Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework for the setting of Eco-design requirements for Energy-Using Products and amending Council Directive 92/42/EEC’ (COM(2003) 453 final -2003/0172 (COD))
Date: 2004-03-31
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: clean technology, eco-label, environmental protection, environmental standard, product design

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/25

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a framework for the setting of Eco-design
requirements for Energy-Using Products and amending Council Directive 92/42/EEC’

(COM(2003) 453 final -2003/0172 (COD))

(2004/C 112/07)

On 5 September 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 2 March 2004. The rapporteur was
Mr Pezzini.

At its 407th plenary session (meeting of 31 March, 2004) the European Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.

Introduction

ballasts for fluorescent lighting (9); and gas appliances (10). The
directive on the energy efficiency of buildings should not be
forgotten. (11)

reducing

their negative

1.1
‘Eco-design’ means the systematic incorporation of envir-
onmental considerations into the design of products with the
aim of
impact
throughout the whole of their life cycle. The aim is to develop
a coherent
framework for eco-design, while maintaining
competitive standards of pricing, performance and quality, in
order to improve sustainability and competitiveness within the
European single market and worldwide.

environmental

1.2
Integration of environmental aspects into product char-
acteristics from the design stage is linked to the development of
the Community's Integrated Product Policy (IPP) – particularly
for the integration of the concept of ‘life cycle’ – on which the
Committee has already commented (1) in connection with the
Sixth Environment Action Programme (2). It also ties in with
the three dimensions (economic, social and environmental) of
sustainability of energy-using products emphasised at
the
Cardiff and Helsinki European Councils.

1.3 Within the context of harmonisation of technical stan-
dards (3), of a new approach and of preventive information (4),
the new framework should take into consideration the direc-
tives already in existence regarding energy efficiency require-
ments for various types of product.

These directives, whose existence is highlighted by the
1.4
Commission, concern Community standards on oil and gas
fired hot water boilers (5); domestic fridges and freezers (6);
noise emissions and labelling regarding the energy consump-
equipment (8);
appliances (7);
tion

domestic

office

of

(1) Opinion OJ C 260 of 17.9.2001
(2) Decision 1600/2002/EC – OJ C 242 of 10.9.2002
(3) Decision 93/465/EEC in OJ L 220 of 30. 8.1993
(4) Directives 98/34/98 EC and 98/48/EC in OJ L 217 of 5.8.1998
(5) Directive 92/42 EEC in OJ L 167 of 22.6.1992
(6) Directive 96/57/EC in OJ L 236 of 18.9.1996
(7) Directive 92/75
(8) Regulation (EC) 2422/2001 in OJ L 332 of 12.12.2001

The Commission states

those directives are
1.4.1
‘considered as implementing measures of the [proposed new]
framework Directive regarding energy consumption during
use’, noting that ‘a consolidation and simplification of Com-
munity legislation is thereby achieved.’

that

In considering the entire life cycle of energy-using
1.5
products,
these
the Commission proposal will ensure that
products – as well as being subject to waste management regu-
lations (WEEE) (12) and to standards on the use of hazardous
substances (13) - will also be subject to further requirements and
checks. The proposal aims to ‘further promote the design of
products to facilitate reuse and recycling by allowing for the
systematic introduction of those aspects in the early stages of
the design process …’. Furthermore, as the environmental
performance of all or part of the design of a product will be
subject to compulsory minimum standards, ‘it will be possible
to address energy consumption throughout the life cycle of the
product and not only during its use phase, as is currently the
case’.

1.6
Complementary measures such as the voluntary labelling
provided for by the Ecolabel scheme (14), the provisions on inte-
grated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) (15) and those on
voluntary participation in the Community eco-management
and audit scheme (EMAS) (16) will also be able to interact with
the regulations on energy-using products, as will
those on
energy labelling of electrical appliances, which draw consumers'
attention to the benefits of more sustainable consumption.

(9) Directive 2000/55/EC in OJ L 279 of 1.11.2000
(10) Directive 90/396/EEC in OJ L 196 of 26/7/1990 (amended by

Directive 93/68/EEC)

(11) Directive 2002/91/EC in OJ L 1 of 4.1.2003
(12) Directive 2002/96/EC in OJ L 37 of 13.02.03
(13) Directive 2002/95/EC in OJ L 37 of 13.02.03
(14) Regulation (EC) 1980/2000 in OJ L 237 of 21.09.00
(15) Directive 96/61/EC in OJ L 257 of 10.10.1996
(16) Regulation (EC) 761/2001 in OJ L of 19.3.2001

