Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee on the Integration of Environmental Aspects into European Standardisation’COM(2004) 130 final
Date: 2004-09-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: European standard, environmental protection, standardisation

23.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/57

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social
Committee on the Integration of Environmental Aspects into European Standardisation’

COM(2004) 130 final

(2005/C 74/11)

On 25 February 2004, the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned communi-
cation.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 July 2004. The rapporteur was Mr
Pezzini.

At its 411th plenary session of 15 September 2004, the European Economic and Social Committee unani-
mously adopted the following opinion:

1. Introduction

1.1
The integration of environmental aspects into the Euro-
pean standardisation process is one of the priorities set out in
the European Strategy for Sustainable Development, adopted
by the Commission in 2001 (1), on which the Committee
issued an opinion in November 2001, as well as a more recent
opinion assessing sustainable development in April 2004 (2).
The strategy aims to strike a balance between economic, social
and environmental considerations, and to strengthen the prin-
ciple established by the EC Treaty (3) that environmental consid-
erations should be integrated into other Community policies.
The Sixth Community Environment Action Programme (4),
specifies that technical standardisation programmes should take
into account the need to protect the environment.

1.2
The technical standardisation process is able to provide
substantial support to the establishment of a fully integrated
European internal market that respects the environment.
It
reconciles the commitment to becoming the most competitive
economy in the world by 2010, capable of
sustainable
economic growth with more and better jobs in an enlarged
Europe with greater economic and social cohesion, as specified
in strategy adopted by the Heads of State and Government of
the European Union in Lisbon in 2000.

1.3
Furthermore, technical standardisation, which is founded
on the consensus of all interested parties, is an essential aspect
of the implementation procedures of Community policies, and
in particular, of integrated product policies, an area that has
already been the subject of a number of EESC opinions (5),
considering the standardisation process itself to have the poten-
tial to limit the environmental impact of products and services.

(1) COM(2001) 264 final.
(2) Opinion CESE 1494/2001 of 29 November 2001 and CESE

661/2004 of 29 April 2004

(3) EC Treaty Articles 2 and 6 (consolidated version)
(4) Decision 1600/2002/EC of 22 July 2002
(5) EESC Opinion on the Green Paper on Integrated Product Policies
(OJ C 260, 17.9.2001 and Opinion CESE 1598/2003 of
10.12.2003 on the Communication from the Commission on Inte-
grated Product Policy - Building on Environmental Life-Cycle
Thinking.

1.4
The Council Conclusions on standardisation of 1 March
2002 reaffirmed the adequacy of standards applied in sectors
currently included in the new approach. The Council stressed
that it was important that all stakeholders play an active role in
the standardisation process and welcomed the Commission's
intention to develop a paper on standardisation and the protec-
tion of the environment.

Following this Council,

the Commission identified a
1.5
series of key areas in a working document entitled the Role of
standardisation in the framework of European legislation and
policies, which set out the following objectives:

1.5.1
to make more extensive use of European standardisa-
tion in EU policies and legislation to foster, in line with the
needs of both society and enterprises, the expansion of standar-
disation into new areas
transport,
such as
consumer and environment protection;

services,

ICT,

1.5.2
to continue to raise awareness of business leaders and
other stakeholders of the benefits of standardisation for busi-
ness through measures that facilitate their participation in the
standardisation process, and to involve SMEs in particular;

1.5.3
to review and to amend the current legislative frame-
work dealing with standardisation so that it can respond to the
latest developments and challenges in European standardisation,
and to simplify legislation and develop a ‘better regulation
package’ to align European legislation (6) with the needs of an
enlarged Europe (7), and with the internal market strategy prio-
rities for 2003-2006 (8);

(6) Communication from the Commission COM(2002) 278
(7) Communication from the Commission :

