Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "A sustainable Europe for a Better World"
Date: 2001-11-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU environmental policy, European Union, European social policy, citizens' Europe, economic policy, sustainable development

C 48/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

Moreover, this increased e-mail traffic requires rapid, appropri-
ate action if we are to respect the ‘netiquette’ for processing
e-mail requests: making services providing specific information
take responsibility, and setting up contact teams covering all
fields and the full range of languages, including certain central
and eastern European languages.

3.5. Visits

duly briefed about institutional activities, the Committee’s role
in Community decision-making, etc.;

It is essential that speakers from other institutions proclaim
the same consensual message,
focusing on cooperation
between the institutions in the interest of European construc-
tion which, when clearly and simply explained, is transparent,
democratic and solid. It is sometimes necessary for these
speakers to explain the very essence of the ESC. Do we have a
training course for these speakers?

The ESC, which has a team of speakers backed up by a number
of members, receives around 8 000 visitors a year, who are

Cooperation with the Commission and with the EUVP is
nevertheless very good and should be stepped up.

Brussels, 29 November 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘A sustainable Europe for a Better World’

(2002/C 48/26)

On 31 May 2001 the Economic and Social Committee decided, in accordance with Rules 11(4), 19(1)
and 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure, to draw up an opinion on ‘A sustainable Europe for a Better World’.

The Sub-Committee ‘Sustainable Europe’, which was responsible for the preparatory work, adopted its
opinion on 30 October 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Ehnmark, the co-rapporteur Mr Ribbe.

At its 386th plenary session (meeting of 29 November 2001) the Economic and Social Committee
adopted unanimously the following opinion.

1. Call to the Laeken Council

ing objective for the Union. With that decision, the Summit
opened up a new vision for the future of Europe.

1.1.
The Economic and Social Committee welcomes the
Belgian Presidency’s initiative to prepare a Declaration on the
Future of Europe to be adopted at the Laeken European
Council. This gives a unique opportunity to present fundamen-
tal views on the future of Europe, its aims and purposes, at an
early stage in the forthcoming wide public debate.

The Gothenburg European Summit

1.2.
took the far-
reaching decision to set sustainable development as an overrid-

1.3.
The intentions for the Laeken Declaration make it a
special occasion to sharpen the vision of sustainable develop-
ment as a major task for the European Union. Now is the time
to make clear the full scope of the challenge and opportunity
for the Union of this new project and to set it clearly in the
midst of the debate on the future of Europe. Sustainable

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/113

development should be there, at the very heart of the debate
on the kind of Europe we want.

1.10.

Practical Policies for People

1.4.
In its work this year, the ESC has paid particular
attention to the global importance of sustainable development
and to the consequences of the Gothenburg Summit decision.
In this second Opinion on sustainable development, the ESC
focuses on how to take this vision forward, making it more
operational with wider public involvement.

1.10.1.
Sustainable development is a radical approach to
the kind of Europe we want. leading to substantial changes in
the lives and behaviour of citizens. Every-day life will be
affected as by no other policy vision. The ensuing challenges
to society and economic and industrial life will be formidable.

Sustainable development is a vision with the ambition
1.5.
to shape good sustained living conditions for all citizens, not
in terms of economic welfare alone but of social, cultural and
environmental well-being too. Good quality of life does not
depend solely on economic resources but is the product of
many interacting factors, valued over time.

1.10.2.
Since sustainable development places solidarity at
the centre, this new vision for Europe in effect provides a
rare opportunity for testing good governance through hard,
practical work. With the formidable task of shaping a future
where policy and action are made to meet the long-term
priorities of its citizens, political leadership will be essential
and issues of governance will need to be placed at the forefront.

1.6.
Having been solemnly declared a long-term over-
arching EU policy, sustainable development is now a new
vision for Europe. It brings a radical integrated view of how to
shape policies for the common good in a shared future,
accentuating the need for policies to be coordinated and
coherent.

Notwithstanding the long-term nature and perspec-
1.11.
tives of sustainable development, realistic and concrete oper-
ational targets must be set. Sustainable development has to be
made operational through concrete projects for the Union and
its member States. This is important, psychologically and
politically, as it responds to every-day concerns of the Union’s
citizens

1.7.
Sustainable development such as this impinges on all
activities of the Union and its member States, opening the way
for its citizens to be closer to the Union and its policies.

