Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Building a sustainable economy by transforming our model of consumption’ (own-initiative opinion)

On 16 July 2009, the European Economic and Social Committee decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion, under Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, on

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 15 June 2010.

At its 464th plenary session, held on 14 and 15 July 2010 (meeting of 15 July 2010), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 98 votes to 7, with 8 abstentions.

With the backdrop of the crisis that Europe is still living, the reality of a number of Europeans is that they are struggling to keep employment or to guarantee an income; whereas SMEs make greater effort for survival, sustainable patterns may seem a luxury. However policies for sustainability should also include parameters to address these realities Europe is living. This opinion shall focus on a small part of sustainability, that of consumption. As an underlying principle, the EESC believes that one of the long term ways of addressing sustainable consumption is that of enhancing citizenship amongst Europeans, not only by devolving the rights of consumers as set out in the Lisbon Treaty but also by enhancing the value of citizenship, so that citizens not only have rights but also the moral responsibility to behave sustainably.

1.1 In a sustainable economy, the modes of both production and consumption would support the continued flourishing of individuals, communities and the natural world. Most agents in society would need to be guided by a set of shared values. EESC emphasises, as in previous opinions, that environmental and social indicators should be used alongside GDP to judge the success of government policy.

1.2 The current European system of production and consumption is seen as environmentally unsustainable, especially in its dependence on energy, materials, land and water, and its impacts on the global climate and biodiversity. If everyone in the world lived a European lifestyle, we would need over 2.5 planets.

1.3 The EU Council has agreed that industrialised countries should reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95 % by 2050. Hence the EESC recommends that the EU2020 strategy would take into consideration both measures for sustainably producing and also measures for sustainable consumption. As the two are closely linked and need to be addressed if we are to minimise the impact on the planet.

1.4 Achieving 80-95 % emission cuts over 40 years while sustaining annual economic growth of 2-3 % means reducing the carbon intensity of the economy by 6-10 %/year. Such a rate of technological change is unprecedented on a sustained, economy-wide basis. It would therefore be prudent to begin a serious dialogue about the potential for changing consumption patterns and the overall economic and social model that relies on expanding production and consumption, as well as seeking the most rapid possible improvements in production and supply chains.

1.5 Efforts for change from the top down alone are unlikely to work. Social change often starts with small groups in society and spreads through a variety of communication channels. The role of the EU, national and regional government may be to identify, encourage and support existing groups working for sustainable living.

1.6 A dialogue is needed involving EU institutions, national and local government, and all the social partners. One way forward would be for the Commission to work with EESC to create a forum on sustainable consumption exploring:

1.7 Dialogue must be connected to action, including support for experimentation by groups working for sustainable living and for communication of their experiences, adjustment and strengthening of policies where relevant, and practical action within EU institutions to provide leadership and demonstrate the potential for more sustainable practices. Furthermore best practices ought to be publicised so as to demonstrate the possibility of changes in consumption models.

1.8 Sustainable consumption cannot be seen as an environment policy brief only. It will require initiatives in many policy areas including health, education, employment, trade, consumer affairs, transport, agriculture and energy.

2.1 The nature of a sustainable economy has been discussed for half a century (1). In such an economy, the modes of both production and consumption would support the continued flourishing of individuals, communities and the natural world.

2.2 For an economic model to be self-sustaining, most agents in society need to be guided by a set of shared values, as is currently the case in EU Member States. Governments currently promulgate a set of economic values through emphasis on GDP and other indicators to guide policy. The shortcomings of GDP as a measure of human, social and ecological flourishing have been widely recognised. To measure progress towards a sustainable economy, the EESC has proposed that (2), in addition to GDP, the ecological footprint (EF) should be used, along with an indicator for quality of life. The EF calculates the productive land area required to sustain a way of life for a person, group of people, institution or region. A quality of life indicator should take account of health, material wealth, access to public services, social participation and incomer integration, leisure time, and the quality of the environment.

2.3 Using a broader set of indicators to judge the success of government policy might be expected to lead to less emphasis in policy design on promoting GDP growth, and more on the other dimensions of human, social and ecological well-being.

3.1 The European Environment Agency emphasises two major groups of issues in its upcoming State of the Environment and Outlook 2010 report: climate and energy, and biodiversity and ecosystems (3). The central challenge to the sustainability of European society is the degradation of the ecosystems that sustain it and of its resource base including energy, soil and water. In 2003 the average EU EF was estimated at nearly 5 hectares per person and rising, whereas global land availability was only 1.8 hectares per person and falling (4). Hence if everyone in the world lived a European lifestyle, we would need over 2.5 planets.

3.2 Climate change is particularly important because, in addition to its direct impacts on human life, it is likely to exacerbate the impacts of society on biodiversity, fresh water and other systems. The largest contributor to Europe’s EF is its use of fossil fuels and generation of greenhouse gases. Other major elements include land use for agriculture, transport and buildings. The EF does not account well for other major impacts of the European economy, including the use of water (mostly for agriculture) and scarce minerals.

3.3 The EU Council has agreed that industrialised countries should reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95 % by 2050 – a 4-7 % annual cut. It has committed to reducing EU emissions by 20 % in 2020 relative to 1990 levels, or by 30 % if other countries make similar commitments. EESC has in fact proposed (5) that the 30 % target should be unconditional.

3.4 The EU seeks to achieve greenhouse gas mitigation primarily through technological means while sustaining economic growth. While technology exists that could meet these goals for 2020, progress in implementation has been slow. The EU15 committed in 1997 to an 8 % emission reduction by 2008-2012 relative to 1990 levels, but emissions in 2006 were only 2.2 % down. In the EU27 emissions fell 7.7 % in this period, but rose 1.5 % since 2000 (6). Since the 1990s EU energy efficiency has improved by only 0.5 % per year (7).

3.5 Achieving 80-95 % emission cuts over 40 years while sustaining annual economic growth of 2-3 % means reducing the carbon intensity of the economy by 6-10 %/year. Such a rate of technological change is unprecedented on a sustained, economy-wide basis. It would therefore be prudent to begin a serious dialogue about the potential for changing consumption patterns and the overall economic and social model that relies on expanding production and consumption, as well as seeking the most rapid possible improvements in production and supply chains.

4.1 European governments committed at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to the elimination of unsustainable consumption and production patterns. They have further committed in the Marrakech Process to develop action plans for sustainable consumption and production by 2010, to be considered by the UN Commission for Sustainable Development in 2011.

4.2 There is a growing body of research on sustainable consumption and the means of achieving it (8). Consumers mostly feel locked in to current lifestyles – for example, even if they wish to reduce their car use they cannot imagine how to do so. Consumption is shaped and constrained by a host of influences, including physiological needs, personality, the social setting, cultural factors, and the availability and prices of alternative goods and services. In the consumer society, consumption choices play a central role in meeting social and psychological needs – e.g. for belonging to a group, self esteem, and defining personal identity. All of this makes it hard for individuals to consider any change, and hard for governments to introduce policies for consumption change. When such policies have been implemented, the results have mostly been disappointingly slight or slow, making them hard to sustain against the resistance of vested interests.

4.3 Meanwhile motivations, patterns of consumption, and likely responses to specific policies, vary considerably from person to person. For any individual they can vary from situation to situation. Hence there is no simple policy solution for sustainable consumption. Rather, a broad sweep of policies, in areas from agriculture and employment to education and health, has an influence. Particular strategies may be needed to support more sustainable choices by specific groups such as the elderly and young people.

4.4 People have adopted voluntary restraint en masse in times of national emergency and war but the ecological crisis is not generally seen as an emergency on such a scale. Nevertheless, recently growing numbers of people have chosen simpler lifestyles to reduce their ecological impacts. Some of the most successful efforts to change consumption have been based on community groups – e.g. the Ecoteam approach used in several countries by Global Action Plan, bringing together small groups of people in a neighbourhood, workplace or school to monitor their waste, energy and water use and identify action they can take to live more sustainably.

4.5 Efforts for change from the top down alone are unlikely to work – especially where politicians with high-consuming lifestyles are trying to influence the general public. Sustainable consumption is not a high priority for most people. However social change often starts with small groups in society and spreads through a variety of communication channels, including the mainstream media, the arts, informal friendship networks and faith organisations. The policy makers' role ought to be more that of identifying and encouraging existing groups working for sustainable living than to impose its own view of what is needed on the community at large.

