Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission on environment and employment (building a sustainable Europe)'
Date: 1998-05-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU policy, economic policy, employment policy, environmental policy, sustainable development

27.7.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235/1

II

(Preparatory Acts)

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
on environment and employment (building a sustainable Europe)’

(98/C 235/01)

On 24 November 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 Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which
was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on
5 May 1998. The rapporteur was Mr Pellarini.

At its 355th plenary session (meeting of 28 May 1998), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The principle of sustainable development is
enshrined in the preamble to the Amsterdam Treaty:
among the Union’s objectives, Article B closely links
‘balanced and sustainable development’ with ‘a high
level of employment’.

The present communication represents an initial
1.2.
step towards
environment-employment
approach. It is assumed that this approach will be
fruitful, and that the appropriate conclusions should be
drawn for the overall thrust of Community policy.

this dual

1.3.
This question has already been discussed several
times by the ESC, primarily in its Opinion on economic
growth and the environment (1). Under the heading
‘managing the transition towards sustainable develop-
ment’, it was stated that ‘at this stage, both sustainable

(1) OJ C 155, 21.6.1995.

development and growth in employment are firmly-fixed
objectives, requiring strong, political initiative and the
responsible participation of all partners’.

The Committee reiterates this view, in the light
1.4.
of the December 1997 call by the Luxembourg European
Council for a strategy to integrate environmental con-
cerns into Community policies and activities, and of the
forthcoming deadline for examination of such a strategy
at the Cardiff summit.

2. Comments on the links between environment and

employment (chapter 2)

2.1.
The Committee welcomes the Commission’s
adoption of the approach advocated in its earlier
opinions, especially in the ‘managing the transition’
section of the communication, and its announcement,
in Chapter 3, of specific supportive policies for various
sectors.

C 235/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.98

2.2.
The Committee is also convinced that without
a strong political message orienting policy towards
sustainable development at Community, national,
regional and local level, some of the statements of
principle in the Treaties may remain a dead letter. The
Committee expressed this view in its opinion on the
fifth environmental programme, considering that the
latter would not be feasible unless ‘the political au-
thorities set priorities’ (1) not only at Community, but
also at Member State level.

2.3.
The international undertaking entered into by
the EU — in 1992 at Rio, on the environment as a whole,
and in 1997 at Kyoto on climate change — to adjust
growth in line with new parameters for the conservation
of natural resources, must be effectively applied and
built into the various measures. At the present stage,
this undertaking can be consolidated by harnessing all
those experiences which can help optimize environmen-
tal protection and employment growth. It must be borne
in mind, however, that the results cannot be checked
against a single benchmark, but are spread across a
broader backdrop. Their effects can only be amplified
by pursuing a ‘sustainable growth’ strategy with determi-
nation.

2.4.
The Committee therefore believes that the com-
munication does not examine a number of basic concepts
in sufficient detail and fails to provide an exhaustive
picture of what has been achieved to date by means of
programmes and political initiatives.

2.5.
The title itself suggests a simplistic association
of the concepts of environment, employment and devel-
opment. The phrase ‘building a sustainable Europe’ in
particular is either meaningless or, at best, obscure in
the extreme.

2.5.1.
It would have been preferable, in the interests
of greater clarity, to use terms with an established
meaning, such as ‘building a competitive Europe as part
of sustainable development’.

2.6.
Given the importance and scale of unemployment
in Europe, it is actually dangerous to establish the
automatic link between environmental protection and
employment which the communication appears to imply.
Although both objectives must be built into all Com-
munity policies, combating unemployment can only
result from the overall implementation of such policies.

It must be borne in mind that environmental
2.6.1.
protection and conservation is a policy in its own right,

quite apart from its collateral aspects, and that the
environmental impact audit of projects and programmes
can usefully be accompanied by an employment impact
audit report for information purposes, which may be
helpful in detecting synergies between different policies
— without thereby prejudging decisions which must be
made on strictly environmental grounds.

The communication begins by stating (in
2.7.
point 1.1) that ‘our EU economies are not developing in
a sustainable way’, but fails to follow through to the
logical conclusion that it is necessary to change the
socio-economic development paradigm and adopt a
new global approach which makes the most of new
know-how and business skills, as initially mentioned in
the Delors white paper (see below) and set out in the
fifth programme for sustainable development.

2.7.1.
By restricting itself to suggestions of possible
measures of sectoral scope within the existing frame-
work, the communication gives the impression that the
Commission has made up its mind to ignore the fact
that the present growth model offers no radical solutions,
only ways of cushioning the effects of the problem by
delaying the foreseeable damage.

