COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Date: 2011-11-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, consumer information, consumer policy, domestic market, product safety

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 9.11.2011 
COM(2011) 1320 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 

IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Proposal for a Regulation of The European Parliament and of the Council 

on a consumer programme 2014-2020 

{COM(2011) 707 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1321 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
Disclaimer 
This Impact Assessment report commits only the Commission’s services involved in its 
preparation and the text is prepared as a basis for comment and does not prejudge the final 
form of any decision to be taken by the Commission 

EN 

2 

EN 

 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 5 

2.1. 
2.2. 

PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF THIRD PARTIES ......................................... 5 
PROCEDURAL ISSUES..................................................................................................................................... 5 
CONSULTATION AND SOURCE OF DATA ......................................................................................................... 6 
PROBLEM DEFINITION ........................................................................................................................ 9 
POLICY CONTEXT .......................................................................................................................................... 9 
3.1. 
DEFINING THE PROBLEM AND ITS CAUSES/EFFECTS..................................................................................... 10 
3.2. 
i) 
Safety.......................................................................................................................................................... 11 
ii)  Consumer information and education........................................................................................................ 13 
iii)  Consumer rights and redress ..................................................................................................................... 15 
iv)  Enforcement of consumer rights ................................................................................................................ 16 
v)  Conclusion: the focus of the actions under the Consumer Programme ..................................................... 17 
NECESSITY AND EU ADDED-VALUE ............................................................................................................ 18 
Legal base........................................................................................................................................................... 18 
Beneficiaries of the Programme ......................................................................................................................... 18 
i)  Product safety ............................................................................................................................................ 18 
ii)  Consumer education and information........................................................................................................ 19 
iii)  Consumer rights and redress ..................................................................................................................... 21 
iv)  Enforcement of consumer rights ................................................................................................................ 22 
POLICY OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................... 23 

3.3. 

5.1. 
5.2. 
i) 

ii) 

POLICY OPTIONS ................................................................................................................................. 25 
OVERVIEW OF BASELINE SCENARIO AND OPTIONS ...................................................................................... 25 
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE OPTIONS.................................................................................................... 29 
Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance throughout the 
Union.......................................................................................................................................................... 29 
Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of their rights, 
to develop the evidence base for consumer policy and to provide support to consumer organisations..... 30 

iii)  Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action and 

improving access to redress including alternative dispute resolution ....................................................... 32 

iv)  Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer rights by strengthening cooperation between national 

enforcement bodies and by supporting consumers with advice.................................................................. 33 
ANALYSING THE OPTIONS ............................................................................................................... 34 

COMPARING THE OPTIONS .............................................................................................................. 41 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION................................................................................................... 43 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

ANNEX 1:  TABLE OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................. 45 

ANNEX 2:  TIMETABLE OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................................... 46 

ANNEX 3:  OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT 2007-2013 PROGRAMME .................................................... 47 

ANNEX 4:  DATA FROM THE EVALUATION OF THE 2007-2013 STRATEGY AND PROGRAMME . 49 

3

 
 
 
 
4

 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

the 
The  post-2013  Consumer  Programme  (hereafter 
implementation  of  DG  SANCO  action  in  the  field  of  consumer  policy  from  2014  onwards.  It 
builds on the results achieved though the current (2007-2013) Programme. 

the  "Programme")  will  support 

In line with the conclusions and recommendations from the results of the mid-term evaluation of 
the  current  Programme,  there  will  be  a  degree  of  continuity  between  the  current  and  future 
Programmes. The evaluation underlines in particular that consumer policy is relatively young at 
EU level and that continuity is key to achieving impact. At the same time, the actions under the 
Programme will be refocused in line with the Europe 2020 priorities and to address issues which 
have grown in importance. 

An Overview of the current 2007-2013 Programme is presented in Annex 3. 

2. 

PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF THIRD PARTIES 

2.1. 

Procedural issues 

The ISG on consumer policy has served as the Steering Group for the evaluation of the current 
(2007-2013)  Strategy  and  Programme  and  subsequently  as  the  Steering  Group  for  the  impact 
assessment of the new Programme. It has met three times between February and July 2011. 

The  services  invited  to  the  ISG  on  consumer  policy  were:  SG,  LS,  AGRI,  BEPA,  BUDG, 
CLIMA,  COMM,  COMP,  EAC,  ECFIN,  ELARG,  EMPL,  ENER,  ENTR,  ENV,  ESTAT, 
HOME, INFSO, JUST, MARE, MARKT, MOVE, REGIO, RTD, TAXUD, TRADE. 

The timetable for the impact assessment is detailed in annex 1. 

The recommendations made by the Impact Assessment Board have been taken into account in the 
following  way:  more  evidence  has  been  added  to  the  chapter  assessing  the  impact  under  the 
various  actions;  a  new  part  has  been  added  in  the  chapter  relating  to  the  problems  definition, 
explaining  how  the  actions  to  be  undertaken  have  been  prioritised;  a  brief  overview  of  the 
stakeholders'  views  has  been  included; the problems linked to the  administration of funds have 
been more clearly identified and solution highlighted in the chapter on impact - however, this has 
not been done through a separate heading but under each relevant action in order to preserve the 
coherence of the document; an indicative table on broad fund distribution has been included in 
the chapter presenting the baseline scenario and options; the option 3 has been screened out and 
omitted  from  the  impact  section  as  requested;  the  chapters  on  the  EU  added-value  and  on 
necessity have been merged and shortened and the description of the baseline scenario extended. 

The additional technical comments submitted have also been addressed in the various chapters of 
the document (the requested information on the existing Programme has been added in an annex 
to limit the total length of the main document). 

5

 
 
2.2. 

Consultation and source of data 

The four main sources of data underpinning this impact assessment are: 
i)  Mid-term evaluation of the 2007-2013 Strategy and Programme1 

The impact assessment makes use to a large extent of the ex-post evaluation of the Programme of 
Community  Action  2004-2007  and  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  2007-2013  Strategy  and 
Programme  where  Member  States  authorities  (through  the  CPN2  and  CPC3  networks),  EU  and 
national  consumer  organisations  (through  the  ECCG)  and  some  industry  representatives  were 
consulted, as well as some members of the European Parliament. 

The  results  of  these  evaluations  were  transmitted  to  the  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on 25 March 2011. They were posted at 
the same time on DG Sanco Europa website. The main highlights are presented below. 

ii)  Contributions  from  the  consumer  networks  in  the  context  of  the  preparation  of  the  future 

consumer policy 

Discussions with stakeholders on several elements of the next consumer policy took place at the 
Consumer  Summit  on  11-12  April  2011,  entitled  ""EU  Consumer  Policy:  the  way  ahead".  Six 
workshops have dealt respectively with data gathering, enforcement, redress (Alternative Dispute 
Resolution), capacity building for consumer organisations, consumer information and consumer 
education. 

Input from consumer networks was requested: a discussion with the CPN members took place at 
the CPN meeting of 31 March 2011 and members were invited to submit additional contributions 
in writing. Input from the CPC and the ECCG4 was requested in April 2011. A discussion was 
subsequently organised at the ECCG meeting of June 2011. 

Contributions from the three main horizontal business organisations (BusinessEurope, UEAPME 
and EuroCommerce) were requested in April 2011. 

Despite  differences  in  focus,  the  contributions  from  national  authorities  and  consumer 
organisations were generally supportive of the priority issues proposed by DG Sanco relevant for 
the Programme. 

In  particular,  CPN  members  expressed  support  for  the  proposed  priorities  on  consumer  market 
monitoring, safety, enforcement (with several members stressing to strengthen the efficiency of 
the  CPC  network),  redress  (including  ADR),  support  to  consumer  organisations.  Some  CPN 
members  called  for  more  coordination  on  consumer  information  and  education.  .  Several  CPN 
members expressed the view that the Programme should provide training for national consumer 
organisations but no direct funding. 

ECCG  members  also  generally  supported  the  Commission  proposal  and  insisted  more 
particularly  on  the  necessity  to  take  into  account  the  different  conditions  of  consumer 

1 The 2007-2013 Programme is the financial framework underpinning the 2007-2013 Strategy.  
2  CPN  -  Consumer  Policy  Network:  informal  network  of  high-level  officials  from  Member  States  national 

administrations in charge of consumer policy 

3 CPC network - Consumer Protection Cooperation network of Member States national enforcement authorities 
4 ECCG - European Consumer Consultative Group, composed of European and national consumer organisations 

6

 
 
                                                 
organisations  across  the  EU.  Several  consumer  organisations  also  specifically  stressed  the 
importance  of  consumer  market  monitoring  and  consumer  behaviour,  and  sustainable 
consumption. 

Business  organisations  generally  agreed  with  the  priorities  proposed  by  the  Commission, 
stressing 
the  right  balance  should  be  struck  between  consumer  protection  and 
competitiveness  (including  of  SMEs).  They  specifically  stressed  the  importance  of  consumer 
market monitoring. 

that 

iii) Results of additional separate external evaluations 

Stakeholders were also consulted on specific elements of the Programme in the context of: 

- 

- 

- 

the separate evaluation of the network of European Consumer Centres (ECC-net) published in 
June 2011; 

the consultation on the revision of the General Product Safety Directive (GPSD), which was 
carried out in the second part of 2010 and beginning of 2011. A stakeholders' conference was 
held  on  1  December  2010.  It  gave  participants  the  opportunity  to  discuss  the  results  of  the 
consultation and the Commission's proposals to improve the current legal framework in this 
field; 

the  separate  evaluation  on  consumer  education,  information  and  capacity  building  actions 
(Dolceta5,  Europa  Diary6,  capacity  building  for  national  consumer  organisations  (TRACE), 
Masters course in consumer affairs) to be finalised in September 2011. 

The main conclusions of these three specific evaluations are mentioned in the document where 
relevant. 

iv)  Data and statistics from consumer market monitoring 

They mainly include the results from the Consumer Markets Scoreboards, market studies and in-
depth surveys (e.g. the empowerment survey published on 11 April 20117). 

Main results from the evaluation of the 2007-2013 Consumer Policy Strategy and Programme 

The ex-post evaluation of the 2004-2007 Programme and  the mid-term evaluation of  the 2007-
2013 Strategy and Programme stress their added value, despite the fact that European consumer 
policy is a relatively new field and that the level of EU funding under the Programme is relatively 
small.  It  underlines  that  actions  under  the  Strategy  and  Programmes  contribute  to  the  Europe 
2020 objectives of a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 

The results are globally positive with regard to the relevance of the objectives of the Strategy and 
the Programme, their impacts and their added-value. It also concludes that the Programme will 
have long-term effects on consumer protection. 

5 An online consumer information and education tool – see list of acronyms in annex 

6 A multi-lingual paper-based distributed to European schools since 2003-4 targeted at students aged 15-18, with a 
focus  on  consumer  affairs  and  accompanied  by  structured  teachers’  resources  and  lesson  plans.  The  2011-12 
edition involved content from 21 Commission Departments, 4,344,575 printed copies which were sent to 27,079 
schools in the EU-27, and in 23 languages. 

7  See  the  Eurobarometer  N°342:  http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm;  Consumer  Empowerment  report 

and Index: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/facts_en.htm 

7

 
 
                                                 
The evaluation makes apparent a certain divergence in views on the Strategy and the Programme 
between national authorities and consumer organisations, the former being more positive on the 
achievements of the  Strategy and  Programmes  (overall 88% of national authorities and 82% of 
consumer organisations believe that the current Strategy has made a large or moderate (medium 
positive) contribution to EU consumer policy initiatives). 

National  authorities  generally  confirm  that  the  Strategy  and  Programme  are  complementary  to 
national consumer policy. 

However, the evaluation  concludes  that emerging social and environmental challenges are only 
partly addressed by the current Strategy and Programme. 

More detailed data are presented in annex 4. 

On the specific actions undertaken under the Programme: 

i)  Safety: 

-  On  product  safety,  coordination  has  increased  between  market  surveillance  authorities.  The 
report  recommends  further  strengthening  surveillance  and  enforcement  through  RAPEX, 
pursuing the efforts aimed at addressing the international dimension of the safety of products 
and capitalising on the use of new technologies. 

ii)  Consumer information and education: 

-  Consumer market monitoring, the Consumer Market Scoreboard and in-depth market studies 
have played an important role to support consumer policy. They play an essential role in the 
proper integration of consumer concerns into relevant EU policies and the design of effective 
legislation. The report also suggests further developing the understanding of actual consumer 
behaviour. 

-  Progress on consumer education has been variable, in particular for Dolceta where there is a 
concern  as  regards  the  definition  of  the  target  audience,  and  consequently  its  effective 
dissemination.  The  report  suggests  consolidating  education  tools,  better  defining  Dolceta's 
target  audience,  its  content  and  dissemination,  and  looking  for  synergies  with  national 
curricula. 

-  The  support  provided  through  the  Programmes  to  EU  level  and  national  consumer 
organisations  has  been  evaluated  positively.  The  role  of  EU  level  organisations  is  seen  as 
crucial  for  ensuring  the  representation  of  consumer  interests  in  EU  policy  making.  The 
reports  suggests  pursuing  the  training  (capacity  building)  provided  to  national  consumer 
organisations, and examining the possibility of providing courses at national level. 

iii) Consumer rights and redress: 

-  The report points to the added value linked to the greater level of harmonisation brought by 

the legislative developments, either finalised or still in the making. 

-  The  Programmes  and  the  Strategy  have  been  increasingly  successful  in  the  integration  of 
consumer policy into relevant EU policies. The report suggests pursuing efforts in this field 
and  to  address  new  emerging  challenges  such  as:  issues  linked  to  digitalisation,  the  move 
towards more sustainable patterns of consumption, the vulnerability of consumers caused by 
the  crisis.  It  also  calls  for  a  clarification  vis-à-vis  stakeholders  of  the  role  of  the  various 
Commission services on consumer issues. 

8

 
 
-  Consumer access to redress remains a problem. The report refers to the need to make progress 

on this issue and to increase consumer awareness about the means of redress. 

iv)  Enforcement: 

-  Under  the  Strategy  and  Programmes,  cross-border  enforcement  cooperation  has  been 
strengthened through the network of enforcement authorities (CPC Network) and coordinated 
actions such as "sweeps". The report suggests further increasing the coordination within the 
CPC Network and enforcement authorities. 

-  The  Strategy  and  Programmes  have  provided  increasing  support  to  consumers  who  seek 
advice on disputes cross-border through the network of European Consumer Centres (ECC-
net). However, the report suggests increasing their visibility and hence consumers awareness. 

3. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

3.1. 

Policy context 

Links to Europe 2020 and flagships 

The Europe 2020 Strategy calls for the "citizens to be empowered to play a full role in the single 
market",  which  "requires  strengthening  their  ability  and  confidence  to  buy  goods  and  services 
cross-border, in particular on line".   

Only informed and empowered consumers are able to make the best choices for their own welfare 
and  for  the  health  of  the  economy,  through  intensifying  competition,  innovation  and  the 
integration  of  the  Single  Market,  thus  supporting  the  overarching  goal  of  the  Europe  2020 
Strategy. Leveraging the vast economic force of consumer expenditure (which represents 56% of 
EU GDP) will make an important contribution to meeting the EU objective of reigniting growth. 
This  is  confirmed  by  the  2011  Annual  Growth  Survey  which  identifies  better  consumer 
conditions  as  one  of  the  drivers  of  growth.  Consumer  policy  helps  consumers  navigate  the 
extensive  choice  offered  to  them  thereby  promoting  businesses  which  are  more  efficient  and 
innovative. 