1.12.
The new vision shows the need for a process of
sustained initiative. Sustainable development is a long process,
relying on sustained momentum in all spheres. The ESC
highlights the knowledge dimension of sustainable develop-
ment which must be backed by investments in education, life-
long learning and research.

As a new vision, it challenges the EU to show how well
1.8.
it can reach out to new generations and to other parts of the
world. An effort of solidarity and responsibility such as this
can however draw strength from the EU’s founding inspiration,
its will to combine efforts and thus face and resolve in a
mutually reinforcing way the conflicts which inevitably arise
in pursuit of an ambitious and wide-ranging objective like this.

1.9.
Sustainable development focuses on three major policy
sectors — economic, social and environmental — setting a
clear ambition to combine objectives and actions in all
three for the end overall of shaping a sustainable society.
Environmental policy is thus a priority equal with economic
and social policy. The three policy sectors interact and have to
do so on a broad scale. Hence the need for the EU to take the
lead as decided by the Heads of Government at Gothenburg,
sending an important message to the citizens of the Union and
ultimately to the whole world

1.13.
Sustainable development policies must be built from
bottom up with wide public support. The national plans
foreseen for sustainable development provide unique oppor-
tunities for new forms of dialogue, such as active involvement
of citizens in shaping EU policies in this field backed by
well-working information and consultation procedures. It is
essential that the role and functions of national plans are
clarified, particularly in relation to European Union strategy.

1.14.
The social partners have an essential role in both
supporting and monitoring the consultation processes. With-
out active involvement of the social partners and other non-
governmental organizations, it will not be possible to launch
sustainable development as a successful strategy for the future
of the Union.

C 48/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

1.15.
The Economic and Social Committee is in a unique
position to monitor and support the consultation processes.
The Committee represents in a very wide sense organized civil
society. The Committee intends to form an active part of the
consultation process.

1.16.
Sustainable development is a major challenge for the
Candidate Countries. The Union should from the outset engage
dialogue with them to ensure their participation in common
objectives and action as soon as possible. The very existence
of this new vision for the European project can give new
impetus to the work of transition in these countries and be a
motivating force in engendering popular support for partici-
pation in the shaping of Union policies.

1.17.
Sustainable development is a challenge for EU insti-
tutions, particularly as regards the need for enhanced policy
coordination and coherency. All institutions will have to meet
the new demands. The urgent need is for better integration
of sustainable development
into all policy planning and
implementation. The Committee stresses the need for this and
emphasizes in particular the importance of improved policy
coordination in the Commission. The ESC proposes that a
special body be created in the General Secretariat or on the
staff of the Commission President.

The EU should move forward at

the Barcelona
1.18.
European Council
in March 2002 with clear signals on
concrete steps to be taken with regard to climate protection,
energy production and long-term solutions in the transport
sector. It is vital that new steps are taken to restore public
confidence in food.

The ESC finds it essential for the Barcelona Summit
1.19.
in the social and economic
to set new objectives as well
pillars of sustainable development. Emerging health hazards in
working life must be addressed in their social, economic and
environmental context. Improved quality of work is a key
factor in the social part of the strategy. Public health, not least
against the perspective of an ageing population, is another. A
multi-disciplinary approach is difficult, but necessary.

1.20.
The ESC proposes a Union-wide information cam-
paign on the basic issues of sustainable development, involving
schools and universities, work-places and libraries, NGO’s and
social partners.

2. Background

2.1.
At its plenary session in May, 2001, the ESC adopted
unanimously its Opinion on the Preparation of a European
Union Strategy for Sustainable Development. The core advice
then from the ESC to the Gothenburg European Council was
that the time available for political consideration and for
achieving broad public support and understanding of concrete
measures was too short and that further work was needed to
provide the Council and governments with a sufficient basis
for the relevant decisions.

2.2.
The ESC emphasised its intention to be active in the
further work both of preparation and implementation of the
strategy.

2.3.
The ESC welcomed the Commission’s proposal that
the ESC act as co-organiser of a biennial Stakeholder Forum
on sustainable development.

