COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Evaluation of the Energy Labelling and Ecodesign Directives Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the review of Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the indication of labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products
Date: 2015-07-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Energy, European Commission
Subjects: consumer information, energy consumption, energy saving, free movement of goods, household electrical appliance, labelling, single market

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.7.2015  SWD(2015) 143 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Evaluation of the Energy Labelling and Ecodesign Directives Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the review of Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the indication of labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products    {COM(2015) 345 final}  
 
 
Contents 
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 3 

Relevance ................................................................................................................................................ 5 

Energy efficiency and protection of the environment ......................................................................... 5 

Consumers ........................................................................................................................................... 6 

Free movement .................................................................................................................................... 7 

Effectiveness ............................................................................................................................................ 8 

The energy label ................................................................................................................................ 11 

Product-specific regulations and voluntary agreements ................................................................... 13 

Compliance and enforcement............................................................................................................ 14 

Non-energy environmental impacts .................................................................................................. 15 

Free movement .................................................................................................................................. 16 

Other effects ...................................................................................................................................... 17 

Efficiency ............................................................................................................................................... 17 

Regulatory process ............................................................................................................................ 19 

EU-added value ..................................................................................................................................... 21 

Coherence ............................................................................................................................................. 23 

Coherence between Ecodesign and Energy Labelling ....................................................................... 23 

Coherence with other EU policy ......................................................................................................... 24 

Coherence with international approaches ........................................................................................ 25 

Robustness of the evaluation ................................................................................................................ 33 

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 34 

Relevance ........................................................................................................................................... 34 

Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 34 

Efficiency ............................................................................................................................................ 35 

EU-added value ................................................................................................................................. 35 

Coherence .......................................................................................................................................... 35 

Annex – Detailed presentation of the Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Directive and their 
implementation ..................................................................................................................................... 37 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

1.  The  Energy  Labelling1  and  Ecodesign  Directives2  were  adopted  to  address  the  basic 
problem that products can have a negative impact on the environment depending on how 
they are made, used and disposed of. The Eco-design Directive addresses this problem by 
'pushing'  the  market  towards  greener  (in  particular,  more  energy  efficient)  products  by 
banning  the  worst  performing  ones.  The  Energy  Labelling  Directive  addresses  this 
problem  by  'pulling'  the  market  towards  more  energy  efficient  products  by  informing 
consumers  about  the  energy  efficiency  and  other  resources  use  of  products  through  an 
energy label (see figure 1), thereby encouraging them to buy more energy efficient ones. 
The Directives provide the framework. The specific requirements for each product group 
are,  after  a  preparatory  study  and  extensive  stakeholder  consultation,  set  out  in  product 
specific regulations (delegated acts for energy labelling; implementing acts for ecodesign). 

2.  The  Eco-design  Directive  contains  a  list  of  products  which  have  been  identified  by  the 
Council and the European Parliament as priorities for implementation by the Commission. 
The  Eco-design  Directive  further  requires  the  Commission  regularly  to  adopt  working 
plans that set out further indicative lists of product groups to be considered as priorities for 
the adoption of specific regulations. The initial list of priority products in the Eco-design 
Directive is based on the European Climate Change Programme which identified products 
offering a high potential for cost-effective improvements of energy performance and CO2 
emissions reductions. The two Commission working plans adopted so far were based on 
studies screening all energy-related products for their savings potential and suitability for 
regulation, and were consulted on extensively with stakeholders. Regulations for specific 
products  are  developed  on  the  basis  of  a  preparatory  study,  which  follows  the 
comprehensive  methodology  laid  down  in  the  "Methodology  for  the  Eco-design  of 
Energy-related  Products"  ("MEErP").  Detailed  background  on  the  Directives  and  their 
implementation is provided in the annex. 

1 Directive 2010/30/EU, formerly Directive 92/75/EEC 

2 Directive 2009/125/EC, formerly Directive 2005/32/EC 

3 

 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 1: EU energy label for fridges 1995-2011 (left) and from 2011 (right) 

3.  The Ecodesign Directive required the Commission to review its effectiveness and that of 
its implementing  measures  by  2012.  That  review3  concluded  that  no  immediate  revision 
was necessary and that there was no need for the extension of the scope of the Directive to 
non-energy related products. The Commission's review proposed that specific aspects of 
the  Ecodesign  Directive  could  be  reassessed  during  the  review  of  the  Energy  Labelling 
Directive due in 2014. The 2012 review concluded that special attention should be paid to 
those  aspects  that  could  not  be  fully  assessed  such  as  the  efficiency  of  implementing 
measures  and  harmonised  standards,  and  a  more  close  coordination  between  the 
implementation of the two Directives. 

4.  The Energy Labelling Directive requires the Commission to review its effectiveness and 
that of its delegated acts by 2014. In addition, it also requires the Commission to assess 
the contribution of the requirement to show the energy class in advertisements to the aim 
of the Directive, the effectiveness of the public procurement provisions of the Directive4 
and  the  need  for  amending  the  design  and  content  of  the  label  in  the  light  of  technical 

3 COM(2012) 765 final 

4 Article 9(1) of the Energy Labelling Directive. This article was already reviewed during the preparations for 
the Energy Efficiency Directive (Directive 2012/27/EU) and as a result deleted from 5 June 2014 and replaced 
by provisions in the Energy Efficiency Directive. 

4 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
evolution  and  the  understanding  by  consumers  of  the  label  layout.  In  addition,  the 
Commission  decided  to  examine  whether  the  current  modalities  need  to  be  adapted  to 
deliver its objectives in a less intrusive way5. 

5.  A joint ex-post evaluation addressing all key aspects of the two Directives makes sense as 
the  effects  of  ecodesign  implementing  regulations  and  energy  labelling  delegated 
regulations  applicable  to  the  same  energy-related  products  are  often  linked  and 
complementary. 

RELEVANCE 

6.  The objectives of the Energy Labelling and Ecodesign Directives are threefold: 

−  Increasing energy efficiency and the level of protection of the environment 

−  Providing  consumers  with  information  that  allows  them  to  choose  more  efficient 

products 

−  Ensuring the free movement of energy-related products in the European Union 

7.  These objectives remain as relevant as they were more than 20 years ago. In the context of 
establishing the Single Market by 1992, a common energy labelling scheme was agreed in 
that year. From 1995 onwards the energy label was implemented for washing machines, 
tumble  driers,  washer-driers,  dishwashers,  refrigerators  and  freezers,  electric  ovens,  air 
conditioners  and  lamps.  Minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements  for  new  boilers  were 
introduced  in  1992.  This  was  followed  in  subsequent  years  by  requirements  for 
refrigerators  and  freezers  and  for  ballasts  for  fluorescent  lighting.  The  adoption  of  the 
Eco-design  Directive  in  2005  provided  the  framework  to  ensure  EU  harmonised  energy 
efficiency requirements for a broad range of product groups; at present more than 20. In 
addition,  along  with  the  implementation  of  the  Ecodesign  Directive,  energy  labels  were 
developed for additional products such as televisions and heating equipment. 

Energy efficiency and protection of the environment 
8.  Increasing energy efficiency is even more relevant than it was 20 years ago. The European 
Union is facing unprecedented challenges resulting from increased dependence on energy 
imports  and  scarce  energy  resources,  and  the  need  to  limit  climate  change  and  to 
overcome  the  economic  crisis.  Energy  efficiency  plays  an  important  role  in  addressing 
these  challenges.  It  improves  the  European  Union’s  security  of  supply  by  reducing 
primary energy consumption and decreasing energy imports. It helps to reduce greenhouse 
gas  emissions  in  a  cost-effective  way,  thereby  mitigating  climate  change.  Shifting  to  a 
more  energy-efficient  economy  should  also  accelerate  the  spread  of  innovative 
technological  solutions  and  improve  the  competitiveness  of  industry  in  the  European 
Union, boosting economic growth and creating high quality jobs in several sectors related 
to energy efficiency. 

5 COM(2014)910, Commission Work Programme 2015, A New Start 

5 

 
 
 
                                                            
9.  In  2007,  the  European  Council  made  energy  efficiency  a  core  part  of  its  2020  strategy6 
with a 20% energy efficiency target by 2020, the achievement of which was the key driver 
for  the  establishment  of  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive7.  The  Juncker  Commission  has 
made a resilient Energy Union with a forward-looking climate change policy one of its ten 
priorities,  which  includes  significantly  enhancing  energy  efficiency  beyond  the  2020 
objective8. In October 2014 the European Council set an indicative target at the EU level 
of at least 27% for improving energy efficiency in 2030. This will be reviewed by 2020, 
having  in  mind  an  EU  level  of  30%9.  The  Commission's  vision  for  an  Energy  Union 
recognises  that  the  EU  has  put  in  place  the  world's  leading  set  of  measures  to  become 
more  efficient  in  our  energy  consumption  through  energy  labelling  and  ecodesign 
legislation10. 

10. The objective to address other environmental aspects of products has gained in relevance 
compared to 20 years ago. Eco-industries and eco-innovation currently supply a third of 
the global market for green technologies, worth a trillion euros and expected to double by 
2020. The Juncker Commission made a commitment to a revised proposal for the circular 
economy that will reinforce this trend thus contributing to green growth. 

Consumers  
11. Providing consumers with information that allows them to choose more efficient products 
remains relevant. Four out of 10 people say that the environmental impact of a product or 
service  influences  their  purchasing decision11.  Energy-related  performance  is  a  top  level 
concern  for  consumers,  often  the  most  frequently  mentioned  purchasing  consideration 
(along  with  price)  more  than  twice  as  frequently  as  appliance  brand12.  European 
consumers trust the energy label and usually take it into account when they buy electrical 
household appliances13. 

6 Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council (8/9 March 2007), 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/93135.pdf 
7 Directive 2012/27/EU 

8 Jean-Claude Juncker, A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change: 
Political Guidelines for the next European Commission,  http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/docs/pg_en.pdf 

9 European Council (23 and 24 October 2014) Conclusions, 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/145397.pdf 

10 Energy Union Package,  A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate 
Change Policy, COM(2015)80 

11 Consumer attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection (Flash Eurobarometer 358) , June 
2013 

12 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive: 
Background report I: Literature review, December 2013.  

13 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive: 
Background report I: Literature review, December 2013.  

6 

 
 
                                                            
12. The media through which consumers search for information has changed over the last 20 
years.  There  is  an  overall  trend  towards  buying  products,  including  energy-related 
appliances,  on  the  internet.  In  addition,  increasing  proportions  of  purchasers  seek 
information  online  before  they  buy  a  product  in  a  shop.  The  opposite  phenomenon  also 
exists  i.e.  purchasers  browsing  in  the  physical  world  but  buying  online,  still  relatively 
marginal in the European Union, though more pronounced in the US14. The Ecodesign and 
Energy  Labelling  frameworks  have  the  necessary  flexibility  to  be  able  to  adapt  to  such 
developments: the energy labelling regulations have recently been adapted to ensure that 
the energy label is shown on the internet15. 

Free movement 
13. The  principle  of  free  movement  of  goods  is  one  of  the  cornerstones  of  the  European 
Union. The Juncker Commission made it one of its ten priorities to complete the internal 
market  in  products  and  services  and  make  it  the  launch  pad  for  our  companies  and 
industry to thrive in the global economy16. The free movement of goods is the most highly 
developed of the four ‘freedoms’ that make up the single market17. Around 75% of intra-
EU trade is in goods. In today’s single market for goods, it is easy to buy and sell products 
in 28 Member States with a total population of more than 500 million. Consumers have a 
wide choice and are able to shop around for the best offers. The free movement of goods 
is also vital to the success of thousands of EU businesses18. The GDP increase that can be 
attributed  to  the  Single  Market  equates  to  almost  €1200  extra  yearly  income  per  EU 
household19.   