Consumer  policy  will  provide  key  contributions  to  the  Digital  Agenda  flagship  initiative 
(borderless and safe services and digital content markets, access, digital literacy), social inclusion 
(taking  into  account  the  situation  of  the  more  vulnerable  consumers),  sustainable  growth 
(sustainable consumption) and the importance of smart regulation (consumer market monitoring 
as the basis for designing effective and targeted policies). 

Links to Single Market Act and other initiatives 

The  Monti  report  on  the  new  strategy  for  the  Single  Market  argues  that  "Consumers  and 
consumer welfare should be at the centre of the next stage of the single market." It stresses the 
importance of empowering consumers, basing policies on evidence and detecting markets failing 
consumers,  the  establishment  of  a  digital  single  market,  redress  (through  Alternative  Dispute 
Resolution and collective redress), product safety and standardisation. 

The Single Market Act highlights a number of these consumer related issues, in particular redress 
(as a strategic initiative), product safety, and the development of problem solving tools. 

9

 
 
The 2010 Citizenship report, presented as a complementary initiative to the Single Market Act, 
identifies  amongst  others  the  absence  of  a  single  set  of  consumer  protection  rules,  lack  of 
awareness about existing means of redress and insufficient means of redress as obstacles to fully 
realising European citizenship. 

The  European  Parliament  issued  several  reports  in  2010  including  recommendations  for  the 
future of consumer policy: 

The  Grech  report  calls  for  a  holistic  approach  putting  consumers'  interests  at  the  heart  of  the 
Single  Market.  The  report  highlights  inter  alia:  the  importance  of  an  evidence  base  and  market 
monitoring,  the  issue  of  product  and  services  safety,  the  major  role  played  by  consumer 
organisations,  improving  the  capacity  of  problem  solving  mechanisms,  integrating  consumers' 
interests  into  relevant  EU  policies  and  legislation,  consumer  protection  in  financial  services, 
redress and consumer information. 

The Hedh report stresses the importance of the evidence base (Scoreboard, studies, complaints) 
and enforcement in the consumer law and product safety (including ADR, sweeps, the need for 
resources for CPC and ECC). It also highlights the need to include consumer interests into all EU 
policies  and  requests  the  Commission  to  publish  an  annual  report  on  this  issue,  the  role  of 
consumer  organisations,  the  need  to  develop  consumer  education  (including  for  adults), 
consumer information (including through web portals, reaching vulnerable consumers), the need 
to promote sustainable consumption. 

In the field of product safety, the Schaldemose report (2011) calls upon the Member States and 
the  Commission  to  deploy  adequate  resources  for  efficient  market  surveillance  activities, 
emphasising  that  failing  market  surveillance  could  generate  a  distortion  of  competition, 
jeopardise consumers' safety and undermine citizens' trust in the Single Market. The report also 
calls  upon  the  Commission  to  further  fund  joint  market  surveillance  actions  and  to  allocate 
sufficient  resources  to  support  financially  the  creation  of  a  platform  and/or  an  organisation 
supporting extended coordination between Member States. The report also urges the Commission 
to  establish  a  public  Consumer  Product  Safety  Information  Database,  including  a  platform  for 
complaints. 

In the context of the debate on the Single Market Act, the Kalniete report on "Governance and 
Partnership in the single Market" underlined the importance of the future proposal on Alternative 
Dispute Resolution (ADR). 

Finally,  the  Parliament  is  preparing  for  October  2011  an  own-initiative  report  on  the  future 
consumer policy (rapporteur: Ms. Eva-Britt Svensson, replaced by Mr K. Triantaphyllides). 

3.2. 

Defining the problem and its causes/effects 

The  objective  to  put  consumers  at  the  centre  of  the  Single  Market  by  empowering  them  and 
strengthening  their  ability  and  confidence  to  buy  goods  and  services  (including  cross-border) 
implies  action  at  EU  level,  which  needs  to  be  supported  by  a  financial  instrument.  An  active 
consumer protection policy is needed to help consumers reap the benefits of the Single Market. 
Informed  and  empowered  consumers  drive  market  competition,  innovation  and  strengthen  the 
integration  of  the  Single  Market,  which  are  the  core  of  the  Europe  2020  objectives.  The  added 
value  of  the  consumer  financial  programme  lies  in  its  capacity  to  tackle  issues  that  cannot  be 
effectively addressed at national level. For example, activities to promote cross-border shopping 
or to ensure an effective surveillance of product safety across the EU require action at EU level. 

10

 
 
The new Programme will support the future consumer policy placing EU citizens as empowered 
consumers at the centre of the Single Market and complement initiatives focussing on the supply 
side:  Single  Market  Act,  industrial  policy  and  product  specific  legislation,  digital  agenda,  and 
initiatives  in  the  field  of  energy,  resources  efficiency,  sustainable  consumption,  transport. 
Encouraging  and  raising  confidence  of  consumers  in  cross-border  purchases  are  especially 
important because cross-border online purchases are not catching up (9% in 2010, compared with 
8% in 2009 and 6% in 2008) with domestic e-commerce (36% in 2010, 34% in 2009, and 26% in 
2008) despite clear benefits in terms of terms of savings and choice. Evidence shows that many 
concerns consumers may have about cross-border purchases can be overcome if consumers can 
be persuaded to make at least one cross-border purchase. When asked whether consumers were 
confident  in  purchasing  online  cross-border,  only  33%  were  equally  confident  in  domestic  and 
cross-border  websites.  However,  among  consumers  with  experience  of  cross-border  purchases, 
61% were equally confident in domestic cross-border online shops.  

There is a need for some continuity between the current and future Programmes, in line with the 
conclusions/recommendations stemming from the reports cited above and the results of the mid-
term  evaluation  of  the  2007-2013  Strategy  and  Programme  which  underlines  that  the  policy  is 
relatively young at EU level and that continuity is key to achieving impact. 

At the same time, new societal challenges have grown in importance: the increased complexity of 
decision  making  (information  overload;  more  responsibility  shifted  to  consumers  following 
liberalisation; sophisticated products, services and advertising), the need to move towards more 
sustainable patterns of consumption, the opportunities and threats for consumers brought by the 
development  of  digitalisation,  an  increase  in  social  exclusion  and  the  number  of  vulnerable 
consumers and an ageing population. 

The main problems to be addressed through the funding of actions under the new Programme are 
the following: 

i)  Safety 

Differences  between  Member  States  in  enforcing  product  safety  legislation,  the  presence  of 
unsafe  products  on  the  Single  Market,  risks  linked  to  the  globalisation  of  the  production  chain 
require  the  authorities  to  cooperate  more  effectively  in  order  to  stop  dangerous  products  from 
entering the Single Market and ensure adequate action whenever such dangerous products appear 
on the market. 

The  public  consultation  on  the  revision  of  the  General  Products  Safety  Directive  (GPSD) 
demonstrated  that  differences  in  enforcing  product  safety  legislation  are  causing  problems  for 
economic  operators  and  consumers.  It  also  showed  the  difficulties  Member  States  have  in 
working together in the absence of a clear pan-European enforcement framework. 

The  evaluation  has  confirmed  the  risks  linked  to  the  globalisation  of  the  production  chain  is  a 
growing  concern  (about  70%  of  dangerous  products  notified  in  RAPEX  originate  from  outside 
the EU). 

According  to  recent  (2010)  public  consultation  results,  all  stakeholders  consider  cooperation 
among  Member  States,  including  joint  market  surveillance  actions,  to  be  beneficial.  An 
overwhelming  majority  of  90%  of  national  market  surveillance  authorities,  90%  of  economic 
operators  and  95%  of  other  stakeholders  agreed  on  the  benefits  of  cooperation  of  national 
authorities.  Providing  more  financial  support  for  joint  actions  was  the  most  preferred  way  of 

11

 
 
improving  market  surveillance  cooperation  among  Member  States;  80%  of  national  market 
surveillance  authorities  and  80%  of  other  stakeholders  were  in  support  of  this  type  of 
cooperation.  A  coordination  platform  at  the  EU  level  was  the  second  most  preferred  way  of 
improving cooperation among Member States; 55 % of national market surveillance authorities, 
45% of economic operators, and 70 % of other stakeholders favoured this solution. 

Members  of  the  European  Parliament,  as  well  as  BEUC  and  ANEC,  frequently  ask  the 
Commission about safety of services, considering also the importance of the service sector in the 
internal market. The safety of services is partly included in the scope of the pending revision of 
the General Product Safety Directive, but only as far as product-related risks are concerned and 
will  be  proposed  to  be  included  under  the  common  rules.  Secondly,  knowledge  base  building 
continues to enable an informed discussion regarding what actions could be taken at the EU level 
regarding other aspects of service safety. The test of EU added value for any regulatory initiative 
is  important,  because  as  far  as  it  has  been  possible  to  ascertain,  the  issue  is  more  with  the 
enforcement of the existing (national) rules rather than the lack of rules. 

Total number of notifications (2003-2010)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

2244

1963

1993

1699

1866

1545

1605

1355

924

1051

701

847

388

468

67

139

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

All notifications

Serious risk notifications

Notifications per country of origin (%)

12%

11%

13%

13%

20%

17%

20%

21%

13%

22%

11%

10%

13%

7%

20%

20%

15%

10%

17%

Other

Unknown

EU-25/27 and EEA

China, including
Hong Kong

49%

49%

52%

59%

60%

58%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

23%

27%

38%

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

12

 
 
 
 
With regard to funding, the best solution found so far by the participating Member State market 
surveillance officials for the coordination of joint actions was the establishment of a foundation 
under  national  law.  This  however  means  it  has  no  own  resources  and  has  difficulties  to 
demonstrate  its  solvability.  The  upper  limit  of  co-financing  has  also  proven  challenging  where 
the number of participating Member States was counted per product category project, although in 
the overall program of projects the minimum number of participating Member States for higher 
co-financing was easily reached. Therefore, a structure that allows the best possible value for co-
financing would be needed, with the necessary flexibility and attractiveness for Member States. 

ii)  Consumer information and education 

•  Underdeveloped consumer markets monitoring: 

There is a lack of robust and good quality data and analysis on the functioning of the Single 
Market  for  consumers  to  help  identify  new  sources  of  growth  by  improving  consumer 
decision-making. 

The  evaluation  of  the  current  Strategy  and  Programme  has  highlighted  the  role  played  by 
consumer  market  monitoring  and  evidence  gathering,  carried  out  through  the  Consumer 
Market Scoreboard and in-depth market studies, the integration of consumer interests into EU 
policies. 

Legislation  affecting  consumers  does  not  always  properly  take  into  account  their  actual 
behaviour.  Greater  understanding  of  consumer  behaviour  would  enable  policy-makers  to 
better achieve their objectives by designing "smart" interventions. 

The annual Consumer Markets Scoreboard ranks 50 consumer markets (which represent 60% 
of consumer expenditure) according to how well they perform for consumers with regard to 
comparability, trust, problems and complaints, and overall satisfaction. A number of markets 
with  low  ranking  –  e.g.  retail  electricity,  bank  fees,  retail  investment  –  have  been  further 
analysed  and  remedies  are  being  implemented.  However,  many  potentially  malfunctioning 
sectors for consumers have not yet been addressed, e.g. mortgages, real estate services, some 
transport and telecommunication services, and new malfunctioning sectors may be identified 
as a result of future market screening exercises. 

• 

Insufficient capacity of consumer organisations, including lack of resources and expertise 

The  importance  of  consumer  organisations  is  highlighted  by  the  fact  that  69%  of  EU 
consumers  say  that  they  have  confidence  in  independent  consumer  organisations  to  protect 
their rights (against 63% trusting public authorities)8. However, the situation and recognition 
of  consumer  organisations  vary  very  significantly  across  EU  Member  States.  According  to 
the empowerment survey, 49% of respondents can mention the name of at least 1 consumer 
organisation  in  their  country,  but  respondents  in  the  new  Member  States  are  less  likely  to 
know  consumer  organisations  (40%  vs  52%).  According  to  the  5th  Consumer  Conditions 
Scoreboard,  national  public  funding  to  consumer  organisations  ranges  from  2€  per  1,000 
inhabitants to 2,112€ per 1,000 inhab itants and is at the low end in most new Member States. 

8 Eurobarometer "Consumer attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection", September 2010. 

13

 
 
                                                 
In addition, in most new Member States the percentage of consumers who say that they have 
confidence in independent consumer organisations to protect their rights is much lower, (e.g. 
35% in Bulgaria). 

Consumer  organisations  need  support  as  public  funding  of  consumer  organisations  in  these 
countries  is  limited  and  in  danger  of  being  cut  further,  partly  due  to  limited  experience  of 
consumer policy, but also because many organisations still lack expertise. 

The current action on capacity building for national consumer organisations (TRACE training 
courses  in  EU  policies  (consumer,  financial  services,  competition)  and  issues  such  as 
financial  management)  is  evaluated  positively  especially  in  terms  of  its  wide  participation, 
relevance  of  course  content  and  the  value  of  the  networking  opportunities  it  offers  to 
participants. However to further improve effectiveness, courses directed at training trainers, a 
more flexible  approach to  course  design and a more cost-effective delivery mechanism, are 
needed. 

•  Lack  of  transparent,  comparable,  reliable  and  user-friendly  information  for  consumers, 
particularly for cross-border cases, as regards price, and quality (including the environmental 
impact); poor knowledge and understanding of key consumer rights and protection measures 
by  consumers  and  retailers  alike;  the  uncertainty  about  the  degree  of  trustworthiness  of 
"shortcuts" (such as information intermediaries) that are currently developing, in particular in 
the digital area (such as comparison websites). 

Following  liberalisation,  consumers  are  confronted  with  increasingly  complex  choices,  for 
instance in the services area. 

According to the Consumer Empowerment report published in April 2011, less than half of 
consumers in the EU (44%) feel confident, knowledgeable and protected as consumers. Only 
in seven Member States does a majority of consumers feel all three 9. 

The  Consumer  Empowerment  report  also  demonstrated  that  consumer  awareness  and  skills 
are worryingly low (e.g. numerical skills, understanding of logos), as well as their knowledge 
of  fundamental  rights  (such  as  cooling  off  periods,  unfair  commercial  practices,  laws 
applying for cross border transactions). 

Information  plays  a  key  role  with  regard  to  the  development  of  cross-border  e-commerce: 
cross-border e-commerce continues to grow at a sluggish pace (9% in 2010, compared with 
8%  in  2009  and  6%  in  2008),  despite  clear  benefits  in  terms  of  savings  and  choice  as 
evidenced in earlier studies10.   

With the development of digitalisation, consumers will be increasingly shopping on-line and 
researching  products  on-line  (especially  through  smartphones  and  as  members  of  social 
networks).  

Specific  challenges  for  EU  intervention  regarding  consumer  information  include  the 
asymmetry  of  national  consumer  information,  and  the  dynamics  and  speed  of  change  in 

9 NL, SE, DK, FI, IE, UK, BE. See the Eurobarometer N°342: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm 
Consumer Empowerment report and Index: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/facts_en.htm 

10 Source: 5th Consumer Market scoreboard, March 2011. 

14

 
 
                                                 
information provision and updating. To enable consumers to make optimal choices, they need 
trustworthy  choice  tools.  While  such  tools  are  becoming  available  on-line  (such  as 
comparison  websites)  the  main  challenge  is  to  find  relevant,  accurate  and  reliable 
information. 

