52004DC0130

MEDDELELSE FRA KOMMISSIONEN TIL RÅDET, EUROPA-PARLAMENTET OG DET EUROPÆISKE ØKONOMISKE OG SOCIALE UDVALG - Inddragelse af miljøhensyn i den europæiske standardisering {SEC(2004)206}

1. INDLEDNING

De fleste af de varer og tjenesteydelser, vi er omgivet af, er nu blevet standardiseret, selv om det i de fleste tilfælde er de færreste, der lægger mærke til det. Standarder er stille, usynlige kræfter, som sikrer, at tingene fungerer ordentligt.

Efter det europæiske standardiseringssystem er der blevet udarbejdet standarder for de områder, hvor interessegrupperne har konstateret fælles interesser, som de har fulgt, når de skulle finde tekniske løsninger. En vigtig drivkraft til udviklingen af europæiske standarder er, at de betyder ensartethed på hele det indre europæiske marked, efterhånden som de afløser de nationale standarder. Hvor det er muligt, bygger de også på internationale standarder, og det gør den internationale handel lettere. En yderligere tilskyndelse til indførelsen af europæiske standarder har for nogle produktområders vedkommende været en harmoniseret og stabil rammelovgivning, som får de europæiske standarder til at udvikle tekniske løsninger i overensstemmelse med lovgivningen.

Boks 1: Det Europæiske Standardiseringssystem

De europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer er CEN [1] (Den Europæiske Standardiseringsorganisation), CENELEC (Den Europæiske Komité for Elektroteknisk Standardisering) og ETSI (Det Europæiske Institut for Telestandarder). Direktiv 98/34/EF [2] anerkender disse organer som dem, der skal udarbejde europæiske standarder. Det indeholder også en definition på europæisk standard. Principperne i forholdet og samarbejdet mellem CEN, CENELEC, ETSI og Europa-Kommissionen og Den Europæiske Frihandelssammenslutning er fastsat ved hjælp af generelle retningslinjer. En revideret udgave af disse retningslinjer blev vedtaget den 28. marts 2003 (EFT C 91 af 16.4.2003).

[1] http://www.cenorm.be; http:// www.cenelec.org; http:// www.etsi.org

[2] Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 98/34/EF om en informationsprocedure med hensyn til tekniske standarder og forskrifter.

Standarder bidrager til den økonomiske og sociale udvikling. Standarder kan fastlægge, hvordan et produkt skal laves, anvendes, vedligeholdes og behandles ved afslutningen af sin levetid, eller de kan bidrage til afprøvning og analyse af produkters eller materialers opførsel i miljøet eller under forskellige forhold, og de kan derfor have betydelig indflydelse på produkters og tjenesteydelsers påvirkning af miljøet. Mens kravene i tekniske bestemmelser er obligatoriske, er der mange tusind tekniske standarder, der udarbejdes frivilligt af virksomhederne ved hjælp af ad hoc-strukturer som forumer og sammenslutninger eller under officielle standardiseringsorganers lederskab. De interessegrupper, der deltager i disse processer, har allerede investeret betydelige midler i form af eksperttid, teknisk viden og mødeudgifter og vil fortsat gøre det. Standarder som frivilligt redskab er af afgørende betydning, og det er vigtigt, at alle interessegrupper, som inddrages i deres udarbejdelse, gør den størst mulige indsats og dermed øger deres rolle for miljøbeskyttelsen.

2. FORMÅL OG ANVENDELSE

Bæredygtig udvikling er en prioritet for EU, som stræber efter at skabe ligevægt mellem de økonomiske, samfundsmæssige og miljømæssige hensyn [3]. Europæiske standarder drejer sig ofte om handel, kvalitet, produkternes sundhed og sikkerhed og om processer og tjenesteydelser. Ved også at inddrage miljøhensyn kan europæisk standardisering yde et positivt bidrag til den bæredygtige udvikling og de relevante former for gennemførelsespolitik, f.eks. den integrerede produktpolitik (IPP), som Europa-Kommissionen har vedtaget [4]. Der findes også et voksende antal europæiske standarder for afprøvnings- og målemetoder, som bidrager til realiseringen af miljøpolitik.

[3] KOM(2001)264 endelig udg. Meddelelse fra Kommissionen - "En bæredygtig udvikling i Europa for en bedre verden: En EU strategi for bæredygtig udvikling".

[4] KOM(2003)302 endelig udg. Meddelelse fra Kommissionen til Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet - Integreret produktpolitik - Miljøpåvirkninger ses i et livscyklusperspektiv.

I standardiseringskredse bør der tages yderligere skridt til systematisk at inddrage de relevante miljøhensyn i udarbejdelsen af europæiske standarder. De vilkår, den europæiske standardisering behøver for at kunne yde et positivt bidrag til miljøbeskyttelsen, fortjener derfor nærmere opmærksomhed.

På de forskellige stadier i dette dokuments udarbejdelse har der været afholdt flere samråd [5]. Et møde med en række interessegrupper blev afholdt den 17. juli 2002 og endnu et den 16. juli 2003. Der blev derpå ført internetsamråd fra den 25. juli til den 15. september 2003. Disse initiativer tog sigte på alle standardiseringssystemets interessegrupper, og der kom indlæg fra erhvervslivet, de private organisationer, de offentlige myndigheder og standardiseringsorganisationerne selv. På grundlag af disse bidrag var det muligt at afgrænse kerneområderne og vurdere, om en meddelelse var et hensigtsmæssigt middel, hvis der skulle gøre fremskridt.

[5] http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ standards_policy/environment_standardisation/ stakeholder_meeting/2003/consultation_stakeholders.htm

Resultatet viste, at næsten alle interessegrupperne mente, at en meddelelse ville være et nyttigt bidrag til hjælp for deres arbejde. Desuden dukkede der en række fælles anliggender op, som viste, at der var enighed om, hvor der med størst sandsynlighed kunne gøres fremskridt. Navnlig blev der peget på fire afgørende områder, som derfor får særlig behandling i denne meddelelse:

- øget miljøbevidsthed

- opstilling af prioriteringer

- øget inddragelse af interessegrupperne

- brug af hjælpemidler og tilskyndelser.

Det europæiske standardiseringssystem og interessegrupperne opfordres til at tage disse områder i betragtning og optræde, så standardiseringssystemet udvikles og gøres mere modtageligt for miljødimensionen, samtidig med at det tager hensyn til alle den bæredygtige udviklings øvrige dimensioner. Blandt de interessegrupper, som denne meddelelse henvender sig til, er:

- de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer og deres nationale medlemmer

- de offentlige myndigheder

- industri- og erhvervsorganisationerne, heriblandt de små og mellemstore virksomheders (SMV) repræsentanter;

- de private organisationer

- de videnskabelige organisationer.

Kommissionen opfordrer Europa-Parlamentet og Rådet til at godkende de kerneområder og de målsætninger, som opstilles i denne meddelelse.

3. DET POLITISKE GRUNDLAG FOR INDDRAGELSE AF MILJØHENSYN I EUROPÆISK STANDARDISERING

3.1 Det europæiske grundlag

EF-traktaten tilsigter en harmonisk, afbalanceret og bæredygtig udvikling af den økonomiske virksomhed, et højt beskyttelsesniveau og forbedring af miljøkvaliteten [6]. Den understreger det princip, at miljøbeskyttelseskrav skal inddrages i den øvrige politik og erkender, at det er en af forudsætningerne for bæredygtig udvikling [7]. Fællesskabet søger at skabe sammenhæng mellem opfyldelsen af sine målsætninger for det indre marked og for miljøet, samtidig med at det overholder sine internationale forpligtelser.

[6] Artikel 2 i den kodificerede udgave af traktaten om oprettelse af Det Europæiske Fællesskab.

[7] Traktatens artikel 6.

Den europæiske standardisering er et middel, der ofte er blevet benyttet i forbindelse med gennemførelsen af Fællesskabets politik [8]. Der har derfor været lagt voksende vægt på den rolle, den kan spille for miljøbeskyttelsen og til støtte for den bæredygtige udvikling.

[8] En oversigt over brugen af europæiske standarder i forbindelse med gennemførelsen af Fællesskabets politik findes i KOM(2001)527 endelig udg. eller på netstedet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ standards_policy/index.htm

Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet har i mange dokumenter fremhævet ønsket om og behovet for at inddrage miljøhensyn i standardiseringen [9]. Det er blevet gentaget i den allerede nævnte IPP-meddelelse, hvori standardisering blev betragtet som et middel, hvormed produkters og tjenesteydelsers miljøpåvirkning, lige fra udvinding af råmaterialer til fremstilling, distribution, anvendelse og affaldsforvaltning kunne formindskes. Et af eksemplerne på, hvordan IPP omsættes til praksis, er det for nylig vedtagne forslag [10] om fastlæggelse af kravene til miljøvenligt design af energiforbrugende produkter. Europæiske standarder kunne være til stor gavn for indførelsen af metoder, hvorefter de relevante miljøparametre for disse produkter kunne måles eller i nogle tilfælde beskrives bedre.

[9] F.eks. Den Europæiske Unions Strategi for Bæredygtig Udvikling: opfølgning af Det Europæiske Råds møde i Gøteborg med hensyn til miljøaspekterne - Rådets Konklusioner, dokument 15280/01.

[10] KOM(2001)527 endelig - Forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om rammerne for fastlæggelse af krav til miljøvenligt design af energiforbrugende produkter og om ændring af Rådets direktiv 92/42/EØF.

Kommissionen har i Fællesskabets Sjette miljøhandlingsprogram [11], som blev vedtaget af Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet i 2002, udtrykkeligt foreslået, at miljøbeskyttelseskrav inddrages i standardiseringsaktiviteterne.

[11] Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets afgørelse nr. 1600/2002/EF om fastlæggelse af Fællesskabets Sjette Miljøhandlingsprogram, EFT L 242 af 10.9.2002, s. 1-15.

Samme år meddelte Kommissionen, at den ville udarbejde et dokument (det vil sige denne meddelelse) om standardisering og miljøbeskyttelse [12]. Rådet bød denne beslutning velkommen i 2002 [13].

[12] KOM(2001)527 endelig. Beretning fra Kommissionen til Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet om foranstaltninger truffet på baggrund af Rådets resolution og Europa-Parlamentets resolutioner fra 1999 om europæisk standardisering.

[13] Rådets konklusioner om standardisering af 1. marts 2002, EFT C 66 af 15.3.2002.

3.2 Europæisk standardisering og europæisk lovgivning: hver sin opgave

Europæiske standarder er frivillige dokumenter, der udarbejdes efter åbne, gennemsigtige procedurer, som forestås af europæiske eller internationale standardiseringsorganisationer. Standardiseringsarbejdet udføres efter konsensus-princippet af de berørte interessegrupper selv for deres egen skyld. Dette princip gælder også de miljøhensyn, der drøftes under standardiseringsprocessen.

Derudover findes der områder og forhold, hvor lovgivning er det bedste middel, når man skal sikre, at offentlige interesser som beskyttelse af sikkerhed, sundhed og miljø varetages på en gennemsigtig og gennemførlig måde under inddragelse af institutioner med demokratisk legitimitet.

