COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products and repealing Directive 2009/125/EC
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: circular economy, ecodesign, energy efficiency, environmental impact, free movement of goods, maintenance, product life, single market, sustainable product, waste recycling

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.3.2022  SWD(2022) 83 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products and repealing Directive 2009/125/EC {COM(2022) 142 final} - {SEC(2022) 165 final} - {SWD(2022) 81 final} - {SWD(2022) 82 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet 

Impact assessment on the Sustainable Products Initiative 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed?  
The  main  problem  is  that  consumption  and  production  are  not  sustainable  and  not  adequately  addressed  by 
existing  EU  product  and  internal  market  rules,  leading  to  increasingly  divergent  national  rules  on  the 
sustainability of products.  
Sub-problem 1: Product design does not sufficiently take into account environmental impacts over the life cycle, 
including circularity aspects. As a result, products are being replaced frequently, involving significant energy and 
resource use in order to produce and distribute new products and dispose of old ones.  
Sub-problem 2: It is still too difficult for economic operators and citizens to make sustainable choices in relation 
to  products  given  that  relevant  information  and  affordable  options  to  do  so  are  lacking.  This  leads  to  missed 
opportunities  for  sustainability  and  for  value-retaining  operations,  limited  demand  for  secondary  materials  and 
obstacles to the adoption of circular business models. 
Sub-problem 3: Sub-optimal  application of the current Ecodesign  legislation.  Although  the Ecodesign Directive 
has  generally  been  successful,  its  full  potential  is  not  systematically  realised.  Its  scope  is  currently  limited  to 
energy-related products while other products also generate significant environmental impacts. Significant delays 
in  the  adoption  of  new  product  regulations  and  lack  of  compliance  are  other  key  issues  that  need  to  be 
addressed. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve?  
The  general  objective  is  to  reduce  the  negative  life-cycle  environmental  and  social  impacts  of  products  and 
improve the functioning of the internal market. The specific objectives are:  

1. To improve products sustainability 
2. Better access to sustainability information along the supply chain 
3. To incentivise more sustainable products and business models to improve value retention 
4. To improve application of the sustainable product legislative framework 

What is the value added of action at the EU level?  
In order to ensure a harmonised and well-functioning internal market across all Member States, and therefore a 
level  playing  field  for  economic  operators  operating  on  the  internal  market,  it  is  essential  to  put  in  place  a 
common  set  of  rules,  which  include  product  requirements  and  the  obligation  to  provide  reliable  information  to 
end-users.  Without  an  EU-level  initiative  and  its  effective  application,  the  problems  assessed  in  this  impact 
assessment will not be fully  and consistently  addressed across the EU. National initiatives (some of which are 
already  underway),  while  bringing  certain  benefits  at  national  level,  will  inevitably  further  fragment  the  internal 
market and render consumer choices more complicated. 

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why?  
A  range  of  sub-options  is  considered  for  6  main  options  and  compared  against  the  baseline  (Option  1).  The 
options relate to: 

  Extension of the product scope of Ecodesign legislation (Option 2) 
  Extension of sustainability requirements for products (Option 3) 
  Sustainability information for consumers and business-to-business (Option 4) 
  Reward more sustainable products through incentives (Option 5) 
  Measures for circular economy and value retention (Option 6) 
  Strengthened application of the Ecodesign framework (Option 7) 

The  preferred  combination  involves  action  on  each  option,  including  expanding  the  scope  of  Ecodesign  to  a 
wide  range  of  products  such  as  textiles,  furniture  and  high  impact  intermediate  products;  significantly 
strengthening  its  sustainability  requirements;  introducing  new  information  requirements  for  products,  including 
the  establishment  of  a  Digital  Product  Passport.  Other  actions  include  incentives  by  public  authorities  for 
sustainable products and measures to prevent the destruction of unsold consumer goods. Various measures to 
strengthen the application of Ecodesign rules are also foreseen.  

