Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on a Europe-Asia cooperation strategy in the field of environment'
Date: 1998-02-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Asia, cooperation policy, environmental cooperation, environmental policy, environmental protection

C 129/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.98

3.5.3.
Article 7(4) states that Directive 70/156/EEC is
to be amended in order to make the objectives for the
year 2015 feasible. In this way, the guarantee of achieving
higher objectives is to be contingent on a regulatory
measure, while for the period up to the year 2005 the
only instrument is to be the producer responsibility
principle, using the negative value to encourage the
taking of preventive action.

3.5.4.
This mixed approach raises a number of ques-
tions.Adistinctionshouldalsoperhapsbedrawnbetween
vehiclesproducedbeforetheentryintoforceofthepresent
directive, on which negative value would be penalized
retroactively, and vehicles produced after 1999. Here it
is worth mentioning the provision adopted in Sweden,
where producer responsibility applies only to new
vehicles from the date of entry into force of the new
legislation.

Brussels, 25 February 1998.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on a
Europe-Asia cooperation strategy in the field of environment’

(98/C 129/11)

On 14 October 1997 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.

The Section for External Relations, Trade and Development Policy, which was responsible
for preparing the Committee’s work on this matter, adopted its opinion on 10 February 1998.
The rapporteur was Mr Koopman.

At its 352nd plenary session (meeting of 25 February 1998), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 92 votes in favour, six against and five abstentions.

1. Background

1.1. State of the environment

1.1.1.
In its communication the Commission presents
a gloomy picture of the environmental degradation the
countries of South Asia, East Asia and South- East Asia
are facing (1).

1.1.2. Water pollution is seen as Asia’s most pressing
environmental problem, accounting for substantial mor-
tality and morbidity rates, especially among children. In

large areas shortages of freshwater occur. Singapore
already experiences chronic water scarcity (2), while
India is heading that way.

Air pollution is also creating severe health problems.
Emissions of particulate matter and SO2 in Asian cities
are among the highest in the world. Asia’s share of
world greenhouse gases’ emissions amounted to 20 %
in 1985 and is expected to rise to 25-30 % by the
year 2000(3).

(1) According to the usual EU-classification: South Asia:
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal,
Pakistan and Sri Lanka. East Asia: China, (Hong Kong),
Korea, Macao, Taiwan and Japan. South-East Asia:
The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)
consisting of: Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam + candidate members:
Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.

(2) Less than 1 000 cubic metres per person per year. Such
limited availability begins to hamper economic develop-
ment and health.

(3) Of which Nepal and Bhutan consume less than 20 kg of
oil equivalent per capita per year in contrast to China,
Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore consuming more than
600 kg, compared with 4 000 kg for Europe and 8 000 for
USA.

27.4.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 129/49

1.1.3. Waste management poses severe problems as
well and will continue to present major health hazards
to the (poor) population and to add to the bill of a
future clean-up as economic growth and the rate of
urbanization are expected to remain high.

Soil degradation is significant in the whole of Asia,
largely due to farmers seeking to maintain food self-
sufficiency.

Deforestation has reached such proportions that tra-
ditional exporters, such as the Philippines and Thailand
have virtually exhausted their forests. India, which has
been self-sufficient in the past has become a major
importer. And, finally the loss of biodiversity has to be
mentioned.

Biodiversity is seriously threatened in the forests of Sri
Lanka, eastern Himalayas and (southern) India. The
communication mentions that nearly three-quarters of
the natural habitat in the region has been lost or
irreversibly degraded.

1.2. Causes

The communication pinpoints three causes for
1.2.1.
this state of the environment: the lack of institutional
capacity to cope with (environmental) problems, Asia’s
large and growing population and the pace of indus-
trialization and urbanization in its wake.

Of its population of 2,8 billion, over half the world’s
population, 700 million live in absolute poverty, with a
largest concentration in South Asia.

The population is expected to grow by almost two per
cent per annum and double this figure in the big
cities, which continue to attract the bulk of industrial
development.

