Commission staff working document - Accompanying the Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the State of Implementation of Integrated Product Policy COM(2009)693 final
Date: 2009-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumption, environmental policy, environmental protection, goods and services, product life, production, report

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION  

Brussels, 21.12.2009 
SEC(2009)1707 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying  

the Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the 
European and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions 

On the State of Implementation of Integrated Product Policy 

COM(2009)693 final 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying 

the Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the 
European and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions 

On the State of Implementation of Integrated Product Policy 

ANNEX I-GLOSSARY-MAIN ACRONYMS 

CSD: UN Commission on Sustainable Development 

EIPRO : Environmental Impact of PROducts (JRC Study) 

ELCD: European Reference Life Cycle Database 

ELV: End-of-Life Vehicles Directive 

EMAS: Environmental Management and Audit Scheme 

ETAP: Environmental Technologies Action Programme 

EU: European Union 

GPP: Green Public Procurement  

ILCD: International Reference Life Cycle Data System 

IMPRO: IMprovement of PROducts (JRC Study) 

IPP: Integrated Product Policy 

ISO: International Standard Organization 

JRC-IES: Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability 

JRC-IPTS: Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies 

LCA: Life Cycle Assessment 

LCIA: Life Cycle Impact Assessment 

MBIs: Market Based Instruments 

ROHS: Restriction of the use of certain Hazardous Substances Directive 

REACH: Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemical substances  

SCP/SIP: Sustainable Consumption and Production/Sustainable Industrial Policy 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
SDS: Sustainable Development Strategy 

SME: Small and Medium Enterprise 

WEEE: Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive 

EN 

3 

   EN 

ANNEX II 

INTRODUCTION 

On  7th  February  2001,  the  European  Commission  adopted  a  Green  Paper  on  Integrated 
Product  Policy  (IPP)1  with  the  objective  of  launching  a  debate  on  the  role  and  possible 
measures  that  could  be  taken  at  European  Union  level.  Based  on  its  Green  Paper  and  the 
following stakeholder consultations, the European Commission published the Communication 
on IPP in June 2003.2 IPP seeks to minimise the environmentally negative impacts of products 
by looking at all phases of a product’s life-cycle and taking action where those impacts can be 
reduced  best  and  most  cost–effectively.  In  accordance  with  five  key  principles,  and  taking 
into  account  the  wide  variety  of  available  products  and  stakeholders  involved,  the  IPP 
approach calls for the use of a combination of different policy instruments. 

Many  concerns  have  been  raised  -both  internationally  and  at  the  European  level-  about  the 
increasing unsustainable consumption and production patterns, which are at the roots of many 
environmental problems through excessive quantities of natural resources consumed and the 
ensuing  degradation  of  water,  air,  soil  and  bio-systems.  Unnecessarily  high  rates  of  waste 
generated,  greenhouse  gas  emissions  and  loss  of  biodiversity  result  from  this.  These 
increasing trends stand in the way of sustainable development, threatening to compromise the 
needs of less developed regions and future generations. To achieve sustainable development -
one  of  the  fundamental  objectives  of  the  European  Union-  economic  growth  needs  to  be 
decoupled  from  further  environmental  degradation.  The  European  Commission  has  been 
working  actively  to  develop  innovative  policies  in  this  field,  and  IPP  is  one  of  the  key 
initiatives, being an integral part of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy. 

In its conclusion the Council welcomed the IPP Communication, supporting its principles and 
the European Commission "intention to encourage relevant actors to include in their policies 
objectives  to  reduce  environmental  impacts  of  all  products  aiming  at  a  continuous 
improvement  of products  and  services produced in  their respective sectors".3 The European 
Parliament, in its resolution,4 welcomed as well the IPP Communication but regretted that "it 
provides  only  limited  guidance  on  how  to  move  society  in  the  direction  of  truly  sustainable 
systems of product development and design." 

In  its  Communication  the  European  Commission  undertook  to  “...  prepare  a  report  on 
progress  being  made  in  implementing  IPP  and  submit  it  to  the  European  Parliament  and 
Council”.  The  present  staff  working  document  accompanies  and  completes 
the 
Communication  containing  the  report,  providing  a  more  complete  overview  of  IPP 
implementation  not  only  at  the  EU  level,  but  also  in  Member  States,  and  by  stakeholders, 
including industry and civil society organizations. It is based on information collected under 
the study "Reporting on the Implementation of Integrated Product Policy",5 commissioned by 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

COM (2001) 68. 
COM (2003) 302. 
Council Conclusions of 27 October 2003. 
European Parliament Resolution (2004) 0349. 
See http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/studiesevents.htm 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
the European Commission in 2008, which has taken into consideration the list of potential IPP 
policies,  actions,  and  measures  outlined  in  the  final  report  by  the  Working  Group  on  IPP 
Reporting  Formats,  submitted  to  the  Commission  in  December  2006  (WGRF,  2006).  It 
furthermore gives account of subsequent related achievements at EU level. 

In  particular,  the  European  Commission  presented,  in  July  2008,  an  Action  Plan  on 
Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy (SCP/SIP),6 which 
at  its  core  establishes  an  integrated  framework  to  improve  the  energy  and  environmental 
performance of products and foster their uptake by consumers. 

The structure of this working document follows the recommendations of the Working Group 
on IPP reporting formats and is based on the structure of the IPP Communication: 

(1) 

IPP approach 

(2) 

EU IPP strategy 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

Establishing the framework conditions for continuous environmental improvement 

Developing a focus on particular products 

Co-ordination and integration 

1. 

IPP APPROACH 

IPP  is  based  on  five  key  principles,  which  are:  a)  life-cycle  thinking,  b)  working  with  the 
market,  c)  stakeholder  involvement,  d)  continuous  improvement  and  e)  a  variety  of  policy 
instruments.  This  section  analyses  the  integration  of  these  guiding  principles  by  different 
stakeholders in recent years. 

(a) 

Life-cycle thinking 

Life-cycle  thinking  is  the  consideration  of  the  supply  chains,  use,  as  well  as  the  end  of  life 
management associated the provision of goods and services (collectively termed products) – 
sometimes  called  "from  cradle  to  grave".  The  environmental  impacts  and  the  resources 
consumed associated with a product’s life cycle are assessed. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is 
one  tool,  standardised  in  ISO14040/44,  that  quantitatively  supports  life-cycle  thinking.  By 
taking a life-cycle approach, the aim is to help avoid the shifting of burdens – from one stage 
in the life-cycle such as "use" to another such as "production", from one country to another 
(possibly outside of the EU), as well as from one impact category such as climate change to 
another such as increased land use or emissions of carcinogenic substances. 

