Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "PRISM 2000" (Single Market Observatory)
Date: 2000-11-29
Institutions: Provisional data
Subjects: EU initiative, dissemination of information, single market

C 116/106

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20.4.2001

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘PRISM 2000’ (Single Market Observatory)

(2001/C 116/23)

On 12 July 2000, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
decided to draw up an opinion on ‘PRISM 2000’ (Single Market Observatory).

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 27 September 2000. The rapporteurs were
Mr Liverani and Mr Glatz.

At its 377th plenary session (meeting of 29 November) the Economic and Social Committee unanimously
adopted the following opinion.

1.

Preliminary comments

The PRISM database groups single market initiatives

1.3.
under the following four headings:

1.1.
The European Single Market Observatory (SMO) has
agreed to highlight the voluntary measures carried out on the
ground that deserve to be more widely known within the single
market because of their motivating force, their innovatory and
exemplary nature and their success. To this end, the SMO
draws up an inventory of ‘best practices’ through the database
PRISM (Progress Report on Initiatives in the Single Market).

The purpose of the present opinion of the Economic and
Social Committee (ESC) is to supply a framework for the
ongoing updating, through a European survey, of the PRISM
database. This is an initial report on the matter; the PRISM
project will be the subject of an annual update by means of an
opinion which will assess and draw up a balance sheet of
persistent obstacles in the single market (1).

a)

Information and support

b)

Problem-solving processes

c)

Partnership

d) Agreements and codes of conduct

The initiatives listed by PRISM are voluntary and not
1.4.
directly profit-making: all initiatives of an industrial, financial
or commercial nature with direct market involvement are
excluded from it (even if these initiatives obviously help
facilitate the operation of the market); initiatives which simply
represent sectoral or local interests are also excluded if they
provide no specific value added. All, or most, of these initiatives
concern the single market of the 15, but some also concern
links with other countries directly associated with the single
market (e.g. European Economic Area, countries applying for
accession).

The SMO has applied various criteria to the initiatives,

1.5.
in particular:

1.2.
The PRISM survey has already identified close to one
hundred initiatives in different areas, all contributing to
facilitating the operation of the single market. The initiatives
can be consulted on the PRISM database forming part of the
Economic and Social Committee website (http:/www.esc.eu.int/).

— their exemplarity (originality, innovation);

— their cost benefit effects (budget, logistics);

(1) This report has been compiled from several sources:

— national, at SMO level;
— national, through specific vistis to Co-ordination Centres set

up in the Member States;

— regional initiatives (opinion on ‘PRISM – regional initiatives’;
— cross-border initiatives (opinion on ‘PRISM – cross-border

initiatives’;

— surveys among the different organisations;
— research by Internet and other sources of information; and
— European agencies.

— their impact (direct effects for the participants, potential

effects for the non-participants); and

— their prospects (sustainability, possible synergy effects).

2.

The single market has generated a proliferation of
initiatives

2.1. While respecting the regulations and directives as the
starting point, the role of the initiatives taken by the economic

20.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 116/107

and social actors is to choose those that are the most adequate
and turn them into concrete achievements in the field, i.e. in
investments, trade, jobs and partnerships.

2.6.5.
The resources provided by the Internet contribute to
this process by spreading information and facilitating contacts.

2.2.
These initiatives are undertaken at all levels (European,
national, regional, local and cross-border) and are promoted by
various bodies (the European Commission, public authorities,
companies, professional or trade union organisations and
other civil society associations).

2.3.
These initiatives respond to the real needs in economic
and social life and facilitate, in particular, the setting-up of
partnerships at different levels. Most of the initiatives aim to
support businesses with problems in the single market, or
wanting to make the most of the opportunities given by the
single market.

2.4.
The combination of the possibilities offered by the
single market and the extension of the Community pro-
grammes gradually erode the distinct barriers between Euro-
pean activities on the one hand, and national and local
activities on the other hand, giving an increasingly European
content to numerous initiatives taken in the field.

2.5.
It is important to note that most of the initiatives
included in the PRISM database are recent; 50 % have been
started during the last five years, and 80 % during the last
10 years.

2.6. These initiatives are constantly growing in number and variety

Extending the freedoms given to operators in the
2.6.1.
single market generates a remarkable increase in initiatives, in
terms of quantity and diversity:

2.6.2.
Community aids, which are growing in number, are
often at the root of partnership initiatives to use them wisely
(in particular in regions benefiting from EU priority aid).

