Commission staff working document accompanying the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Public procurement for a better environment - Impact assessment {COM(2008) 400 final} {SEC(2008) 2125} {SEC(2008) 2126}
Date: 2008-07-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: eco-label, economic growth, goods and services, public contract

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 16.7.2008 
SEC(2008) 2124 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

accompanying the  

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Public procurement for a better environment  

IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

{COM(2008) 400 final} 
{SEC(2008) 2125} 
{SEC(2008) 2126} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Lead DG: ENV - Other involved services: SG, LS, MARKT; ENTR; TREN, EMPL, OIB, 
ADMIN, AGRI, RELEX, DEV, TRADE, SG; REGIO  

WP reference: 2007/ENV/ 

Our  current  consumption  in  the  EU  causes  environmental  damage  at  rates  that  are 
unsustainable.  If  the  world  as  a  whole  followed  traditional  patterns  of  consumption,  global 
resource use might quadruple within 20 years. It is necessary therefore to stimulate the faster 
development and diffusion of environmentally beneficial products. 

Public authorities yearly spend a sum which equals 16 % of EU GDP, particularly in sectors 
with  relatively  high  environmental  impacts  and  at  the  same  time  serious  scope  for 
improvement (transport, buildings and building fittings..).  

Considering this purchasing power, Green public procurement has been identified as a cost-
the  supply  side  and  pulling 
effective 
environmentally beneficial goods into the market place. 

tool  for  "leading  by  example",  "greening" 

Green  public  procurement  (GPP)  is  defined  as  a  process  whereby  public  authorities  seek  to 
procure goods, services and works with a reduced environmental impact throughout their life 
cycle when compared to goods, services and works with the same primary function that would 
otherwise be procured. It is a process that promotes, but not necessarily leads to, the purchase 
of a "green" product and which fully respects the EU legislation on public procurement.  

Research  carried  out  in  2006  has  shown  that  only  7  Member  States  were  practising  a 
significant  amount  of  GPP  and  that  in  the  remaining  20  Member  States,  GPP  was  applied 
much less, or not at all.  

Following problems have been identified as hindering EU wide uptake of GPP: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

Lack  of  awareness  of  benefits,  misperception  of  the  extent  of  costs,  and  lack  of 
political priority for GPP 

Lack of legal clarity 

Lack  of  information  and  tools  for  GPP,  inadequate  training  structures,  lack  of 
knowledge of priority areas and absence of easy to apply GPP criteria 

Lack  of  similarity  between  GPP  procedures  and  criteria  across  the  EU,  which  also 
results  in  increased  administrative  costs  in  particular  for  SMEs  and  hindering  the 
internal market  

In the light of these problems, the Commission has identified a series of actions and measures 
aimed at radically increasing the quantity and quality of GPP in the EU 27. Those actions can 
be bundled into different policy options.  

–  Option  1  relates  to  "Business  as  usual":  the  Commission  would  continue  to  provide 
guidance on its GPP website, including relevant studies and the GPP Handbook, and hold 
regular  meetings  with  national  GPP  experts  to  exchange  best  practice.  Only  minor 
improvements  may  be  expected  because  the  underlying  problems  will  not  be  properly 
addressed. 

–  Option  2  would  address  problems  1  to  4,  through  the  provision  of  a  package  including 
political support, legal and operational guidance, recommendations and concrete actions on 
establishing GPP criteria and GPP training in view of increased and improved GPP, some 
of which would be delivered through a Communication. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
–  Option  3  would  necessarily  complement  the  previous  option  by  maximizing  political 
support through a legal instrument setting mandatory targets for GPP. It includes various 
alternative  sub-options,  ranging  from  mandatory  targets  for  life  cycle  costing  (3A),  over 
mandatory  targets  for  "basic"  (not  necessarily  outcome  based)  GPP  (3B),  to  mandatory 
targets linked to compliance with GPP criteria set in comitology procedure (3C).  

–  Option 4 would also seek to maximize political support through a legal instrument which 
would  make  GPP  mandatory,  either  for  certain  types  of  contracting  authorities  when 
purchasing certain types of products (Option 4A), either for contracts above the thresholds 
of the Public procurement Directives (Option 4B); either for certain types of environmental 
criteria to be included in services and works contracts above certain thresholds (Option 4C) 

–  Option 5 would be complementary to all other options insofar as it would seek to ease the 
burden of monitoring for the Member States and the EU, by proposing a modification of 
the Commission Directive on standard forms for use in public procurement, to include also 
information  on  the  environmental  aspects  of  tenders  in  the  contract  advice  and  contract 
award notices 

The  impact  assessment  has  shown  that  option  2  is  the  most  timely  option  which  addresses 
different  problems  hindering  the  uptake  of  GPP.  The  Commission  therefore  proposes,  as  a 
result of the current impact assessment, to adopt a Communication proposing voluntary GPP 
targets and providing operational and legal guidance and kicking off a process of co-operation 
with the Member States to identify GPP criteria. This option therefore includes quantification 
of  the  (voluntary)  GPP  target  set  forth  by  EU  leaders  in  their  renewed  Sustainable 
Development  Strategy,  namely  that  by  2010,  the  EU  level  of  GPP  should  be  at  the  current 
level of GPP in the best performing Member States. 

However,  the  impact  assessment  has  also  shown  that,  increased  political  support  would 
maximize  the  aggregate  benefits  of  the  measures  proposed  under  option  2.  Options  3  and  4 
include various alternative options which would have the effect of raising political support to 
varying degrees, ranging from mandatory targets for GPP to mandatory GPP for all contracts 
covered by the public procurement Directives. Option 5 finally would be complementary to 
any of the other options, as it would make it mandatory for contracting authorities to include 
information on environmental considerations into the standard forms used for contracts above 
the thresholds of the public procurement directives.  

The  current  impact  assessment  also  shows  that  further  research  needs  to  be  undertaken  into 
the impacts of Options 3, 4 and 5 to allow selection of the most appropriate policy measures, 
if  any,  to  increase  political  support.  The  Commission  will  therefore  not  propose  these 
measures  now,  but  carry  out  additional  impact  assessment  of  options  and  publish  its 
conclusions. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1. 

Procedural issues  

This impact assessment examines the benefits and costs of various policy options to 
raise the quantitative and qualitative level of Green public procurement, in line with 
the  Commission  Legislative  and  Work  Programme  for  2007  and  relevant  roadmap 
published in the light of this1.  

1.2. 

Consultation and use of expertise 

This  impact  assessment  is  drafted  on  the  basis  of  relevant  studies  (Annex  1),  the 
input  of  an  Inter  Service  Group  gathering  relevant  Commission  services  including 
DG  MARKT,  ENTR,  SG,  LS,  TREN,  EMPL,  REGIO,  TRADE,  AGRI,  AIDCO, 
DEV,  ADMIN,  BUDG,  RELEX,  established  for  the  purpose  of  the  impact 
assessment and consultation with stakeholders (Annex 2).  

1.3. 

Integration of the Impact Assessment Board's recommendations 

On 11 October the Impact Assessment Board adopted an opinion on the draft version 
of the Impact Assessment of the Communication. 

All  the  recommendations  for  improvements  have  been  fully  integrated  into  the 
impact assessment as outlined below: 

(1) The IA report should be more conclusive in its –at least qualitative- assessment 
and comparison of a number of comprehensive policy options, and be more explicit 
on which options to be withheld, rejected or put up for further study 

The  policy  options  have  been  bundled  into  5  comprehensive  policy  options, 
including several sub-options (replacing prior 10 options). It has been made clear that 
Option 2 is the currently preferred option but that it could be complemented, in the 
future,  with  one  or  more  mandatory  measures  envisaged  under  options  3,  4  and  5, 
subject  to  additional,  future  impact  assessment  to  be  carried  out,  including  a 
preliminary subsidiarity test. 

(2)  Need  for  better assessment  of  the  economic  impacts  of  a  higher  GPP  uptake  in 
general and of the various options in particular 

The  revised  report  better  highlights  the  impact  on  competition  and  international 
competitiveness  and  includes  reference  to  possible  side-effects  such  as  "crowding 
out"; whilst also better illustrating the effect on administrative burden.  

(3) Need to elaborate on the context of the proposed set of actions, which can impact 
their effectiveness 

The  revised  report  points  at  expected  differentiated  impacts  linked  to  the  type  of 
product/service addressed as well as the level of government agencies targeted. The 
heterogeneity of the types of goods and services potentially covered by GPP has led 
to the identification of priority product and service groups, based on an assessment of 
their  financial  and  environmental  impact. The  probable  differentiated  impact  of  the 
policy  on  central  and  local  government  has  led  to  the  proposal  of  differentiated 
targets for GPP.  

1 

COM(2006)629 final of 24.10.2006 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

2.1. 

Background 

2.1.1.  Background: the unachieved potential of Green Public Procurement 

Green public procurement (hereafter referred to as GPP) is defined here as a process 
whereby  public  and  semi-public  authorities  seek  to  procure  goods,  services  and 
works  with  a  reduced  environmental  impact  throughout  their  life  cycle  when 
compared  to  goods,  services  and  works  with  the  same  primary  function  that  would 
otherwise be procured.  

It  is  a  process  that  promotes,  but  does  not  necessarily  lead  to,  the  purchase  of  a 
"green" product2 and which fully respects the EU legislation on public procurement3.  

GPP procedures can bring a number of different benefits, the extent of each benefit 
below depending on both the product group and the criteria used in purchasing.  

•  Direct financial benefit to purchasing authorities 

For  products  that  consume  resources  over  their  lifetime,  the  purchase  of  more 
resource efficient products can significantly cut costs for users, even where the initial 
expenditure is higher. Examples are office equipment, lighting, vehicles, buildings.  

Example:  A  Life  Cycle  Cost  evaluation  of  alternative  HVAC  Systems  (Heating, 
ventilation  and  airconditioning  systems)  carried  out  in  the  US  in  2005,  has  led  a 
public  authority  to  buy  a  HVAC  system,  based  on  an  alternative  energy-efficient 
"green"  technology,  whose  energy  consumption  was  markedly  lower  so  that  cost 
savings  outweighed  higher  capital  and  maintenance  costs  as  well  as  yielding 
environmental  benefits  in  terms  of  reduced  greenhouse  gases  and  other  air 
pollutants4. 

Example: A recent study carried out for the UK Government showed that the use of 
sustainable  construction  techniques  in  the  Newport  Southern  Distributor  Road 
resulted  in  benefits  valued  at  £2.1  m(€  3.1m),  part  of  which  came  through  reduced 
purchase cost of recycled materials.  

•  Stimulating  development  and  diffusion  of  environmentally  beneficial 

technologies 

Our  current  consumption  in  the  EU  causes  environmental  damage  at  rates  that  are 
unsustainable. If the world as a whole followed traditional patterns of consumption, 
global  resource  use  might  quadruple  within  20  years.5  It  is  necessary  therefore  to 

2 

3 

4 

5 

For simplicity  of presentation, the impact assessment only mentions products: this should be taken to 
include also services and works 
Directive 2004/18 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination 
of  procedures  for  the  award  of  public  works  contracts,  public  supply  contracts  and  public  service 
contracts (hereinafter: Directive 2004/18) and Directive 2004/17 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, 
energy, transport and postal services sectors (hereinafter: Directive 2004/17). 
Fuller,  Sieglinede  and  Stephen  R.  Petersen,  1996  Life-Cycle  Costing  Manual  for  the  Federal  Energy 
Management Program, referred to in 2003 OECD Report on the environmental performance of public 
procurement 
Estimated  population  growth  of  3  billion  people  (a  50%  increase)  by  2050  :  World  Population 
Prospects:  The  2006  Revision  and  World  Urbanization  Prospects:  The  2005  Revision  Population 
Division  of  the  Department  of  Economic  and  Social  Affairs  of  the  United  Nations  Secretariat, 
http://esa.un.org/unpp 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
stimulate  the  faster  development  and  diffusion  of  environmentally  beneficial 
products. 

GPP  rewards  firms  that  develop  such  goods  and  provides  incentives  for  the  future 
development of technologies, promoting innovation that supports the EU economy.  

There are two effects: 

–  Environmentally  better  goods  are  often  niche  products  for  which  increased 
demand  will  lead  to  economies  of  scale,  allowing  products  to  move  into 
mainstream  markets.  Ultimately,  the  economic  benefits  from  the  reduced  costs 
may accrue not to the public procurer but to other buyers. 

–  The  pull  of  public  procurement  may  stimulate  greater  and  faster  technological 
innovation or breakthrough that will ultimately lead to lower unit costs and mass 
market availability.  

A  recent  OECD  Report  on  the  Environmental  Performance  of  Public  Procurement 
(2003)  refers  to  several  examples  of  green  product  invention  in  response  to 
procurement initiatives, including the development of highly energy efficient clothes 
dryers, electric motors, and office copiers (Westling 2000).  
According  to  an  expert  study6  on  Technology  procurement,  the  US  Department  of 
Energy,  early  1998,  set  out  to  develop  the  market  for  a  new  generation  of  smaller, 
brighter and less expensive CFLs – a sub-compact lamp, through procurement. The 
initial sales goal of one million lamps was exceeded by more than 50 percent and as 
a  result  of  the  programme,  16  new  lamp  models  have  been  introduced  into  the  US 
market at reasonable prices.  
A recent study carried out for the Commission on cost/benefits of GPP7 refers to the 
procurement  of  public  railcars  with  particle  filter  for  the  Taunusbahn,  Germany 
(2004-2005). The Eco-Technology ‘particle filter for diesel railcars’ corresponds to 
recent  technologic  developments  whose  objective  is  to  reduce  emissions  by 
improving the engine technologies in order to reach high emission standards that will 
come  into  foce  in  2012.  The  ‘Taunusbahn’  procurement  approach  not  only 
stimulated  R&D  to  develop  economic  efficient  eco-solutions  at  Alstom,  MTU  and 
Hug Engineering, but also provided a business case that ended in a breakthrough of 
this Eco-Technology on international markets. 

•  Cost efficient achievement of environmental goals 

Where  GPP  leads  to  the  purchase  of  greener  products,  the  reduced  environmental 
impact from those products will contribute to achieving existing environmental goals 
– and could do so more cheaply than other available policy instruments. This would 
lead to a reduction in the cost of achieving those environmental goals.  

For example,  it may  be cheaper for an authority to meet local air quality standards 
through the additional cost of purchasing cleaner buses than by setting (more costly) 
restrictions on pollution from domestic boilers.  

6 

7 

"Experiences  with  Technology  Procurement  as  an  Instrument  for  Changes  on  the  Market",  report 
written by Hans Nilsson, 2003-02-19, FourFact 
Costs and Benefits of Green Public Procurement in Europe, Final Report, 26 July 2007, by Öko-Insitut 
e.V. and ICLEI  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The above mentioned study on costs/benefits of GPP compared prices of "green" and 
"non green" goods in the EU and concluded that it cannot be generalised that green 
products  always  have  higher  purchase  prices  than  non  green  product  versions, 
suggesting great scope for cost-effective action to achieve policy goals through GPP.  
The RELIEF project8, which has measured the environmental impact of GPP in EU 
15, has for instance calculated that, if all public authorities used water saving toilet 
cisterns,  this  would  result  in  an  annual  saving  of  an  amount  of  190.407.539  m³  of 
drinking  water  per  year.  The  use  of  water-saving  devices  with  the  water  tap  could 
economise a further 60.639.140 m³ of drinking water. Considering the water prices, 
this would moreover allow public authorities to save 527.110.000€ annually. 

•  Maximising social benefit from public expenditure 

Environmental problems impose costs on society, for example through sickness from 
poor air quality or social costs from waste disposal. As the goal of public expenditure 
is to improve social benefit, where purchases contribute to environmental problems, 
they are reducing the real social benefit from the expenditure. GPP helps to reduce 
the  environmental  problems  resulting  from  public  purchases,  better  achieving  the 
efficiency of public spending. It is rare that the operation of good GPP would lead to 
a decision that did not increase the social benefit.  

By  way  of  example,  a  recent  German  study  has  established  that,  for  instance,  the 
"green" electricity generated by renewable electricity producers who received €2.4bn 
through Germany’s “feed in” preferential tariffs in 2005, allowed to avoid €2.8bn of 
social  costs  that  would  have  occurred  if  it  had  been  produced  in  fossil  fuel  power 
stations9. 

2.1.2.  Background: The Scope for Impact of Green Public Procurement 

Public authorities in Europe have a purchasing power equivalent to 16% of the EU 
GDP  (approximately  1800  billion  EUR)10.  Office  machinery,  transport,  food  and 
catering,  energy,  construction,  waste  management  are  all  areas  with  major 
environmental  impacts  where  public  authorities,  because  of  their  relatively  large 
spending  power  in  those  areas,  have  the  capacity  to  trigger  the  supply  of  products 
with  improved  environmental  performance  and  reduce  their  own  environmental 
impact.  