C 112/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

1.7
In the Committee's view, the proposal for a ‘framework’
simplifying and consolidating Community legislation should
allow the Union to pursue a sustainable and globally competi-
tive development path while also upholding the principles of
corporate social responsibility and of
informed
choice for the citizen/consumer.

freedom of

2. The Commission proposal

2.1
The purpose of the Commission proposal is to establish
a coherent framework for integrating environmental character-
istics into the design and development of energy-using products
(EuPs) within the European single market (1). The aim of the
proposal is to be a framework directive that – by providing ‘the
right framework for addressing emerging environmental issues
swiftly’ – will allow eco-design requirements to be taken into
consideration in a coherent and comprehensive fashion in
order to:

— ensure the free movement of energy-using products within

the EU;

— improve the overall environmental performance of such

products;

— contribute to the security of energy supply;

— strengthen the competitiveness of the European economy;

— preserve the interests of industry and consumers.

This new framework, according to the Commission,
2.2
should not be limited to aspects of energy efficiency, but
should extend to all aspects of environmental impact, especially
as regards emissions (solid, gas, sound, electromagnetic, etc.)
and be based on Article 95 of the EC Treaty, this being the best
article for elimination of barriers to trade and distortions of
competition within the internal market.

The scope of the proposed framework directive would,
2.3
however, be very large as it would, in principle, apply to all
products that use energy in order to fulfil the purpose for
which they were designed. Motor vehicles are explicitly
excluded, given that these are already subject to a large number
of both regulatory measures (on design) and voluntary ones
(voluntary agreements on emissions).
the
Commission also lists criteria for selecting products that could
be subject to future implementing measures.

In its proposal,

2.4
The directive will also apply to components and sub-
assemblies of EuPs which are marketed as spare parts destined
for end users, and whose environmental performance can be
assessed independently.

The proposal

2.5
includes provisions on declarations of
conformity, CE marking, assessment and presumption of
conformity of products,
the procedures for adopting and
restrictions of
publishing harmonised technical
placing on the market, the exchange of information and coop-
eration between Member States, and rules on penalties applied
by them.

standards,

The Commission considers

2.6
that although – in the
absence of implementing measures - the proposed framework
directive will not directly create legal obligations for manufac-
turers, importers or distributors, it should nevertheless help to
integrate the concept of ‘life cycle’ into product design, thereby
applying one of the guiding principles of the Union's Integrated
Product Policy (IPP).

2.7
Finally, the proposal encourages initiatives or voluntary
agreements that have achieved wide-ranging and well-deserved
success in a number of sectors likely to be affected by the
implementation of the directive. Accordingly,
in cases where
market mechanisms or existing legislation are already having a
positive effect, no further implementing measures should be
required.

3. The situation at European and international level

There are a number of obstacles to the implementation
3.1
of eco-design, which have been noted at international
level
thanks to the survey carried out among the Fortune 500 list of
the world's largest companies (2). This revealed that cost was
than other factors,
classified at a considerably higher level
which leads one to think that increasing the amount of infor-
mation on the environment and its protection is critically
important.

the existence (or absence) of

3.2 Moreover,
information
sources was felt – not least by the largest American, Japanese
and European businesses – to be a highly relevant factor. Simi-
larly, the vast majority of respondents (79 %) considered that
education and training on eco-design, both inside and outside
the company, were important for promoting a real culture in
this area.

3.3 However, there did not seem to be a clear perception of
the models of eco-design. The few who did know about it
linked it to the Environmental Management System. On the
one hand, respondents cited a lack of expert personnel (‘envir-
onmentally literate product designers’) and of suitable qualifica-
tions; on the other, there did not appear to be any great differ-
ences between the analyses of the preceding five years, nor any
significant changes in eco-design activities.

(1) The Committee welcomes the legal reference to Article 95, free

(2) ESTO Report 2000 – Joint Research Centre of

the European

movement of goods.

Commission

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/27

3.4
As regards international standards, the ISO 14000 family
was mentioned as the first result from the Uruguay Round and
the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. On the subject of the ISO, the
United States seems to favour the adoption of guidelines for
eco-design rather than binding standards, to which they have
recently reiterated their opposition.

As far as Europe is concerned, the studies carried out by

3.5
the Community (1) seem to show a highly diverse situation:

— on the one hand, we have a group of Nordic countries that
already have significant, well-developed experience over a
wide range of relevant sectors;

— on the other we have another group, mostly of Mediterra-
nean countries, which until recently seem only to have
developed limited support structures for eco-design;

— then there is a third group of countries, which have devel-
for
oped financial and information support
industry in general, with the support of sectoral organisa-
tions and regional development agencies;

structures

— finally, there are the accession countries, which already
need help in overcoming the difficulties inherent in fully
complying with the standards set out in the environment
chapter of the acquis communautaire in its present form.

