer organisations: 67% (24% large). 
 
 52iii) Safety  
Both national authorities and consumer organi sations believe that the current Strategy has 
been successful with regard to enforcement, including safety (RAPEX)33. They also believe 
(national authorities to a larger degree than  consumer organisations) that the current 
Programme has, in this field, successfully addressed the needs34. 
An overwhelming majority of national authorit ies and consumer organisations believe that 
the activities relating to  enforcement (including those related to safety) under the current 
Programme have an impact, with around half of them believing th at the impact is large. This 
is in line with the result s under the previous Programme35. 
Authorities involved in safety will have increasingly to deal  with issues linked to the 
globalisation of the production chain and the safety of import s. The evaluation highlights the 
efforts made so far to work with third countri es and stresses that this momentum should be 
kept. 
The more specific public consulta tion on the revision of the Gene ral Product Safety Directive 
(GPSD) concluded that the joint surveillance actions fi nanced under the Programme were 
very useful. Ways to improve cooperation would be to increase financial support to joint 
surveillance actions and exchange of official s and to establish a coordination body at EU 
level. A majority of economic operators consider that differences between Member States in enforcing product safety legislation are cau sing problems for busines ses. Respondents are 
overwhelmingly of the opinion that more inte nsive information shar ing and/or cooperation 
between Member States would enhance the safety of consumers throughout the EU. 
iv) Consumer rights and redress
 
- Further strengthening the enforcemen t of consumer rights and redress  should be given 
priority. 
Network of European Consumer Centres (ECC-net): 
- The evaluation concludes that there has been  increasing support to consumers who seek 
advice on disputes cross-border through the ECCs. However, the evaluation concludes 
that their visibility should be improved.  
CPC and "Sweeps"  
- Stakeholders highlighted the positive impact of the Strategy and Programme on the 
strengthening of enforcement, in particular  with regard to the EU-wide network of 
                                                 
33 Strategy 2007-2013 – enforcement (including  safety): national authorities: around 85% moderately to very 
successful (around 25% very successf ul). Consumer organisations: ar ound 85% moderately to very 
successful (around 5% very successful) 
34 Programme 2007-2013 - Addressing needs: national au thorities: 70% moderate to large success (more than 
25% large). Consumer orga nisations: 50% moderate to large success (5% large) 
35 Impact (enforcement in general): national authorities: 80% moderate to large impact (55% large). Consumer 
organisation: 80% moderate to large impact (45 % large). Coherent with findings on previous Programme: 
around 80% of both national authorities and consumer organisations believed that impact of actions on 
safety was moderately to largely positive. 
 
 53enforcement authorities (CPC) and the coordi nated market surveillance and enforcement 
actions ("Sweeps") by the network. 
Legislation 
- The evaluation highlighted the positive impact  of the harmonisation brought by the Unfair 
Commercial Practice Directive (UCP), Time share Directive, GPSD, Package Travel 
(proposal expected in the second half of this year). It also mentioned the concerns relating 
to the level of harmonisation in the current discussion on the Consumer Rights Directive. 
- The issue of redress has been singled out  (for sometimes dive rging reasons among 
stakeholders) as the main area where not enough progress has been achieved by the Strategy and Programme. 
v) Support to consumer organisations
 
Consumer organisations believ e that the support provided u nder the current Programme has 
contributed to the integration of consumer interests into EU policy36 and, to a lesse r extent, to 
improving the awareness and understanding of th e work by the Commission. A majority of 
consumer organisations also believe that th e training for national c onsumer organisations 
organised under the TRACE programme has (par tly to completely) covered their priority 
issues. More generally on capaci ty building for national and EU consumer organisations, 
while a majority of national authorities believe that the Programme has been successful in meeting this need, a majority of consumer orga nisations believe that it has only had a limited 
success
37. 
Both national authorities and consumer orga nisations believe that  support to consumer 
organisations under the current Programme has a positive impact. This is in line with the 
results under the previous Programme38. 
The evaluation concludes th at the role of EU-level  consumer organisations  (BEUC - Bureau 
Européen des Consommateurs and ANEC - Europ ean Consumer Voice in Standardisation), 
financially supported through th e Programme, is essential for consolidating national 
consumer organisations input into EU policy making. 
vi) Consumer information and education 
The views of national authorities and consum er organisations diverge with regard to 
consumer education actions under the Programme : while a majority of national authorities 
                                                 
36 Consumer organisations believe that support from Commission has contributed to the integration of consumer 
interest into EU policy (70% moderately to significantly, 35% significantly). 
37 Addressing needs: Capacity building for consumer organisations at EU and national level: national 
authorities: around 60% moderate to  large success. Consumer organisati ons: 35% moderate to large success 
(20% large)  
38 Programme 2007-2013: Impact: national authorities: 60% moderate to large impact (20% large). Consumer 
organisations: 75% moderate to large impact (60% large). Previous programme: Member States: 58% on 
capacity-building; 65% on support to EU level organisations; consumer organisations: 85% on capacity-building; 90% on support to EU level organisations. 
 
 54believe these actions have been successful in  meeting stakeholders' need, a majority of 
consumer organisations believe they only achieved limited success in meeting the needs39. 
Both national authorities and consumer organisa tions believe that consumer education actions 
under the current Programme have a positive imp act. There is an upward trend compared to 
the previous Programme40. 
Both national authorities and consumer organi sations believe that consumer information 
actions under the current Programme have a positive impact41.  
- While the evaluation stresses th e importance of consumer educa tion, it points at the need 
to rationalise resources and consol idate some of the current tool s. It highlights the need to 
better define the target audience of Dolcet a. The evaluation suggests finding synergies 
between Dolceta and national curricula. 
- The country studies highlighted the importance of consumer education. 
 
                                                 
39 Programme 2007-2013 - Consumer edu cation: Addressing needs: national authorities: around 65% moderate 
to large success (more than 35% large). Consumer organisations: 30% moderate to large success (10% 
large). N.B.: consumer organisations are not the target group for these actions. The actions supplement and 
support those of the authorities. 
40 Programme 2007-2013 - Impact education: national auth orities: 73% moderate to large impact (41% large). 
Consumer organisation: 65% moderate to large impact (25% large). Previous programme: National 
authorities: 69%; consumer organisations: 40%. 
41 Impact: national authorities: 83% moderate to large impact (46% large). Consumer organisations: 79% 
moderate to large impact (37% large).