Example 1: Public procurement represents for instance about 33 % of the European 
bus market: specifying requirements aimed at reducing CO² and pollutant emissions 

8 

9 

10 

(September 

Procurement" 

Project funded by the EC under the 5th Annual Framework Programme, by full name "Environmental 
Relief Potential Of Urban Action On Avoidance And Detoxification Of Waste Streams Through Green 
Public 
http://www.iclei-
2003);  more 
europe.org/index.php?id=1781  
"Externe Kosten der Stromerzeugung aus erneuerbaren Energien im Vergleich zur Stromerzeugung aus 
fossilen Energieträgern" by Wolfram Krewitt, DLR, Institut für Technische Thermodynamik, Abteilung 
Systemanalyse  und  Technikbewertung,  Stuttgart  and  Barbara  Schlomann,  Fraunhofer  Institut  für 
System-  und  Innovationsforschung  (ISI),  Abteilung  Energiepolitik  und  Energiesysteme,  Karlsruhe,  6 
april 2006 
See  2004  Commission 
report  on 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/studies_en.htm  

economic  gains  of  public  procurement 

information 

the 

at: 

at 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
could  be  expected  to  significantly  improve  the  offer  of  cleaner  busses  to  the  mass 
market as economies of scale are achieved within this market segment11. 

Example  2:  Buildings  account  for  approximately  40  %  of  the  final  energy 
consumption  in  Europe.  For  most  public  authorities,  construction  and  renovation 
works, and running costs of buildings represent a major share of annual expenditure, 
in  some  cases  over  50  %.  By  applying  stricter  standards  to  those  public  buildings, 
overall energy consumption could be importantly reduced. 

2.1.3.  Background: Political recognition of Benefits  

The  European  Commission,  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  have 
recognized  the  importance  of  GPP  as  a  means  of  stimulating  sustainable 
consumption and production and pulling environmental technologies into the market 
place12.  

In  June  2006,  the  Council  has  adopted  the  renewed  EU  Sustainable  Development 
Strategy13 including the goal to bring the average level of EU GPP up to the standard 
currently achieved by the best performing member states by 2010.  
Directive  2006/32/EC  on  Energy  efficiency  and  energy  services14  provides  that  the 
public sector should fulfil an exemplary role by adopting at least two measures from 
a list in Annex aimed at procurement of energy efficient equipment and buildings. 
The  new  Energy  Star  Regulation15  obliges  central  government  to  apply,  in  their 
procurement  procedures  for  office  equipment,  at  least  the  energy  efficiency 
requirements as included in Energy Star Standards, for contracts situated above the 
thresholds  of  the  Public  Procurement  Directives  (which,  for  supply  and  service 
contracts is 137.000 EUR, for works contracts 5 million EUR).  

11 

12 

13 
14 
15 

Impact Assessment of the proposal of the Commisson for a Directive on the support of clean vehicles 
by public procurement (COM(2005)634); see also the study carried out for the revised Proposal on the 
promotion of clean and energy efficient vehicles at: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/clean/index_en.htm 
The  Commission  Communication  on  Integrated  Product  Policy  (IPP)  of  18  June  2003  encouraged 
Member states to “draw up publicly available action plans for greening their public procurement". The 
Environmental  Technologies  Action  Plan  (ETAP)  of  24  January  2004  identified  GPP  as  a  priority 
instrument  to  stimulate  the  development  and  diffusion  of  environmental  technologies.  The  EP,  in  a 
resolution  of  5  July  2005  on  the  Communication  on  the  implementation  of  ETAP  (COM(2005)  16 
final), expressly “Calls on the Commission to set an ambitious target with regard to the role of public 
procurement,  the  goal  being  to  establish  as  a  general  rule  that  all  public  procurement  should  include 
environmental  criteria  and  that  Member  States  should  develop  standardised  guidelines  for  the  most 
important  products  and  services  by  2007  as  well  as  provide  training  to  public  procurers  on  these 
guidelines"; () and “Welcomes the work done by the Commission with regard to creating a handbook 
on environmental public procurement and is looking forward to an assessment of its impact in order to 
see  if  more  binding  rules  would  be  useful".  In  its  spring  summit  (23/24  March  06)  conclusions,  The 
European  Council  endorsed  the following  lines for  action:  ()  "exploration of  specific  actions  to bring 
about  more  sustainable  consumption  and  production  patterns  at  EU  and  global  level,  including  the 
development  of  an  EU  SCP  Action  plan,  and  fostering  green  public  procurement,  inter  alia  by 
promoting environmental criteria and performance targets, by examining the proposal for a Directive 
on the promotion of clean road transport vehicles as soon as possible and by making progress with the 
realization of an ambitious European source based policy" 
http://ec.europa.eu/sustainable/sds2006/index_en.htm  
OJ L 114, 27/04/2006 
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/demand/legislation/energy_star_programme_en.htm  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.1.4.  Background: The Current situation  

The EU currently lags behind its global trade partners in implementation of GPP. In 
the USA, federal state department is required to acquire environmentally preferable 
products and services, referred to in a database16. In Japan, a 2001 Law on Promoting 
Green  Purchasing  requires  public  purchasers  at  all  levels  of  government  to 
implement green purchasing activities and encourages the inclusion of environmental 
considerations  "whilst giving  due consideration to appropriate  use of the budget"17. 
In  Canada,  the  Green  public  procurement  legislation  focuses  on  government 
purchasers, emphasizing in particular life cycle costing as a way to ensure the cost 
effective uptake of environmental requirements in procurement18. 

An EU wide study carried out for the Commission in 2006 (here-after the "Take-5" 
Study)19 concludes that only 7 Member States (Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Austria, 
Germany, the Netherlands and the UK) are currently practising a significant amount 
of  GPP,  with  over  40  %  of  all  tender  documents  examined  for  the  purpose  of  the 
study  including  environmental  considerations.  Even  so,  many  of  those  "green" 
tenders  proved  non  compliant  with  EU  procurement  legislation  as  environmental 
requirements  were  often  formulated  in  a  non  transparent  way.  In  the  remaining  20 
Member States, GPP was applied much less, or not at all.  

Despite the strong recommendation of the Commission, in its 2003 Communication 
on  Integrated  Product  Policy,  for  Member  States  to  adopt  national  action  plans  on 
GPP by the end of 2006, only 13 Member States have, to date, adopted such plans. 

2.2. 

Specific Problems 

The Commission, through consultation and expert studies, has identified the specific 
problems which hinder the realisation of the potential benefits of GPP: 

2.2.1.  First  problem:  Lack  of  awareness  of  benefits,  misperception  of  the  extent  of  costs, 

and lack of political priority for GPP 

There is a common misperception that GPP will always lead to additional costs. In 
many  cases,  this  perception  results  from  sub-optimal  budgeting  practices  or  from  a 
lack of life cycle costing20 in award procedures.  

Lack  of  appreciation  of  the  benefits  partly  arises  from  uncertainty  on  how  to  take 
account  of  wider  non-monetary  benefits  from green  purchasing:  this  is  for  instance 
the case of organic food, where the economic benefits are indirect and acknowledged 
through reduced health care costs at a later stage.  

16 

17 

18 

19 
20 

than 

on  more 

Executive  Order  13101  and  Federal  Acquisition  Regulation  (FAR)  -  more  information  at 
http://www.epa.gov/epp/pubs/about/about.htm  
More  info  at  http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/green/index.html.  The  Japanese  Green  Purchasing 
Network  (GPN)  has  developed  a  series  of  purchasing  guidelines  and  a  database  with  product 
information 
companies. 
products 
http://www.gpn.jp/English/index.html  
As of 1 April 2006, Canada applies a green procurement policy, which applies to all departments within 
the  meaning  of  section  2  of  the  Financial  Administration  Act,  unless  specific  acts  or  regulations 
override it. For more information see http://www.pwgsc.gc.ca/greening/text/proc/pol-e.html  
TAKE 5 Study : more information at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/studies.htm#state  
Whole  life  cost  should  cover  the  purchase  price  and  associated  costs  (delivery,  installation, 
commissioning…), operating costs (including energy, spars, maintenance) and end of life costs such as 
decommissioning and removal 

approximately 

10,000 

from 

600 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
According  to  the  above  mentioned  OECD  2003  Report,  financial  barriers  relate 
primarily to the implementation of public expenditure management systems and not 
to financial costs per se. Following main causes were identified :  

–  usual  practice  of  not  attributing  responsibility  for  operating  costs  (energy  and 
water use, paper consumption..) directly to the relevant operational level; this is, 
in environmental terms, particularly important in the case of energy and water use, 
but also in other cases such as paper consumption in administrative offices. When 
operating costs are borne by a central fund rather than the managers who are able 
to exercise influence over the means by which energy-using and water-using are 
used, then there are incentives to use them inefficiently; 

–  historical reliance on single-year budgeting procedures, resulting in an inefficient 

use of funds within public authorities 

In  general,  a  lack  of  high  level  political  support  results  in  a  lack  of  resources  for 
implementing  GPP.  Where  strong  government  support  exists,  as  in  the  UK,  France 
and  the  Netherlands  -who  have  all  issued  ambitions  to  be  amongst  the  leaders  in 
Sustainable public procurement- resources are made available to make studies, draft 
criteria, monitor implementation, facilitate country wide uptake of GPP.  

A  lack  of  a  strong  centralised  political  message  on  GPP  is  reflected  down  the 
individual  purchasing  organisations  who  display  a  lack  of  management  support  for 
GPP by their purchasers, which further increases the effects of the problem.  

The "Take-5" study reveals that 33 % of public authorities surveyed state that lack of 
management support is a barrier.  

The lack of political support may result from a lack of clarity on the leadership and 
accountability  for  GPP,  at  ministerial  level  as  well  as  within  procuring  authorities: 
Finance or Economics departments are responsible for the correct implementation of 
procedures  within  certain  budgetary  and  legal  constraints,  whereas  Environment 
departments are responsible for reducing the environmental impact of procurement. 

2.2.2. 

Second problem: Legal Problems 

All  Stakeholders  have  raised  the  need  to  clarify  certain  outstanding  legal  issues 
(Annex 2). In particular, it needs to be clarified to what extent purchasers can include 
in  their  tender  documents  environmental  criteria  which  relate  to  the  production 
process. According to the Public Procurement Directives, production process related 
criteria can be used as technical specifications or award criteria, on the condition that 
those criteria are relevant for characterising the product. Technical specifications are 
minimum conditions that all bids need to comply with. Award criteria will be used 
by the contracting authority to compare the offers against each other and choose the 
bid  offering  best  value  for  money.  If  given  a  significant  weighting,  most  bids  will 
comply with an environmental award criterion, but not necessarily. If the "relevance" 
for the product is to be determined on a life cycle basis, this may include for instance 
the  inclusion  of  criteria  related  to  emissions  to  water  and  air  during  the  production 
process.  It  also  needs  to  be  clarified  how  to  specify  methods  of  proof  (to  verify 
compliance of claims by suppliers with technical specifications or selection criteria). 
Member  States  are  not  in  a  position  to  give  concrete  guidance  on  GPP  if  they  are 
uncertain about these legal issues.  

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
2.2.3.  Third  problem:  lack  of  information  and  tools  for  GPP,  inadequate  training 
structures,  lack  of  knowledge  of  priority  areas  and  absence  of  easy  to  apply  GPP 
criteria 

Lack of implementation tools, in particular access to GPP criteria 

In  many  Member  States,  there  is  a  lack  of  implementation  tools,  such  as  freely 
accessible  environmental  databases  for  criteria,  guidance,  helpdesks,  training.  This 
results  in  poor  quality  of  GPP  both  in  terms  of  legal  compliance  and  quality  of 
environmental specifications. This leads to added costs and less GPP activity. 

The EC Commission has adopted a Handbook on Environmental Public procurement 
in  2004  and  translated  it  into  all  EU  languages21.  The  Handbook  clarifies  the 
possibilities  provided  under  the  new  public  procurement  Directives  to  include 
environmental  specifications  in  a  procurement  procedure.  It  gives  several  good 
practice examples. However useful, the results of the stakeholder consultation clearly 
show  that  not  all  legal  issues  have  been  clarified.  The  EC  services  have  recently 
launched a new website on GPP22, including examples of GPP criteria. However, the 
website is in English only and it does not seem the appropriate tool for implementing 
GPP in local authorities. Several GPP workshops have been organised in 5 Member 
States, evidencing the willingness of in particular local authorities to practice GPP, 
subject to training and information on cost/benefits.  

The  "Take-5"  study  shows  that  a  large  number  of  tenders  analysed  included  badly 
defined  environmental  criteria  which  were  unlikely  to  result  in  a  greener  purchase. 
Lack  of  information  and  tools  were  however  felt  to  be  less  of  a  barrier  in  the  best 
performing Member States. Member States who have set high ambitions in the field 
of  GPP,  such  as  the  UK,  France,  the  Netherlands,  have  or  are  in  the  process  of 
developing databases including GPP criteria23, which are essential for implementing 
GPP.  Sweden  and  Denmark,  which  have  the  longest  tradition  in  the  field  of  GPP, 
base  their  policy  on  extensive  databases  with  environmental  specifications, 
established in co-operation with industry.  

Lack of knowledge of priority areas 

Public purchasers who want to start implementing GPP should focus on areas where 
the  best  results  can  be  expected  in  terms  of  cost-effectiveness  and  environmental 
improvement.  However,  many  contracting  authorities  don't  know  how  to  prioritise 
certain sectors in view of applying GPP.  
In the UK, the Sustainable24 Procurement Task Force has raised the need for giving 
clear indications on where to focus efforts first: this has resulted in a "prioritisation" 
of  sectors,  based  on  a  review  of  procurement  spend  data  sources  and  evidence  of 
associated  environmental  and  socio-economic  impacts,  aimed  at  identifying  the 
"largest,  quickest  and  easiest"  sustainable  procurement  opportunities.  Similarly,  the 
aforementioned "Take-5" study has also identified  11 product groups which can be 
considered  as  most  suitable  for  greening,  based  on  the  environmental  impact  of 

21 
22 
23 

24 

SEC (2004/1050) see http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/guideline_en.htm 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/index_en.htm 
More  information  on  national  databases  can  be  found  in  the  overview  of  national  GPP  policies  and 
guidelines at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/national_gpp_strategies_en.htm  
The UK, as well as other Member States such as France, the Netherlands, Belgium, apply the notion of 
"sustainable" public procurement, which covers both "environmental" and "social" 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
greening,  the  availability  of  green  products  in  the  market  place  and  the  analysis  of 
good practices of Member States.  

2.2.4.  Fourth  Problem:  A  lack  of  similarity  between  GPP  procedures  and  criteria  across 

the EU 

Current GPP activity tends to be set locally. Different environmental criteria apply in 
different  geographical  markets  (different  areas  and  levels  of  environmental 
performance, different measurement methods), causing following problems:  

•  Increased  administrative  costs  for  replying  to  different  procurement  requests, 
which  may  involve  re-measurement,  or  restatement  of  environmental  attributes. 
This  can  be  an  economic  cost  for  the  business,  or  it  may  reduce  the  number  of 
offers  and  thereby  the  efficiency  of  the  process.  SMEs  may  be  particularly 
disadvantaged, because administrative costs are a larger part of their costs. SMES 
being  frequently  amongst  the  most  innovative  companies,  this  presents  a 
particular  problem for the effectiveness of GPP. If for instance Member State X 
refers  in  its  GPP  guidance  for  paper  to  the  underlying  criteria  of  the  European 
Ecolabel  (or  equivalent)  and  Member  State  Y  to  the  underlying  criteria  of  the 
Nordic  Swan  criteria  (or  equivalent)  and  Member  State  Z  to  the  underlying 
criteria  of  the  Blue  Angel  criteria  (or  equivalent),  a  company  preparing  bids  for 
contracting  authorities  in  those  3  different  Member  States  will  have  to  prove 
compliance with slightly different technical specifications, providing evidence of 
compliance  through  slightly  different  verification  methods.  Administrative  costs 
linked to certification are relatively higher for SMEs.  

•  Barriers  to  the  free  movement  of  goods  and  services  in  the  internal  market. 
Although the EU Treaty obliges contracting authorities to recognize –as a matter 
of  principle-  goods  and  services  legally  produced  or  provided  in  other  Member 
States,  the  Court  of  Justice  has  explicitly  stated  that  the  protection  of  the 
environment  may  justify  certain  market  restrictions  (Judgment  of  the  Court  of 
Justice  in  Case  C-513/99  Concordia  Bus  case).  In  the  absence  of  harmonised 
criteria, a contracting authority could therefore restrict intra-community trade by 
setting national environmental criteria which are not currently met by products in 
other  Member  States,  justifying  this  by  reference  to  the  need  to  protect  the 
environment. 

•  Reduced rewards from innovation to suppliers whose greener products may only 
meet some of a wide variety of environmental criteria and reducing the clarity of 
the  public  sectors  requirements,  both  reducing  incentives  to  innovate.  It  will  be 
much  more  stimulating  for  a  supplier  to  invest  in  eco-innovation  and  seek  to 
comply  with  high  environmental  standards  if  this  will  raise  his  chances  of 
competing in not just one but different national procurement markets, based on the 
same sets of environmental standards.  

2.3. 

Affected Parties  

Global  citizens  are  affected  by  reduced  chances  to  achieve  sustainable  production 
and  consumption  through  lack  of  development  and  uptake  of  environmentally 
beneficial products.  

