Assessment of Criteria Development within the EU Eco-labelling Scheme
Summary and conclusions
The EU Regulation of eco-labelling was adopted in 1992 and it came into force on 23. March 1993. The first EU eco-labelling studies were initiated in 1992. Thus, a practical preparation of the-coming-to-be EU eco-labelling scheme was initiated before the adoption of the Regulation itself. However, early preparation of the EU schemes met many obstacles on its way.
The development of criteria is just one way of focusing on the implications of the scheme. Today, unresolved issues still remain but the scheme and the importance of it (in a product oriented environmental strategy) is growing steadily.
This study compares twelve EU eco-labelling criteria development studies. There are more projects in which different eco-labelling criteria establishment studies within the same product group are compared. However, to our knowledge this is the only project that compares eco-labelling studies with respect to (LCA-) methodological matters and including different product groups.
The project has been carried out over a long interval of time (1993-2000). The disciplin most in focus - LCA and criteria establishment - have both undergone an enormous development within that period of time. This has created a unique possibility to investigate the involvement of LCA in establishing of criteria while both tools have been under development. One can say that the project has evolved on its long way and the target of the project has to some extent been moving as well. The target has changed from originally only performing a survey to including adopted criteria also.
Due to this lengthy time span of the project it has been possible to include the original criteria proposals with the eco-labelling studies that were carried out, highlights from the negotiations and in many cases the final adopted criteria.
A detailed description of the study is placed in the Introduction. The overall structure in the report is divided in two parts.
The first part of the report monitors what has been done in twelve eco-labelling studies. Special emphasise has been put to the inclusion of LCA in the work of establishing criteria. But also other matters like handling of energy, waste water treatment and data sources were considered. By this comparison many similarities and dissimilarities are revealed.
The second part of the report takes its starting point from the adopted criteria. An overview of general features is given.
By combining the two approaches it has been possible to make room for a discussion. The outcome of this discussion will provide input to future establishing of criteria and revision of the Regulation.
It is not possible to provide clear-cut conclusions on the basis of the discussion. Some of the conclusions that can be drawn are:
 | There is a built-in conflict between having precise, well-defined product group definitions and at the same time enlarging the product groups. The latter is a consequence of the wish to cover as many product groups as possible and thereby also to cover as large a part of the market as possible. |
| The adopted ISO LCA standards recommend an iterative process while performing LCA studies, the same recommendation is relevant when balancing between definition of functional unit, fitness for use and design of criteria. The member states and the EU Commission have to work on these specific topics because the iterative process easily may conflict with international negotiations. In international negotiations it may often be difficult to reopen already decided discussions. |
| It will be advantageously if the member states and the EU Commission could agree upon some parts of impact assessment, e.g. normalisation of global and regional environmental impacts. That would ensure less debate of relatively non-complicated matters and also provide more transparency to the scheme as such. |