14. There is free movement of goods in the European Union because, for most products, the 
European  Union  has  managed  to  agree  on  the  extent  to  which  we  should  protect  at 
European Union level various public interests that could otherwise be invoked by Member 
States  to  justify  barriers  to  goods  entering  (or  leaving)  their  territories.  So-called 

14 SWD(2014) 57 Commission Staff Working Document: Impact Assessment Accompanying the document 
Commission Delegated Regulation amending Commission Delegated Regulations (EU) No 1059/2010, 
1060/2010, 1061/2010, 1062/2010, 626/2011, 392/2012, 874/2012, 665/2013, 811/2013 and 812/2013 with 
regard to labelling of energy-related products on the Internet 

15 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 518/2014 of 5 March 2014 amending Commission Delegated 
Regulations (EU) No 1059/2010, (EU) No 1060/2010, (EU) No 1061/2010, (EU) No 1062/2010, (EU) No 
626/2011, (EU) No 392/2012, (EU) No 874/2012, (EU) No 665/2013, (EU) No 811/2013 and (EU) No 812/2013 
with regard to labelling of energy-related products on the internet 

16 Jean-Claude Juncker, A New Start for Europe: My Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic 
Change: Political Guidelines for the next European Commission,  http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/docs/pg_en.pdf 

17 COM(2013)74 

18 COM(2013)74 

19 20 years of the European Single Market – Key Points. European Commission, 2012. 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publications/docs/20years/key-points-web_en.pdf 

7 

 
 
                                                            
‘harmonisation 
requirements that products must meet to benefit from free movement. 

legislation’  such  as  Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  specifies 

EFFECTIVENESS 

15. The  evaluation  of  the  effectiveness  of  the  policy  framework  has  revealed  that  its 
objectives  have  been  achieved.    Nevertheless,  the  introduction  of  A+  and  higher classes 
on  the  energy  label  during  the  last  review  of  the  Directive  in  2010  have  reduced  the 
effectiveness of the label for consumers and there is untapped potential for energy savings 
and reducing other environmental impacts20. 

16. To date 24 ecodesign implementing regulations have been put in place. Products covered 
range  from  household  appliances,  such  as  fridges,  lamps  and  vacuum  cleaners,  to 
professional  and  industrial  equipment,  such  as  electric  motors,  power  transformers  and 
fans. Two further products groups, i.e. imaging equipment and complex set-top boxes, are 
covered  by  voluntary  industry  agreements  endorsed  by  the  Commission.  In  addition,  13 
delegated  regulations  on  energy  labelling  now  ensure  that  a  range  of  mostly  consumer 
products  must  be  sold  with  an  EU  energy  label  attached.  For  the  majority  of  product 
groups there is a strong consensus on the appropriateness of the measures.21 

17. The  energy  efficiency  of  the  regulated  products  has  increased.  The  effectiveness  of  the 
policy  is  illustrated  by  the  transformation  of  the  market  shown  for  a  number  of  product 
groups in figure 2 and 3 below. It is possible that the energy efficiency improvement is in 
part due to other factors such as ongoing market trends in energy efficiency improvement 
independently of the policy. No ex-post counterfactual data is available to assess this. It is 
likely, however, that a significant part of the energy efficiency improvement is due to the 
Directives:  e.g.  for  vacuum  cleaners,  a  product  that  was  until  recently  not  regulated  by 
ecodesign or energy labelling, energy use was, in absence of regulation, increasing rather 
than decreasing22.  

20 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

21 For a full list of these measures see the annex.  

22 AEA Energy & Environment, Work on Preparatory Studies for Eco-Design Requirements of EuPs, Lot 17 
Vacuum Cleaners, February 2009. 

8 

 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 2: Transformation of the EU Market for refrigerators and freezers 1992-200323 

Figure 3: Transformation of the market for selected appliances (2009-2014, for Belgium)24 

23 Benoit Lebot & Paul Waide, The European Energy Label: An energy efficiency success story with an impact 
beyond EU borders, September 2005 

24 Based on GfK data 

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
18. In terms of energy savings, the ecodesign and energy labelling measures in place to date 
and soon to be adopted are estimated to save 175 Mtoe primary energy per year by 202025. 
This corresponds to 19% savings with respect to business-as-usual energy use scenario for 
those  products.  As  such,  these  policies  will  deliver  almost  half  of  the  20%  energy 
efficiency target by 2020. 

19. The Directives have helped consumers to lower their utility bills compared to what they 
would  have  been  in  their  absence.  The  number  of  household  appliances  in  the  EU  has 
risen  by  a  quarter  in  the  past  ten  years,  but  household  electricity  use  has  been  flat26.  In 
total, the ecodesign and energy labelling measures in place to date are estimated to save 
end-users  of  products  100  billion  euro  per  year  in  202027,  which  is  approximately  465 
euro  per  household  per  year.  Reinvesting  these  savings  in  other  sectors  of  the  economy 
would  result  in  the  creation  of  a  significant  number  of  jobs.  Dependency  on  imports  of 
energy would be reduced by 23% and 37% for natural gas and coal, respectively28. 

20. There  is  still  untapped  potential  from  regulating  further  product  groups29  and  from 
revising existing measures30, although 80-90% of final energy consumption in the form of 
electricity  and  heat  (excluding  transport)  comes  from  products  already  dealt  with  by 
ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  regulations  or  covered  by  preparatory  studies  for  such 
regulations31. 

21. The achievement of the full savings potential of this policy has been reduced because of 
several  factors.  Firstly, following  the  introduction  of  A+  and  higher  classes,  labels  have 
become less effective in persuading consumers to buy more efficient products. Secondly, 
non-compliance  with  ecodesign  and  labelling  requirements,  in  part  related  to  weak 
enforcement by national market surveillance authorities, is estimated to reduce the energy 
savings by 10%. Thirdly, while for some product groups the minimum requirements and 

25  This  estimate  includes  the  impact  of  all  the  measures  adopted  until  March  2015,  and  that  of  measures  at 
various  stages  of  adoption.  It  does  not  include  the  impact  of  future  measures  covering  those  product  groups 
where only preparatory studies are on-going or that are considered for the next Working Plan, or the impact of 
on-going and future revisions of existing measures. 

26 The Economist, March 21st-27th 2015, 'CO2 and the climate, flatlining' 

27 VHK, Ecodesign impact accounting part 1, May 2014 

28 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

29 20 Mtoe yearly primary energy savings by 2030 from measures listed in the Ecodesign Working Plan 2012-
2014, currently subject to preparatory studies. Source: VHK, Ecodesign impact accounting part 1, May 2014 

30 15 Mtoe yearly primary energy savings by 2030 from revising measures adopted between 2008 and 2012. The 
saving potential of revising more recently adopted measures cannot be estimated yet, because the market has not 
developed sufficiently to assess the this potential. Source: VHK, Ecodesign impact accounting part 1, May 2014 

31 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

10 

 
 
                                                            
labels have shown the right level of ambition, for other product groups the ambition levels 
are  lower  than  what  is  technically  and  economically  feasible.  Fourth,  the  rulemaking 
process  is  long,  sometimes  resulting  in  outdated  technical  and  preparatory  work  at  the 
time of policy decisions; and finally there is a trend towards larger products, which tend to 
be relatively more efficient than smaller products and thus achieve a high energy class, but 
nevertheless have a higher absolute consumption than smaller appliances of the same type. 

The energy label 
22. There is  strong evidence  that  consumers  respond  positively to  informative energy labels 
using  a  comparative  scale  with  multiple  performance  thresholds  showing  that,  for  the 
same level of service, certain products consume more energy than others. The majority of 
consumers recognise, understand and use the energy label in their purchasing decisions32. 
The  EU  energy  label  has  raised  the  profile  and  importance  of  energy  efficiency  as  a 
product  feature  and  through  successfully  overcoming  information  barriers  has  made 
energy efficiency matter to consumers for the majority of labelled products. In so doing it 
has  also  become  a  widely  recognised  brand  for  energy  efficiency.  The  recipe  for  this 
success has been the universal application of a label design that is easy to understand at a 
glance,  presents  information  that  is  salient  to  and  trusted  by  consumers  and  can  be 
retained  throughout  the  purchasing  process  so  that  it  actively  affects  product  purchase 
decisions. 

23. One of the key reasons for the success of the EU energy label is that it uses mnemonics33 
to  convey  and  reinforce  the  energy  efficiency  ranking  of  labelled  products.  The  most 
obvious  mnemonic  used  is  the  letter  to  indicate  the  energy  efficiency  class  but  this  is 
reinforced by the colour scale of the classes in the efficiency scale. Lastly, the arrows in 
the efficiency scale itself, which are stacked in order of length from short (denoting low 
energy  consumption)  to  long  (denoting  high  energy  consumption)  constitute  a  third  and 
more subtle set of reinforcing mnemonics. Thus, the A to G of the letter scale reinforces 
the  green  to  red  colour  scale  that  is  reinforced  by  the  length  of  the  stacked  arrows. 
Collectively,  this  set  of  reinforcing  mnemonics  enables  the  easy  visual  identification  of 
the efficiency of the product in question and contextualises it against a broader efficiency 
scale,  so  it  is  clear  where  the  highest  and  lowest  part  of  the  scale  are  and  where  the 
efficiency  of  the  specific  labelled  product  is  positioned  on  the  scale.  Lastly,  the 
mnemonics are essential in aiding memory so that consumers are readily able to remember 
the efficiency of products they have previously seen and keep that information in mind as 
they consider which product to purchase.34 

32 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

33 A system such as a pattern of letters, ideas, or associations which assists in remembering something. 

34 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

11 

 
 
                                                            
24. After  20  years  of  energy  labelling  in  Europe  the  energy  label  still  functions  broadly  as 
originally  intended.  However,  the  design  amendment  that  uses  additional  plusses  to 
indicate  higher  efficiency  classes  beyond  the  A  class  is  less  effective  in  motivating  the 
purchase  of  higher  efficiency  products  than  the  original  A  to  G  scale.  While  consumer 
research  shows  that  the  new  label  scale  is  understandable  for  consumers,  it  has  reduced 
their  willingness  to  purchase  more  for  more  efficient  products,  because  they  are  less 
motivated by a difference between A+ and A+++ than by a difference between C and A35. 

25. A key challenge is how best to address the need to modify the label to take account of the 
concentration of products into the higher efficiency classes of the product groups that have 
been subject to labelling for a number of years. Whenever concentration in the top classes 
occurs  or  new  products  are  available  that  have  a  significantly  higher  efficiency than  the 
current top efficiency threshold, it is appropriate to revise the label to increase the spread 
in  product  efficiency  among  label  classes  to  ensure  that  the  most  efficient  products  are 
clearly  differentiated  from  other  products  on  the  label.  Since  the  2010  review  of  the 
energy labelling Directive, this issue has been addressed by adding new classes above the 
A  class  (the  A+,  A++  and  A+++  classes).  However,  these  new  classes  have  been 
contentious due to concerns that they weaken the label’s effectiveness and there is general 
agreement among all stakeholders that for this reason it is not desirable to add further + 
classes on top of the current A+++ class36. 

26. The  EU  energy  label  is  well  known  among  European  consumers  and  as  such  can  be 
considered  a  high  profile  brand.  This  brand  has  been  built  up  over  many  years  and  has 
considerable recognition value in its current form. Therefore, it is important for any design 
changes to be incremental rather than introduce a completely new concept. With regard to 
concepts  using  numeric  scales,  there  is  evidence  such  labels  lead  to  more  consumers 
choosing less energy efficient products than with alphabetic scales37. Further, the effect of 
the requirement for advertisements to contain a reference to the energy class could not be 
quantified38, but it does address an information failure in the market39.   