The fact that consumers are not readily able to access, control and use the information that 
businesses  collect  about  them  is  an  obstacle  to  improving  information,  lowering  searching 
and switching costs, improving consumer choice, and promoting competition. 

• 

Inadequacy  of  current  EU  consumer  education  tools,  especially  with  regards  to  the 
developments of the digital environment 

The evaluation of the consumer education, information and capacity building actions pointed 
to  the  fact  that  the  EU  education  tools  in  their  current,  one-size-fits-all  form  are  no  longer 
adapted to consumer needs. The main problems identified include overlaps of target groups, 
separate collection of information, the fact that the information update cycle is not responsive 
enough, and overly restrictive channels of dissemination (internet portal and print). 

Over  the  past  10  years,  information  and  technology  models  have  evolved  dramatically. 
Developments include increasing access to the Internet across the EU-27, rapid expansion of 
e-Commerce in some but not all Member States, accompanied by associated developments in 
risks  to  consumers,  the  rapid  emergence  of  electronic  communication  forms  and  social 
networking tools across the EU, as well as progress in ICT usage in EU-27 schools.  

The evaluation has further concluded that target groups of Dolceta and the Diary overlap and 
may  duplicate  national  resources,  that  they  are  not  sufficiently  responsive  to  policy 
developments in terms of their updating cycle and that the channels used are too restrictive to 
be effective for all target groups.  

The  evaluation  recommends  that  future  education  actions  be  built  on  current  and  future 
behavioural studies that should help understand the dynamic consumer needs at EU level.  

In  the  medium-term,  the  development  of  a  single,  coherent  pan  –EU  consumer  information 
resource should be envisaged. This should be done through engaging the user community in 
the  process  of  building  the  information  resources,  and  in  cooperation  with  DG  INFSO  and 
DG EAC. This should allow to build a dynamic and interactive community of good practice 
in consumer information and education, .in line with the objectives of active citizenship. 

iii) Consumer rights and redress 

The development or the adjustment of EU policies requires studies that necessitate funding from 
the Programme (of the kind of the study carried out on Online dispute Resolution). 

•  Sub-optimal protection of consumer rights, in particular in cross-border situations: 

Only a third of EU consumers say they are equally confident when ordering goods or services 
via the internet from sellers or providers in another Member State of the EU than from sellers 
or providers in their own country11. 

11 Eurobarometer "Consumer attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection", September 2010. 

15

 
 
                                                 
Six out of ten companies refrain from selling to e-commerce customers in another Member 
State, depriving consumers of choice and value. 

Outside  the  fully  harmonised  areas,  the  regulatory  fragmentation  of  consumer  legislation 
creates difficulties both for consumers and business seeking to take advantage of the Single 
Market.  

•  Problems  faced  by  consumers  when  trying  to  secure  redress,  notably  in  cross-border 

situations: 

The Empowerment report has shown that more than one in five Europeans has encountered a 
problem  for  which  they  had  cause  for  complaint.  The  less  educated  and  elderly  are  more 
reluctant to seek redress, although they are no less likely to have problems. 

Awareness among consumers about the means of redress is insufficient. 

•  Need to further improve the integration of consumer interests in EU policies (in line with art 

12 TFEU): 

The  most  important  sectors  and  emerging  challenges  for  consumers  include:  consumer 
choices  in  recently  liberalised  or  increasingly  complex  markets  (e.g.  energy,  transport  and 
telecommunications),  issues  linked  to  digitalisation  (e.g.  access  to  networks  and  content; 
privacy),  moving  towards  more  sustainable  pattern  of  consumption,  the  issue  of  social 
exclusion/vulnerability exacerbated by the financial crisis12. 

Moreover, it is widely expected that in the coming years, consumers will be faced with higher 
prices in, for instance, the energy and food sector. The proper functioning of these markets to 
the benefit of consumers is therefore a key concern. 

iv)  Enforcement of consumer rights 

The  evaluation  of  the  current  Strategy  and  Programme  concluded  that  the  efficiency  of  the 
CPC Network could be further strengthened by improving the coordination of the network. 
Awareness  about  ECC-Net  among  consumers  is  not  high  enough13  and  a  number  of 
complaints  brought  to  the  ECCs  by  consumers  remain  unresolved  because  traders  do  not 
reply to the ECCs, in the knowledge they are not obliged to collaborate and that ECCs have 
no powers to enforce compliance14. 

12  According  to  the  5th  Consumer  Conditions  Scoreboard,  the  ability  of  consumers  to  afford  the  same  goods  and 
services continues to vary very significantly across the EU. The level of the adjusted gross disposable income of 
households per capita, measured in Purchasing Power Standards (PPS), which takes account of differences due to 
different  price  levels  between  countries,  varies  hugely,  ranging  from  Latvia  (9045)  to  Germany  (23222).  This 
gives a clear picture of the remaining challenge to harmonise consumer conditions within the single market.  
According to a study carried out on the functioning of retail electricity markets, 22% of respondents said they had 
some problems affording their electricity bill (these respondents either stated that they worry about paying their 
electricity bills but usually manage to do so, or that they sometimes cannot pay their electricity bills on time, or 
that they often cannot pay their electricity bills on time). In three countries (NMS), the share is more than half of 
the respondents. 

13 Although it is the best known of EU networks (11% of EU consumers have heard about it against 2-6% for other 
EU networks such as SOLVIT, FIN-net), most consumers have not heard of it (external evaluation of ECC-Net, 
2011, page ix). 

14 In 2009, among closed cases, 29% indicated "lack of agreement with the trader". 

16

 
 
                                                 
With  regard  to  funding  rules,  the  current  system  of  annual  calls  for  proposal  creates  an 
administrative  burden  besides  the  actual  work  of  the  ECCs.  Moreover,  there  is  a  need  for 
greater stability of the financing in order to develop better planning. Finally, more flexibility 
on the upper limit of co-financing would help to address co-financing issues at a time where 
national authorities face resources constraints. 

v)  Conclusion: the focus of the actions under the Consumer Programme 

While  the  problems  to  be  tackled  by  consumer  policy  are  of  multiple  kinds  and  of  broad 
scale, as mentioned above, the relatively small size of the Consumer Programme means that 
actions  to  be  financed  under  this  Programme  have  to  be  targeted  on  specific  areas  where 
intervention at EU level can make a difference and add value. 

The selected areas for actions are of three kinds: 

1)  Actions corresponding to legal obligations imposed by the Treaty and the existing EU acquis 

in the field of consumer protection. 

•  Financing  the  maintenance  and  proper  functioning of the RAPEX Network,  of the CPC 

Network of enforcement authorities and of the cosmetics databases. 

2)  Actions which are not or could not be undertaken at national level because of their EU level 

character: 

•  Assisting consumers on cross-border issues by: 

- 

co-financing of the operation of the Network of European Consumer Centres (ECCs). 
National authorities or consumer organisations are usually not in a position to provide 
advice and support to consumers on cross-border issues 

- 

establishing and operation of an ODR platform dealing also with cross-border cases 

•  Developing  cooperation  with  international  partners  to  deal  with  the  impact  of  the 

globalisation of the production chain on product safety 

•  Supporting  the  production  of  EU-level  comparable  consumer  markets  data  for 

benchmarking between Member States and  input into EU-level policy-making 

•  Ensuring an EU-level representation of consumer interest by financially supporting EU-

level consumer organisations 

3)  Actions  complementing  and  enhancing  the  efficiency  of  measures  undertaken  at  national 

level: 

•  Coordination  and  co-financing  of  joint  actions  in  the  field  of  product  safety  and  of 

consumer rights enforcement ("Sweeps") 

•  Supporting  awareness-raising  campaigns  on  consumer  issues  with  Member  States  and 
other  stakeholders  and  working  with  intermediaries  to  contribute  to  the  provisions  of 
clear, transparent and reliable information to consumers 

•  Supporting  the  training  national  consumer  organisations,  which  would  be  much  more 

costly at national level without economy of scale 

17

 
 
•  Providing a platform for exchange and sharing of good practices in the field of consumer 

education. 

3.3. 

Necessity and EU added-value 

Legal base 

Article 169 of TFEU stipulates that "in order to promote the interests of consumers and to ensure 
a high level of consumer protection, the Union shall contribute to protecting the health, safety and 
economic  interests  of  consumers,  as  well  as  to  promoting  their  right  to  information,  education 
and to organise themselves in order to safeguard their interests." 

The attainment of these objectives can be ensured through measures which support, supplement 
and monitor the policy pursued by the Member States. 

Article 12 TFEU stipulates that "Consumer protection requirements shall be taken into account in 
defining and implementing other Union policies and activities". 

Beneficiaries of the Programme 

The  beneficiaries  of  the  Programme  will  be  consumers,  national  authorities  in  charge  of 
consumer  protection  and  consumer  organisations,  with  the  overarching  objective  of  improving 
the situation of consumers throughout the EU. 

The Programme will offer support to consumer organisations at EU and national level, as well as 
Member States national authorities in charge of product safety and enforcement. 

The  Programme  will  also  de  facto  benefit  reputable  businesses,  as  effective  consumer  policy 
supports  the  proper  functioning  of  the  Single  Market,  rewards  the  most  competitive  companies 
and drives out  rogue operators. Empowered consumers are  drivers of innovation  and consumer 
policy will therefore support innovative business. Finally, economic operators will benefit from a 
level playing field based on clear rules and better coordinated enforcement. In this context, the 
Programme will contribute to stimulating the economic growth. 

The results of the mid-term evaluation of the current Strategy and actions undertaken under the 
current Programme highlight the complementary nature of EU and national consumer policy (cf. 
data  in  annex  2).  While  Member  States  are  best  placed  to  implement  most  aspect  of  consumer 
policies, a number of EU actions can complement their action and assist them by reason of their 
scale or effects: 

i)  Product safety 

(Action listed in the Single Market Act) 

The  operation  of  the  RAPEX  system  is  one  of  the  obligations  stemming  from  the  General 
Product  Safety  Directive  (GPSD)  and  Regulation  765/2008.  Without  financial  support, 
activities  would  not  be  undertaken  at  the  necessary  level  and  frequency  to  improve  market 
surveillance cooperation. 

Enforcement  of  product  safety  by  Member  States  requires  coordination  at  the  EU  level, 
because  markets  and  supply  chains  are  ever  more  complex  across  Europe  and  the  world. 
Action at EU level and cooperation through the GPSD network delivers better results than a 

18

 
 
series of individual actions by Member States since it fills information gaps, including using 
information collected by other countries, and avoids disparities in the Single Market. This is 
essential to a genuinely level playing field for businesses. It produces a consistent approach to 
the  risks  from  consumer  products  and  offers  consumers  throughout  the  EU  a  high  level  of 
protection. 

9 out of 10 national authorities believe that RAPEX is useful. This assessment is shared by 6 
out of 10 consumer organisations15. 

In  the  international  context,  RAPEX  also  supplies  the  EU  good  data  to  support  demands 
made to China16, and more generally the basis for discussions with third countries, to improve 
the quality and safety of products coming from those countries placed on the EU market.  

Cosmetic products databases - CPNP & CosIng 

CPNP  (Cosmetic  Products  Notification  Portal)  is  an  online  database  developed  in  the 
context of the new cosmetic Regulation 1223/2009 (Articles 13 and 16). This database 
will  be  used  by  the  cosmetic  industry  to  notify  some  information  about  the  cosmetic 
products  they  place  on  the  European  market.  Part  of  this  information  will  be  made 
available  to  Member  States  competent  authorities  for  the  purpose  of  market 
surveillance,  market  analysis,  evaluation  and  consumer  information,  and  to  European 
poison centres for the purposes of medical treatment in case of poisoning. This database 
shall be available as from 11 January 2012 and its use will become mandatory as from 
11 July 2013. 

CosIng is an electronic database on cosmetic ingredients that presents the applicable cosmetic 
legislation in an easy and user friendly way. It will facilitate the information and access by the 
competent authorities and by the industry to the relevant legislation. 

ii)  Consumer education and information 

•  Consumer market monitoring 

Only  at  EU  level  can  comparable  data  collection  and  analysis  be  undertaken  to  provide 
overall  analysis  of  the  functioning  of  the  demand-side  of  the  Single  Market.  The  peer 
comparison  of  national  market  performance  will help  national  policymakers  in  their  reform 
programmes and the establishment of benchmarks.  

The  Consumer  Markets  Scoreboard  provides  indicators  of  consumer  conditions  in  different 
markets  and  in  Member  States.  The  in-depth  market  studies  of  failing  consumer  markets 
deliver robust analyses of the policy issues that need to be tackled at EU and/or national level 

15  Value  of  RAPEX  (evaluation  of  2007-2013  Programme):  national  authorities:  around  90%  moderately  to  very 

useful (close to 70% very useful). Consumer organisations: 60% useful (30% very useful). 

16  China  is  the  country  of  origin  in  approximately  60  %  of  the  RAPEX  notifications  and  in  some  categories  (e.g. 
toys) the figure is even higher. To date, in total 5469 RAPEX notifications were submitted to Chinese authorities 
for  a  follow-up.  So  far,  Chinese  authorities  have  reported  conclusions  of  their  investigations  carried  out  with 
regard to 1,386 notifications; in 795 investigated cases, Chinese authorities decided to take restrictive measures, 
including an export ban. 

19

 
 
 
                                                 
to  make  markets  work  for  consumer.  Policy-specific  behavioural  research  and  testing 
provides practical tools to develop smarter regulation.  

In general, the data is designed to be sufficiently robust and representative to be used not only 
at  EU  but  also  at  national  level,  thereby  delivering  some  EU-scale  efficiency  gains  and 
enabling Member States' benchmarking. 

The data and analyses are used to help design new policies, for example in e-commerce, a fast 
growing area bringing about specific challenges for consumers in terms of trust, choice, etc.  
They  are  also  used  to  implement  legislation  in  areas  that  have  a  significant  impact  on 
household budget such as energy, transport, or telecommunications. 

9  out  of  10  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that  the  Consumer 
Markets Scoreboard is useful17. A number of Member States use it as a basis for developing 
their own evidence-gathering tools. The added value of the consumer market monitoring tools 
was also highlighted in the context of the country studies of the mid-term evaluation of the 
2007-2013 Programme. 

The  harmonised  methodology  for  classifying  and  reporting  consumer  complaints  in  the 
Commission Recommendation aims to provide data on a comparable basis across the EU and 
between  countries  and  help  authorities  to  identify  better  the  problems  consumers  face.  The 
possibility to compare complaints with other countries will also be very useful in identifying 
EU-wide trends. 

•  Support to consumer organisations 

The existence of EU-level consumer organisations is a necessity to ensure that the consumer 
voice is heard in the preparation of EU initiatives, thus compensating for the lack of balance 
with industry associations which enjoys vastly superior resources. There is a need for a strong 
and  coherent  representation  from  the  consumer  movement  at  EU  level  with  a  consolidated 
consumer  input  into  EU  policy-making,  EU  institutions  and  EU-level  dialogues  (including 
international ones such as the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue – TACD).  

The  financial  support  to  BEUC  -  Bureau  Européen des Consommateurs  (around  50% of its 
budget)  contributes  to  the  promotion  of  consumer  rights,  mainly  in  the  field  of  financial 
services, energy, health, safety, food, consumer redress, etc. While BEUC has progressively 
developed  alternative  source  of  funding  (membership  fees,  reply  to  call  for  tender)  these 
sources will not cover the whole funding in the foreseeable future. 