1.3. Existing EU-Asia environmental cooperation

1.3.1.
At the level of the Community a number of
agreements have been concluded with Asian countries.
The Commission estimates its commitments in 1994 to
amount to 130 MECU. 40 % of its funds were allocated
to tropical forests, 30 % to land resources and about
8 % to both freshwater and institutional strengthening.
Biodiversity, the urban environment and pollution con-
trol attracted together about 5 % of the available funds.

1.3.2.
The EU supports a number of programmes for
which particular channels and instruments are used.
Mention may be made of: programmes under S&T
cooperation (science and technology), the EU-China

environmental management cooperation programme,
economic cooperation through the European Business
Information Centres (EBIC) which have been set up with
local chambers of commerce and business associations of
Member States, and through a technical window which
is exclusively representing the environment (Regional
Institute of Environmental Technology-RIET), the Asia-
Invest Programme, the European Community Invest-
ment Partners’ scheme (ECIP) in pursuance of foreign
direct investment, the Community’s scheme for Gen-
eralized Tariff Preferences (GSP) and finally the lending
operations of the EIB which at present focus on energy
and transport.

1.3.3. Mention should also be made of various
initiatives aimed at fostering better relations and partner-
ships between the EU and groups of Asian nations. In
1996 the Commission presented its communication:
creating a new dynamic in EU-ASEAN relations. (1) In
the joint declaration of the 12th ASEAN -EU ministerial
meeting of February 1997, reference is made to the
decision to establish an informal working group on the
environment. At the same venue, a day later, the first
foreign ministers’ meeting of ASEM (2) took place. In its
conclusion reference was made to the progress made to
establish the Asia-Europe environmental technology
centre in Thailand, to which the heads of state had
decided in their meeting in March 1996.

1.3.4. Member States of the EU maintain numerous
bilateral environmental relations with Asian nations.

The following flows may be distinguished: public
development aid, commercial promotion schemes,
resources of major operators seeking to commercially
enter environmental markets together with local partners
and loans provided by European private banks.

The total flow of resources and programmes of individ-
ual Member States is not known, as there do not exist
mechanisms to record such activities.

2. The communication’s Europe-Asia environment

cooperation strategy

2.1.
‘the
The communication aims at enhancing:
efficiency and the impact of the overall cooperation
between Europe and Asia in the field of the environ-

(1) COM(96) 314 final of 3.7.1996. In paragraph 3.1.4 mention
is made of a number of areas in the field of the environment
in which (more) cooperation is desired.

(2) Asia and EU Meeting. The first meeting of heads of states
of ten Asian countries (ASEAN + China, Korea and Japan)
and of the EU and its Member States took place in March
1996. The second meeting will be held in London in April
1998.

C 129/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.98

ment.’ It proposes key measures which should serve as
a reference for cooperation and pleads for voluntary
coordination between all European actors in order to
increase the impact of the resources that flow from
Europe to Asia. The strategy covers 17 (developing)
countries: The members and candidate members of
ASEAN minus Brunei and Singapore (1), the (8) South
Asian countries and China.

The communication lists four major reasons for

2.2.
launching this new strategy.

First of all it notes that (many) environmental problems
are not limited to national borders, such as the effects
of emissions of greenhouse gases, depletion of the ozone
layer and the loss of biodiversity.

In the second place, poverty is directly influencing
environmental degradation as viable sustainable alterna-
tives for their use of the environment are not (sufficiently)
available to the poor. Thirdly, the present level of
environmental degradation and the continuing pressures
on the environment begin to threaten economic develop-
ment in these regions. And because of the global nature
of the economies, their effects will also be felt in
Europe (2). Finally Asia’s efforts to address their environ-
mental problems provides opportunities for European
business to make contributions to meeting these chal-
lenges, to mutual benefit.

The Commission’s strategy and proposals are

2.3.
based on three pillars.