27. Beyond  consumers'  understanding  of  the  label  layout,  other  issues  have  been  noted  by 
stakeholders  as  potentially  weakening  the  label's  impact.  One  of  them  is  the  technical 
complexity  that  underpins  the  label  and  notably  the  calculation  of  the  energy  efficiency 

35 London Economics & Ipsos Mori, A study on the impact of the energy label – and of potential changes to it – 
on consumer understanding and on purchase decisions, 2014. 

36 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

37 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

38 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive: 
Background report I: Literature review, December 2013.  

39 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

12 

 
 
                                                            
index.  The  current  use  of  linear  formulae  for  most  labels  may  favour  large  appliances 
resulting  in  better  energy  efficiency  classifications  than  for  smaller  products  despite  a 
higher absolute energy consumption. Many consumers also have difficulty understanding 
the meaning of certain icons present in the label giving information on other aspects of the 
product, for example the 'switch logo' on the television label and the drying efficiency on 
the dishwasher label40. 

Product-specific regulations and voluntary agreements 
28. For  a  number  of  product  groups  the  ambition  level  of  the  regulations  is  considered 
appropriate  compared  to  what  is  technically  and  economically  feasible.  This  is  the  case 
e.g. for boilers, standby and off-mode requirements,  external power supplies,  circulators 
in  buildings  and  simple  set-top  boxes.  For  a  number  of  other  product  groups  there  is 
disagreement  among  stakeholders  and  experts  on  whether  the  ambition  level  of  the 
regulations is appropriate or too low. At least for computers and televisions, it seems clear 
that the level of ambition of the regulations is too low compared to what is technically and 
economically  feasible.  It  was  found  that  a  low  level  of  ambition  is  often  related  to  the 
problem  of  limited  and  outdated  data.  The  requirement  in  the  Ecodesign  Directive  of 
aiming to set requirements at the least life cycle cost41 also poses problems in some cases. 
This  criterion  assumes  that  more  efficient  products  have  increased  investment  cost  and 
decreased  cost  of  operation  (namely  energy  cost).  However,  for  e.g.  electronic  products 
there is not always a clear relationship between purchase price and efficiency. 

29. The  two  existing  voluntary  agreements,  for  imaging  equipment  and  for  complex  set-top 
boxes,  are  considered  to  have  an  ambition  level  that  is  too  low  compared  to  what  is 
technically and economically feasible.  For voluntary agreements, the Ecodesign Directive 
does not prescribe a reference level for requirements, but merely indicates that they need 
to have added value compared to business as usual. However, the low level of ambition in 
the  voluntary  agreement  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  a  regulation  for  these  specific 
product groups would have achieved higher energy savings. The features and performance 
of these products change so fast that regulation could have difficulties to follow these fast 
technological  trends.  Further,  the  voluntary  agreement  on  complex  set-top  boxes  is  not 
restricted to manufacturers, but other important market players such as service providers, 
component manufacturers and software providers can subscribe as well. This is a different 
approach  than  in  most  product  legislation  and  is  an  important  feature  of  this  voluntary 
agreement, as software is an influential factor in the energy consumption of a complex set-
top  box  and  service  providers  determine  the  software  on  the  box.  Energy  savings  in 
software may, therefore, have offset the low level of ambition in relation to hardware. 

40 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive: 
Background report I: Literature review, December 2013.  

41 The life cycle cost is the combined cost of purchasing the appliance and the running cost (energy and any other 
resources) over its lifetime. Setting requirements at the least life cycle cost means that the level of the 
requirement is set as such that the cheap, inefficient appliances are banned, but not the ones that are cheapest in 
life cycle cost. 

13 

 
 
                                                            
30. Experience  to  date  with  voluntary  agreements  has  shown  that  they  can  work  effectively 
when "inclusion" of a broad part of the market sector is possible, whilst "non-inclusion" of 
certain industry actors or groups has been the cause of opposition by stakeholders because 
of  market  distortion,  unfair  competition  or  missing  out  on  the  full  savings  potential.  In 
addition,  openness  and  transparency  is  crucial:  citing  company  confidentiality  as  an 
argument for not disclosing information such as sales numbers can make it impossible for 
independent  entities  to  monitor  the  agreement.  The  Commission  is  in  the  process  of 
developing  guidelines  for  voluntary  agreements.  The  Ecodesign  Consultation  Forum 
endorsed in June 2014 an approach that voluntary agreements should cover at least 80% 
of the market share of a product category and that at least 90% of all product models of 
each signatory of the voluntary agreement comply with its requirements, with an incentive 
to increase this to 100%42.  

Compliance and enforcement 
31. It is estimated that 10-25% of products on the market are non-compliant with ecodesign 
and energy labelling requirements and that around 10% of envisaged energy savings are 
being lost due to non-compliance43. In absolute terms, this means about 17 Mtoe primary 
energy per year. 

32. Kitchen specialist shops, furniture shops and large supermarkets are among the shop types 
with the lowest level of proper label display. Furthermore, internet shops, whose market 
shares  are  increasing,  often  do  not  display  some  of  the  required  information.  As  for 
product  types,  wine  storage  appliances,  air-conditioners,  and  electric  ovens  have  the 
lowest degree of proper label display. 

33. Expenditure  by  Member  States  on  market  surveillance  is  estimated  to  be  around  €  10 
million  per  year.  Almost  all  Member  States  perform  product  documentation  checks  and 
inspection  of  display  of  labels  in  shops.  Nevertheless,  for  some  years,  a  few  Member 
States  reported  that  they  had  no  market  surveillance  activity.  The  number  of  Member 
States  without  activity  decreased  from  4-5  in  the  years  2009/2010  to  none  in  2013.  In 
some  cases  Member  States  only  acted  upon  receipt  of  complaints,  while  others  had  an 
active  programme  involving  random  and/or  targeted  checks.  In  general,  the  combined 
market surveillance activities of the Member States increased significantly between 2009 
and  2013.  However,  the  level  of  market  surveillance  started  from  a  low  base  and  the 
number of ecodesign and energy labelling regulations increased during those years44. 

43 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

44 COWI & BIO Intelligence Service, Assessing the data collected in the framework of the Ecodesign and 
Labelling annual market surveillance data collection exercise run by the Commission, 2014 

14 

 
 
                                                            
 
34. Industry has contributed to market surveillance, notably through participation in projects 
funded  by  the  Commission,  such  as  'Athlete'45.  This  has  contributed  to  improved 
capacities  of  market  surveillance  authorities  with  regard  to  testing  procedures  for 
ecodesign  and  energy  labelling.  The  capacity  needs  of  market  surveillance  authorities 
have now shifted to better cooperation between authorities and exchanging good practices, 
such as explored in the 'Ecopliant' project46. 

35. There  are  administrative  and  legal  barriers  for  market  surveillance  of  ecodesign  and 
energy labelling. Firstly, lack of staff is a consequence of the lack of financial resources 
and different policy priorities. Secondly, unclear formulations in legal texts (e.g. apparent 
differences between the Energy Labelling Directive and its delegated acts concerning the 
way the product fiche has to be made available). Thirdly, there is no benchmark on what 
is  considered  appropriate  market  surveillance.  Fourth,  a  specific  obstacle  concerns  the 
ability to contact foreign entities, including the identification of the manufacturer placing 
the  products  on  the  EU  market.  Finally,  there  is  no  independent  evaluation  of 
manufacturer claims about products as exists in some other sectors where manufacturers 
are required to do a third party certification on their products. 

Non-energy environmental impacts 
36. For  environmental  aspects  other than  energy  consumption  there  has  been  less  impact  so 
far, because most of such ecodesign requirements were introduced more recently and do 
not yet apply and such requirements have not been introduced as systematically as energy 
efficiency  requirements. The exception  is water consumption, which has been addressed 
by the energy label for washing machines since 1996, by the energy label for dishwashers 
since 1999, and by an ecodesign requirement for washing machines since 2011. For both 
washing  machines  and  dishwashers  the  water  consumption  per  cycle  more  than  halved 
over the last ten years47. 

37. Regulations  to  date  have  mainly  addressed  the  energy  consumption  in  the  use-phase,  as 
this represents, to varying degrees, the most important contribution to the environmental 
impacts of energy-related products. Nevertheless, there is a potential for further reduction 
of  other  environmental  impacts  in  energy-related  products,  which  has  been  identified  in 
several  studies,  e.g.  on  aspects  of  reusability,  recyclability,  recycled  content,  hazardous 
substances, emissions in use, and durability/reparability. Some product-specific ecodesign 
regulations contain requirements on such aspects, such as emission requirements for solid 

45 http://www.atlete.eu/ 

46 http://www.ecopliant.eu/ 

47 VHK, "Omnibus" Review Study on Cold Appliances, Washing Machines, Dishwashers, Washer-Driers, 
Lighting, Set-top Boxes and Pumps, 12 March 2014. 

15 

 
 
                                                            
fuel boilers and solid fuel local space heaters and durability requirements for lamps and 
vacuum cleaners.48 

38. An additional reason why other environmental impacts of products have been addressed to 
a  lesser  extent  than  energy  impacts  is  because  the  Ecodesign  Directive  covers  only 
energy-related products. For other products, non-energy environmental impacts are more 
dominant.  Due  to  the  nature  of  the  current  scope  of  products  covered,  the  MEErP 
methodology focuses  mainly on technological aspects of the product itself, which in the 
case of non-energy-related products are often not the cause for environmental impact or a 
basis  for  improvement,  since  impacts  occur  at  the  stage  of  resource  extraction,  during 
production  or  at  the  end-of-life  stage.  Since  these  impacts  are  not  measurable  on  the 
product  itself,  conformity  with  any  ecodesign  requirements  would  have  to  rely  on  the 
provision  of  information  by  suppliers  to  ensure  that  products  comply  with  set 
specifications.  The  information  (and  certification)  requirements  would  have  to  be  based 
on environmental impact analysis and assessment, continuous measurement, targets, and 
monitoring  procedures  for  each  step  in  the  supply  chain.  The  on-going  EU  Product 
Environmental  Footprint  pilot  phase49  is  currently  testing  verification  approaches  for 
embedded impacts to identify a method that balances reliability and feasibility. The testing 
should  be  finalised  in  2016  after  which  the  Commission  will  evaluate  progress  before 
deciding on the way forward50. 

Free movement 
39. Ensuring  free  movement  is  one  of  the  two  objectives  of  the  Ecodesign  Directive 
(alongside  environmental  protection).  It  is  also  manifest  from  its  internal  market 
harmonisation legal basis and its specific provisions to Member States with regard to free 
movement.  

40. Since  2010,  the  Energy  Labelling  Directive  has  energy  rather  than  internal  market 
harmonisation  as  legal  basis.  Nevertheless,  it  harmonises  energy  labels  and  their 
application across the EU through its delegated regulations. Only complementary policies 
such  as  information  campaigns  to  inform  consumers  about  new  labels  and  additional 
incentives for energy-related products are implemented differently from Member State to 
Member State. 

41. None  of  the  two  Directives  has  caused  any  obstacles  to  the  free  movement  of  energy-

related products in the European Union. 

48 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

49 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/policy_footprint.htm 

50 COM(2013)196, 'Building the Single Market for Green Products' 

16 

 
 
                                                            
Other effects 
42. In the course of 2014, ecodesign became the subject of a certain amount of negative media 
attention, notably in the United Kingdom, Germany and Austria, which led to a negative 
perception of the policy by a certain share of the public and some policymakers51. By its 
very  nature  the  energy  label  is  intended  to  attract  consumers  and  guide  their  decision 
making. It is in fact appreciated as such by the large majority of consumers who recognise 
and  use  it  for  their  purchasing  decisions.  With  regard  to  ecodesign,  the  media  have 
claimed that it limits consumer choice and regulates energy consumption at the expense of 
performance of appliances. 