Purchasing  authorities  are  missing  opportunities  to  reduce  costs  and  provide  better 
value as a whole to their citizens as a result of their activities. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Member States and purchasing authorities already applying green purchasing policies 
are  affected  by  a  relative  lack  of  competition  in  the  ‘green’  segment  of  the  market 
which would otherwise be likely to lead to lower prices. 

Companies  supplying  more  environmental  performing  products  are  affected  by  the 
lack  of  demand  for  such  goods,  which  hinders  innovation.  As  companies  tend  to 
trade  more  in  their  domestic  markets  than  export  markets,  the  comparative  lack  of 
demand  compared  to  the  GPP  policies  of  our  trading  partners  weakens  EU 
companies  development  of  environmentally  efficient  products  when  compared  to 
trading  partner  competitors.  Companies  not  in  a  position  to  supply  green  products 
may  see  their  ability  to  compete  in  international  trading  partner  markets,  already 
applying GPP, restricted.  

2.4. 

Does the EU have the right to act?  

Under  Article  6  of  the  Treaty,  environmental  protection  requirements  are  to  be 
integrated  into  the  definition  and  implementation  of  Community  policies,  in 
particular with a view to promoting sustainable development.  

GPP is about integrating environmental considerations in the Internal Market policy 
of public procurement, which seeks to open up European procurement markets to EU 
wide  competition,  whilst  ensuring  non-discrimination,  equal  treatment  of  bidders, 
free movement of goods and services and best value of tax payer's money. The EU 
new  public  procurement  directives  of  31st  March  2004  allow  public  authorities  to 
include environmental elements into their procurement procedures.  

Increased GPP would contribute to achieving the EU environment and energy policy, 
in particular to the target adopted by the EU leaders at the 2007 Spring Council, of 
cutting 20 % of EU greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.  

EU  Action  is  also  required  to  tackle  the  fourth  problem  above  which  adversely 
affects achievement of internal market, energy and environment goals, but which can 
not be readily solved by Member States action.  

In  the  absence  of  EU  action  in  this  field  -except  for  those  [7]  Member  States  with 
high levels of political support and experience with GPP- the extent of GPP is likely 
to increase slowly from low or zero levels, and as it does, in all Member States, the 
lack of similarity between procedures is likely to exacerbate administrative costs for 
tendering  firms.  In  the  continuing  absence  of  legal  security,  of  transparent 
environmental  criteria  and  of  evidence  of  cost  effectiveness,  Member  States  are 
likely to refrain from stepping up efforts in this field, and will not allow to reach the 
environmental objectives resulting from more and better GPP. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES 

3.1. 

General policy objectives 

•  increase innovation in environmental technologies and products, strengthening the 

EU economy and reducing the environmental impact of EU consumption; 

•  reduce the environmental damage caused from public sector consumption; 

•  reduce internal market barriers caused by non harmonised GPP criteria; 

through the achievement of appropriate quantities of GPP of a quality that will lead 
to these goals, by raising the number and value GPP procedures with 50 % by 2010. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
3.2. 

Specific objectives (linked to the defined problems) 

•  increase understanding of the benefits and political support for GPP 

•  reduce legal barriers to GPP 

•  provide new, and support the provision of existing, implementation tools  

•  increase  similarities  between  GPP  criteria  across  the  EU  to  improve  market 

signalling, guarantee a true internal market and reduce administrative costs 

3.3. 

Consistency with other EU policies and horizontal objectives 

GPP will contribute to the following EU policies by: 

•  promoting energy-efficient procurement in view of reaching the binding targets on 
climate protection and clean energy agreed upon by the EU leaders at their Spring 
Summit on 9 March 200725  

•  supporting  Directive  2006/32/EC  on  energy  end-use  efficiency  and  energy 
services,  which  obliges  the  public  sector  to  play  an  exemplary  role  in  taking 
energy efficient improvement measures by using public procurement  

•  reinforcing  the  objectives  of  the  Environmental  Technologies  Action  Plan26  and 
contributing  to  the  Lisbon  Strategy27,  by  offering  large  scale  markets  for  newly 
developed environmental technologies  

•  contributing to the establishment of a proper Sustainable Industrial Policy and the 
proposed development of "lead markets" in the field of 'sustainable construction', 
'recycling' and 'bio-based products 

•  contributing  to  the  objectives  of  the  EU  Sustainable  Development  Strategy,  in 
particular the forthcoming framework of Sustainable Consumption and Production 
•  reinforcing the implementation of EMAS28 and Ecolabelling schemes29, which are 
voluntary  policy  tools  aimed  at  improving  the  environmental  performance  of 
organisations and products, currently under revision 

•  contributing  to  the  objectives  of  the  Community  health  and  social  policies,  in 
particular  by  taking  into  account  several  EU  policies  in  this  field  when 
establishing  GPP  criteria  (the  new  chemicals  regulation  REACH,  the  renewed 
Community strategy to reduce CO2 from light vehicles)  

The identification of suitable GPP criteria will be co-ordinated and complementary to 
new and existing Eco-label, Energy Star and EuP Regulations30, as well as with other 

25 

26 
27 
28 
29 
30 

30 % greenhouse gas reduction for developed countries by 2020, at least 20 % GHG reduction for EU 
by 2020, 20 % energy efficiency savings by 2020, 20 % binding target for renewables by 2020 and 10 
% binding target for biofuels by 2020, http://ec.europa.eu/councils/bx20070308/index_en.htm  
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/etap/index_en.htm  
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/reports/index_en.htm 
More information at : http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/index_en.htm  
More information at : http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/index_en.htm  
Regulation  1980/2000  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  of  17  July  2000  on  a  revised 
Community  Eco-labelling  Award  Scheme,  OJ  L  237,  21/09/2000,  currently  under  revision;  Directive 
2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for 
the setting of ecodesigne requirements for energy-using products, OJ L 191, 22/07/2005; Energy Star 
Regulation  to  comply  with  Council  Decision  of  18  December  2006  concerning  conclusion  of  the 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
EU  initiatives  aimed  at  setting  voluntary  environmental  product  or  production 
process  related  criteria,  including  reference  to  standards  for  the  assessment  of  the 
energy performance of products and services (as foreseen under Energy Performance 
in Buildings Directive and Construction Products Directive)31. 

4. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

4.1. 

Option 1: Business as Usual 

Under this option, the Commission would continue to provide the existing guidance 
on its GPP website, including the Handbook on environmental public procurement, 
reference  to  existing  national  and  international  product  databases  and  to  relevant 
studies.  It  would  continue  to  hold  regular  meetings  with  national  GPP  experts  to 
exchange information and best practice.  

4.2. 

Option  2:  adoption  of  a  package  of  guidance,  support,  recommendations  and 
future  actions,  some  of  which  would  be  delivered  through  a  Communication 
proposing voluntary targets, legal and operational guidance and a process of co-
operation for establishing GPP criteria for priority product groups  

4.2.1.  Proposing  voluntary  targets  for  GPP,  based  on  a  quantification  of  the  EU  wide 

target set forth in the EU renewed Sustainable Development Strategy  

The  Member  States  have  committed  to  a  formal  GPP  target  in  the  renewed 
Sustainable Development Strategy, stating that by the year 2010, the average level of 
GPP should be at the current level in the best performing Member States.  

Against this background, the Commission would propose a common political target 
of 50 % use of GPP by 2010, without giving it any legal force. 

This  target  is  in  effect  a  quantification  of  the  above  mentioned  Sustainable 
Development  Strategy  commitment.  The  baseline  for  setting  the  percentage  results 
from an assessment of the situation in the best performing Member States in 2005-
2006,  carried  out  in  the  "Take-5"  study.  According  to  the  results  of  this  study, 
between 40 to 60 % of all analysed tender documents in the relevant Member States 
included green criteria. Taking into account precision rates, it is proposed to set the 
target at the average level of 50 %.  

4.2.2.  Provision of new and highlighting of existing implementation tools 

•  Highlight the most useful existing guidance and tools on GPP through description 
in an Annex to a Commission Communication. This will facilitate the exchange of 
best practice. 

•  Develop and publish additional guidance on: 

–  Life  cycle  costing  as  an  award  criterion,  including  the  provision  of  easy-to-use 

calculator tools  

31 

Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the European Community on 
the coordination of energy-efficiency labelling programmes for office equipment  
Directive  2002/91/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  December  2002  on  the 
energy  performance  of  buildings,  OJ  L  1,  4/1/2003;  Council  Directive  89/106/EEC  of  21  December 
1988 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of Member states relating 
to construction Products. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
–  budgetary  practices  facilitating  the  uptake  of  GPP,  including  the  use  of 
performance contracting or similar financing models, where the risks for installing 
new and more energy efficient equipment is left to the private investor who will 
be paid through sharing of savings 

–  joint procurement to reduce administrative costs and stimulate innovation  

–  how  to  define  environmental  award  criteria  for  products  for  which  no  EU  or 

national environmental performance levels have been identified 

–  a management model facilitating uptake of GPP within an organisation  

–  how to use GPP to stimulate the diffusion of new eco-technologies, based on the 

recently published Guide on Procurement and innovation32 

•  Develop and publish a Training programme, based on the recently developed web 
based Training Toolkit on GPP, on EC funded "train the trainer" workshops and 
integration of GPP into regular procurement training. 

•  Highlight  existing  co-operation  platforms  to  facilitate  greater  regional  and  local 
dissemination  of  GPP  and  integrate  GPP  in  the  implementation  of  other  EU 
policies,  for  instance  by  using  the  networks  set  up  or  promoted  under  the  EU 
Urban Strategy, or the co-operation networks in the field of the implementation of 
the Structural Funds.  

For instance, the activities financed under the URBACT II 2007-13 programme (The 
Urban Development Network Programme) could be used as building blocks for the 
exchange  of  experience  on  GPP.  The  programme  generally  aims  to  provide 
structured  information  on  urban  issues  to  local  authorities  across  Europe  through 
networks of cities in the Member States, as part of the Cohesion Policy for the period 
2007-201333. 

4.2.3.  Provision  of  key  information  on  prioritisation  and  easy  to  use  core  and  more 

advanced GPP criteria for priority sectors  

•  Provision  of  a  list  of  10  "priority"  sectors  covering  product  and  service  groups, 
considered  most  suitable  for  starting  to  apply  GPP  by  reason  of  their 
environmental/financial impact and scope for improvement  

On  the  basis  of  abovementioned  DEFRA  and  "Take-5"  studies  and  analysis  of 
existing  national  GPP  strategies,  the  Commission  would  propose  the  following 
priority  sectors:  Construction  (both  construction  works  and  products  including  raw 
materials  such  as  wood,  cement,  aluminium,  steel);  Food  and  catering  services; 
Transport (cars, light and heavy duty vehicles, buses, metro's, trams and trains) and 
transport  services;  Energy;  Office  machinery  (computers,  monitors,  printers  and 
copiers); Clothing (uniforms  and other textiles); Paper and printing services; Wood 
and  wood  products;  Cleaning  products  and  services;  Equipment  used  in  the  health 
sector.  Both  studies  have  been  subject  to  wide  stakeholder  consultation.  The 
prioritisation study carried out for DEFRA has been subject to discussions in the UK 
Sustainable  Public  Procurement  Task  Force,  which  was  a  private  sector  led  task 
force,  gathering  representatives  of  both  private  and  public  organisations  and 
companies.  The  final  results  of  the  Take-5  study  are  based  on  draft  reports  which 

32 
33 

http://www.proinno-europe.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&topicID=89&parentID=0  
http://urbact.eu/urbact-programme.html  

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
                                                 
have  been  discussed  at  several  stakeholder  meetings.  The  list  of  priority  product 
groups  and  services  was  also  included  in  the  document  which  was  sent  out  for 
consultation to over 200 stakeholders (results of the consultation are in Annex).  

These priority products cover a substantial part of total expenditure, particularly by 
larger authorities. In the UK, similar product groups have been singled out based on 
a slightly different methodology, covering 59 % of total procurement. For example, 
construction  is  one  of  the  heaviest  posts,  with  £  22.3  billion  in  2003/2004.  Public 
transport services cover more than 2 billion EUR, Health and social care cover £ 21.3 
billion, Transport £ 5.4 billion, Office machinery and computers £ 6.5 billion, Food £ 
3.2  billion.  Also  in  the  Netherlands,  construction  and  maintenance,  and  road  and 
water construction are the most important central government expenditure areas, with 
a budget of 6 to 10 billion €, Public transpor t services cover more than 2 billion €.  

•  Provision of "core" and more advanced/comprehensive environmental criteria for 

use in GPP  

The core criteria would be designed to allow easy application of GPP, focussing on 
the  key  area(s)  of  environmental  performance  of  a  product  and  aimed  at  keeping 
administrative costs for companies to a minimum. 

The  more  advanced  or  comprehensive  GPP  criteria  would  take  into  account  more 
aspects  or  higher  levels  of  environmental  performance,  for  use  by  authorities  that 
want to go further in supporting environmental and innovation goals. 

To date, the Commission services have established criteria for 11 product and service 
groups. The criteria have been developed by a contractor in close co-operation with 
stakeholders (including Member States and industry).The Commission would seek to 
formalise the process by re-submitting these criteria for formal endorsement by the 
Member  States.  Formal  endorsement  would  imply  their  uptake  in  national  action 
plans and guidance on Green public procurement. The Commission would continue 
its work on criteria setting, and gradually propose criteria for more and more product 
and  service  groups  suitable  for  GPP.  The  Member  States  and  relevant  stakeholders 
would  be  involved  from  in  the  beginning  and  the  Minimum  Standards  for 
Consultation  of  interested  parties  fully  respected.  The  Communication  would,  by 
way of example, publish in Annex GPP product sheets with core and comprehensive 
criteria  for  4  product  groups  (cleaning  products  and  services,  paper,  electricity  and 
food and catering services). The criteria have and will be put together on the basis of 
the  extensive  environmental  criteria  information  already  available34  in  the  EU  and 
elsewhere  and  from  newly  commissioned  work.  The  definition  of  criteria  will 
consider the product market in question. Stakeholder expertise would be essential to 
providing  criteria  –  and  would  be  obtained  through  an  informal,  but  structured, 
process  of  co-operation.  The  draft  GPP  criteria  would  be  submitted  for  advice  to 
relevant  stakeholders  (national  GPP  experts,  Advisory  Committee  on  Public 
Procurement,  the  EUEB  =  the  European  Union  of  Eco-labelling  Bodies  which 
include  amongst  its  members  national  eco-labelling  experts  and  stakeholders  from 
industry  and  civil  society).  The  final  set  of  criteria  would  be  endorsed  on  the 
occasion of regular meetings organised with an expert group of national GPP experts.  

34 

See  also  references  under  Section  3.3  on  "Consistency  with  other  policies".  For  example,  Eco-label 
criteria or Euro standards for vehicles before they become mandatory 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Commission  monitoring  exercise  would  focus  on  priority  product  groups  and 
relevant  core  GPP  criteria,  which  would  stimulate  their  EU  wide  uptake.  Criteria 
would be published in a data-base in each MS working language. 

4.2.4.  Legal guidance 

•  Clarify to what extent production process related criteria, such as emissions to air 
and  water  during  the  production  process,  can  be  included  as  technical 
specifications  or  award  criteria;  in  this  context,  it  would  also  clarify  which 
elements of a production process may be considered relevant for characterising a 
product as "sustainable".  

•  Clarify whether public purchasers can request from bidders, by way of a contract 
performance  clause,  that  they  need  to  start  up  an  environmental  management 
system when awarded the contract. 

When  providing  legal  guidance,  the  Communication  would  ensure  that  the 
interpretation clarifies and was also fully in line with the World Trade Organisation 
and the Government Procurement Agreement concluded within the WTO. For more 
details on international aspects of GPP, see Annex 4. 

4.2.5.  Recommend  Member  states  managing  authorities  to  use  GPP  when  implementing 
projects funded through Structural funds and other EU funding mechanisms  

A recommendation for Member States and managing authorities designated in view 
of  the  management  and  monitoring  of  Structural  programmes  (which  is  the  sole 
responsibility of the Member States) to make the award of Structural Fund projects 
and other EU funds dependant upon compliance with GPP (where relevant). 

4.3. 

Option 3: Setting mandatory targets for GPP 

This option would tackle the problem of lack of political support by setting targets 
for  certain  levels  of  GPP  to  be  achieved  by  Member  States  and  Community 
Institutions  by  certain  dates.  Targets  would  be  set  as  a  percentage  of  procurement, 
(measured by value and numbers of procurement procedures/contracts).  

Various forms and levels of targets could be set:  

Sub-option 3.A) mandatory targets for life cycle costing 
Sub-option 3.B) mandatory targets for "basic" GPP 
Sub-option 3.C) mandatory targets for “outcome-based” GPP 

For the purposes of judging achievement of the targets under sub-option B, GPP and 
"basic" GPP would be taken to be: 

Use of a procurement process which either: 

sets  minimum  environmental  criteria  comparable  with  the  minimum  specifications 
described in the core criteria provided by the Commission; or which 

grants a significant weighting to environmental criteria in assessing tender bids. 

