 |
Brussels, 16 february 1999
Euro Coop's position on Eco-Label
Euro Coop is extremely concerned with the manner in which the EU Eco-Label scheme has evolved. We have always welcomed the principles underlying this scheme, as a voluntary instrument intended to promote products with a reduced environmental impact during their entire life cycle and to provide consumers with accurate and scientifically based information on the environmental impact of products. However we would like to reiterate our concern raised in our 1997 Opinion on the revision of the Eco-Label Scheme that the implementation of this Scheme has not worked in a satisfactory way. In our earlier opinion we believed that the Eco-label scheme should be encouraged, because it allows for the assessment of products which have a reduced environmental impact and expressed our hope that the revision process would help to increase the efficiency and transparency of the scheme.
However, faced with the following issues, Euro Coop is now unsure about the continuing with the EU Eco-Label :
- Consumers do not recognise the EU Flower: since its establishment much time and money has been devoted to the Eco-Label, yet it is still not visible on the market.
- There is little support for the scheme, and it is not working: It is not supported by some national governments that have established their own schemes. In addition, the producers do not seem to want the Eco-label, as they are not applying for it. Indeed, they have started dragging their heels and are stopping their applications.
- High administrative costs: producers who are interested in using the Eco-Label scheme incur high administrative costs. They are paying for having products, which have reduced environmental impacts.
- Difficulties with agreeing on criteria: various interest groups have different agendas, which conflict. For example, consumers and environmentalists tend to look for perfection whilst the traders, manufacturers and retailers, do not commit to such standards of excellence. The Commission's approach is to fudge the issue in an attempt to satisfy all parties rather than address the issues. For example, the paints and varnishes Eco-label have attracted the largest number of applicants. Therefore, in order not to discourage them, the Commission proposed that the 3-year review should introduce minimal change (improvement) in the criteria. The nub of the problem is that the 3 year review period is too short, bearing in mind that the label in the market will, at best, have less than 3 years duration and, for long shelf-life products, the Eco-labelled product could well be on-shelf long after the expiry of the criteria - illegally.
Euro Coop supports the principles of the EU Eco-Label scheme, and acknowledges the importance of having a system like this. But we are in favour of a scheme, which respects the following:
- Informs the consumer about the reduced environmental impact of a product in an easy manner, that can help him decide on the purchase of the product at the point of sale
- Encourages producers to take on board the scheme, and thus increase its visibility
- Internalise external costs. Eco-label schemes are actually the opposite of this, as producers have to pay when the product is more sustainable.
- Organise extensive marketing campaigns to increase awareness of the scheme.
Eco-label schemes have worked and as such it is possible that the European scheme could work. The process is important as it increases consumers' awareness of the environmental impact of goods. Indeed their willingness to buy environmentally friendly goods should be used to encourage producers to recognise the need for such goods.
- In the light of the problems, Euro Coop has identified that perhaps the way to advance is to favour national labels, which are recognised, over the EU Eco-Label, which is not visible. There are already some Member States which do not want to use the EU Eco-Label; the Nordic countries perceive the Swan as better known and respected and see no need to change. Therefore, Euro Coop suggests that unless, or until, the EU flower is better known or perceived in a better way, national labels should be used. We realise that some countries do not have their own national schemes, and propose that they could use the Eco-label or be incorporated into existing national schemes in other countries.
|
|