As  far  as  national  consumer  organisations  are  concerned,  EU  support  should  only 
complement national support. EU support leads to economy of scale by providing training to 
many national consumer organisations at  the same  time; fosters transfers of  knowledge and 
experience  and  best  practice  sharing  between  participants  from  different  Member  States,  in 
particular  between  those  with  established  consumer  support,  and  others  who  are  less 
advanced;  offers  opportunities  to  build  trans-national  networks  between  participants, 
including for mentoring and peer-review. 

17 Value of Scoreboard (evaluation of 2007-2013 Programme): national authorities: more than 90% moderately to 
very  useful  (40%  very  useful,  i.e.  "we  use  them  frequently").  Consumer  organisations:  90%  useful  (25%  very 
useful). 

20

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
A consumer is a good consumer in the Single Market only if he/she is a good consumer in the 
national market. The Commission action is therefore complementary to that of the Member 
States. Moreover, since BEUC relies to a large extent on national consumer organisations to 
collect  data,  it  is  essential  that  these  organisations  have  the  capacity  to  provide  an  accurate 
image of the situation of national consumers. 

Support  to  national  consumer  organisations  is  to  enable  them  to  play  a  role  to  articulate 
consumer concerns at national level so that policy-making at EU level accurately reflect the 
range  of  issues  across  the  EU.  Improve  empowerment  of  consumers,  knowledge  when 
making every-day decisions, helps national market and as a consequence EU Single Market. 

•  Education and awareness-raising 

EU  consumer  information  and  education  initiatives  increase  consumer  knowledge  and 
confidence in cross-border transactions, thus supporting the completion of the Single Market.  

EU  action  on  consumer  education  should  promote  EU  policy  priorities  (Europe  2020), 
legislative effort and give attention to cross-border transactions in the EU. It is also a means 
of exchanging and transferring good practices from one national context to another. It acts as 
an  incentive  for  raising  the  overall  level  of  consumer  empowerment  across  the  EU,  with  a 
positive  effect  on  the  competitiveness  of  the  Single  Market.  Insofar  as  targeting  national 
audiences,  they  should  be  based  on  a  needs  analysis  i.e.  supporting  and  complementing 
efforts  in  Member  States,  and  require  intervention  with  variable  geometry  to  avoid 
duplication, and even more importantly, to support exchange of best practices and materials 
between  Member  States,  in  order  to  contribute  to  the  creation  of  a  single,  coherent  and 
authoritative source or information at EU level. 

iii) Consumer rights and redress 

•  Ensuring high level of consumer protection 

Article  169  TFEU  stipulates  that  the  EU  to  contribute  should  contribute  to  protecting  the 
health, safety and economic interest of consumers. 

• 

Integration/mainstreaming of consumer interest in other policy areas 

The integration of consumer interests is an obligation stemming from article 12 TFEU. 

•  Redress 

The existing studies point to the need of strengthening means for consumers to resolve their 
disputes  with  traders.  The  lack  of  efficient  ADR/ODR  limits  the  potential  of  this  means  of 
dispute resolution and creates imbalances in the effectiveness of handling consumer disputes 
in  different  Member  States,  in  particular  as  regards  cross-border  disputes.  This  situation 
affects consumers' confidence in shopping across borders.  Both businesses18 and consumers 
clearly  state  that  concerns  about  potential  redress  problems  in  another  Member  State 

18   In particular for SMEs since their limited administrative capacity would not allow them to pursue claims through 
judicial means. The availability of easy dispute resolution such as ADR could address such concerns of small 
and medium enterprise. 

21

 
 
                                                 
discourage  them  from  selling  and  buying  across  borders  and  thus  not  fully  reaping  the 
potential  benefits  of  internal  market19.  In  this  context;  the  Commission  will  consider 
initiatives  in  the  field  of  Alternative  Dispute  Resolutions  (ADR)  and  On-line  Dispute 
Resolution (ODR). 

Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  (ADR)  will  offer  consumers  and  businesses  a  cheap,  rapid 
and  easy  way  of  getting  redress  out-of-court  throughout  the  EU.  ADR  schemes  respecting 
core quality principles will be available for all disputes, thus ensuring a level playing field.  

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): The ODR platform will allow national ADR schemes to 
handle cross-border disputes related to the online sale of goods or services more effectively, 
by handling the procedure entirely online. The financing of a European platform will allow 
having a co-ordinated approach and create economies of scales and synergies both of which 
can  only  result  from  action  at  EU  level.  As  a  consequence,  ADR,  including  ODR,  is  a  key 
action in the Single Market Act. 

Out of the 35 000 cross-border consumer complaints received by the ECC network in 2010, 
91% could not be referred to an ADR scheme in another Member State20. 

iv)  Enforcement of consumer rights 

•  CPC Network (Consumer Protection Cooperation Network): 

The  Commission  is  tasked  with  the  management  of  the  CPC  network  (network  of  national 
enforcement  authorities).  The  CPC  Regulation  (No  2006/2004)  provides  notably  for  joint 
projects, joint enforcement actions and exchange of officials. Cooperation between Member 
States'  authorities  improves  the  effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  market  surveillance,  thus 
ensuring better protection of the economic interests of European consumers. It contributes to 
ensuring a level playing field for business, boosting growth and competitiveness in the Single 
Market. The organisation of joint actions between several Member States (co-financed by the 
Programme and the Member States) is an effective tool in this respect. 

Coordinated joint enforcement actions with the CPC Network such as the "sweeps" are a very 
efficient way to tackle issues which have a cross-border EU dimension. 

•  ECC-net (network of European Consumer Centres): 

The ECC-Net was established and is co-financed at 50% by the Commission at an annual cost 
of around 4.6 million euros. It provides a European network informing consumers about their 
rights when shopping across-borders and supporting them in seeking redress with a trader in 
another EU Member State (plus Iceland and Norway) when something goes wrong. National 
consumer associations do not help consumers in cross-border cases. The network covers all 
Member States and thus secures EU-wide support for consumers. 

19   Reportedly, 1 in 20 consumers faced problems with cross-border purchases of goods or services, while 59% of 
traders  said  that  an  important  obstacle  to  them  selling  cross-border  is  the  potentially  higher  cost  in  resolving 
complaints and conflicts cross-border compared to domestically. 

20 ECC network, 2010 Annual Report 

22

 
 
                                                 
In 2009, cross-border expenditure amounted to 175 billion euros in the EU. The amount spent 
by consumers on cross-border internet shopping is estimated at 30 billion euros for the same 
year. In total, these expenditures represent 1.75% of EU GDP. 

As the total detriment suffered by EU consumers amounts to 0.4%, the detriment related to 
cross border shopping (including internet) can be estimated between 500 million and 1 billion 
euros. 

In  2010,  ECCs  handled  over  71,000  cases  (+15%  compared  to  2009).  In  total,  the  network 
helped consumers clarify their claims for an amount of 14 million euros, and the volume of 
cases handled by the network has increased by more than 25% over the last 5 years.  

The services of the ECCs present a positive cost-benefit balance. Every Euro invested helped 
consumers to settle 1.77 euro worth of complaints and contributed also to the establishment 
of level playing field for business operators. 

4. 

POLICY OBJECTIVES 

The Programme should support the general objective of the future consumer policy which places 
the  empowered  consumer  at  the  centre  of  the  Single  Market.  European  consumer  policy 
supports and complements national policy by seeking to ensure European citizens can fully reap 
the  benefits  of  the  Single  Market  and  that  in  so  doing,  their  safety  and  economic  interests  are 
properly protected. The actions will support the following four specific objectives: 

i)  Safety:  to  consolidate  and  enhance  product  safety  through  effective  market  surveillance 

throughout the Union. 

Ensure  consumer  product  safety  (operation  of  the  RAPEX  network,  coordination  of  joint 
surveillance  actions  with  Member  States  and  of  joint  cross-border  enforcement;  cosmetics); 
develop international cooperation to deal with the globalisation of production chains; collect 
data and information on risk and safety aspects of services 

Operational objective: 

Increase  the  follow-up  by  national  authorities  to  RAPEX  notifications,  both  in  terms  of 
reactions to notifications and in terms of Member States reacting. 

Depending  on  the outcome of  the revision of the General Product  Safety Directive  (GPSD) 
which might lead to a unification of market surveillance for harmonised and non harmonised 
products, the scope of this objective will have to be adapted. 

ii)  Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of 
their  rights,  to  develop  the  evidence  base  for  consumer  policy  and  to  provide  support  to 
consumer organisations. 

Enhance  consumer  market  monitoring  and  understanding  of  consumer  behaviour  to  better 
identify market malfunctioning and facilitate smarter policy design 

Increase awareness of consumers by providing them with the necessary information and tools 
to  take  decisions  which  really  are  in  their  interest  when  confronted  with  the  increased 
complexity  of  choices  offered  to  individuals  safe  goods  or  services  of  their  desired  quality, 
including  in  terms  of  environmental  sustainability;  strengthen  consumer  education  in 
partnerships with Member States and other actors, and ensure that in line with Europe 2020,  

23

 
 
the  actions  SANCO  develops  are  readily  accessible  not  just  to  the  target  consumers,  but  to 
intermediaries who can focus the information on specific groups, such as for example older or 
more vulnerable consumers in particular Member States. 

Support the consumer organisations both at EU level (financial support to EU level consumer 
organisations) and at national level (in particular through capacity building) 

Operational objectives: 

-  Improve the comparability and reliability of data based on consumer complaints 

-  Contribute to rise of consumer trust in cross-border transactions 

iii) Rights  and  redress:  to  consolidate  consumer  rights  in  particular  through  regulatory  action 

and improving access to redress including alternative dispute resolution. 

Further improve the integration of consumer interests into all relevant EU policies 

Support  the  development  of  targeted  legislative  action  at  the  appropriate  level  of 
harmonisation; secure access to redress, including through the support to the development of 
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and on-line dispute resolution (ODR).  

Operational objectives: 

-  Increase the number of cross-border cases referred to ADR by the ECCs 

-  Ensure the rapid uptake of the ODR platform 

iv)  Enforcement:  to  support  enforcement  of  consumer  rights  by  strengthening  cooperation 

between national enforcement bodies and by supporting consumers with advice. 

Strengthen the enforcement of consumer legislation through the CPC-network, coordination 
of joint actions with Member States 

Increase  the  effectiveness  of  the  ECCs  action  that  is  related  to  provision  of  information  on 
consumer rights and support in the case of cross-border disputes. 

Operational objectives: 

-  Increase the flow of information and cooperation within the CPC Network 

-  Increase the number of contacts with consumers handled by ECCs 

These  objectives  are  fully  supportive  to  Europe  2020  as  regards  growth  and  competitiveness. 
They will integrate Europe 2020 specific concerns on: 

•  digital agenda, by ensuring that also the development of new technologies (e.g. digitalisation) 

actually leads to increased consumer welfare; 

•  sustainable growth, by increasing the involvement and participation of consumers in a move 

towards more sustainable patterns of consumption; 

•  social inclusion, by ensuring that the specific situation of vulnerable consumers and the need 

of an ageing population are taken into account; 

24

 
 
 
•  smart  regulation,  with  consumer  market  monitoring  actions  (Consumer  Market  Scoreboard, 
market  studies)  providing  feedbacks  on  the  policies  that  deliver  results  and  on  emerging 
trends, thereby contributing to design smart, lean and targeted regulations. 

Of  course,  the  ambition  of  the  objectives  of  the  Programme  will  have  to  be  adapted  once  the 
amount of the budget available for consumer policy is decided by the budgetary authorities. 

5. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

5.1.  Overview of baseline scenario and options 

Baseline scenario 

The  baseline  scenario  corresponds  to  the  option  1  for  the  initiatives  under  the  4  specific 
objectives (as  presented  in details below). Under this  option,  the  majority  of  actions  conducted 
under  the  2007-2013  Programme  are  pursued,  with  some  adaptation.  Some  actions  are 
substantially  reduced  or  no  longer  implemented  because  they  are  no  longer  relevant  (less 
emphasis  on  information  campaigns  in  new  Member  States  following  accession,  stop  of  the 
Master programmes, no substantial development of education tools), while some new actions are 
launched  with  a  limited  level  of  ambition  (for  instance  on  redress).  It  corresponds  to  a  budget 
equal to or lower than the one provided under the current Programme (156 millions euros over 7 
years). 

The effects of the societal changes mentioned under 3.2 means that the impact of similar actions 
to those conducted under the 2007-2013 Programme will be affected or reduced: the approach on 
product safety needs to take into account the increased globalisation of the production chain and 
the  growing  importance  of  services;  initiatives  relating  to  consumer  information  and  education 
need  to  deal  with  the  increased  complexity  of  decision  making  (information  overload;  more 
responsibility shifted to consumers following liberalisation; sophisticated products, services and 
advertising) and support more strongly the necessity to move towards more sustainable patterns 
of  consumption,  the  specific  needs  of  vulnerable  and  ageing  consumers.  The  development  of 
digitalisation,  on-line  shopping  and  intermediaries  (such  as  comparison  websites)  makes 
necessary  the  adaptation  of  consumer  information  and  enforcement  initiatives  (e.g.  on-line 
Dispute Resolution). 

Although it is difficult to make forecast for the period 2014 and beyond, it is to be expected that 
the  pressure  on  resources  will  continue  among  national  administrations  dealing  with  consumer 
policy issues, for instance on market surveillance and enforcement. 

Consumer  organisations  are  in  danger  of  seeing  financial  support  by  national  authorities  being 
substantially cut, in particular in new Member States21. 

In  time  of  economic  uncertainty,  manufacturers  cut  corners  and  might  more  frequently  have 
recourse to fraud, people tend to buy cheaper goods and be subject to scams. 

Other options: 

21 BEUC report on "Reinforcing the Consumer Movement in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe (CESEE)", 

2011.  

25

 
 
                                                 
When considering globally the elements under each of the four objectives of the programme, the 
other options can be summarised as follows: 

-  The option 0 corresponds to the absolute minimum actions to be financed resulting from the 
legal obligations imposed by the Treaty and the existing EU acquis in the field of consumer 
protection. 

-  The  option  2  corresponds  to  a  more  ambitious  approach  in  line  with  Commission  priorities 
(Europe  2020,  Single  Market  Act)  and  the  on-going  reflection  on  the  future  of  consumer 
policy22. The budget under this option is around 25 millions euros annually. 

-  The  option  3  would  require  an  increase  of  budget  compare  to  the  current  programme  for 
additional actions on some of the components of the programme such as: the development of 
a public consumer product safety database; redress: setting a fund to support the financing of 
cross-border redress actions. 

The  Communication  COM(2011)500  of  29/06/2011  allocated  175  millions  (in  constant  2011 
prices) to the Consumer Programme for the period 2014-2020. 

The option 3 which had been initially considered has therefore been discarded since it did not fit 
with this allocation. It is mentioned below in the description of options but is not subsequently 
evaluated. 

Indicative table of funding distribution under the options: 

approximately the same level of funding; 

Change in level of funding as compared to the 2007-2010 period: 
= : 
 + / ++ :  higher level of funding / substantially high level of funding; 
lower level of funding / substantially lower level of funding 
 - / - - : 

2007-2010 average 

Option 1 

Option 2 

i) Safety 

•  RAPEX 

•  Cosmetics 

2,300,000 

0 

ii) Information and education 

•  Consumer market monitoring 

3,000,000 

•  Consumer organisations 

•  Consumer education 

2,100,000 

3,800,000 

•  Consumer information 

1,100,000 

= 

++ 

= 

= 

-- 

-- 

++ 

++ 

+ 

+ 

- 
Refocused on new activities 

- 
Refocused on new activities 

22 which might take the form of a Consumer Agenda to be published in 2012. 