2.6.3.
The need to get together in order to derive greater
benefit from the single market has also been a determining
factor, irrespective of whether aid from the public sector is
provided or not.

The advent of the euro will provide even greater
2.6.4.
impetus to the development of such initiatives by facilitating
transactions and comparisons.

2.6.6.
The preparations for enlargement are the source of a
growing number of initiatives to facilitate incorporation of EU
law and practice by applicant countries into their national laws
and boost trade.

Once a certain critical mass has been reached, as is
2.6.7.
now the case today, initiatives feed on each other through
mutual contact and chain reactions.

3.

The origins of these initiatives

growing number of directives

The European Commission was not only at the root of
3.1.
a
It
accompanied this new regulation by supporting programmes
for the economic and social actors, setting up partnerships and
networks. These initiatives aimed at:

and regulations.

a)

b)

c)

d)

supporting economic operators,
in particular SMEs,
through the Euro-Info-Centres (EIC), whose network (273
establishments) has spread throughout the regions of
the EU, in particular within professional organisations,
chambers of commerce, and regional administrations
(including extensions in associated countries). This par-
ticularly outstanding initiative has made it possible to
support numerous companies in the single market, but
the EICs are still insufficiently known among SMEs as a
whole. It would therefore be a good idea to launch a
new European information campaign about the EICs,
especially as they have the locations and skills required to
be ‘one stop shops’ providing information about the
single market and the various Community initiatives for
companies and socio-professional organisations;

carrying out surveys to help evaluate the state of progress
of the single market, published in half-yearly scoreboards.
Such surveys enable entrepreneurs on the ground to
provide direct input in assessing the single market, and in
particular to specify the nature of the obstacles they still
face in order of difficulty;

informing consumers through a network of consumer
information offices; these are still at an experimental stage
and need to be developed further (11 offices exist at
present);

setting up an out-of-court regulation network for con-
sumer disputes, while promoting quick, simple and cheap
processes aimed at bringing about agreement between
the two parties. As this network is still at the planning
stage, it would be advisable to ensure it can be applied
consistently on a European scale;

C 116/108

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20.4.2001

e)

f)

g)

h)

i)

j)

k)

l)

developing cross-border social co-operation with the
EURES-centres, which have already enabled innovative
measures to be taken to facilitate cross-border labour
markets (18 centres exist at present);

observing the trend in the labour markets through a
European observatory for employment, which has
allowed operational co-operation to develop between the
Commission and the social security administrations of
the Member States;

promoting exchanges of students, teachers, apprentices
and researchers, which have grown considerably through-
out the EU during the last ten years, particularly through
the Socrates and Leonardo programmes;

dialoguing with the general public and with business
interests through information campaigns and discussions,
especially on their rights in the single market;

permanently informing Europeans on the status of the
different Community projects through the Europa databa-
se, which is currently among the most-used websites in
Europe;

n)

o)

p)

developing trans-regional partnerships (Europartenariat,
Interprise, etc.), which now need to be revitalised,
especially with the new prospects offered by the euro on
the single market;

technology, particularly for
encouraging transfers of
the
SMEs, which have developed with the help of
Structural Funds, especially the regional development
programmes, and under the framework programme for
research and development, which largely takes small
innovative enterprises and encourages their partnership
with larger ones and with research centres; and

beginning infrastructure work through major trans-Euro-
pean networks; however, these are running behind sched-
ule, mainly for administrative and financial reasons, and
need to be speeded up.

At the urging of the Commission each Member State
3.2.
has created Single Market Co-ordination Centres for the single
Market aimed at settling problems of obstacles within the
single market directly and bilaterally between states. They have
also set up single market contact points for the general public
and for companies.