2.8.
This is shown all the more clearly by the complete
absence from the communication of any in-depth or
up-to-date thinking on at least three key points:

— unemployment in Europe is structural, not cyclical;

— despite the fundamental role of technological devel-
opment in boosting European economic competi-
tiveness, it is far from certain that technological
innovation will be capable of creating more jobs
than it replaces, particularly in terms of conventional
employed work;

— it is an illusion to believe that an automatic cause-
link still exists between the rate of

and-effect
economic growth and falling unemployment.

(1) OJ C 287, 4.11.1992.

2.9.
It is clear from the above that to tackle unemploy-
ment successfully, a comprehensive policy must be
adopted, aimed at achieving sustainable development,
and which makes use of a whole range of instruments,

27.7.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235/3

adheres to the ‘polluter pays principle’, and fits in with
the legal formalization of the concept of responsibility
for environmental damage (1).

emerging, principally in the information- and consul-
tancy-related services sector, suggest that growth of
atypical employment is more likely.

2.10.
It is evident, assuming agreement on the mean-
ing of the term ‘sustainable development’ (as understood
in the Commission document too) that if this objective is
to be pursued, the socio-economic mechanisms currently
underpinning the production and consumption of goods
and services need to be challenged. The environment-
employment approach can only be fully effective if
this is taken on board and directly reflected in the
job-creation policies being pursued by the various
Member States.

2.11.
In this regard, the Committee regrets that the
comments made in Chapter 10 of the Delors White
Paper on insufficient use of labour resources and
excessive use of natural resources, and on the need for
fiscal measures to redress this imbalance, are not
adequately developed in the communication (2).

2.11.1.
A fruitful combination of the twin priorities
of environmental protection and job creation is only
possible by adopting this approach. Action should not
be confined to taxation; there should be a whole package
of measures, so as to comply with the principal of fiscal
neutrality.

2.12.
There must be a dynamic approach which takes
account of the new environmental-protection needs and
of the new productive and ecological management
methods, the new technologies and new information
and training services implicit in the shift to sustainable
development. This is the only way to identify the new
occupational profiles and new jobs which may be
created, and to exploit the specific role which SMEs can
play.

2.12.1.
In creating these new occupational profiles
and new jobs, special attention must be given to
workplace safety and health regulations.

2.13.
Thinking should not be restricted to industrial-
type employment; the new forms of self-employed,
fixed-term contract and part-time work which are

2.14.
The above-mentioned opinion on growth and
the environment argued that there was no automatic
link between environmental protection measures and
employment trends. This is confirmed by the abundant
research literature provided by Commission services
over recent years in this area. The research does,
however, show that environmental protection measures
using the best available technologies have a net albeit
modest impact on jobs and are often combined with
technological innovation and production rationalization
which safeguard corporate competitiveness. To this
extent, they at least help to safeguard employment.

2.14.1. Developing new production processes, prod-
ucts and services which satisfy new demands from
industry, public administrations and consumers can
generate synergies which, however, require major invest-
ment.

2.15.
In addition to the specific ‘eco-industrial’ sector
— which is a particular response to the demand for
environmental protection technologies and services, and
is a new, growth sector — a more general distinction
must be made between (a) pollution reduction and
prevention — which involves additional investment, but
which in the long term results in raw material and
energy savings, thereby contributing to greater pro-
lower social costs
ductivity and,
generated by environmental damage — and (b) natural
and urban environment conservation and rehabilitation,
which creates new jobs, both conventional and innova-
tive.

in the long term,

2.15.1. Here, a further distinction should be made
between the methods of financing the various measures.
The former concern mostly private, profit-making sec-
tors (manufacturing industry, energy production, trans-
port), while the latter require large-scale public invest-
ment.

(1) Cf. the ESC opinion on the communication from the
Commission to the Council and Parliament and the
Economic and Social Committee: Green paper on rem-
edying environmental damage, in OJ C 133, 16.5.1994.
(2) Cf. the ESC opinions on the white paper in OJ C 295,

22.10.1994.

2.16.
Implementation of a dynamic and comprehen-
sive strategy will require new know-how, skills and
consultancy services. These may be provided not only
by public bodies — which must prepare themselves
accordingly — but also by new service companies, which
might be an important provider of jobs. The results, in

C 235/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.98

employment terms, should be assessed in the aggregate
and in the medium term, taking account of the necessary
restructuring.

lines of debate, simply listing possible measures under
existing policies.

2.17.
Since sustainable development is a goal pursued
at international level, Europe could also benefit from
exports of clean technologies/products and know-how
if it moves more rapidly in this direction. This, too,
could impact positively on employment.