This  definition  of  GPP  would  be  chosen  because  it  reflects  the  two  methods  by 
which environmental considerations can easily be incorporated into procurement and 
because  it  gives  flexibility  to  procurers.  It  would  therefore  also  include  procedures 
which do not necessarily lead to a "green" outcome and would avoid that the use of 
GPP would result in significantly greater financial costs for authorities.  
Where  environmental  criteria  are  set  as  minimum  technical  specifications,  they 
would relate to the core GPP criteria established under Option 2. Where for instance 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
a minimum 15 % environmental award criterion is set, this could be done either by 
awarding  15  %  to  offers  complying  with  the  core  GPP  criteria  established  under 
Option 3, or by weighing the different offers to for instance a maximum of 15 % (of 
overall award percentage) based on their relative environmental performance against 
certain well described and verifiable environmental impacts. In the latter case, there 
would  be  no  direct  link  to  the  core  GPP  criteria  as  established  under  Option  2.  By 
providing this flexibility as regards ways to reach the targets, it would be possible to 
set mandatory targets without there being a need to link those targets to compliance 
with  core  GPP  criteria  agreed  in  a  comitology  process.  Stakeholders  state  that  a 
weighting  of  15%  would  nevertheless  still  promote  the  development  of  better 
performing products. 

Mandatory  targets  under  sub-option  3.C  would  require  the  purchase  of  products 
meeting  set  minimum  standards  for  a  proportion  of  public  purchasers.  For  the 
purpose  of  judging  achievement  of  targets,  the  notion  of  “outcome-based”  GPP 
would  cover  only  those  procurement  processes  in  which  minimum  environmental 
criteria as described in the core criteria provided by the Commission have been set as 
minimum technical specifications (to be met by all offers). This option would be the 
only  one  to  guarantee  in  all  cases  a  “green”  outcome.  Because  of  the  mandatory 
character  of  the  GPP  criteria,  they  would  need  to  be  established  through  a 
comitology process.  
The Commission would intend to review targets for GPP, however set, every 5 years 
to  encourage  or  oblige  Member  States  to  reach  a  level  of  GPP  equal  to  the 
quantitative  and  qualitative  level  that  had  been  achieved  by  the  best  performing 
Member States 5 years before. 

Sub-Option 3.A): mandatory targets for life cycle costing 

Life  cycle  costing  is  the  consideration  of  the  full  financial  cost  to  an  authority  of 
purchasing  a  product:  the  initial  purchase  price,  the  running  and  maintenance  costs 
over the lifetime and the costs at the end of life (for example disposal). 

Under  this  sub-option  the  Commission  would  propose  targets  for  use  of  life  cycle 
costing for a % (by value) of all procurement contracts for which it was appropriate. 
Although it cannot be considered an environmental criterion as such, given the fact 
that  the  life  cycle  cost  would  just  replace  the  initial  purchase  price  in  the  award 
procedure,  it  comes  close  –as  to  its  effect-  to  a  mandatory  environmental  award 
criterion where a certain number of points would be awarded for energy efficiency. 
Translating  the  energy  efficiency  immediately  into  the  price  of  the  product  would 
ease its acceptance by public purchasers. Legislation setting targets would include a 
description  of  the  areas  covered,  focussing  on  resource  using  products,  such  as 
vehicles, electrical equipment, lighting, buildings. 

Sub-Option 3.B) mandatory targets for "basic" GPP  

The Commission is developing a precise method for calculating levels of GPP, based 
on compliance with GPP criteria in priority sectors. It will implement this method in 
the  seven  best  performing  Member  States,  which  would  allow  to  translate  the  SDS 
target  into  a  mandatory  target,  namely  that,  by  the  year  2010,  the  average  level  of 
GPP would be at the current (= 2006) level in the best performing Member States. . 
The  target  would  need  to  be  reached  in  terms  of  numbers  and  (estimated)  value  of 
"green" tendering procedures which have led to "green" contracts. If one would only 
consider the value, it would be sufficient to "green" a small number of big contracts. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
If  only  the  number  would  be  considered,  it  would  be  sufficient  to  "green"  a  lot  of 
small contracts without making a real environmental difference. Therefore, the target 
should be reached in terms of number and value.  
These targets would be based on the definition of "basic" GPP mentioned above. The 
option would be linked to the proposed process for prioritisation and criteria setting 
under Option 2. Considering the fact that achievement with the targets may also be 
attested by procurement procedures in which environmental award criteria have been 
set without specifying certain minimum levels of environmental performance, there 
would be no need to identify those criteria by way of a comitology process.  

Sub-Option 3.C) mandatory targets for “outcome-based" GPP  

Considering  the  mandatory  character  of  the  target  and  outcome-based  definition  of 
GPP used, the Commission would conduct additional research to propose appropriate 
targets for priority product groups and linking those to cost-effective minimum levels 
of environmental performance. Where the life cycle cost of environmental products 
is lower than that of the non-"green" version, targets could be set at a higher level. 
These  minimum  standards  and  targets  would  be  set  in  advance  at  EU  level  in  a 
Comitology procedure, based upon recommendation from the Commission working 
with stakeholders where appropriate.  

4.4. 

Option 4: Make GPP mandatory for certain types of purchasing authorities and 
for  certain  specific  products,  or  for  certain  types  of  contracts,  or  for  certain 
types of public spending 

Various forms of mandatory GPP can be identified: 

Sub-Option  4.A:  Make  GPP  mandatory  for  certain  types  of  contracting  authorities 
when purchasing certain specific products 
Sub-Option 4.B: Make GPP mandatory for all purchases above the thresholds of the 
public procurement directives 
Sub-Option  4.C:  Make  it  mandatory  for  all  contractors  in  service  and  works 
contracts  above  certain  thresholds,  to  implement  an  environmental  management 
system 
Sub-Option  4.D:  Make  it  mandatory  to  use  GPP  in  the  implementation  of  EU 
funded projects, where appropriate  

Sub-Option  4.A.  Make  GPP  mandatory  for  certain  types  of  purchasing 
authorities and for certain specific products  

By  analogy  with  the  recently  adopted  new  Energy  Star  Regulation  (as  presented 
under  Option  1),  such  option  would  make  outcome  based  GPP  mandatory  (100  % 
target) for central government purchasers and for certain products, where advanced 
GPP criteria have been identified and the market is such that 100 % GPP by central 
government would be appropriate, taking into account a transitional period sufficient 
to allow the market to adapt to change. It is not yet possible to specify the products 
and  services  which  would  be  covered  by  such  proposal,  as  an  additional  impact 
assessment needs to be carried out to identify those product groups.  

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
Sub-Option  4.B.  Make  GPP  mandatory  for  all  purchases  above  the  thresholds 
of  the  public  procurement  directives,  by  making  the  environmental  award 
criterion mandatory 

The  public  procurement  Directives  lay  down  the  rules  that  need  to  be  followed  by 
public  authorities  when  buying  goods,  services  or  works.  One  of  the  basic  rules  is 
that purchasers can, when choosing the bid offering best value for money, either base 
themselves on the lowest price, either choose the “economically most advantageous 
bid”, meaning that, on top of the price, the purchaser will take into account one or 
more  award  criteria,  such  as  the  technical  quality,  the  delivery  time,  the  energy 
efficiency  and  so  on.  The  Directives  provide  for  a  non  exhaustive  list  of  possible 
award  criteria,  including  environmental  award  criteria.  Under  this  option,  public 
purchasers  would  be  obliged  to  include,  amongst  the  award  criteria,  a  minimum 
environmental criterion (for instance 15 %). Hence the option of awarding a contract 
based on the lowest price only would no longer exist. This option would not prevent 
purchasers from also specifying minimum environmental technical specifications. In 
addition,  the  award  of  the  contract  would  always  need  to  be  based  upon,  amongst 
other  criteria,  the  relative  environmental  merits  of  the  offers.  This  option  would 
provide a strong incentive for innovation.  

Sub-Option  4.C:  Make  it  mandatory  to  include,  for  all  service  and  works 
contracts above certain thresholds, a contract performance clause which obliges 
the winning bidder to set up an environmental management system during the 
performance of the contract 

This option would also imply a modification of the public procurement Directives in 
view of making it mandatory for public purchasers to include a specific performance 
clause in all important services and works contract (above certain thresholds, which 
could be the threshold currently applying for works contracts which is 5 million €). 
Considering  the  significant  environmental  impact  resulting  in  particular  from  the 
execution phase of these contracts, it is important to oblige the contractor to set up 
and  run  an  environmental  management  system  during  its  performance,  as  this  will 
contribute to guaranteeing minimised environmental impacts.  

Sub-Option 4.D: Modify the rules governing the award of EU funding in view of 
making  it  mandatory  to  use  GPP  when  implementing  EU  funded  projects, 
where appropriate 

A  change  in  the  EU  rules  governing  the  award  of  structural  funds  and  other  EU 
funding  mechanisms  to  make  the  award  of  funds  dependant  upon  compliance  with 
GPP, where relevant. 

4.5. 

Option 5: Modify the Commission Directive on Standard forms for use in public 
procurement 

Modification  of  Commission  Directive  on  the  use  of  standard  forms  in  the 
publication of public contract notices35. 

35 

Commission  Directive  2001/78/EC  of  13  September  2001  amending  Annex  IV  to  Council  Directive 
93/36/EEC,  Annexes  IV,  V  and  VI  to  Council  Directive  93/37/EEC,  Annexes  III  and  IV  to  Council 
Directive 92/50/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/52/EC, and Annexes XII to XV, XVII and XVIII to 
Council Directive 93/38/EEC, as amended by Directive 98/4/EC (Directive on the use of standard forms 
in the publication of public contract notices) 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
                                                 
This  Directive  lays  down  the  mandatory  forms  that  have  to  be  used  by  purchasers 
when  publishing  their  intention  to  tender,  as  well  as  the  results  of  any  tendering 
procedure,  covered  by  the  public  procurement  Directives.  The  modification  would 
oblige purchasers to indicate in both the contract advice and contract award notices 
information  on  relevant  environmental  specifications  or  award  criteria.  This  will 
allow  Member  States  to  easily  monitor  the  situation  and  identify  the  amount  and 
number of procurement procedures where environmental criteria have been included 
and compare them to the amount and number of procurement contracts which have 
actually also lead to the purchase of a "green" product or service. 

5. 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

Presentation of the impact analysis presents difficulties. Each of the options below is 
likely  to  have  direct  and  indirect  impacts  –  and  because  of  the  nature  of  GPP,  the 
indirect impacts (the outcomes that result from greater uptake of GPP) are the most 
significant. However, these are also the most difficult impacts to quantify, as the end 
result depends on a chain of action36. 

Additionally, the options are not mutually exclusive and their impact will depend on 
the interaction between options.  

Impact  would  also  depend  on  the  process  used.  Administrative  practices  may  vary 
greatly  between  Member  States.  Procedures  setting  high  minimum  standards  or 
weights  for  the  environmental  criteria  are  more  likely  to  result  in  the  purchase  of 
substantially greener products and steer the market towards innovation. A high level 
of  ambition  of  the  environmental  standards  set  and  the  procedural  stage  at  which 
these standards are introduced –either as a mandatory technical specification which 
all  offers  have  to  comply  with  or  as  a  relatively  important  award  criterion  on  the 
basis  of  which  offers  will  be  compared  against  each  other  at  the  award  stage,  will 
give the strongest signal to the market place.  

Impacts would be product or market specific and depend in particular on: the share 
of  public  procurement  in  that  market;  the  potential  for  innovation  for  that  product 
type; the difference in environmental performance between the best and the average 
performing  products;  and  the  difference  in  initial  price  and  life-time  costs  between 
the best environmentally performing and the other products. 

To deal with these difficulties, the analysis of Options is divided into a description of 
the  likely  impacts  of  the  aggregate  effects  of  increased  GPP  across  the  EU,  then 
descriptions of the (additional) specific effects of different options.  

5.1. 

Aggregate impacts of increased GPP 

The overall impact would of course depend on the change in scale of uptake of GPP. 
To give an idea of the potential impact in case of a 25 % uptake of GPP: Total public 
procurement  in  the  EU  is  estimated  at  around  €1800bn  a  year.  In   the  UK,  priority 
areas  have  been  estimated  to  account  for  59  %  of  total  central  government 
procurement.  Based  on  this  example,  and  considering  the  fact  that  the  priority 
product groups proposed by the Commission are very similar to the ones identified in 

36 

Commission action influences political motivation in central government which influences procurement 
procedures in regional authorities which then influences (but does not determine) the level of uptake of 
certain  types  of  greener  products,  with  the  impact  on  the  environment  and  the  economy  from  the 
purchase of those products itself depending on the nature of the product and structure of the market. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
                                                 
the UK, and whilst reducing slightly the UK percentage to take into account relative 
differences between Member States, public expenditure on the priority areas could be 
estimated  to  be  around  50  %,  covering  thus  50  %  of  €1800bn.  If  GPP  procedures 
were used for 25% of the procedures in those priority sectors, this would mean that 
€225bn  worth  of  green  tenders  would  be  produced  a  year  –  offering  substantial 
incentives  to  the  market  to  offer  greener  products.  Going  an  assumption  further,  if 
50%  of  those  tenders  did  result  in  the  purchase  of  greener  goods,  €112,5bn  would 
move from less green to greener purchases. 

ECONOMIC IMPACTS 

Direct Economic Impacts  

Direct financial impacts on authorities: 

•  Savings or additional costs from purchases 

The net direct financial benefits or costs will depend on the savings or costs from the 
"green" products purchased over their life time (compared to those that would have 
been purchased without GPP processes) and whether these more than compensate for 
or add to, administrative costs.  

The above mentioned study on Costs/benefits of GPP has compared prices of "green" 
and "non green" goods in the EU and concluded that, for most product groups, the 
‘make’ or brand of the product or other features have a much higher influence on the 
purchase price than green criteria. For example, cleaning products vary very much, 
both within the green or non green versions and between the selected Member States. 
The resulting average purchase prices of the green versions are partly higher, partly 
lower than the prices of the corresponding non green version. 

The  future  costs  of  greener  goods,  in  particular  of  energy  efficient  goods  may  not 
remain constant. Some stakeholders call for reduced VAT rates for these goods. This 
would lower their purchase price.  

Equally significant, GPP leads to better consideration of the whole-life costs of the 
product. In particular in cases of resource efficient products, buying "green" products 
can  also  mean  buying  "cheaper"  products  for  the  purchaser  over their  lifetime.  For 
instance,  the  RELIEF  project  calculated  that,  if  all  public  authorities  used  water 
saving devices, this would result in annual savings of €527m. 

A  recent  Study  carried  out  a  Cost  Benefit  Analysis  of  Sustainable  Public 
Procurement  for  the  UK  government37,  showed  for  instance  that  the  use  of 
sustainable  construction  techniques  in  the  Newport  Southern  Distributor  Road 
resulted in benefits valued at £2.1 m (3,100,000 EUR), part of which came through 
reduced purchase cost of recycled materials.  

By  focussing  on  the  function  to  be  delivered,  the  cost  differences  between  some 
green and non green versions are put in relation to the overall costs to fulfil a certain 
function. This is most obvious for product groups used in service contracts (such as 
for instance ‘painting’ and ‘cleaning products and services’) where costs are highly 
dominated by labour costs. However, also for products like coffee, the share of the 
ingredient which can be ‘greened’ (coffee beans) only contributes to a minor degree 

37 

See final Report to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, completed by SQW 
Ltd May 2006 (Cost Benefit Analysis of Sustainable Public Procurement)  

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
                                                 
to the overall costs of the end product. In these cases, the magnitude of the potential 
cost increase through GPP will be highly overestimated by only looking at the direct 
cost  differences  of  certain  products  or  ingredients  but  not  at  the  full  costs  of  the 
service or end product.  

•  Start-up administrative and organisational costs 

The  above  mentioned  study  on  cost/benefits  of  GPP  has  concluded  that  the 
administrative  costs  for  setting-up  and  implementing  GPP  in  a  local  authority  in 
Europe  are  higher  than  for  standard  procurement.  The  biggest  cost  driver  is  the 
continuous awareness raising, training and support for procurers. Costs for setting up 
the  policy  are  low  compared  to  the  overall  procurement  budgets.  There  may  be 
additional costs resulting from the search of environmental criteria in procurement.  

The  level  of  these  costs  depends  on  the  current  management  of  the  authority's 
procurement  and  the  practices  it  follows  to  put  in  place  GPP  processes.  In  cases 
where the adoption of GPP also streamlines existing complex procurement practices, 
there may be cost savings resulting from more effective procurement as such.  

The study found evidence that GPP does generate monetary savings after the initial 
period  of  developing  a  GPP  strategy  and  integrating  administrative  tasks  into  the 
procurement  process.  Thus  potential  savings  through  lower  (life  cycle)  costs  for 
green products and services might outweigh the additional administrative costs.  

Administrative costs could be  minimised through sharing  good-practice, using only 
core  environmental  criteria,  using  training  and  other  tools  developed  by  more 
experienced authorities.  

By  way  of  example,  it  can  be  stated  that,  at  the  level  of  the  Danish  government, 
Environment  Ministry,  purchasers  use  ¼  to  1/3  person  a  year  for  including  green 
criteria/requirements  in  calls  for  tenders  and  informing  decentralised  purchasers  on 
green requirements for product groups which are not purchased commonly.  