3.2.1.
The SMO has started to visit these Co-ordination
Centres to check out how they operate and see the types of
problems that still persist. Summary of the visits:

direct settling of problems with obstacles through the
Single Market Co-ordination Centres set up in each
Member State (see point 3.2);

Over the last
representatives of six Coordination Centres:

few months, visits have been paid to the

promoting exchanges of officials between Member States,
in particular within the framework of customs co-
operation, which appears to have marked time recently
and should be relaunched on a more ambitious basis,
especially in view of the increasing joint responsibilities
that Member States will be required to assume to improve
the operation of the single market;

trying to simplify regulations by directly associating users
through the SLIM and BEST projects. These projects are
still at an experimental stage, and as yet have insufficient
real impact on regulations, mainly because of delays in
taking the relevant decisions at the Council and Parlia-
ment. It is essential to follow these up more effectively
and promote them on a wider scale;

m) organising technical monitoring and follow-up of several
individual aspects of the single market (medicines, trade
marks, environment, training, etc.), through European
Agencies which are already established in several EU
countries;

— Berlin, in June 1999;

— London and Dublin, in July 1999;

— Helsinki and Stockholm, in September 1999;

— Rome, in March 2000;

— Lisbon, in June 2000, and

— Paris, in November 2000.

3.2.2.
can be summarised as follows:

The main remarks following the various meetings

a)

There is a tendency to apply directly to the courts, rather
than trying to reach an agreement, although the very
existence of a contact point encourages plaintiffs to
withdraw their complaints.

b)

The main difficulty is that of disclosing information in
companies, especially SMEs.

20.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 116/109

c) Most complaints arise from a lack of information or a

misinterpretation of legal ‘grey areas’.

d) Most companies facing difficulties contact the European
Information Centres, because usually they do not know
about the Co-ordination Centres.

been concluded (parental leave, fixed-term work and part-
time work), which have since been converted by the
Council into directives. This entry on to the stage by the
social partners is a major step forward which has great
development potential, as it paves the way for a greater
role for Europe in collective agreements and voluntary
self-regulation;

Contacts are normally established directly between com-
panies and the Co-ordination Centres, and not via
national organisations.

b) Over 600 European works councils have been set up in
the European Union, and many have anticipated the
provisions of the directive;

e)

f)

g)

The companies which call in the Centre are usually those
encountering problems on foreign markets, and seldom
the reverse.

Personal contacts between all
the Centres are an
important advantage as regards finding better resolutions
for problems.

h) As regards content, problems are most often encountered
in the following areas: worker assignment,
taxation,
product quality control, mutual recognition, varying
interpretations of the law and freedom of movement for
goods and services.

i)

j)

The inadequate incorporation of European legislation
into national law is a fundamental problem, especially in
fields such as certification, and in particular technical
standards, the agri-food sector, direct and indirect tax-
ation and public contracts.

Local and regional peculiarities as regards differences
between laws cause numerous problems.

k) A disproportionate number of problems concern the

applicant countries.

3.2.3.
The presidency found these visits very useful and the
general impression is very positive, for the Centres have solved
a number of concrete problems at a level close to the user.
They have also succeeded in obtaining a good level of co-
operation with the Member States and in creating co-operation
between Member States.

3.3.
A great number of initiatives have been taken by the
economic and social players, not only in partnership with
the Commission, but also on their own, with or without
government help:

a)

the social partners, at their own initiative, have under-
taken a European social dialogue under conditions set
out by the Maastricht Treaty, and these have led to
contractual agreements. Three agreements have already

c)

d)

e)

60 territorial pacts
employment have been
implemented in the regions of the EU, thus creating new
local partnerships;

for

several thousand European standards have been laid
down by the European standardisation bodies (CEN,
CENELEC and ETSI); this is already a big step forward,
and one which is essential to ensuring that the EU has
cohesive standards, even if
the number of national
standards, far from diminishing, has continued to grow
on an ever-increasing scale;

480 000 European patents have been issued by the
European Patent Office. These European patents already
enable their holders to benefit from intellectual and
industrial protection in the Member States of their choice,
although only the Community patent, which is widely
awaited despite still being at the planning stage, will give
full EU coverage at reduced cost;

f) mutual recognition has been facilitated by certification
agreements concluded on a European scale, but these are
still too few in number and much more use must be
made of them in the years ahead;

g)

h)

a number of surveys on the single market have been
conducted in several Member States, often at the initiative
of or in partnership with employers’ organisations; these
have very useful complements to the surveys of the
Commission;

the prospects of setting up a European stock market,
following the introduction of the euro, has inspired
several initiatives, particularly Euronext between Paris,
Brussels and Amsterdam. There will be strategic develop-
ments in this field in the near future, especially as
Economic and Monetary Union, and the attendant back-
ground of globalisation, will inevitably require greater
unification of the European stock market;

i)

associations of young entrepreneurs (junior companies,
etc.) have been set up on a European scale;

C 116/110

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20.4.2001

j)

k)

l)

several associations to promote venture capital have been
in the new
founded to help in particular ‘start-ups’
acceleration,
SMEs.
economy
especially through computerisation, is thus becoming a
reason for and a major source of innovative European
initiatives;

Technological

and

Russia, Japan), thus helping to facilitate contacts and
trade agreements between the EU and its principal
partners on a coherent European basis.