2.4.
The ESC stated moreover that it was ready to mobilise
its membership for strengthening communication with grass-
roots levels and to develop a Watch-dog function focusing on
quality analysis of the implementation of the strategy for
sustainable development.

3. The European Council in Gothenburg

3.1.
The European Council in Gothenburg in June decided
to follow a political course that can be seen as fairly parallel
to the ESC suggestions and a result of converging policy
considerations.

The essence of the Council decision can be set out in

3.2.
four points:

— endorsement of the necessity that the economic, social
and environmental effects of all policies be examined in a
coordinated way and taken into account in decision-
making;

— use of a bottom-up strategy, building on national sus-
tainable development strategies to be drawn up by
Member States of the Union;

1.21.
The ESC insists on the importance of taking the key
issues to the people, for discussion and consultation. The ESC
proposes a prolonged consultation period in 2002, following
the Barcelona European Council.

— placing emphasis on wide consultation with all relevant
stakeholders and inviting Member States to establish
appropriate consultative processes;

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/115

— identification of a number of objectives and measures as
general guidance for future policy development in four
priority areas: climate change, transport, public health
and natural resources.

Barcelona European Council, be accompanied by concrete and
realistic measures. This is vital for preserving broad public
involvement.

The Council further emphasised its intention to review

3.3.
progress at two meetings during the forthcoming year:

— at the Laeken summit the Council will examine Com-
mission proposals for mechanisms to submit all major
policy proposals to a sustainability impact assessment
covering their potential economic, social and environ-
mental consequences;

— at the Spring European Council

in March 2002 the
Council will review in a wider context progress in
developing and implementing the strategy.

3.4.
The Council underlined that sustainable development
has the potential to unleash a new wave of technological
innovation and investment, generating growth and employ-
ment. The Council
in the
development and wider use of new environmentally friendly
technologies in sectors such as energy and transport.

invited industry to take part

4. The Gothenburg European Council in perspective

4.1.
The outcome of the Gothenburg European Council,
given the circumstances, can only be described as measuring
up to expectations. The Council launched a long-term effort
for sustainable development and in so doing firmly placed
sustainability as a core dimension in European cooperation. It
emphasised with all due weight that sustainable development
must be backed by the citizens themselves and adequate
mechanisms for consultation established. Finally, the Council
set out a batch of priority actions and planning requests for
future action.

The call for policy coherence in support of sustainable

4.2.
development has thus been firmly established.

4.3.
Both the Commission and Council recognise that
sustainable development in the EU can only be achieved
through close consultation with all parts of civil society. This
will require intensive consultation and collaboration with a
wide number of stakeholder groups.

4.3.1.
Lack of time meant that the Gothenburg Summit
was unable to adopt a series of concrete measures to implement
the agreed objectives. Therefore, it is all the more important
the Commission’s synthesis report, as basis for the
that

To take one case in point, the Commission consul-
4.3.2.
tation paper of March 2001 mentions cutting CO2 emissions
by 70 % long term. The Committee welcomes these remarks
but notes that no ‘strategies’ are set out to show how this sort
of cutback is to be achieved.

A 70 % CO2 emissions cut would inevitably make it
4.3.3.
necessary to introduce radical changes in the way we manage
economic activity and our daily lives. According to the
European Environment Agency the EU will find it difficult
already to adhere to the Kyoto targets. What sort of strategies
will then be needed to achieve much more radical long-term
objectives?

4.3.4.
Some people have perceived an active climate protec-
tion policy as constituting a constraint on economic competi-
tiveness. Yet increasing energy and resource efficiency is not
only right from an ecological point of view but also from an
economic one: less consumption of energy means not only
less greenhouse gases but also lower energy costs for industry.
Thus the use of innovative and efficient technology pays off
twice.

4.3.5.
For the ESC, these conflicting views and unfortunate
lack of consistency between aims and means explain why it is
so difficult to gain credibility for giving priority to sustainable
development and to engage support for this from broad
groups in society.

4.4.
The Gothenburg Council made clear that institutional
methods will have to be set up to ensure coherency in policy.
This will mean new measures within the European Institutions
for cross-border and inter-sectoral coordination. The Gothen-
burg Council called on the General Affairs Council to coordi-
nate the horizontal preparation of the Sustainable Develop-
ment Strategy.