In  the  Netherlands,  the  administrative  costs  for  implementing  the  national  strategy 
have been estimated at 6 to 7 m € over a  period of 4 years. The administrative costs 
for  individual  organisations  to  set  up  green  purchasing  policies,  gather  information 
and  ensure  appropriate  training  of  purchasers  are  considered  negligible  and  part  of 
regular organisational management. 

The  above  study  shows  that  individual  purchasing  authorities  setting  up  and 
implementing GPP spend on average 223 Euro per 1 000 inhabitants (this takes into 
account both initial onetime costs and average annual costs) over a period of 2 to 6 
years. Those costs would cover the costs of setting up and implementing a GPP and 
costs for training. According to the study, based on an analysis of the situation in 20 
EU public authorities of varied size and experience in GPP, the costs for setting up a 
GPP policy would amount to on average 69 additional Euro per 1000 inhabitants of 
the  respective  city  or  region.  The  costs  for  implementing  the  GPP  policy  relate  to 
costs  for  assessing  procurement  practices,  adapting  tenders,  developing  criteria, 
analysing environmental impacts of products, verifying bids, participating in working 
groups  and  managing  audits.  They  would  amount  to  on  average  41  Euro  per  1000 
inhabitants. Costs for miscellaneous tasks and activities (dissemination, newsletters, 
raising  awareness  of  employees  and  suppliers)  have  been  estimated  to  be  at  an 
average level of 28 Euro per 1000 inhabitants. Finally, on training, local and regional 
authorities  spend  on  average  38.854  Euro  for  training  and  events  (equivalent  to  an 
average of 157 Euro per 1000 inhabitants). Most of the costs for training and events 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
(95%) derive from in-house staff training with people attending different training in 
GPP.  

Direct financial impact on vendors of products: 

In  any  procurement  process,  one  bidder  wins  business  and  others  lose.  GPP  would 
not  change  this.  Currently,  large  firms  win  a  disproportionate  percentage  of  public 
procurement  contracts.  A  shift  towards  environmentally  friendly  products  may 
support producers who are smaller, newer, and who are not specialised in traditional 
mature  products.  Alternatively,  the  shift  may  also  take  place  within  large  firms 
towards  ‘green’  products  However,  it  seems  likely  overall  that  SMEs  will  be  no 
worse off and, more likely, at least marginally advantaged.  

This  would  be  subject  to  there  being  uniform  environmental  criteria  applied 
throughout the EU; if not, bidders and in particular SMEs (as bidding costs tend to 
burden SMEs disproportionately) would run into additional administrative costs for 
preparing bids in different Member States or for different procuring authorities. They 
would need to prove compliance with different sets of criteria, which would result in 
additional administrative costs. 

Indirect Economic Impacts  

Promotion of Innovation 

It is likely that ‘green’ products will be relatively new in the market and not currently 
enjoy economies of scale. Niche products will be given the demand that allows them 
to expand and cut unit costs and so move into mainstream markets. Ultimately, the 
economic benefits of this may accrue not to the public procurer but to other buyers.  

According to above mentioned OECD 2003 Report, the benefit will be significant if 
the government demand is large enough to allow the realisation of significant scale 
economies.  Further,  GPP  would  be  most  promising  when  it  focuses  on  product 
attributes, such as energy efficiency, that will clearly be of interest to private buyers. 
Finally,  GPP  may  act  as  advertising  or  certification  of  the  green  product  and  set  a 
moral example that some private purchasers may choose to follow.  

Increased  Macro-economic  Resource  Efficiency  and  Cheaper  Achievement  of 
existing environmental and economic goals 

As  described  above,  GPP  is  likely  to  promote  innovations  in  products  that  spread 
more  quickly  through  the  private  market  and  most  promising  when  focussing  on 
product attributes, such as energy efficiency, that will clearly be of interest to private 
buyers.  It  may  set  a  moral  example  that  some  private  purchasers  may  choose  to 
follow.  The  faster  adoption  of  resource  saving  products  across  the  economy  would 
have  a  macro-economic  effect,  reducing  in  particular  energy  consumption38, 
inflationary pressure and energy imports.  

Even in case of increased direct costs for the public sector, GPP could well be saving 
the  financial  costs  for  the  economy  as  a  whole.  Both  the  public  and  private  sector 
currently  face  certain  costs  to  meet  diverse  environmental  and  innovation  goals: 
where GPP can help achieve these goals, it could do so at a lower cost than would be 
required to achieve the goals through other policy instruments, implying other types 

38 

An  economy-wide  rebound  effect  may  reduce  the  aggregate  energy  savings,  but  seems  unlikely  to 
exceed 25% of those savings. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
                                                 
of costs for the public and private sector. For example, GPP of less polluting vehicles 
or buses may avoid imposition of (more expensive) restrictions on boilers. 

Increased Competition 

The application of GPP criteria will trigger a new form of competition (focussing on 
the  environmental  aspects  of  bids)  in  public  procurement  procedures  and  increase 
transparent  and  competitive  procedures  throughout  the  EU.  A  recent  study  on  the 
impact  of  public  procurement  legislation39  has  identified  that  "Open,  non-
discriminatory and transparent procedures can also help boost the competitiveness of 
firms  operating  in  public  procurement  markets.  Only  firms  confronted  by  foreign 
competitors at home will be able to perform efficiently and compete successfully in 
foreign  markets  and  withstand  foreign  competition  at  home".  GPP  will  boost  the 
competition  between  firms  operating  in  GPP  markets.  This  was  also  recognized  in 
the  Commission's  broad  based  innovation  strategy  for  the  EU40,  in  which  the 
Commission  called  for  actions  stimulating  competitive  demand,  such  as  public 
procurement  and  standards,  to  facilitate  the  development  of  new  lead  markets  for 
innovative products and services in Europe.  

Benefits for international competitiveness 

The  promotion  of  innovation  for  green  products,  which  are  often  growing  markets 
worldwide, is likely to increase the future power of EU industry to compete in global 
environmental  product  markets.  EU  firms  dominate  the  market  for  public 
procurement  and  hence  innovative  EU  firms  will  gain  greatest  support.  The  aim  of 
the  Lisbon  strategy  for  Growth  and  Jobs  is  to  find  solutions  not  only  for  the 
continuing underinvestment in R&D, but also to improve Europe's ability to convert 
new inventions into new products and jobs. The US is currently spending $50 Bn per 
year  in  public  procurement  of  R&D,  an  amount  which  is  20  times  higher  than  in 
Europe.  In  addition  to  improving  the  quality  and  efficiency  of  public  services,  this 
has  often  played  an  important  role  in  the  emergence  of  globally  competitive 
companies41. For instance, in the area of energy and the environment several public 
institutions in US and Japan have significantly reduced the installed system cost of 
fuel cell stations through R&D procurements. In China last year's national long-range 
science and technology plan officially introduced public technology procurement in 
China  as  a  means  to  stimulate  innovation42.  EU  wide  Green  public  procurement  is 
needed  to  give  same  strong  signals  to  the  markets  and  secure  international 
competitiveness of EU industry.  

Potential negative side effects 

The  aforementioned  OECD  Report  of  2003  refers  to  the  potentially  counteracting 
effect  of  GPP  due  to  crowding  out  of  private  consumption  of  a  certain  "green" 
product  as  a  result  of  increased  public  demand.  Crowding  out  could  occur  if 
suppliers are slow to respond to increased demand for their greener product but quick 
to respond to demand for the "brown" product, In this case the "green" product that 
the government buys might otherwise have been purchased by a private buyer, who 

39 
40 
41 

42 

More information at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/studies_en.htm  
COM(2006)502final, Putting Knowledge into practice: a broad-based innovation strategy for the EU 
"US Defence R&D spending: an analysis of the impacts", EURAB report ERA scope & vision, PREST, 
2004 
Draft Communication on pre-commercial procurement 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
                                                 
will now turn to the brown product and the net impact on sales of greener products is 
reduced.  

The problem is not likely to be widespread for GPP. Higher prices caused by demand 
from GPP will typically stimulate greater supply, particularly as demand for greener 
products from GPP will increase gradually across the EU and be signalled in advance 
to suppliers. Where there are supply constraints, prices will rise, which – as these are 
also taken into account in GPP decisions – would limit any crowding out.  

When considering GPP in markets where the production is yet insufficient to cover 
both private and public demand and will be slow to change, for instance in the case 
of  "green"  electricity,  explicit  consideration  should  be  given  to  stepwise  approach 
e.g.not to aim at an immediate 100 % "green" electricity purchase.  

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

Reduction of environmental harm resulting from public purchases 

The  extensive  environmental  damage  from  current  government  activities  would  be 
reduced. For instance: 

The  UK  Government  Sustainable  Procurement  Action  Plan  includes  a  package  of 
actions  to  ensure  that  supply  chains  and  public  services  will  be  increasingly  low 
carbon,  low  waste  and  water  efficient,  respect  biodiversity  and  deliver  wider 
sustainable  development  goals.  It  is  directly  linked  to  the  targets  for  sustainable 
operations  on  the  Government  Estate,  aimed at  materialising  substantial  changes  in 
the  fields  of  carbon  emissions,  energy  efficiency,  waste  and  recycling,  biodiversity 
and water consumption. Action in the field of procurement is thus considered crucial 
to achieving the Government's operations targets, which will deliver around 1 million 
tonnes of carbon dioxide savings by 2020.  

The  French  national  action  plan  on  sustainable  public  procurement  also  links  the 
actions  on  GPP  to  the  achievement  of  targets  for  reducing  certain  environmental 
impacts,  such  as  reducing  –by  2010-  the  carbon  emissions  linked  to  transportation 
activities by the government with 10 % and reducing carbon emissions from public 
buildings with 10 %. 

The  RELIEF  project  has  calculated  that  the  application  of  organic  farming 
requirements  for  domestic  production  aimed  at  public  consumption  of  wheat,  beef, 
pork,  and  milk  would  reduce  nutrification  impacts  equivalent  to  the  nutrification 
impacts of over 2 million people.  

The  Canada’s  Federal  Buildings  Initiative  (FBI),  focussing  on  the  purchase  of 
"green"  power  has  led  to  a  significant  reduction  of  Green  house  gas  emissions  in 
targeted buildings. The average FBI project realised an estimated energy reduction of 
25 % and GHG emission reduction of 20 %. Projected energy savings (up to 2012) 
result in a projected CO2 emission reduction of 884 000 tonnes or about 2 % of the 
total Federal energy-related emissions43.  

Increased Diffusion of Greener Products reducing societal impacts 

The public sector is estimated to buy approximately 150.000 GWh of electricity per 
year, representing about 6 to 7 % of the market. If –theoretically- this market would 

43 

See OECD Report 2006 on the environmental performance of public procurement 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                 
shift to green electricity, this could save up to 60 million tonnes of CO² emissions or 
18 % of the EU Kyoto commitments44. 

Public Procurement represents about 33 % of the annual European Bus market. GPP 
may drive this market towards less pollutant and more energy efficient buses.  

The buildings sector accounts for 40% of the EU’s energy requirements. It offers the 
largest  single  potential  for  energy  efficiency.  Research  shows  that  more  than  one-
fifth  of  the  present  energy  consumption  could  be  saved  by  2010  by  applying  more 
ambitious  standards  to  new  and  when  refurbishing  buildings.  Public  buildings 
covering an important share of those buildings, public sector has been identified for 
its important role in terms of leadership in this field45.  

Promotion of new sustainable business models.  

GPP can promote resource saving business models: e.g. in case of cleaning, the use 
of  dosage  devices  might  lead  to  appropriate,  lower  dosage  of  cleaning  products, 
reducing  the  amount  of  chemicals  flushed  in  the  sewage  system  and  reducing  the 
amount of products bought.  

In Barcelona, a tender for the purchase of 500 new bus shelters and adaptation of all 
1200  existing  bus  shelters  has  led  to  the  development  of  a  unique  bus  shelter 
prototype, referenced to as the ‘Barcelona bus shelter model’46.. The firm who won 
the tender on the basis of a package of installation and maintenance of the shelter has 
extended the offer of that successful package to other municipalities. 

Support for other environment and economic policies 

As  described  in  Section  3.3  "Consistency  with  other  EU  policies  and  horizontal 
objectives. 

SOCIAL, DISTRIBUTIONAL AND EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS 

In  November  2005,  the  European  Commission  issued  a  report  analysing  the  links 
between  employment  and  environment  policies47  in  which  it  was  held  that  studies 
show  that  environmental  policy  does  not  decrease  employment  but  instead  has 
neutral or even mildly positive impact on the number of people in work.  

A more recent study aimed at analysing the link between climate change and related 
energy efficiency policies and employment has come to the conclusion, that the net 
gain  in  employment  would  be  of  the  order  of  1.5%.  Employment  in  the  energy 
production  sector  is  sensitive  to  energy-saving  policies.  However,  the  jobs  created 
from the development of energy savings options would largely outweigh the number 
of  jobs  lost  in  the  coal  sector.  In  the  transport  sector,  the  development  and 
dissemination  of  clean  technologies  could  give  a  significant  technology  lead  to  EU 

44 
45 

46 

47 

The Procura+ Manual : A guide to cost effective public procurement, ICLEI 
The  Commission  working  document  annexed  to  the  Energy  Efficiency  Action  Plan,  considers 
proposing an expanded role for the public sector to demonstrate new technologies and methods, based 
on an impact assessment to be carried out in 2009 
The  roof  consists  of  a  beehive-shaped  fibreglass  material,  strengthening  it  and  making  it  easier  to 
disassemble at the end of its life cycle and recycle it; the advertising panel is unique for using 3 highly 
efficient T5 lamps of 35W each instead of 4 inefficient lamps. The new cleaning system uses osmosed 
water,  avoiding  the  need  to  use  soap/detergents  -  2007  study  on  Costs  and  Benefits  of  Green  public 
procurement in Europe, Öko-institut 
SEC 
of 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/employment_en.htm  

information 

November 

(2005) 

1530, 

2005, 

more 

17 

at 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
                                                 
industry  and  represents  thereby  a  huge  potential  for  job  creation.  The  building  and 
construction sector represents a major source of employment, but it has to tackle the 
challenges of training in sustainable building and innovation48. 

Increases  in  efficiency  of  public  services,  in  particular  increases  in  the  energy 
efficiency of housing, are more likely to create benefits to the less-well off classes of 
society  whose  costs  of  heating  and  cooling  (whether  paid  direct  or  by  public 
services) are likely to become relatively lower. 

Although  GPP  is  in  the  first  place  about  stimulating  the  use  of  environmental 
specifications in tender documents, legal guidance on GPP may imply advice on the 
inclusion of both environmental and social aspects and hence open the door also to 
more 'social' public procurement. Legal guidance would indeed include guidance on 
how  to  take  into  account  aspects  related  to  the  legality  of  production  processes, 
which may include respect of environmental, social or economic aspects.  

5.2. 

Specific economic, social and environmental impacts of each of the Options 

5.2.1.  Option 1: Business as Usual 

The  option  of  continuing  with  the  present  approach  (dissemination  of  Handbook, 
website,  regular  meetings  with  national  GPP  experts)  is  not  likely  to  result  in 
significant increases of GPP in the EU. Evidence of this comes from an assessment 
of trends in uptake in recent years. 

Although  Member  States  had  been  recommended  to  adopt  national  action  plans  on 
GPP by the end of 2006, up to date, only 14 Member States have adopted such action 
plans, with varying levels of ambition. Further, when comparing the results of a GPP 
survey carried out in EU 15 in 200349 and in EU 25 in 200550, the situation remains 
grossly unchanged. Following the 2003 study, the highest level of GPP was that 50 
%  of  all  purchasing  authorities  (of  a  certain  Member  State)  interrogated  would 
include  environmental  criteria  in  more  than  half  of  their  tender  documents. 
According to the 2005 study, the highest level of Green tenders in a certain Member 
State  amounted  to  60  %  of  all  tender  documents  analysed  for  the  purpose  of  the 
study. However, many of those tenders scored very poor on legal compliance.  

Benefits 

Slow and scattered increase in GPP with occasional benefits as mentioned above. 

Some recent and upcoming initiatives could benefit the uptake of GPP: 

The recently adopted new Energy Star Regulation will adapt the implementation of 
the "Energy Star" programme to the new EU/US Energy Star Agreement (applicable 
5 years-entry into force 31.12.2006). It obliges central government and Community 
Institutions  to  specify,  in  their  supply  contracts  covered  by  the  public  procurement 
Directives  (above  the  threshold  of  137.000  €),  energy-efficiency  requirements  not 
less  demanding  than  the  Energy  Star  Common  Specifications.  This  initiative  may 

48 

49 

50 

EN 

in 

Report 

information 

employment” 
More 
http://www.tradeunionpress.eu/Web/EN/Activities/Environment/Studyclimatechange/rapport.pdf 2007) 
See ICLEI study on state of play of GPP in Europe at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/studies.htm 
based on questionnaire sent to some 6300 contacts – reply rate of 10 %  
See Take-5 study under http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/studies.htm#state based on an analysis of 
of responses to 860 on line questionnaires and by analysing the use of environmental criteria in more 
than 1000 tender documents. 