43. However,  as  intended,  the  Energy  Labelling  and  Ecodesign  have  had  little  perceived  or 
real impact on overall market sizes, overall market structure, or overall product choices. 
Although ecodesign bans the least efficient products from the EU market, this has not had 
a  negative  effect  on  the  availability  of  a  wide  range  of  products  across  different  price 
ranges. Even the higher purchase prices (which are offset by savings on the energy bill) 
are  hardly  noticeable  to  consumers:  the  impact  of  Energy  Labelling  and  Ecodesign  on 
prices is understood to be low and they have not affected the long-term downward trend of 
prices, with the exception of lighting and circulators.52 

44. The  perceived  trade-off  between  energy  efficiency  and  performance  reported  by  some 
media is not based on facts. Only in the case of the ban of certain light bulbs in the early 
years  of  the  policy  could  the  speed  of  the  implementation  of  the  bans  (as  a  result  of 
political demand from the Member States) have (temporarily) affected performance since 
alternative  technologies  were  not  yet  fully  mature.  This  perceived  trade-off  was  raised 
again  by  some  media  in  the  case  of  regulations  for  vacuum  cleaners  and  ovens53  even 
though industry and other experts claim that such trade-offs are non-existent or minimal. 
In  the  case  of  vacuum  cleaners  functionality  is  explicitly  addressed  through  minimum 
performance requirements in the legislation. This has also made it clear that the benefits of 
the policy have not been sufficiently communicated.  

EFFICIENCY 

45. In  general,  the  benefits  from  Energy  Labelling  and  Ecodesign  outweigh  costs,  both  for 
businesses and for society as a whole. While the cost of requirements and labelling will 
fall  on  manufacturers  in  the  first  instance,  these  are  then  passed  on  to  end-users 
(households  and  other  businesses)  who  benefit  from  cost  savings  that  considerably 

51 E.g. Bild 07-11-2014, EU will bei Doppeltoastern einen Schlitz abschalten; Mirror 21-08-2014, That sucks - 
your favourite vacuum cleaner is about to get banned;  

52 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

53 E.g. Express 05-01-2015, EU farce: Now Brussels bureaucrats kill off Sunday roast with new green rules for 
ovens. 

17 

 
 
 
                                                            
outweigh the upfront costs. In total, the ecodesign and energy labelling measures in place 
to date are estimated to save end-users of products 100 billion euro per year in 202054. 

46. Regarding  the  level  of  production  costs  and  the  improvement  of  profit  margins  for 
manufacturers the evidence is inconclusive. For energy labels, however, it is important to 
appreciate  that  the  response  of  manufacturers  is  as  important  as  the  response  of 
consumers. Although the application of the label is mandatory there is no obligation for 
manufacturers to improve the efficiency of their products in response to this requirement. 
However,  there  is  strong  evidence  that  manufacturers  have  reacted  positively  to  the  EU 
energy  labels  and  have  voluntary  embraced  them  as  an  important  feature  which  can 
differentiate  their  products.  This  suggests  that  the  extra  investment  needed  to  achieve 
higher efficiency levels has generally been outweighed by the benefits.55 

47. Actual data for the EU as a whole are not available, but for the UK the benefit to cost ratio 
was  estimated  at  3.8  (compared  to  an  average  of  3.0  for  a  range  of  17  environmental 
policies)56 for the regulations in place in 2012 and there are no indications why the benefit 
to  cost ratio would be substantially different in other  Member States. The ratio includes 
the  costs  for  manufacturers  of  producing  labels  and  meeting  the  requirements,  the  costs 
for  enforcement  and  the  financial  savings  to  final  consumers  from  reduced  energy 
consumption.  It  does  not  include  benefits  that  are  hard  to  quantify,  such  as  the  higher 
profit  margins  on  more  expensive  efficient  products,  the  stimulation  of  innovation,  the 
contribution  to  energy  security,  and  removing  competition  from  poor  quality  cheap 
products from the market through a level playing field. 

48. Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  have  an  impact  on  innovation,  but  this  it  difficult  to 
attribute and quantify, as it does not show up clearly in patent statistics and firms do not 
strongly  attribute  their  innovation  activities  to  the  legislation57.  What  is  clear  is  that  the 
regulations  are  one  of  the  main  drivers  for  innovation,  alongside  consumer  demand  and 
competitive position. The balance between requirements being set at an ambitious but not 
over ambitious level is important to stretch but not overstretch firms. SMEs may benefit 
from  new  niche  markets,  e.g.  for  LEDs,  although  the  opposite is  also true  for  SMEs,  in 
cases  where  lower  capacities  and  resources  for  innovation  see  them  left  behind.  SMEs 
typically  have  more  limited  technical  and  financial  capacity  to  comply  with  the 
regulations, which is a risk, and some evidence of market concentration suggests that in 
some product groups these constraints are adversely affecting SMEs. 

54 VHK, Ecodesign impact accounting part 1, May 2014 

55 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

56 UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Emerging Findings from Defra’s Regulation 
Assessment First update covering 2012, February 2015. 

57 Ecofys, Impact of Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre Labelling on R&D and Technological Innovation, May 2014 

18 

 
 
                                                            
49. Ecodesign and Energy Labelling apply also to micro-enterprises. For energy labelling, the 
affected  retailers  (that  have  to  ensure  the  label  is  applied to  the  product)  include  micro-
enterprises, which cannot be exempted as energy labels are only useful for consumers if 
all  products  are  labelled  in  all  retail  outlets.  The  sectors  concerned  include  few  or  no 
micro-enterprises manufacturers, but those that do exist need to be treated in the same way 
as  other  manufactures  for  the  same  reason  as  given  for  retailers  and  to  ensure  fair 
competition in the single market where it concerns ecodesign requirements.  

50. The  position  of  SMEs  and  microenterprises  is  considered  in  the  legislation,  but  in 
different  ways  than  through  exemptions  based  on  company  sizes.  Firstly,  the  Ecodesign 
Directive mainly considers as candidates for potential regulation products that are usually 
mass-manufactured:  this  follows  from  its  requirement  that  the  products  to  be  regulated 
should represent a significant volume of sales, indicatively 200.000 units per year within 
the  European  Union.  In  addition,  a  number  of  regulations  also  make  exceptions  for 
subcategories  of  products  that  have  low  sale  volumes,  where  such  exceptions  are  not 
expected to be exploited as loopholes to the regulations. Furthermore, as required by the 
Ecodesign  Directive,  implementing  dates  for  regulations  take  into  account  possible 
impacts on SMEs. 

51. For  voluntary  agreements,  one  advantage  that  is  generally  emphasised  is  that  such 
agreements  are  likely  to  deliver  the  policy  objectives  in  a  less  costly  manner  than 
mandatory requirements. However, no systematic data is available on their benefit to cost 
ratio. Nevertheless, their benefits are expected to be less than for regulations, based on the 
fact  that,  as  referred  to  earlier,  the  two  existing  voluntary  agreements  are  considered  to 
have an ambition level that is too low compared to what is technically and economically 
feasible.  The  costs  are  also  expected  to  be  less  that  for  regulations  given  that 
administrative  and  procedural  requirements  are less.  However,  there  are  additional  costs 
for industry compared to regulation in terms of having to arrange independent verification 
of  compliance,  whereas  regulations  are  subject  to  market  surveillance  by  the  Member 
States, who usually bear the cost for that. 

Regulatory process 
52. The entire ecodesign/energy labelling regulatory process should normally take 41 months 
from the start of the preparatory study to the publication of the implementing measures in 
the  Official  Journal  (see  annex  for  details  on  the  process).  In  practice  though,  the 
regulatory  process  took  on  average  49  months  until  2012,  with  a  number  of  regulations 
that had been in the process for years not yet being finished. The number of regulations 
adopted each year has increased in recent years and included a few difficult ones such as 
those on space and water heaters or on directional lamps and luminaires. 

53. Delays in the process have been connected with several issues. Firstly, the quality of the 
preparatory  study  and  availability  of  sufficient  quality  data.  Secondly,  a  gap  of,  on 
average, 10 months between the publication of the preparatory study and the Consultation 
Forum  meeting.  Thirdly,  the  technical  complexity  of  some  of  the  products.  Fourth, 
contentiousness for some of the products for which stakeholder involvement can lead to 

19 

 
 
conflicts  that  practically  grind  the  process  to  a  halt.  The  last  steps  before  adoption  are 
straightforward, and should be fairly quick compared to the preparatory phase. However, 
experience shows that the adoption of a measure can sometimes take a long time. 

54. Harmonised standards play a key role in the process. Due to the so-called 'New Approach' 
for EU product legislation applied from 1986, under EU Ecodesign and Energy Labelling 
the  development  of  test  procedures  is  mandated  to  the  European  standardisation 
organisations  resulting  in  harmonized  European  Standards.  Where  they  exist,  standards 
make an important contribution to the success of the regulations. Problems tend to arise 
when they do not exist or are still under development, in which case this is an important 
obstacle to the smooth drafting and adoption of regulations.58 

55. For  voluntary  agreements,  one  advantage  that  is  generally  emphasised  is  that  such 
agreements  are  likely  to  deliver  the  policy  objectives  faster  than  the  mandatory 
requirements.  Voluntary agreements tend to  be proposed for complex products  with fast 
technological development, so that the technology and market change can be reflected in 
an updated version of the voluntary agreement. However, in practice, voluntary agreement 
processes  are  not  necessarily  fast:  they  also  require  an  impact  assessment,  inter-service 
consultation and a formal decision from the Commission, which puts the presumption of a 
more efficient process into question. 

56. Stakeholder input and involvement is  considered to  be of great value to the process, for 
information, discussion and creation of a broad base of support for a measure. There is a 
trade-off: the transparency and inclusiveness of the process also contributes to its length. 
Official stakeholder involvement is scheduled to take place multiple times and in practice 
there  are  many  more  moments  of  stakeholder  involvement,  such  as  through  bilateral 
discussions  between  stakeholders  or  between  stakeholders  and  the  Commission  or 
consultant, and through position papers from stakeholders. A significant majority of non-
governmental  stakeholders  (industry,  retailers/  distributors,  environmental  and  consumer 
organisations)  in  the  Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  process  see  no  need  for  changing 
stakeholder  involvement  in  the  process.  The  main  reason  for  dissatisfaction  with  the 
energy labelling  regulations process for Member State is  that they do not  have  a formal 
vote in the adoption process, as they currently still have for ecodesign regulations. This is 
a consequence of the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty on delegated and implementing acts. 