Industrial Policy in an

Enlarged Europe COM (2002) 714

(8) Communication: Internal Market Strategy – Priorities 2003-2006

COM(2003) 238 final

C 74/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.3.2005

1.5.4
to put financial support for European standardisation
on a solid legal basis thereby ensuring that Member States and
the Commission co-finance standardisation procedures, Euro-
pean infrastructure and the intensified synergy between CEN,
Cenelec and ETSI;

2. Summary of the Communication

1.5.5
to support the efforts of European standards organisa-
tions in their drive to increase the efficiency of the standardisa-
tion process by promoting the development and implementa-
tion of international standards in order to facilitate access to
markets and international trade, and to avoid creating unneces-
sary obstacles to trade and to ensure the international dimen-
sion of standardisation.

The establishment of a European technical standardisa-
1.6
tion culture is vital
for an efficient and balanced internal
market in the EU-25. It is therefore important, particularly in
the environmental sector, to take steps to train experts and to
create and use databases that integrate environmental data in to
the European standardisation system, with the full participation
of the new Member States through their standardisation institu-
tions. Given the structure and size of enterprises in those coun-
tries, the Committee believes that in order to participate fully
in the standardisation process and to apply existing European
technical standards, small and medium-sized enterprises in all
the new Member States will require support.

1.7
The European technical standardisation system, which is
based on consensus between all parties involved in drafting
new standards and on their willingness to apply them, has
proved to be extremely workable, and sufficiently efficient and
flexible to permit extensive standardisation. In 2003, the total
number of standards was around 13,500. This had a positive
impact on the economy by reducing the transaction costs, facil-
itating trade, increasing competition and encouraging innova-
tion. Another important aspect of standardisation is the reduc-
tion of obstacles to trade in the internal market, as well as the
world market.

The objectives of the Communication from the Commis-

2.1
sion may be summarised as follows:

— to raise awareness of the need to systematically integrate
issues into the European standardisation
in a voluntary way, substantially driven by the

environmental
process,
stakeholders;

— to establish permanent dialogue between standardisation
players in order to draw up a specific action plan on 1)
training and awareness-raising activities; 2) the organisation
and support of stakeholder participation in the standardisa-
tion process; 3) systematic use of all available tools in order
to take environmental issues into account in standards; 4)
redefinition by the Commission of the framework for the
standardisation mandates and the specific mandates for
environmental policy and the environmental aspects of
products;

— to continually assess and monitor the integration of envir-
onmental aspects into European standardisation, in the light
of the results obtained in the four areas mentioned above.

In order to achieve these objectives, the Commission

2.2
intends, to proceed as follows:

— at stakeholder level: put forward proposals to promote
awareness-raising activities; share best practice and experi-
ence in training and awareness-raising; initiate broad-based
stakeholder consultation on the formulation of standardisa-
tion mandates; set priorities for the integration of environ-
mental concerns into European standards; identify indica-
integration of environmental
tors to assess the level of
requirements into standards;
identify and coordinate the
environmental aspects dealt with by European standardisa-
tion institutions; provide Community support to European
stakeholder groups that are active in the sector; report regu-
larly on the ways in which the various tools used to inte-
grate environmental concerns
into the standardisation
process are being used;

1.8
The Committee believes that these successes must be
consolidated and further developed as underlined in the
Council Conclusions on standardisation of March 2002. Never-
theless, however desirable it may be to take economic, social
and environmental issues into consideration, this must not, in
the Committee's view, vitiate the fundamental nature of the
standardisation process, which must remain free, voluntary and
consensual. These are after all the characteristics that have
made the process successful in the internal and international
markets.