4.5.
An important aspect of the Gothenburg decisions was
that Union efforts on sustainable development be backed by
national action plans, starting in Spring 2002. This recalls the
Structural Funds working methods and means that all aspects
given priority by the Council need to be reflected in plans
based on considerations at national level. In other words, this
is a way of building coherent sustainable policies from bottom
up, not top down.

C 48/116

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

A final comment could be that

4.6.
the Gothenburg
Council message was that the real work on the Sustainable
Development (SD) strategy was now to begin; after all, the
issues have a time horizon of 20-25 years. No one should
expect a full SD strategy to appear out of a few months of
public debate and political summitry.

5.6.
The social pillar is obviously a multifaceted challenge.
According to the social action plan, forceful steps should be
taken to minimise social exclusion and achieve more inclusion.
The EU employment policy, initiated by the 1997 European
Council in Luxembourg, is another key part of the social pillar.
Education and training as well as life-long learning are other
parts together with quality of work added by the 2001
Stockholm Summit.

5. Coherency in Sustainable Development (SD)

The SD strategy completes the Union’s political com-
5.1.
mitment to economic and social renewal and adds a third,
environmental pillar (or dimension) to the Lisbon strategy.

The ESC emphasised in its previous opinion how
5.2.
essential
it is for actions under these three pillars to be
fully coordinated. Thus environmental objectives must make
reference to employment and social consequences. Likewise
sustainable public finances are a prerequisite for a credible
sustainable strategy in the fields of social care and social
inclusion/exclusion.

5.3.
The ESC recognises the difficulties in shaping adequate
policy coherency between the three pillars. It is not always
obvious how the three pillars interact, whether in supportive
or counter-productive ways. The selection of indicators for
evaluation is clearly crucial. The trouble is that indicators — as
illustrated, i.a., by recent OECD analysis — usually refer to one
only of the three pillars, economic, social or environmental.
Indicators that make it possible to measure and analyse ‘cross-
pillar’ connections and effects are an altogether different
matter.

5.7.
It is noteworthy, however, that the Commission draft
2002 employment guidelines refer only in passing to the
decisions on sustainable development. The proposal notes, i.a,
that the Summit recommended that national action plans for
sustainable development include the promotion of employ-
ment
In the actual proposed
guidelines, however, there is scant reference to sustainable
development.

in the environmental

field.

In the social pillar, there is also a long-term issue, the
5.8.
European social model. This is gaining in importance in view
of both enlargement and the Union’s growing world-wide
commitments. The European social model is often referred to
without further analysis or explanation, its existence however
can be taken as very obvious. It is, for instance, widely accepted
that the model includes such aspects as solidarity and social
security together with competitive industrial and economic
growth.

The social partners must take special responsibility for
5.9.
deepening the analysis and bringing up to date the European
Social Model.

5.4.
The ‘Broad Economic Guidelines’ offer an example of
partial integration of sustainability in the overall analysis and
recommendations. The Commission draft economic guidelines
— later adopted by Council and Parliament with minor
amendments — emphasise the need for sustainable public
finances and include at the very end a reference to the decision
by the Stockholm European Council to include sustainable
development in the Lisbon strategy.

5.10.
Another key dimension of the SD strategy as seen by
the ESC is cohesion in its widest sense. For the future of the
European Union, maintaining and strengthening cohesion will
be crucial. In the case of enlargement, this is most obvious.
But cohesion is not attained by economic, social and environ-
mental development alone. It must include as well a cultural
dimension embracing shared values, cultural understanding
and mutual respect for cultural diversity.

5.5.
The need for sustained economic growth, high employ-
ment, robust pension systems, adequate policies for counter-
acting social exclusion, new investments in research and
development, new measures to provide for a sustained environ-
mental policy — all these factors will have to be integrated as
starting points in drawing up broad economic guidelines.

5.11.
The cultural dimension of the SD strategy needs more
analysis. Cultural pluralism and variety is at the heart of the
Union vision. The SD strategy should take careful note of this
and include action to support an emerging concept of sustained
cultural variety and diversity.