57. Another factor relevant to assess the efficiency of the regulatory process is that for the size 
of its economy the EU commits substantially less resources to support its programme than 
other economies, as shown in figure 4. It is interesting to note that the US expenditure is 
roughly 10 times that of the EU despite both having similar sized economies and similar 
magnitudes  of  benefits  to  achieve  from  optimising  their  equipment  energy  efficiency 
programmes.  The  estimated  person-hours  per  year  for  development  of  the  Chinese 
programme  are  over  twice  those  of  the  EUʼs.  The  Japanese  and  Australian  programmes 

58 Ecofys, Evaluation of the Energy Labelling Directive and specific aspects of the Ecodesign Directive, June 
2014 

20 

 
 
                                                            
have the lowest person hours committed for administration. However, the total Australian 
effort when consultants are added is roughly equivalent to that in the EU despite having a 
population of only  1/25th  of the EUʼs  and a much smaller economy. The total  Japanese 
effort is not available.59 

Figure  4:  Administrative  and  technical  support  for  the  development  and  administration  of 
equipment  energy  efficiency  regulations  by  peer  economy–estimated  hours  per  year.  'na' 
refers to 'not available', 'MEPS' refers to minimum efficiency requirements 60 

EU-ADDED VALUE 

58. An EU harmonised regulatory framework rather than having rules at Member State level 
brings  down  costs  for  manufacturers.  Regulating  at  EU  level  has  ensured  energy 
efficiency of products, while preventing that this could otherwise be invoked by Member 
States  to  justify  barriers  to  goods  entering  (or  leaving)  their  territories.  Since  the  Single 
Market became a reality in 1993, intra-EU trade in goods has grown as a share of GDP by 
around 5 percentage points. Intra-EU trade represented around 17% of EU GDP in 1999 

59 Waide Strategic Efficiency, International comparisons of product policy, Coolproducts, February 2013 

60 Waide Strategic Efficiency, International comparisons of product policy, Coolproducts, February 2013 

21 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
and close to 22% in 2011. Furthermore, intra-EU trade represents a very high percentage 
of GDP in most Member States. Better access to the internal market and global markets 
has  led  to  greater  economies  of  scale  and  scope  and  thus  enhanced  firm-level 
competitiveness  and  cost  efficiencies  through  regulatory  and  product  convergence  at 
European  level  and,  to  some  extent,  also  globally.61  Consumers  also  benefit  from  lower 
prices due to EU-wide competition. The GDP increase that can be attributed to the Single 
Market equates to almost €1200 extra yearly income per EU household.62  

59. Prior  to  the  establishment  of  certain  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  regulations  at  EU 
level, Member States imposed national obligations on business in the interests of energy 
efficiency and consumer protection. For example, in 1990, 9 of the 12 Member States of 
the EU had diverging mandatory minimum requirements in place for the efficiency of hot-
water  boilers  for  central  heating63.  This  meant  that  there  were  considerable  regulatory 
barriers  to  trade  for  those  products  because  of  the  different  rules  and  requirements, 
meaning that businesses had to treat each EU Member State as a separate market and offer 
different  products.  Doing  business  on  a  cross-border  basis  in  this  environment  imposed 
considerable  regulatory  compliance  costs  on  businesses.  The  adoption  of  the  first 
ecodesign-type  measure  on  boiler  efficiency  in  1992  therefore  directly  addressed  the 
needs of European industry. 

60. Also in  1990, Germany, the Netherlands and the  United  Kingdom had voluntary  energy 
labelling  schemes  in  place,  and  Denmark  was  about  to  introduce  a  mandatory  one.  The 
Commission  decided  that  that  was  likely  to  hinder  trade  between  Member  States,  asked 
Denmark  to  defer  its  proposal  and  announced  its  intention  to  propose  what  became  the 
EU's  energy  labelling  directive  in  199264.  The  intention  of  the  Netherlands  to  introduce 
minimum energy efficiency requirements on refrigerators in 1992 was similarly deferred 
by  the  Commission  and  led  to  the  EU-wide  ecodesign-like  regulation  for  fridges  and 
freezers65. French, Italian, Irish and British measures intending to ban incandescent bulbs, 
as  well  as  a  specific  request  that  the  European  Council  addressed  to  the  European 
Commission66  (on  the  initiative  of  Germany67,  holding  the  Presidency  of  the  EU  at  the 
time), led to the introduction of such a ban at EU level. 

61 COM(2014) 25: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the 
European Economic and  Social Committee A vision for the internal market for industrial products 

62 20 years of the European Single Market – Key Points. European Commission, 2012. 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publications/docs/20years/key-points-web_en.pdf 

63 Cf. COM(90) 368 

64 Cf. COM(91) 285 

65 Cf. COM(94) 521 

66 Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council (8/9 March 2007), 7224/1/07 REV 1, page 20  

67 Letter from German Federal Minister for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety Sigmar 
Gabriel to European Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas, 23 February 2007. 

22 

 
 
                                                            
61. For  other  types  of  energy-related  products,  no  national  rules  were  in  place  prior  to  the 
adoption of ecodesign and energy labelling legislation that addressed regulatory gaps. In 
these  sectors,  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  preceded  the  possible  development  of 
national legislation thus preventing the emergence of different national regulations which 
would  otherwise  have  led  to  market  fragmentation,  obstacles  to  the  free  movement  of 
products and to higher costs for regulatory compliance. Thereby, they enabled businesses 
to tap into a larger market for their products, while ensuring high levels of environmental 
protection.  The  approximation  of  product  legislation  through  internal  market  legislation 
has been relevant in promoting industrial competitiveness because regulatory convergence 
at  EU  level  supported  by  voluntary  technical  standards,  has  promoted  access  to  new 
markets within the internal market and led to fairer competition and a level playing field 
among economic operators.68 

62. Union  harmonisation  legislation  also  strengthens  competitiveness  in  other  ways,  e.g. 
through  effects  on  global  regulatory  and  product  convergence,  enhanced  take-up  of 
innovation  and  RTD  results  (through  a  technology-neutral  approach),  the  promotion  of 
industry  consolidation  leading  to  even  greater  economies  of  scale  with  manufacturing 
firms capable of operating across the internal market and beyond.69 

COHERENCE 

Coherence between Ecodesign and Energy Labelling  
63. The  two  Directives  are  complementary  and  their  implementation  is  largely  done  in  a 
coherent  way.  While  the  Energy  Labelling  Directive  lacks  a  working  plan  and  a 
formalised  stakeholder  forum  such  as  the  Consultation  Forum  under  the  Ecodesign 
Directive,  in  practice  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  regulations  have  always  been 
developed  together using the Ecodesign Directive's working plan and stakeholder forum 
as a basis. So far only in one case was only an energy labelling regulation developed (for 
updating  all  energy  labelling  regulations  with  regard  to  the  display  of  the  label  on  the 
internet),  for  which  the  same  consultation  procedure  was  applied  as  for  ecodesign. 
Further,  for  a  number  of  product  groups  the  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  regulations 
have  in  the  course  of  time  become  incoherent,  because  further  steps  of  staged  bans  by 
ecodesign  were  put  into  place  while  energy  labels  were  unchanged.  This  means  that  a 
number  of  classes  shown  on  the  energy  label  are  unpopulated  because  of  ecodesign 
legislation; a state of affairs often not known to consumers. In the most extreme cases of 
washing machines, fridges and dishwashers the energy label currently displays A+++ to D 
classes, but only A+++, A++ and A+ appliances can still be placed on the market. This is 
undermining the consumer relevance of the label.   

68 COM(2014) 25: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the 
European Economic and  Social Committee A vision for the internal market for industrial products 

69 COM(2014) 25 

23 

 
 
 
                                                            
64. In  theory,  ecodesign and  energy labelling  could  be  merged  on  the  grounds  that  they  are 
thematically  closely  related  and  complement  each  other.  This  would  ensure  that 
definitions, measurement methods, etc. are exactly the same, and would lead to leaner and 
more transparent decision processes. Also, the labelling of tyres could be integrated into 
energy labelling, because its aim and appearance of the label are similar. However, such 
mergers  are  not  so  self-evident.  Although  Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  are  at  first 
sight  quite  similar,  they  partly  follow  different  logics.  For  example,  the  Ecodesign 
Directive includes a conformity assessment and CE marking procedure while the Energy 
Labelling  Directive  does  not.  In  addition,  the  scope  is  not  identical  with  respect  to  life 
cycle phases and environmental aspects. In the end, the question of mergers does not turn 
out to be decisive. What is important is that existing policies should be coherent, mutually 
supportive, streamline procedures and methods, and represent a clear task sharing.  

Coherence with other EU policy 
65. The  overall  policy  framework  is  coherent  and  mutually  supportive.  In  general,  different 
policies complement each other by addressing different life cycle stages, impacts, actors, 
or  employing  different  mechanisms.  Still,  there  can  be  a  lack  of  policy  coherence  for 
specific  products  or  issues,  and  there  may  be  inefficiencies  due  to  double  work  in 
misaligned procedures. In particular, the criteria and requirement levels of different pieces 
of product legislation (Green Public Procurement, Ecodesign, Energy Labelling, Ecolabel, 
Energy Star for office equipment) are not fully aligned. 

66. Notably  there  is  lack  of  synergy  in  measurement  methods  for  certain  products.  While 
ecodesign and energy labelling rely on the same measurement methods, other instruments 
such  as  green  public  procurement  or  the  EU  Ecolabel,  use  different  methods  for  some 
products and parameters. Further, there are possibilities for a more integrated process of 
developing product specific policy measures. Following the conclusions of the review of 
the Ecodesign Directive in 201270 a pilot project was initiated in which the Commission's 
Joint  Research  Centre  provides  technical  support  to  the  policy  DG's  for  a  number  of 
products  and  investigates  the  possibilities  for  a  more  integrated  process  of  developing 
product  specific  policy  measures.  The  project's  results  are  not  yet  available,  but  it  is 
possible that the conclusions will point to some trade-off: on the one hand developing the 
preparatory work for all product instruments at the same time could guarantee alignment 
of  measurement  methods,  save  duplicate  technical  work  and  reduce  the  number  of 
consultations  and  meetings  of  stakeholders;  on  the  other  hand  the  increased  number  of 
variables and dimensions of four or five rather than two policy instruments could lead to 
longer preparatory and policy processes, leading to lower cumulative energy savings71. 

70 COM(2012) 765 

71 An indication for this is the process for ecodesign and energy labelling for solid fuel boilers and solid fuel 
local space heaters: the ecodesign regulations address five types of key environmental impacts (energy and four 
types of pollutant emissions), whereas the energy label only addresses one (energy efficiency). The difficulty to 
find an agreement in the Ecodesign Regulatory Committee on the ecodesign regulations delayed the adoption of 
the energy labels, for which there was consensus, for more than a year.  

24 

 
 
                                                            
Coherence with international approaches 
67. At  least  45  countries  outside  the  European  Union  have  adopted  minimum  energy 
efficiency requirements for products and at least 59 non-EU countries use energy labels, 
as shown in figures 5 and 6. Lighting, heating, air conditioning and refrigeration are the 
product  groups  most  regulated  through  such  policies  around  the  world.  The  EU 
regulations are influential internationally and the EU has an important role in international 
standardisation and harmonisation efforts. Some countries follow the EU's ecodesign and 
energy  labelling  regulations  while  others  use  different  requirements,  testing  methods 
and/or labels. Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, as part of the European Economic Area, 
implement  both  the  EU's  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  regulations.  Turkey  does  the 
same as part of the Customs Union with the European Union. The contracting parties of 
the Energy Community (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, FYR of Macedonia, Moldova, 
Montenegro,  Serbia  and  Ukraine;  Georgia  is  candidate  member)  implement  the  EU's 
energy  labelling  regulations.  Some  of  them  also  implement  ecodesign  regulations  in  the 
context  of  association  agreements  or  EU  membership  negotiations.  Further  countries 
implement  some  or  all  energy  labelling  and/or  ecodesign  regulations,  because  of  their 
close  relationship  with  the  EU  market  for  energy-related  products  (e.g.  Jordan, 
Switzerland and South Africa). 

68. 