Various  policies  and  legal  instruments  at  the  EU  level  in  2003  already  integrated  life-cycle 
thinking  to  a  varying  extent,  e.g.  the  Eco-label  Regulation,  the  EMAS  Regulation,  the 
Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste, the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment 
(WEEE) Directive, the End-of-Life Vehicles Directive (ELV), the Batteries Directive and the 
RoHS Directive.7 Following the IPP Communication, life-cycle thinking has been taken up as 

6 
7 

COM (2008) 397. 
Regulation  (EC)  1980/2000  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  a  revised  Community 
eco-label award and scheme; Regulation (EC) 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
a  core  element  in  the  Thematic  Strategies  on  the  Sustainable  Use  of  Natural  Resources.8 
Subsequently, it was carried further as a central component of the SCP/SIP Action Plan and 
the  proposed  integrated  and  dynamic  policy  framework  for  smarter  consumption  and  better 
products. In particular, it is a basic principle of the Ecodesign Directive, which has recently 
been  extended  to  energy-related  products,9  and  it  has  been  taken  up  in  the  revised  Ecolabel 
Regulation,  the  revised  Directive  on  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings,10  and  the  revised 
Waste  Framework  Directive.  Through  the  “Impact  Assessment”  process  life-cycle  thinking 
has  become  a  central  consideration  of  new  European  Commission 
initiatives  on 
environmental product, resources and waste policy and legislation. 

An  important  initiative  directly  resulting  from  the  IPP  Communication  is  the  “European 
Platform  on  Life  Cycle  Assessment”,11  which  is  managed  by  the  European  Commission’s 
Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability (JRC-IES) together with 
the  DG  Environment,  as  explained  in  paragraph  3)  (b).  This  helps  support  the  scientific 
robustness, consistency, and quality-assurance of data, methods, and assessments required to 
support life-cycle thinking and assessment in policy. 

The  life-cycle  thinking  is  also  applied  increasingly  in  the  national  policies  and  measures  of 
different  Member  States,  but  each  Member  States  has  a  different  way  of  integrating  this 
aspect. Collected evidence indicates that product policies and related actions currently being 
implemented (or planned) in most of the Member States integrate a life-cycle approach. 

Some  European  consumer  organisations  have  acknowledged  the  importance  of  informing 
consumers  about  products'  impacts  during  their  whole  life-cycle  and  different  stakeholders 
from  the  industry  (manufacturers,  retailers,  trade  organisations,  recyclers,  waste  manager 
associations, etc.) support an approach that takes account of competitiveness issues and looks 
at reducing environmental impacts where they are most appropriate and effective in the life-
cycle of a product. As far as industry is concerned, awareness regarding life-cycle thinking in 
certain  SMEs  is  less  advanced,  even  though  there  are  large  differences  depending  on  the 
specific  position  of  the  enterprise  in  the  product  supply  chain,  sector,  product  group,  and 
country. 

(b)  Working with the market 

The IPP Communication calls for setting appropriate incentives so that the market moves in a 
more  sustainable  direction  by  encouraging  the  supply  and  demand  of  greener  products.  The 
European  Commission  has  promoted  and  implemented  measures  targeting  both  the  supply 
side (development of more energy and resource efficient products by means of directives such 
as the Ecodesign Directive) and the demand side (mandatory Energy Labelling, and voluntary 

allowing voluntary participation by organizations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme 
(EMAS);  Directive  94/62/EC  on  Packaging  and  Packaging  Waste;  Directive  2002/96/EC  of  the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  Waste  Electrical  and  Electronic  Equipment;  Directive 
2000/53/EC  on  End-of  life  vehicles;  Directive  91/157/EEC  on  batteries  and  accumulators  containing 
certain dangerous substances; Directive 2002/95/EC on the Restriction of the use of certain hazardous 
substances in electrical and electronic equipment ;  
COM (2005) 670. 
Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the 
setting of Ecodesign requirements for energy-related products 
Directive  2002/91/EC  of  the  European  parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  December  2002,  on  the 
energy performance of buildings. O.J. L 1/65 of 4.1.2003). 
See http://lct.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eplca 

8 
9 

10 

11 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                                                                                                                         
 
Ecolabel  to  support  consumer  choice  for  greener  products,  addressing  public  demand  by 
promoting  Green  Public  Procurement  -  GPP),  largely  building  on  the  principle  of  working 
with the market. The SCP/SIP Action Plan integrates this approach further by providing for, 
on one hand, measures to promote the supply of more energy and resource efficient products 
and, on the other hand, to support demand through improved availability of green products to 
better  informed  consumers  (via  Energy  Label,  Ecolabel  and  the  Retail  Forum,  for  instance) 
and GPP. The European Commission also proposed to harmonise at which performance level 
Member  States  would  grant  financial  incentives  for  environmentally  highly  performing 
products  or  provide  for  'green'  public  procurement,  so  as  to  fully  use  the  potential  of  the 
Internal  Market.  So  far,  it  seems  that  the  focus  –both  at  Member  States  and  EU  level-  has 
been on the supply side and the public demand side, as well as on labelling as an instrument to 
address  private  demand.  Further  promoting  "green"  private  demand  appears  to  offer 
significant additional potential. 

Most  Member  States  implement  the  “working  with  the  market”  principle  to  some  extent. 
Some  Member  States  such  as  France  or  the  United  Kingdom  take  stronger  action  to  drive 
demand  for  greener  products  and  by  doing  so  promote  greater  efficiency  of  products.  To 
increase demand, Member States can either use product policy, procurement policy, financial 
incentives for greener products or fiscal policy to increase the price of energy or resources - 
and  so  increase  the  savings  from  more  efficient  products.  The  European  Commission  is 
investigating  the  benefits  of  the  use  of  financial  incentives  for  products,  an  area  where 
common actions across Member States would drive the market. In addition, the use of price-
mechanisms could be better coordinated through IPP. 

(c) 

Stakeholder involvement 

Another important principle present in EU policy developments and also included in the IPP 
Communication  is  to  involve  all  stakeholders  during  the  different  stages  of  policy 
development and implementation as well as to encourage co-operation among stakeholders in 
general.  Stakeholder  involvement  has  been  important  during  the  implementation  of  the  IPP 
Communication.  For  instance,  the  IPP  Regular  Meetings,  organised  bi-annually  by  the 
European Commission with the Member States representatives and key stakeholders, provide 
a forum to report and inform the Member States and stakeholders on the IPP related activities 
of  the  European  Commission.  It  also  serves  for  an  exchange  of  information  on  the  actions 
taken  by  the  Member  States  and  other  stakeholders  in  this  direction.  Furthermore,  active 
stakeholder  participation  was  also  observed  during  the  identification  and  execution  of 
voluntary pilot projects to demonstrate how IPP can work in practice. 

Another  example  is  the  elaboration  of  the  handbook  of  technical  guidance  documents  for 
LCA  as  part  of  the  European  Platform  on  Life  Cycle  Assessment,  both  of  which  were 
foreseen  in  the  IPP  Communication  as  deliverables.  The  developments  involve  regular 
stakeholder dialogue and input including  16  formal  agreements  with  key  European  Industry 
Associations, Memorandum of Understanding with several key trade partners (China, Japan, 
Brazil, among others), and 2 international advisory groups (tool and database developers, and 
life cycle impact assessment methodology providers). 