Standardisering og lovgivning er to forskellige midler, der i nogle tilfælde indebærer to forskellige muligheder for behandling af miljøproblemer. De kan også supplere hinanden, da standardisering kan støtte lovgivningsinitiativerne. Standarder kan give løsninger på indviklede tekniske problemer og derfor indebære fordele. Der kan skabes stabile lovrammer, hvis lovgivningen holdes resultatorienteret og de tekniske enkeltheder overlades til frivillige standarder. Det betyder, at standardiseringen har brug for faste rammer for at kunne give de forventede resultater. For at dette gensidighedsforhold kan give det størst mulige udbytte, må man imidlertid under lovgivningsarbejdet følge reglerne for bedre styring og foretage konsekvensanalyse. Denne konsekvensanalyse kunne også udvides til at omfatte eventuelle standarders rolle i forhold til den planlagte lovgivning. Hvis standarderne udarbejdes, så de yder et effektivt bidrag til miljøbeskyttelsen, må dette tages i betragtning, når bestemmelserne udarbejdes, eller når det overvejes at decentralisere og bygge på frivillig indsats.

3.3 Den internationale dimension

Handelen har fra tidernes morgen været standardiseringens vigtigste drivkraft. På verdensplan kræver flere og flere problemer samlede løsninger, ikke mindst har varer i international handel brug for internationale standarder overalt, hvor det er muligt. Det multilaterale handelssystem, som blev oprettet med WTO, navnlig aftalen om tekniske handelshindringer (THH), kræver brug af frivillige internationale standarder som grundlag for tekniske forskrifter for varer. WTO's regler respekterer de enkelte medlemmers ret til selv at fastsætte det beskyttelsesniveau, de betragter som nødvendigt af hensyn til legitime formål som sundheds- og miljøbeskyttelse, blot de ikke anvender dem på en vilkårlig eller uensartet måde. WTO medlemmer behøver derfor ikke at benytte internationale standarder, hvis de er ineffektive eller utilstrækkelige til at opfylde legitime formål. Baggrunden herfor er den betragtning, at vigtige beskyttelseskrav (legitime formål) bør fastsættes af de lovlige myndigheder, som samtidig erkender, at de tekniske løsninger, hvormed sådanne formål skal opfyldes, helst skal findes af de private interessegrupper ved hjælp af internationale standarder.

Europæisk standardisering er nøje forbundet med den internationale standardisering på grund af de fordele i form af handel, markedsadgang og teknologispredning, som er knyttet til den. De europæiske standarder bygger derfor på internationale standarder, hvis sådanne findes, og hvis de opfylder europæiske behov [14]. En stor del af CEN-standarderne er overtaget fra Den Internationale Standardiseringsorganisation (ISO), og de fleste af CENELEC's resultater udarbejdes i Den Internationale Elektrotekniske Kommission (IEC). Ved hjælp af aftaler mellem de europæiske og de internationale standardiseringsorganisationer er der også mulighed for, at de internationale standardiseringsorganisationer kan få tilbudt europæiske standarder med henblik på at få dem vedtaget som internationale standarder. Europæisk førerskab, når det drejer sig om at behandle miljøforhold eller inddrage miljøhensyn i eksisterende standarder, kan derfor bringe de relevante internationale standarder med sig.

[14] SEK(2001)1296 europæiske politiske principper for international standardisering.

4. UDVIKLINGER INDEN FOR EUROPÆISK STANDARDISERING

Europæisk standardisering har gennemgået flere udviklingsforløb, som har øget dens anvendelsesmuligheder, når det gælder miljøbeskyttelse.

4.1 Et voksende antal europæiske standarder

For det første er antallet af europæiske standarder vokset betydeligt. I skrivende stund tilbyder CEN ca. 7 000 europæiske standarder inden for en lang række forskellige sektorer. Inden for elektroteknik findes der ca. 3 300 europæiske stander fra CENELEC, hvoraf de fleste bygger på internationale standarder fra den internationale elektrotekniske kommission (IEC). Inden for telekommunikation tilbyder ETSI sine brugere rundt regnet 3 200 standardiseringsdokumenter (EN og ETS). Hvert år offentliggøres der ca. 1200 europæiske standarder (EN) af disse organisationer. I 2003 fandtes der omkring 13 500 europæiske standarder.

4.2 Et voksende antal sektorer benytter europæiske standarder

Også de emner, der behandles af den europæiske standardisering, har fået øget rækkevidde. Standardiseringsorganerne kommer nu ind på områder, som er miljømæssigt følsomme, f.eks. produktdesign, energieffektivitet, løsninger på deles og komponenters livsafslutningsstadium samt tekniske processer og styringsprocesser. Hertil kommer, at der er voksende efterspørgsel efter miljøtekniske afprøvnings- og målemetoder.

4.3 Voksende inddragelse i europæisk lovgivning

Til støtte for direktiverne i forbindelse med EF's nye holdning [15] inden for en række bestemte produktområder er 2 165 harmoniserede standarder blevet frivillige løsninger, som skal godtgøre overensstemmelse med lovens bestemmelser. Tilskyndelsen til at udarbejde frivillige løsninger i overensstemmelse med loven forudsætter, at de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer overholder bestemte ansvarlighedsprincipper, som f.eks. national efterforskning og afstemning og inddragelse af interessegrupperne i standardiseringsprocessen. Direktiverne i forbindelse med den nye holdning kan også benyttes ved udarbejdelse af miljøpolitik, hvad der hidtil egentlig ikke har været tilfældet.

[15] Rådets resolution af 7. maj 1985 om en ny holdning til teknisk harmonisering og tekniske standarder (EFT C136 af 04.06.1985) - se http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ newapproach/legislation/guide/legislation.htm

4.4 Standarder og miljø

Standarder er midler, hvormed teknisk viden kan udbredes. I dag findes der allerede mange europæiske standarder, som enten direkte gælder miljøet eller tager hensyn til miljøforhold. Anvendelsen af dem bør fremmes.

4.4.1 Produktstandarders miljødimension

Produktstandarder (dvs. standarder, der fastsætter krav til produkter) udgør en stor del af de 13 500 europæiske standarder, som findes på nuværende tidspunkt. Disse standarder kan opstille vigtige kriterier for produkter, f.eks. deres sikkerhed og deres dimensioner, som medvirker til at sikre korrekt sammensætning med andre komponenter. Derved undgås spild af komponenter og uoverensstemmelser mellem dem, og de omkostningsfordele, der blive følgen, kan videregives til forbrugerne. Standarder, som tager tilstrækkeligt hensyn til de miljømæssige sider af et produkt, kan medvirke til at gøre disse produkters negative miljøpåvirkninger så små som muligt.

Der udarbejdes i stadig højere grad produktstandarder, som drejer sig om vigtige afsnit af produktets livscyklus. Nogle standardiseringsdokumenter [16] går især ud på at inddrage miljøaspekter i produktdesignet og produktudviklingen og tager sigte på at få virksomhederne til at forstå tankegangen bag miljødesign og dets praktiske anvendelse. Der er desuden et voksende antal standarder, som bidrager til behandling af produkters livsafslutningsfase.

[16] F.eks. ISO TR 14062: Environmental management - Integrating environmental aspects into product design and development

Denne type miljøbestemte standarder (eller vejledninger og rapporter osv.) for produkter kan udelukkende dreje sig om et produkts miljøvirkninger og/eller miljøpræstation, hvis dette er nødvendigt. Anvendelsen af dem kan få voksende betydning i fremtiden. Fordelen ved dem er, at de udarbejdes af standardiseringsorganisationer med specialviden om miljøforhold, således at bestemte miljøhensyn ikke prioriteres til skade for andre.

4.4.2 Afprøvningsmetoder med miljøformål

Gennemførelsen af Fællesskabets direktiver og forordninger kræver sommetider, at der udarbejdes standardiserede afprøvningsmetoder, f.eks. for forureningsmåling, forureningsbekæmpelse og vandanalyse. Sådanne standarder gør det muligt at gennemføre og håndhæve lovgivningen på ensartet måde i hele Europa. Uden standardiserede målemetoder ville der ikke være nogen overensstemmelse/sammenlignelighed mellem de miljøkvalitetsdata, der indsamles i EU som helhed.

Boks 2: Afprøvningsmetode til slam

Kommissionen har givet CEN mandat til at udarbejde horisontale standarder for slam, biologisk affald og jord for at kunne gennemføre nuværende og kommende EU-direktiver. Hensigten er, at der kun skal være nogle få standarder, som kan benyttes i tilknytning til flere direktiver. F.eks. kan der benyttes en horisontal standard for afprøvning af kaliumindhold til påvisning af kaliumniveauet i slam eller jord eller biologisk affald.

4.4.3 Miljøteknologi

I forbindelse med udarbejdelsen af handlingsplanen for miljøteknologi [17], har Kommissionen konkluderet, at standarder kan øge denne teknologis udbredelse. Det præstationsniveau, standarderne angiver, kan få stor indflydelse på markedet for miljøteknologi.

[17] Miljøteknologi defineres som al teknologi, hvis brug skader miljøet mindre end relevante alternativer. KOM(2004)38 endelig udg. Meddelelse fra Kommissionen.

F.eks. er energiudnyttelse et område, hvor europæiske standarder medvirker til at skabe miljøfordele. Der findes således europæiske standardiseringsprojekter, som drejer sig om elektriske apparaters og gasapparaters energieffektivitet. Til gavn for forbrugeren udarbejdes der standarder, som gør det lettere at måle apparaternes præstation. De relevante oplysninger om et apparats energiudnyttelse fremgår af et såkaldt energimærke. Det sætter de europæiske forbrugere i stand til at træffe deres valg på et velorienteret grundlag.

Nogle standarder har miljøfordele, som ikke er umiddelbart indlysende. Et godt eksempel herpå er standarden for måling af maskestørrelserne i fiskenet [18]. De giver forskellige lande mulighed for at håndhæve de internationale bestemmelser og beskytte fiskebestandene. Det hævdes også, at standarder, der udarbejdes til støtte for initiativer som intelligente transportsystemer, vil få miljøfordele, da de kan medvirke til at begrænse trafikken og dens negative miljøpåvirkning.

[18] EN ISO 16663 Fishing nets - Method of test for the determination of mesh size.

Boks 3: Kombineret kraftvarmeproduktion eller mikro-KVP

Mikro-KVP er samtidig udvikling af varme og elektricitet, som kan foregå i bygninger, der har brug for det. Når de europæiske standarder engang foreligger, vil de kunne fremhjælpe denne teknologi yderligere på markedet.

4.4.4. Standarder for miljøstyring

Miljøstyring er et andet eksempel på et område, hvor der er standarder af hensyn til miljøet. Et miljøstyringssystem sætter et foretagende i stand til at vurdere, tilrettelægge og hele tiden forbedre sine aktiviteters, produkters eller tjenesteydelsers virkning på miljøet. Virksomhedernes sikring af miljøhensyn skal ske på samme systematiske måde som kvalitetssikring, og standarder for miljøstyring, som EMAS [19] og EN/ISO 14001, er nyttige hjælpemidler.

[19] Europaparlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 761/2001 af 19. marts 2001 om organisationers frivillige deltagelse i en fællesskabsordning for miljøledelse og miljørevision (EMAS) EFT L 114 af 24.4.2001, s. 1. Yderligere oplysninger på http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ emas

ISO 14000 er en række standarder for miljøstyring, som er internationalt anerkendte. ISO-standard 14001 for miljøstyringssystemer er også blevet vedtaget som europæisk standard (EN ISO 14001). Andre dele af ISO 14000-rækken gælder forhold som vurdering af produkters livscyklus (ISO 14040), kriterier for miljøindsats (ISO 14030), og miljømærkning og miljøerklæringer (ISO 14020). Standarderne i 14000-rækken er styringsstandarder, der ikke gælder nogen bestemt sektor eller virksomhedstype, men tilbyder vejledning i grundlæggende miljøstyring, f.eks. tilrettelæggelse og fastlæggelse af mål og omfang.

EMAS benytter EN ISO 14001: 1996 som grundlag for sit miljøstyringssystem, men går videre end det. Blandt de vigtigste forskelle er, at EMAS kræver overholdelse af lovgivningen, stadig forbedring af miljøindsatsen, inddragelse af arbejdstagerne og offentliggørelse af en miljøerklæring (herunder oplysninger om virksomheden og dens miljøpåvirkning). Desuden er det et offentligt system under medlemsstaternes kontrol.

5. KERNESPØRGSMÅL

5.1 Miljøbevidsthed

Omsorg for miljøet, den bedste udnyttelse af ressourcerne og effektivt energiforbrug har fået voksende betydning for de økonomiske beslutningstagere, kunderne og de offentlige myndigheder. Standardiseringen bør som middel til udførelse af erhvervsaktiviteter kunne påvirkes af behovet for miljøbevidsthed, selv om det aldrig er standarderne selv, der påvirker miljøet, men derimod de produkter, processer og tjenesteydelser, som omfattes af de pågældende standarder. Hvordan de forhold, der skal standardiseres, kommer til at påvirke miljøet, afhænger i vid udstrækning af, hvordan standarden udformes, dvs. hvilke bestemmelser der medtages, og hvilke der udelades. De eksperter, som udformer eller ændrer standarderne skal derfor være opmærksomme på miljøhensyn og mulige miljøpåvirkninger. Meget afhænger af den miljøekspertise, der er til stede under standardens udarbejdelse, og af viljen til at tage systematisk hensyn til miljøproblemerne. Formålet med denne meddelelse er at fremme bevidsthedsskabende aktiviteter og udveksling af ekspertviden og god praksis, så standarderne kan bidrage til et bedre miljø og dermed til den bæredygtige udvikling. Den indsats der gøres på europæisk plan, skal nødvendigvis suppleres på internationalt plan.

5.1.1 Forpligtelsen til miljøhensyn

At tage hensyn til miljøet må blive en forpligtelse for alle interessegrupper og tekniske eksperter, som deltager i udarbejdelsen af standarder. At øge miljøbevidstheden er ofte en langsom og vanskelig proces, alene på grund af det store antal berørte interessegrupper, og fordi den praktiske miljøviden ændrer sig så hurtigt. Interessegrupperne, herunder de europæiske og internationale standardiseringsorganisationer, de offentlige myndigheder, industrien og erhvervslivet må være indstillet på hele tiden at gøre en indsats. Ikke mindst de interessegrupper, der repræsenterer de store virksomheder, kan spille en afgørende rolle for udarbejdelsen og anvendelsen af miljøstandarder på grund af deres forhold til leverandører og forretningsforbindelser. Desuden er miljøbevidsthed sandsynligvis et spørgsmål, de vil tage op i forbindelse med virksomhedens samfundsansvar eller dens forhold til aktionærerne. De bør også sørge for, at enhver erklæring, de fremsætter til fordel for miljøet eller offentliggør i miljødeklarationer, kommer til udtryk i deres egne eksperters arbejde med standardiseringsaktiviteter. Mange organisationer, ikke mindst de private, er allerede i gang med at øge deres medlemmers bevidsthed om de miljømæssige sider af standardiseringen. Der er imidlertid store variationer i denne form for engagement i både EU og tiltrædelseslandene.

5.1.2 Hensyn til mulige miljøpåvirkninger fra begyndelsen

Der er ikke noget enkelt svar på, hvordan man skal bære sig ad for at tage hensyn til miljøet i det europæiske standardiseringsarbejde. Det første skridt bør naturligvis være at finde ud af, hvordan standarden påvirker miljøet. Hensyn til standardernes eventuelle miljøpåvirkning behøver ikke nødvendigvis at indebære komplicerede, tidskrævende forsknings- eller undersøgelsesaktiviteter, og de behøver ikke nødvendigvis at betyde, at der skal foretages en levetidsvurdering for at nå frem til en tilfredsstillende vurdering. Det er selvfølgelig bedre at tage hensyn til miljødimensionen fra det allerførste stadium end at ændre en standard senere. Hvad der kræves, er derfor en systematisk indsats for at øge miljøbevidstheden på alle stadier i standardiseringsprocessen og således nå frem til konkrete forbedringer.

Spørgsmål som energi- og materialeforbrug og udledninger i luft, vand og jord er eksempler på miljøpåvirkninger, der bør tages hensyn til under standardiseringsarbejdet. På samme måde bør målelige og objektive forhold som frigivelse af farlige stoffer, risiko for miljøet ved uheld eller misbrug og affaldsdannelse og støjgener tages i betragtning, hvis det er relevant. Desuden spiller standarder for måling af ressourceeffektivitet eller emission af forurenende stoffer en afgørende rolle, når det gælder om at øge produktstandarders miljødimension. Hvis der på et tidligt tidspunkt foretages en vurdering af den slags miljøpåvirkninger, kan det være nyttigt for standardernes brugere. Derfor bør relevant materiale om, hvilke miljøforhold der er blevet taget i betragtning på hvilket stadium (under udarbejdelsen af en europæisk standard), stilles til rådighed i et hensigtsmæssigt format.

5.1.3 Hensyn til mulige miljøpåvirkninger på revisionsstadiet

Uheldige miljøpåvirkninger kan begrænses betydeligt ved hjælp af ny viden. Da innovationsgraden er høj, det gælder ikke mindst i forbindelse med miljø, er det vigtigt, at standarderne revideres regelmæssigt. Standarder revideres som regel hver femte år. Den regelmæssige revisionsproces er en passende anledning til at begynde at se på allerede eksisterende standarders miljøindhold. Under disse revisionsprocedurer bør miljøhensyn inddrages systematisk, ligesom når udarbejdelsen af nye standardiseringsprogrammer og -projekter påbegyndes, og de bør gøres tilgængelige i et hensigtsmæssigt format.

5.1.4 Uddannelse

To former for uddannelse kan fremme inddragelsen af miljøhensyn i den europæiske standardiseringsproces.

For det første må viden om bestemte, materialers, processers eller funktioners mulige miljøpåvirkninger være tilgængelige for alle tekniske eksperter, som deltager i den europæiske standardiseringsproces. For det andet kan standardiseringsprocessen, selv om den er åben og gennemsigtig, forekomme overkompliceret for en uindviet offentlighed, også selv om denne offentlighed har gode og hensigtsmæssige miljøkundskaber. Udannelse af sådanne interessegrupper kan hjælpe dem til at finde ud af, hvordan de skaffer sig ørenlyd på nationalt og europæisk plan. Adgang til standardiseringsrelevante miljøoplysninger kan være en fordel for alle interessegrupper og kan styrke standardernes kvalitet ved at forbedre udbredelsen af teknisk viden og kunnen. Uddannelse, som drejer sig om standardiseringsprocessens virkemåde, kan bidrage til gensidig forståelse mellem interessegrupper med forskellige interesser.

Fremtidige uddannelsesaktiviteter på europæisk og nationalt plan bør udvikles sammen med alle relevante interessegrupper og skal bygge på de erfaringer, der hidtil er opnået.

5.2 Opstilling af prioriteter

På grund af det store antal standardiseringsprojekter, de store udgifter ved at deltage i standardiseringsarbejdet og interessegruppernes ofte knappe ressourcer er der brug for en prioritering. Interessegrupperne kan opstille deres prioritering på grundlag af mange forskellige forhold, der strækker sig fra deres egne behov (erhvervslivets og offentlighedens) til gennemførelse af europæisk lovgivning og politik (der f.eks. skyldes ratificering af internationale aftaler som Kyoto-protokollen). Det sjette miljøhandlingsprogram og Kommissionens årlige lovgivningsprogram indeholder de vigtigste prioriteringer og kan være en hjælp til at forudse og prioritere standardiseringsaktiviteter og miljøhensyn.

5.2.1 De europæiske standardiseringsorganisationers prioritering: arbejdsprogrammer

Der er behov for en enkel metode, hvormed standardiseringsprogrammer eller standardiseringsprojekter, som kan påvirke miljøet, kan bestemmes. Det ville sætte interessegrupperne i stand til at sætte deres ressourcer effektivt ind på de standardiseringsprojekter, som virkelig er i deres interesse og indebærer potentielle fordele for dem. Med en sådan ordning kunne der også indhentes tekniske bemærkninger, ekspertudsagn og anden støtte. F.eks. kunne de arbejdsprogrammer og virksomhedsplaner, der forestås af de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer tekniske udvalg og arbejdsgrupper, indeholde en redegørelse for, hvordan arbejdet forbindes med miljøhensyn.

5.2.2 Kommissionens prioritering: mandater

Et af de midler, hvormed Kommissionen kan tilkendegive sine prioriteringer i forbindelse med det europæiske standardiseringsarbejde, er det europæiske standardiseringsmandat. Mandater bruges, når der skal iværksættes europæiske aktiviteter i tilknytning til politiske mål, ikke mindst i forbindelse med direktiver på grundlag af den nye holdning, hvor det kan dreje sig om varers og tjenesteydelsers fri bevægelighed på det indre marked. De kan også gælde områder, der kræver særlige miljøstandarder, eller støtte til EU's miljøpolitik.

Kommissionen har allerede i nogle år understreget, at når der gives mandat, er den vigtigt at inddrage væsentlige hensyn som beskyttelse af sikkerhed, sundhed og miljø [20]. Kommissionen må derfor sikre, at standardiseringsmandaterne opfordrer til at tage tilstrækkeligt hensyn til miljøforholdene under standardernes udarbejdelse og samtidig tager andre politiske områder som varernes frie bevægelighed på det indre marked i betragtning. Når et mandat forberedes kan en foreløbig vurdering af forskellige miljø-, sundheds- og sikkerhedsspørgsmål eventuelt give øget vægt. Endelig skal mandaterne opstille miljøkrav på en sådan måde, at det er muligt at afgøre, om det pågældende miljøhensyn har ført til et godt resultat.

[20] KOM(1998)291 endelig., s. 11. Beretning fra Kommissionen til Rådet og Europa-Parlamentet - Effektivitet og ansvarlighed i europæisk standardisering i den nye metode.

Særlige mandater til støtte for EU's miljøpolitik er også nyttige. Et særligt middel, Kommissionen benytter, når den skal opfordrer til opstilling af prioriteter i forbindelse med europæisk standardiseringsarbejde, er det såkaldte programlægningsmandat. Kommissionen har f.eks. udstedt et programlægningsmandat til støtte for det fremtidige direktiv om miljødesign af energiforbrugende produkter.

5.3 Inddragelse af interessegrupperne

Standardernes acceptabilitet afhænger i vid udstrækning af, at alle interessegrupper inddrages. Samfundets (dvs. interessegrupper, som repræsenterer forbruger-, sundheds-, sikkerheds- og miljøinteresser) deltagelse i standardiseringen gør enigheden bredere og dermed standarden mere repræsentativ og mere acceptabel for interessegrupperne selv og eventuelt også for myndighederne. Også videnskaben bør inddrages, for at sikre, at standarderne tager hensyn til de seneste videnskabelige landvindinger. På det politiske plan har Rådet understreget, at det er vigtigt at inddrage alle berørte parter ved at opfordre dem til at deltage aktivt i udarbejdelsen af europæiske standarder og medvirke til standardiseringsprocessens tilrettelæggelse [21]. Bidrag til programlægningen af den europæiske standardisering skal naturligvis bygge på et legitimt grundlag ved at repræsentere en interessegruppe på nationalt og europæisk plan.

[21] Rådets resolution af 28. oktober 1999 om standardiseringens rolle i Europa og Rådets konklusioner om standardisering af 1. marts 2002.

Næsten alle standardiseringsorganisationer (nationale og europæiske) har erklæret sig villige til at inddrage nye interessegrupper i standardiseringsprocessen. I praksis afhænger effektiv deltagelse i standardernes udarbejdelsesproces imidlertid i høj grad af den pågældende interessegruppes evne til at levere tekniske bidrag og afsætte midler til dette arbejde.

5.3.1 Den nationale dimension

Miljøgruppernes deltagelse i standardiseringen er meget vigtig, især på nationalt plan. Det nationale delegationsprincip giver interessegrupperne mulighed for både at deltage i standardiseringsarbejdet uden omfattende rejseaktiviteter og at fremsætte tekniske bemærkninger på deres eget sprog. At opnå enighed mellem interessegrupperne på nationalt plan og derpå skabe overensstemmelse mellem de nationale holdninger fører som regel til standarder, der accepteres både regionalt og internationalt.

Nogle interessegrupper oplever, at der er praktiske vanskeligheder for deres deltagelse i standardiseringen. Blandt disse grupper er miljøorganisationer, forbrugerrepræsentanter, repræsentanter for sundhed og sikkerhed på arbejdspladsen og for SMV. Mangel på økonomiske midler og teknisk sagkundskab kan være til hindring for deres deltagelse. Da de imidlertid udgør en offentlig interessedimension i standardiseringsarbejdet, og da de kan øge brugernes accept af standarderne, bør deres deltagelse være genstand for offentlig støtte.

På samme måde bør de nationale myndigheder deltage mere aktivt i standardiseringsprocessen. En dialog mellem de forskellige involverede (nationale og lokale) myndigheder kan fremme inddragelsen af miljøhensyn i de sundhedsmæssig, sikkerhedsmæssige og økonomiske overvejelser.

Det er også vigtigt, at den enighed, der opnås mellem interessegrupperne på nationalt plan, dokumenteres og fremlægges som en fælles holdning på europæisk plan. Der bør sørges for udveksling af erfaringer og de bedste former for praksis mellem medlemsstaterne. Det bør fremgå af dem, hvordan miljøinteresser repræsenteres på nationalt standardiseringsplan, hvilken støtte de relevante interessegrupper får, og hvordan de nationale myndigheder inddrages i standardiseringen. Kommissionen kan derpå sammen med medlemsstaterne på grundlag af nationale aktivitetsrapporter undersøge, hvilke fremskridt der er sket.

5.3.2 Den europæiske dimension

Den europæiske standardiseringsproces i CEN og CENELEC bygger på nationale delegationer, og det er vigtigt, at de nationale delegationer indtager holdninger, som er udtryk for de synspunkter der er blevet fremsat af samtlige deltagende interessegrupper på nationalt plan. Da miljøgruppernes nuværende deltagelse ikke anses for tilfredsstillende, har Kommissionen indgået en kontrakt [22] med ECOS (European Environmental Citizens Organisation for Standardisation), en sammenslutning af miljøorganisationer. ECOS søger at lade miljøinteresser komme til udtryk i standardiseringsprocessen og at sikre, at der tages hensyn til dem. På europæiske plan kommer ECOS til at spille en vigtig rolle ved

[22] 'Service contract for the integration of environmental requirements in the European standardisation process' OJ 2002/S 173-137828

- at tiltrække nye medlemmer blandt de private organisationer, der deltager i standardiseringen på europæisk plan

- at oprette et net af eksperter og arbejdsprocedurer, som skaber gennemsigtig koordination blandt ECOS's medlemmer og således får større indflydelse på beslutningsprocessen på nationalt plan

- at udarbejde et teknisk arbejdsprogram og finde frem til de tekniske udvalg, hvor de ønsker at deltage i standardiseringsarbejdet

- at uddanne eksperter og personale i standardiseringsprincipper og standardiseringsprocedurer

- at sikre deres eksperters deltagelse i de tekniske udvalg og arbejdsgrupper, som angives i deres arbejdsprogram.

ECOS påbegyndte arbejdet i november 2002. Ansøgninger om associeret medlemskab af CEN og social og økonomisk partnerstatus i CENELEC er på vej. Efter den indledende fase forventer Kommissionen, at ECOS kommer til at spille en vigtig rolle for inddragelsen af miljøhensyn i standardiseringen og vil støtte dets arbejde yderligere.

Europa-Kommissionen lægger stor vægt på, at alle interessegrupper inddrages fuldt ud i den europæiske standardiseringsproces, og har allerede sikret forbrugerne (ANEC), arbejdstagerne (TUTB) og de små og mellemstore virksomheder (NORMAPME) repræsentation. Disse grupper har fået associeret medlemskab eller dertil svarende status i de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer.

6. HJÆLPEMIDLER OG INCITAMENTER

De europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer har allerede udviklet en række nyttige hjælpemidler, som kan bidrage direkte til inddragelsen af miljøhensyn i standardiseringen. Yderligere udvikling og systematisk anvendelse af dem bør fremmes. For at øge standardernes markedsrelevans er det også vigtigt, at standardbrugere som producenter, leverandører og forbrugere giver udtryk for, hvilke miljøhensyn de ønsker tilgodeset.

6.1 Eksisterende hjælpemidler

Arbejdsgrupper for miljø

Nogle europæiske standardiseringsorganer har oprettet specialgrupper for miljø. De fungerer ofte som miljøorienterede diskussionscentre for eksperter, hvor der kan udarbejdes henstillinger til strategiudvikling. CEN's Rådgivende Udvalg for Miljø (SABE) [23] og CENELEC's Arbejdsgruppe for Miljøstandardisering under det Tekniske Udvalg (BTWG 85-3) [24] er gode eksempler herpå.

[23] http://www.cenorm.be/cenorm/workarea/ advisory+bodies/ strategic+advisory+board+for+the+environment/index.asp

[24] http://www.cenelec.org/Cenelec/ About+CENELEC/Our+strategy/Environmental+strategy/default.htm

CEN's miljøhjælpetjeneste

CEN har oprettet en tjeneste for miljøanliggender, CEN's miljøhjælpetjeneste (CEN EHD) [25], som ved hjælp af et net af miljøeksperter yder standardforfatterne rådgivning. CEN EHD får økonomisk støtte fra Kommissionen.

[25] http://www.cenorm.be/cenorm/workarea/ advisory+bodies/environmental+helpdesk/index.asp

Miljødatabase

En miljødatabase ville kunne øge gennemsigtigheden og sprede oplysninger om miljøhensyn. Brugen af databaser kan medvirke til indsamling af relevante oplysninger om de eventuelle miljømæssige virkninger af materialer, produkter eller processer (f.eks. de tekniske oplysninger, der kræves for at kunne beregne de forurenende emissioner eller energiforbruget). Let adgang til sådanne oplysninger fremmer udbredelsen af miljøviden og kan medvirke til, at dublering af udgifter undgås. Naturligvis kræver det tid og ressourcer at opbygge og vedligeholde sådanne databaser. Navnlig skal der være enighed om de oplysninger, de skal indeholde, og de skal være efterprøvede.

CENELEC har for nylig udarbejdet en miljødatabase, som skal samle alle de miljøforhold, CENELEC beskæftiger sig med, og medvirke til at stille miljøviden til rådighed.

Vejledninger og checklister

Der findes også en række miljøvejledninger og checklister, som kan hjælpe med at vise, hvordan miljøhensyn kan inddrages i standarderne. De er enten generelle eller tager sigte på bestemte sektorer. Især de sidste er nyttige, fordi de er skrevet af eksperter fra den pågældende sektor for eksperter i denne sektor.

Boks 4: Miljøchecklister og miljøvejledninger

CEN Guide 4 - Vejledning i, hvordan miljøhensyn inddrages i produktstandarder

CEN Guidance - Inddragelse af miljøaspekter i standarder, indeholder en matrix-checkliste, som kan være til hjælp ved den første miljøvurdering

ISO Guide 64 - Vejledning i, hvordan miljøhensyn inddrages i produktstandarder

IEC Guide 109 - Miljøhensyn - inddragelse i elektrotekniske produktstandarder

IEC Guide 113 - Spørgeskema til materialeangivelse - Grundlæggende vejledning

ISO TR 14062 - Miljøstyring - Inddragelse af miljøhensyn i produktdesign og produktudvikling

6.2 Tilskyndelse til systematisk anvendelse af midlerne til hjælp for miljøinddragelse

Under standardiseringsarbejdet giver interessegrupperne deres tid og sagkundskab frivilligt. Hvis de skal bruge ressourcer på at inddrage miljøhensyn, vil det kræve motivering. Kommissionen anerkender derfor politisk interessegruppernes bestræbelser på at inddrage miljøhensyn mere systematisk. Der findes mange hjælpemidler, som kan være til nytte, når miljøet skal inddrages i europæisk standardisering. Den egentlige opgave er at fremme systematisk anvendelse af dem. Kommissionen vil udbrede de bedste former for praksis og støtte de hjælpemidler, der allerede har vist sig at være effektive, når miljøhensyn skulle inddrages. Den vil sende interessegrupperne en åben opfordring til at fremlægge deres idéer til incitamenter og til at indlede en dialog om god praksis og opnåede resultater. Med det voksende antal europæiske standarder, som omfatter miljøaspekter, vil Kommissionens anvendelse af dem til politiske formål sandsynligvis vokse.

7. KONKLUSIONER OG VIDEREUDVIKLING

Kommissionen vil med denne meddelelse øge bevidstheden om og behovet for at inddrage miljøhensyn i europæisk standardisering som en frivillig proces, der drives af interessegrupperne.

Kommissionen erkender hermed, at miljøhensyn skal inddrages i de europæiske standarder. Den understreger imidlertid også, at det er vigtigt, at miljøaspekterne behandles hensigtsmæssigt og velovervejet, og at der tages tilstrækkeligt hensyn til de øvrige begrundelser for at udarbejde standarder.

Kommissionen vil nu indlede drøftelser med de berørte parter i standardiseringskredse for at få udviklet konkrete foranstaltninger. Der planlægges to workshops i 2004, som skal indsamle idéer og udarbejde projekter for at opnå fremskridt på følgende fire områder:

- Bevidstheden om inddragelse af miljøhensyn i europæisk standardisering skal øges blandt alle interessegrupper, ikke mindst i tiltrædelseslandene. Udveksling af ekspertviden og god praksis kan sikre, at miljøhensyn i forbindelse med standardisering påvises på et tidligt tidspunkt under udarbejdelsen af nye standarder, eller når eksisterende standarder revideres hvert femte år. Uddannelse har vist sig at være afgørende for at sikre, at miljøgrupperne effektivt kan gøre deres synspunkter gældende i den europæiske standardiseringsproces. På samme måde må alle relevante miljøoplysninger samles og videreformidles til alle tekniske eksperter, som deltager i processen. For at komme videre opfordrer Kommissionen interessegrupperne til at fremsætte idéer og forslag, så de inddrages yderligere i bevidstgørelses- og uddannelsesaktiviteterne. Kommissionen er villig til at yde støtte til de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer, hvis der fremsættes passende forslag. Medlemsstaterne opfordres til at planlægge lignende foranstaltninger for de nationale standardiseringsorganisationer. Situationen vil blive overvåget af hensyn til de relevante aktiviteter, og interessegrupperne opfordres til at udveksle erfaringer for at kunne fastslå, hvad der er god praksis. Da midlerne er begrænsede, må der foretages prioriteringer af arbejdet med miljøhensyn i europæisk standardisering. På grund af processens frivillige karakter bør standardiseringens interessegrupper fortsat selv bestemme deres arbejdsprioriteringer. Dog bør der tages hensyn til områder af offentlig interesse og til anliggender, som er relevante for europæisk politik. For at komme videre vil Kommissionen, når det er hensigtsmæssigt, inddrage miljøhensyn, når den udarbejder europæiske standardiseringsmandater, og overveje særlige mandater til støtte for miljøforhold og standarder, der gælder produkternes miljømæssige virkninger. Kommissionen vil rådføre sig med interessegrupperne, når den udarbejder mandater. Alle interessegrupperne opfordres til at udarbejde indikatorer, hvorefter standarder, som på tilfredsstillende vis inddrager miljøhensyn, kan fastlægges.

- Interessegruppernes deltagelse er afgørende for standardernes acceptabilitet og relevans. Alle interessegrupper bør kunne deltage effektivt i udarbejdelsen af de europæiske standarder, som berører dem. Da den europæiske standardiseringsproces bygger på nationale holdninger, er det vigtigt, at medlemsstaterne fremmer alle interessegruppers deltagelse i formuleringen af de nationale holdninger. De skal derpå bringes videre på grundlag af konsensus på europæisk plan. På europæisk plan spiller de interessegrupper, der kan samordne og formulere holdninger af offentlig interesse, f.eks. på miljøområdet, en vigtig rolle som effektiv støtte for de nationale holdninger. For at komme videre opfordrer Kommissionen medlemsstaterne og tiltrædelseslandene til at hjælpe alle interessegrupper, især dem, der repræsenterer samfundsinteresser og offentlige miljøinteresser, herunder de offentlige myndigheder, til at kunne deltage i standardiseringsprocessen og formulere fælles holdninger, der fremlægges på europæisk plan som led i standardiseringsprocessen. Kommissionen opfordrer medlemsstaterne og tiltrædelseslandene til regelmæssigt at give meddelelse om de forskellige former for støtte, der ydes. Det forventes at fremme udvekslingen af erfaringer og god praksis. På europæisk plan vil Kommissionen fortsat tilbyde støtte til de europæiske interessegrupper, der kan spille en rolle for fastlæggelsen og samordningen af de miljømæssige standardiseringsspørgsmål, som skal behandles af de europæiske standardiseringsorganisationer.

- Den systematiske anvendelse af de hjælpemidler, hvormed miljøhensyn kan inddrages i standardiseringen, må gøres til praksis. Interessegrupperne må opmuntres til at benytte de hjælpemidler, der er blevet udviklet til inddragelse af miljøhensyn i standardiseringen. Større brug af disse hjælpemidler vil øge erfaringerne og dermed også det antal standarder, som indeholder en miljødimension. Det vil på sin side give de europæiske standarder øget attraktivitet til støtte for politik og lovgivning, også på miljøområdet. For at komme videre opfordrer Kommissionen interessegrupperne til at meddele, hvordan de har benyttet de forskellige hjælpemidler, der står til deres rådighed. Regelmæssige møder for at udveksle erfaringer og fastlægge indikatorer, hvorefter udviklingen kan bedømmes, bidrager til at opbygge et voksende antal europæiske standarder, som indeholder en miljødimension.

Kommissionen vil fortsat vurdere inddragelsen af miljøhensyn i europæisk standardisering på baggrund af udviklingen på de ovenstående fire områder. Til dette formål vil der blive afholdt regelmæssige møder og workshops for interessegrupperne mindst en gang om året.

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER - Communication of the Commission on the Integration of Environmental Aspects into European Standardisation - Extended Impact Assessment {COM(2004)130 final}

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Problem identification

2. Main objective of the Communication

3. Policy options

4. Social, environmental and economic impacts of each policy option

5. Monitoring of results

6. Stakeholder consultation

7. Commission draft Communication and justification

ANNEX to the Extended Impact Assessment: Report on the Public Consultation

1. Problem identification

Standardisation is a voluntary process carried out by and for the stakeholders within the structures and rules of standards organisations. The resulting technical specifications are voluntary consensus documents that may define, for example, how a product is manufactured used or disposed of.

In recent years, the number of European standards has grown significantly - the total number of European Standards is estimated at 13,500. The interest in European standards and this increase in numbers can be explained by the fact that standards play a positive role in the economy as they reduce transaction costs, facilitate trade, increase competition, and channel innovation. Moreover, European standards help to avoid technical barriers in the internal market, they are consistent with the international trade framework deemed to facilitate global trade and in some instances, they are used to implement European legislation.

There are three European Standardisation Organisations (ESOs), CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. They are recognised under Community law (Directive 98/34). Jointly adopted guidelines exist for the co-operation between the Commission (and EFTA) and the European Standards Organisations (OJ C 91 of 16.4.2003).

The growing number of standardised products, processes and services poses questions about their effects on the environment. There are many standards and many ways in which standardised products can interact with the environment. Virtually all standardised goods and processes impact on the environment, although this impact may or may not be significant. Four major types of relationships between standards and the environment have been identified: the environmental dimension of products, the standardised tests methods for environmental purposes, the environmental technologies included in standards and the environmental management standards.

However, the extent to which the environmental dimension is taken into account varies among national and European standardisation organisations. There are many tools already developed, yet their use is not systematic. One of the main obstacles identified during the consultation phase was a lack of environmental knowledge among experts sitting on technical committees.

Practices regarding stakeholder participation also differ. Standardisation is a business-driven process, even though it must ensure openness to the representation of all interested parties, in particular if standards are to be widely recognised and used in the market. There are various groups of stakeholders that have particular difficulties in taking an active part in standardisation: small and medium sized enterprises, environmental and consumer non-governmental organisations and representatives of the workforce. They often lack knowledge about the standardisation process itself, and even if this is not the case, they may still experience shortcomings in terms of financial and human resources.

The large number of standards adopted every year, the ever-widening scope of products and processes that they cover, along with the voluntary character of this process, means that it is not possible for the European Commission to assess the environmental dimension in individual standards. It is more appropriate for the Commission to focus on the European standardisation process as a whole (tools and methods applied) and its institutional framework (participating stakeholders) in order to stimulate the production of European standards that positively contribute to the environment and to sustainable development in view of their economic and social importance. The Commission is tackling the issue of integration of environmental aspects into standardisation for the very first time at this level. In order to send a strong signal to all stakeholders involved in the standardisation process (industry, standardisation organisations, NGOs and public authorities), and bearing in mind the voluntary nature of standards and their consensus-based elaboration, it is therefore crucial to have a sufficient level of visibility and of commitment from the Commission services. A Communication was deemed to be the best way to start the process even though this Communication has to be seen as a stocktaking exercise presenting the state of the art and highlighting areas which deserve more attention in the future to meet our objectives.

No policy change scenario

A 'no change' scenario means that even though the number of European standards continues to grow - mainly due to technological, but also to legislative developments - the integration of environmental, aspects would remain un-systematic, becoming more a consequence of a personal commitment by a few experts rather than being based on a consistent analysis of potential impacts. Consequently, an opportunity for sustainable development in Europe would be missed. In other words, the environmental pillar may be neglected and standards would not contribute to the development of more sustainable production and consumption patterns.

There is also the risk that if European standards fail to take into account relevant environmental aspects, they would become less attractive and relevant for both the market and public authorities.

2. Main objective of the Communication

The aim is to promote the effective integration of environmental aspects into the European standardisation process.

3. Policy options

There are three major policy options available:

- Do nothing (business as usual);

- Encourage stakeholders to make further voluntary efforts;

- Use of legislative and financial instruments.

3.1 Do nothing (business as usual)

This option assumes continuing limited support from the Community budget for the participation of environmental NGOs such as ECOS (European Environmental Citizens Organisation for Standardisation). Indeed the European Commission has already shown the great value it attaches to the full involvement of all stakeholders in the European standardisation process. To that effect, it has already ensured representation of both consumers and workers for several years. With this new contract to ECOS, launched in November 2003, the voice for the environment is now secured.

Under this option the Commission will continue drafting standardisation mandates for environmental issues, concentrated mostly on measurement and performance standards.

The European standardisation organisations will continue to use some existing tools for the consideration of environmental aspects in standardisation, but not systematically and without any extra incentives from the Commission or national authorities.

3.2 Encourage stakeholders to make further voluntary efforts

The second option goes further and assumes that the stakeholders themselves could increase their efforts to systematically improve the integration of environmental aspects into European standardisation. Although the standardisation process is voluntary and based on consensus, all stakeholders involved are sensitive to strong political messages that can be sent out from the Commission. They would also react positively to incentives and accept appropriate support offered to them. This option assumes the development of incentives and targeted support for the stakeholders and the system. Identification of these measures has been the key objective of stakeholder meetings and consultations organised in 2002/2003 and the Communication aims to present the outcome of these previous phases. In a nutshell, 4 key issues have been identified to encourage stakeholders to make further voluntary efforts:

- raising awareness and environmental thinking

- setting priorities

- enhancing wider stakeholder participation

- using tools and offering incentives.

3.3 Use of legislative instruments

The third option assumes that legislative instruments would be used in lieu of voluntary standards if the stakeholders were not willing to deal with environmental aspects in standards making. As a consequence, public authorities would then need to lay down detailed rules for technical issues that could have been dealt with by the standardisation process. The authorities would need to assess, lay down and revise in the light of technical progress, the technical, economic and environmental specifications needed by the stakeholders. The associated cost would need to be covered entirely by public funding.

4. Social, environmental and economic impacts of each policy option

4.1 Do nothing (business as usual)

Environmental: There are many European standards that could have impacts on the environment in one way or another. Doing nothing may be a lost opportunity as these standards could make a positive contribution to safeguarding or even improving the environment. This impact is difficult to assess in quantitative terms due to the wide scope of products and goods covered by standards. The environmental pollution resulting from using goods made to standards that do not take the environmental dimension on board is very diverse. As far as products are concerned one should also take into account the different phases when environmental impacts can occur: design, production, use, re-use and disposal.

Social: Existing European standards support a number of directives for workers' health and safety and for consumer protection. Also, standardisation stakeholders, including industry and business, have an interest in developing standards for safe products and processes. If business as usual is continued, limited stakeholder participation from consumer organisations, unions or environmental NGOs will risk to make the standardisation process less democratic and user-oriented. On the other hand, users such as consumers or public authorities may prefer to purchase products which have a better environmental performance or at least to have information on this issue. Standards which take the environment into account are more likely to lead to products which give these elements to users.

Economic: There is little if any economic impact in the business as usual option because the drivers for standardisation are industry and business who want to find technical agreements for the purposes of compatibility and trade. The majority of the existing European standards have been created by the wish to enable trade and to effectively implement the single market. Only in the long term could a worsening of the state of the environment potentially exercise pressure on the standardisation stakeholders to systematically deal with environmental aspects.

4.2 Encourage stakeholders to make further voluntary efforts

Environmental: Further voluntary initiatives in this area would lead to a positive impact on the environmental pillar of sustainable development. Taking into account the wide coverage of standards, integration of environmental aspects will help to reduce the negative impacts of certain goods and processes. However there are three factors that will delay the potential positive effects. Firstly, taking into account the large number of stakeholders there is some time needed to raise their environmental awareness and to provide them with efficient tools to effectively deal with environmental consideration in the standardisation process. Secondly, the time span needed for development or revision of a standard varies from 3 to 5 years. Lastly, due to the large number of standards and the limited capacities of the standardisation bodies and their stakeholders, it would be unrealistic to expect immediate integration of the environmental dimension into all standards.

Social: This option may have an ultimately positive impact for consumers who buy products and services produced in accordance with standards which consider environmental aspects. Also, purchasers along the production chain and public authorities may have more choices between products and services with certain environmentally relevant functionalities and characteristics. Another positive aspect is the potential contribution to the state of the environment that in the long term leads to improvement of health, including health and safety at the workplace. A negative impact of this option may be that the efforts of standardisation stakeholders are steered away from the existing work on health and safety and consumer protection.

Economic: When environmental aspects are integrated appropriately, there could be economic benefits to the standards users - an obvious positive impact. However, a negative impact of this option may be that the existing standardisation work which supports economic activities such as free trade and the single market risks to be hampered. Moreover, the involvement of more stakeholders who have previously not taken part in standardisation activities, may delay the delivery of the new standards beyond what is acceptable to the market. This in turn may hamper innovation in the European economy. However, one should recognise that the standardisation process is already too lengthy in some instances and that efficiency improvements are under way. Therefore there are different potential delay-factors that should be addressed. Encouragement of stakeholders to make further efforts implies increased financial support for the environmental stakeholders so that they can effectively participate and apply the appropriate tools to integrate environmental aspects into European standards. This can be considered as an economic impact as such.

4.3 Use of legislative instruments

Environmental: This option may lead to the quickest results with the legislator developing and reviewing standards from their environmental point of view. This could be considered as a positive impact on the environmental pillar. However, it would change the well defined relationship between the legislator and the standardisation system and put the existing achievements at risk. In addition, it could create negative perceptions of the environmental debate - no other policy area has needed special legislation to become considered in standardisation.

Social and economic: This option may be perceived as heavy-handed interference. This may lead stakeholders to leave the system altogether so the current work being done for the social and economic aspects in standardisation could suffer. On the other hand, the public authorities would have to assess, lay down and revise in the light of technical progress, the technical, economic and environmental specifications needed by the stakeholders. The associated cost would need to be covered entirely by public funding. Overregulation and a regulatory process that is overburdened with technical detail would negatively impact on Europe's economy and competitiveness.

5. Monitoring of results

Due to the financial assistance given by the EU to European standardisation (5-6% of the total estimated cost of European standardisation), there is a need for the European standards organisations to be accountable and to regularly report on a number of issues. Also, due to the principle of national representation in the European standardisation system, there is a need for cooperation between the Commission and the Member States. For the integration of environmental aspects, progress reports from the different stakeholders such as the European standardisation organisations, the Member States or the private stakeholders from business and NGO side are foreseen. These should make some benchmarking possible and, if the focus is on continuous improvement, will be enable progress to be tracked. The Commission can regularly assess the situation, give further support, or propose new or alternative measures as and when it feels necessary. Main activities to be followed are:

Environmental thinking

Care for the environment, optimal use of resources and efficient energy consumption have grown in importance amongst economic operators, customers and public authorities. Standards should participate to this trend.

Experts involved in the development of standards have this power in their hands to influence the provisions written in the standard. The Commission is aware of the voluntary and consensus driven nature of standards. The Communication therefore aims to promote awareness-raising activities and an exchange of expert knowledge and good practice. This is a qualitative approach which is needed to trigger off the process and measurable aspects will come only in the long run. As regards quantitative aspects, ideas such as the provision of training are options which were highly supported by the stakeholders during the consultations. The Commission, in cooperation with stakeholders, therefore intends to explore the possibilities in these areas, identify what already exists at European or national level, work with stakeholders to better define their needs and present concrete actions in the coming months.

Setting priorities

Priorities can be set by the European Standardisation Organisations via their work programmes or by the Commission via the mandates. At this stage, these options were deemed to be interesting enough to be included in the Communication although it is clear that further dialogue and research is needed on how to put these measures into practice. This is particularly important for the mandates which observe specific rules, under specific conditions (a political or legislative framework for instance).

Stakeholder participation

The acceptability of standards depends to a large extent on the involvement of all stakeholders. The participation of civil society (e.g. stakeholders representing consumer, health, safety and environmental interests) in standardisation reinforces the quality of consensus and makes the standards more representative and thus acceptable for use by the stakeholders themselves, and, if appropriate, by the authorities. The monitoring of these participation (at national and European level) and information regarding names of participants, funding, areas of expertise, etc. could be easily coordinated by European standardisation organisations and passed on to the Commission.

Systematic and better use of tools

The national and/or European Standardisation Organisations have already developed a number of useful tools which can directly help with the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation. Their further development and systematic use should be encouraged. Environmental databases for example already exist in some specific areas. An assessment of these databases could be carried out to see under which conditions they could be further developed to cover other areas of activities.

Generally speaking, three sets of criteria could be considered together with stakeholders:

- When designing concrete awareness raising and/or training activities in the future, one should define indicators to monitor the participation at national and European level.

- Likewise, if databases containing relevant environmental information are established, indicators could be for example, the number of entries into the database and the number of queries made, etc.

- It is also important to monitor progress regarding the integration of environmental requirements. To that effect, stakeholders should be invited to develop appropriate indicators.

- It is important to bear in mind the Communication aims at presenting ideas that have been validated by the stakeholders. The process started two years ago and a lot of ideas were suggested but rejected for one reason or another (see also annex to the extended impact assessment). As stated in the Communication, all these ideas deserve further attention with relevant stakeholders. However their support for them needs to be built up and a commitment obtained.

6. Stakeholder consultation

Two stakeholder meetings took place in July 2002 and in July 2003. In addition, DG Environment and DG Enterprise held an internet consultation which ran from mid July until mid-September 2003 and invited all stakeholders to deliver their comments on a working document setting out the elements aiming at the encouragement of stakeholders.

A questionnaire was also developed to help gather comments and feedback for the alternative policy options. The extended impact assessment has been refined in accordance with the results of the stakeholder consultations. The detailed results of the consultation can be found in the Annex.

Overall, the consultation highlighted that:

- the aim and scope of the Communication targeted at the stakeholders is relevant and appropriate;

- all key issues have been identified;

- there are enough tools to address environmental issues in standardisation, but they require time, expertise and resources to be used systematically and all stakeholders must address this challenge;

- the Commission and Member States should jointly play a role in facilitating the effective participation of all interested stakeholders in the standardisation process;

- the progress made with the integration of environmental issues into European standardisation should be reviewed every five years.

7. Commission draft communication and justification

From the policy options available, the encouragement of stakeholders to make further voluntary efforts has been identified as a proportionate and balanced approach in view of the nature of the subject and the goals pursued. The results of the stakeholder consultation provide reassurances for this approach.

Two instrument options were considered: a working paper from the Commission services and a Communication from the Commission.

7.1 Instrument option: Working Paper from the Commission services

This paper would focus on the role of the Commission services, for instance, in the development of standardisation mandates or of legislation that sets out specific requirements for corresponding standards. The stakeholders who need to be convinced most may take little notice of this instrument.

7.2 Instrument option: Communication from the Commission

A Communication is considered a realistic option considering the nature of standardisation: a voluntary and stakeholder driven process. In view of its political significance and the contributions European standardisation has made and should make to EU policies, a Communication is a good way to meet the objectives of visibility and encouragement for stakeholders. The Communication also invites political feedback from the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

ANNEX to the Extended Impact Assessment

Report on the Public Consultation

The Integration of Environmental Aspects into European standardisation

25 July 2003 - 15 September 2003

This is a joint report by the Enterprise and the Environment Directorate General of the European Commission.

The aims for this report are:

- to describe the steps taken by the Commission to ensure the full consultation of stakeholders during the formation of a policy on the integration of environmental aspects into European standardisation

- to analyse the views collected during the public consultation.

The public consultation of stakeholders is part of the Commission's extended impact assessment process.

Consultation websites:

Background

Between 25 July 2003 and 15 September 2003, the Enterprise and Environment DG of the European Commission held a public internet consultation on the integration of environmental aspects into European standardisation. The consultation followed the Commission's consultation standards [26] and was aimed at stakeholders in the European standardisation system: businesses and industry, NGOs, public authorities and standards organisations. The stakeholders were asked to give their views on a working document for a Commission Communication on the integration of environmental aspects into European standardisation. In order to take advantage of the principle of Interactive Policy Making (IPM), a set of questions, designed by the responsible Commission services, was also posed.

[26] COM (2002) 704 final, 11.12.2002

At the start of the internet consultation period a multi-stakeholder meeting was held. It took place on 16 July 2003 in Brussels. This helped to raise attention for the internet consultation, clarify the objectives and check the initial contents of the planned Communication. The multi-stakeholder meeting was, in fact, the second of its kind since the responsible Commission services started to look into the opportunities and challenges linked with the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation in 2002 and held a first stakeholder meeting on 17 July 2002.

The feedback obtained from the meeting(s) and the responses now received from the internet consultation will feed into the extended impact assessment which is already underway for the Communication. The responses will help to further analyse the subject and examine the appropriateness of the policy instrument chosen. They will also help to finalise the text of the Communication itself and to make sure that it will cover the main issues in a balanced and appropriate manner.

Main findings

The general conclusion of the multi-stakeholder meeting of July 2003 was that the working document was a good basis for a Communication from the Commission.

The answers to the set of questions posed in the subsequent public internet consultation show that the presented text is broadly satisfactory to the range of different stakeholders at which it is aimed. There was a strong conclusion that the Communication will help stakeholders in their work and will help them achieve their aims in standardisation. Importantly, there is general agreement that a Communication from the Commission is the appropriate policy instrument for what the Commission is trying to achieve at this point in time.

The written contributions were often accompanied by general statements laying out the environmental policies of the respondents. These were often much wider than the contents of the Communication and indeed were wider than the subject of standardisation itself. Nevertheless, no stakeholders indicated opposition to the working document and the specific comments mainly related to the strengthening or clarifying of certain chapters.

To summarise, the main findings were:

- aim and scope of the future Communication are relevant and appropriate;

- all key issues have been identified, and it is important to clarify the relation between voluntary standards and mandatory legislation;

- there are enough tools to address environmental issues in standardisation. However these require time, expertise and resources if they are to be used systematically. All stakeholders must address this challenge;

- the Commission and Member States should jointly play a role in the financing for an effective participation of all interested stakeholders in the standardisation process;

- priorities should be set, primarily for efficiency purposes, on where to start with the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation; whilst the Commission could flag interest areas by way of mandate it should be left to the standardisation stakeholders to decide whether and how to deal with them;

- training of experts and the use of databases with relevant environmental information were considered the most instrumental incentives to incorporate environmental aspects into standards whereas the idea of awards was not supported;

- the international framework for standards and technical regulations must be respected to avoid unnecessary trade barriers, but the European standardisation system should take a certain leadership role in the development of specific environmental standards;

- the progress made with the integration of environmental issues into European standardisation should be reviewed every five years.

Annex 1: Multi-stakeholder meeting of 16 July 2003

1. Findings

Nearly all those attending expressed a positive opinion on the presented working document for a Communication. Some new ideas were introduced and these were taken on board in the text that was placed on the internet. e NGO, however, did not feel that satisfactory solutions to protect the environment could be achieved by voluntary standardisation and indicated a general preference for mandatory requirements in standardisation or legislative approaches in favour of the environment.

1.1 General Statistics

Over 50 participants attended the meeting. The represented stakeholders came from business and industry, NGOs, and the standardisation bodies from both the Member States and candidate countries. The European standards organisations CEN (European Committee for Standardisation), CENELEC (European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation) and ETSI (European Telecommunication Standardisation Institute) were also represented.

Below is a detailed list of organisations represented during the meeting:

* ACEA

* AENOR

* ANEC

* ANIE - Electronic Industry Italy

* BEAMA Ltd

* BE-Federal Department of the Environment - Product Policy Division

* British Standards Institution

* BUND KNU

* CECED

* CEN - European Committee for Standardization

* CENELEC

* CENELEC BTWG 85-3 "Environmental Standardisation"

* Council of European Producers of Construction Materials (CEPME)

* Czech Office for Standards, Metrology and Testing

* Danish Standards Association

* DIN - Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.

* ECOS

* EFTA

* Estonian Centre for Standardisation

* ETSI

* EUCAR

* EUROFER

* Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Labour

* FIEC (Fédération de l'Industrie Européenne de la Construction)

* Finnish Ministry of Trade and Industry

* Finish Standards Association SFS

* FME ORGALIME

* FNE - France Nature Environnement

* IEC/ACEA

* Malta Standards Authority

* Ministère de l'Economie, des Finances et de l'Industrie

* Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Sweden

* Ministry of Agriculture, Forest, Water and Environment (Romania)

* Ministry of the Environment

* Mission of Norway to the EU

* NEN

* NORMAPME

* ORGALIME

* Spanish Electric Manufacturers Association

* Spanish Permament Representation to the EU

* Svenska Elektriska Kommissionen

* Swedish Ministry of Environment

* Swedish National Board of Trade

* Swedish Standards Institute

* TUTB - European Trade Union Technical Bureau for Health and Safety

* UK Department of Trade and Industry

* UMI

Annex 2: Internet consultation

1. Findings

The analysis of replies received in the internet consultation are reproduced according to the structure of the working document and the questions of the survey.

1.1 Aim and Scope

Q1 Do you agree with the aim and scope?

Supporting comments

Most of the respondents agreed with the aim and scope presented in the working document. It was confirmed that the international framework and the effective participation of certain groups of stakeholders, like small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) should be taken into account.

Concerns

Some stakeholders expressed concern as to whether voluntary standardisation was a valid tool to contribute to a high level of environmental protection and indicated a preference for mandatory solutions. Others pointed out issues like a potential cost increase or negative impact on competitiveness.

Q2 Have we identified all the key issues?

Supporting comments

The majority of stakeholders confirmed that the working document identified the main issues. Some respondents pointed out that the consumer dimension was insufficiently addressed, and if there is no consumer demand, it will be difficult to maximise profit through economies of scale. Moreover, the relation between legislation (mandatory) and standards (voluntary) should be explored. Experience already gained, for instance with the Environmental Help Desk of CEN, should also be added.

Concerns

Some respondents said that the inclusion of environmental aspects into standardisation does not guarantee a higher level of environmental protection, as standards are voluntary. Complexity of the standardisation process would generally make it difficult for some stakeholders, including SMEs, to get involved. This includes the fact that standards are regularly revised and that not every laboratory could test against every standard if tests were required.

1.2 Environmental Thinking

Q3 Should another policy option (e.g. legislation, guidelines) have been chosen by the Commission? If so, which and why?

Supporting comments

The main feeling was that a Communication was the appropriate tool. This respects the voluntary nature of standardisation best while progressing the matter forward. Most respondents said that specific legislation was not appropriate for bringing environmental aspects into standards

Concerns

A few respondents said that the debate on environmental aspects in standardisation needed a general legal framework, such as the European Directive on General Product Safety without this, stakeholders would be unlikely to include environmental aspects into standards.

Q4 How frequently should the progress be assessed regarding the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation (e.g. every 2, 5 or 10 years)

Supporting comments

Five years was seen as a satisfactory period by the majority of the respondents.

Q5 Do you feel that you or your organisation contributes to the promotion of environmental thinking in standardisation? If yes, please describe the nature of your contribution.

Supporting comments

Many respondents indicated that they were contributing to the promotion of environmental thinking in standardisation in one way or another. The dissemination of state-of-the-art knowledge and offers for training and educational material were mentioned. Also, some respondents undertook lobbying activities aimed at regulators. Companies and their associations mentioned the use of environmental management standards and environmental declarations, their involvement on the development of certain test and measurement methods, and for the environmentally conscious design of products. NGOs engaged in raising awareness for standardisation amongst their stakeholders or made active contributions to standardisation work and the development of the internal procedures of standards organisations.

Q6 What are your expectations with regard to possible positive and negative impacts of the ideas implemented in the text?

Supporting comments

Respondents felt that the promotion of environmental thinking in standardisation can have a positive effect regarding the state-of-the-art environmental performance of products. This includes issues such as the use of recycled materials in industrial activities. Also, the use of uniform measures (European standards) throughout the EU and EEA was mentioned. Business stressed the need to integrate environmental aspects without damaging the achievements of the existing standardisation process such as its facilitation of trade

Concerns

Some scepticism was expressed about the situation that standards would become prescriptive and not performance oriented. It was mentioned that unwanted delays and increased cost in the standardisation process could occur due to awareness raising and educational activities. NGOs had the concern that business would limit environmental considerations to requirements imposed by the law. One organisation went as far as indicating that they do not believe in achieving results by awareness raising and recommended, instead, an obligatory environmental statement produced for each standard.

1.3 Tools and Standards for the Environment

Q7,8,9 Do you feel that there are sufficient tools to deal with environmental aspects in standardisation?If not, what new kinds of tools could improve the situation? Do you have any examples/experience of these tools being used?

Supporting comments

The general feeling was that there are sufficient and adequate tools and that these should be open to review and improvement as necessary. Most respondents felt that more encouragement was needed to ensure the use of these tools. Some said that the use of the tools could be systematic and monitored. There were no real concrete ideas for new tools (as defined as directly helping to integrate the environmental aspects - the use of databases is dealt with separately). Some considered Guides for product disassembly, use, disposal options and sustainable production as useful tools. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and educational tools were suggested. Many respondents said that they had used the existing tools and had positive experiences with them. However, no specific examples were given. A comment made several times was that the expertise to use these tools was needed. It was suggested that in the cases where comments from CEN's EHD were not taken into account, a justification should be provided.

Concerns

Some respondents felt that the CEN Environmental Help Desk (EHD) needed stable resources for staff from different backgrounds and countries. These respondents wished that CEN changed its internal rules and procedures regarding the role of the EHD.

Q10 Does the text correctly describe the existing tools? Have we forgotten some instruments used which are already being used in standardisation?

Supporting comments

Several additional existing tools were suggested including the following: ISO 14062, 14040, 14020, IEC Guide 109, 112 and 113, the EHD, CLC Database, CEN Memorandum 4, CEN Checklist and ENIS team (implements Guide 64). It was also mentioned that a leaflet describing all these tools may be useful.

Q11, 12 Are the categories for the existing standards for the environment correct and are the examples given useful? Please give other examples of types of standards that when applied, have a particular positive or negative impact on the environment.

Supporting comments

On the whole, this section of the working document was found to be useful, some simplification and clarification could lead to improvement. e categories of different standards for the environment should be changed to include product standards: product standards take environmentally friendly design into account and product standards are where the main thrust of effort is needed. relation to this, it was said several times that safety took precedence over the environment or that at least the environment must be assessed with the other aspects covered in product standards. Alternative headings were suggested: product standards, measurement standards, systems management standards, standards for dealing with products and technologies, other useful management standards, supply chain, procurement, design management. Many respondents noted that for the section on ISO EN 14000 management standards it should be stressed that the benefit came from applying it, not from the 3rd party certification to it. Several poor and one good example were presented.

1.4 Priority Setting

Q13, Q14 Should the Commission set priorities (at all)? Can you think of any positive or negative consequence of setting priorities?

Supporting comments

The views as to whether the priorities should be set by the stakeholders in the standardisation process or by public authorities like the Commission differed widely among the respondents. From the reactions obtained one could conclude that the European policy makers should flag public interest areas, but that it should be left to the discretion of the standardisation stakeholders to decide - on a case by case basis and agreed by consensus - whether and how to deal with them. Prioritisation as such was acknowledged as important and positive for better efficiency in standards making.

Concerns

Concerns were raised that low priority standards would be unlikely to see completion and ill chosen priorities would result in market distortion.

Q15 Do you have suggestions as to how priorities could be set?

Supporting comments

Respondents suggested different ways to set priorities for the integration of environmental aspects in standards. Proposals included a prioritisation according to industrial/product sectors, according to the links with EU legislation and policy, according to the relevance for public procurement, or according to key environmental problems tackled by international commitments such as the Kyoto Protocol.

Q16 Do you think that the Commission should use mandates in order to prioritise issues?

Supporting comments

Many respondents perceived mandates as tools for priority setting in standardisation. They acknowledged the potential for public authorities to express their priorities by means of standardisation mandates. However, some NGOs wanted to link mandates strictly to legislation and it was suggested that, on a general basis, an assessment of compliance could help to decide whether voluntary standards or mandatory regulations are the better solution. Some respondents wished to see mandates from the Commission regarding low carbon technologies to support Kyoto Protocol measures or regarding reverse logistics to facilitate the return of products from the market place at the end of their useful lives.

Concerns

Certain respondents had concerns as to the possibility of political decisions being transferred to standards organisations. It was suggested that in preparation of a mandate, the Commission evaluates different environmental, health or safety costs from a sustainability perspective; that stakeholders should be consulted in the preparation of mandates; that environmental requirements are well defined to allow for assessment on whether a mandate has been fulfilled or not; and that national public authorities be encouraged to participate in mandated standardisation work.

1.5 Stakeholder Participation in the Standardisation Process

Q17 Should the emphasis of the efforts to improve the integration of environmental aspects be placed at the European or national level?

Supporting comments

Many respondents felt that standardisation should take place at the European level. It was more cost effective and avoided duplication of work at different levels. The national and international dimension, they said, were nevertheless important. The national, because this would be the level at which standards were implemented; and international, because of the growing importance of the global market.

Concerns

Some stakeholders, in particular NGOs, expressed concern that in their countries there was no mechanism guaranteeing that consensus achieved at the national level would be transferred to the European standardisation process. This raised the issue of how important it was that NGOs are sufficiently represented at the European standardisation level to complement any representation in the national standardisation committee.

Q18 Do you have practical suggestions for ensuring the effective participation of groups of stakeholders that have important input but that are difficult to reach?

Supporting comments

It was clearly demonstrated that stakeholder participation in standardisation varied from country to country. Suggestions were made as to improve the effective participation of the relevant stakeholders:

- by making publicly available the work programmes of the standardisation organisations;

- by increased financial support for some stakeholders;

- by limiting their participation to technical committees or working groups that are relevant from the point of view of environmental protection;

- by encouraging representatives from national public authorities to participate in the relevant standardisation work;

- by providing easier access to relevant data; and

- by providing appropriate training.

Concerns

Many respondents stated that the relevant stakeholders already participate in the standardisation process. Standards organisations were generally open to participation and opinions from all interested parties. Hence, the current system would not require any changes- those who are truly interested ould already participate in it

Q19 How will more involvement of different stakeholders affect / change the standardisation process?

Supporting comments

Opinions concerning the participation of a wider group of stakeholders were mixed. One potential positive consequence would be that standardisation would be made more transparent, so that the interests of all affected parties could be represented. It would be particularly important for SMEs to ensure that standards reflected their needs and not just those of big companies.

Concerns

Some opinions noted that wider participation may slow down the process of adoption / revision of standards, which was already too slow. In particular, a further slowdown may occur in the initial phase when new stakeholders join the technical committees and working groups as they may not be familiar with all the procedures. Moreover, standardisation is a consensual process and some of the newcomers may have difficulties in accepting the need for compromise.

1.6 An international framework for greener standards

Q20 What implications does the international framework have for European policies in your view?

Supporting comments

Some respondents pointed out that national, island solutions risked becoming barriers to international trade and the integration of the Single Market called for the WTO Agreement on technical barriers to trade to be respected. Others stated that Europe could take a leading role and intellectual leadership in the development of certain environmental standards; and that for global transfer and use of European standards, comments from stakeholders outside Europe should be enabled. Close co-operation between international and European standards development via the principle of national mirror committees was considered important.

Concerns

A third country administration pointed out that developing countries may require special and differential treatment, as they will have difficulties in implementing international standards with specific environmental requirements.

1.7 Possible Incentives to further integrate environmental aspects in standards

Q21 Would it encourage standardisers to develop standards with an environmental dimension if there was the possibility to show compliance with environmental legislation?

Supporting comments

To demonstrate compliance with environmental legislation by using voluntary standards tends to be perceived as an incentive by industry, mostly against the background of the New Approach directives. But clearly, this is only seen as positive in instances where regulation is absolutely needed and legal incentives should not be introduced as a rationale for new, unnecessary legislation. Some respondents suggested that New Approach type legislation should be used for new areas such as energy using products or that existing directives for products should cover environmental requirements in the future.

Concerns

Some NGOs stressed that standardisation cannot and should not replace legislation. Other respondents asked for an advanced warning of new legislation, which would avoid wasting resources on standards in areas that are likely to be regulated in the foreseeable future. Many respondents felt a need for a clear distinction between voluntary standards and mandatory laws. The discrepancy between product related legislation affecting all competitors equally and EU environmental legislation, differing from member state to member state was mentioned.

Q22 Are you familiar with the information made available under the eco-labelling schemes? If so, is it of use for the production of European standards?

Supporting comments

Most of the respondents were familiar with eco-labelling schemes. However, the views on whether eco-labelling could be used in standardisation were mixed. Some stakeholders perceive eco-labels as a good reference point, clearly identifying most important areas of concern. Standards, however, should be less ambitious in establishing environmental performance, as they are to be accepted by all the stakeholders. Some of the eco-label criteria, such as water or energy use, could be easily adapted for standardisation needs. Certainly, data gathered during assessment of products for eco-labels should be used in the standardisation process.

Concerns

Concerns for using eco-label criteria in standardisation were mostly related to market relevance. Eco-label criteria are developed by a relatively limited number of market players and therefore should not be extended to the whole market. Eco-labels should remain as goals for front-runners only. Some respondents pointed out that environmental standards should be rather process than product orientated as this is the case with eco-labels. Also, the eco-label is more perceived as a marketing tool for a limited group of market players.

Q23 Would you use standards or purchase standardised products, processes and services that cover environmentally important performance?

Supporting comments

Many of the stakeholders said that this was already the case. Other factors, such as price and quality, however, must also be taken into account.

Concerns

Stakeholders expressing doubts pointed out that the impact on the environment is only one among many factors taken into account when purchasing products or contracting services.

Q24 Would awards provide an incentive to integrate environmental issues into standardisation?

Concerns

The majority of respondents were sceptical as to possible use of awards. If at all, awards needed to be accepted by the market rather than being introduced by a top-down approach. The effects of awards were considered limited as they tend to attract the participation of only the highly committed organisations, and therefore could have a divisive effect. However, the need to communicate achievements was noted.

Q25 Would you consider using databases? How would you use them? uld the availability of databases ease the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation?

Supporting comments

The overwhelming response was yes that databases were useful. However the format, usability, content, access rights and procedures to use them needed to be very carefully thought through. Otherwise it would just be additional to an already confusing amount of information and innovation could be stifled by old data. The data would be the main thing to think about. In particular its validation was important - especially when conflicting views were put forward. It was noted that if databases needed to be created they should be an aid to standardisers but not mandatory in their use. Resources and costs would also needed to be considered. The text of the working document needed to define databases: those that are specifically for standards issues and then databases in general which give information on materials and technologies

Q26 Can you think of other incentives than the ones presented here?

Supporting comments

Many respondents did not think that incentives were the primary issue of the overall debate on integrating environmental aspects into standards. The challenges went wider than that. Many noted that market driven / customer / economic incentives were the most likely to succeed. incentives were developed this should be done with the stakeholders affected by them.

Q28 Will this Communication on the integration of environmental aspects into European standardisation help you or your organisation in your work?

Supporting comments

Responses to this question concentrated rather on the scope of the Communication and its final shape. For some stakeholders, it clarified the discussion on environment and standardisation and helped them to raise awareness and promote the systematic use of existing tools.

Q29 What could be the positive and negative consequences of this Communication for your work?

Supporting comments

Positive consequences identified by stakeholders included:

- raising awareness;

- easier dissemination of good practices;

- better co-operation between the experts;

- support for existing efforts.

Some respondents said that the Commission should indicate the level of environmental protection it hoped to be achieved by means of standardisation.

Concerns

Some stakeholders, mainly from the business community indicated that a negative consequence might be a deviation from the original purpose of standardisation: the production of technical documents for trade.

Q30 Please give any positive and negative examples of the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation?

Supporting comments

The majority of stakeholders who gave examples pointed out that the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation is already happening. The positive examples they mentioned included the work of CENELEC where a new guide for the integration of environmental aspects was developed in TC 20, and the two international guides already in place (IEC guide 109 and ISO TR 14062).

Concerns

The process of adding new requirements in the standardisation process should be considered and monitored carefully, otherwise it may lead to contradictory requirements that cannot be dealt with by the consensual standardisation process. Also, if the environmental targets/requirements are too ambitious in the beginning, it may discourage stakeholders and hamper the entire standardisation process. As negative examples, some of the stakeholders perceived both the mandate and the existing European standards for packaging. Another issue raised by some stakeholders was that the inclusion of environmental requirements would widen the gap between international standards and European ones, thus creating barriers to trade.

1.8 Overall Conclusions

The internet consultation broadly confirmed the views voiced at the stakeholder meeting on 16 July. These are that:

- aim and scope of the future communication are relevant and appropriate;

- all key issues have been identified, and it is important to clarify the relationship between voluntary standards and mandatory legislation;

- there are enough tools to address environmental issues in standardisation. However these require time, expertise and resources if they are to be used systematically. All stakeholders must address this challenge;

- the Commission and Member States should jointly play a role in the financing for an effective participation of all interested stakeholders in the standardisation process;

- priorities should be set, primarily for efficiency purposes, on where to start with the integration of environmental aspects into standardisation; whilst the Commission could flag interest areas by way of a mandate it should be left to the standardisation stakeholders to decide whether and how to deal with them;

- training of experts and the use of databases with relevant environmental information were considered the most instrumental incentives to incorporate environmental aspects into standards whereas the idea of awards was not supported;

- the international framework for standards and technical regulations must be respected to avoid unnecessary trade barriers, but the European standardisation system should take a certain leadership role in the development of specific environmental standards;

- the progress made with the integration of environmental issues into European standardisation should be reviewed every five years.

1.9 General Statistics

Between July and September more than 5800 hits on the website were reported. Over 60 written responses were then received. Replies to the questions came from 10 EU countries: Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK. A contribution was received from China. Although representatives from the acceding countries participated in the stakeholder meeting of 16 July, only one written response was received from them. Most of the comments came from pan-European business and NGO organisations. The business sector (individual enterprises and business organisations) was the most active contributor to the consultation, which reflects that standardisation is considered a voluntary and market driven activity. A detailed breakdown is shown below:

>REFERENCE TIL EN GRAFIK>

Type of stakeholder //

Business // 61%

Academic // 2%

NGO // 10%

Public Authorities // 8%

Standards organisations // 18%

Individuals // 2%

List of contributors

(1) AeA Europe

(2) AEN GET1

(3) AENOR Associación Española de normlización y certificación

(4) AIM, the European Brands Association

(5) AmCham

(6) ANEC

(7) ANIE

(8) Association Léo Lagrange pour la Défense des Consommateurs

(9) AVBB

(10) BEAMA

(11) BSI British Standards Institution

(12) Building and Sharing Partners (B-Sharp)

(13) BUND e.V Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit (Germany)

(14) CEMPC Council of European Producers of Materials for Construction

(15) CEN

(16) CENELEC

(17) CIAA Confederation of the food and drink industry of the EU

(18) Comitato Elettrotecnico Italiano - CEI

(19) Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers VNO-NCW

(20) Construction Products Association

(21) Co-operative Group

(22) CYS Cyprus Organisation for the Promotion of Quality

(23) Danish Standards Association

(24) Danish Trade Association of International Transport (ITD)

(25) Dansk Industry - Confederation of Danish Industries

(26) Department of Trade and Industry (UK Government)

(27) DIN

(28) ECOS

(29) EICTA - European Information, Communications and Consumer Electronics Technology Industry Association

(30) ENEA Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and the Environment

(31) Environmental Authorities of Belgium

(32) EUPC RecyTrade - Plastics Recycling Market

(33) Eurofer & Eurometaux

(34) Europacable

(35) European Composite Industry

(36) European Emulsion Fuel Manufacturers' Association (EEFMA)

(37) European Heating Industry

(38) Europen

(39) FIEEC

(40) Finnish Forest Industries Federation

(41) Finnish Industry and Employers confederation

(42) Finnish Ministry of the Environment

(43) Finnish Standards Association SFS

(44) Five Winds Int

(45) France Télécom Délégation à l'Environnement et au Développement Durable

(46) Friends of the Earth (Germany), BUND e.V.

(47) General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (People's Republic of China)

(48) German Commission for Electrical, Electronic & Information Technologies of DIN and VDE

(49) German Federal Ministry of Environmental Protection

(50) IKEA

(51) National House Buildling Council

(52) NEN (Netherlands Standard Institute)

(53) ORGALIME

(54) Ragnar Sellberg Foundation

(55) RAL Quality Assurance Association for the demanufacture of refrigeration equipment containing CFC

(56) Red Eléctrica de España

(57) SBGI - The Trade Association for the UK Onshore Gas Industry

(58) SIS (Swedish Standards Institute)

(59) Sony International (Europe) GmbH

(60) Swiss Agency for Environment, Forest and Landscape

(61) Telecom Italia - Network Department

(62) The European Natural Gas Vehicle Association (ENGVA)

(63) Umwelt Bundesamt (Germany)

(64) UNICE

(65) Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

(66) University of Environment and Public Works Greece

(67) VCI

(68) Zentralverband Elektrotechnik- und Elektronikindustrie (ZVEI) e. V.

Annex 3: Publicity

Publicity actions

The internet consultation was announced by means of the multi-stakeholder meeting on the 16 July 2003. Subsequent news updates, to almost 4.000 subscribers on the ENTERPRISE Europe on-line service, were sent (in July and August 2003) all of which showed the links to the various sites of the public consultation

Conclusion

Overall, the public consultation was well attended/visited. The initiative has drawn sufficient attention from a broad range of stakeholders.