Figure 5: Countries with minimum efficiency requirements and the degree of alignment with 
the European Union72 

72 Ecofys, Impacts of the EU’s Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre labelling legislation on third jurisdictions, April 2014 

25 

 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 6: Countries with energy labels and degree of alignment with the EU label73 

69. The  system  of  minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements  works  in  most  countries  in  the 
same  way  as  in  the  European  Union:  if  a  product  does  not  meet  the  minimum 
requirements  it cannot be  placed  on that  country's  market. The  main difference between 
the  EU's  ecodesign  and  other  countries'  requirements  is  that  in  other  countries  the 
requirements  are  normally  limited  to  energy  efficiency,  whereas  ecodesign  can  also 
address  other  significant  environmental  impacts.  The  only  approach  that  is  distinctively 
different is that of Japan's Top Runner scheme, which imposes mandatory minimum fleet-
average efficiency requirements that producers or importers have to satisfy for regulated 
products.  What  this  means  is  that  instead  of  each  product  having  to  meet  a  minimum 
energy efficiency threshold, the sales-weighted sum of all products that a producer sells in 
a  specific  target  year  has  to  meet  the  specified  Top  Runner  minimum  energy  efficiency 
threshold.  The  threshold  is  in  principle  set  at  the  most  efficient  product  at  the  time  of 
market analysis, though products with particularly high price or using patented technology 
are excluded from that analysis. The target year is set 3 to 10 years ahead. In practice, the 
rate of improvement of products in terms of energy efficiency due to Top Runner is in the 
same range as for ecodesign. Regarding the interest of some European stakeholders in a 
Top  Runner  scheme  it  seems  that  the  appeal  of  the  Top  Runner  approach  is  to  a  large 
degree  conceptual  and  to  a  certain  extent  even  more  based  on  an  ideal  picture  than  on 
facts.  Most  of  the  'top  runner'  characteristics  can  also  be  found  in  the  Ecodesign 
Directive.74 

73 Ecofys, Impacts of the EU’s Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre labelling legislation on third jurisdictions, April 2014 

74 Hans-Paul Siderius and Hidetoshi Nakagami, 2013, A MEPS is a MEPS is a MEPS: Comparing Ecodesign 
and Top Runner schemes for setting product efficiency standards. Energy Efficiency 6: 1-19. 

26 

 
 
 
                                                            
70. The system of energy labels works in most countries in the same way as in the European 
Union:  all  products  offered  for  sale  have  to  bear  an  energy  label  that  includes  a 
comparative  scale  allowing  consumers  to  choose  more  efficient  products.  More  than  30 
countries have adopted energy labels that fully or partially emulate the EU label design. 
The alphabetic label layout with coloured arrows is followed in Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, 
Chile,  Colombia,  Egypt,  Iran,  Israel,  Jordan,  Norway,  Peru,  Russia,  South  Africa, 
Switzerland,  Turkey,  Ukraine  and  Uruguay  though  without  the  A+  classes.  Other 
jurisdictions  use  numbers  (China,  Taiwan,  Thailand,  Tunisia  and  South  Korea),  star 
ratings  (Australia,  Bangladesh,  Costa  Rica,  Ghana,  India,  Indonesia,  Japan,  Kenya, 
Malaysia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, United Arab Emirates and Vietnam), or 
indicate  on  a  horizontal  scale  the  estimated  yearly  energy  or  operating  cost  (Canada, 
Mexico and the US)75. Some jurisdictions also apply endorsement labels that can be used 
on a voluntary basis for the best-performing products. An example is the US Energy Star 
label,  which  is  also  used  in  the  European  Union  for  office  equipment  based  on  an 
agreement between the EU and the US government76. 

75 Lloyd Harrington & Jack Brown, Energy standards and labelling programmes throughout the world in 2013, 
May 2014 

76 Details about the EU Energy Star programme can be found on http://www.eu-energystar.org/ 

27 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure  7:  Chinese  label  (top,  left),  Australian  label  (top,  right),  US  comparative  label 
(bottom,  left)  and  US  Energy  Star  label  (bottom,  right).  The  EU  Energy  Label  is  shown  in 
figure 1. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
71. The  EU  and  the  US  are  the  world  leaders  in  the  development  of  minimum  energy 
efficiency  requirements  and  energy  labelling.  Perhaps  surprisingly,  the  EU  leads  in  the 
number  of  minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements,  whereas  the  US  has  more  energy 
labels than the EU, see figure 8. This is a reversal of earlier years in which the EU relied 
more  on  energy  labels  and  the  US  relied  more  on  minimum  energy  efficiency 
requirements. It should be noted however that most US labels are voluntary Energy Star 
endorsement  labels,  whereas  most  EU  labels  are  mandatory  comparative  energy  labels. 
The  EU  regulations  tend  to  be  more  ambitious  (see  figure  9).  The  EU  typically  tackles 
products that have not previously been regulated elsewhere, thus setting an international 
benchmark for testing and evaluating efficiency for those products, which is later adopted 
by other economies. A similar process applies to the US, although probably limited to ICT 
products,  for  which  US  Energy  Star  specifications  seem  to  set  the  example  for  how  to 
measure and rank energy performance.77 

Figure  8:  Number  of  product  groups  regulated  by  minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements 
("MEPS")  and/or  labels.  Note  that  the  EU  numbers  do  not  correspond  to  number  of 
regulations,  because  product  groups  were  categorised  differently  for  the  purpose  of 
international comparison.78 

77 CLASP & The Policy Partners, Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards 
and Labels, September 2014 

78 CLASP & The Policy Partners, Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards 
and Labels, September 2014 

29 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure  9:  Most  ambitious  minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements  ("MEPS")  and/or  labels 
for each product group categorised by country.79 

72. The  alignment  of  test  procedures  in  the  world  is  greater  than  that  of  the  minimum 
requirement  and  the  labels  themselves,  as  shown  in  figure  10.  Test  procedures  describe 
how the energy consumption/efficiency of a product should be determined. For a number 
of  products  test  procedures  are  well-aligned  world-wide,  with  the  highest  alignment  for 
lighting, consumer electronics/ICT products and motors/pumps/fans. Standard 60034-2-1 
of the International Electrotechnical Commission concerning test procedures for motors is 
an example of a successful,  though slow and resource intensive process, to  align testing 
procedures  across  the  globe80.  The  European  Union  scores  high  on  alignment  of  test 
procedures with other economies, as shown in figure 11. This is because test procedures 
for  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  usually  rely  on  international  standards,  where 
available.  

79 CLASP & The Policy Partners, Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards 
and Labels, September 2014 

80 Ecofys, Impacts of the EU’s Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre labelling legislation on third jurisdictions, April 2014 

30 

 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 10: Similarities with EU test procedures81 

Figure 11: CLASP alignment score for test procedures and energy efficiency metrics (higher 
score is more alignment with other economies)82   

81 Ecofys, Impacts of the EU’s Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre labelling legislation on third jurisdictions, April 2014 

31 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
73. The  EU's  approach  of  relying  on  international  standards  for  testing  methods  does  mean 
that policy makers give up a certain degree of administrative control over test procedures. 
Moreover,  due  to  the  so-called  'New  Approach'  for  EU  product  legislation  applied from 
1986, under EU Ecodesign and Energy  Labelling, the development of test  procedures is 
mandated  to  the  European  standardisation  organisations  through  harmonized  European 
Standards (which can be identical or similar to international standards). By contrast,  US 
policy makers have a full mandate to set the test procedures used in all US regulations. In 
Australia, policy makers have a large degree of influence over the test procedures used in 
the  regulations  via  the  consultants  that  they  hire  to  represent  their  interests  in  the  test 
procedure  development  process  and  via  direct  liaison  with  the  standardisation  body 
directly  responsible  for  establishing  test  procedures.  A  similar  situation  exists  in  Japan 
where  the  policy  makers  have  a  close  working  relationship  with  the  national 
standardisation body and in China where agencies designated by the policy makers have 
direct input into the national test procedure standardisation process.83 

74. In  terms  of  monitoring  and  enforcement,  other  countries  also  have  market  surveillance 
through  checking  and  testing  of  random  and  targeted  samples,  similar  to  the  EU.  Many 
countries  accompany  this  by  requiring  information  on  performance  and  compliance  of 
products  to  be  registered  in  a  central  registration  database  to  which  market  surveillance 
authorities have access (e.g. Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, India, South Korea, US and 
Vietnam).  In  the  EU,  Member  States'  market  surveillance  authorities  instead  have  to 
request such information from manufacturers each time they inspect a product. A number 
of countries also require a third party to certify that the product model is compliant before 
any  units  are  placed  on  the  market  (e.g.  Canada,  China,  Mexico  and  Thailand).  The 
Japanese  Top  Runner  scheme  has  a  distinctly  different  approach  and  requires 
manufacturers  and  importers  to  provide  both  energy  and  sales  data  for  all  products 
covered  by  the  scheme  in  the  target  year.  Because  in  the  Top  Runner  scheme  not  the 
individual models, but the fleet average needs to comply with the target requirement, data 
from individual products cannot be conclusive regarding whether a manufacturer complies 
with  the  target  for  a  certain  product  category.  This  means  that  the  Top  Runner  scheme 
regarding  monitoring  and  enforcement  is  highly  dependent  on  co-operation  from 
manufacturers  and  on  confidential  data.  In  practice  this  means  that  independent 
enforcement  is  not  possible.  Furthermore,  it  requires  a  stable  market  situation  in  which 
manufacturers or importers do not change quickly. It also means that consumer purchasing 
behaviour is still important: the fleet average approach goes wrong if too many consumers 
buy products with low efficiency, which are then not compensated for by products bought 
with a high efficiency.84 

82 CLASP & The Policy Partners, Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards 
and Labels, September 2014 

83 Waide Strategic Efficiency, International comparisons of product policy, Coolproducts, February 2013 

84 Hans-Paul Siderius and Hidetoshi Nakagami, 2013, A MEPS is a MEPS is a MEPS: Comparing Ecodesign 
and Top Runner schemes for setting product efficiency standards. Energy Efficiency 6: 1-19. 

32 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                          
ROBUSTNESS OF THE EVALUATION  

75. This report was drafted on the basis on a combination of evaluation tools and inputs. The 
main input was an evaluation study by an external contractor85. This study generated as its 
first  input  a  literature  review,  including  academic  literature.  The  second  source  of  input 
was  that  of  stakeholders.  The  study  took  into  account  the  responses  of  a  public 
consultation  on  the  ‘Your  voice  in  Europe’  web  page.  Further,  the  study  contacted 
selected stakeholders directly on specific topics in order to appropriately capture the end-
user  perspectives.  In  addition,  stakeholders  were  consulted  on  the  progress  of  the  study 
through  three  dedicated  stakeholder  meetings,  ensuring  a  balanced  representation  of 
stakeholders  by  relying  on  the  members  of  the  Ecodesign  Consultation  Forum.  This 
allowed double–checking and provided confirmation of the results. 

76. A  third  source  of  input  for  this  evaluation  was  further  research,  notably  studies  not  yet 
available  at  the  time  of  the  literature  review86  and  studies  looking  at  international 
comparisons  of  energy  efficiency  policy  for  products87.  Availability  of  quantitative  data 
was limited for this part of the evaluation. An important quantitative input is the benefit to 
cost ratio. The source  used88 applied a reliability rating to  qualify it and considered that 
the costs were well understood and that the estimates relied largely on expert judgement 
informed by some real-world data. 

77. Since  a  number  of  different  sources  and  evaluation  techniques  were  used  by  external 
contractors  and  these  were  themselves  complemented  and  corroborated  with  other 
evidence, the evaluation presented in this report can be considered robust and fact-based. 

85  Ecofys,  Evaluation  of  the  Energy  Labelling  Directive  and  specific  aspects  of  the  Ecodesign  Directive,  June 
2014; London Economics, study on the impact of the energy label – and of potential changes to it – on consumer 
understanding and on purchase decisions, October 2014. 