3. Comments on supportive policies and key actions

(chapters 3 and 4)

2.18.
The role of central, regional and local au-
thorities should also be looked at more closely as they
can introduce rules or incentives to make the public
interest attractive to the private sector, thereby contribu-
ting to a gradual shift in the current model towards
growth compatible with environmental protection and
sustainable growth.

2.19.
As part of their ‘shared responsibility’, the
various economic and social players could harness their
administrative resources and links as associations and
provide encouragement, education and information with
a view to ‘sustainable’ consumption and development.
Current experiments in cooperation between different
socio-occupational,
trade union and environmental
organizations, including across borders, are of particular
value.

2.20.
In tandem with horizontal education and infor-
mation efforts, which may generate new types of
employment in the ‘third sector’, in which voluntary
associations — whose merits should be recognized and
built upon — operate, attention should also be focused
on improved environmental management of companies
under the Eco audit system, which is soon to be revised
to broaden its utilization and bring it more closely into
line with the requirements of SMEs, especially in the
crafts and micro-business sectors. The system is spread
unevenly at European level, and should be encouraged
more vigorously by the Member States.

2.21.
The ESC would draw particular attention to
the need to bring in legislative and fiscal measures that
are geared to the realities of these small businesses and
crafts firms so as to help them to introduce environmental
standards. It would particularly stress the need to
support and facilitate the role and actions of intermediary
associative organizations.

The above comments reveal the Commission
2.22.
document to be over-cautious. It fails to open up new

3.1.
The communication reviews actions already
under way in the various sectors together with the
supportive policies, picking out a number of key actions
for the way forward. This section (chapter 4) is the
vaguest part of the document: it needs to be fleshed out
by practical proposals, tying in with the sectoral analysis
of chapter 3.

3.2.
The ESC suggests a number of issues for exami-
nation in the light of the documents received and the
initiatives launched in the Member States, with the active
participation and cooperation of trade organizations and
environmental and consumer associations.

3.2.1. N a t i o n a l e m p l o y m e n t p o l i c i e s

3.2.1.1.
It is important that the sustainable develop-
ment aspect should be built into the guidelines for
Member State employment policies, thus promoting
national territorial pacts which harness environmental
resources, stimulate innovation and skills and provide
appropriate means for training and disseminating know-
how, particularly to small and medium-sized enterprises.
These pacts should not be restricted to pilot projects,
but should be built into use of the structural funds.

3.2.2. C i t i e s a n d u r b a n r e g e n e r a t i o n a s
a t e s t - b e d f o r i n n o v a t i v e p o l i c i e s
s u c c e s s f u l l y
t h e
e n v i r o n m e n t a n d e m p l o y m e n t

c o m b i n i n g

3.2.2.1.
The ‘urban space’ concept has gelled in recent
years. Unfortunately, however, the picture is increasingly
one of decline in the conurbations which are plagued
with problems having a unique impact on the environ-
ment. Old blueprints are being discarded and the concept
of urban growth is progressively being replaced with
that of urban conservation. The need to resolve the
problems which cities pose for the environment is giving
birth to a new approach, whereby cities are not seen as
just a physical space in which people live, travel and

27.7.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235/5

work, but as organic entities operating as a system of
flows and cycles, the eco-efficient management and
eco-compatibility of which guarantee the well-being of
their inhabitants (1).

It is now clear that the methods used to
3.2.2.2.
protect urban ecosystems, to reduce their consumption of
environmental and land resources, are heavily influenced
by urban policies — that is, the planning, shaping and
monitoring of the development of the urban environment
— on, say, land-use, regeneration, traffic, waste-disposal
or energy. It is possible to reconcile the demands of urban
development with environmental-friendly solutions, and
also with the need to create new, long-term jobs (2).

3.2.2.3.
The example of the construction/housing
sector shows that incentives to maintain and renovate
housing stock can have a much broader effect on the
urban environment. Initiatives in this sector are complex
and interlinked, embracing as they do a number of
spheres and disciplines ranging from general urban
renovation to specific policies for the restoration of
inner and outer urban areas, from conservation to
the development of brownfield sites and the overall
improvement of the urban environment.

3.2.2.4.
Energy saving should be pursued through
conversion work on existing buildings, as well as through
an active policy of involving users, for instance through
appropriate incentives. As the figures show, this con-
tributes not only to positive environmental effects, but
also to greater job opportunities.

3.2.3. W a s t e m a n a g e m e n t

3.2.3.1.
The preventive approach of reducing the
amount of waste at source, separate collection and
treatment for reuse and recycling is generating new types
of employment and new job opportunities. This process
can be fostered, as the Committee has pointed out in
earlier opinions (3).