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/117

5.12.
For the ESC this dimension of SD strategy needs to
be rated much higher. Inherited European cultural values in
customs and patterns of behaviour play, directly or indirectly,
a key part in the way models of cohesion evolve. Recognition
and acceptance of shared cultural traditions and attitudes
help cement mutual understanding and respect. A cultural
dimension of sustainable development can be seen as a tool
for preserving and supporting cultural pluralism.

accordance with what can be sustained by peoples and
governments. SD strategy is no big-bang-phenomenon. Over-
ambition can be an enemy of the best intentions.

The ESC finds it important to stress this step-by-step
6.5.
nature of SD strategy. The European Council has the same
approach, in deciding that an annual follow-up be made as
part of the Lisbon strategy.

Solidarity between the generations is at the heart of
5.13.
any SD definition. Consultation and other work concerning
the SD strategy must therefore attract and actively involve the
full range of generations. It would be particularly valuable to
involve young groups (identified as under 25 years) and the
somewhat older people (identified as 55+).

6. The SD strategy — an urgent start to a long journey

7.

Identifying the critical issues in environment

The environment part of the SD strategy alone includes
7.1.
a number of critical issues, with wide consequences for the
way citizens live their lives and society functions. The ESC
finds it appropriate to present the following relevant instances.

The debate on the Commission proposal for an SD
6.1.
strategy revealed a split in the perspectives chosen: either a
more visionary outlook on the need to counter unsustainable
trends, or a more operational emphasis on concrete actions,
mainly in the environmental field. This last approach was
often backed up with references to the many years passed
since the Rio conference adopted the overall objective of
sustainable development.

The Council and the Commission have often pointed
7.2.
out
that sustainable development will prompt new tech-
nologies, thereby opening new markets and paving the way
for a new economy. In the field of energy-efficiency and
energy-saving, the Commission has presented a number of
proposals and the ESC likewise has made its comments. In this
sector however the over-riding impression is that there is vast
untouched potential for doing more — and for involving
citizens more.

6.2.
After the Gothenburg European Summit, the debate
has more or less slumbered, in spite of the challenging work
to put the Summit decisions into effect. Overshadowed by
world events, the social partners and organized civil society as
a whole await initiatives from the European institutions on
how to implement the Gothenburg decisions and carry the
strategy forward.

7.2.1.
To engage in a sustainable manner in manufacturing
or other forms of economic activity is intrinsically a more
difficult proposition and requires a more intelligent approach
than is the case with the short-term ‘exploitation’ or over-
exploitation of resources. Furthermore, because of the general
conditions which apply, sustainable economic activity con-
tinues to be uneconomic in many cases.

This can be a dangerous let-up in the pressure from
6.3.
wide groups in society for action to start shaping a more
sustainable society. The ESC pointed out,
in the previous
opinion on the strategy, that it was urgent for the process to
start and be given concrete content. The urgency is not less a
half year after the Gothenburg Summit.

6.4.
At the same time, it must be emphasised that the SD
strategy must be developed over a long time, step by step, in

7.2.2. We recognise that our planet represents a closed
system and that many stable, closed systems operate at local
and regional level. We are, however, to an ever increasing
extent, disrupting cycles which used to be stable, making use
of the ability — previously non-existent — to over-exploit
natural resources massively.

7.2.3.
It is sad but true that profits have been most easily
made from ‘exploitation’ of readily available factors such as
natural resources and labour. Production according to stricter
standards than legally required does not automatically lead to
higher profits.

C 48/118

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

7.2.4.
The fact that this is so does not imply criticism of
current political and economic decision-makers; rather is it a
difficult legacy of history. To shape incentives for enterprises
to integrate a ‘triple-bottom-line’ in activity and annual reports,
indicating not only economic results but also social and
environmental dimensions, is ultimately a task for society as a
whole.

8.4.
The knowledge component will have effects also on
education and training systems. There will be demands for
engineers and technicians with training in applying sustainable
solutions. There will be demands for agronomists and other
specialists in the food and animal sector. The need for inter-
disciplinary education and training will increase.

7.2.5.
These instances illustrate the long-term challenges
inherent in an SD strategy and the need for sustained public
debate on its aims and means. A further conclusion to which
they point is that contemporary economic models are not well
adapted to the SD strategy.