Most  Member  States  consider  that  the  level  of  involvement  of  stakeholders  in  relevant 
national  policies  and  measures  is  generally  good.  In  some  Member  States  (i.e.  Germany), 
stakeholders  consultation  dates  back  to  the  70s,  and  this  experience  has  been  replicated  in 
many  Member  States  with  the  establishment  of  national  dialogue  processes  or  platforms  on 
SCP  with  all  relevant  stakeholder  groups  (France,  Belgium,  Netherlands,  Sweden).  In  the 

EN 

7 

   EN 

United  Kingdom,  different  stakeholder  groups  are  involved  in  the  design  of  policy 
instruments  and  systematic  database  of  stakeholders  in  the  context  of  SCP  has  been 
developed. 

(d) 

Continuous improvement 

Improvements can often be made to decrease a product’s environmental impact across its life-
cycle, whether in design, manufacture, use or disposal, taking into account the parameters set 
by the market. This philosophy underpins the IPP Communication and many of the initiatives 
undertaken by the European Commission in this context, such as the Ecodesign Directive, the 
Ecolabel, the EMAS Regulations (regarding the improvement of organizations' environmental 
management), the Green Public Procurement Communication as well as other elements of the 
SCP/SIP Action Plan. 

The  continuous  improvement  principle  is  embedded  in  the  Ecodesign  Directive  and  -in  line 
with  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan-  is  further  stressed  in  its  application  by  the  definition  of 
voluntary  benchmarks  to  complete  binding  requirements  in  its  implementing  measures. 
Furthermore, some Member States have institutionalised the principle, which has become part 
of  the  national  Sustainable  Development  Strategies,  such  as  for  instance  in  Finland  and 
France. 

Furthermore,  the  European  Commission  is  seeking  to  identify  and  stimulate  actions  on 
products  with  the  greatest  potential  for  environmental  improvement.  To  this  end,  two  IPP 
initiatives,  the  EIPRO  and  the  environmental  IMprovement  of  PROducts  (IMPRO)  studies 
coordinated  by  the  Joint  Research  Centre,  Institute  for  Prospective  Technological  Studies 
(JRC-IPTS),12 aim to identify products having the greatest environmental impact from a life-
cycle  perspective  and  possible  ways  in  which  the  life-cycle  environmental  impacts  can  be 
reduced  for  some  of  these  products.  Based  on  the  results,  the  European  Commission  is 
developing  policy  measures  for  the  products  identified  to  have  the  greatest  potential  for 
environmental improvement. 

(e) 

A variety of policy instruments 

The  IPP  approach  requires  a  number  of  different  instruments  in  reason  of  the  variety  of 
products available in the market and the variety of stakeholders involved. These instruments 
range  from  voluntary  initiatives  to  regulations  and  from  the  local  to  the  international  scale. 
The tendency is to work with a combination of voluntary approaches (such as Eco-label and 
EMAS Regulations) and mandatory measures (such as Ecodesign, Energy Labelling, Energy 
Performance  of  Buildings,  RoHS  and  WEEE  Directives).  As  some  tools  for  promoting 
greener  production  and  consumption  existed  prior  to  the  formulation  of  IPP,  such  as  the 
European  Eco-label,  the  real  challenge  of  IPP  implementation  was  to  use  a  coherent  and 
mutually-enforcing  set  of  existing  and  new  tools  to  achieve  the  policy  objectives.  This 
challenge  has  been  taken  up  by  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan,  which  provides  a  coherent 
framework  integrating  different  policy  instruments  and  initiatives  (both  mandatory  and 
voluntary)  to  promote  resource  efficient  and  eco-friendly  products  and  raise  consumer 
awareness. 

The  Member  States  apply  different  instruments  to  implement  IPP  and  to  support  product, 
technology,  and  systems  level  innovations.  Green  public  procurement  is  the  most  popular 

12 

See http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/identifying.htm 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
instrument used in Member States, followed by labelling and other informative instruments. 
Life-cycle  thinking,  research  and  awareness  of  Ecodesign  are  not  equally  developed  in  the 
Member States assessed, while Environmental Management Systems (ISO 14000 and EMAS) 
seem to be lagging behind.  

2. 

THE EU IPP STRATEGY 

The  EU  IPP  primary  aim  is  to  reduce  the  environmental  impacts  from  products  throughout 
their  life-cycle,  harnessing,  where  possible,  a  market  driven  approach,  within  which 
competitiveness concerns are integrated. To achieve this objective, the EU IPP is contributing 
to  addressing  the  environmental  challenges  identified  in  both  the  Sustainable  Development 
Strategy  and  the  Sixth  Environment  Action  Programme.  Without  a  product  dimension  the 
chances of meeting them will be smaller. IPP is also a key part of the implementing measures 
for  the  Thematic  Strategy  on  the  Sustainable  Use  of  Resources  and  that  on  Prevention  and 
Recycling of Waste and closely linked to the Environmental Technologies Action Programme 
(ETAP). The IPP principles have been taken up and carried over by the SCP/SIP Action Plan. 
Internationally, IPP and in particular the SCP/SIP Action Plan constitutes a major input to the 
ten-year framework of programmes on sustainable production and consumption agreed to be 
developed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in September 
2002, and which will be developed in consultation with regions and stakeholders throughout 
the CSD 18-19 cycle.13 

In  implementing  the  IPP  strategy,  the  European  Commission  has  increasingly  focussed  on 
strengthening  co-ordination  and  coherence  between  existing  environment-related  product 
policy  instruments  to  fully  exploit  the  potential  synergies  and  to  encourage  their  integrated 
development, as documented through the adoption and approach of the SCP/SIP Action Plan. 

At the national level, only some Member States (Finland, Sweden, Belgium, and Poland) have 
specific  national  strategies  for  IPP  and  only  two  of  them  (Poland  and  Belgium)  use 
specifically the term IPP. Most Member States include IPP principles in their national (or sub-
national)  programmes  on  SCP  and  only  two  Member  States  (Portugal  and  UK)  have 
developed plans for a specific IPP strategy. Some Member States, considered frontrunners in 
environmental product policy such as Denmark (which had a specific IPP strategy until 2001) 
and  Sweden  have  progressively  shifted  their  approaches:  the  specific  IPP  strategy  is  now 
integrated or being integrated in other framework approaches addressing SCP (Denmark), or 
in  other  strategies,  for  instance  the  Swedish  Sustainable  Development,  Governmental  Bills 
and Communications Strategy. 

In some Member States, regions sometimes go ahead of the national policies as concerns IPP. 
This is the case of the Basque government in Spain, where efforts have been put during the 
last  years  to  develop  several  actions  in  the  key  areas  of  IPP  such  as  eco-design,  LCA,  and 
GPP with the aim of promoting these new environmental issues among all economic actors. 
Another good example is the Federal State of Bavaria, in Germany, where an IPP unit exists 
since  2000  in  the  Bavarian  State  Ministry  of  the  Environment,  Health,  and  Consumer 
Protection (StMUGV). IPP became a separate field of activity in the Environmental Pact of 
Bavaria, between this state and the business community. The main objective of the IPP related 
activities is to develop and test IPP methodology and instruments. 

13 

Paragraph  14  of  the  WSSD  –  Johannesburg  Plan  of  Implementation  and  paragraph  8  of  the  General 
Affairs and External Relations Council’s conclusions of 30.10.2002 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
Several  companies  and  industrial  federations  are  committed  to  reduce  the  impact  of  their 
operation  and  products.  The  related  activities  usually  include  the  application  of  instruments 
such  as  Environmental  Managements  Systems,  the  adoption  of  voluntary  agreements  and 
sustainable development strategies aiming at improving product stewardship. Some recyclers 
and  waste  managers  are  involved  in  voluntary  agreements  and  the  elaboration  of  guidelines 
for the optimal use of waste. 