It calls for the mobilization of the private sector. This is
not only necessary in order to attract sufficient funds —
it mentions the need for 34 billion ECU a year by the
year 2000, but also because a market driven approach
‘could improve resource efficiency’.

Secondly, more emphasis should be placed on urban
and industry related issues, pollution prevention and
cleaner technologies as these problems rank among the
most pressing to be solved, instead of the priority given
to natural environment related issues.

The Commission furthermore believes in the prevalence
of ‘win-win’ opportunities by taking off from European

(1) These two countries have been excluded from the proposed
strategy because their level of economic development far
exceeds that of the other countries.

(2) The effects of faltering financial markets in a number of
Asian countries, precipitating steep declines of their bourses
last October on the stock exchanges in the ‘western world’
are a case in point.

strengths such as: environment management capacity
building, equipment and technologies to reduce and
prevent pollution and innovation and research and
development.

2.4.
The Commission proposes to focus the cooper-
ation on the three key areas of activities it has mentioned
as European strengths and presents for each of these
practical guidelines.

It suggests to pursue the environmental dialogue on the
basis of strategies which have to be developed for each
of the listed countries.

It pleads for synergy with Member States’ programmes
and calls for the allocation of sufficient resources.

2.5.
The communication concludes with mentioning
four criteria on the basis of which EU cooperation
activities will be selected.

These are: mutual interest, complementarity with Mem-
ber States’ activities, synergy with multilateral agencies
and sustainability.

3. General comments

3.1.
The Committee welcomes this well-written com-
munication and agrees with the basic principles upon
which its proposals rest. It presents the problems, the
need for action and the strategy for cooperation in a
compact but compelling manner. Its logic is so convinc-
ing that one is almost tempted to overlook and underesti-
mate the formidable obstacles and impasses which will
lie ahead in the process and have to be overcome before
culminating in the reaping of the fruits of the executed
projects. These huge problems may also be illustrated
by the deliberations and the commitments made at the
Kyoto conference on climate change which was held in
December 1997.

The Committee wishes to state once more in this context
its strong commitment towards sustainability at all
policy levels.

The growth pause which these countries have experi-
enced in 1997 should provide an opportunity to integrate
environmental protection and sustainable development
criteria more fully into the new economic direction
which these countries are going to have to take. EU
cooperation and experience can play a major part in
this strategy.

3.2. We understand that the reason for not addressing
these obstacles is not because the Commission is not
aware of them, or minimizes their importance, but
because it believes the Community at large, Commission,

27.4.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 129/51

governments of Member States and social partners in
the broadest sense should first get their act together and
reach agreement on the framework it proposes. Once
the strategic level
including
agreement on the question in what fields we are strong,
and thereafter also by Asia, the next stage will be to
formulate objectives on the basis of which programmes
and projects will be designed. In these stages attention
is to be given to address these hindrances.

is defined by Europe,

3.3.
This is also why the Commission has not yet
thought fit to informally consult other international
agencies or individual Asian countries before it finalized
this communication. The ESC can follow this line of
reasoning, but wishes to observe that the logic also
contains elements of a circular argument. For, agreement
on this framework may be facilitated by a better
understanding of its implications, of which, because of
all the sensitivities involved, an inkling of the reactions
of Asian countries towards the proposed cooperation
approach would seem to be an obvious parameter.

3.4.
The communication does not provide an insight
into its follow-up. How does the Commission intend to
proceed once the Council has reached agreement? The
Committee urges the Commission to indicate in what
manner it thinks to engage in these discussions with its
Asian partners as well as the international organ-
izations (1) which are also working in this field, as this
will help them to formulate a position on the strategy.