European codes of conduct for associations and compani-
es have been adopted to allow working methods to be
harmonised within the single market;

the promotion and supervision of e-commerce are the
subject of increasing self-regulation, to ensure ethical
rules and better consumer protection. This is a major
development which should be stepped up;

4.

The effects of and constraints of these initiatives

The vast majority of initiatives are designed to support
4.1.
small and medium-sized businesses, which often have greater
need of support than large companies in order to benefit fully
from the single market.

m) machinery to facilitate company sponsorship on a Euro-
pean scale has recently been set up, yet another economic
and cultural that deserves a special mention;

4.2.
It is clear that initiatives which concern other areas or
actors play a less important role than those related to
businesses. Nevertheless, a certain number of these exists,
especially in the area of employee affairs; as yet, there are not
so many concerning consumer matters.

n)

o)

p)

q)

legal co-operation and assistance schemes have been
started between professional organisations, trade unions,
lawyers’ associations; these are developing as the single
market becomes a reality as regards the freedom to move,
work and consume from one Member State to another;

4.3.
Regarding the content of these initiatives, there have
recently been a great many on the subject of Internet and E-
commerce. There is obviously at present a lot to be done in
this area as far as information and co-operation is concerned,
especially, once again, for small and medium-sized businesses.

urban co-operation and twinning schemes, which in
themselves are initiatives with a long and successful track
record, continue to develop, both between small and
medium-sized towns and big cities; they enable experi-
ences to be exchanged in numerous fields, such as the
environment, transport, safety and the arts;

regional and local partnerships in general have been set
up in a very large number of regions, and have helped to
flesh out the territory of the EU with decentralised and
active mutual support and trading networks — while the
growth in the number of regional representation offices
to the Community institutions (194 delegations so far)
has enabled fruitful contacts to develop and strengthened
these partnerships further;

European training schemes for civil servants have been
organised in several European countries, such as the one
by the European Centre in Strasbourg; these should grow
further in view of the scope for increasing co-operation
between the administrations of the Member States within
the single market;

The main message to be learnt from these initiatives, is
4.4.
the decentralisation of the management of the single market,
which increasingly involves the socio-professional organis-
ations, as well as regional and local administrations.

4.5. These initiatives have major positive effects

4.5.1.
There are now permanent and direct information
tools for Europeans that are practically free, whether they
be websites, particularly Europa, or networks created in
partnerships throughout Europe; this is a real revolution
compared with the situation only a few years ago.

4.5.2.
This direct information is a constant incentive for
Europeans to use all the freedoms at their disposal, to take
new initiatives, and to make the single market an ever-
increasing reality on the ground.

r)

a transatlantic dialogue for European business interests
has been set up under the TABD (Trans-Atlantic Business
Dialogue), and other round tables have developed (e.g.

Partnerships have developed at all levels, involving
4.5.3.
the European institutions, the Member States and the economic
and social partners in common objectives.

20.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 116/111

4.5.4. Managing the single market is increasingly becoming
a shared mission, with administrations and socio-professional
organisations playing a key role as middlemen in enacting
changes on the ground.

4.6.3. Technical aspects:

— individual

initiatives are often too specific and not
sufficiently co-ordinated with others, thereby not benefit-
ing from the potential synergy effect; and

4.5.5.
Areas of contractual freedom and self-regulation are
growing, indicating a new style of European governance calling
for a new spirit of responsibility, no longer centralised and
‘top down’ but pluralist and ‘interactive’, or even ‘bottom up’.

— the cost/benefit relationship of the initiatives, their degree
of innovation, of exemplarity and of effectiveness for
their participants vary a lot, even if it is often difficult to
evaluate them properly.

4.5.6.
A genuine European labour market is developing,
particularly in border areas, thanks to trade and relevant
support measures.

4.5.7.
administrative and cultural barriers which still remain,
addition to legal directives.