In  consumers  associations,  the  IPP  related  strategies  usually  aim  at  increasing  consumer 
awareness  about  the  impact  of  consumption  on  the  environment  and  to  induce  changes 
towards sustainable consumption patterns. 

3. 

ESTABLISHING THE FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS FOR CONTINUOUS ENVIRONMENTAL 
IMPROVEMENT 

(a) 

Tools for creating the Right Economic and Legal Framework 

The 2003 IPP Communication requires the European Commission to continue to promote and 
encourage the use of fiscal measures, such as environmental taxes and incentives. The use of 
Market  Based  Instruments  (MBIs)  in  environmental  policy  is  continuously  taken  up  in  EU 
policy  such  as  the  Sixth  Environment  Action  Programme,  the  renewed  EU  Sustainable 
Development  Strategy,  and  the  Lisbon  Strategy.  Furthermore,  in  2007  the  European 
Commission adopted a Green Paper on the use of MBIs in environment policies, and launched 
a broad consultation on their use in various fields. Nevertheless, the EU’s role in practice has 
been  rather  small  to  date  and  IPP  does  not  seem  to  have  been  a  driver  for  any  recent 
developments  in  the  field  of  environmental-related  taxes  and  incentives  at  the  European 
Union level. 

There  is  a  wide  variety  of  product-related  taxes  and  incentives  used  in  different  Member 
States. Better and most extended examples are related to waste management charges laying in 
regulatory requirements for producers (producers’ responsibility) such as the ELV Directive, 
WEEE  Directive,  and  the  Directive  on  Packaging  and  Packaging  waste.  Most  recent 
developments  include  eco-taxes  on  cars  and  fuels,  and  also  tax  incentives  to  promote  the 
purchase of greener products such as energy efficient appliances and equipment. 

Concerning voluntary agreements, the most notable development at EU level was the setting 
up  of  a  Retail  Forum,  as  one  element  of  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan,  aiming  to  reduce  the 
environmental footprint of the retail sector and its supply chain, to promote more sustainable 
products  and  to  better  inform  consumers.  In  parallel,  the  food  industry  established  the  EU 
Food SCP roundtable to develop a common methodology to assess the environmental impacts 
of food and drink products. In the context of implementing the Ecodesign Directive, voluntary 
agreements can play a role as an alternative to mandatory requirements being set through an 
implementing measure.  

As  regards  standardisation,  implementation  of  the  Ecodesign  Directive  is  linked  with  a 
number of mandates being given to European standardisation bodies, in particular in relation 
to  testing  and  verification  of  compliance.  A  consortium  of  European  environmental  NGOs 
named ECOS was established in 2002 to ensure the integration of environmental aspects into 
standardisation ("greening standardisation"). 

Member States such as Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and France have 
been  quite  active  setting  voluntary  agreements  with  the  industry.  In  most  cases,  active 

EN 

10 

   EN 

dialogues  between  governments  and  different  sectoral  associations  have  been  established  in 
order to agree on specific actions and targets to be achieved. 

(b) 

Promoting the Application of Life Cycle Thinking 

Notably,  as  a  result  of  the  IPP  Communication,  the  European  Commission  has  created  a 
platform  to  facilitate  communication  and  exchange  of  information  regarding  life  cycle 
assessment  (LCA)  in  business  and  public  authorities,  by  providing  reference  data  and 
recommended methods for LCA studies. The “European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment” 
is  a  project  of  the  European  Commission,  managed  by  the  JRC-IES  together  with  DG 
Environment. Its main deliverables to date are: 

•  a  technical  guidance  handbook  on  LCA  foreseen  in  the  IPP  Communication,  to 
become the basis for an International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD); 

•  the  European  Reference  Life  Cycle  Database  (ELCD),  with  over  350  quality-
assured  Life  Cycle  emission/resource  consumption  (Inventory)  data  sets  with 
European market scope for core materials, energy carriers and services primarily 
provided by working together with industry associations; 

•  the  Recommended  Life  Cycle  Impact  Assessment  (LCIA)  methods  and  an  LCA 
information  hub  to  ease  the  access  to  data  and  methods  and  to  facilitate 
knowledge exchange. 

Having  its  foundation  in  the  IPP  Communication,  the  European  Platform  on  LCA  supports 
also the implementation of the Thematic Strategies on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste 
and  on  the  Sustainable  Use  of  Natural  Resources,  as  well  as  the  implementation  of  the 
SCP/SIP  Action  Plan  and  life  cycle  thinking  in  a  growing  number  of  other  policies.  It  is 
worthwhile  noting  the  significant  participation  of  European  industry  associations  in  the 
European Platform on LCA.14 

Furthermore,  the  IPP  working  group  on  environmental  product  information  examined  the 
issue  of  life-cycle  information  throughout  the  product  chain.  The  final  report  builds  up  a 
practical  vision  of  what  actions  governments  and  stakeholders  can  take  to  make  life-cycle-
based  product  information  a  real  force  for  environmental  improvement,  working  in 
combination with the toolbox of other IPP measures and activities.15 

Member States such as the Netherlands, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Sweden and France can 
be  considered  as  frontrunners  in  the  implementation  of  life-cycle  thinking,  based  on  the 
variety  of  measures  implemented  and  tools  developed  to  promote  the  application  of  this 
principle. Italy, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and Poland are also quite active. In the rest of 
the Member States related activities are very limited or not existing. In some Member States 

14 

15 

Some 16 industry associations are member of the platform Advisory Group, which mainly focuses on 
advice  on  the  development  of  the  recommended  LCA  methods  of  the  ILCD  Handbook,  the 
development of the ILCD data set documentation format, the list of reference elementary flows, and of 
the recommended LCIA methods and factors. The members of the group commit to provide life cycle 
inventory (LCI) data sets of their key products (goods or services) and/or processes for publication in 
the ELCD database. See http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/lcainfohub/index.vm. 
To access the final report : http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pdf/20070115_report.pdf 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
(Denmark, Hungary, Italy, Sweden or Germany), LCA research centres have been created to 
develop LCA databases and development of specific tools.16 

In  general,  the  life-cycle  thinking  is  well  known  in  many  industries  such  as  packaging, 
chemical,  plastics  or  the  metal  industry,  and  large  companies.  For  instance,  Plastics Europe 
promotes the use of LCA to take more informed decisions through a better understanding of 
the human health and environmental impacts of products, processes, and activities relating to 
plastics.17 Nevertheless, the practical application of this principle is still limited and it can be 
particularly  challenging  for  certain  SMEs.  The  results  of  LCA  studies  are  mainly  used 
internally  for  product 
in  some  cases  for  external 
communication. 

improvement  (eco-design)  and 

Concerning Environmental Managements Systems, there are certain actions presented in the 
IPP Communication to be carried out by the Commission that refer specifically to EMAS, the 
EU voluntary instrument which acknowledges organisations that improve their environmental 
performance  on  a  continuous  basis.  As  part  of  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan,  the  EMAS 
Regulation has been revised, with the objective of increasing the uptake of the scheme, and 
hence overall increasing its positive environmental impact. 