3.5.
The communication rightly mentions the need
for more coordination of programmes and projects
which are being carried out in the Member States for
reasons of avoidance of duplication, putting in tune and
possible synergies. Given the direct causal relationship
between the protection of the environment and the fight
against poverty, relevant programmes under the aegis
of development cooperation should be incorporated in
such schemes (2). For, the Committee realizes that the
poor are hardest hit by the environmental degradation
and least able to defend themselves against or escape
from the incidence of pollution. It must be admitted
however that it is often, even at the national level,
difficult to achieve the required coordination as different
agencies are accustomed to follow their own patterns
(networks, methodology) of cooperation. Moreover
coordination may be seen to be interfering with own

(1) E.g.: ESCAP (UN’s Economic and Social Commission for

Asia and the Pacific), World Bank and UNCTAD.

(2) At the level of the Commission this responsibility (for
Asian countries) rests with Directorate General I (F) and I
B ( C).

interests (3). Therefore it will be necessary to develop
mechanisms, such as the creation of expert groups,
which will be conducive to fostering coordination and
which will make visible the rewards such schemes may
yield to the participants.

It has to be recognized that

3.6.
the seventeen
countries which have been selected for the strategy are
very different in nature. They do not belong to one
particular partnership, nor do they entertain a common
relationship with the EU. Although the communication
correctly mentions the need for specific environment
strategies for each Asian partner, it would be most
unfortunate, if the EU would have to negotiate the
cooperation strategy with each of the countries individu-
ally. It is true that ASEM is covering South-East and
East Asia, but no such relationship exists as of yet
with South Asia (4). Perhaps ESCAP could become an
important forum for the dialogue with Asia as it is
fulfilling a respected role in environmental cooperation.

Although awareness of the ill effects of environ-
3.7.
mental degradation in a number of Asian countries on
health and economic development is growing, an integral
vision on sustainable development is often lacking. The
institutional capacity to cope with these problems needs
to be strengthened urgently in order to become more
effective, also because of the relatively weak position of
the newly created national environmental depart-
ments (5). The Committee therefore fully agrees with the
communication on the significance of the development
of the environmental management capacity. It also
agrees with the Commission that the Member States of
the EU could make a vital contribution in this area (6).

(3) The success of the EU- interservice group on China proves
that cooperation can be beneficial to the realization of the
goals of the individual departments.

(4) Although the South Asian Agreement on Regional Co-

operation (SAARC) may fulfil that function.

(5) The growth of environmental management capacity in
industry is positively influenced by trade (with more
developed countries) considerations. Management capacity
may also increase through investments made by foreign
firms. An example is the introduction of toxic waste
management in the Philippines. Foreign firms desiring to
set up production facilities ultimately may decide to take
care of Toxic and Hazardous Waste themselves in the
absence of government action because they could not
‘afford’ to be accused of being lax with respect to toxic
waste on their premises.

(6) Mention should be made of the implementation of ISO
14000 series (environmental management systems) by
developing countries which will help companies to better
control the environmental impact of their activities. In
many Asian countries a proactive approach has been taken.
At the regional
level, mention may be made of the
establishment of a technical working group under the
ASEAN Consultative Committee for Standards and
Quality.

C 129/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.98

3.8.
The Committee notes with pleasure the emphasis
the communication places on the role of the private
sector in meeting Asia’s environmental challenges. It
firmly believes that the social partners should be part of
the strategy and their participation should be actively
sought. Indeed, a wealth of literature supports the thesis
that a larger involvement of private business and greater
reliance on market-based solutions, conditioned and
supported by an «enabling» environment, good gover-
nance (capacity building) are the most efficient vehicles
for generating sustained development (1).

3.9.
The Committee also notes with approval the
chairman’s statement of the Asia-Europe meeting in
Bangkok of March 1996, which seems to endorse such
an approach as well. It would like to observe however
that this element of the strategy needs to be elaborated,
in order to create transparent mechanisms for the private
sector to play its role effectively.

3.10.
It is for this reason that we hope that UNICE
will raise this subject at the Europe Asia Business Forum
which will precede ASEM II.

3.11.
The Committee also endorses the third pillar of
the Commission’s strategy of strengthening environmen-
tal R&D. Indeed, technological development is one of
Europe’s strengths and could play a major role in the
cooperation strategy to the mutual benefit of all the
countries involved.