7.3.
The example also illustrates the need for political
leadership if the SD strategy is to be more of a reality than a
declaration. Governments and political parties will have to be
active in shaping public support.

8.5.
Particularly, the knowledge component of the SD
strategy will have effects on life-long learning and training in
the work-place.

9. Consultation and dialogue

9.1.
It is not new to state that public support for Union
policies requires adequate processes for consultation and
dialogue. The problem is how to do it. The issues involved are
often technical and not perceived as grass-roots priorities.
The Gothenburg European Summit pointed to Sustainable
Development as an area where consultation and dialogue was
particularly important.

8. An SD society — a knowledge society

the SD Strategy,

For further examination of

9.2.
two
processes of consultation are here given closer consideration.
One is the drafting of Member State plans for sustainable
development, which are supposed to be linked closely to
consultations with stakeholders. Another is the Commission
proposal for a bi-annual Stakeholder Forum, organised in
cooperation between the Commission and the ESC.

8.1.
In a previous opinion, the ESC argued that a society
with SD ambitions will have to be a knowledge-intensive
society. The Gothenburg European Council stressed the poten-
tial of SD to unleash a new wave of technological innovation
and investment.

The form for consultation at national level is a matter
9.2.1.
for Member States and stakeholder organisations to organise.
There are however certain connections to the efforts at Union
level.

8.2.
The SD strategy is by decision part of the Lisbon
overall strategy to make the EU the most competitive region
in the world. The sustainable development requirements only
go to further underscore the urgency of the investments in
research and education foreseen in the Lisbon Strategy, while
sustainable development solutions offer the potential of adding
to the EU’s competitiveness.

8.3.
Specifically, the ESC would emphasise the need for
consistency on policy and priorities between the EU Frame-
work programme for Research and Development and the SD
strategy. The EU should in its science policy take the lead in
securing adequate resources for development of new solutions
in transport and energy production, to mention just two
examples. Without adequate EU support, the national science
funding bodies will have difficulties in measuring up. The ESC
also finds it important for EU financial support to be allocated
to networks of universities and institutes cooperating in
projects relevant to the SD strategy.

The first Stakeholder Forum is planned to take place in

9.3.
Autumn 2002.

9.3.1.
The outcome of the Forum will depend heavily on
the preparatory work. Stakeholder organisations should be
involved early in the process.

9.3.2.
The ESC suggests that the Forum be preceded by a
lengthy period of consultation and dialogue at national,
regional and local level. This would create a rare opportunity
for the Union to be involved in dialogue not only with
stakeholder organisations but with the citizens themselves for
example through events in schools, events organised by
voluntary organisations, and others.

This period of consultation would aim to raise the
9.3.3.
awareness of unsustainable trends and the need to start doing
something, while also creating a channel of communication
between citizens and the Union. Capturing the interest of wide
public audiences is an imaginative task; in this case it would
be good to formulate one or two lead themes that can clearly
project the issues and the challenge.

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/119

9.3.4.
Public awareness of the need for sustainable develop-
ment could no doubt be higher than it is. The ESC proposes
that a special information effort be made by the Commission
in cooperation with organized civil society to widen knowledge
and understanding of the concrete issues involved in sustaina-
ble development.

10.

Institutional mechanisms for policy coherency

The problems facing policy coherency in the field of
10.1.
sustainable development are part of a wider problem within
the Union institutions and elsewhere. The Commission White
Paper on Governance has addressed this wider issue. For its
part
the Gothenburg European Council emphasised that
sustainable development requires dealing with economic,
social and environmental policies in a mutually reinforcing
way.

10.2.
The ESC welcomes the signals given by the European
Council and agrees that sustainable development is a clear case
where different sectors must be dealt with in a mutually
reinforcing way.

10.3.
The ESC emphasises that it is most important for
policy coordination within the Commission to be good.
Therefore, the ESC proposes that a special function of SD
Strategy Co-ordinator be established within the Commission,
either in the General Secretariat or on the Commission
President’s staff.

10.4.
The ESC would welcome the establishment of a
coordinating group within the European Parliament, to help
safeguard the degree of coherency between different issues and
reports.