All  Member  States  have  measures  in  place  to  promote  EMAS.  Particularly  active  in  the 
implementation  of  activities  on  a  national  level  to  promote  the  EMAS  scheme  are  Austria, 
Belgium,  the  Czech  Republic,  Germany,  Italy,  and  Spain.  EMAS  proved  to  be  less  popular 
with  business.  Some  companies  apply  Environmental  Managements  Systems  according  to 
both the ISO 14001 standard and the EMAS, while others have developed their EMS at site 
level  and  carry  out  site  certifications  according  to  ISO  14001  (in  some  cases  also  EMAS 
verifications). In general, due to EMAS imposing stricter requirements and ISO providing for 
global  application,  the  uptake  of  ISO  14001  certification  is  higher,  especially  for  global 
companies. 

As regards to product design obligations, a number of policies and initiatives of the European 
Commission have close relevance and direct influence on the improvement of product design. 
Adding  to  those  adopted  prior  to  the  2003  IPP  Communication  (e.g.  ELV,  Energy 
Performance  in  Buildings,  WEEE  and  RoHS  Directives,  EU  Ecolabel  Regulation  and  the 
Directive  on  batteries  and  accumulators)  policies  devised  in  the  following  include  the 
Ecodesign  Directive  and  the  REACH  Regulation.  Regarding  the  Ecodesign  Directive,  a 
number  of  implementing  measures  have  been  adopted  in  2008  and  2009  to  lay  down 
Ecodesign  requirements  for  energy  using  products,  from  standby  over  domestic  lighting,  to 
televisions.  The  Ecodesign  Directive  can  be  considered  the  legislative  cornerstone  of  the 
SCP/SIP Action Plan and its scope has been extended from energy using products to energy 
related  products.  A  possible  further  extension  beyond  energy-related  products  will  be 
considered at its review in 2012. 

Certain  environmental  organisations  are  engaged  in  contributing  and  supporting  the 
implementation of the Ecodesign Directive, as it is a high priority in most NGOs working in 
related  areas,  due  to  its  high  potential  beneficial  impact.  Business  Association  as  well  are 
contributing  to  the  implementation  of  the  Ecodesign  Directive  (e.g.  CECED,  Orgalime, 
EICTA, Digital Europe and CELMA). 

16 

17 

See for instance the Swedish CPM (LCA-competence-centra) at Chalmers www.cpm.chalmers.se, co-
financed by the government and the industry, with major Swedish companies involved. 
See Eco-profiles, http://www.plasticseurope.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1170. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

                                                 
Product  design  is  also  a  priority  for  certain  retailers  (e.g.  IKEA  and  H&M)  and  business 
associations  (e.g.  CEFIC,  ACE,  CITPA,  CEPI,  EuRP,  and  RREUSE).  In  the  electrical  and 
electronic  sector,  an  increased  awareness  is  observed  resulting  from  the  related  EC 
legislations mentioned (RoHS, Ecodesign, WEEE, etc.) and also from the awareness raising 
efforts made by the European Commission in this direction. 

(c) 

Giving Consumers the Information to Decide 

Consumers, whether private, public or individual, play a key role for the commercial success 
of greener products. Since the adoption of the IPP Communication, the European Commission 
has  developed  and  encouraged  EU-wide  tools  and  frameworks  to  provide  consumers  with 
product information and raise their awareness. 

Public purchasers spend 17% of annual European Gross Domestic Product on supply/services 
and  works  contracts.  Green  Public  Procurement  (GPP)  has  received  growing  political 
attention  and,  the  renewed  EU  SDS  of  June  2006  includes  the  goal  of  bringing  the  average 
level of EU GPP, by 2010, up to the standard achieved by the best performing member states 
in 2006. Based on indications resulting from a 2005-2006 study, the Communication on GPP 
presented by the European Commission in 2008 as part of the SCP/SIP Action Plan package 
proposes  a  general  indicative  target  of  50  %  of  GPP  by  2010.  Furthermore,  it  establishes  a 
process for setting common voluntary GPP criteria in cooperation with the Member States and 
relevant  stakeholders  for  "priority"  product  and  service  groups,  and  develops  guidance  on 
GPP.18 

The latest study on the collection of statistical information on GPP (2008) gives an overview 
of  the  level  of  GPP  in  2006  and  2007  in  the  7  best  performing  Member  States:  Austria, 
Denmark,  Finland,  Germany,  the  Netherlands,  Sweden  and  the  United  Kingdom.  Efforts 
undertaken by the so-called Green 7 have led to an average overall level for all countries of 
45% GPP of the total procurement value and 55% GPP of the total number of contracts. By 
buying green products and services, their efforts lead to an average reduction of 25% of CO2 
emissions.  Furthermore,  it  was  found  that  buying  'green'  has  led  to  an  average  decrease  in 
costs of 1%, taking into account the Life Cycle Costs (LCC) of a product or service. Overall, 
electricity, paper, office IT and furniture are the product groups where GPP is most practised; 
construction, gardening and transport are the lowest-scoring product groups. 

National  Action  Plans  (NAPs)  on  GPP  as  called  for  in  the  IPP  Communication  have  so  far 
been adopted in Cyprus (2007), Denmark (1994), Finland (2008), France (2007), Italy (2008), 
Lithuania  (2007),  Poland  (2007),  Portugal  (2007),  Slovakia  (2007),  Slovenia  (2009),  Spain 
(2008), Sweden (2007), United Kingdom (2007). In the remaining Member States, NAPs are 
either  in  the  process  of  adoption,  or  in  preparation.  The  Netherlands  is  one  of  the  Member 
States  with  most  ambitious  targets  and  expect  to  achieve  100%  sustainable  procurement  by 
central  government  in  2010;  they  have  furthermore  developed  GPP  criteria  for  80  product 
groups and services. The French  national action plan is the more ambitious one  in  terms of 

18 

The guide, Training Toolkit on GPP consists of 3 Modules (strategic, legal and operational) and can be 
downloaded  from  the  EU  GPP  website:  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/toolkit_en.htm.  Member 
States are asked to formally  endorse and implement the 10 voluntary GPP criteria: criteria have been 
translated  into  all  EU  languages.  The  10  priority  product  and  service  groups  for  which  GPP  criteria 
have  been  developed:  Construction,  Food  and  catering  services,  Transport,  Electricity,  Office  IT 
equipment, Textiles, Paper, Furniture, Cleaning products and services, Gardening products and services. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

                                                 
approach, as it refers to the sustainability of the public procurement. Therefore, besides "pure" 
environmental criteria, it makes use of social and ethical criteria as well. 