— in the Member States, particularly the new ones: take
steps to promote training and awareness-raising activities;
ensure the gathering and dissemination of information by
standardisation bodies; help and assist all stakeholders,
particularly those representing civil society groups and
public institutions active in the environmental sphere, to
ensure that
they participate fully in the standardisation
process; report on the support measures applied in order to
promote the exchange of experience and best practice;

23.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/59

— at Community level: earmark Community funds

and

training

awareness-raising

to
support
programmes
promoted by European standardisation institutions; conti-
nually monitor ongoing training and awareness-raising
programmes;
include, with consultation of stakeholders
wherever necessary, environmental issues into the formula-
tion of standardisation mandates; support stakeholders on a
European scale in the identification and coordination of the
environmental aspects of standardisation; organise meetings
to facilitate the exchange of experience and best practice
and the adoption of indicators to assess the progress of
European standards that are relevant to the environment;
system to monitor
develop a permanent
progress in the sectors indicated, with consultation of stake-
holders at least once a year.

assessment

3. General comments

The Committee welcomes the Commission's initiative
3.1
involving in-depth consideration of
the possibilities,
opportunities and means whereby concerns relating not only
to environmental protection but also to the sustainable use of
natural resources and raw materials required in the production,
packaging, distribution, maintenance, and end-of-life treatment
of products can be included in the standardisation process.

3.2
In this regard, the Committee underlines that developing
its own authentic European culture of technical standardisa-
tion is vital for the efficient and balanced functioning of the
European internal market and to ensure that steps are taken to
train experts and to create suitable databases for the environ-
ment in particular. This will facilitate the assessment of the
possibilities and opportunities for integrating environmental
aspects into the European standardisation system, including the
new Member States in the process.

it

The Committee believes that

the
3.3
voluntary, consensual, open and transparent nature of a stan-
dardisation process, which is freely applied by and for stake-
holders, and which has made European technical standardi-
sation so successful, is not marred but strengthened by the
inclusion of socio-economic and environmental considerations.

is essential

that

3.3.1
The Committee draws attention to the fact that there
are already a substantial number of technical standards that
concern the environment directly or
into
account. These include standards concerning the essential
aspects of the life-cycle of products, standardised methods for
measures and tests, technical standards on environmental tech-
nologies and environmental management such as EMAS eco-
management, which is based on EN/ISO 14001.

take it

that

3.3.2 Moreover, the Committee notes with satisfaction that
the European standardisation institutions already possess a set
of tools that are suitable for the optimal integration of
into the standardisation
environmental considerations
process. For instance, the IEC 109 (1), successfully introduced
as early as 1995 and updated recently, on technical standards
for electrotechnical and electronic products; ISO/TR 14062 (2),
ratified in 2002, on the design and development of products;
the 100 and more ETSI/Cenelec Emissions and immunity
quality standards; and finally the ISO/64 code of conduct
promoted by the CEN Environment Help Desk.

the

effective

The Committee reaffirms its conviction that, as demon-
3.4
strated above,
integration of environmental
concerns into the technical standardisation process will more
easily be achieved, especially in the case of small and medium-
sized firms, through codes of conduct, technical reports and
more flexible tools, or through training workshops and hand-
books that facilitate the transfer of knowledge and raise aware-
ness of this issue, from the planning stage of new products,
manufacturing processes and services.
the
simplified procedures adopted for EMAS and for health and
safety standards in small and medium-sized enterprises could
be used, as repeatedly stressed in the relevant EESC opinion (3).

In this context,

The Committee strongly emphasises that the ongoing
3.5
process must not weigh down or slacken the pace of stan-
dardisation. The very act of increasing the cost and red
tape involved in the process would, in itself, contradict the
EU principle of simplifying standardisation. The Committee is
therefore in full agreement with the Council Conclusions on
standardisation of 1 March 2002, according to which ‘the
viability of
standardisation system in Europe
remains far from secure in the light of rapidly changing Euro-
pean and international sources of income’ (4). The Committee
believes that standardisation must be made increasingly attrac-
tive and useful to enterprises and their experts, who have the
technical skill to integrate environmental considerations into
their product innovations at a sustainable cost.

the overall

3.6
In order to optimise the overall performance of enter-
prises, mechanisms for the improvement of the environ-
mental expertise of all stakeholders should be developed to
ensure that the interested parties play an active role in the
development of standards from the very outset. Technical,
economic and social
issues must be considered alongside
health, safety and customer satisfaction. In recent years, it has
become apparent that we need to pay close attention to redu-
cing and rationalising the consumption of natural resources
and energy, to reducing waste and emissions, and above all to
enhancing the quality of the process of voluntary technical
standardisation itself so that new standards can be applied
easily at an international level.