And finally the Committee agrees with the
3.12.
proposed shift of environmental priorities towards
urban and industry related problems. It is indeed
necessary, given the urgency of these issues, to increase
the budget lines for technology transfer, urban environ-
ment and pollution control for which at present less
than 10 % of the EU-funds for environmental projects
are allocated notwithstanding the importance of con-
tinuing to contribute to the preservation of the natural
habitat.

environmental standards that could prevail for their
customers in overseas markets. There is evidence that
SMEs make a relatively large contribution to industrial
pollution, although there is a (great) potential for
improving environmental management through better
housekeeping practices provided the appropriate sup-
porting infrastructure is in place (2).

4.2.
The Committee notes the decision taken by the
heads of state of ASEM to establish an Asia-Europe
Environmental Technology Centre in Thailand. It wishes
to signal however the existence of the Regional Institute
for Environmental Technology (RIET) in Singapore
which was established by the Community and Singapore
jointly in 1993. As the communication rightly observes,
RIET became, in its three years of operation, a centre of
excellence in the transfer and exchange of environmental
know-how and services between Europe and Asia.

The Committee thinks it would be beneficial for both the
European and Asian ASEM partners if complementarity
were to be pursued between this new environmental
institute and RIET. As RIET is more business oriented,
promoting best practices and business in environment,
the new institute may be more involved in societal
environmental issues, especially by providing views on
policy, the institutional framework and institutional
capacity in environmental management. The institute
could also stimulate strategic thinking on environmental
issues and to serve as a forum for consultation and
dialogue.

4.3.
The communication asserts that foreign firms
are setting up production facilities in certain Asian
countries in order to benefit from less stringent environ-
mental measures. The Committee would like to observe
that this is fortunately not taking place on a significant
scale (3).

4. Specific comments

4.1.
The Committee is of the opinion that the position
of the SMEs in Asia deserves special attention. In many
developing countries SMEs have a large participation in
exports. In India for instance SMEs account for 90 % of
the export of textiles and leather (products). These
companies may need assistance to comply with high

The Committee would obviously be even more opposed
towards a migration of foreign firms if this were to be
induced by a lowering of environmental standards in
Asian countries. In this connection the Committee calls
on the Commission, in the framework of multilateral
negotiation rounds, such as the OECD negotiations on
a multilateral agreement on investment (MAI) and the
WTO, actively to support the ‘non-lowering domestic
standards’ approach. These phenomena illustrate pre-

(1) For instance: The World Bank, The State in a changing
world, 1997, part. pp. 163-165, United Nations, State of
the environment in Asia and the Pacific, 1995, chapter 19,
Social Economic Council (Netherlands), The role of the
private sector in international cooperation (in Dutch),
1997.

(2) See also footnote 5, p. 51, and for instance: Unctad.
TD/B/COM 1/EM.4/2 of 18 August 1997 (points 55-61).
(3) COM(96) 54 final of 28.2.1996, p. 5 and COM(96) 314
final of 3.7.1996. In paragraph 3.1.4 mention is made of a
number of areas in the field of the environment in which
(more) cooperation is desired.

27.4.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 129/53

cisely the need to encourage the Asian nations to improve
their environmental performance and the relevance and
timeliness of the proposed strategy.

4.4.
The Committee would finally like to recommend
that all parts of budget lines dealing with environmental
aspects and cooperation for Asia are grouped together
under a kind of Framework Programme comparable to
the one for research and technological development

referred to under Article 130i of the Treaty or the newly
proposed Framework Programme for energy. Such an
administrative rearrangement of budget lines would
greatly increase the transparency of the environmental
effort of the EU. Improved transparency will also provide
the policy maker with a better insight into possible
relationships between the various programmes that are
being considered and with a simple tool to enhance the
desired coordination and synergy of approved schemes.