Some  recent  legislative  initiatives  at  European  level  integrate  environmental  mandatory 
requirements for public procurement: 

•  the Energy Star Regulation 106/2008, which obliges central government and EU 
institutions  to  purchase  IT  equipment  complying  at  least  with  the  energy 
efficiency requirements set under the Energy Star Regulation; 

•  Directive  2009/33  on  the  promotion  of  clean  and  energy  efficient  road  transport 
vehicles, which obliges public authorities and public service providers to take into 
account  energy  and  other  environmental  aspects  when  purchasing  road  transport 
vehicles; 

•  Directive 2006/32 on energy end-use efficiency and energy services, which calls 
Member  States  to  ensure  that  the  public  sector  fulfils  an  exemplary  role  and 
ensure  that  energy  efficiency  improvement  measures  are  taken  by  the  public 
sector; 

•  Under the SCP/SIP Action Plan and as part of the proposed recast of the Energy 
Labelling  Directive,  the  European  Commission  has  proposed  that  one  of  the 
labelling classes defined under the Energy Labelling Directive is used as a level 
below  which  products  would  not  be  procured  by  public  bodies  and  granted 
financial  incentives  by  Member  States.  The  proposal  also  aligns  the  scope  with 
that of the Ecodesign Directive to apply to energy related products. 

The  primary  function  of  the  voluntary  EU  Ecolabel  is  to  stimulate  both  the  supply  and 
demand of products with a reduced environmental impact. The EU Ecolabel is currently used 
by participants in the scheme as a tool to help improve environmental performance and also 
induce an improvement in the performance of other companies in the supply chain. As part of 
the SCP/SIP proposals, the scheme is being strengthened. This involves widening the number 
of products and services covered, focusing on those with the most significant environmental 
impacts and the highest potential for improvement. This broader scope includes the possibility 
to develop criteria for food and drink products.19 The EU Ecolabel criteria for a product group 
should be achievable by the top 10-20% of the best products on the market. The revised EU 
Ecolabel also reduces bureaucracy and simplifies criteria for companies applying for the label. 
In the EU around half of the Member States have their own national ecolabel schemes, such 
as  the  well-known  "Nordic  Swan",  widely  used  in  Scandinavian  countries  and  the  German 
‘Blue Angel’, the first official national ecolabelling scheme worldwide, which now covers 80 
products  categories  with  over  10,000  licensed  products.  Concern  has  been  expressed  on  the 
growing  number  of  national  ecolabels,  which  may  create  confusion  for  the  consumers  and 
constitute a barrier to intra-EU trade. In addition, it should be noted that further complexity 
could  result  from  the  increasing  number  of  carbon  and  climate  labels,  which  are  currently 
under  development  in  certain  Member  States  on  the  basis  of  private-public  partnerships. 
These  developments  seem  to  suggest  the  necessity  of  a  more  coordinated  approach  at  EU 

19 

Subject  to  the results of  a study  to  be  undertaken  by  the  Commission  "…  exploring  the feasibility  of 
establishing  reliable  criteria  covering  environmental  performance  during  the  whole  life-cycle  of  such 
products, including the products of fishing and aquaculture." 

EN 

14 

   EN 

                                                 
level, to avoid confusion for the consumers and prevent disruptions to the smooth functioning 
of the internal market. 

4. 

DEVELOPING A FOCUS ON PARTICULAR PRODUCTS 

(a) 

Voluntary Pilot Projects 

Two  voluntary pilot projects  were established in 2004 to demonstrate  how IPP can work in 
practice.  The  chosen  products  were  mobile  phones  (project  lead  by  Nokia)  and  tropical 
wooden  garden  chairs  (lead  by  Carrefour).  In  line  with  the  IPP  principle  of  stakeholder 
involvement,  both  projects  registered  an  active  participation  by  key  stakeholders,  ranging 
from  producers  to  research  institutes,  from  consumers  and  environmental  organizations  to 
governmental authorities. 

On the basis of the analysis of the environmental impacts of the products throughout their life-
cycle,  options  to  improve  these  environmental  impacts  were  identified,  followed  by  the 
analysis  of  the  potential  social  and  economic  effects  of  the  improvement  options.  Finally, 
viable  options  for  improvement  were  selected  and  both  project  concluded  in  concrete 
commitments  by  stakeholders  to  improve  the  environmental  impacts  of  the  products  in 
September 2006.20 

Some  voluntary  pilot  projects  are  also  been  carried  out  in  different  Member  States.  For 
instance,  the  projects  for  developing  and  testing  IPP  methodologies  and  instruments  carried 
out  in  the  Federal  State  of  Bavaria  can  be  considered  as  an  example  of  good  practice  in 
Europe.21 

(b) 

Identifying  which  products  have  the  greatest  potential  for  environmental 
improvement 

The European Commission is seeking to identify and stimulate actions on products with the 
greatest  potential  for  environmental  improvement.  This  work  has  been  carried  out  in 
subsequent phases. 

(1) 

(2) 

first  study  consisted 

"Study on external environmental effects related to the life cycle of products 
the  elaboration  and 
and  services".  This 
implementation of a life-cycle methodology to help policy makers in defining 
priorities regarding products and services constituting the European economy. 
An  assessment  of  life-cycle  environmental  impacts  and  life-cycle  external 
costs of about 30 product or service groups was performed in order to identify 
those with the greatest environmental impact. 

in 

"EIPRO  –  Environmental  Impact  of  PROducts".  This  study  identifying 
products consumed in the EU having the greatest environmental impact from 
a life-cycle perspective was completed in May 2006. It grouped consumption 
of  the  society  into  almost  three  hundred  product  categories  (sectors),  which 
were  assessed  in  relation  to  different  environmental  impact  categories,  such 

20 
21 

See http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pilot.htm. 
16  IPP  R&D-projects  have  been  developed,  aiming  at  showing  the  ecologic  and  economic  win-win 
situation for all stakeholders when using the IPP approach. See www.ipp-bayern.de 

EN 

15 

   EN 

                                                 
(3) 

as  acidification,  toxicity,  global  warming,  ozone  depletion,  etc.  Results 
suggest that three areas of the economically most important sectors - food and 
drink, private transportation, and housing - together are responsible for 70-80 
percent of environmental impacts of private consumption. 

"IMPRO  -  environmental  IMprovement  of  PROducts".  The  project  was 
carried out in 2006-2007, focusing on products that are among those with the 
greatest environmental impacts, as emerged from the EIPRO study. The work 
was  intended  to  help  identify  possible  ways  in  which  the  life-cycle 
environmental impacts can be reduced for some of these products. The main 
aims of the studies were: estimate and compare the environmental impacts of 
the  products  under  a  life-cycle  perspective;  identify  the  main  environmental 
improvement options related to the product, addressing all the different life-
cycle  stages  and  estimate  the  size  of  the  environmental  improvement 
potentials;  and  assess  the  main  improvement  options  regarding  their 
feasibility  and  potential  social  and  economic  impacts.  Results  are  available 
for  three  of  the  product  groups:  passenger  cars,  meat  products,  and 
buildings.22 

All Member States have reported on product groups that have been previously identified for 
action. In many cases, the results of the EIPRO, commissioned by the European Commission, 
was  used,  among  other  studies  to  selecting  new  product  groups.  Product  panels  have  been 
established  in  several  countries.  In  Denmark,  between  1998  and  2005,  different  product 
panels were running with members from the whole product supply chain (as far as possible) 
with  the  purpose  of  co-operating  on  activities  to  get  greener  products  on  the  market.  There 
have  been  product  panels  for  textiles,  electronics,  goods  transportation,  buildings,  and 
agricultural products. In Finland, two product panels were established: a textile panel (2001-
2003) and furniture panel (2004-continuing). Sweden has initiated two dialogues: one in the 
retail sector (Future Trade, 1998-2007) and the other in the building sector (Building-Living 
Dialogue, 1998-2009).23 The aim of the product panel on the furniture sector is to focus on the 
environmental  load  of  furniture  throughout  the  life-cycle  of  each  piece  and  to  promote 
sustainable development in the furniture industry. The United Kingdom has been running the 
'Market Transformation Programme' (MTP), which comprised a number of different product 
panels in different sectors. The main aim of MTP was to identify and develop ideas on how to 
address the whole supply chain of a product. 