3.6 With regard to European SMEs (2), the following points
emerge:

— even in those countries that have the most experience and
have developed the best practices, the proportion of SMEs
designing eco-friendly products is very limited;

— SMEs tend to stop their eco-design activities once external

support has ceased;

— SMEs are faced with a very high number of individual
integrated environmental protection.
initiatives aimed at
These commitments, which take up a lot of time for small
businesspeople, impede the much-needed concentration of
efforts. The most effective way of further improving best
practice in supporting eco-design is to develop sector-
specific methods and approaches.

4. Comments

4.1
The Committee has always welcomed the European
Union's commitment to including an environmental dimension
of energy efficiency in policies for businesses and their produc-
tion processes, as an integral part of
the competitiveness
strategy which, among other things, is central to the decisions
taken in Lisbon in 2000. Promoting a more intelligent use of
product
energy

from the

addressing

aspect

this

by

design stage is an objective that
support.

the Committee can fully

its

the

Furthermore,

in an opinion adopted by a
reiterated
Committee

large
4.2
majority (3),
previously
expressed (4) concern regarding ‘…[the] underplaying [of] the
fact that the adoption of such vitally important measures as
Life-Cycle Analysis (LCAs) and eco-design necessitates major
financial, managerial and legislative efforts’. This opinion also
highlighted ‘the need for stronger action in promoting policies
to support research and innovation tailored to SMEs, particu-
larly focusing on disseminating information and on framing
innovative processes to develop greener products.’

4.3
The Committee therefore welcomes the Commission's
general aims of ensuring coherence and transparency in Com-
munity legislation on the subject and avoiding fragmentation of
the internal market as established by Article 95 of the EC
Treaty. However, the Committee has a number of reservations
about the current proposal, in terms of the context in which it
would have to operate, in terms of the choice of legal instru-
ment (enabling act), and finally, in terms of the articulation of
the proposal itself.

4.4
A wide range of Community directives (vertical or other-
wise) will be affected by the proposal, which has the ambitious
aim of establishing a consistent framework for them. In the
Committee's view, it might be helpful to consolidate these as a
first step. Directives on minimum efficiency requirements
already exist. A more integrated environmental assessment
to businesses and avoid
could provide better guidance
subjecting them to a system of requirements and guidelines
that could lead to over-regulation.

4.5
The Committee therefore considers it appropriate to
bring in a consolidated and simplified version of the Com-
munity regulations that already apply to product manufac-
turers. This should also include systems for supporting the
development of an eco-design culture, both on the demand
side and on the supply and design side, with measures
supporting databases of good practices, dissemination of infor-
mation, and training measures tailored to the various audiences
and the various technical levels involved.

4.6
In the Committee's opinion, it would be appropriate to
promote both guidelines on eco-design and the creation of
permanent platforms for dialogue and mandatory consultation
between the Commission, businesses, consumers, manufac-
turers and civil society. To this end, suitable promotional
instruments could be added into the Community's current
multi-annual ‘Intelligent Energy’ programme, into the mid-term
review of the Union's Sixth RTD Framework Programme, and
into the review of measures planned under the structural and
cohesion policies.

(1) IPTS Report 2000 ‘Eco-design: Strategies for dissemination to SMEs/

15 countries studies’ (Part 2).
(2) See IPTS Report 2000 – Part 1.

(3) EESC opinion OJ C 80 of 30.3.2004 on Integrated Product Policy -

COM (2003) 302

(4) EESC Opinion in OJ C 260 of 17.9.2001 and EESC Opinion in OJ

C 296 of 29.9.1997

C 112/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

4.7
Given the current state of the art, the Committee thinks
that it would be useful to promote voluntary sectoral agree-
ments and other instruments that involve economic and social
operators, in order to promote a culture of change. It is impor-
tant, in the Committee's opinion, to promote corporate social
responsibility and informed consumer choice.

be useful
to consider making them fully applicable to all
products, whether they are made in the EU or in third coun-
tries, and to extend this to components of the product. In the
trade made by the
Committee's view, checks on external
Union's customs services, and those within the internal market,
could prove costly, slow and ineffective when faced with accel-
erating global trends.