26

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
iii) Rights and redress 

•  Preparation of legislation 

700,000 

•  Redress 

iv) Enforcement 

•  CPC Network 

•  ECC Network 

0 

500,000 

4,000,000 

- 

+ 

= 

= 

- 

++ 

+ 

++ 

The data in the table are purely indicative and cover the main actions only. 

The following activities financed under the Consumer Programme 2007-2013 will be covered by 
other  programmes  during  the  period  2014-2020:  financial  support  to  ANEC  (DG  Enterprise 
programme); activities relating to the Unfair Commercial Practice (DG Justice programme). 

The methodology and intervention logic are outlined in the chart on next page.  

27

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
28

 
 
5.2. 

Detailed description of the options 

In order to ensure flexibility, the options are presented for each of the four components. 

i)  Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance 

throughout the Union 

The GPSD will be revised before 2014. 

RAPEX 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

Maintenance of the RAPEX system, which is a legal obligation. 

Cosmetic  Products  Notifications  Portal  (CPNP):  the  creation  of  this  European  database  for 
cosmetic products is a legal requirement of Regulation 1223/2009 on cosmetic products. 

Option 1 (baseline): 

Ensure  the  stability  and  continuity  of  the  product  safety  system  by  defining  a  long-term 
perspective  for  the  operation  of  the  RAPEX  network  and  the  coordination  of  joint 
surveillance actions with Member States 

Pursue  the  development  of  international  cooperation  to  deal  with  the  globalisation  of 
production chains. 

Co-financing from the EU consumer policy budget to the Member States has been (pending 
structural  changes)  between  50  and  70  %  of  the  total  costs  of  the  joint  actions,  amounting 
annually to approximately 1.5 million euros. As such annual and project-based funding is not 
the most appropriate form, steps will be taken to put in place a more permanent coordination 
structure. 

Option 2 (additional): 

Improve the coordination of market surveillance activities through the creation of an EU level 
coordination body. 

Note: The new market surveillance legislation resulting from the ongoing revision of the 
GPSD should define the specific instruments by which such a body is funded and the 
appropriate funding should be made available. 

Raise the EU share of co-financing for joint actions and exchange of officials. 

Study the opportunity of developing EU initiatives in the field of services safety. 

Option 3 (additional) – "screened out" 

Possible development of a public Consumer Product Safety Information Database, including 
a platform for complaints. 

29

 
 
ii)  Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness 
of their rights, to develop the evidence base for consumer policy and to provide support to 
consumer organisations 

•  Consumer markets monitoring 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

Stop all activities in the field of consumer market monitoring. 

Option 1 (baseline): 

Pursue with the Consumer Markets Scoreboard and in-depth studies, adapting the frequency 
and markets coverage to the budget available. 

Support the Commission work in the field of  behavioural economics on a relatively ad hoc 
basis. 

Option 2 (additional to option 1): 

Target  the  Consumer  Markets  Scoreboard  to  specific  problems  in  the  functioning  of  the 
Single  Market,  which  negatively  affect  consumers  with  a  view  to  identifying  solutions 
benefiting the consumer. 

Target studies and surveys with a view to providing policy advice on subjects with a bearing 
on consumer interests, across all policy areas. 

Use studies on behavioural economics to inform policy makers across policy areas on matters 
affecting consumer interest.  

Make the evidence gathering at EU level (including behavioural studies) available in a more 
systematic  way  to  other  Commission  services  and  provide  incentives  for  them  to  use  it 
including through tailored-made approaches, which may suppose additional financing. 

Promote the use of EU data on consumers in Member States' policies. 

Option 3 (additional to option 2) – "screened out": 

Systematically integrate requests from Members States into data collection design. 

•  Supporting consumer organisations 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

No financial support to consumer organisations. 

Option 1 (baseline): 

-  Pursue the financial support to EU level consumer organisations, using whenever possible 

partnership agreements in order to streamline financing procedures. 

-  Pursue  (and  adapt)  the  support  to  capacity  building  for  national  consumer  organisations 
subject to a proper monitoring on the performance delivered. Explore the possibility and 
value of organisation of training in Member States. Promote multipliers of expertise at a 
national level. 

30

 
 
-  Work  with  national  authorities  to  address  the  heterogeneity  of  the  national  consumer 
organisations  standing  (and  their  sometimes  difficult  situation,  especially  in  the  new 
Member  States).  The  solution  most  probably  will  not  come  from  EU  level  funding  but 
from proper recognition of the importance of consumer organisations at national level. 

Option 2 (additional to option 1): 
Support  international  cooperation  between  consumer  organisations  (e.g.  TACD23)  to  mirror 
transatlantic enforcement cooperation. 

Option 3 (additional to option 1 or 2) – "screened out": 

Include the possibility to extend support to EU level sectoral organisations. 

•  Consumer information 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

Discontinue support to all activities in the field of consumer information, with the exception 
of  Europa  website,  DG  Health  and  Consumer  Newsletter  and  other  in-house  information 
products.  

Option 1 (baseline): 

Continue  to  support  information  campaigns  on  consumer  rights  exclusively  for  acceding 
Member States. 

Option 2 (additional to option 1): 

Support  awareness-raising  campaigns  together  with  Member  States,  possibly  associating 
other  stakeholders.  Such  campaigns  will  continue  to  involve  ECCs,  national  consumer 
authorities and consumer organisations as appropriate. 

Develop new actions to increase price transparency, stimulate cross border price comparison, 
increase  trust  in  price  comparison  results  and usability  of  such  data  for  consumers,  product 
testing, and dissemination including by mainstream media. Actions could include supporting: 

- 

the  development  of  code  of  conduct/best  practice  guidelines  for  price  comparison 
websites 

-  guidance for the development of EU-wide multilingual price comparison and comparative 

testing websites 

- 

the development of EU guidelines on price transparency (in services of general interest, 
on-line sales) 

-  promoting the sharing of best practices on facilitating access to information on complaints 
and  other  forms  of  consumer  feedback  about  bad  business  practices  and  enable  cross 
border access to such data 

- 

- 

the sharing of best practices on facilitating consumer access to personal data 

facilitating EU-wide comparative product testing and dissemination of this information 

23  The  Transatlantic  Consumer  Dialogue  (TACD)  -  forum  of  US  and  EU  consumer  organisations  promoting  joint 

consumer policy recommendations to the US government and the European Commission. 

31

 
 
                                                 
These actions will take into account the specific needs of older and vulnerable consumers. 

•  Consumer education 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

No financial support to consumer education initiatives. 

Option 1 (baseline): 

Keep  the  existing  tools  but  focus  on  a  more  selective  portfolio  of  activities.  Prioritise 
DOLCETA and the Europa Diary in terms of target users and information needs that are not 
met through existing EU or national information sources.  

Consider the extent to which DOLCETA can link to other information resources available at 
the national levels, and prioritise resources on the identified ‘gaps’ in consumer education.  

Option 2 (alternative): 

Re-focus  the  resources  currently  allocated  separately  to  DOLCETA  and  the  Europa  Diary 
(and TRACE) at two main activities: the development of the content; and the dissemination 
of  the  content  through  different  channels  for  education  purposes  depending  on  target 
audience.  The  development  and  dissemination  of  the  content  will  be  consulted  with  the 
community  of  practice  composed  of  consumer  organisations  and  other  stakeholders  across 
Member States.  

It  will  be  also  supported  by  a  network  of  stakeholders  such  as  teachers,  NGO's,  social 
services  etc.  where  the  participants  will  continuously  share  information,  skills,  and  best 
practice. 

Option 3 (alternative) – "screened out": 

Re-develop  DOLCETA  to  be  a  dynamic  and  comprehensive  information  and  education 
resource  available  in  all  21  official  languages.  It  would  be  updated  at  the  same  speed  as 
national sites so that there is synchronicity of information.  

Make  a  multi-lingual  Europa  Diary  available  in  printed  form  to  all  schools  in  the  EU  each 
year  for  all  students  in  the  15-18  year  target  group,  and  would  be  linked  link  it  to  modern 
ICTs such as 3-G mobile phone apps and interactive tools using social networking. 

iii) Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action 

and improving access to redress including alternative dispute resolution 

•  Supporting the preparation of consumer legislation 

The  revision  of  existing  legislation  or  the  proposal  of  new  legislation  will  be  subject  to  a 
separate  impact  assessment  (specific  studies  might  be  needed  to  support  such  impact 
assessments). 

•  Redress 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

No financial support to actions in the field of redress. 

32

 
 
Option 1 (baseline): 

Raise consumer and business awareness of consumer rights and the means to resolve disputes 
and obtain compensation by various means (e.g. leaflets, video, social media). 

Option 2 (additional to option 1): 

Support ADR and on-line dispute resolution (ODR) schemes. Financing a platform, including 
for associated services such as translation. 

Option 3 (additional to option 2) – "screened out": 

Collective redress: look at the  feasibility to set up a fund to support the financing of cross-
border actions. 

iv)  Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer rights by strengthening cooperation 

between national enforcement bodies and by supporting consumers with advice 

•  CPC – network of enforcement authorities 

The Commission will present a proposal for the revision of the CPC Regulation in 2014. 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

Only  maintenance  of  the  IT  tool  (in  line  with  the  obligation  stemming  from  the  CPC 
Regulation). 

Option 1 (baseline): 

Pursue  current  level  of  cooperation  through  the  network,  including  one  yearly  Sweep 
exercise, common activities and workshops for the CPC authorities. 

Option 2 (additional to option 1): 

Raise financial support to develop more frequent joint actions. 

In  addition  a  follow-up  exercise  to  every  Sweep  where  Member  States  or  an  external 
contractor  could  verify  after  a  period  of  time  whether  the  websites  checked  in  the  past  still 
comply with legal requirements.  

•  European Consumer Centres network (ECC-net): 

Option 0 (only legally compulsory spending): 

End the co-financing of ECCs. 

Option 1 (baseline): 

Strengthen 
the 
the  cooperation  with  enforcement  bodies  (CPC-Network) 
establishment  of  agreements  on  e.g.  information  sharing  and  evidence  about  complaints. 
Where applicable the ECC-Net could establish protocols for cooperation with CPC and with 
Alternative Dispute Resolution schemes, such as setting out procedures for referral to ADRs. 

through 

The ECC-net is co-financed with grant by the Commission and by Member States on a 50% 
basis.  The  possibility  to  replace  the  current  system  of  annual  grants  by  a  framework 
partnership agreement (that would reduce the administrative burden and allow the ECC-Net 
to undertake medium term forward planning) could be studied. 

33

 
 
Option 2 (additional to option 1): 

The ECC-Net could put greater emphasis on consumer awareness campaigns of a preventive 
nature on cross border issues. 

The  ECC-Net  could  be  encouraged  to  make  proactive  and  preventive  approach  towards 
targeted traders (within key sectors) in order to raise their awareness about and compliance 
with consumers' rights via voluntary self-regulatory measures. 

The ECC-Net could provide support to the web-based platform for ODR. 

6. 

ANALYSING THE OPTIONS 

Overall impact on simplification and reduction of burden 

The Programme is expected to have an impact with regard to simplification by: 

- 

- 

- 

simplifying  consumer  market  monitoring  (with  Member  States  increasingly  using  results 
from the Consumer Market Scoreboard and the market studies, including for benchmarking). 
This leads to a better understanding of consumers and business and provides feedbacks on the 
policies that deliver results and on emerging trends, thereby contributing to design smart, lean 
and  targeted  EU  policies.  The  cooperation  with  Member  States  on  data  collection  is 
voluntary; 

streamlining  cooperation  between  Member  States  through  exchange  of  information  and 
experience (CPN, CPC), as well as joint actions (RAPEX, sweeps); 

ensuring a convergence in the implementation of consumer policy, thus establishing a level 
playing field for business and simplifying life for consumers; 

-  putting  in  place  structured  cooperation  with  third  countries  (e.g.  RAPEX  China  for  the 

monitoring of unsafe products from China). 

The Programme incorporates EEA and EFTA countries. 

By  contributing  to  the  improving  of  the  functioning  of  the  Single  Market,  the  Programme  will 
have a positive impact on businesses and SMEs in particular. Some education tools are already 
used by SMEs. Using the ECCs as intermediaries might also help SMEs. 

The cooperation with the USA facilitates regulatory convergence by common understanding and 
exchange of views. 

The tables below indicate, for each of the problem identified in section 3.2 above, to which extent 
the  various  options  respond  to  this  problem  and  contribute  to  achieving  the  objective. 

34

 
 
Impact: ---: much lower; --: lower; slightly lower; 0: baseline; + slightly higher; ++: higher; +++ much higher 

Cost: ---: much more expensive; --: more expensive; slightly more expensive; 0: baseline; + slightly less expensive; ++: less expensive; +++ much less expensive 

Impact/cost: ---: much lower; --: lower; slightly lower; 0: baseline; + slightly higher; ++: higher; +++ much higher 

ANALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES 

IMPACT 

COST 

IMPACT
/ COST 

Objective 1 - Safety: to consolidate and enhance product safety through effective market surveillance throughout the Union 

The GPSD will be revised before 2014. 

Option 0 (legal 
obligations 
only) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

Maintenance of the RAPEX network 

Maintenance of the system, discontinue joint surveillance actions.  

Establishment and maintenance of the Cosmetic Products Notifications Portal (CPNP). 

Ensure the stability and continuity of the product safety 
system by defining a long-term perspective for the 
operation of the RAPEX network and the coordination 
of joint surveillance actions with Member States 

Pursue the development of international cooperation to 
deal with the globalisation of production chains. 

Under  this  option,  the  current  system  will  be  maintained;  some  streamlining  in  terms  of 
procedures could take place, but no additional effort on enforcement. 

Option 2 
(additional) 

Greater coordination of market surveillance activities 
through the creation of an EU level coordination body. 

Raise the EU share of co-financing for joint actions and 
exchange of officials. 

Study the opportunity of developing initiatives in the 
field of services safety. 

The  creation  of  an  EU  level  coordination  body  (not  an  Agency  or  any  sort  of  EU  body)  is 
expected to lead to a streamlining of the funding procedures, better planning, coordination and 
information  sharing  between  the  authorities,  as  well  as  joint  cross-border  enforcement  action. 
This  would  contribute  to  the  reinforcement  of  safety  levels  throughout  the  EU  and  better 
functioning of the Single Market. 

The  multi-annual  framework  for  market  surveillance  co-proposed  by  ENTR,  SANCO  and 
TAXUD should also provide for additional financial support to this objective.   

--- 

0 

+ 

0 

-- 

0 

+++ 

- 

++ 

importance  of 

The 
from 
Commission)  has  been  stressed  by  stakeholders  in  2010  in  the  context  of  the  public 
consultation on the review of the General Product Safety Directive. 

increased  enforcement  actions  (and  corresponding  support 

Joint actions lead to common understanding of risks and more surveillance activities on a given 
product (in line with what has been done in the past years on e.g. children clothing, lighters and 
baby walkers and helmets). 

35

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Objective 2 - Information and education: to improve consumers' education, information and awareness of their rights, to develop the evidence base for consumer 
policy and to provide support to consumer organisations  

ANALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES 

IMPACT 

COST 

IMPACT
/ COST 

• 

Consumer market monitoring 

Stop all consumer market monitoring activities 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

Scoreboard and studies with current frequency 
and coverage 

Behavioural economic ad hoc support to policy 
design 

Option 2 
(additional to 
1) 

Target Scoreboard and studies to specific 
problems in the functioning of the Single Market.  