“Climate 

change 

and 

29 

   EN 

 
                                                 
have considerable environmental impact, taking into account the success of a similar 
obligation applied in the USA under the previous Energy Star Regulation. The latter 
has allowed overall penetration of Energy Star computer equipment and is estimated 
to have reduced total US energy needs by more than 200 billion kilowatt hours since 
1995 which translates into an estimated carbon reduction of 9 million tonnes51. 

Increased  energy  efficiency  requirements  are  also  likely  to  provide  whole-life  cost 
reductions for these products and lower costs for public purchasers.  

In the field of transport, the EC has recently adopted a proposal for a Directive on the 
promotion  of  clean  and  energy  efficient  vehicles.  The  approach  is  based  on  the 
internalisation  of  operational  lifetime  costs  of  vehicles  in  the  procurement  award 
process.  Common  rules  are defined  for  calculating  lifetime  costs  for  energy 
consumption,  CO2  emissions,  and  pollutant  emissions  linked  to  the  operation  of 
vehicles. These operational lifetime costs should be included as award criteria for all 
procurement of  vehicles or transport services by public authorities. The application 
of these criteria will be optional in a first phase and mandatory from 2012. Covered 
by the proposal are all road transport vehicles procured by public authorities and by 
operators providing transport services under contract, license, permit or authorisation 
by public authorities52. 

Costs 

As uptake of GPP slowly rises, differences between the practices of Member States 
are  likely  to  create  increased  market  distortions  and  additional  administrative  costs 
for suppliers and only provide very limited stimulus for eco-innovation. In particular 
in  the  field  of  timber  and  timber  products,  Member  States  are  adopting  different 
approaches  in  their  procurement  policies,  focusing  sometimes  on  legal  only,  or  on 
sustainable  only,  or  on  legal  and  sustainable  and  referring  to  different  verification 
schemes;  This  follows  from  the  stakeholder  consultation  mentioned  in  annex  and 
various contacts with this sector. On top of that, there are great differences between 
the different certification schemes, which are not equally recognized in all member 
States. 

The  obligation  for  central  government  to  buy  only  Energy  Star  products  will  lead 
authorities  to  undertake  training  and  change  their  procurement  processes  –  which 
will incur initial administrative costs.  

International  competitiveness  in  eco-technologies  is  likely  to  decline  as  domestic 
markets  will  not  provide  European  companies  with  the  stimulus  to  develop  new 
green  technologies  that  are  found  in  trading  partners.  This  won't  be  the  case  for 
energy star products, because of the mandatory implementation of minimum Energy 
Star requirements in central public procurement contracts. 

As demonstrated under Section 4.4, public purchasers are important market players, 
in  particular  in  sectors  with  huge  environmental  impact,  such  as  buildings  and 
transport. If the situation would be left unchanged, public authorities would continue 
to  importantly  contribute  to  the  emission  of  Green  house  Gases  and  pollutant 
including 
emissions  and  an  ever  faster  consumption  of  natural  resources, 
jeopardising energy security.  

51 
52 

See Energy Star website http://ec.europa.eu/energy/demand/legislation/energy_star_programme_en.htm  
More information at: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/clean/promotion/index_en.htm  

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
                                                 
5.2.2.  Option 2: A package of options: proposing a voluntary target, providing operational 
and legal guidance, establishing a process of co-operation with the Member States to 
identify  GPP  criteria  for  priority  product  and  service  groups  and  providing  for 
increased  awareness  raising  and  training  on  GPP,  through  dissemination  of  a 
training toolkit on GPP and use of GPP in the implementation of EU funded projects  

Benefits  

Voluntary target for GPP 

The additional value is to put in place the means for quantifying and benchmarking 
the  achievement  of  the  target  already  agreed  by  the  Member  States  in  the  renewed 
Sustainable Development Strategy.  

The  agreement  of  a  better  defined  target  may  also  have  a  political  meaning, 
stimulating  Member  States  towards  reaching  the  SDS  target.  Considering  that  the 
SDS  commitment  already  exists,  it  seems  probable  that  Member  States  who  are 
(almost)  not  implementing  GPP  now,  will  not  significantly  change  their  political 
motivation on the basis of voluntary targets.  

Further, as the monitoring of target achievement for EU level benchmarking will be 
based  on  an  assessment  of  GPP  for  the  product  groups  covered  by  GPP  criteria 
which the Commission proposes to develop in co-operation with the Member States 
under, there may be an important incentive for Member States to recommend the use 
of the GPP criteria.  

Highlighting of existing and provision of new guidance 

This  may  help  Member  States  to  build  up  their  own  GPP  strategies  and  increase 
GPP. It could substantially reduce the costs typically associated with setting up and 
implementing GPP processes.  

It  may  also  lead  authorities  to  other  ways  to  reduce  their  costs  and  increase  the 
effectiveness  of  their  GPP.  For  instance,  joint  procurement  (combining  the 
procurement  actions  of  two  or  more  public  authorities)  may  lead  to  economies  of 
scale  through  bundled  demand  and  reduce  administrative  costs  by  exchanging 
experience  on  GPP  criteria  and  on  new  products  available  on  other  than  local 
markets. Guidance on the inclusion of whole-life-costing as an award criterion will 
also encourage purchasers to apply GPP, as it will show that GPP is in many cases 
nothing else than efficient procurement, allowing to save money in the long run. 

The  increased  uptake  and  effectiveness  of  GPP  would  be  likely  to  increase  the 
contribution of GPP to economic and environmental benefits. 

Central  EU  guidance  may  also  reduce  costs  for  Member  States  to  develop  its  own 
rules and contribute to consistency. 

Training 

Training on GPP is essential to its wider uptake, in particular by regional and local 
authorities  who  are  more  difficult  to  target  with  general  guidance.  Integrating 
environmental  guidance  in  general  public  procurement  training  will  allow  to  cost-
effectively target many if not all relevant purchasers. Inversely, a "Train the trainer 
Toolkit  on  GPP"  will  add  to  the  general  public  procurement  knowledge  of  trained 
purchasers,  as  it  would  follow  the  structure  of  a  public  procurement  procedure  and 
draw the attention of trainees to legal compliance issues. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
Information on Prioritisation  

The  identification  of  10  product  groups  considered  most  suitable  for  "greening" 
based  on  economic  and  environmental  impact,  will  enhance  targeting  and  the  cost 
effectiveness of the whole process, inviting Member States to focus on areas where 
the  biggest  environmental  improvements  can  be  expected,  without  the  costs  of 
carrying out the research themselves. The selection of product groups will also give a 
strong market signal to relevant industry.  

Provision of criteria 

The provision of core-criteria would remove one of the greatest hindrances to GPP, 
removing one of the greatest costs and causes of difficulty for practitioners.  

It would be likely to provide greater consistency in the product characteristics asked 
for by authorities and give greater transparency to producers and so better signalling 
of rewarding innovation opportunities, whilst also reducing their administrative costs 
from having to provide environmental product information in different procurement 
processes. 

Industry stakeholders who carry out green procurement for their own purchases have 
indicated  that  the  provision  of  core  criteria  could  also  raise  their  levels  of  green 
procurement,  by  reducing  the  costs  and  difficulties  of  identifying  suitable  criteria. 
This would particularly be the case if the public sector was widely seen to adopt and 
successfully use the criteria as part of a system. 

Provision of legal clarity 

By providing the necessary legal certainty and guidance to purchasers, the latter will 
no longer be refrained from adopting GPP policies. 
Recommend to use GPP when implementing EU funded projects  

This recommendation would be particularly effective at initiating the uptake of GPP 
by  local  authorities,  main  beneficiaries  of  Structural  funds,  who  are  traditionally 
more  difficult  to  reach  in  view  of  raising  awareness  on  GPP,  providing  political 
support, guidance and training. It would furthermore ensure cost effectiveness of an 
important part of the EU budget, meet the requirements of Art. 6 of the EC Treaty 
and give strong signals to local companies taking part in the calls for proposals and 
contracts awarded under those Structural Funds. 

Costs 

Proposing voluntary GPP targets  

Without political co-ordination from central government, the uptake of GPP by local 
authorities, is unlikely to take a harmonised approach. 

Highlighting and provision of guidance 

Much guidance already exists, both at EU and Member State level, from both central 
government  and  other  organisations,  for  instance  the  pro-inno  guide  on  innovation 
and procurement53. The costs of providing additional guidance to fill the gaps will be 
negligible compared to the sums involved in GPP, and borne by the Commission. 

53 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/related_policies_en.htm 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Training 

The Commission has developed a Training Toolkit on GPP which could feed into the 
additional  training  programmes  to  be  set  up  in  each  Member  State,  subject  to 
translation  and  adaptation  to  the  national  situation.  The  LIFE+  budget  provides  for 
support  for  capacity  building  to  facilitate  the  implementation  of  Community 
environmental policy at the local and regional level.  

Information on prioritisation and provision of criteria 

The work to identify priority groups has already been undertaken and there would be 
no further costs. 

A  huge  amount  of  information  already  exists  in  various  Member  States  and  at 
European  level,  as  well  as  in  the  product  programmes  of  trading  partners. 
Environmental product criteria are being established in various frameworks, such as 
the  Energy-Using  products  Directive,  the  Eco-label  Regulation,  the  field  of  Energy 
labelling and Euro standards for vehicles. The costs for criteria setting will therefore 
be shared with those other policy instruments.  

By  way  of  example,  the  costs  for  developing  new  eco-label  criteria  may  vary 
between  30.000  to  60.000  EUR.  The  costs  for  making  new  Energy  using  Product 
criteria (mandatory and based on a full LCA) would be over 300.000 €. 

An  on-going  contract  will  provide  core  criteria  for  10  product  groups  (150.000  € 
contract).  Under  the  revised  eco-label  regulation,  whenever  Eco-label  criteria  are 
being  developed  GPP  criteria  will  simultaneously  be  developed.  The  Commission 
will sign a 150.000 € contract to establish  GPP criteria for 10 more product groups.  

Provision of legal clarity  

The  provision  of  legal  guidance  would  not  involve  any  additional  costs  for  the 
Commission.  For  Member  States  and  public  authorities,  it  would  involve  some 
training  and  additional  guidance.  Where  GPP  would  be  integrated  into  existing 
public procurement training, there would be no additional costs. 

Recommendation  to  use  GPP  when  implementing  EU  funded  projects,  where 
appropriate 

A recommendation to the Member States would not imply any additional cost for the 
Commission. It may involve some training and additional guidance to be provided by 
the national managing authorities of the Structural funds.  

5.2.3.  Option 3: Setting of mandatory targets for GPP 

General Benefits of Targets 

Targets would act as a political driver for Member States to step up their efforts in 
the field of GPP, the strength of which would depend on the seriousness with which 
the Member States (and Community Institutions) viewed the targets. Other Options 
are  very  likely  to  have  a  bigger  and  more  important  impact  if  complemented  by  a 
target  that  generates  political  support.  Targets  would  be  likely  to  encourage  the 
establishment and use of central guidance on GPP, coupled to internal targets and/or 
to political or legal instructions to selected (or all) regional and local authorities. 

The  existence  of  targets  would  also  provide  an  indication  to  industry  of  the  likely 
direction of demand for greener products in coming decades, allowing them to early 
respond to this new demand and plan innovation. 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
General Costs related to Targets 

A) The costs of Member State action in providing national, regional or local advice 
on GPP. This would be reduced if the Commission services provided Member States 
with the guidance and practical tools considered under Option 2.  

B)  Costs  of  putting  in  place  means  to  monitor  achievement  of  internal  targets, 
responsibility  for  which  would  lie  with  the  Member  States.  This  would  create 
administrative cost on the public administration. 

For  instance,  the  Swedish  National  Action  Plan  on  GPP  identifies  ambitious 
objectives  and  proposes  a  series  of  measures  to  achieve  those  objectives.  The  total 
cost of these proposals for the duration of the three-year action plan (2007-2010) is 
estimated at approximately SEK 18 million (approximately €2 million). 

In  the  Netherlands,  costs  for  implementing  the  action  plan  which  makes  GPP 
mandatory for central government and sets a mandatory target of 50 % for all other 
purchasers  by  2010  (including  costs  for  establishing  criteria,  communicating  the 
policy etc.), amounted in 2006 to approximately € 6 to 7 million. Further, money is 
spent  by  the  government  on  subsidies  to  organisations  that  contribute  to  the 
implementation (through training for instance): some € 5 million over a period of 5 
years. Costs for purchasers to implement GPP (training/monitoring/setting up action 
plans etc.) are considered costs which are inherent to management.  

The cost resulting from monitoring would be similar whether targets are voluntary or 
mandatory.  Those  costs  could  be  reduced  by  a  Commission  proposal  to  modify 
Commission  Directive  on  Standard  Forms  in  Public  procurement  so  as  to  include 
information on environmental criteria in contract advice and contract award notices. 
It  would  also  be  reduced  as  the  Commission  would  bear  the  administrative  cost  of 
identifying suitable indicators and methods for calculating (details in Section 7).  

Differences in impacts between sub-options 

Sub-Option 3.A) Mandatory targets for life cycle costing 

Benefits 

This  sub-option  would  be  likely  to  lead  to  political  and  administrative  action  in 
Member  States  to  change  procurement  practices.  It  would  lead  to  increased 
identification  of  the  real  costs  of  products  and  to  very  significant  costs  savings  for 
public  authorities.  By  making  procurers  familiar  with  the  concept  of  looking  at 
resource  use  during  procurement,  this  would  be  likely  to  make  adoption  of  GPP 
procedures  much  easier  in  future,  with  a  large  number  of  shared  concepts  between 
the  two  systems.  It  would  both  directly  cut  resource  use  –  particularly  energy  and 
water use – and provide incentives for industry to innovate in these areas. 

The  introduction  of  life  cycle  costing  is  likely  to  promote  new  business  models  in 
which  products  or  services  are  shaped  in  such  a  way  as  to  reduce  the  whole-life 
costs. The adoption of these practices in the public sector is likely to stimulate their 
offer and adoption in the wider private sector, as they are seen to be cost-efficient. 
This  in  turn  has  the  potential  to  bring  substantial  economy  wide  cost  savings, 
increasing international competitiveness.  

For  sectors  where  mandatory  requirements  on  energy  efficiency  exist  (for  instance 
Energy  Star  Regulation  for  central  government  purchases,  as  well  as  all  product 
groups that will gradually be covered by the Energy Using Products Directives), the 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
benefits of the proposed option would be reduced as the obligation to take life cycle 
costing  into  account  could  be  redundant,  due  to  the  fact  that  energy  efficiency 
requirements achieve the same effect as life cycle costing.  

Costs 

There  would  be  costs  resulting  from  training  courses  for  procurers,  in  view  of 
introducing  new  procurement  procedures  in  relevant  areas.  There  would  also  be  a 
need  for  post-purchase  testing  of  products  by  authorities  to  be  extended  to  the 
resource use characteristics (for example energy consumption). 

The  scale  of  impacts  of  such  targets  is  likely  to  be  hugely  bigger  than  the 
administrative costs.  

Sub-Option 3.B): Mandatory targets for basic GPP 

Benefits 

•  Create  the  political  obligation  for  Member  States  to  set  up  and  implement  GPP 
policies allowing to achieve targets. It would promote action at  both central and 
regional/local level if separate targets were to be set.  

•  Promote  greater  consistency  of  EU  wide  implemented  GPP  criteria,  as  targets 
would  be  linked  to  the  GPP  criteria  established  by  the  Commission  and  the 
Member  States  as  under  Option  2.  Whilst  under  this  option  Member  States  and 
public authorities would have the flexibility to comply with targets by including 
an environmental award criterion not directly linked to the GPP minimum criteria 
provided under Option 2, it is likely to create greater similarities than a voluntary 
approach. 

•  Stimulate training programmes. 

•  Provide  a  clear  signal  to  industry,  indicating  both  the  longevity  and  trend  in  the 
market  for  consideration  of  environmental  impacts,  reducing  the  risk  of 
investments in eco-innovation and increasing the potential rewards. 

•  Stimulate,  through  successful  demonstration  of  GPP,  greater  uptake  of  green 

procurement practices by the private sector.  

•  The faster adoption of environmental improvements in products through increased 
GPP  not  only  creates  a  level  of  performance  for  future  years,  but  allows  future 
increases in performance which will bring additional environmental benefits. The 
purchase  of  greener  products  in  the  EU  is  likely  to  affect  supply  chains, 
the  offer  of  better 
production  and  design  outside 
environmental performing products in non-EU countries. 

the  EU  stimulating 

Costs 

Training  costs  for  GPP  would  be  additional  to  existing  training  and  could  be 
integrated into rolling on-going public procurement training.  

Costs of procurement may be significantly lower, as: 

•  Member States have the option of meeting the targets by applying GPP to those 
contracts  within  the  priority  product  groups  which  are  most  likely  to  lead  to 
reductions (rather than increases) in whole-life costs. 

•  The definition of "basic" GPP used does not require the purchase of greener goods 
when  they  are  much  more  expensive  as  it  would  consider  to  be  GPP  also 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
in  which  sufficient  weighting 

procurement  procedures 
the 
the  purchased  product.  With 
environmental  characteristics  (eg.  15%)  of 
weightings like this, price will still be the main determinant of product selection. 
This may be particularly important in regions characterised by a relatively small 
market of "green" goods at still more expensive prices.  

is  given 

to 

Sub-Option 3.C): Mandatory targets for "outcome-based" GPP 

Benefits  

•  The impact on political support for GPP may be higher in some Member States – 
who  see  this  sub-option  as  more  tightly  binding,  and  therefore  requiring  greater 
activity to meet the perceived stricter compliance.  