10.5.
The ESC has itself established a Sub-committee for
the issues concerning sustainable development and will later
consider the future relevant institutional arrangements.

10.6.
The Laeken European Council in December, 2001,
should consider more wide-ranging steps in order to shape
better policy coherency. The Commission has pointed out that
there is at present an abundance of concurrent strategies and
policy programmes with little or no coordination between
them.

11.

Indicators to be used for the follow-up

11.1.
The Commission presented at the end of October its
indicators for sustainable development. Eight new indicators
are thus added and eight withdrawn. The total list of indicators
for the Lisbon strategy now including sustainable development
has thus been kept short.

11.2.
The ESC emphasises the need for data and indicators
to be agreed upon and validated so that all can accept them
and so that discussion on the way to act can be based on
sound facts and not ideological positions. The indicators
should give a wide vision of all aspects involved in sustainable
development, not be short-term or partial ones.

11.3.
at a later stage.

The ESC will give further comments on the indicators

12. Targeted priorities from the Gothenburg Summit

The Gothenburg European Council singled out a
12.1.
limited number of priorities and measures for general guidance
for future policy development in four priority areas. The ESC
will make detailed comments in future opinions.

12.2.
Combating climate change: the Council reaffirmed its
commitment to deliver on Kyoto targets, to meet the indicative
targets for electricity produced from renewable energy sources
and invited the European Investment Bank to cooperate with
the Commission on issues concerning climate change.

12.2.1.
The ESC has recently adopted an opinion on the
Commission’s Green Paper on energy policy (1). The ESC
emphasises that
increased production of electricity from
renewables will necessitate considerable investments in infra-
structure and technology development. The Directive on
Renewable Energy has set an ambitious target for the year
2010 for electricity produced from renewables. Reaching this
target and moving beyond is a major challenge.

(1) ESC opinion on the ‘Green Paper — Towards a European strategy
for the security of energy supply’ (COM(2000) 769 final) — OJ
C 221, 7.8.2001.

C 48/120

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

12.2.2.
The ESC calls for special attention to be given to
university networks with the task of generating research on
ways and means to make renewable energy sources more
efficient. Such networks should be allocated support within
the framework R&D programmes.

Agricultural Policy, on the context of the review of the
Common Fisheries Policy, on the implementation of the EU
Integrated Product Policy and on halting biodiversity decline
with the aim of reaching this objective by 2010.

12.2.3.
The ESC looks forward to further initiatives from
the Commission as to how the EU, having adopted the Kyoto
agreement, is to achieve the promised cuts in greenhouse gas
emissions.

Ensuring sustainable transport:

12.3.
the Gothenburg
Council, in emphasising the need for a shift from road to rail,
water and public passenger transport, invited the Parliament
and Council to adopt by 2003 revised guidelines for trans-
European transport networks and noted that the Commission
by 2004 will propose a framework ‘to ensure that the price of
using different modes of transport better reflects costs to
society’.

The links between transport, spatial planning, and
12.3.1.
new energy-saving vehicles are very obvious. However, the
supporting forces for change are to be found at municipal and
regional level. Therefore, consultation efforts at local level are
necessary.

12.4.
Addressing threats to public health: the European
Council, aware of citizens’ concerns about safety and quality
of food, gave priority to the adoption of the chemicals policy,
to the envisaged action plan for outbreaks of
infectious
diseases, to the approval and start-up of the European Food
Authority and Food Law Regulation, and finally called for
examination of a European surveillance and early warning
network on health issues.

12.5.1.
the CAP in Spring 2002.

The ESC will present its Opinion on the future of

13. The procedure ahead, and new issues

to be

addressed

The first

13.1.
follow-up to the Gothenburg European
Council as regards the SD strategy items is for the Barcelona
European Council
in March 2002. The Commission will
produce for this a Synthesis Report to be finalised by January
2002.

13.2.
Gothenburg Council,
included in the 2002 synthesis report.

In addition to the priority issues decided by the
the ESC proposes the following be

Quality of work:

13.2.1.
in the social pillar of the SD
strategy the focus has been on social exclusion and social
inclusion as well as employment policy. The ESC proposes
that the issues of sustained quality of work be added.

This is an area where the Union very clearly can
12.4.1.
establish its capacity for responding to citizens’ concerns but
it is also one where the division of responsibility between EU
and national level can be sensitive. Public opinion, awake to
recent outbreaks of infectious diseases among farm animals, is
probably more interested in what is done than in who does
what.

13.2.2.
The Stockholm European Council agreed that
regaining full employment involves focusing not only on
more jobs but also on better ones. Common approaches to
maintaining and improving the quality of work should be set
out. New studies have shown that modern working life brings
environmental and particularly psychological problems related
to overstress and overwork. In the ICT sector, such phenomena
have been known for some time.

12.4.2.
High priority should be given to arrangements for
a European public health surveillance and early warning
network. The ESC would welcome an early Commission
initiative on this.

12.5. Managing natural resources more responsibly: the
European Council underlined that strong economic perform-
ance must go hand in hand with sustainable use of natural
resources and agreed on objectives for changes in the Common

13.2.3.
Scientific networks and the role of the universities:
a number of the challenges inherent in the SD strategy need to
be met with investments in science and technology, by public
funding and private. The European Council has emphasised
the need for sufficient coordination between the SD strategy
and the new framework R&D programme. The ESC proposes
that the forthcoming synthesis report pay particular attention
to the existing and planned scientific networks in relation to
the SD strategy.

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/121

13.2.4.
Co-operation with industry: the European Council
emphasised the need for active involvement by industry in the
SD strategy work. The ESC sees industry as an ally in
promoting coherent sustainable policies and proposes that its
role be highlighted in the synthesis report.

13.2.5.
Broad Economic Guidelines: In accordance with the
European Council decision, economic policies are an integrated
part of the SD strategy. The next set of Broad Economic
Guidelines should include an assessment of how the guidelines
interact with the overall objectives for the SD strategy. The
ESC suggests that the synthesis report focus on the interaction
between the guidelines and the strategy.

14. Enlargement and the global dimension

14.5.
ESC underscores the EU’s twin responsibility with
regard to the global dimension of sustainable development,
both to set a good example showing that SD measures can and
should be applied and to give vigorous support to efforts to
create a new and strengthened Global Deal. This last task is
one of the most important in coming years for the EU. The
ESC will do what it can to support it.

15. The role of the ESC in the SD strategy

In its previous Opinion, the ESC stated its intention
15.1.
to assist the future development of the strategy, its willingness
to co-organise with the Commission bi-ennial Stakeholder
Forums and to develop a watchdog function using the reports
produced at national and EU level.

The SD strategy will

14.1.
take years to develop and
implement. It is all the more important that the Candidate
countries are actively involved in the further deliberations on
the EU SD strategy.

15.2.
In this Opinion, the ESC advocates lengthy consul-
tation leading up to the Stakeholder Forum that will take place
Autumn 2002. The ESC will participate actively in preparing
and monitoring this process as well as the Stakeholder Forum.

14.2.
The form for this could be that representatives from
the candidate countries regularly participate in meetings with
the coordinating body in the European Commission, that is
with the General Secretariat. This will give the candidate
countries a better possibility to address the relevant problems
in each country well ahead of actual membership.

15.3.
As a means to enhance coherency in policy, the ESC
has established a multi-sectoral Sub-Committee for sustainable
development. The ESC will later consider suitable permanent
forms for establishing the necessary policy coherency. The SD
dimension will have to be included as a reference frame in a
number of opinions in the future.

14.3.
ESC will for its own part regularly invite representa-
tives of organised civil society in the candidate countries for
discussions on SD strategy issues.

14.4.
The SD strategy has a very important global dimen-
sion, as shown by the Rio conference on sustainable develop-
ment. Next year, the United Nations conference on SD issues
in Johannesburg will evaluate events since the Rio conference
and address the issues ahead.

15.4.
The ESC will next year consider some of the key areas
in the SD strategy in more detail and thereby add to the
introduction of the SD dimension in all major parts of the EU
work programme.

15.5.
The ESC is the only EU institution representing broad
segments of organised civil society. This gives it a unique
capacity for being a constructive and supportive body in the
further development and monitoring of the SD strategy.

Brussels, 29 November 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS