DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
ENVIRONMENT
ENV.G - Sustainable Development & Integration
ENV.G.4 - Sustainable Production & Consumption
Brussels, 26.01.2007
BD/tb D(2006) 4710
Minutes of the 6th IPP Regular Meeting
on the Implementation of the Commission’s Communication on Integrated Product Policy (COM(2003) 302 final)
15 November 2006 (09:30 -17:00) in Brussels
Chairman: Mr. Klaus KÖGLER (1-3); Ms. Anne-France WOESTYN (3-7)
1. Welcome and adoption of the agenda
The Chairman Mr Klaus Kögler opened the 6th IPP Regular Meeting and welcomed all participants, especially Adviser Mr Herbert Aichinger and Detached National Expert Ms Aphrodite Korou who recently joined the Sustainable Consumption and Production team.
Mr Aichinger is from 1 November 2006 appointed Adviser to Director Mr Timo Mäkelä and responsible for coordinating the new sustainable consumption and Production (SCP) Action Plan among other tasks. Mr Aichinger was formerly Head of Unit in the Environment and Industry Unit, then responsible for eco-label, EMAS, Greening of Public Procurement, SME's, etc. Ms Korou is seconded from UK's Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), where she was Assistant Director in Sustainable Development and in SCP. She will join DG Environment 16 November 2006.
The suggested draft agenda was adopted.
List of meeting participants is attached.
2. IMPRO project
Ms Françoise Nemry, DG JRC-IPTS – Unit for Sustainability in Industry, Energy and Transport (SIET); action on Sustainable Production and Consumption (SUSPROC) – presented an update of the research on the IMPRO project. The European Commission announced in its Communication on Integrated Product Policy that it will seek to identify and stimulate action on products with the greatest potential for environmental improvement. This work is carried out sequentially in three phases.
IMPRO is the second phase of the work, following the results of the EIPRO study. The purpose of IMPRO is to identify possible ways to reduce the lifecycle environmental impacts of some of the products with the greatest environmental impact. Specific studies are currently at different stages of development for cars, housing, and meat and dairy products. Later, in the third phase, the European Commission will seek to address policy measures for the products that are identified having the greatest potential for environmental improvement at least socio-economic cost.
The EIPRO study analysed the lifecycle environmental impacts of products consumed in the EU-25 covering among abiotic depletion, acidification, eco-toxicity, global warming, eutrophication, human toxicity, ozone layer depletion, and photochemical oxidation impact categories. The results of this study indicate three areas having the greatest impact. These are food and drink (20–30% of the various environmental impacts), private transport (15–35% depending on the impact category) and housing (i.e. building and occupancy) (20–35% of the impacts of all products for most impact categories).
IMPRO explores whether there is room further improvement, in addition to already ongoing and decided actions:
· Estimate and compare the environmental impacts of the products by taking a life cycle approach;
· Identify the main environmental improvement options related to the products, addressing all the different life cycle stages and estimate the size of the environmental improvement potentials;
· Assess the main improvement options regarding their feasibility and potential social and economic impacts.
Key components of the three different research studies are:
i) Analysis of the lifecycle stages and environmental impact categories;
ii) Environmental improvement associated with technical improvement;
iii) Analysis of social and economic barriers;
iv) Analysis and recommendations for improving the different options (to be further considered by policy makers).
The study on car transportation will be delivered before the summer 2007, while the report on meat and diary products and the report on building are planned to be finalised towards the end of the year. The research work includes contacts with relevant experts for the products.
More information on IMPRO can be found on page: http://susproc.jrc.es/pages/r4.htm
During the discussion, the following main comments were made:
JRC-IPTS clarified a question by NL that natural resources were included in the study. UNICE was assured by JRC-IPTS that they in the three IMPRO studies will follow the ISO/LCA standard guidelines in the combined LCI data and impact data analysis. With regard to the building study, they will as much as possible take into account results from existing studies available, and will also consider deliveries of the EuP eco-design framework. UK considered the EIPRO study had already been powerful and the IMPRO project could also have some very significant implications for future policy; and asked how the results will be taken forward into policy. JRC-IPTS responded that the analysis of environmental impacts and socio-economic barriers, problems and gaps identified, and technical solutions and options will provide the overall evidence (or scientific evidence) basis for possible future policies, but there will be no policy choice made by JRC-IPTS as this is DG ENV's responsibility. DG RTD concluded the IMPRO prospective is until 2020-2030, asking the JRC-IPTS how they could take into account rebound effects and what life cycle costs could be included in the study. JRC-IPTS responded that the IMPRO projects analyse direct costs incurred at the different life cycle steps. Doing this, they also analyse what is feasible, from a technical perspective and on the market. Rebound effects are difficult to analyse but JRC-IPTS will try to include them in socio-economic analysis, referring to the lists of criteria in the Impact Assessment guidelines. ES asked further explanation regarding the variation of the impacts analysed by the EIPRO study. JRC-IPTS clarified that the variation in the EIPRO study reflects different environmental impact categories and is not a reflection of uncertainties. Following a direct question from BE, other Commission Directorate-Generals are involved in the study or contacted where relevant. These are for example synergies with the eco-design work under the EuP Framework Directive, particularly on boilers, cooling equipment, and lightning. BE also asked whether the impacts incurred outside the EU were considered. JRC-IPTS confirmed these impacts are covered in two ways. Firstly, the projects do full LCA studies; therefore they also consider options outside the EU. Secondly, environmental benefits can also take place outside the EU. It was confirmed following EEB's question that data for eco-toxicity is difficult to obtain. Environmental benefits for businesses are included the analysis, which also includes avoided costs, e.g. air quality improvement, soil clean-up, etc. Following a question by EuroCommerce, it was clarified that the scope of the car project is private transportation, and not other transportation means. The car project also considers fuels like bio-fuel (which also addressed in the 6EAP thematic strategy on natural resources). Animal feed is included in the study on meat and diary products as all production processes are included the life cycle analysis.
3. Sustainable Production & Consumption (SCP)
Presentation of the views on the future SCP Action Plan by the Commission:
On the basis of a European Commission proposal, the European Council of June 2006 requested the European Commission to develop an EU Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) Action Plan by 2007 in the context of the reviewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS). In the SDS review in 2005, the Council upgraded SCP to one of priority areas ("key action") in the environment field, at the same level as climate change, transport, natural resources and public health. The SCP Action Plan should also be a response to EU's commitments on SCP made at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002.
The objective of the Action Plan is "promoting sustainable consumption and production by addressing social and economic development within the carrying capacity of ecosystems and decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation". The added value of developing an SCP policy is to tackle environmental problems in a prevention-oriented approach, aiming at a more sustainable management of both production and consumption. IPP is considered to be a great and contributor to SCP-AP.
Mr Herbert Aichinger presented initial views in terms of approach and possible content of the SCP Action plan. This is the second Commission meeting on the SCP Action Plan (Director Timo Mäkelä already made similar presentation at the Informal European IPP Network Meeting in Helsinki, 18 October 2006). The European Commission is in the preliminary stages of developing the Action Plan. The emphasis of the Action Plan will be on actions building on a preventative approach (not remediation). The specific priority actions will consist of new initiatives, reinforcement of existing initiatives, ensuring better coherence, and contributing to better regulation and simplification. Existing initiatives which will be considered include IPPC, EMAS, eco-labelling, and the EuP Framework Directive. The Action Plan will focus on the most damaging product areas, following the results of the EIPRO and the forthcoming IMPRO studies, therefore taking an evidence-based scientific approach, also described in Impact Assessment guidelines. A challenging task for the Action Plan will be how to address the consumption side. Stakeholders will be involved as early as possible in the consultation process, most likely towards the end of drafting the document in May 2007.
Preliminary ideas for the SCP Action Plan include:
§ Extension of eco-design legislation (EuP) with minimum requirements;
§ Greening the private procurement sector;
§ Performance targets for products (ETAP);
§ Reinforcement of eco-label and EMAS;
§ Global initiative.
Slides of the presentation by the Commission to be find in Annex 2.