•  The official and binding character of targets will allow for easier, more objective 

monitoring and benchmarking.  

•  The  Comitology  procedure  would  include  an  impact  assessment  of  each  set  of 
criteria developed, including trade-offs between any additional whole-life costs of 
a  product  and  the  environmental  and  economic  benefits  likely  to  result  from  its 
wider uptake. Minimum criteria are unlikely to be put in place where the costs to 
authorities exceeded the benefits to society.  

•  The  costs  of  participation  in  the  comitology  procedure  are  likely  to  be  small 
compared  to  the  economic  costs  and  benefits  of  implementation  of  GPP.  The 
discussions  for  many  product  groups  could  be  based  on  information  gathered 
under other related product policies.  

•  The  adoption  of  minimum  GPP  criteria  in comitology would be likely to ensure 
harmonised  GPP  across  the  EU,  in  full  compliance  with  public  procurement 
legislation for those product groups where criteria are being developed. Member 
States  or  purchasing  authorities  would  in  any  case  have  the  possibility  to  set 
higher environmental standards or award criteria. 

•  Setting  clear  minimum  EU  wide  standards  for  a  certain  proportion  of  contracts 
would send a very clear signal to industry on the levels of performance to be met. 
Where  applied  to  large  percentages  of  purchases,  this  would  be  very  likely  to 
promote  innovation,  including  the  knock-on  effects  in  promoting  green  private 
procurement.  

•  This stimulus would be re-enforced where targets for GPP in future years were set 
and commitments were given to review the minimum standards for GPP after a set 
number of years, to reflect technological progress.  

Costs 

•  In some Member States, the obligation to apply precise requirements might reduce 

enthusiasm for GPP.  

•  The  comitology  procedure  for  setting  GPP  criteria  would  require  agreement  of 
Member States to areas and levels of environmental performance. Difficulties in 
reaching  agreement  accommodating  national  and 
stakeholder 
considerations may slow the process and lead to a lower common standard being 
adopted than would be adopted where the minimum standards were not binding. It 
may also lead to practical difficulties for revising criteria in a way that keeps them 
relevant and useful for the fast-moving product groups. 

industry 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
•  Regional  differences  might  not  be  well  picked  up  in  a  comitology  impact 

assessment and could still lead to costs exceeding benefits in some regions. 

•  The  cumbersome  GPP  criteria  setting  process  may  reveal,  in  the  future, 
unnecessary or badly designed, considering the on-going initiatives in the field of 
environmental  criteria  setting;  it  may  be  appropriate  to  await  the  outcomes  of 
those initiatives before deciding on what type of procedure would be best for GPP 
criteria  setting  or  the  process  may  be  limited  to  endorsement  of  environmental 
criteria developed in other frameworks. 

•  The Budgetary autonomy of regional/local authorities may make it more difficult 
for  Member  States  to  implement  mandatory  targets  linked  to  mandatory  GPP 
criteria. 

5.2.4.  Option 4: Various forms of mandatory GPP 

Sub-Option 4.A): Mandatory GPP for certain types of purchasing authorities and for 
certain "niche" products  

Benefits 

A  100  %  target  for  central  government  would  provide,  for  the  relevant  product 
groups, a very clear signal to the market, and have the biggest potential for triggering 
change  of  the  supply  side  towards  ever  better  performing  products,  with  strong 
knock-on effects also on private consumption. Benefits are of a similar nature to but 
at the same time expected to be greater per product group than the benefits that can 
be expected to result from Option 3.C) "mandatory targets for outcome-based GPP". 

This Option would be similar to the obligation for central government included in the 
recently  adopted  Energy  Star  Regulation,  to  only  buy  office  equipment  complying 
with  energy-efficiency  requirements  not  less  demanding  than  the  Energy  Star 
Specifications  (described  under  Option  1).  However,  it  would  focus  on  other 
products than office equipment covered by the Energy Star Regulation. To estimate 
the benefits of this option, an additional impact assessment is necessary, to identify 
suitable sectors and estimate the potential benefits. 

Costs 

There  would  be  costs  for  the  Commission  or  the  Member  States  related  to  the 
transposition of a regulatory measure and the monitoring of compliance.  

Considering  the  100  %  target,  the  measure  would  focus  on  cost-effective 
procurement, involving no extra costs for purchasing authorities, taking into account 
whole-life-costing.  

Sub-Option 4.B): Make GPP mandatory for all purchases above the thresholds of the 
public  procurement  directives,  by  making  the  environmental  award  criterion 
mandatory 

Benefits  

This  integrated  approach  would  give  a  very  important  political  signal  as  it  would 
integrate GPP directly into the relevant internal market legislative tool. It would draw 
the  attention  of  all  purchasers  to  the  importance  of  integrating  environmental 
concerns into public procurement, even for purchases below the thresholds, because 
many countries apply the same legislation or principles also for those procedures.  

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
In order for it to guarantee those benefits and not lead to unclear and non transparent 
procurement procedures, it would need to be complemented with relevant guidance 
on potential environmental award criteria for priority products and guidance on how 
to specify an environmental award criterion in the absence of such criteria.  

It would not in all cases lead to the purchase of green goods. 

Costs 

Costs for Member states related to transposition and monitoring of compliance. 

It  would  certainly  need  to  be  complemented  with  relevant  tools  and  guidance  on 
environmental  criteria,  as  described  under  Option  2,  including  costs  as  described 
there.  In  the  absence  thereof,  it  may  lead  to  non  transparent  procedures, 
discrimination, reduced competition and increased costs for purchasers as a result. 

Such proposal would call for a separate impact assessment. 

Sub-Option 4.C): Make it mandatory to include, for all service and works contracts 
above  certain  thresholds,  a  contract  performance  clause  which  obliges  the  winning 
bidder to set up an environmental management system during the performance of the 
contract 

Benefits 

This  option  would  be  expected  to  constitute  a  cost-effective  way  of  reducing  the 
environmental  impact  resulting  from  important  services  and  works  contracts.  The 
biggest  environmental  impact  of  such  contracts  indeed  occurs  during  its  execution 
(use of resources during performance, transportation issues, waste management and 
so on). The implementation of an environmental management system by the winning 
bidder would ease the burden of verification for the purchasing authority and provide 
additional  guarantees  as  to  its  compliance  with  environmental  performance 
standards.  It  would  also  help  the  contractor  to  comply  with  high  environmental 
standards of the contract.  

Costs 

Considering the fact that the obligation would only apply to contracts above a certain 
financial  threshold  (which  could  be  the  current  threshold  for  application  of  the 
Directive to works contracts, namely 5 million €), the costs for the winning company 
to set up and run an environmental management system can be considered relatively 
small. When added up, the overall costs for all winning companies may be relatively 
important  though.  For  a  full  examination  of  costs  and  benefits  of  implementing  an 
environmental management system, reference can be made to the impact assessment 
for the on-going revision of the EMAS Regulation on  the European  Environmental 
Management  and  Audit  Scheme54.  Costs  for  the  Member  States  related  to 
transposition and implementation of modified procurement Directives. 

This proposal would equally call for a separate impact assessment, to set appropriate 
thresholds  or  consider 
to 
subcontractors. 

the  possibility  of  applying  a  similar  obligation 

54 

Costs  for  registering  under  the  EMAS  scheme  basically  involve  registration  fees  and  auditing  and 
verification fees (paid to consultants). Registration fees differ per Member State and range from 18€ to 
2234 €. Consulting costs for a medium-size organisation with about 50 employees, are average about 
12.000 €, whereas the cost for verification range from about 500 to 8000 €.  

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Sub-Option 4.C): Mandatory GPP for the implementation of EU funded projects 

Benefits 

Making  it  mandatory  to  use  GPP,  wherever  appropriate,  that  is  in  all  cases  where 
public  authorities  are  implementing  EU  funded  projects  through  use  of  a  public 
procurement  procedure,  would  be  particularly  effective  at  initiating  the  uptake  of 
GPP by local authorities, main beneficiaries of Structural funds, who are traditionally 
more  difficult  to  reach  in  view  of  raising  awareness  on  GPP,  providing  political 
support,  guidance  and  training.  It  would  ensure  cost  effectiveness  of  an  important 
part of the EU budget, meet the requirements of Article 6 of the EC Treaty and give 
strong signals to local companies taking part in the calls for proposals and contracts 
awarded under those Structural Funds. 

Costs 

Current  EU  rules  governing  Structural  funds  have  been  adopted  late  2006  for  the 
period 2007-2013, after 2 years of difficult discussions. A proposal to modify would 
need to wait the adoption of the new rules for the next period (2014-…). Discussions 
may start in 2010. This would allow the Commission to carry out a separate impact 
assessment. A similar assessment would be made of the possible change in the rules 
for the award of other EU funding mechanisms (such as LIFE +, R&D grants etc.) 

5.2.5.  Option 5: Modification of the Commission Directive on the use of Standard forms in 

public procurement 

Benefits 

Contracting  authorities  have  to  make  use  of  these  Standard  Forms  for  all  contracts 
above  the  thresholds  of  the  public  procurement  Directives.  Contract  advice  notices 
are published to invite potential bidders to request tender documents and submit bids. 
They include information on the selection criteria and on the estimated total value of 
the contract to be conclude, and may also include information on the award criteria. 
Contract  award  notices  are  published  after  the  award  of  the  contract  and  include 
information on the final total value, contractor withheld, award criteria used.  

The  Standard  forms  are  used  for  the  collection  of  statistical  evidence  on  number, 
value,  type  of  contracts  concluded.  The  inclusion  of  environmental  information  in 
those forms would allow to also collect statistical information on this aspect of public 
procurement  procedures.  This  would  seriously  reduce  the  burden  of  monitoring  of 
GPP  for  both  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States,  the  latter  being  in  any  case 
legally obliged to report public procurement statistics to the Commission.  

Costs 

There  will  be  administrative  costs  for  authorities  from  the  provision  of  additional 
information in the standard forms. However, as the use of standard forms is already 
mandatory  for  contracting  authorities  and  as  Member  States  are  already  subject  to 
statistical obligations in the field of public procurement, the fact of having to include 
environmental information (for the contracting authority) and of having to include in 
the  public  procurement  statistics  also  information  on  GPP  (for  the  Member  States) 
would  be  the  most  efficient  means  of  information  provision  to  monitor  the 
implementation of targets for GPP. It would involve the transfer of the information 
that they have already published (e.g. on award criteria) into a Standard Forms which 
they already prepare. 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
6. 

COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

6.1.  Which are the best options for tackling the identified specific problems?  

Information and Tools 

For  the  problems  associated  with  lack  of  information,  policy  development  has 
focussed  on  identification  of  the  information  that  is  missing,  together  with 
consideration  of  the  best  form  in  which  it  can  be  supplied.  Options  2,  3  and  4  all 
tackle  –to  a  certain  extent-  the  problem  of  lack  of  information.  Option  2  would 
provide the most complete solution for the raised problem on lack of information, as 
it  would  provide  information  on  costs  and  benefits,  propose  GPP  criteria,  provide 
legal guidance  and operational guidance which are essential  building  blocks  of any 
national GPP strategy and imperative for achieving more and better GPP.  

The  impact  assessment  above  indicates  that  the  generation  and/or  publication  of 
information about GPP practices and tools to facilitate GPP at lower cost will remove 
or reduce some of the barriers to GPP and would do so at negligible cost compared to 
the potential benefits of the policy. 

Options 3 and 4 would partially solve the problem of a lack of information, as under 
both  options  (sub-options  3.B),  3.C)  and  sub-option  4A)),  GPP  criteria  would  be 
recommended or imposed for use in GPP.  However, those options would not solve 
the  other  problems  raised  regarding  legal  uncertainty  and  lack  of  information  on 
costs and benefits and implementing tools. 

On  the  other  hand,  additional  information  and  tools  do  not  appear  likely  to  be 
sufficient  to  greatly  increase  uptake  of  GPP  whilst  there  is  a  lack  of  political 
motivation  to  push  GPP  uptake.  Provision  of  greater  information  about  the 
advantages and disadvantages of GPP and different ways to put it into practice could 
have some effect on political support for GPP. Yet, in Member States where there is 
currently  little  interest  in  GPP,  the  provision  of  information  is  unlikely  to  have  an 
impact, and may go unread. 

Generation of Necessary Political Support  

•  Targets 

Mandatory targets appear to complement Option 2 and raise the political support in 
Member States needed  for wider uptake of GPP. There are various alternative sub-
options  for  the  target  setting  for  GPP,  each  with  different  advantages  and 
disadvantages, mentioned above.  

For  instance,  mandatory  targets  with  minimum  standards  set  by  Comitology  would 
be  likely  to  provide  clearer,  innovation-prompting  signalling  to  industry,  but  might 
lead  to  lower  levels  of  environmental  performance  and  greater  up-front  costs  of 
implementation in Member States. Targets only for life cycle costing would ensure 
cost  savings  for  authorities,  but  have  comparatively  weak  environmental  benefits. 
Purely voluntary targets would be likely to stimulate some degree of greater Member 
State activities, but with more mixed stimulus to innovation and potential friction in 
the internal market.  

Administrative process concerns must also be taken into consideration: For instance, 
a  lack  of  mandatory  use  of  criteria  may  make  the  informal  process  of  co-operation 
proposed for criteria setting more successful by reducing strategic behaviour, though 
on the other hand may reduce the incentives for parties to co-operate.  

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
The  analysis  of  sub-options  indicates  that  all  would  bring  net  benefits  and  that 
therefore  targets  should  be  proposed.  However,  the  evidence  gathered  up  to  now 
does not indicate which form of targets would maximise net benefits and therefore no 
recommendation is made on the adoption of mandatory targets. Greater investigation 
of the impacts of options for mandatory targets in the form of a separate legislative 
instrument  is  needed,  that  includes  market  analysis  of  relevant  product  groups, 
performance levels and whole-life-costs.  

Therefore, whilst acknowledging the importance and usefulness of setting mandatory 
targets,  an  additional  impact  assessment  will  be  carried  out  in  order  to  identify  the 
most appropriate sub-option(s), if any. In the meantime, quantification of the existing 
renewed  SDS  Strategy  GPP  target  in  a  Commission  Communication,  as  proposed 
under  Option  2,  may  prove  helpful  as  a  cost-effective  way  of  triggering  political 
support.  

•  Mandatory GPP 

As an alternative or in addition to mandatory targets, Option 4 provides 4 alternative 
regulatory  sub-options  also  aimed  at  raising  political  support  for  GPP.  Additional 
impact  assessment  is  needed  to  determine  whether  one  or  more  of  these  options 
could be complementary/a suitable alternative to mandatory GPP targets.  

Mandatory GPP for central government for certain product groups 

Option 4.A): Whilst such approach would yield the best results in terms of triggering 
market  transformation  and  continuous  improvement  towards  better  performing 
products,  it  would  be  limited  in  coverage.  Additional  impact  assessment  is  being 
carried out to estimate its cost-effectiveness for any product group.  

Modification of public procurement Directives 

Option 4.B), 4C) and 4D) would in any case need to be complemented with relevant 
tools and guidance on environmental criteria, as described under Option 2, including 
costs  as  described  there.  In  the  absence  thereof,  it  may  lead  to  non  transparent 
procedures  which  could  result  in  discrimination  and  reduced  competition  and 
increased  costs  for  purchasers  as  a  result  of  this.  As  regards  option  4  C)  on 
mandatory  implementation  of  environmental  management  systems,  it  would  be 
useful to examine the feasibility of applying such obligation also to subcontractors. 
Option 4 D) would imply a change of the EU rules governing structural funds. The 
Commission will further examine costs and benefits of those options before making a 
proposal, examining both subsidiarity and administrative burden. 

Modification  of  a  Commission  Directive  on  Standard  forms  for  use  in  public 
procurement 

Option  5  is  a  stand-alone  option  which  is  complementary  to  all  other  options,  as  it 
seeks to facilitate the monitoring of GPP for procedures above the thresholds of the 
Public  procurement  Directives.  Appropriate  monitoring  is  a  pre-condition  to  any 
form of political target setting and an incentive for implementation. The Commission 
proposes to carry out an additional impact assessment to assess whether to develop 
this option into an appropriate proposal. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
7. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

7.1. 

Establish suitable indicators and methods for calculating  

To identify the baseline of the renewed SDS target, according to which the average 
level of GPP in the EU should, by 2010, be at the (2006) level of the best performing 
Member  States,  it's  necessary  to  measure  the  level  of  GPP  in  2006  in  the  best 
performing Member States.  

The "level of GPP" can be assessed through several types of indicators.  

Process-oriented  indicators  allow  to  assess  for  instance  whether  a  national  GPP 
policy  has  been  established,  whether  guidance  exists,  whether  and  what  sources  of 
GPP criteria exist, levels of GPP training. The Commission will regularly calculate 
those indicators, through contacts with national GPP experts.  