Brussels, 25 February 1998.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

APPENDIX

to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee

The following amendment attracted more than 25 % of the votes cast, but was rejected during the course
of the deliberations:

Point 4.3

Replace the first two paragraphs with the following:

‘The Committee notes with concern the Commission’s assertion that foreign firms are setting up
production facilities in certain Asian countries in order to benefit from less stringent environmental
measures.

Promoting environmental standards to protect public health and encouraging sustainable development
must be a permanent and major focus of the EU’s cooperation strategy with the Asian countries. To this
end, the Committee also calls on the Commission, to engage in a process leading to mutually accepted
international standards and to defend vigorously in the framework of multilateral negotiations (OECD
and possibly WTO), the principle of mutual recognition of basic environmental protection standards as
well as the concept of non-lowering domestic standards.

The implementation of environmental standards is also linked with the political situation in each
country. In this regard, the existence of real democratic transparency, of freedom of action for NGOs
and of effective supervisory procedures are essential guarantees of the effectiveness of national and
international standards. The possibility of deterrent sanctions and fair victim-compensation rules should
also be explored.’

Reason

It is tempting to exploit less developed laws. Moreover, in some countries compensation arrangements
for the victims of accidents are far less costly. We should not minimize this problem, as the report
appears to do. We should not forget the Bhopal disaster in India and its tragic consequences for
thousands of victims, who after years of legal proceedings have received only minimal compensation.

C 129/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.98

It is essential to promote universal basic standards and to improve national laws in line with experience
and developing knowledge. Unless account is taken of the environmental dimension in trade and
investment, the door will remain open to possible dumping in violation of fair competition. (Dumping
contravenes WTO principles.)

Result of the vote

For: 41, against: 46, abstentions: 7.

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a European Parliament
and Council Directive amending Council Directive 93/74/EEC on feedingstuffs intended for
particular nutritional purposes and amending Directives 74/63/EEC, 79/373/EEC and
82/471/EEC’ (1)

(98/C 129/12)

On 6 November 1997 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee,
under Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the
above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s
work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 5 February 1998. The rapporteur was Mr Gardner.

At its 352nd plenary session (meeting of 25 February 1998), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion with 76 votes in favour, 5 votes against and 6 abstentions.

1. General comments

(i) This proposal

introduces a new category of
‘Nutritional Supplements for Animals’ into Com-
munity legislation. These are concentrated mixtures
of trace metals, vitamins etc., which are used in
supplements with other feeds. This category adds
further to the considerable corpus of existing EU
law on the subject, which already has:

(iii) The Committee therefore is not completely con-
vinced that the new category is needed at EU level.
If it is introduced, the whole system will become
even more complicated. Already it has to be made
more transparent. A codification would be an early
start towards transparency.

(iv) This opinion is subject to the comments above and

the following paragraphs.

— Compound feedingstuffs

— Complementary feedingstuffs

— Premixed feedingstuffs

— Feedingstuffs for particular nutritional pur-

poses

(ii) The nutritional supplements are widely used in
Member States. They are permitted separately in
some Member States for instance ANSA products
in France (Apports Nutritionnels Spécifiques
d’Adaptation) while in others there is no separate
legislation but they appear to be accommodated
within the existing categories of feed under the
national interpretation of existing directives.

(1) OJ C 298, 30.9.1997, p. 10.

1.1. Legal base

1.1.1.
The Commission has presented this proposal
under Article 100a of the Treaty (Single Market) though
the normal base for this type of legislation is Article 43
(Agriculture) since it concerns production and sale of
Annex II products. The legal services of the Council
have confirmed Article 43 as the proper base (Advice
11180/97, 10 October 1997).

The Committee understands the Commission’s
1.1.2.
reasons for taking Article 100a as the legal base of this
directive. It would, however, point out that these reasons
are also accommodated by Article 43.

Therefore, in order to avoid the lengthy and
1.1.3.
complex procedure that Article 100a now entails,