4.8
It would also be useful to carry out an in-depth evalua-
tion of the extent to which the Commission's proposals comply
with the requirements of proportionality, subsidiarity and
cutting red tape, and of the consequences that these could have
in terms of reducing or increasing costs and improving or
worsening the
and economic performance of
products, with a view to developing appropriate and coherent
policies and fiscal and financial support measures.

technical

The Committee has concerns regarding the content of
4.9
the proposal in that, as stated by the Commission itself, it ‘has
a wider scope than any related existing Community legislation
… in terms of products to be covered’. Putting the proposed
framework into practice would require implementing measures
based on set environmental impact criteria, not to mention a
defined series of environmental performance indicators,
in
order to create ecological profiles for a very large number of
products.
this would be
conferred on the Commission itself, with input solely from the
comitology procedures.

responsibility for

Furthermore,

4.10
The Committee also feels that the use of fictitious refer-
ence models for sectors of products could be a cause for
concern. To this end, the concept of the ‘state of the art’ would
be used – not to refer to the latest scientific achievements, but
technical performance’,
rather to ‘a good average level of
reflecting a ‘reasonable balance’ between industrial feasibility
and current standards and practices. The Committee believes
that it would be appropriate to maintain a similar balance with
regard to costs and benefits in order to ensure value for money
types of consumer, commensurate with their own
for all
choices and possibilities.

4.11 When setting the specific requirements for eco-design,
the proposal suggests that precise measurement methods would
be established, based on the standardised use of the product, its
performance and features that provide extra utility or comfort
for the user. The Committee believes that a further criterion
should be added: technical and economic analysis of the feasi-
bility of the design solutions. Given that the necessary indica-
tors would need to be fixed and pre-determined, there is a risk
of fossilising progress and technical and marketing innovations,
and of hamstringing competition in the technological perfor-
mance of new products.

4.12
As well as the effects of the above-mentioned measures
on businesses that produce the relevant products, it would also

4.13
The Committee considers it essential to ensure equal
treatment between products manufactured in the EU and
imported ones, and to put in place suitable control mechanisms
in order to prevent the regulations from impacting differently
on different manufacturers.

4.14
The Committee also believes that due consideration
must be given to the progress made internationally by the ISO
standards and guidelines on the integration of environmental
considerations into the design of energy-consuming products.

4.15
The Committee would like to heavily underscore the
current situation faced by SMEs, which is made worse by the
significant disparities between Member States and by the fact
that sectors with high concentrations of SMEs tend to take
longer to reach a consensus on the adoption of voluntary
measures.

4.16
In the Committee's opinion, the guiding principles –
both in general and for SMEs in particular – should be those of
proportionality and of real relevance, as well as prior verifica-
tion of the feasibility of the measures accompanied by sufficient
financial support and/or tax incentives. This is essential
in
order to encourage and sustain the competitive implementation
of eco-design information and fast, easy access to databases,
training of technicians and businesses, dissemination of innova-
tion and the technological marketing of innovative products.

4.17
Finally, the Committee underscores the absolute neces-
sity of ensuring the right balance between minimum standards
of environmental protection, safeguarding the development of
businesses and jobs, and the freedom of consumers to make
informed choices.

5. Conclusions

5.1
The Committee has always been in favour of putting an
environmental dimension of energy efficiency into policies
aimed at businesses and their products, and considers this to be
an integral part of the European competitiveness strategy. The
Committee stresses the need to develop a true eco-design
culture that draws on the social and environmental responsi-
bility of businesses and consumers and promotes active and
responsible behaviour.

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/29

5.2
The Committee also favours the creation of a framework
that is consistent with the legislation in this area, avoids market
fragmentation and ensures transparency of treatment for all
businesses and users.

5.3
The Committee therefore recommends that this consoli-
dated framework should be provided as a matter of priority in
order to give better guidance to businesses, especially SMEs.

5.4
Eco-design requirements for new products should be
kept at reasonable and acceptable levels in order to ensure the
development of new designs and the freedom of the consumer
to choose between the different technical solutions on offer.

5.5
The Committee believes that as a very wide range of
Community regulations will be affected by the new directive,
the initiative needs to go hand in hand with the simplification
of the legislation and with a strengthening of competitiveness
of the single market in an enlarged Europe.

Brussels, 31 March 2004.

5.6
The Committee strongly recommends that the existing
legislation on energy saving and efficiency and the different
environmental impact aspects of products should be consoli-
dated and simplified as a first step (1). The main thing is to
arrive at a simplified, user-friendly overview of the Community
regulations
energy-
consuming products.

currently cover

the design of

that

The Committee advocates the adoption, as soon as
5.7
possible, of guidelines on eco-design and on the creation of
permanent dialogue platforms for the different sectors and for
sensitive products, bringing together the Commission, busi-
nesses, consumers, manufacturers, and civil society. The aim is
to assess developments and promote initiatives that consistently
and coherently support Community and national programmes
and instruments with eco-friendly objectives,
to
improve awareness and develop a real eco-design culture on
the part of both producers and consumers.

in order

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

(1) See COM(2003) 71, and SEC(2003) 165 of 11 February 2003