(1) IEC/109 on Environmental aspects – Inclusion in electro-technical

product standards

(2) ISO/TR 14062 on Environmental management – integrating envir-

onmental aspects into product design and development

(3) Opinion CESE 560/1999 of 29 May 1999 (OJ C 209, 22.7.1999)
(4) OJ C 66, 15.3.2002

C 74/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.3.2005

in the light of

The Committee considers that,

3.7
the
ongoing democratic process, which is predominantly based on
national structures,
it would be appropriate to avoid a top-
down approach by entrusting stakeholders, with appropriate
recourse to expertise and advice, with the responsibility
of identifying the methods for the integration of environ-
mental considerations into the standardisation process.

3.13 With regard to the Commission using compulsory
mandates in the context of the new approach, the Committee
believes that promoting the use of environmental technical
standards should not be subject to top-down decisions but
should be effected through widespread acceptance of eco-
compatible products in order to respond as effectively as
possible to the needs and interests of citizens and consu-
mers.

3.8
The Committee considers that the pace of standardisa-
tion cannot exceed the pace of cultural change that will
enable various sectors to understand the role they play in
sustainable development. The Commission's role takes on
particular importance in the awareness-raising process and
the cultural ‘foresight’ that must be implemented through
the dissemination of know-how and best practice.

3.14
The Committee believes that clearly-defined mandates
based on the new approach have contributed to the success of
the internal European market and that
this should not be
jeopardised by using mandates to transfer difficult political
decisions within standardisation institutions.

3.9
The high-quality of voluntary technical standards is an
essential aspect of their added value at European level and,
in the Committee's opinion, can only be ensured through the
active participation of all stakeholders in the standardisation
process,
from the various
sectors of industry,
including small and medium-sized enter-
prises, employees, consumers and NGOs. The diversity of the
stakeholders involved constitutes a fair balance of economic,
social
considerations, without
neglecting health and safety priorities.

i.e. experts and representatives

environmental

and

3.10
In compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, stake-
holder participation must, first and foremost, be applied at
national level, particularly in the case of new Member States.
It is essential to support NGOs, to ensure their active and
competent participation, but also and above all, SMEs, whose
structure and size make their improved access to the standar-
disation process particularly important. It is therefore worth
remembering that European institutions specifically created
for SMEs, such as NORMAPME, should be strengthened and
used to the best effect.

The Committee emphasises the need for urgent Com-
3.11
munity support measures
for capacity-building activities
promoted by the standardisation institutions and NGOs of the
new Member States, including projects for training experts.
The Committee recommends the establishment of a network
of databases that is fully interoperable, decentralised and
easily accessible by the end user. In practice, this means
permanent and improved access to information and the knowl-
edgeable participation of all enterprises in the standardisation
process.

The Committee considers that transposing interna-
3.15
tional standards into European standards is essential
to
ensure that our products are fully present and competitive on
the international market. At present, due to the Dresden and
Vienna Agreements, over 83 % of Cenelec standards and
approximately 40 % of CEN standards are based on interna-
tional ISO, IEC and ITU standards. The Committee believes that
it is necessary to prevent environmental standards from
becoming barriers to trade under the terms of the World
Trade Organisation's TBT Agreement. Nor should standards
make European enterprises uncompetitive on the world
market. It is therefore necessary to assume a proactive stance
within the context of the trans-Atlantic dialogue (TABD), the
Japanese (EJBD) dialogue and the Mercusor Forum (MEBF) in
order to prevent the gap between European and international
standards from widening.