3.2.4. T r a n s p o r t

3.2.4.1.
The Economic and Social Committee has, in
a number of opinions (4), emphasized the need for public
— and particularly urban — transport systems to
be overhauled and rationalized, and the need for
environmental considerations to be taken into account
when planning the expansion of national and trans-
European networks. Secondary rail
links should be
upgraded, and local transport should be boosted.

3.2.4.2.
It is essential to encourage the growth of
public transport, as emphasized in the ESC’s opinion on
the green paper on the impact of transport on the
environment (5).

3.2.5. R u r a l

d e v e l o p m e n t

a n d A g e n d a

2 0 0 0

3.2.5.1.
There are no real grounds for optimism about
the employment effects of Agenda 2000 in the farm
sector. Priority actions must therefore be devised which
optimize the role of farmers in protecting the environ-
ment, with particular regard to land use, landscape
conservation, reforestation, combating desertification,
biodiversity conservation, protection of upland areas
and new commercial ventures such as agritourism and
organic farming.

3.2.5.2.
As part of the CAP reform, the Structural
Funds should favour a switch to ecologically sustainable
farming and boost new types of work attractive to
young people.

Real possibilities of new jobs, technological
3.2.5.3.
innovation, modernization and the overall economic
recovery of rural areas, however, can flow above all
from a coherent and incisive rural development policy
which acknowledges agriculture as the keystone of the
rural economy and also aims to take all useful measures
in the food, tourism, craft, transport and other ancillary
sectors.

Establishing a link between the Natura 2000
3.2.5.4.
network (Habitats Directive) and the structural funds,
by including network sites of natural interest among
Objectives 1 and 2, might help promote this kind of
recovery.

(1) Cf. the ESC opinion on the green paper on the urban

environment in OJ C 269, 14.10.1991.

(2) Cf. the ESC opinion on sustainable development in building

and housing in Europe in OJ C 355, 21.11.1997.

(3) Cf. in particular the opinion on the review of the Com-
munity strategy for waste management in OJ C 89,
19.3.1997.

(4) Cf. the ESC opinion on The citizens’ network — fulfilling
the potential of public passenger transport in Europe —
European Commission green paper, in OJ C 212, 22.7.1996.
Cf. the ESC opinion on the Green paper — towards fair
and efficient pricing in transport — policy options for
internalizing the external costs of transport in the European
Union, in OJ C 56, 24.2.1997.

(5) OJ C 313, 30.11.1992.

C 235/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.98

3.2.5.5. Management of water resources by river
basin authorities, as promoted by the framework water
directive, could for example serve as a powerful tool for
a new approach to area management.

better environmental management by companies, which
includes a continuous training and upskilling element
for relevant workers, should also be brought to bear on
this area.

3.2.6. E d u c a t i o n a l

v o c a t i o n a l
a n d
t r a i n i n g a n d i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s e c t o r

3.2.6.1.
This is the sector where the greatest efforts
should be made, to prepare workers for new types
of employment, to steer young people towards new
occupations and new skills and to train public officials,
intermediary and professional organizations and small-
business men in new technologies and environmentally-
friendly management.

In addition to educational and vocational
3.2.6.2.
training facilities, the Eco-audit system for promoting

Associations

3.2.6.3.
and socio-economic orga-
nizations can play a major multiplier role in the education
and training sector.

3.2.7. R e s e a r c h a n d d e v e l o p m e n t

The new framework programme should back
3.2.7.1.
together with new
technologies,
R&D for ‘clean’,
approaches to production methods and products which
are compatible with sustainable growth and consump-
tion. Europe’s competitiveness and the ensuing growth
depend on the ability to meet the challenges of environ-
mental protection and to enhance and conserve natural
resources.

Brussels, 28 May 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 European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee on food,
veterinary and plant health control and inspection’

(98/C 235/02)

On 30 January 1998 the European 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 Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which
was instructed to prepare the Committee’s work on this matter, adopted its opinion on 5 May
1998. The rapporteur was Mr Nielsen, with Mr Colombo and Mr Verhaeghe acting as
co-rapporteurs.

At its 355th plenary session on 27 and 28 May 1998 (meeting of 27 May) the Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 81 votes in favour and 3 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
In this Communication, which follows on the
Communication on consumer health and food safety
of April 1997 (1), the Commission gives an overview of the
measures adopted in connection with the introduction of
the Commission’s food, veterinary and plant health
control services.

In addition, the Commission gives details of
1.2.
plans for future control activities, which are based on a
food safety study and recommendations by its Inspection
General Services (IGS) (IGS report) (2).

(1) COM(97) 183, 30.4.1997.

(2) Inspection General Services (IGS) study of 13 October 1997

on food safety control bodies.