What are different stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?  
Most stakeholders  advocated for a comprehensive scope for the SPI framework that  includes  a  wide range of 
products  and  takes  a  whole  life  cycle  (LCA)  approach.  Support  for  an  extension  of  the  scope  of  Ecodesign  is 

1 

 
strong,  with  general  agreement  that  the  sectors  identified  in  the  CEAP1  should  be  prioritised,  and 
manufacturers/importers  in  particular  expressing  a  preference  for  an  approach  that  takes  product  specificities 
firmly  into  account.  There  is  general  agreement  (including  from  manufacturers/importers,  SMEs,  retailers  and 
waste operators) that lack of clear, comprehensive, binding legislation, as well as lack of trustworthy information 
are  all  presenting  barriers  to  greater  availability  of  sustainable  products,  as  is  uneven  enforcement  of  product 
sustainability  requirements.  Digital  Product  Passports  are  generally  supported  by  clear  majorities  across  all 
stakeholder  groups.  A  large  majority  of  all  stakeholders  (including  public  authorities)  expressed  support  for 
mandatory  Green  Public  Procurement  and  agree  that  more  incentives  are  required  to  orient  demand  towards 
sustainable  products.  Stronger  enforcement  and  market  surveillance  activities  (e.g.  inspections  or  audits)  are 
seen as necessary to accompany the implementation of the SPI. 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 
Citizens  will  benefit  from  wider  availability  of  more  sustainable  products  and  product-related  options  (such  as 
repair). The worst performing products  will gradually  be removed from the market resulting in benefits such as 
improved  durability,  reliability  and  reparability  of  products.  Requirements  to  ensure  high-quality  recycling  of 
products and to increase their recycled content will contribute to boosting supply of and demand for secondary 
raw  materials.  Improved  availability  of  information  on  the  sustainability  dimension  of  products  should  facilitate 
consumer choice and complement other EU level initiatives in this area2. Measures to orient public purchasing 
power towards the most sustainable products, ensure value retention and foster circular economy practices will 
help green the market. Overall, there will be significant greening of the market for products, with economic and 
social  benefits.  There  will  also  be  material  environmental  benefits,  including  a  significant  reduction  of  GHG 
emissions.  

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 
Due  to  the  framework  architecture  foreseen  for  SPI,  overall  costs  of  the  preferred  options  are  challenging  to 
identify  precisely.  While  there  will  be  certain  initial  costs  associated  with  establishing  the  framework  and 
preparing SPI measures, the most significant are likely to be incurred only after these measures are laid down 
for priority products. Overall, this means costs for economic actors involved in product manufacturing are likely to 
increase, with some costs passed on to consumers. The experience of the Ecodesign Directive is, however, that 
increased costs are more than offset by financial savings for consumers over the long term. Under SPI, there is 
also  clear  potential  for  benefits  from  life  extension  and  improvements  in  the  production  process.  Furthermore, 
production  cost  increases  could  also  be  offset  by  savings  along  the  value  chain  for  other  businesses.  All  SPI 
measures will  be underpinned by impact assessments  and consultation processes  that examine the costs and 
benefits to ensure proportionality.  

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness? 

Businesses including SMEs will face additional costs that will be analysed in the context of future implementing 
measures, with possibilities for mitigation considered in the accompanying impact assessments. Any compliance 
costs will be proportionate, and some may be passed on to consumers (which in turn are expected to be offset 
over  time  as  described  above).  For  businesses  operating  across  EU  borders,  harmonised  requirements  at  EU 
level  are  likely  to  reduce  overall  compliance  costs,  given  that  they  will  replace  various  existing  or  planned 
requirements at national level. There will also be direct benefits to the competitiveness of businesses, including 
from a shift of activity from the processing of primary towards secondary raw materials and from production of 
products  to  maintenance,  reuse,  refurbishment,  repair  and  second-hand  sales,  which  is  expected  to  benefit 
SMEs  significantly  because  they  are  more  active  in  these  sectors.  While  SMEs  have  suggested  that  certain 
negative  impacts  may  stem  from  some  of  the  main  measures  under  the  preferred  policy  options,  many  also 
believe  that  these  can  be  offset  and  bring  added  value  over  time  (e.g.  due  to  reduced  material  expenditure; 
increased customer loyalty; better access to the market for greener products; reputational benefits etc.) 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 
There will be administrative costs for Member States as a result of the preferred options, in particular a need for 
additional  human  resources.  Overall,  these  are  not  expected  to  be  significant  compared  to  the  economic, 
environmental, and social benefits of the options.  

1 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en  
2 In particular, the Green Claims Initiative and the initiative on Empowering Consumers for the Green 
Transition.  

2 

 
 
                                                 
Will there be other significant impacts? 
Requirements  would  apply  in  a  non-discriminatory  manner  to  European  and  non-European  companies,  thus 
ensuring  a  level  playing  field  for  sustainable  products  placed  on  the  EU  market.  The  requirements  would  be 
consistent with the EU’s international trade obligations. 

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed? 
An  evaluation  of  the  SPI,  eight  years  after  its  entry  into  force,  will  build  upon  product  group-specific  review 
studies and examine what is and is not working well. 

3