86    COWI  &  BIO  Intelligence  Service,  Assessing  the  data  collected  in  the  framework  of  the  Ecodesign  and 
Labelling annual market surveillance data collection exercise run by the Commission, 2014;  VHK, "Omnibus" 
Review  Study  on  Cold  Appliances,  Washing  Machines,  Dishwashers,  Washer-Driers,  Lighting,  Set-top  Boxes 
and Pumps, 12 March 2014; UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Emerging Findings from 
Defra’s Regulation Assessment First update covering 2012,  February 2015 ; Ecofys, Impact of Ecodesign and 
Energy/Tyre  Labelling  on  R&D  and  Technological  Innovation,  May  2014;  Ecofys,  Impacts  of  the  EU’s 
Ecodesign  and  Energy/Tyre  labelling  legislation  on  third  jurisdictions,  April  2014;  Lloyd  Harrington  &  Jack 
Brown, Energy standards and labelling programmes  throughout the world in 2013, May 2014; CLASP & The 
Policy  Partners,  Improving  Global  Comparability  of  Appliance  Energy  Efficiency  Standards  and  Labels, 
September 2014 

87  Ecofys,  Impacts  of  the  EU’s  Ecodesign  and  Energy/Tyre  labelling  legislation  on  third  jurisdictions,  April 
2014;  Hans-Paul  Siderius  and  Hidetoshi  Nakagami,  2013,  A  MEPS  is  a  MEPS  is  a  MEPS:  Comparing 
Ecodesign and Top Runner schemes for setting product efficiency standards. Energy Efficiency 6: 1-19; Lloyd 
Harrington & Jack Brown, Energy standards and labelling programmes throughout the world in 2013, May 2014; 
CLASP & The Policy Partners, Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards and 
Labels, September 2014; Waide Strategic Efficiency, International comparisons of product policy, Coolproducts, 
February 2013 

88  UK  Department  for  Environment,  Food  and  Rural  Affairs,  Emerging  Findings  from  Defra’s  Regulation 
Assessment First update covering 2012, February 2015. 

33 

 
 
 
                                                            
CONCLUSIONS 

Relevance 
78. In  summary,  the  evaluation  has  shown  that  the three  objectives  of  the  Energy  Labelling 
and Ecodesign Directives (increasing energy efficiency and the level of protection of the 
environment;  providing  consumers  with  information  that  allows  them  to  choose  more 
efficient  products;  and  ensuring  the  free  movement  of  energy-related  products  in  the 
European Union) remain as relevant as they were more than 20 years ago. In particular, 
increasing energy efficiency has in fact gained in relevance. 

Effectiveness 
79. The evaluation has shown that the legislative framework governing the energy efficiency 
of  energy-related  products  is  effective,  delivering  almost  half  of  the  20%  energy 
efficiency target by 2020. At the same time, the policy has provided significant benefits to 
consumers  in  terms  of  monetary  savings,  to  industry  in  terms  of  lowering  compliance 
costs  by  ensuring  a  level  playing  field  in  the  internal  market  and  to  the  environment  in 
terms of reduced impacts. 

80. Nevertheless, the evaluation  found that  the  full savings potential of this policy has been 
reduced because of several factors. In particular, the introduction of the A+++, A++ and 
A+ classes on the label following the 2010 revision, by reducing simplicity, has reduced 
the  effectiveness  of  the  instrument  in  encouraging  consumers  to  buy  more  efficient 
products. Ensuring a clear legal framework to address this reduced effectiveness requires a 
revision of the Energy Labelling Directive. 

81. In  addition,  non-compliance  with  product-specific  requirements,  in  part  related  to  weak 
enforcement by national market surveillance authorities, was identified as the cause of a 
reduction in energy savings, estimated to be around 10%. While some remedies to address 
this could be introduced without a revision of the Directives (e.g. making more resources 
available for enforcement at Member State level), others would require a change at least to 
the  Energy  Labelling  Directive  (e.g.  introducing  a  central  product  registration  database 
that a number of other jurisdictions  have in place for similar policies). 

82. Further  factors  limiting  energy  savings  (problems  with  the  right  level  of  ambition  for 
some  product  groups;  long  rulemaking  process;  trend  towards  larger  products  not 
addressed in most energy labels) and other identified problems (e.g. certain icons on labels 
not  understood  by  consumers)  can  be  addressed in  the implementation  of  the  Directives 
and do not require revision. Thus, as regards ecodesign, while the evaluation has indicated 
some areas where further improvements could be made (including also a more systematic 
inclusion  of  other  significant  environmental  impacts  beyond  energy),  the  Directive  can 
still be considered broadly fit for purpose. Further improvements to implementation would 
not require a revision of the Ecodesign Directive. 

83. For  electronic  products,  of  which  some  are  covered  by  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling 
regulations and others by voluntary agreements, the evaluation found challenges related to 
the fast development of the market and the absence of clear relationship between purchase 

34 

 
 
 
price  and  efficiency.  This  may  merit  a  specific  in-depth  review,  which  would  fit  in  the 
context  of  the  upcoming  evaluation  of  the  EU  Energy  Star  label,  which  also  addresses 
electronic (office) equipment. 

84. The evaluation found no evidence of intrusiveness of the policy, with an exception of the 
speed  of  the  implementation  of  the  ban  of  certain  light  bulbs  in  the  early  years  of  the 
policy (as a result of political demand from the Member States). The perceived trade-off 
between energy efficiency and performance reported by some media is not based on facts. 
It  is  clear,  however,  that  the  benefits  of  the  policy  should  be  better  communicated  to 
citizens.  

Efficiency 
85. The evaluation has shown that the ecodesign and energy labelling policy is efficient. The 
benefits outweigh costs, both for businesses and for society as a whole. The benefit to cost 
ratio  was  estimated  at  3.8,  compared  to  an  average  of  3.0  for  a  range  of  environmental 
policies. 

86. The  regulatory  process  is  efficient  compared  to  other  jurisdictions  in  terms  of  the 
resources  used.  However,  the  rulemaking  process  is  too  long.  New  ways  to  reduce  the 
length of the process and prevent delays should be explored.  

EU-added value 
87. An  EU  harmonised  regulatory  framework  for  energy  efficiency  of  products  provides  a 
clear EU-added value. It brings down cost for manufacturers compared to different rules 
and  requirements  in  each  Member  State  (as  was  the  situation  in  1990  for  efficiency  of 
central heating boilers). It enables businesses to tap into a larger market for their products, 
while ensuring high levels of environmental protection. 

88. An  EU  harmonised  framework  also  strengthens  competitiveness  in  other  ways,  notably 
through  effects  on  global  convergence  and  the  promotion  of  industry  consolidation 
leading to greater economies of scale with manufacturing firms capable of operating on a 
global scale.  

Coherence 
89. The overall policy framework is coherent and mutually supportive. The main incoherence 
between  ecodesign  and  energy  labelling  is  found  between  certain  ecodesign  and  energy 
labelling  regulations  targeting  the  same  product  groups:  further  steps  of  staged  bans  by 
ecodesign  were  put  into  place  while  energy  labels  were  unchanged,  which  meant  that  a 
number  of  classes  shown  on  the  energy  label  are  unpopulated  because  of  ecodesign 
legislation while this is often not known to consumers. To prevent this problem in future 
the  Energy  Labelling  Directive  would  need  to  be  revised  so  that  energy  labels  can  be 
further updated once too many classes on the label are unpopulated. 

90. As  regard  coherence  with  other  EU  product  policies,  there  could  be  synergy  in 
measurement methods where this is not yet the case. Ecodesign and Energy Labelling rely 

35 

 
 
on the same measurement methods, but the EU Ecolabel uses different methods for some 
products and parameters. A fitness check of the EU Ecolabel is on-going. 

91. The EU is, along with the US, the world leader in the development of minimum energy 
efficiency  requirements  and  energy  labelling.  Many  other  countries  follow  similar 
approaches:  at  least  45  countries  outside  the  European  Union  have  adopted  minimum 
energy efficiency requirements for products and at least 59 non-EU countries use energy 
labels. The EU regulations and the A-G label layout (other countries have not added the 
plusses)  are  influential  internationally  and  the  EU  has  an  important  role  in  international 
standardisation  and  harmonisation  efforts.  In  terms  of  monitoring  and  enforcement,  a 
number  of  other  countries  complement  market  surveillance  by  requiring  information  on 
performance and compliance of products to be registered in a central registration database 
and/or require a third party to certify that the product model is compliant. 

92. Only  Japan's  Top  Runner  scheme  works  distinctively  different:  it  does  not  impose 
minimum  energy  efficiency  requirements  on  individual  units  of  products,  but  on  the 
average of the products (of a certain type) that the company sells.  It is equally effective to 
ecodesign,  but  more  suitable  for  a  homogeneous  national  market,  such  as  Japan.  As 
compliance cannot be verified on individual products, enforcement is highly dependent on 
cooperation by  manufacturers. It could  also be less effective for products groups, where 
the share of imports is high. 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX – DETAILED  PRESENTATION  OF  THE ECODESIGN  AND ENERGY LABELLING 
DIRECTIVE AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION  

This  Annex  sets  out  the  background  to  the  Ecodesign  and  Energy  Labelling  Directives, 
summarises the  process for  developing  implementing  measures  and the role  of  the different 
institutions,  presents  what  has  been  achieved  and  describes  the  next  steps  in  their 
implementation. 

Summary 

The Ecodesign Directive, adopted in 2005 and extended from energy-using to energy-related 
products  in  2009,  allows  the  Commission  to  prohibit  the  sale  in  the  EU  market  of  those 
models of energy-related products with the highest environmental impacts. Every three years 
an ecodesign working plan identifies the products to be studied in detail. After a preparatory 
study a product specific regulation is drafted detailing the EU-harmonised ecodesign criteria 
for that product group, which is adopted following the implementing act procedure. To date 
24  ecodesign  implementing  regulations  have  been  put  in  place,  some  of  which  have  been 
subsequently  updated  through  amendment,  and  two  ecodesign  voluntary  agreements  are  in 
place. Products covered range from household products, such as fridges, lamps and boilers, to 
professional and industrial products, such as electric motors and fans. Further products groups 
are under study for potential regulation. 

The  Energy  Labelling  Directive,  revised  in  2010,  allows  the  Commission  to  require  energy 
labels  to  be  displayed  on  energy-related  products  at  point  of  sale.  The  label  shows  which 
energy  class  a  product  achieves,  and  this  encourages  the  sale  of  more  energy  efficient  and 
environmentally friendly models through the provision of comparable information on energy 
efficiency  and  consumption  of  key  resources.  After  a  preparatory  study  a  product  specific 
regulation  is  drafted  detailing  the  energy  label  for  that  product  group,  which  is  adopted 
following  the  delegated  act  procedure.  13  delegated  regulations  now  ensure  that  a  range  of 
products,  all  of  which  are  also  subject  to  Ecodesign  regulations,  must  be  sold  with  an  EU 
energy label attached. All these measures were amended in 2014 so that the energy label will 
also be shown when selling the product via the internet. 

The  related  Tyre  Labelling  Regulation  is  separate  from  the  Energy  Labelling  Directive 
framework, but addresses the same issue for the specific sector of tyres. Its review is foreseen 
for March 2016, although the present review may have an impact on this regulation, because 
of its similarity to the Energy Labelling Directive's delegated regulations. 

Ensuring compliance by manufacturers and retailers with the legislation is the responsibility 
of  Member  States  through  market  surveillance.  To  ensure  a  common  interpretation  in 
enforcing  the  requirements  and  to  organise  market  surveillance  efficiently  across  the  EU, 
Member States' market surveillance authorities exchange information through Administrative 
Cooperation groups (ADCO). Furthermore, the Market Surveillance Regulation provides the 
framework for Members States to organise their market surveillance. The regulation specifies 
that its provisions apply to all Union harmonisation legislation on products, insofar as there 
are no specific provisions with the same objective in that legislation. The latter is at present 

37 

 
 
 
the case for Articles 3(2)-(4) and Article 7 of the Ecodesign Directive and Article 3(2)-(4) of 
the Energy Labelling Directive. These articles take precedence over similar provisions in the 
market  surveillance  regulation.  To  further  improve  Member  States'  market  surveillance  the 
surveillance  the Commission proposed  a new market surveillance  regulation for products  in 
February 201389. 