These initiatives are helping greatly to remove the
in

4.6.4.
Some of these obstacles have been brought to light
thanks to the survey carried out in September 1999 by the
European Commission in more than 3000 companies differing
in size, sector of activity and nationality. Even if overall these
companies recognise that the obstacles are fewer and less
serious than before, the Committee noted a certain number
following the various hearings:

— extra costs generated by the need to make goods and

services comply with national specifications;

4.5.8.
They are also a good way of revealing the obstacles,
particularly the legal ones, which still remain, and which these
initiatives still run into all too often.

— excess government aid which encourages certain com-

panies and stifles competition;

4.5.9.
They constitute a reservoir of good practices, spread-
ing ideas and successes and helping to make the single market
a proving ground for innovation.

New, common identities — whether truly European
4.5.10.
or simply across frontiers — are thus emerging through the
joint measures taken within the single market and with respect
to non-EU markets.

4.6.
The constraints, on the other hand, fall into different
categories, some of which are more easily remedied than
others:

— difficulties connected with the system and non-homo-

geneous procedures of VAT;

— restrictions on access to markets and the existence of

exclusive networks;

— the high cost of financing cross-border operations;

— inadequate punishment of tax evasion, fraud, piracy and

counterfeiting; and

— the lack of legal safety in cross-border contracts and

transactions.

4.6.1. Psychological aspects:

5. Recommendations of the ESC

— European citizens (consumers, trade unions, employers,
etc.) are not always aware of the tools at their disposal,
despite their being widely publicised; an

— language and culture differences also remain, even if the
different initiatives are seeking to overcome them.

4.6.2. Legal aspects:

A proliferation of

5.1.
purpose of the PRISM-exercise is, therefore, to:

initiatives exists and the main

— establish criteria for ‘best practice’;

— remove obstacles hampering this; and

— make the best initiatives known.

— the hampering effects of the missing legal instruments
become increasingly obvious as these initiatives develop
(cf. European company statute, Community patent,
removal of double taxation, etc.).

5.2. With these goals in mind, the ESC calls upon the other
actors on the single market scene — the European institutions,
the Member States,
the regions, and the socio-economic
organisations — to increase their efforts in the following fields:

C 116/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20.4.2001

5.2.1.

The European institutions should:

lift the barriers still facing initiatives within the
5.2.1.1.
single market by creating the necessary legal basis (Community
patent, statute of the European company, etc.);

ensure that Community aid is tied more to the
5.2.1.2.
promotion of innovatory partnerships involving the socio-
economic players;

5.2.1.3.
revamp certain Community initiatives to meet the
in particular the Business
expectations expressed by users,
Co-operation Centre (BC-CNET and B.R.E.), the Interprise
programme or the Mattheus programme for exchanges of
officials;

5.2.1.4.
promote new initiatives to cope with the emphasis
on certain requirements, particularly better product safety and
consumer protection, the environment, combating fraud; and

5.2.1.5.
encourage the socio-economic players to develop
contractual and self-regulation areas to spell out and flesh out
the rules of the European single market.

5.2.2.

The Member States and the regions should:

5.2.2.3.
ensure that national and local regulations are
compatible with European law and develop mutual recognition
on a European scale;

5.2.2.4.
correctly and promptly into national laws;

ensure that European legislation is transposed

5.2.2.5.
provide more Community aid for socio-economic
players and partnerships facilitating the operation of the single
market; and

5.2.2.6.
beef up the role of such initiatives as means of
providing relevant information on the state of the single
market.

5.2.3.

The socio-economic organisations should:

5.2.3.1.
develop initiatives and partnerships within the
single market based on the best practices in their respective
fields;

5.2.3.2.
establish links between complementary initiatives,
so as to increase their impact and synergies within the single
market;

5.2.2.1.
improve the operation and visibility of the Contact
Points and the Co-ordination Centres, in particular by making
sure that these bodies are well-known among the general
public and in business circles;

5.2.3.3.
participate directly, through codes of conduct and
contractual agreements, in the development of areas of self-
regulation in the definition and application of the rules of the
single market; and

5.2.2.2.
collaborate more with each other and with the
European Commission to facilitate the operation of the single
market, in particular by strengthening co-operation between
administrations to ensure joint controls;

5.2.3.4.
identify problems which persist, new needs which
emerge and mention them to the competent authorities (in
particular the European Commission and the ESC’s Single
Market Observatory).

Brussels, 29 November 2000.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS