Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on "The Lisbon Strategy and Sustainable Development"
Date: 2003-02-27
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: accession to the European Union, economic and social cohesion, environmental policy, sustainable development

C 95/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.4.2003

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The Lisbon Strategy and
Sustainable Development’

(2003/C 95/14)

On 24 October 2002, the European Economic and Social Committee decided, under Rules 19(1) and
29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, to draw up an opinion on ‘The Lisbon Strategy and sustainable
development’.

The Subcommittee on Sustainable Development, which was responsible for the Committee’s work on the
subject, adopted its opinion on 5 February 2003. The rapporteur was Mr Ehnmark and the co-rapporteur
was Mr Ribbe.

At its 397th plenary session on 26 and 27 February 2003 (meeting of 27 February), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 98 votes to 2, with 4 abstentions.

1. Summary

Sustainable development was conceived as an over-
1.1.
arching priority for the European Union. Over recent years,
sustainable development has become an ever more urgent
policy approach for safeguarding a balanced shaping of
economic growth, welfare, social justice and environmental
knowledge. This urgency should be clearly reflected in the
Union’s policy decisions. At present, however, this is not the
case. Sustainable development is still a very general concept
rather than an integrated working instrument.

1.2.
The world around confronts us with more rapid
change than anticipated. Climate change, concerns about long-
term energy supply and transport facilities, the challenges from
social exclusion, unsustainable production and consumption
patterns — a number of factors pose challenges for the EU’s
own sustained future welfare. They require decisions backed up
by citizens, and implemented by inspiring political leadership.

1.3.
Having been launched at the Göteborg European
Summit in June, 2001, sustainable development has so far
not been a very visible guiding objective for EU policy
considerations. Instead of being vigorously moved forward —
as was decided by the Göteborg Summit — sustainable
development is too often identified as mainly an environmental
issue, and not integrated in a total policy mix of economic,
social and environmental issues. Sustainable development was
conceived as a new approach to policy-making. There is still
much to do in this respect.

1.5.
The EESC therefore calls on the Spring Summit, in
March 2003, to firmly re-establish sustainable development as
an overarching objective for the European Union. The EESC
calls on the Summit
to give the necessary impetus for
integrating sustainable development fully in the Lisbon strat-
egy. The EESC calls on the Greek and Italian Presidencies of
the Union to initiate in operational terms this integration of
sustainable development.

1.6.
It is time to sharpen the vision of sustainable develop-
ment as a major objective for the European Union. This
includes establishment of a consensus of what sustainable
development could be, and what political steps would be
taken. Policies for sustainable development will have effects on
the everyday life of citizens. It is all the more important
therefore that there is a continuous dialogue between European
citizens and their political leaders.

Now is also the time to make clear that sustainable
1.7.
development should be at the heart of the debate on the future
of Europe. The vision should be clearly stated in the new
Treaty.

1.8.
The Lisbon strategy is in trouble, because of inadequate
delivery on the bold objectives and actions set out in 2000.
The strategy has to be re-invigorated. The EESC proposes that
a special effort is made to review the strategy during 2003,
with the aim of providing a basis for conclusions to be drawn
by the Spring European Summit in March, 2004. The EESC is
ready to make its contribution to such a review.

1.4.
The EESC finds it regrettable that sustainable develop-
ment is still not fully integrated in the Lisbon Strategy and not
recognised as one of the EU’s most important and wide-
ranging challenges and one which will require difficult choices
to be made.

1.9.
The EESC would like to give an indication of issues in
the Lisbon strategy where sustainable development consider-
ations should be integrated and where economic, social
and environmental considerations are coupled instead of
decoupled.

23.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/55

1.10.
The EESC underlines particularly three such issues:
more vigorous support for private and public investments in
new and clean technology and equipment, new efforts for
improving quality in work, and a new wide consultation on
setting prices on the use of natural resources.

does it yet have a perfectly clear policy framework. But it is a
guiding vision with a strong appeal, setting out key aspects for
our common future quality of life, in economic, social and
environmental terms. Sustainable development must not be
seen as a limitation to economic growth and employment, but
rather as an attractive investment strategy for prosperity,
welfare and social justice.

1.11.
A group of key issues in sustainable development
stem from the use of non-renewable resources such as fossil
fuels, for energy production and for transport. Although some
approaches have been taken in these fields, the EESC proposes
that the Spring European Summit should signal the start of a
coherent action to lower dependence on fossil fuels.

1.12.
Sustainable development is a vision with clear conse-
quences for governance, political leadership and policy coher-
ence, both at national level and at EU level. Dialogue with
citizens can not be a one-off effort, but requires continuing
endeavours. The recent agreement on public participation in
the shaping of environmental policies is a positive develop-
ment. To establish policy coherence will be a challenge for the
EU institutions, and for national governments. Both the
Commission and the European Parliament should take further
action in order to ensure policy coherence.

1.13.
The new member states of the EU will automatically
be partners in the Lisbon strategy and the strategy for
sustainable development. These issues were not included in
the accession talks, because they are not part of the acquis
communitaire. It will become essential to be able to offer the
new member states appropriate assistance particularly in
implementation of the strategy for sustainable development.

1.14.
The approach signed up to by the EU at the Johannes-
burg World Summit in 2002 gives the EU a unique and
historic opportunity to set an example and to take the lead
globally in forging practical policies to implement sustainable
development. In addition to forcefully pushing ahead with its
own strategy for sustainable development, the EU should act
strongly to ensure other countries and regions follow, includ-
ing through partnerships.

1.15.
In a number of opinions, and by organizing stake-
holder consultations, the EESC has taken a very active part in
the development of the strategy for sustainable development.
The EESC intends to continue this work.

1.16.
In the current economic and political situation, it is
all the more important that the EU gives a clear message on
the importance of pushing ahead in the realm of sustainable
development. This vision is not an answer to all problems. Nor

2. A strategy in trouble

2.1.
The Lisbon strategy of economic, social and environ-
mental renewal is one of the most ambitious projects initiated
by the European Union. However, three years after its launch,
the strategy is in trouble. The objective to become the most
competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the
world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and
better jobs and greater social cohesion remains highly relevant,
but its delivery and implementation is falling seriously behind
schedule. The European Commission in its 2003 Report to the
Spring European Council has illustrated the deficiencies in the
implementation of the Lisbon strategy.

It

2.2.
is particularly regrettable that with the Lisbon
strategy in trouble the concept of sustainable development is
also falling behind in planning and delivery. The Spring Report
fails to deliver a coherent report on progress with sustainable
development and particularly in those areas identified as
priority items by the Göteborg European Council. The Spring
Report refers to sustainable development
issues only in
passing. The Commission repeats the common mistake of
identifying sustainable development mainly as an environmen-
tal issue. The European Economic and Social Committee would
have appreciated a more thorough analysis of progress and
shortcomings as regards the implementation of sustainable
development as an overarching priority.

The European Summit in Göteborg in June 2001
2.3.
agreed a strategy for sustainable development, which added a
third, environmental dimension to the Lisbon strategy giving
environmental issues the same political priority as economic
and social issues. The real importance of the decision was to
establish a new approach to policy-making for the EU
stipulating that the economic, social and environmental effects
of all policies should be examined in a coordinated way and
taken into account in decision-making. This required that all
to a sustainability impact
EU actions should be subject
assessment covering their potential economic, social and
environmental consequences.

C 95/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.4.2003

2.4.
The absence of sustainable development as a topic for
reflection at the Convention on the Future of Europe further
illustrates that the concept of sustainable development has yet
to be integrated into mainstream political
thinking and
decision-making.

2.5.
Sustainable development has not played a significant
role in any of the 31 chapters which formed the basis for the
negotiations with the new member states. It will be essential
to support
the new member states in adapting to and
integrating the EU strategy for sustainable development in
order to avoid unsustainable developments. An example is the
development in the transport sector, to which the EESC has
already pointed several times. The EESC would have expected
that the Commission in its Spring Report would open a
discussion on how to introduce sustainability criteria into the
implementation of EU financial aid in the enlarged Union.

2.6.
The EU played a leading role at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002, pushing
for more ambitious commitments and actions to implement
sustainable development. The EU should not lose the oppor-
tunity to be a global leader on these issues. It should act
strongly to ensure other countries and regions follow, includ-
ing through partnerships.

3.3.
The September 2002 Stakeholder Forum examined
progress and future priorities for the EU sustainable develop-
ment strategy and clearly indicated three overriding concerns:

— The concept of sustainable development needs to be
further developed, particularly in a long-term perspective.
Conflicting views on the meaning of sustainable develop-
ment persist, both inside and outside of the EU.

— Sustainable development has to be defined in concrete
terms, making it possible to communicate the concept to
citizens and what it implies for the present and for future
generations.

— There is a lack of political leadership on the subject and
sustainable development is still not yet integrated into a
coherent approach to policy making at EU level. Links
between economic, social and environmental consider-
ations must be combined building win-win situations
into the sustainable development strategy rather than
following a compartmentalised approach. The strategy
could provide a unique opportunity for the EU to develop
a new approach to its economic development based on
more sustainable production and consumption patterns
and involving new patterns of innovation for technologi-
cal development. Sustainable development must be tur-
ned into an attractive investment strategy for the environ-
ment and prosperity based on competitiveness, employ-
ment and combating social exclusion.

3. The policy challenges of the Göteborg vision

development’

4. Agreement on a common concept of ‘sustainable

the decisions of

The importance of

3.1.
the Göteborg
European Council did not lie in their details but in establishing
a new overall approach to policy-making: sustainable develop-
ment was made the impact assessment factor against which all
major policy proposals should be measured. Implementing
this decision has proved difficult. So far, only a limited number
of Commission proposals have been subjected to this impact
assessment. The set of criteria used has to be further developed,
particularly as regards environment. New indicators to be used
could include limits on the use of undeveloped land, for
built-up purposes, environmental constraints by urbanisation,
proportion of nature protection areas and implementation of
protection policies.

3.2.
In the run-up to the Göteborg Summit, the Com-
mission set in train a short consultation process on sustainable
development, including a hearing co-organised with the EESC,
in order to involve the public in the political decision-making
process. Two Stakeholder Forums, organised jointly with the
EESC, have since been held.

4.1.
Sustainable development, as an overarching vision and
priority for the EU, suffers from one obvious weakness:
there has never been any wide-ranging, comprehensive and
systematic consultations on this matter with the governments
of the Member States and candidate states or with organised
civil society. As a result, the concept is sometimes still difficult
to grasp.

the debates at

4.2.
It is clear from the 2003 Spring Report and the
outcome of
the Stakeholder Forum that
to be reached on the
comprehensive agreement has yet
meaning of the term ‘sustainable development’, the changes
which will have to be introduced and the ways and means of
implementing these changes.
is easy enough to reach
verbal agreement on the need for sustainable development.
Introducing and applying concrete measures in this field,
which in some cases may have a severe impact on life in
present-day society is, however, a more difficult proposition,
particularly when no uniform objective has yet been set. This
has been clearly demonstrated by the political discussions in
recent months on issues such as fisheries policy and the reform
of the CAP.

It

23.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/57

4.3.
It is therefore becoming ever more obvious that there
is, as yet, no general understanding on the meaning of
‘sustainable development’. Until such time as the sometimes
diametrically opposed views can be brought into line with
each other, no more far-reaching measures can be taken with
any degree of satisfaction.

4.4.
Sustainable development is based on the three-pillar
principle. Some people interpret this as meaning that econ-
omic, social and environmental aspects are to be addressed on
the aim is not
an equal footing . Others maintain that
to achieve equal treatment but rather to seek a ‘balanced
consideration’ of economic, social and environmental aspects.
Shifts in emphasis between the different pillars are therefore
perfectly conceivable. Both of these approaches entail difficult
political decisions.

4.5.
There is a lack of awareness in large sections of society
with regard to the consequences for the future of the current,
unsustainable trends. Other sections of society are aware of
these consequences but are more afraid of the short and
medium-term consequences of reorganisation than of the
long-term consequences of the current unsustainable system
(which they will not live to see). The necessary political
decisions to reverse all unsustainable trends in industrialised
countries have not yet been taken, and the situation is even
worse as regards our readiness to take responsibility for the
impact of industrial development in other parts of the world.

4.6.
There is no disputing the fact that, as a general rule,
economic competitiveness has to be maintained and any
reorganisation has to be carried out with care. There are,
however, at present a number of economic sectors which are
sustainable but not competitive (such as renewable energy
production) whilst unsustainable sectors form the backbone
of the economy because of the general conditions which
currently apply. This is where the reorganisation must com-
mence.

4.7.
There is therefore a need to redefine the general
conditions under which new markets and new jobs are to be
developed. Competitiveness has to be given a strong boost
with a view to achieving a competitive, socially just and
into
sustainable economy. This objective is bound to call
question a number of current activities and make a broader
public debate necessary. The groups concerned need a forum
in which to address the conflict in order to be able to advise
political decision-makers on difficult decisions which might be
necessary for the well-being of mankind and future generations
but could go against the short-term interests of individuals,
groups or whole regions.

On this basis the EESC proposes that sustainable

4.8.
development be tackled from three angles:

— the Commission must help bring about a consensus
is really meant by the term ‘sustainable

over what
development’;

— in the short term, up to 2010, the focus should be on
formulating concrete actions to follow up the Göteborg
European Council decisions, inter alia in the light of: the
priorities set
for combating climate change; ensuring
sustainable transport; addressing threats to public health;
managing natural resources more responsibly; integrating
the environment into Community policies; and incorpor-
ating the concept of sustainable development into the
Lisbon strategy;

— in the long term, i.e. over the next 25 to 30 years, the
focus should be on deciding which issues have to be
tackled if our generation is to give succeeding generations
sufficient scope for maintaining and further enhancing a
high standard of living. In this context the key issues to
focus on should be efforts to decouple economic growth
from the consumption of resources and to decrease
dependence on fossil fuels.

5.

Integrating the Lisbon strategy into the vision of
sustainable development

5.1.
It has been agreed that sustainable development is an
integral part of the Lisbon strategy. With this addition, the
strategy should integrate the economic, social and environ-
mental aspects in all policy decisions. The Lisbon strategy is
thus an opportunity to operationalise sustainable development
in the short- and medium-term perspective. However, this
opportunity has so far not been very visibly grasped. The
Spring Report 2003 from the European Commission is an
improvement compared with the Spring Report of last year,
but it still falls short of meeting the expectations inherent,
ultimately, in the Göteborg European Council decisions.

It should, however, be emphasised that in a long-
5.2.
term perspective, sustainable development must be further
developed as an overarching priority for all EU policymaking.
In policy terms, this means that the Lisbon strategy has to be
integrated into the vision of sustainable development, and that
actions within the Lisbon strategy as well as other EU
programmes and actions should be the subject of sustainability
impact assessments, as was decided by the Göteborg European
Council.

5.3. Making the Lisbon strategy operational and consistent
with sustainable development has sometimes proved difficult.
In a number of opinions on the subject, the EESC has called
for the Lisbon strategy objectives to be made more concrete
so as to demonstrate how the strategy and sustainable
development objectives can be merged. In the view of the
EESC, it is vitally important to translate sustainable develop-
ment theories into practical policies for people. Otherwise,
sustainable development will remain an undefined long-term
vision.

C 95/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.4.2003

5.4.
The EESC would like to point to examples of issues
where a coherent and integrated approach is essential. One
such issue is the need for promoting and supporting invest-
ments in new and clean technology and equipment which
would also enhance EU competitiveness in the longer term.
Another issue is that of quality of work, where practical action
is still missing. A third is the need to launch a wide public
consultation on the issues of unsustainable production and
consumption patterns.

of 2002, on progress in the field of sustainable development.
Even if the reports in many cases were fairly basic, they
constitute an important step towards policy coherence. The
EESC, in applauding this initiative, suggests that the General
Affairs Council should follow-up on this reporting exercise
with further specific questions in view of the preparations for
the 2004 Spring Council.

5.5.
The EESC limits itself to these three examples. Together
with others they should also be part of a major review of the
Lisbon strategy, three years after its launching. The strategy was
conceived in a particular economic climate, and subsequent
developments have changed the context. The EESC proposes
that the Lisbon strategy be reviewed during 2003, in order to
make it possible for the Spring European Council in 2004 to
take the necessary decisions for the further implementation of
the strategy.

6. Coherent policy-making for sustainable development

6.1.
The choice of indicators which allow a sustainability
assessment of new EU actions and programmes is of funda-
mental importance to establish policy coherence and create
win-win situations. At present, most indicators refer to only
one or another of the three dimensions instead of systemati-
cally assessing interrelations and progress towards overall
sustainable development. The EESC recommends that the
indicators chosen for the 2003 Spring Report are refined in
view of the Report to the Spring European Summit in 2004.

6.2.
Appropriate institutional arrangements are a key factor
in reaching coherence in sustainable development. On repeated
occasions the EESC has emphasised that it is essential that the
EU institutions, and particularly the Commission, take steps in
order to establish mechanisms for effective internal coordi-
nation and policy coherence on sustainable development.
The Commission President must assume an even stronger
leadership role on sustainable development, ensuring the
alignment of compartmentalised and competing policy objec-
tives.

6.4.
To establish policy coherence with regard to sustaina-
ble development will be a challenge for the EU institutions as
well as for the national governments. Both the Commission
and the Parliament should take further action in order to
ensure policy coherence internally.

6.5.
Several Member States have presented national sus-
tainable development plans within the UN framework and
produced national sustainable development strategies as a
follow-up to the Göteborg European Council decision on this
matter. The EESC recommends that the European Council calls
upon Member States to report annually on their sustainable
development strategies as part of the preparation of the Spring
European Council.

6.6.
Given the decision by the Göteborg European Council
to add an environmental dimension to the Lisbon strategy, the
EESC considers that in addition to the report on Economic
Policy Guidelines and on Employment Guidelines, which in
themselves should make due reference to the integration of
sustainable development, an annual sustainable development
policy report would also be prepared for the Spring European
Council.

7. The role of the EESC

7.1.
The EESC has given very high priority to the problem
of ensuring that sustainable development is given the necessary
prominence, above all in view of the profound effects that
measures in this field will have on the everyday life of European
society. A number of the EESC’s own-opinions and a range of
different kind of stakeholder meetings have illustrated the
importance the EESC attaches to discussion of the issues.

6.3.
The Göteborg European Council gave the General
Affairs Council overall responsibility for coordinating the
horizontal preparation of the sustainable development strat-
egy. One of the initiatives taken by the General Affairs Council
was to ask all other Council formations to report, by the end

7.2.
The EESC stands ready to assist in the future develop-
ment of the EU strategy for sustainable development. It is
prepared to take on further tasks in this development, to
ensure that there is full integration of sustainable development
into the Lisbon strategy.

23.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/59

7.3.
The EESC calls on the Commission to produce an
annual or bi-annual scoreboard on progress in sustainable
in connection with the annual or bi-annual
development,

Stakeholder Forum that has been envisaged in cooperation
between the Commission and the EESC.

Brussels, 27 February 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Resolution of the European Economic and Social Committee to the ‘Spring European Council of
21 March 2003’

(2003/C 95/15)

At its 397th plenary session on 26 and 27 February 2003 (meeting of 27 February), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Resolution by 126 votes, with 1 abstention: ‘The
Lisbon strategy is in trouble’.

The Commission Report to the Spring European Council on
the Lisbon strategy of economic, social and environmental
renewal makes it evident that although some progress has
been made, implementation of the strategy is falling seriously
behind schedule. With the Lisbon strategy (and its objective
for the EU to become the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable
economic growth with more and better jobs and greater
social cohesion) in trouble, the EU strategy for sustainable
development based on the interdependence of economic,
social and environmental considerations is also falling behind.
The Report indicates growing disparities between Member
States in the implementation of the strategy as a whole.

The EESC calls for efforts to be made to implement the Lisbon
strategy (as completed by the Göteborg European Council)
comparable to those deployed to bring about the single
market and the single currency. It calls for a much stronger
commitment by Member States, but also by European insti-
tutions, regions, social partners and civil society as a whole to
work towards the Lisbon objectives, including presentation of
detailed progress reports.

vision for the future, based on citizens’ involvement, ensuring
a more balanced distribution of the wealth produced and the
surplus created by modern technology.

The Göteborg European Summit established a new approach
to policy-making, stipulating that the economic, social and
environmental effects of all policies should be examined in a
coordinated way and taken into account in decision-making.
The integration of sustainable development into the Lisbon
strategy presents a particular challenge not yet met by the
European institutions or by Member States.

The EESC considers that in the present political and economic
climate it is all the more important that the EU gives a stronger
message on the importance of pushing ahead with the Lisbon
objectives and with sustainable development.

The EESC strongly believes that the Lisbon objectives remain
relevant and necessary. Efforts need to be made to rebuild
confidence among European citizens and to create a positive

The new Member States will automatically be partners in the
Lisbon strategy and the EU sustainable development strategy,
although neither were included in the discussion of the acquis
communautaire. The EESC considers it is essential to facilitate
efforts by the accession countries to speed up implementation
of the strategy.