Quantitative  indicators  allow  to  assess  uptake  and  progress  of  the  policy,  by 
comparing  the  level  of  GPP  (expressed  in  numbers  and  value  of  Green  tendering 
procedures)  to  the  overall  level  of  public  procurement.  To  assess  also  the  effective 
impact  on  the  supply  side,  the  Commission  proposes  to  calculate  in  addition  the 
value  of  green  contracts  concluded  as  compared  to  the  overall  value  of  public 
procurement contracts. 

The Commission  will  establish  a statistical method  for calculating those indicators. 
To  guarantee  uniform  monitoring  and  benchmarking,  the  monitoring  exercise  will 
focus on the priority product groups and corresponding core GPP criteria referred to 
under Option 3.  

Impact-oriented  indicators  allow  to  assess  the  environmental  and  financial  gains 
delivered  by  GPP.  An  example  of  such  indicator  would  be  "the  estimated 
environmental  (and  financial)  benefit  of  a  purchase  of  a  certain  "green"  product 
volume,  as  compared  to  the  purchase  of  a  similar  "neutral"  product  volume.  The 
Commission  will  develop  such  indicators  and  integrate  them  in  the  monitoring 
exercise. 

7.2. 

Core indicators 

•  Raise political profile of GPP - Indicator :  

–  number of action plans/strategies adopted and implemented by 2010.  

•  Raise,  by  2010,  the  average  level  of  GPP  in  the  EU  to  the  current  level  of  best 

performing Member States – Indicators: 

–  number  and  value  of  "green"  tendering  procedures  as  compared  to  total  number 

and value of tendering procedures 

–  value of green contracts as compared to total value of contracts  

7.3. 

Additional indicators related to Operational objectives 

•  Improve quality of GPP –Indicators :  

–  number of product groups covered by GPP criteria 

–  number of tenders compliant with public procurement legislation, resulting from 

revision of the situation in 2010  

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
7.4.  Monitoring by the EC  

The  EC  will  monitor  the  situation  in  the  best  performing  Member  States  in  2008 
(based  on  2006  figures  so  as  to  establish  the  baseline  of  the  renewed  SDS  target). 
The Commission will monitor the situation in the whole EU 27 in 2010, on the basis 
of the indicator(s) and appropriate calculation methods (under development). As the 
EC  monitor  would  take  as  a  reference  GPP  procedures  which  are  compliant  with 
recommended  GPP  criteria,  Member  States  should  be  encouraged  to  apply  those 
GPP criteria in their respective countries. This would ease the administrative burden 
for Member States, who will thus be able to focus on guidance and training. 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 1: STUDIES AND BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS CONSULTED 

Most relevant studies and background papers are:  

–  TAKE-5 study carried out for the Commission in 2005-2006 and aimed at measuring the 
state  of  play  of  GPP  in  the  EU  and  analysing  barriers  for  further  uptake  of  GPP,  final 
report August 2006 at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/studies_en.htm 

–  "Procuring the Future, the Sustainable procurement Task Force National Action Plan" and 
its underlying studies, launched 12 June 2006 to give advice to the public sector on how it 
can be amongst the EU leaders in Sustainable Procurement by 2009, more information at 
http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/government/task-
forces/procurement/index.htm 

–  2003  OECD  Report  "the  Environmental  Performance  of  Public  Procurement": 
http://www.oecd.org/document/21/0,3343,fr_2649_34487_37414933_1_1_1_1,00.html 

–  Report on "Costs and Benefits of Green Public Procurement in Europe", Öko-Institut and 

Iclei, final report July 2007; http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/index_en.htm. 

ANNEX 2 : STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION : SUMMARY 

The  TAKE-5  study  has  been  drafted  in  close  cooperation  with  Commission  services  and 
interested  parties,  in  particular  Member  State  representatives.  In  a  first  stage,  the  Study 
proposed to develop a GPP definition. Stakeholders have been involved throughout the study. 
A  workshop  was  organised  in  October  2005  by  the  UK  Department  for  Environment,  Food 
and Rural Affairs (Defra), to collect the opinions of representatives of the Member States and 
other stakeholders on the intermediary report of the TAKE-5 Study. All recognised the need 
for  improvement  of  the  situation,  through  national  guidelines  and  action  plans.  The 
intermediary report of the TAKE-5 Study was approved as a good basis for future actions and 
policies, although it was recognized that it could have given a too positive view of the level of 
GPP in the EU, due to the risk of biased answers to the questionnaire and to the fact that, even 
in  the  case  of  established  GPP,  the  identified  "green"  criteria  were  often  not  clear  or  not 
ambitious enough. All stakeholders furthermore recognized the particular role for the EU to 
provide coherent and easily accessible information, enable networking and exchange of good 
practices,  gather  evidence  on  environmental  and  economic  benefits  of  GPP,  hold  regular 
benchmarking  exercises  on  the  basis  of  tender  analysis  and  involve  the  supply  side.  As 
regards  the  identified  priority  sectors,  those  have  been  established  on  the  basis  of  the 
measurements carried out in the framework of the study, experience, practical know-how and 
analysis of the Take-5 Consortium, taking into account the environmental impact of greening, 
the availability of green versions of these products in the market, the available examples.  

A  stakeholder  meeting  was  organised  on  25  June  2007,  based  on  a  background  document 
proposing  a  definition  of  GPP  (not  only  outcome  based  but  covering  also  procedures 
including green award criteria), a list of priority product and service groups and listing main 
options  for  improvement,  including  the  voluntary  and  mandatory  measures  subject  of  the 
current  impact  assessment.  The  document  was  sent  out  to  the  "Green  public  procurement 
expert group", gathering over 80 Member States representatives in the field of GPP, as well as 
to  the  European  Union  Eco-labelling  Board  gathering  the  competent  bodies  of  the  Member 
States responsible for eco-label issues as well as relevant stakeholders (representatives from 
industry,  suppliers,  civil  society,  ngo's)  and  to  a  list  of  other  potentially  interested 
stakeholders,  in  particular  from  forestry  and  paper  sector,  Food  industry,  Textiles  industry, 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
Packaging  industry,  IT  industry,  Plastics  industry,  SMEs.  The  members  of  the  Advisory 
Committee on public procurement have also been consulted in writing.  

The web-based consultation on the proposed Sustainable Production and Consumption Action 
Plan  (closed  23/09/2007)  also  included  some  questions  as  to  the  possibility  of  making  GPP 
sectors 
mandatory,  by 
(http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/environment/sip_en.htm).  

focussing  on 

an  overall 

target  or 

specific 

setting 

In summary, the idea of setting voluntary GPP criteria was well received, subject to 

•  Need to involve industry at an early stage of the criteria setting process 

•  LCA approach 

•  Product specific approach, rather than materials (wood sector) 

•  Call for simplicity of tender documents 

•  Co-ordination with other EC initiatives 

•  Call for more guidance on LCC 

•  Strong call for more legal clarity, in particular as regards procurement of legal and 

sustainably harvested wood/wood products 

More specific comments by stakeholders and Member States: 

Construction sector  

–  "construction" cannot be considered a product group as such 

–  Need for taking into account local and climatic differences 

–  Points  at  useful  on-going  standardisation  procedures  concerning  the  environmental 

performance of buildings and construction products 

–  Focus on energy efficiency and LCC – allow "green" variants to stimulate innovation  

–  Need for training on LCA and LCC 

–  Opposed to additional third-party certification schemes  

–  Would consider modification of public procurement directives to impose in all cases award 
of  contracts  on  the  basis  of  the  economically  most  advantageous  (as  opposed  to  the 
cheapest) offer, including LCC and energy efficiency, and to require contracting authorities 
to accept variants in all cases (where relevant), to stimulate innovation 

Food and Drink industry 

–  Organic  Food  Regulation  only  considers  environmental  impact  on  Agriculture;  there  is  a 

need to also consider social and economic criteria and health issues 

American Forest and Paper Association 

–  Need to consider equivalent environmental standards and verification methods 

–  Concern over inclusion of CO² criteria for paper and wood which my be inconsistent with 

WTO 

–  Supports  a  neutral  approach  towards  various  mentioned  certification  schemes  (to  assure 

compliance with WTO) 

–  Recommends work of UK's Central Point of Expertise on Timber (CPET)  

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
CEPI 

–  welcomes a harmonised EU wide approach 

–  GPP criteria to be set for all products made from wood, ranging from paper to bio-energy, 

as well as for competing products 

–  Insists on a "risk based" approach and not a "proof all" approach  

–  Strong  call  for  more  legal  clarity  on  the  use  of  production  process  related  criteria,  raw 
material  criteria,  social  criteria,  on  the  use  of  EMS  in  criteria-setting,  on  the  way  to  use 
references to ecolabels, certification systems and third party verification  

–  Opposed to GPP award criteria (prefers minimum technical specifications) 

CITPA : International Confederation of Paper and Board Converters 

–  Packaging would be inappropriate for GPP : combining an assessment of the product and 
the packaging is complex and could lead to misconceptions, if to be included, need to base 
itself  on  full  LCA  or  require  verification  that  packaging  conforms  to  the  essential 
requirements of the Packaging and Packaging Waste directive  

Finnish Forest Industries Federation 

–  EU guidelines should be general; detailed instructions are country specific 

–  Avoid discrimination (for instance in terms of forest certification)  

Plastics Industry  

–  Favours  voluntary  GPP  approach  but  with  mandatory  GPP  criteria  and  "result  based" 

definition of GPP  

–  Use of plastics in construction, food and transport can save energy 

–  GPP to be based on all three pillars: economic, social and environmental 

PROMPTEX (Fédération européenne pour la promotion des machés publics – Textile et Cuir) 

Satisfied with the inclusion of "clothing and textiles" amongst the priority groups for which 
GPP criteria will be identified. Giving examples is absolutely necessary.  

EUAPME 

–  Is opposed to GPP if to lead to additional administrative burdens for SMEs (to provide for 

instance complex life-cycle calculations or expensive certificates) 

–  Is opposed to inclusion of full life-cycle-assessment into the definition of GPP 

–  Prioritisation should take into account impact on SMEs 

–  Difficulty to continuous update GPP criteria 

–  Opposed to recommended use of national databases 

–  Prefers minimum environmental technical specifications over award criteria  

–  Opposed to additional third-party certification schemes; recommends use of EPDs  

UNIEP(International Federation of Painting and Decorating Associations) 

–  Raises potential difficulties for SMEs 

–  Avoid linking GPP to the general activities of a company, as this would adversely affect 

SMES 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
–  Life-cycle certificates are not appropriate in relation to the services sector 

–  Favours voluntary promotion of environmental standards by business over GPP 

Finland 

–  Calls for greater legal clarity 

–  In the field of wood products, one cannot allow only certified wood; further examination of 

this issue needed, involving all market players  

France  

Against the inclusion of "medical devices" as a priority group, too sector specific 

Hungary 

The  Environment  Ministry  welcomes  proposal,  but  proposes  to  exclude  the  notion  of 
"utilities" in the definition 

The  Economy  and  Finance  Ministry  considers  that  concrete  legal  obligations  in  the  field  of 
GPP would increase the efficiency of the policy. The Ministry further agrees with proposed 
selection of priority sectors and welcomes the process for identifying GPP criteria. As regards 
monitoring,  the  Ministry  would  support  a  modification  of  the  Standard  forms  for  public 
procurement. The Ministry welcomes the additional guidance proposed. The Ministry agrees 
with differentiated and gradually implemented voluntary targets for central and local/regional 
government. However, when setting targets, account would need to be taken of the fact that 
GPP may imply some additional burdens, which would weigh in particular in Member States 
with less advanced economies.  

Italy 

–  Suggests to raise political profile by linking GPP to financial support schemes  

–  Co-operation with the Member States to be based on efficient working methods, involving 

stakeholders 

–  Opposed  to  the  inclusion  of  medical  devices  amongst  the  "priority"  groups;  could  be 

replaced waste management or urban management services 

Slovak Republic 

–  need to clarify EU funding possibilities for implementing GPP 

–  welcomes work on a uniform methodology for monitoring GPP 

–  questions effectiveness of a voluntary approach 

UK 

–  Proposes  to  replace,  in  the  definition,  the  notion  of  "public/semi-public  authorities"  by 

"contracting authorities" 

–  Unnecessary  to  keep  as  a  minimum  'beyond  legal  requirement',  because  some  Member 

States may have very restrictive legal requirements; 

–  Asks for clarification of the reasons for choosing the proposed definition and the reason for 
rejecting  the  earlier  "outcome  based"  definition  agreed  upon  in  the  framework  of  the 
"Take-5" study 

–  Would favour a structured process of championing best practice 

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
–  GPP  criteria  to  be  based  on  cost/benefits  evidence  and  broad  stakeholder  consultation, 
linked to other EU policies, and to ensure legal compliance – leaving it up to the Member 
States  to  mandate  their  use  –  draws  the  attention  to  several  risks  resulting  from  using 
complex ecolabel criteria not originally drafted for the purpose of GPP 

–  Offers to share experience, in particular as regards timber procurement, as there is a clear 
need  to  agree  on  minimum  standards  for  this  commodity  and  assist  Member  States  in 
adopting harmonized policies 

–  Welcomes examples of GPP criteria for 4 product 

–  Services may call for a different, case-by-case approach 

–  Welcomes co-operation with Member States 

–  Welcomes  the  quantification  of  the  SDS  target  but  does  not  see  a  need  to  differentiate 
between central government and local government nor to set targets for different product 
groups  –  Member  States  should  be  encouraged  to  set  their  own  targets  enabling  them  to 
contribute to the EU target 

–  Welcomes EU activity to benchmark performance and champion best practice 

–  Proposes  to  develop  impact  related  indicators  (for  example  educed  CO2  emissions  from 
the  government  estate);  notion  of  "benchmarks"  preferred  over  "targets"  to  underline 
voluntary character and allow assessment of progress 

–  Potential administrative burden due to data collection; 

–  Welcomes policy coherence 

–  Welcomes economic and legal guidance on boundary issues 

Romania 

–  welcomes the proposal, considering however that a regulatory approach would yield better 

results  

–  welcomes idea of giving examples of GPP criteria Agrees with proposed indicators raises 

the need to address the issue of verification of compliance  

ANNEX 3 – INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS 

A  Government  Procurement  Agreement  (GPA)  has  been  signed  in  the  framework  of  the 
World Trade Organisation (WTO). It is a so-called plurilateral agreement, characterised by a 
narrower group of signatories than general WTO agreements. 

The  GPA  itself  does  not  contain  any  reference  to  environmental  protection.  However,  the 
Sixth Recital of the Preamble to the WTO Agreement recognises the need to act in accordance 
with  the  principle  of  sustainable  development  and  to  protect  and  preserve  the  environment. 
Therefore, it is broadly accepted that the GPA allows contracting entities to take into account 
environmental  considerations  when  defining  technical  specifications  (including  process  and 
production  methods)  and  selection  and  award  criteria,  on  condition  that  they  are  not 
discriminatory, and are sufficiently objective and verifiable. 

One sector with particular international relevance is the wood sector. In this sector, frequent 
use is made of international concepts of "legality" and "sustainability" and of many, slightly 
differing, international certification schemes attesting the legal and/or sustainable origin of the 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
harvested wood. In relation to this sector, it needs to be clarified whether and to what extent 
the concepts of "legality" and "sustainability" can be used to define GPP criteria and which 
types  of  proof  or  certification  can  be  asked  from  bidders  to  attest  compliance  with  those 
criteria.  Many  different  international  certification  schemes  exist  and  clarity  needs  to  be 
created as to  the potential reference to those  schemes in the  field  of GPP.  The  EU Forestry 
Action  Plan  adopted  in  2006  foresees  as  one  of  its  actions  co-operation  and  exchange  of 
information between Member States in view of reducing market distortions due to preference 
given  to  different  types  of  certification  schemes  by  different  Member  States.  The  notion  of 
sustainable harvesting basically refers to compliance with environmental and social aspects of 
the harvesting process, whereas the notion of legality refers to compliance with elements of 
national  legislation  during  harvesting.  Insofar  as  national  legislation  may  also  include 
environmental and social aspects, both concepts can be overlapping; they are both used in the 
field of Green and/or sustainable public procurement. In relation to the concept if "legality", 
account  needs  to  be  taken  of  the  EU  FLEGT  action  plan  (Forest  Law  Enforcement 
Governance  and  Trade)  which  seeks  to  reduce  the  importation  of  illegally  harvested  wood 
(tropical wood)  in  the EU,  by  concluding bilateral agreements with  developing countries. If 
public  authorities  in  the  EU  are  increasingly  buying  legally  logged  wood,  this  may  be  an 
important incentive for trader partner countries to sign those agreements.  

Another international issue is the fact that GPP may have the effect of making market access 
more difficult for products from developing countries, which are less inclined to comply with 
certain environmental standards. However, this effect may be mitigated by the fact that, at an 
international  level,  the  Marrakech  Task  force  on  Sustainable  Procurement  seeks  to  develop 
and  implement  a  training  toolkit  on  SPP  in  12  to  14  developing  countries,  with  the  aim  of 
drawing conclusions for further uptake and dissemination in more developing countries at the 
WSD in 2010 (more information at: http://marrakech.taskforces.ewindows.eu.org/).  

EN 

49 

   EN