4.6 Choice for a sustainable lifestyle should not be perceived and designed as a luxury for the people who have the financial means for such a lifestyle. The EESC has emphasised that sustainable production should not come at a higher price (9) but should be accessible to all. It is essential to avoid making low-impact consumption more costly to individuals as this would enable choices for only part of society, marginalising poorer and low wage earners.

4.7 The EESC emphasises that in order to enable choice for low-impact consumption other critical areas of well-being need to be addressed, some of which are perceived as more essential, these being employment opportunity, appropriate wages for work done, decent jobs, and access to credit for SMEs.

5.1 EU institutions have a history of setting out a vision and providing leadership for radical change, in the building of a united Europe. They have mostly worked with a pluralistic model, facilitating agreement among governments rather than leading change in particular directions. There have been instances where the EU has led, for example in health and environmental standards. These experiences may be valuable in building a sustainable economy. Leadership and inspiration may be as important as technical expertise and bureaucratic skill.

5.2 The Committee has welcomed the Commission’s Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan (10). Many other existing EU policies are relevant to sustainable consumption, including the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS), the Car Fuel Efficiency Labelling Directive, the Light-duty Vehicle CO2 Regulation, the Biofuels Directive, the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, the Directive on Energy End-Use Efficiency and Energy Services, and environmental provisions in the Common Agricultural Policy. However, EU policy focuses on market instruments and technology/product standards. Only ETS deals with absolute levels of greenhouse gas emissions. There are tensions with other policy goals such as increasing mobility. There is very little to directly address consumption and lifestyle and the policies are clearly inadequate to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals and independence from unsustainable mineral resources.

5.3 A dialogue is needed involving EU institutions, national and local government, and all the social partners. One way forward would be for the Commission to work with EESC and others to create a forum on sustainable consumption exploring:

5.4 Policy should address both immediate and long-term action to change consumption. Much can be learned from experience, for example with smoking, where a combination of pricing, regulation, labelling and education has brought about a substantial change in attitudes and behaviour.

5.4.1 Price incentives are an important part of a policy package but there is a tension between the Commission’s aim of reducing energy prices (11) and the need to reduce consumption. Carbon taxes or trading must be complemented by other measures. For example, without strong support for home insulation and alternative energy sources, high fuel or carbon prices may increase fuel poverty.

5.4.2 The EESC has on a number of occasions emphasised the importance of educational programmes to bring about effective sustainable behaviour. The EESC reiterates that such learning programmes should not only be targeted at schools and young people, which is important, but people at all stage of life. Vocational education, life long learning and programmes should be offered for the elderly. It is imperative that sustainable practices should not increase the marginalisation of groups such as the unemployed.

5.5 Dialogue must be connected to action, including providing support for experimentation by groups working for sustainable living and for communication of their experiences. To be of any use it must be taken seriously by the EU institutions, leading to adjustment and strengthening of policies where relevant, and to practical action within those institutions to provide leadership and demonstrate the potential for more sustainable practices.

5.6 Sustainable consumption cannot be seen as an environment policy brief only. It will require initiatives in many policy areas including health, education, employment, trade, competition, consumer affairs, transport, agriculture and energy.

5.7 The EESC strongly encourages the commission to seriously consider action for sustainable consumption under Commission work programme 2010 – Time to act (12) and henceforth within the EU2020.

Brussels, 15 July 2010.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Mario SEPI

(1) Boulding, K. ‘The economics of the coming spaceship earth’, in Environmental Quality in a Growing Society, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1966) pp. 253 ff.

(4) Global Footprint Network and WWF, Europe 2007: Gross Domestic Product and Ecological Footprint.

(6) EEA, Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2006 and inventory report 2008: Submission to the UNFCCC Secretariat, (Copenhagen: EEA, 2008).

(7) Tipping, P. et al., Impact Assessment on the Future Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, carried out by ECN (NL) and WS Atkins (UK) for DGTREN. Contractor: ECORYS, NL (2006).

(8) Jackson, T. Motivating Sustainable Consumption: A Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change, a report to the Sustainable Development Research Network, 2005, available at http://www.sd-research.org.uk/.

(11) Monti, M., A New Strategy for the Single Market, Report to the President of the European Commission, May 2010.