Target studies and surveys with a view to 
providing policy advice on subjects with a bearing 
on consumer interests, across all policy areas. 

Tailor-made approach to provide support to other 
Commission services including more developed 
behavioural aspects 

Look at possibilities to further increase the use of 
the data at national level. 

Under  this  option,  the  current  data  collection  will  be  maintained  (annual  screening  of  50  consumer 
markets, 2 in-depth market studies yearly), some smaller adaptation in terms of frequency or coverage 
could  take  place,  but  no  additional  market  or  consumer  evidence  could  be  collected.  This  minimal 
option would not properly address the need for translating the findings into smart policies. 

This  minimal  option  would  not  leave  room  for  new  data  needs  that  may  arise  as  a  result  of  future 
consumer trends and challenges. 

--- 

++ 

0 

0 

- 

0 

Under this option, the need to translate findings into smart policies will be better addressed. 

++ 

- 

+ 

Including  behavioural  issues  by  testing  different  policy  options  is  crucial  for  the  success  of  priority 
policies  with  a  consumer  dimension  since  opinion  and  perception  are  not  sufficient  (as  highlighted  at 
the 2011 Consumer Summit). 

Impact of studies: 50 markets are screened annually with regard to how well they perform in terms of 
comparability, trust, problems and complaints, and overall satisfaction. Each year two in-depth market 
studies are carried out. A previous study on bank fees led the banking industry to voluntarily develop a 
code to make bank fees more transparent. As a follow-up to a study on retail electricity, the regulators 
are developing guidelines on comparability of tariffs and switching and the industry helped developing a 
consumer-friendly  bill.  The  results  of  a  behavioural  study  on  retail  investment  decisions  will  feed  into 
the Commission's work on Packaged Retail Investment Products. Developing a tailor-made approach 
contributes to designing smarter policies with a bigger impact (better up-take by consumers), focused 
on sectors linked to Europe 2020. 

Better  understanding  the  growing  gap  between  consumers  (need  for  in-depth  studies  on  specific 
sectors  and  consumer  groups:  digital,  ageing  population)  addresses  the  need  for  better  including  the 
needs  of  specific  groups  of  consumers  in  policies  (including  vulnerable  consumers).  It  contributes  to 
strengthening the impact of  policies affecting consumers, including  with  regards to the move towards 
more sustainable patterns of consumption. 

Additional analysis of the data with a focus on benchmarking national consumer policies, together with 
targeted  discussions  on  these  findings,  will  ensure  that  Member  States  make  more  use  of  the  data 
when prioritising their national actions.  

Since the establishment of the Scoreboard, several Member States have begun to use the Scoreboard 
data. For example, the Belgian authorities have set up a 'Consumption Observatory' within the ministry 
which will coordinate the national contributions to the consumer Scoreboard and ensure better use of 
the  data.  In  this  frame,  the  authorities  also  have  regular  meetings  with  the  "Consumption  Council",  a 
body  bringing  together  relevant  national  stakeholders,  to  disseminate  the  findings  and  promote  their 

36

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
use. In the Netherlands, the consumer authorities are discussing the Scoreboard market data with the 
other  relevant  ministries  (energy,  transport,  etc.)  to  ensure  that  consumer  interests  are  taken  up  in 
sectoral policy actions. In Finland, the main consumer research centre will prepare regular reports on 
the  Finish  data  provided  in  the  Scoreboard.  The  consumer  authorities  of  Denmark,  Sweden,  the  UK, 
the  Netherlands  and  Norway  are  meeting  regularly  with  the  Commission  to  discuss  their  respective 
market monitoring exercises. Finally, more than half of the Member States have started to implement 
the complaints recommendation and many use it to prioritise enforcement activities.  

It involves some additional cost but the expected impact of smarter consumer policies far outweighs the 
additional cost. 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

• 

Consumer organisations 

Discontinue support to consumer organisations at 
EU and at national level 

Pursue the financial support to EU level consumer 
organisations, using whenever possible 
partnership agreements in order to streamline 
financing procedures. 

Pursue (and adapt) the support to capacity 
building for consumer national organisations 
subject to a proper monitoring of the performance 
delivered. Explore the possibility and value of 
organisation of training in Member States. 
Promote multipliers of expertise at a national 
level. 

Work with national authorities to address the 
heterogeneity of the national consumer 
organisations standing (and their sometimes 
difficult situation, especially in the new Member 
States).  

No organised consumer voice and input into EU policy making. 

--- 

++ 

- 

The  EU  level  organisations  play  a  key  role  to  convey  consumer  the  voice  into  EU  policy  making  and 
support national consumer organisations especially in Member States having joined the EU after 2004. 

0 

0 

0 

The  use  of  partnership  agreements  has  proved  to  have  a  positive  impact  on  the  streamlining  of  the 
financing  procedures  under  the  2007-2013  Programme  and  should  be  pursued  under  the  new 
Programme. 

Capacity building for national consumer organisations is primarily the responsibility of Member States, 
but  there  is  an  EU  interest  in  a  strong  consumer  voice,  including  at  national  level,  including  for  the 
proper functioning of the national / single market.  

The  recent  evaluation  on  training  courses  organised  in  the  framework  of  TRACE  showed  that  was 
evidence that TRACE was helping build the capacity of consumer organisations. For the future, it was 
recommended that the training courses will continue via new training models (such as blended learning) 
and train multipliers. 

According  to  the  annual  2010  evaluation  made  by  BEUC,  95%  of  the  respondents  among  the 
participants to the TRACE courses indicated that the courses have had a large to medium impact  on 
their  daily  work  and  organisations  (highest  satisfaction  rates  for  the  courses  on  consumer  law  and 
financial capacity-building courses). 

Enlarging the target group for the training through  the use of languages other than English (distance-
learning or courses in Member States), the combination of traditional and on-line courses and relying on 
multipliers will increase the impact. 

Option 2 
(additional to 
1) 

Support international cooperation between 
consumer organisations (e.g. TACD) to mirror 
transatlantic enforcement cooperation. 

Relatively  low  budget  and  potentially  positive  impact  but  conditioned  to  equal  support  and  political 
commitment from the US side. 

++ 

- 

+ 

It  would  support  a  convergent  regulatory  approach  to  emerging  consumer  issues  (for  instance  on 
nanotechnologies, digital and sustainability issues). 

• 

Consumer information 

37

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Option 0 

Stop all consumer information initiatives, except 
Europa website, DG SANCO newsletters and 
other in-house information products 

This option does not address the issues identified in terms of consumer information since dealing with 
e.g. cross-border on-line issues requests EU intervention. 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

Information  campaigns  on  consumer 
exclusively for acceding Member States 

rights 

This option is a minimal one, a necessary but one-off awareness-raising exercise for acceding Member 
States. 

Option 2 
(additional to 
1) 

Support  awareness-raising  campaigns  together 
with  Member  States,  possibly  associating  other 
stakeholders. 

Develop  guidance  on  price  transparency,  cross-
border  price  comparison  and  facilitate  EU-wide 
product  testing.  Support  the  dissemination  of 
information, including through mainstream media. 

This option supports the provision of information to consumers through the appropriate channels and 
the development of tools, thus contributing to increasing consumers trust notably with regard to cross-
border e-commerce, and to the move towards more sustainable patterns of consumption. The use of 
appropriate channels of communication should allow reaching specific targets such as vulnerable and 
older consumers. 

Guidance on pricing should be targeted at national enforcement authorities (including regulators in 
liberalised industries) and aim at ensuring that information are accurate, objective and easy to use. 

Private firms have not supplied sufficiently reliable cross-border comparison tools because there are 
legal and technical difficulties and, according to some stakeholders, a desire to maintain a 
segmentation of the Single Market for commercial ("anti-competitive") ends. 

-- 

0 

+ 

0 

- 

0 

+++ 

-- 

+ 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

Option 2 
(alternative) 

• 

Consumer education 

Stop all consumer education initiatives 

portfolio 

Keep the existing tools but concentrate on a more 
selective 
activities.  Prioritise 
of 
DOLCETA  and  the  Diary  in  terms  of  target  users 
and  information  needs  that  are  not  met  through 
existing EU or national information sources.  

Consider  the  extent  to  which  DOLCETA  can  link 
to  other  information  resources  available  at  the 
national  levels,  and  prioritise  resources  on  the 
‘gaps’.  

of 

the 

two  main  activities: 
and 
content; 
the 

Re-focus 
resources  currently  allocated 
separately  to  DOLCETA  and  the  Europa  Diary 
the 
(and  TRACE)  at 
development 
the 
dissemination  of  the  content  through  different 
channels  for  education  purposes  depending  on 
target 
and 
The 
dissemination of the content will be consulted with 
the community of practice composed of consumer 
organisations  and  other  stakeholders  across 
Member States.  

development 

audience. 

Completely stopping education tools would lead to a loss of the resources invested until now into their 
development  and  the  momentum  that  has  been  built  up  at  various  levels  across  Member  States  in 
school curricula regarding EU consumer issues. 

--- 

++ 

- 

This option will not address the overarching problem of uneven and duplicated information. The content 
update cycle would remain not frequent enough. 

0 

0 

0 

 This  option  addresses  the  issue  of  uneven  and  duplicate  information  through  the  establishment  of  a 
single and coherent information resource.  

++ 

- 

+ 

The variable geometry of this option will allow the update, when needed, such as with articles, news or 
consumer related issues.  

The content can be developed in new areas and will address policy priorities such as media literacy or 
sustainable consumption.  

Synergies  between  education  and  information  tools  and  partnerships  with  other  actors  would  lead  to 
savings in terms of resources (in particular  with regard to content development). It  will also enable to 
make consumer education interact with other areas relevant for consumer protection. 

It  will  be  also  supported  by  a  network  of 
stakeholders  such  as  teachers,  NGO's,  social 
the  participants  will 
services  etc.;  where 

As  regards  the  development  and  dissemination  of  the  content,  stakeholders  and  the  network  of 
practitioners  will  have  a  constant  opportunity  to  comment  on  the  content  as  it  will  be  continuously 
updated.  

38

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
continuously  share  information,  skills,  and  best 
practice. 

The use of intermediaries and digital channels and content, should allow a broader dissemination that 
current  tools  like  Dolceta.  The  use  of  more  flexible  and  adapted  delivery  channels  will  increase  the 
impact.  

ANALYSIS OF HOW ACTIONS ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES 

IMPACT 

COST 

IMPACT
/ COST 

Objective 3 - Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory action and improving access to redress including alternative 
dispute resolution  

• 

Support the preparation of consumer 
legislation 

The revision of existing legislation or the proposal of new legislation will be subject to a separate impact 
assessment (specific studies might be needed to support such impact assessments). 

• 

Redress 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

No awareness-raising actions, no support through 
ODR 

The  lack  of  awareness  among  consumers  and  traders  of  the  existence  and  opportunities  offered  by 
ADR would greatly limit the effectiveness of this tool.  

Raise consumer and business awareness of 
consumer rights and the means to resolve 
disputes and obtain compensation through ADR 
and ODR schemes. 

This is the minimum option following the expected establishment of ADR schemes by 2014. 

-- 

0 

+ 

0 

- 

0 

Option 2 
(additional to 
1) 

Support ADR and on-line dispute resolution 
(ODR). Finance a platform, including for 
associated services such as translation. 

This option would entail additional non negligible cost, but the cost would be more than compensated 
by increased access to redress for consumers. 

++ 

- 

+ 

All  stakeholders  (consumers,  businesses)  agree  about  the  advantages  of  ADR,  in  terms  of  efficiency 
and about the very substantial potential savings compared to judicial proceedings (e.g. 2011 Consumer 
Summit). 

Objective 4 - Enforcement: to support enforcement of consumer rights by strengthening cooperation between national enforcement bodies and by supporting 
consumers with advice  

• 

CPC – network of enforcement 
authorities 

The Commission will present a proposal for the revision of the CPC Regulation in 2014 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Only the maintenance of the IT tool would be 
ensured (in line with the obligation stemming from 
the CPC Regulation). 

No common activities, no exchange of officials, no Sweeps 

-- 

+ 

- 

39

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Option 1 
(baseline) 

Pursue current level of cooperation through the 
network, including one yearly Sweep exercise, 
common activities and workshops for CPC 
authorities 

This  option  corresponds  to  maintaining  current  activity  level  (providing  IT  support  and  ensuring  that 
Member States meet their legal obligation under CPC).  It does not address the need for strengthening 
enforcement. 

0 

0 

0 

Option 2 
(additional 
to1) 

Raise the EU funding for more frequent joint 
actions. 

In addition a follow-up exercise to every Sweep 
where Member States or an external contractor 
could verify after a period of time whether the 
websites checked in the past still comply with 
legal requirements.  

Under  this  option,  we  would  work  towards  greater  uniformity  of  enforcement,  the  prioritisation  of 
enforcement cases and an increased role of the Commission in coordinating the CPC (as requested by 
a number of Member States), thus exploiting better the full potential of the CPC network and achieving 
a bigger impact. 

It is expected to achieve similar or higher rate of success than in the actions conducted so far across 
more sectors. 

- 2008 Sweep on ringtones: out of the 301 websites checked 70% were corrected after the enforcement 
phase. 

-  2009  Sweep  on  electronic  goods:  out  of  the  369  websites  checked,  84%  complied  after  the 
enforcement phase. 

++ 

- 

+ 

• 

European Consumer Centres network 
(ECC) 

Option 0 
(legal 
obligations) 

Option 1 
(baseline) 

End to co-financing of ECC 

There  would  be  no  such  action  at  the  level  of  the  Member  States  if  the  EU  withdrew  its  engagement 
resulting in detriment to consumers in cross-border activity. 

--- 

++ 

- 

Strengthen the cooperation with enforcement 
bodies through the establishment of agreements 
on e.g. information sharing and evidence about 
complaints. Where applicable the ECC-Net could 
establish protocols for cooperation with ADRs, 
such as setting out procedures for referral to 
ADRs. 

The current system of annual grants could be 
replaced by a framework partnership agreement.  

The lack of consumer confidence to purchase cross-border  would  undermine the very essence of the 
Single Market. 

Positive cost-benefit balance: 1.77 times its cost to tax payer (results of ECC evaluation) 

0 

0 

0 

This  option  addresses  the  main  shortcomings  identified  in  the  ECC  evaluation  with  regard  to 
enforcement. 

With regard to the co-financing process, framework partnership agreements would lead to a 
streamlining of procedures, reduce the administrative burden and provide greater stability conducive to 
better medium-term planning. It is expected that the number of cases handled by the ECCs (71,000 
cases in 2010, +15% compared to 2009) will further increase. 

Option 2 
(additional to 
1) 

The ECC-Net could put grater emphasis on 
consumer awareness campaigns of a preventive 
nature on cross-border issues. 

ECCs to make proactive and preventive approach 
towards targeted traders in order to raise their 
awareness about and compliance with 
consumers' rights via voluntary self-regulatory 
measures. 

Focussing  more  on  complaints  handling  and  launching  information  campaigns  on  major  cross-border 
consumer  issues  conducted  through  the  whole  ECC  Network  at  the  same  time  would  contribute  to 
raising  awareness  among  consumers  and  thus  reducing  consumer  detriment  and  the  cost  linked  to 
corrective measures (e.g. redress). 

+++ 

- 

++ 

40

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7. 

COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

The choice of the preferred option under the four objectives of the Programme is summarised 
below. 