5. 

CO-ORDINATION AND INTEGRATION 

In  order  to  enhance  coordination,  the  European  Commission  is  organising  IPP  Regular 
Meetings bi-annually with Member States representatives and key stakeholders to provide a 
forum  for  the  European  Commission  and  Member  States  and  stakeholders  to  exchange  best 
practices/information on IPP related activities. Within this forum, two working groups were 
set up to discuss and find solutions for specific subjects relevant for the development of IPP. 
The  Working  Group  on  Reporting  Formats  reviewed  the  type  of  information  that  could  be 
reported to the European Parliament and Council as stipulated in the IPP Communication and 
to propose to the European Commission an approach for collecting the necessary information 
for reporting from Member States and stakeholders. Its conclusions have provided guidance to 

22 
23 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/identifying.htm 
See www.framtidahandel.se and www.byggabodialogen.se 

EN 

16 

   EN 

                                                 
the drafting of the present report. The Working Group on Environmental Product Information 
examined  the  issue  of  life-cycle  information  throughout  the  product  chain.  It  identified  the 
needs,  examined  the  tools,  identified  the  gaps  and  opportunities,  and  proposed  how  the 
situation should be improved. Both working groups finalised their work at the end of 2006. 

Many stakeholders have highlighted the need to further exploit synergies between the various 
instruments (both voluntary and mandatory), as required by the IPP Communication. In this 
regard,  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan  has  contributed  to  clarifying  the  links  and  to  enhance  the 
coherence between the different IPP instruments, providing a single framework for a variety 
of interlinked activities and instruments. In the implementation of the Action Plan, synergies 
will be further exploited and constrains between different instrument and tools removed. 

In  order  to  increase  coordination  and  coherence,  Member  States  have  adopted  different 
approaches.  Some  have  established  inter-ministerial  working  groups  (Germany,  Finland, 
Belgium,  Sweden  and  Italy),  while  others  have  decided  to  supervise  and  coordinate  IPP 
related  measures  by  means  of  a  working  group  in  the  specific  organism  responsible  for  the 
implementation of this policy (such as in Denmark). Others, such as Romania, have created 
committees  with  members  for  the  national  authorities  and  stakeholders.  In  the  United 
Kingdom, the government  has  established a dedicated “Sustainable  Products and Materials” 
division to develop strategies and to take forward the ‘product roadmap’ approach. In France, 
it  is  the  MEEDDM  that  specifically  supervises  and  ensures  the  implementation  of  the 
measures related to sustainable consumption, supported by the ADEME. 

An example of coordination between different Member States on IPP is the Nordic working 
groups  consisting  of  representatives  from  Denmark,  Finland,  Norway,  Sweden  and  Iceland. 
This  initiative  further  proves  that  Nordic  countries  have  been  frontrunners  in  Europe 
regarding IPP issues. 

Different business associations, retailers, and environmental organisations are also engaged in 
various projects to support sustainable production. For example, in 2005 with the support of 
the European Commission (DG Enterprise and Industry), ACE carried out a project related to 
"Evaluation  of  Environmental  Management  Systems  and  their  role  with  respect  to  product 
related environmental information". Another example is IKEA, where resources are allocated 
into  environmental  projects  related  to  IPP  such  as  forestry-projects,  the  cotton-project,  the 
low-emission-project,  the  EcoBuild-project,  and  the  Greenchem-project.  Some  of  these 
projects  are  carried  out  in  co-operation  with  R&D  (universities,  institutes),  specialists  and 
NGOs (e.g. WWF). 

6. 

THE FUTURE OF IPP – INTEGRATION WITH THE SCP/SIP AGENDA 

The 2003 IPP Communication undoubtedly had the effect of opening a fruitful debate on the 
role  and  possible  measures  that  could  be  taken  at  European  Union  and  national  level  by 
different  actors,  from  public  authorities  to  industries  and  civil  society  organizations,  in  the 
attempt to minimise the impacts of products through a combination of policy and legislative 
tools.  It  also  provided  a  conceptual  framework  -based  on  the  life-cycle  thinking-  which  has 
been  successful  in  strengthening  the  coordination  and  coherence  between  different 
environment-related product policy instruments. 

In  the  last  6  years,  the  IPP  approach  -based  on  the  5  five  principles  of  life-cycle  thinking; 
working with the market; stakeholder involvement; continuous improvement of products; and 
the use of a variety of policy instruments- has been successfully integrated in the activities of 

EN 

17 

   EN 

the regulators and the relevant stakeholders. These principles are also the pillars of the 2008 
SCP/SIP Action Plan, which has become the natural extension and logical prosecution of the 
process started with the IPP Communication. 

The  life-cycle  thinking  is  widely  applied  in  EC  environmental  legislation  (i.e.  Ecodesign 
Directive)  and  commonly  used  in  national  policies  and  measures  by  Member  States. 
Industries make use of the principle as well, not only to comply with the legislation in force, 
but also to better understand the impact of the products they produce on human health and the 
environment. For certain SMEs and consumers, life-cycle thinking might not be easy to adopt, 
despite the efforts made by some European consumer organizations to inform citizens on the 
environmental impact of product from cradle to grave. In this context, the LCA instruments 
developed  by  JRC  are  of  crucial  importance,  and  JRC  on-going  work  should  be  further 
supported to develop a common, authoritative EU reference methodology/data basis for LCA. 

Setting  appropriate  incentives  to  move  the  market  towards  sustainability  is  one  of  the 
objectives of the Communication. To achieve this, it is necessary to work with the market and 
this principle has been implemented both at EU and national level. Working with the market 
is  also  part  of  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan,  which  makes  specific  provisions  for  linking 
incentives and public procurement with the environmental performance of products. With the 
notable exception of labelling instruments, it seems, however, that so far the focus – both at 
Member  States and  EU  level-  has  been on the supply side and the public demand side,  and 
more could be done to further promote "green" private demand, to reward sustainable product 
with a wider consumers' demand. Similarly, the EU's role in the promotion of fiscal measures 
for sustainability has been rather small to date. 