4. Specific observations

It

level,

Participation:

4.1
to ensure that broader
is important
participation does not slow down the process of approving and
revising standards, which already takes an average of three to
five years. The principle of subsidiarity must be fully
the participation of all stake-
applied. At national
holders, particularly employers and workers, must be ensured,
whereas at European level, the representatives of national
standardisation institutions must present
consensual
national positions achieved. The Community-level representa-
small and medium-sized enterprises and NGOs
tives of
concerned should also participate, bringing the consensual
positions achieved by their institutions to the debate.

the

3.12 With regard to setting priorities for the standardisa-
tion process, the Committee considers that a consensual and
voluntary process that involves the free participation of
all stakeholders should continue to be used to identify priori-
ties. Priorities that are entirely politically motivated and that fail
to take into account the specific characteristics of products and
the enterprises that produce them are to be avoided.

4.2
Cooperation: The Committee considers the organised
exchange of technical know-how and the development of
voluntary codes of conduct and of best practice to be parti-
cularly important. However, the latter should be implemented
through existing tools (cf. 3.3.2.), which need to be strength-
ened and developed, particularly where the new Member States
are concerned.

23.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/61

4.3
Culture: The development of a European technical
standardisation culture that takes economic, social and envir-
onmental
issues into account is essential for enterprises and
organisations thereof, and, in particular, for SMEs', employees'
and stakeholders' organisations. Consumer and environmental
protection groups should have sufficient access to financial
support at both national and Community level in order to rein-
force their training in technical standardisation and ensure their
qualified and competent participation.

whilst building the capacity of Member States' institutions as a
preparatory measure.

5.2
The EESC believes that the process of integrating envir-
onmental aspects into the European standardisation system
should fully respect the principle of subsidiarity, and must
involve the full participation of all stakeholders, particularly
SMEs and NGOs, at national and regional
levels especially,
since they are closest to the interested parties.

4.4
Funding: There is a need for both national and Com-
munity multiannual budget resources to develop training
and awareness-raising activities. These funds should be allo-
cated, in particular, to national and European standardisation
bodies, to the social partners and to organisations representing
the various civil society bodies.

5.3
The development of the global market and the opening-
up of large markets such as China, India, and Russia to world
trade, make it a priority to transpose current international stan-
dards into European standards, in accordance with the Dresden
and Vienna Agreements, so as to turn standardisation to the
commercial advantage of European enterprises.

4.5
Priorities: Where new technical standards are to be
drafted, priorities should be established by consensus of all the
participants, since they are directly involved in the standardisa-
tion process and therefore have to bear full responsibility for it.
Under no circumstance should priorities be decided through a
top-down process imposed from above. Tools: The systematic
use of the tools - as described in points 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 -
necessary for the integration of environmental aspects into the
standardisation process should be seen as an opportunity
offered to those involved in the technical standardisation
process, which is a voluntary undertaking, rather than as a
requirement imposed on them.

4.6 Monitoring: Monitoring and assessing results achieved
through training and awareness-raising activities and strength-
ening national and European standardisation institutions not
least as regards the knowledgeable participation of NGOs and
bodies representing SMEs, should provide the Commission, the
Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic
and Social Committee with the basis for biannual reports and
five-yearly reviews of Community measures and policy in the
field.

5. Conclusions

5.1
The EESC is convinced of the need to speed up the stan-
dardisation process without weighing it down, thereby ensuring
development and high quality in all spheres of the internal
market, including the environment. The aim must be to make
the process efficient and inexpensive and to minimise red tape,

The EESC considers that

5.4
the objective must be to
achieve maximum compatibility between environmental regula-
tions and non-binding standards, which are based on greater
awareness of environmental considerations and quality.

The EESC stresses that

5.5
forums for the exchange of
experience, best practice and dialogue amongst stakeholders
should be strengthened through expertise from European and
national standardisation institutions, industry, SMEs, employee
representatives, consumers and NGOs, in order to support the
development of standardisation procedures, in accordance with
the Lisbon Strategy and the principle of sustainable, competi-
tive development.

5.6

In particular, it is necessary to:

— promote a technical standardisation culture for the EU;

— take steps to train experts and develop appropriate, widely-

used databases;

— increasingly integrate environmental protection into the

European standardisation system;

— raise consumer awareness to increase demand for a market
which favours the sustainable use of natural resources, raw
materials and finished and packaged products;

— strike a balance between key health and safety concerns and
global environmental issues, with due consideration for the
Kyoto Protocol;

— apply the principle of subsidiarity fully by promoting the
participation of all stakeholders at national and regional
levels;

C 74/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.3.2005

— develop more flexible codes of conduct that result in eco-
friendly standardisation processes that primarily enable
facilitate the
SMEs to develop technical processes that
new products,
economically-viable
processes and services;

development

of

encourage an exchange of expertise amongst all stake-
holders in the standardisation process: CEN, CENELEC,
ETSI, NORMAPME, ANEC (consumers), TUTB (workers'
union), ECOS (environmental body), Industry, distribution
and services;

— provide a forum for discussion between the Lisbon Strategy
for developing the internal market and the European Envir-
onment and Health Action Plan 2004-2010 in order to

— support the development of basic technical standardisation
for quality products and processes in the agriculture and
food sector.

Brussels, 15 September 2004

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Agriculture in peri-urban areas’

(2005/C 74/12)

On 17 July 2003, the European Economic and Social Committee decided to draw up an opinion, under
Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, on ‘Agriculture in peri-urban areas’.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 July 2004. The rapporteur was Mr Caball i
Subirana.

At its 411th plenary session of 15 and 16 September 2004 (meeting of 16 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 132 votes in favour and three absten-
tions.

1. Introduction

1.1 A productive activity conditioned by the urban environment

1.1.1
Peri-urban areas have been discussed at various Euro-
including the European Economic and Social
pean forums,
Committee. This is a growing phenomenon that affects many
municipalities in the EU as a consequence of urban, industrial
and tertiary development and the spread of communication
and transport infrastructures, which are gobbling up prime
farming land and generating an increasing number of marginal
and uncompetitive agricultural areas.

Agricultural activity in peri-urban areas is conditional
1.1.2
on the urban environment in which it is practised, in the sense
that
the latter has negative repercussions for the former,
limiting its economic viability. Such negative repercussions are
the primary cause of environmental degradation in the area
relationship
and have a detrimental effect on the social
between city and country. Depending on how it is addressed
and resolved, this disjuncture between city and country can
seriously jeopardise the survival of agricultural activity itself.

1.1.3
In addition to the traditional problems facing peri-
urban agricultural areas, another more recent problem has now

emerged, namely the protection of free areas near cities, but
without agricultural activity. This new problem basically stems
from the idea that such areas should be some sort of ‘theme
park’, with the result that everything is artificial, decontextua-
lised and impersonal. The aesthetic criteria underlying this idea
are based mistakenly on biodiversity protection regulations or
an image of
the countryside that seeks to marginalise or
romanticise agricultural activity.

1.1.4
The EU's Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) stresses
the need for farms to diversify by exploring activities that will
generate new incomes for farmers. It must be emphasised that
without agriculture there is no agricultural landscape, that is, a
landscape characterised by fields of crops, animals, meadows
and, above all, farmers.

1.1.5
All of these factors (pressure from the urban environ-
ment, the idea of agriculture without farmers, the reform of the
CAP) raise serious problems for the continuity and stability of
are much more
peri-urban agriculture.
pronounced here than in other similar agro climatic areas,
which means there is a higher risk of agricultural activity disap-
pearing.)

(Such problems