Presentation of national SCP initiatives by selected Member States:
The Czech Republic approved its SCP programme in June 2005. Amongst key priorities are education, integration of policies, eco-efficiency, local activities, and improvement of market conditions; presentation in Annex 3 and framework of programmes in Annex 4.
The Netherlands has been partly successful on demonstration projects, fiscal tax systems, and greening of public procurement (GPP). They have critically analysed the environmental benefits, and concluded that integration and green thinking is poor. All initiatives in the Netherlands are voluntary actions (VA), which make them weak. It is important the SCP Action Plan focuses on the EU level. For presentation, see Annex 5.
Based on fifteen years of experience in the SCP area, the Netherlands have suggested five priorities:
1. Focus on suppliers – instruments are legal performance standards and eco-design;
2. Products with highest environmental pressure – starting from EIPRO;
3. Financial drivers – greening of overall tax system, fiscal facilitation with green investments and savings, special drivers such as purchase with tax differentiation, tax subsidy and tax exemption;
4. Green public procurement (GPP);
5. Product information and transparency. The benefits will contribute to provide insight where products need improvement, select good suppliers, and make visible for authorities and NGOs. However, costs are involved in collecting data, and it is questionable whether actors will voluntarily use the information.
United Kingdom national strategy for SCP brings together ambitions on production, products and consumption patterns. The work is being organised and steered with the help of a programme management board, consisting of Government and relevant stakeholders. Later in 2007, the UK will adopt ‘action roadmaps’ for ten major product areas; taking a strong evidence-based approach (the results of EIPRO study have been extremely valuable). The presentation is in Annex 6.
Hungary has some SCP activities and management, focusing on change on food, housing, transportation. They will analyse gaps and develop targets. The presentation is in Annex 7.
Sweden prepared in spring 2006 a report that focuses on households to enable sustainable consumption. Following the advent of a new Government in October 2006, the decision for an Action Plan on Sustainable Production and Consumption in Sweden will be taken at a later stage.
Finland presented its SCP Action Plan in early 2006. The Finnish Action Plan was drafted by a multi-stakeholder committee. The committee included officials from different ministries as well as representatives from industrial, business, environmental and consumers' organisations. The Government discussed the programme in the so-called evening school last April. Some of the elements of the SCP programme are also included in the newly revised SD Strategy (in Finland). The Finnish government gave support to the ministries to continue promoting the ideas and to specially concentrate in five themes:
1. Economic instruments – guidelines for long-term reform;
2. Public sector as a role model though greening public procurement (GPP);
3. Establishing a service centre for eco-efficiency – this includes dialogues and product panels, setting of targets, innovation and identification of new solutions, and launch of IMPRO like studies;
4. Based on studies on the environmental impacts of material flows in key sectors to start a so-called dialogue with volunteer sectors, and;
5. Promoting policy instruments in public-private partnership to innovate sustainable products and services – enable sustainable consumer choices.
The suggested task to include environmental costs in prices will be put on hold due to elections next year 2007. Follow-up of the Finnish SCP programme will be through a dedicated group on governmental level also including stakeholder. SCP was discussed at the informal environmental Presidency meeting in Turku (Åbo) in June 2006. A review will be done in 2010. For summary of the Finnish SPC Action Plan, see Annex 8.
SCP input from the latest Informal European IPP Network Meeting:
The Commission would like to thank the Finnish presidency to have organised the IPP Informal Network meeting in Helsinki in 18 October 2006. Ms Taina Nikula, Ministry of the Environment in Finland, presented the conclusion of the discussion on Sustainable Production and Consumption at the Informal European IPP Network Meeting. The presentation, see Annex 9 and http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pdf/ipp_report.pdf
Main points on the EU SCP Action Plan from the Informal European IPP Meeting were:
§ Participants positive on the Commission’s SCP initiative so far;
§ Use the report of the IPP working group on Environmental Product Information and integrate its ideas in the SCP Action Plan;
§ Integrate different data systems – here is also a need for regulation;
§ Market-based instruments must play a role in the Action Plan (as also confirmed by Mr Timo Mäkelä).
§ Develop product performance targets, using experience of the Japanese top-runner approach. Also include chemicals and WEEE products.