Background energy labelling and ecodesign  

Energy labelling 

The second oil crisis in the early '80s led the Council in 1986 to set an objective to improve 
energy  efficiency  by  20%  by  1995.  The  Gulf  Crisis  of  1990  reinforced  doubts  about  the 
security  of  oil  supplies.  Furthermore,  the  Energy/Environment  Council  of  1990  set  the 
objective  to  maintain  CO2  emissions  at  1990  levels.  While  energy  consumption  in  industry 
remained  stable  in  the  '80s,  residential  and  transport  consumption  rose  substantially.  In  this 
context, and in an effort to preserve the single market from fragmentation by similar national 
initiatives  introduced  at  the  time,  a  Community-wide  energy  labelling  scheme  (Council 
Directive 92/75/EC) was established, using the A-G scale with coloured arrows for the first 
time.  The  directive  was  supplemented  by  further,  "implementing"  Directives  on  household 
washing machines, washer-dryers, lamps, cold appliances, electric ovens and air-conditioners 
during the period 1995-2002. 

In 2010, the Energy Labelling Directive 92/75/EC was replaced by Directive 2010/30/EU. Its 
main features were the introduction of A+, A++, and A+++ classes on top of the A-G scale, 
an almost language-free label used across the whole internal market, and distance and internet 
sales  added  into  the  scope.  Previously  existing  labels  have  since  been  updated,  and  new 
labelling measures have been created for a number of additional product groups. 

Ecodesign 

In  the  course  of  the  1990's  Council  directives  were  adopted  setting  minimum  energy 
efficiency  requirements  for  boilers  (1992),  refrigerators  and  freezers  (1996)  and  fluorescent 
lamp  ballasts  (2000).  These  aimed  at  avoiding  the  fragmentation  of  the  internal  market 
(Member  States  had  initially  introduced  or  expressed  the  desire  to  introduce  national 
requirements) and at ensuring that the increased circulation of products on the internal market 
did not result in a proliferation of cheaper, low-efficiency appliances. 

To set a framework for future work, in 2003 the Commission then proposed the Ecodesign of 
Energy-Using  Products  Directive  (adopted  in  July  2005).  The  directive  allowed  for  product 
specific  implementing  measures  adopted  in  comitology,  containing  minimum  requirements 
that would remove the worst performing products from the market. The rationale behind this 
approach was to allow for fast progress in highly technical matters, while maintaining legal 
soundness and cooperation among the institutions of the EU. 

89 

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/archive/safety/psmsp/index_en.htm 

38 

 
 
                                                            
The  Energy  Labelling  and  Ecodesign  Directives  complement  each  other,  as  the  former 
promotes  the  best  products  (exercising  a  "pull"  towards  more  energy  efficiency),  while  the 
latter removes the worst from the market ("push" effect). 

In 2009, the Ecodesign Directive's scope was extended to cover also energy-related products, 
i.e.  products  that  do  not  use  energy  themselves  but  have  an  influence  on  other  products' 
energy use, such as building controls or thermal insulation. 

Process and role of the Institutions 

Both the Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Directives are framework directives. They require 
the  Commission  to  come  forward  with  implementing  regulations  laying  down  product-
specific  requirements,  and  set  the  conditions  these  regulations  must  meet.  In  turn,  the 
regulations must be approved or not objected to by the European Parliament and Council. The 
below figure gives an overview of the legislative process. 

The process starts with establishing the priorities for Union action. Priority product groups are 
selected  based  on  their  potential  for  cost-effective  reduction  of  energy  consumption  and 
following a transparent process culminating in working plans that outline the priorities. 

A  first  list  of  priority  product  groups  was  provided  in  the  Ecodesign  Directive  itself 
(2005/32/EC, Article 16). Subsequently, the first formal working plan (for 2009-2011) and the 
second  (for  2012-2014)  were  adopted  by  the  Commission90  after  consultation  of  the 
Ecodesign Consultation Forum (composed of Member State and stakeholder experts).  

The 1st Working Plan was a Commission Report addressed to the EP and Council, the 2nd Working Plan 

90 
- on advice of SG - was a Staff Working Document. 

39 

 
 
 
                                                            
The products listed in the two plans (1st working plan: 1-10; 2nd working plan: 11-18) are the 
following: 

1.  Air-conditioning  and  ventilation 
systems (commercial and industrial)  
2.  Electric  and  fossil-fuelled  heating 

equipment 

11. Window products 

12. Steam boilers ( < 50MW) 

3.  Food 

preparing 

equipment 

13. Power cables  

(including coffee machines) 

4.  Industrial  and  laboratory  furnaces 

14. Enterprises' servers, data storage and 

and ovens 
5.  Machine tools 
6.  Network,  data  processing  and  data 

ancillary equipment 
15. Smart appliances/meters 
16. Lighting systems 

storing equipment 

7.  Refrigerating 
(professional) 

and 

freezing 

17. Wine 

storage 

appliances 

(c.f. 

Ecodesign regulation 643/2009) 

8.  Sound  and 

imaging  equipment 

18. Water-related products 

(incl. game consoles) 

9.  Transformers 
10. Water-using equipment 

There  were  also  a  number  of  conditional  products  in  the  2nd  Working  Plan  that  the 
Commission committed to study closer before deciding to launch full preparatory work (such 
as thermal insulation, power generating equipment). 

Once  the  product  group  has  been  selected,  a  preparatory  study  is  undertaken  by  an 
independent  consultant, 
interested 
stakeholders.  

technical  discussions  with 

involving  extensive 

Next, the Commission's first drafts of ecodesign and energy labelling measures are submitted 
for  discussion  to  the  Consultation  Forum,  consisting  of  Member  States'  and  other 
stakeholders'  representatives.  The  Parliament,  Member  States  and  stakeholders  are  kept 
informed (by receiving copies of the evolving texts of the draft regulations) at each stage from 
there onwards. 

After  the  Consultation  Forum,  the  Commission  drafts  an  impact  assessment,  which  after 
approval  of  the  IAB  is  taken  forward  to  inter-service  consultation  together  with  draft 
implementing measures.  

The next step is WTO notification. Following that, the two procedures follow different paths. 
The draft energy labelling delegated act is discussed in a Member State Expert Group where 
opinion(s)  are  expressed  and  consensus  is  sought  but  no  vote  is  taken.  The  draft  ecodesign 
measure is  submitted for vote to  the Regulatory Committee of Member  State experts. Next, 
the Commission adopts the delegated act for energy labelling. 

After  this the European Parliament and Council have the right of scrutiny for each measure 
for which a period of three or four months is foreseen. Within this time the co-legislators can 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
block  the  adoption  process  by  the  Commission.  Parliament  committees  sometimes  discuss 
proposals to object to measures (light bulbs and fridges in 2009) or go one step further and 
vote on such a proposal (vacuum cleaners and water heaters in 201391). On one occasion an 
objection was even adopted in plenary, blocking the measure for televisions in 200992. 

VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS 

The Directive sets out in its Annex VIII in addition to the basic legal requirements indicative 
criteria  for  assessing  whether  proposed  self-regulatory  initiatives  can  be  considered  as  an 
alternative  to  an  implementing  measure.  The  industry  which  submits  a  self-regulatory 
proposal in view of it being officially recognised by the Commission is expected to provide 
sufficient  technical  background  to  enable  the  Commission  and  the  members  of  the 
Consultation Forum to assess the proposal, notably in terms of the added value as compared 
with business-as-usual. 

The  Commission  assesses  each  self-regulatory  initiative  on  a  case  by  case  basis  after 
consulting the members of the Consultation Forum and taking into account the findings of the 
technical/economic  preparatory  study  if  available.  The  basis  for  the  assessment  whether  a 
proposal  goes  beyond  business-as-usual  is  the  information  provided  by  the  industry  and 
affected parties and, if available, the findings of the preparatory study. Voluntary agreements 
are expected to include quantified and staged objectives, starting from a well-defined baseline 
and measured through verifiable indicators. Voluntary agreements also need arrangements for 
independent verification as they are not necessarily subject to market surveillance by Member 
States.  

The  Commission  is  in  the  process  of  developing  guidelines  for  voluntary  agreements.  The 
Consultation Forum endorsed on 12 June 2014 an approach that voluntary agreements should 
cover  at  least  80%  of  the  market  share  of  a  product  category  and  that  at  least  90%  of  all 
product models of each signatory of the voluntary agreement comply with its requirements93.  

Existing ecodesign, energy labelling and tyre labelling legislation 

Framework legislation 
  2009/125/EC 

Ecodesign Framework Directive 

91 The vacuum cleaner objection was defeated in the ENVI committee by 43 votes against and 4 in favour. The 
water heater objection was defeated in the ENVI committee by 51 votes against and 1 in favour. 

92 The motivation of the objection was that the EP wanted to delay the discussion of the draft labelling measure 
so that it would have to become a delegated act under the recast post-Lisbon Energy Labelling Directive in 2010. 
The measure was indeed subsequently adopted as a delegated act 

93 With an incentive to increase this to 100% in which case no sensitive market data has to be submitted to the 
independent inspector 

41 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
  2010/30/EU 
  1222/2009/EC  

Energy labelling Framework Directive  
Labelling of tyres with respect to fuel efficiency and other 

essential parameters 

24 Ecodesign implementing regulations 

  1275/2008   
  107/2009 
  244/2009 
  245/2009 

  278/2009 
  640/2009 
  641/2009 
  642/2009 
  643/2009 
  1015/2010   
  1016/2010   
  327/2011 
  206/2012 
  547/2012 
  932/2012 
  1194/2012   

  617/2013 
  666/2013 
  801/2013 
  813/2013 
  814/2013 
  66/2014 
  548/2014 
  1253/2014   

Electric power consumption standby and off mode 
Simple set-top boxes 
Non-directional household lamps (+amending regulation 859/2009) 
Fluorescent lamps without integrated ballast, for high intensity  
discharge lamps and for ballasts and luminaires (+ amending regulation
347/2010) 
External power supplies 
Electric motors (+ amending regulation 4/2014) 
Circulators (+ amending regulation 622/2012) 
Televisions 
Household refrigerating appliances 
Household washing machines 
Household dishwashers 
Industrial fans 
Air conditioning and comfort fans 
Water pumps 
Household tumble driers 
Directional lamps, light emitting diode (LED) lamps and related  
equipment 
Computers and servers 
Vacuum cleaners 
Networked standby  
Heaters 
Water heaters  
Domestic cooking appliances 
Power transformers 
Ventilation units 

4 amending Ecodesign implementing regulations 

  859/2009 

  347/2010 

  622/2012 
  4/2014 

Ultraviolet  radiation  of  non-directional  household  lamps  (amending 
regulation 244/2009/EC) 
Fluorescent  lamps  without  integrated  ballast,  for  high  intensity 
discharge  lamps  and  for  ballasts  and  luminaries  (amending  regulation 
245/2009/EC) 
Circulators (amending regulation 641/2009) 
Industrial electric motors (amending regulation 640/2009) 

2 Voluntary ecodesign agreements (Report to the EP & Council) 

  COM (2012) 684  Complex set top boxes  

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  COM (2013) 23 

Imaging equipment 

13 energy labelling supplementing regulations (of which 1 amending) 

  1059/2010   
  1060/2010   
  1061/2010   
  1062/2010   
  626/2011  
  392/2012 
  874/2012 
  665/2013 
  811/2013 
  812/2013 
  65/2014 
  518/2014 
  1254//2014  

Household dishwashers 
Household refrigerating appliances 
Household washing machines 
Televisions 
Air conditioners  
Household tumble driers  
Electrical lamps and luminaires 
Vacuum cleaners 
Heaters 
Water heaters 
Domestic cooking appliances 
Energy labelling on the internet (amending the above regulations) 
Residential ventilation units 

3 Product-specific Directives still in force 

  92/42/EEC  
  96/60/EC   

Hot-water boilers efficiency Council Directive (94ED95)  
Household combined washer-driers (EL96) 

95 ED = Ecodesign requirements 

96 EL = Energy labelling 

43