•  Safety:  to  consolidate  and  enhance  product  safety  through  effective  market 

surveillance throughout the Union 

Option  0,  which  entails  maintaining  the  RAPEX  notification  system  and  setting  up  the 
cosmetics  database  (CPNP),  has  the  lowest  budgetary  implications.  However,  its  impact  in 
terms  of  effective  detection  of  unsafe  products  on  the  market  would  not  be  satisfactory. 
Option  1  corresponds  to  maintaining  the  current  level  of  coordination  actions  and  joint 
surveillance. It provides more effective protection for consumers against unsafe products, but 
it  does  not  to  factor  in  the  stakeholders'  request  for  greater  coordination  and  increased 
enforcement.  

This issue is addressed in option 2, which allows for better planning and information sharing 
between  authorities,  as  well  as  more  effective  enforcement  action,  including  joint  cross-
border  enforcement.  This  option  guarantees  the  most  effective  use  of  the  notification  and 
surveillance system at EU level. 

•  Information  and  education:  to  improve  consumers'  education,  information  and 
awareness  of  their  rights,  to  develop  the  evidence  base  for  consumer  policy  and  to 
provide support to consumer organisations 

Option  0  entails  no  action  at  EU  level  on  information  and  education,  no  consumer  market 
monitoring activities and no support to consumer organisations (which means in practice the 
likely  disappearance  of  substantial  and  coherent  consumer  input  into  EU  policy-making). 
Option 0 does not respond to the needs expressed by policy makers at national and EU level 
for more evidence based approach to consumer policy. 

Option 1 entails a minimum adaptation of current consumer market monitoring activities. It 
ensures  support  to  consumer  organisations  (financial  support  to  EU  level  organisations, 
capacity-building  for  national  ones)  but  it  does  not  support  international  cooperation.  This 
option  does  not  address  the  issue  of  providing  consumer  with  information  supporting  the 
development  of cross-border shopping and  the need for an overhaul of consumer education 
initiatives (as highlighted in the separate evaluation of consumer information and education 
actions). 

In contrast, option 2 envisages the development of a single and coherent information resource 
on consumer affairs at EU level and design interventions sensitive to the channels used by the 
target  groups.  It  entails  the  development  of  tailor-made  approach  with  regard  to  market 
monitoring and better understanding of consumer behaviour to design smarter policies (better 
up-take  by  consumers),  focused  on  sectors  linked  to  Europe  2020  and  relating  to  emerging 
challenges (increased complexity, digital, sustainability, ageing population). While entailing 
medium  budgetary  costs,  this  option  appears  to  best  address  the  needs  identified  by  the 
external evaluation of the information and education tools and in terms of market monitoring. 

41

 
 
•  Rights and redress: to consolidate consumer rights in particular through regulatory 

action and improving access to redress including alternative dispute resolution 

Under option 0, consumers and business will not be made aware of the potential benefit of 
Alternative Dispute Resolution, thus limiting its effectiveness. Option 1 addresses the issue 
of awareness-raising. 

Option  2  further  enhances  the  effectiveness  of  ADR  through  the  development  of  on-line 
dispute  resolution  (ODR).  This  option  appears  to  be  the  most  effective  in  passing  to 
consumers the benefits of the savings brought by ADR compared to judicial proceedings. 

•  Enforcement:  to  support  enforcement  of  consumer  rights  by  strengthening 
cooperation  between  national  enforcement  bodies  and  by  supporting  consumers 
with advice 

Option  0  corresponds  to  a  minimum  level  of  activities  and  cooperation  between  national 
enforcement authorities and the disappearance of the ECC-net, the only network supporting 
consumers  when  shopping  cross-border.  Under  option  1,  the  current  level  of  activity  is 
maintained both for the CPC and the ECC-network while addressing the main shortcomings 
identified in the functioning of the two networks. It would however not address the need for 
strengthened enforcement. 

Option  2  tackles  this  issue  and  better  exploits  the  potential  of  the  two  networks:  increased 
coordination at EU level within the CPC (as requested by Member States), leading to greater 
unity  of  enforcement  and  better  prioritisation  of  enforcement  cases;  strengthening  the 
effectiveness  of  ECCs  in  line  with  expected  increase  of  cross-border  purchases.  It  is  the 
preferred option. 

As  a  conclusion,  option  0,  which  correspond  to  maintaining  the  minimum  level  of 
intervention  imposed by the law and discontinuing  a  number of actions  at  EU  level,  would 
cause  a  reduction  of  EU  support  to  consumer  policy,  and  would  contravene  the  EU 
commitments  expressed  notably  in  the  Europe  2020  Strategy  and  the  Single  Market  Act  as 
well  as  the  conclusions  of  the  evaluation  of  the  current  Consumer  Policy  Strategy  and  the 
existing  financial  programme.  It  would  fail  to  guarantee  an  adequate  support  to  the  future 
consumer policy currently under preparation. 

Option 1, corresponding to a budget equal to or lower than the current Programme, would not 
allow  addressing  satisfactorily  the  challenges  faced  by  consumers  and  consumer  policy 
makers  in  the  next  years  while  option  3,  corresponding  to  a  substantial  increase  of  the 
consumer  budget,  may  not  be  realistic  and  entails  substantial  additional  costs  not 
commensurate with the attached additional benefits. 

Option  2  (corresponding  to  option  2  for  each  of  the  actions)  is  the  best  option  from  a 
cost/benefit  point  of  view.  The  budget  under  this  option  would  be  around  25  millions  euro 
(2011 constant prices) annually, which is in line with the proposed budget allocation for the 
consumer programme in the Communication COM(2011)500 of 29/06/2011. It also addresses 
the problems identified with regards to the administration of funds: partnerships agreements, 
currently used for the support to EU consumer organisations, could also be used for the co-
financing  of  ECCs;  the  creation  of  an  EU  level  coordination  body  for  market  surveillance 
relating to safety should also lead to a streamlining of the funding process in this area.. 

42

 
 
The  possibility  to  use  lump  sums  whenever  possible  will  be  examined  so  as  to  reduce  the 
administrative burden. 

The management by the Executive Agency for Health and Consumers also contributes to the 
streamlining of procedures in the management of the funding process. 

Under this option, the Programme will be able to support the objectives of Europe 2020 and 
of  the  future  consumer  policy,  focussing  on  safety,  information  and  education,  rights  and 
redress and enforcement. 

8. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The Programme will foresee a mid-term and an ex-post evaluation at an appropriate date. 

The  ex-post  evaluation  of  the  current  (2007-2013)  Programme  (foreseen  before  end  2015) 
will also provide useful elements for the implementation of the next Programme. 

A set of indicators has been defined for the 4 specific objectives of the Programme to monitor 
its implementation. 

The objectives are indicative and the baseline will have to be adjusted with the 2013 values. 

As  part  of  the  mid-term  evaluation  or  when  necessary,  the  objectives  will  be  reviewed  to 
guard against the possibility of diminishing returns or capacity limits. 

Objective 1:  Safety  -  to  consolidate  and  enhance  product  safety  through  effective 

market surveillance throughout the Union 

Indicator 

Source 

Current situation 

Target 

% of RAPEX notifications entailing at least one reaction (by other 
Member States) 

RAPEX 

43% (843 
notifications) in 2010 

Increase of 10% in 7 
years 

Ratio number of reactions / number of notifications (serious 
risks)*  

RAPEX 

1.07. in 2010 

Increase of 15% in 7 
years 

* a notification usually triggers several reactions from authorities from other Member States 

Note: It is also envisaged in the context of the GPSD review (currently in technical drafting) 
that the legislation could require the publication by Member States of notices of all measures 
against dangerous products, whether they were notified in RAPEX or not. Such information 
would  enable  the  Commission  to  monitor  product  safety  enforcement  beyond  RAPEX 
notifications and reactions to them. 

Objective 2: 

Information  and  education 
improve  consumers'  education, 
to 
information  and  awareness  of  their  rights,  to  develop  the  evidence  base 
for consumer policy and to provide support to consumer organisations 

- 

Indicator 

Source 

Current situation 

Target 

Number of complaint bodies submitting complaints to the ECCRS 

ECCRS (European 
Consumer Complaints 
Registration system) 

na 

60% of complaint 
bodies in 7 years 

Trust in cross-border transactions - % of consumers who are 
equally confident or more confident in making an internet 
purchase from sellers from another EU country 

Consumer 
Eurobarometer 

37% in 2010 

50% in 7 years 

43

 
 
 
Objective 3:  Rights and redress - to consolidate consumer rights in particular through 
regulatory  action  and  improving  access  to  redress  including  alternative 
dispute resolution 

Indicator 

Source 

Current situation 

Target 

% of cross-border cases referred to ADR by ECCs 
Number of cases dealt with by the ODR platform 

Annual ECC report 
Database ODR platform 

9% in 2010 
17.500 (complaints 
received by ECCs 
related to e-
commerce 
transactions) in 2010 

50% in 7 years 
38.500 (+120%) in 7 
years 

Objective 4:  Enforcement 

- 

to  support  enforcement  of  consumer  rights  by 
strengthening  cooperation  between  national  enforcement  bodies  and  by 
supporting consumers with advice 

Indicator 

Source 

Current situation 

Target 

Level of information flow and cooperation within the CPC 
Network: 
- number of requests to exchange information between CPC 
authorities 

- number of requests for enforcement measures between CPC 
authorities 
- number of alerts within the CPC network 

CPC Network Database 
(CPCS) 

annualised averages 
of 2007-2010: 

- 129 

- 142 

- 63 

Number of contacts with consumers handled by the European 
Consumer Centres (ECC) 

ECC report 

71.000 in 2010 

- increase of 40% in 7 
years 

- increase of 40% in 7 
years 

- increase of 30% in 7 
years 

Increase of 50% in 7 
years 

44

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 1:  TABLE OF ACRONYMS 

ANEC 

ADR: 

BEUC 

"The  European  consumer  voice  in  standardisation".  This  organisation 
represents  the  European  consumer  interest  in  the  creation  of  technical 
standards,  especially  those  developed  to  support  the  implementation  of 
European laws and public policies 

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Bureau  Européen  des  Unions  de  Consommateurs  (European  Consumers’ 
Organisation). BEUC acts as an umbrella for national consumer organisation 
in  Brussels.  Its  main  task  is  to  represent  our  members  and  defend  the 
interests of all Europe’s consumers 

CPC Net: 

Consumer  Protection  Cooperation  Network,  composed  of  Member  States 
national enforcement authorities 

CPN: 

Consumer  Policy  Network  -  informal  network  of  high-level  officials  from 
Member States national administrations in charge of consumer policy 

DOLCETA 

ECC: 

ECCG: 

Development  of  On  Line  Consumer  Education  Tool  for  Adults  - an  online 
consumer  information  and  education  tool  created  in  2002,  targeted  at 
teachers in adult education as well as primary and secondary and the general 
public.  A  multi-lingual  website,  DOLCETA  contains  information  such  as 
consumer rights and product safety, as well as teaching resources (including 
lesson plans) in consumer education topics 

European  Consumer  Centres  -  the  network  of  European  Consumer  Centres 
provides  EU  consumers  with  advice  on  their  rights  and  helps  them  with 
disputes with traders in other Member States 

European  Consumer  Consultative  Group  -  composed  of  European  and 
national  consumer  organisations.  It  is  the  Commission's  main  forum  to 
consult consumer organisations 

GPSD: 

General Product Safety Directive 

ODR: 

On-line Dispute Resolution 

RAPEX: 

TRACE: 

EU  rapid  alert  system  for  all  dangerous  consumer  products  (with  the 
exception of food, pharmaceutical and medical devices) 

Training courses designed to help build the capacity of European consumer 
organisations, fully funded from the EU budget 

45

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 2:  TIMETABLE OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

-  11 February: first meeting of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG 

-  March: report to EP and Council on the results of the mid-term evaluation of 2007-2013 

Strategy and Programme 

-  11-12 April: 2011 Consumer Summit (input from stakeholders on specific items) 

-  3 May: second meeting of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG 

-  April/May/June:  consultation  of  stakeholders,  through  the  consumer  networks:  national 
authorities  through  CPN  (Consumer  Protection  Network)  and  CPC  (enforcement 
authorities);  consumer  organisations  through  ECCG  (European  Consumer  Consultative 
Group). 

- 

July:  input  from  the  results  of  the  evaluation  of  consumer  information,  education  and 
capacity building actions 

-  13 July: third meeting of the ISG on consumer policy/IASG 

-  Before 3 August: transmission of the impact assessment report to the IA Board 

-  7 September: IA Board meeting 

-  October: ISC on the new Consumer Programme 

-  November / December: adoption by the College of the new Programme as a package with 

other financial frameworks 

46

 
 
 
ANNEX 3:  OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT 2007-2013 PROGRAMME 

The Programme of Community Action in the field of consumer policy 2007-201324 has two 
operational objectives: 

•  Objective I - to ensure a high level of consumer protection, notably through improved 
evidence, better consultation and better representation of consumers’ interests, and 

•  Objective  II  -  to  ensure  the  effective  application  of  the  rules,  notably  through 

enforcement cooperation, information, education and redress. 

These  objectives  have  been  pursued  through  a  combination  of  11  actions.  Concrete  actions 
and budget allocations have been established in annual work plans, which are adopted by the 
Commission after consultation of a Member States committee. 

In  addition  to  priorities  already  addressed  in  earlier  programmes,  such  as  involvement  of 
consumer  organisations  in  policy  making  and  better  enforcement,  the  Programme  2007  to 
2013  addresses  the  need  to  develop  the  evidence  base,  to  integrate  consumer  policy  more 
actively  into  other  EU  policies,  and  to  reinforce  the  cooperation  with  Member  States  on 
market surveillance. 

The total budget allocation for the 7 years period is set at 156.8 million euros: 136.6 million 
euros  of  operational  budget  and  20.2  million  euros  for  technical  and  administrative 
assistance, including for the functioning of the Executive Agency). The yearly average of the 
operational budget is 20 million €. 

Grants  and  contracts  under  the  Programme  2007  –  2013  have  been  implemented  by  the 
Commission  and  since  2008  by  the  Executive  Agency  for  Health  and  Consumers25  on  a 
centralised basis. Grants were given to support 

• 

• 

joint  actions  by  the  Community  and  competent  authorities  from  Member  States  and 
EFTA/EEA third countries for the support of the European Consumer Centres ("ECC-
net),  joint  enforcement  actions  in  the  area  of  safety  and  of  Consumer  Protection 
Cooperation ("CPC"), and the exchange of enforcement officials (maximum level of 
co-financing: 50 %) 

the functioning of EU-level consumer organisations (maximum level of co-financing: 
50%)  and  EU-level  consumer  organisations  representing  consumer  interests  in  the 
development  of  standards  for  products  and  services  at  Community  level  (maximum 
level of co-financing: 95 %) 

24 OJ L 2006/404, page 39 – Decision No 1926/2006/EC of 18 December 2006 

25 Commission Decision 2008/544/EC of 20 June 2008 amending Decision 2004/858/EC in order to transform 
the  "Executive  Agency  for  the  Public  Health  Programme"  into  the  "Executive  Agency  for  Health  and 
Consumers"  and  to  extend  the  Agency's  implementation  tasks  to  the  management  of  the  Consumer 
programme for 2007 – 2013 

47

 
 
 
                                                 
• 

the development of European Master Degree courses in consumer issues (maximum 
level of co-financing: 85 %), including scholarships for students and teachers 

To simplify the management of grants, use was made of flat rates wherever possible (mainly 
to cover overheads, travel  and subsistence allowances) and Partnership agreements  for four 
years were established in 2010 with EU-level consumer organisations. 