Stakeholder involvement was one of the most important elements in the implementation of the 
IPP  Communication  at  EU  and  national  level.  The  systematic  involvement  of  stakeholders 
during  the  design  phase  of  legislative  and  non-legislative  initiatives  has  been  extremely 
positive,  strengthening  the  initiatives  themselves  and  increasing  their  legitimacy  and  their 
effectiveness.  For  instance,  the  IPP  Regular  Meetings  provided  a  forum  for  the  European 
Commission,  Member  States  and  key  stakeholders  to  report  and  inform  on  relevant  IPP 
activities. This positive experience will be continued and extended, to cover the wider scope 
of  SCP/SIP  issues.  There  are  other  valuable  examples  of  stakeholder  involvement  worth 
mentioning,  such  as  the  Ecodesign  Consultation  Forum,  the  Retail  Forum,  the  BUILD-UP 
initiative24 and the EU SCP Food roundtable. 

Continuous improvement of products' performance is a clear guiding principle of IPP, which 
has  been  taken  up  by  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan.  Following  the  ground-breaking  studies  by 
JRC (EIPRO and IMPRO), the European Commission has been developing policy measures 
for the products identified to have the greatest potential for environmental improvement. The 
principle is extremely useful and pragmatic, in particular because it keeps the IPP-SCP tools 
updated in face of quick technology change and it allows industry to focus on the most cost-
effective improvements. The brightest example is the Ecodesign Directive, with its system of 
moving  benchmark  to  stimulate  progress  while  providing  predictability  to  the  industries 
concerned. 

The  IPP  approach  requires  the  combination  of  a  number  of  different  tools  in  reason  of  the 
variety of the products marketed and the stakeholders involved, from voluntary instruments to 

24 

See http://www.buildup.eu/. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

                                                 
mandatory  measures.  As  some  tools  for  promoting  greener  production  and  consumption 
existed prior to the formulation of IPP, such as the European Eco-label, the real challenge of 
IPP  implementation  was  to  use  a  coherent  and  mutually-enforcing  set  of  existing  and  new 
tools  to  achieve  the  policy  objectives.  This  challenge  has  been  taken  up  by  the  SCP/SIP 
Action  Plan,  which  provides  a  coherent  framework  for  different  policy  instruments  and 
initiatives  designed  to  promote  resource  efficient  and  eco-friendly  products,  while  raising 
consumer  awareness.  Even  though  it  is  not  always  easy  to  understand  how  this  wide  set  of 
initiatives  correlate  to  the  IPP  Communication, it  is  fair  to  say  that  the  Communication  has 
served  as  an  important  platform  and  reference  for  the  ongoing  necessary  shift  from  the 
"punctual"  regulation  of  production  to  initiatives  and  measures  to  decrease  environmental 
impact  in  all  phases  of  the  life-cycle,  including  consumption.  In  this  regard,  the  work 
undertaken  by  JRC  has  provided  important  figures  and  methodology  for  calculation  of  the 
environmental impacts from different product groups. 

On the basis of these considerations, what is the future for IPP in the EU? It is fair to say that 
by promoting the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of products and 
organisations,  IPP  has  fulfilled its promise  and contributed to promoting the perception that 
the environment is an opportunity - also in terms of cost reduction and marketing - and not 
any  longer  an  obstacle.  This  is  for  instance  the  case  for  the  re-usability  of  packaging  for 
logistic and the spectacular increase in green claims in advertising registered in recent years. 

As this working paper demonstrates, the SCP/SIP Action Plan is carrying forward the process 
initiated with the IPP Communication with the aim of further unlocking market potentials for 
more  sustainable  products  and  promoting  smarter  consumption.  At  this  stage  -and  looking 
ahead- it seems appropriate to further integrate the two processes and make IPP a significant 
element of the SCP/SIP agenda. This new, strengthened and coordinated process will need to 
be  integrated  also  with  the  implementation  of  the  Thematic  Strategy  on  sustainable  use  of 
natural resources, including the related issues of managing ecosystem services. The challenge 
towards  the  2012  review  of  the  SCP/SIP  Action  Plan  is  coordinated  and  effective 
implementation,  with  the  view  of  addressing  broader  sustainability  aspects  if  suitable 
methodologies for assessment will eventually became available. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

ANNEX III: LIST OF IPP REGULAR MEETINGS 

•  24 February 2004  

•  20 September 2004  

•  2 March 2005  

•  23 November 2005  

•  6 June 2006  

•  15 November 2006  

•  2 October 2007 

•  21 April 2008 

•  2 December 2008 

•  6 June 2009 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
ANNEX IV: LIST OF ADOPTED EUP IMPLEMENTING MEASURES 

Eco-design and Labelling 
measures  

Final 
Adoption 
(by EC) 

Type 
measure 

of 

Revision 

Others 

1  Standby  and  off  mode 

Ecodesign 

YES 

6 years 

- Standardisation mandate: power consumption measurement 

losses 

18 December 2008 

(18 
2014) 

December 

2  Simple Set top boxes 

Ecodesign 

YES 

5 years 

26 February 2009 

(26 February 2014) 

3  Tertiary 
Lighting 
office) 

sector 
& 

(street 

Ecodesign 

YES 

5 years 

18 March 2009 

(18 March 2014) 

4  Domestic Lighting25 

Ecodesign 

YES 

5 years 

(non-directional 
households lamps) 

18 March 2009 

(18 March 2014) 

- During the revision, remove CFL UV radiation requirements from Table 4 provided the related standards are updated 
and harmonised by then 

  Amendment 

on 

Ecodesign 

September 2009 

- Mandate SCENIHR to examine scientific evidence on the health impact of UV radiation from artificial light 

ultraviolet radiation  

5  External 
Supplies 
chargers, etc.) 

Power 
(battery 

25 

Ecolabel exists 

EN 

- Introduce UV radiation limits into CFL and LED safety standards 

- Update existing UV radiation limits in halogen lamp safety standards 

Ecodesign 

YES 

4 years 

-  Standardisation  mandate:  measurements  of  no-load  condition  electric  power  consumption  and  average  active 
efficiency of EPS 

7 April 2009 

(7 April 2013) 

21 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
6  Electric Motors 

Ecodesign 

July 2009 

7 years 

- Standardisation mandate: variable speed drives 

7  Domestic 

Ecodesign 

July 2009 

5 years 

Refrigerators/Freezers
* 

(2  years 
-wine 
storage appliances) 

Labelling 

8  TVs* 

Ecodesign 

July 2009 

3 years 

Labelling 

- The review will include resource efficiency, re-use and recycling and the level of measurement uncertainty 

-  Standardisation  mandate:  procedures  and  methods  for  measuring  the  energy  and  water  consumption,  washing 
efficiency,  spin-drying  efficiency,  programme  time,  spin  speed,  noise  emissions,  product  specific  low  power  modes, 
left-on mode duration and rated capacity  

-  The  review  shall  in  particular  assess  the  verification  tolerances  of  Annex  V  and  the  possibilities  for  removing  or 
reducing the values of the correction factors of Annex IV. 

- Adopt specific ecodesign requirements for wine storage appliances no later than in two years. 

9  Circulators 

July 2009 

1 January 2017 

- The review will include the assessment of design options that can facilitate re-use and recycling. 

(cca 8 years) 

-  Review  the  methodology  for  calculating  the  energy  efficient  index  (Annex  II)  for  glandless  circulators  integrated  in 
products before 1 January 2012  

EN 

22 

EN