Summary of estimated operational budget 2011 per objective and action 

OBJECTIVE I - To ensure a high level of consumer protection, notably through an 
improved evidence basis, better consultation and better representation of 
consumers' interests. 
Action 1. Knowledge base economic interest 
Action 2. Knowledge base safety 
Action 3. Support for scientific advice 
Action 4. Preparation of legislation 
Action 5. European consumer organisations 
Action 6. Community consumer organisations for standardisation 
Action 7. Capacity building for consumer organisations. 

OBJECTIVE II - To ensure the effective application of consumer protection rules, in 
particular through enforcement cooperation, information, education and redress. 
Action 8. Joint actions GPSD and CPC 
Action 9. Transposition (notably UCP and CPC)  
Action 10. Information, advice and redress 
Action 11. Consumer education 

8 850 000

4 940 000

330 000
230 000
1 350 000
1 300 000
700 000

11 290 000

2 555 000

5 705 000
3 030 000

TOTAL 

20 140 000

48

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 4:  DATA  FROM  THE  EVALUATION  OF  THE  2007-2013  STRATEGY  AND 

PROGRAMME 

Methodology and evaluation issues 

Three main sources of data have been used in carrying out these evaluations: 

- 

- 

- 

a literature review, 

collection of numerical data and 

consultations,  including  discussions  with  key  stakeholders  in  the  European  Parliament, 
Commission  services,  EU  organisations  representing  the  different  stakeholder  interests, 
Member State authorities and national consumer organisations. This includes meetings as 
part of four country case studies. 

The  criteria  used  in  the  evaluations  include  effectiveness,  relevance,  efficiency/cost-
effectiveness, sustainability, external and internal coherence, synergies, EU added value and 
overall impacts (expected and unexpected). 

There are some intrinsic limitations to the evaluation, in particular the difficulty of isolating 
the  effects  of  EU  consumer  policy  from  the  general  economic  and  social  context  since,  for 
instance, consumer confidence is subject to the influence of many factors; the fact that impact 
of actions such as consumer empowerment are very long term; the numerous actors involved; 
and the fact that some actions are at an early stage of implementation. 

Success in meeting the objectives: 

-  Stakeholders  consider  that  the  current  Strategy  has  globally  met  its  objectives:  between 
70 and 80% of national authorities and consumer organisations believe that the Strategy 
has made a moderately to very successful contribution towards its objectives26, with the 
exception of redress and, to a lesser extent, of the objective of putting consumers at the 
heart of other EU policies and regulation (around 50%). 

-  The current Programme has been considered successful in meeting most of its objectives: 
For  8  out  of  10  actions,  around  70%  of  Member  states  were  positive  on  the  degree  to 
which the Programme 2007-2013 has addressed the need of consumers (moderate to large 
success),  with  the  exception  of  redress.  Consumer  organisations  believe  that  the 
Programme  has  had  a  moderate  to  large  success  for  6  out  of  10  actions,  and  a  limited 
success for the 4 others. 

Impact: 

- 

88% of national authorities and 82% of consumer organisations believe that the current 
Strategy has made a large or moderate contribution to EU consumer policy initiatives. 

26  Better  monitoring  of  consumer  markets  and  national  consumer  policies;  Better  consumer  protection 
regulation; Better redress; Better informed and educated consumers; Putting consumers at the heart of other 
EU policies and regulation 

49

 
 
 
                                                 
-  86% of national  authorities and 52% of consumer organisations believe that the current 
Programme has made a (medium to large) positive impact. This result is better than for 
the previous Programme (for which 70% of national authorities thought the impact was 
positive and 54% of consumer organisations thought the impact was low positive). 

This conclusion is confirmed when evaluating the impact by actions, with the majority of 
Member  States  believing  that  the  actions  the  Programme  to  date  have  had  a  large  to 
moderate  positive  impact  on  consumer  protection27,  with  the  exception  of  redress.  The 
majority  of  consumer  organisations  also  believe  that  the  actions  under  the  Programme 
have had a large positive impact on consumer protection28. 

Sustainability: 

-  82% of  national authorities and 70% of consumer organisations believe that the actions 
under  the  Programme  will  have  a  long  term  effect  (up  to  10  years)  on  consumer 
protection, safety, empowerment and education. 

Complementarity to actions at national level: 

-  9  national  authorities  out  of  10  believe  that  the  actions  undertaken  under  the  current 

Programme are complementary to their national consumer policy. 

-  The  majority  of  national  authorities  (55%)  believe  that  Member  States  are  increasingly 
taking over or multiplying actions launched under the current Programme at national level 
(examples highlighted by respondents include: enforcement of consumer protection rules, 
actions  relating  to  product  safety,  developing  redress  system,  informing  and  educating 
consumers).  However,  almost  half  of  consumer  organisations  do  not  share  this  view 
(some of them highlight the gap between EU and national consumer policy). 

Addressing the new social and environmental challenges: 

-  According to national authorities and consumer organisations, the new environmental and 
social challenges (ageing population, climate change, limited natural resources and social 
exclusion) are only partly addressed by the current Strategy. Similarly, 50% of consumer 
organisations (and 32% of Member States authorities) think that the current Programme 
should address other or emerging needs. 

Success in meeting the objectives: 

-  Stakeholders  consider  that  the  current  Strategy  has  globally  met  its  objectives:  between 
70 and 80% of national authorities and consumer organisations believe that the Strategy 
has made a moderately to very successful contribution towards its objectives29, with the 

27 For 6 put of 10 actions, at least 40% thought that the actions had a large positive impact with around a further 

30% indicating that the impact had been moderately positive 

28 For 6 actions out of 10, a majority of consumer organisations think that the positive impact has been large (20 

to 30% moderately large). 

29  Better  monitoring  of  consumer  markets  and  national  consumer  policies;  Better  consumer  protection 
regulation; Better redress; Better informed and educated consumers; Putting consumers at the heart of other 
EU policies and regulation 

50

 
 
                                                 
exception of redress and, to a lesser extent, of the objective of putting consumers at the 
heart of other EU policies and regulation (around 50%). 

-  The current Programme has been considered successful in meeting most of its objectives: 
For  8  out  of  10  actions,  around  70%  of  Member  states  were  positive  on  the  degree  to 
which the Programme 2007-2013 has addressed the need of consumers (moderate to large 
success),  with  the  exception  of  redress.  Consumer  organisations  believe  that  the 
Programme  has  had  a  moderate  to  large  success  for  6  out  of  10  actions,  and  a  limited 
success for the 4 others. 

Main results on the various components of the Strategy and Programme 

i)  Integration 

-  The  work  on  integration  of  consumer  interest  into  other  EU  policies  is  seen  to  have 
progressed  under  the  current  Strategy.  Integration  activities  are  considered  as  very 
positive, with a high added-value. These activities are supported by the evidence gathered 
through consumer market monitoring. 

-  Stakeholders have however pointed at some confusion about the role and responsibility of 
the respective commission services and EU networks in the field of consumer policy. 

ii)  Consumer market monitoring 

Both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  strongly  believe  that  the  current 
Strategy  has  been  successful  with  regard  to  better  monitoring  of  consumer  markets 
(Scoreboards and related studies)30. They also believe (national authorities to a larger degree 
than  consumer  organisations  however)  that  the  current  Programme  has,  in  this  field, 
successfully addressed the needs31.  

Both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that  consumer  market 
monitoring has a positive impact, with a substantial proportion believing that this impact is 
large. There is a slightly upward trend compared to the previous Programme32. 

-  Consumer market monitoring is an essential tool to support the integration of consumer 

interest into other EU policies. 

-  Behavioural  economics  will  play  a  key  role  when  dealing  with  increasingly  important 

issues such as moving towards more sustainable patterns of consumption. 

30  Strategy  2007-2013:  national  authorities:  around  90%  moderately  to  very  successful  (around  35%  very 
successful).  Consumer  organisations:  around  80%  moderately  to  very  successful  (around  35%  very 
successful). 

31  Programme  2007-2013:  Addressing  needs:  national  authorities:  75%  moderate  to  large  success  (more  than 

25% large). Consumer organisations: 55% moderate to large success (20% large) 

32  Evaluation  of  the  impact  of  the  current  action  under  the  current  Programme  (mid-term  evaluation  results): 
national authorities: 80% moderate to large impact (35% large). Consumer organisations: 70% moderate to 
large  impact  (more  than  45%  large).  Programme  2004-2007:  national  authorities:  77%  (46%  large); 
Consumer organisations: 67% (24% large). 

51

 
 
                                                 
iii) 

Safety 

Both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that  the  current  Strategy  has 
been successful with regard to enforcement, including safety (RAPEX)33. They also believe 
(national  authorities  to  a  larger  degree  than  consumer  organisations)  that  the  current 
Programme has, in this field, successfully addressed the needs34. 

An  overwhelming  majority  of  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that 
the  activities  relating  to  enforcement  (including  those  related  to  safety)  under  the  current 
Programme have an impact, with around half of them believing that the impact is large. This 
is in line with the results under the previous Programme35. 

Authorities  involved  in  safety  will  have  increasingly  to  deal  with  issues  linked  to  the 
globalisation of the production chain and the safety of imports. The evaluation highlights the 
efforts made so far to work with third countries and stresses that this momentum should be 
kept. 

The more specific public consultation on the revision of the General Product Safety Directive 
(GPSD)  concluded  that  the  joint  surveillance  actions  financed  under  the  Programme  were 
very  useful.  Ways  to  improve  cooperation  would  be  to  increase  financial  support  to  joint 
surveillance  actions  and  exchange  of  officials  and  to  establish  a  coordination  body  at  EU 
level. A majority of economic operators consider that differences between Member States in 
enforcing  product  safety  legislation  are  causing  problems  for  businesses.  Respondents  are 
overwhelmingly  of  the  opinion  that  more  intensive  information  sharing  and/or  cooperation 
between Member States would enhance the safety of consumers throughout the EU. 

iv)  Consumer rights and redress 

-  Further  strengthening  the  enforcement  of  consumer  rights  and  redress  should  be  given 

priority. 

Network of European Consumer Centres (ECC-net): 

-  The evaluation concludes that there has been increasing support to consumers who seek 
advice  on  disputes  cross-border  through  the  ECCs.  However,  the  evaluation  concludes 
that their visibility should be improved. 

CPC and "Sweeps" 

-  Stakeholders  highlighted  the  positive  impact  of  the  Strategy  and  Programme  on  the 
strengthening  of  enforcement,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  EU-wide  network  of 

33  Strategy  2007-2013  –  enforcement  (including  safety):  national  authorities:  around  85%  moderately  to  very 
successful  (around  25%  very  successful).  Consumer  organisations:  around  85%  moderately  to  very 
successful (around 5% very successful) 

34 Programme 2007-2013 - Addressing needs: national authorities: 70% moderate to large success (more than 

25% large). Consumer organisations: 50% moderate to large success (5% large) 

35 Impact (enforcement in general): national authorities: 80% moderate to large impact (55% large). Consumer 
organisation: 80% moderate to large impact (45 % large). Coherent with findings on previous Programme: 
around  80%  of  both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believed  that  impact  of  actions  on 
safety was moderately to largely positive. 

52

 
 
                                                 
enforcement authorities (CPC) and the coordinated market surveillance and enforcement 
actions ("Sweeps") by the network. 

Legislation 

-  The evaluation highlighted the positive impact of the harmonisation brought by the Unfair 
Commercial  Practice  Directive  (UCP),  Timeshare  Directive,  GPSD,  Package  Travel 
(proposal expected in the second half of this year). It also mentioned the concerns relating 
to the level of harmonisation in the current discussion on the Consumer Rights Directive. 

-  The  issue  of  redress  has  been  singled  out  (for  sometimes  diverging  reasons  among 
stakeholders)  as  the  main  area  where  not  enough  progress  has  been  achieved  by  the 
Strategy and Programme. 

v)  Support to consumer organisations 

Consumer organisations believe that the support provided under the current Programme has 
contributed to the integration of consumer interests into EU policy36 and, to a lesser extent, to 
improving the awareness and understanding of the work by the Commission. A majority of 
consumer  organisations  also  believe  that  the  training  for  national  consumer  organisations 
organised  under  the  TRACE  programme  has  (partly  to  completely)  covered  their  priority 
issues.  More  generally  on  capacity  building  for  national  and  EU  consumer  organisations, 
while  a  majority  of  national  authorities  believe  that  the  Programme  has  been  successful  in 
meeting this need, a majority of consumer organisations believe that it has only had a limited 
success37. 

Both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that  support  to  consumer 
organisations  under  the  current  Programme  has  a  positive  impact.  This  is  in  line  with  the 
results under the previous Programme38. 

The evaluation concludes that the role of EU-level consumer organisations (BEUC - Bureau 
Européen  des  Consommateurs  and  ANEC  -  European  Consumer  Voice  in  Standardisation), 
financially  supported  through  the  Programme,  is  essential  for  consolidating  national 
consumer organisations input into EU policy making. 

vi)  Consumer information and education 

The  views  of  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  diverge  with  regard  to 
consumer  education  actions  under  the  Programme:  while  a  majority  of  national  authorities 

36 Consumer organisations believe that support from Commission has contributed to the integration of consumer 

interest into EU policy (70% moderately to significantly, 35% significantly). 

37  Addressing  needs:  Capacity  building  for  consumer  organisations  at  EU  and  national  level:  national 
authorities: around 60% moderate to large success. Consumer organisations: 35% moderate to large success 
(20% large)  

38 Programme 2007-2013: Impact: national authorities: 60% moderate to large impact (20% large). Consumer 
organisations:  75%  moderate  to  large  impact  (60%  large).  Previous  programme:  Member  States:  58%  on 
capacity-building;  65%  on  support  to  EU  level  organisations;  consumer  organisations:  85%  on  capacity-
building; 90% on support to EU level organisations. 

53

 
 
                                                 
believe  these  actions  have  been  successful  in  meeting  stakeholders'  need,  a  majority  of 
consumer organisations believe they only achieved limited success in meeting the needs39. 

Both national authorities and consumer organisations believe that consumer education actions 
under the current Programme have a positive impact. There is an upward trend compared to 
the previous Programme40. 

Both  national  authorities  and  consumer  organisations  believe  that  consumer  information 
actions under the current Programme have a positive impact41.  

-  While the evaluation stresses the importance of consumer education, it points at the need 
to rationalise resources and consolidate some of the current tools. It highlights the need to 
better  define  the  target  audience  of  Dolceta.  The  evaluation  suggests  finding  synergies 
between Dolceta and national curricula. 

-  The country studies highlighted the importance of consumer education. 

39 Programme 2007-2013 - Consumer education: Addressing needs: national authorities: around 65% moderate 
to  large  success  (more  than  35%  large).  Consumer  organisations:  30%  moderate  to  large  success  (10% 
large). N.B.: consumer organisations are not the target group for these actions. The actions supplement and 
support those of the authorities. 

40 Programme 2007-2013 - Impact education: national authorities: 73% moderate to large impact (41% large). 
Consumer  organisation:  65%  moderate  to  large  impact  (25%  large).  Previous  programme:  National 
authorities: 69%; consumer organisations: 40%. 

41  Impact:  national  authorities:  83%  moderate  to  large  impact  (46%  large).  Consumer  organisations:  79% 

moderate to large impact (37% large). 

54