Evaluating product panels
5 Conclusions and recommendations
This chapter summarises experience gained from the three product panels for the purpose of identifying the pivotal factors in determining product panel activities. It outlines and discusses the dilemmas of using product panels as an environmental initiative tool.
Drawing on analysis results, the chapter proposes a number of recommendations for the future use of product panels in the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. Does the product panel concept need adjustment? Finally, the chapter discusses how product panels can interact with environmental initiatives contemplated by the European Union in the product area.
5.1 Pivotal factors in determining product panel activities
The three product panels have moved in different directions and have achieved different results. The intention of the Danish EPA has always been to provide a relatively broad framework for product panels to develop on their own conditions. In itself, this has been a crucial factor in the product panels’ activities.
The panel members interviewed have pointed to several factors that have affected the product panels’ activities. To some extent, the members see the product panels as being part of an experiment charged with defining its own framework. At the same time, cooperating with such varying – at times conflicting – interests in one specific product area has been a new experience for many of the members. In all three product areas, this new and relatively undefined forum has sparked off many a discussion on objectives, funds and obligations.
One should keep in mind that the product panels in the three product areas operate on different foundations of knowledge, tools and competence in environmental issues. At the launch of the textiles panel, the textiles industry already had such a foundation to offer, whereas the electronics and goods transport panels had to develop their fundamental knowledge and tools.
One of the most important factors in product panel work processes, if not the most important, is the composition of the panels.
5.1.1 Composition
Unsurprisingly, the composition of panel members is vital to the panels’ development and results. According to many panel members interviewed, dedication and a belief in the ability of product panels to make a difference are pivotal factors. The work undertaken by the textiles panel, which has achieved the most evident market results, clearly reflects this dedication and firm belief.
This is also closely related to the power of decision that members bring with them into the product panel. The textiles panel has succeeded in recruiting a number of key market players8 with a substantial power of decision, especially from the retail trade. Neither the electronics panel nor the goods transport panel has managed to do the same. In the electronics panel, individual power of decision seems to be relatively limited, and no companies representing the retail trade sit on the panel, for example. Only one private enterprise representative currently sits on the goods transport panel. Consequently, the electronics and goods transport panels have not had the same opportunities to produce specific market results supported by front-runner companies9 and other key market players. Together with trade associations as well as consumer and environmental organisations, public institutions are used to operating under framework conditions, so when this type of participant is clearly over-represented in a product panel, focus naturally shifts from market-oriented projects to this level.
The decision-making process conducted by the three product panels also reflects the difference in power of decision. The textiles panel, whose members possess the greatest individual power of decision, seems to have more room for negotiation. A key element of its action plan, choosing an eco-label, is thus based on a compromise. The textiles panel agreed on using the European eco-label, the flower, although several panel members preferred the Nordic eco-label, the Green Swan logo. A product panel’s scope for action hinges on its ability to make compromises and thus to prevent the lowest common denominator from forever setting the strategy. Obviously, the other two product panels have had difficulty compromising, which is reflected in the very generally formulated objectives, if any, in their action plans.
5.1.2 Chairmanship and secretarial duties
Many of the panel members interviewed point out that the role of the chairman is particularly crucial to the development and results of the product panels. As the product panels consist of a number of players who do not normally work closely together and who, in some cases, have conflict-ridden relationships, having an impetus has been pivotal in motivating the panels and attracting their attention. Furthermore, the chairman is charged with presiding over the discussions and must constantly push the process forward to allow the individual panel to increase its scope for action despite diverging interests and limited resources. One should remember that a product panel usually meets once every two months and that participation is unpaid for all members except the secretary. Members therefore expend only limited resources on panel work, and the chairman and the secretary typically need to keep the process moving between meetings.
According to the panel members interviewed, great demands are placed on the chairman, who under optimum conditions must:
 | be a motivating and inspirational chairman of the panel’s discussions |
| be enterprising, results-oriented and dynamic for the purpose of keeping the process moving |
| possess technical and industry-specific knowledge |
| be able to develop compromises (not just the lowest common denominator) |
| be able to preside over discussions and negotiations from a neutral position (not be too influenced by self-interest) |
| be able to represent the panel |
Finding a chairman on the basis of these many criteria is not easy, and especially not when chairmanship duties are unpaid.
In both the electronics and the goods transport panels, the same person has performed both the chairmanship and the secretarial duties. According to panel members interviewed, having one person perform all duties has not posed any substantial problems. Interviews with textiles panel members suggest, however, that having separate secretarial duties has benefited the panel in its work. Trusted by panel members and helping solve potential conflicts, the textiles panel secretary has played an especially neutral role.
The course of events in the three product panels suggests that the action plan is an important management tool. The more specific the objectives of the panel’s work are, the easier it is to maintain focus and put action behind words. On the other hand, broadly formulated objectives and action plans seem to result in too many and too broad target areas. Without a targeted and visionary action plan, product panels seem to have difficulty moving from tool and method-oriented development work to implementation and specific market results.
A generally formulated action plan is typically a symptom of a product panel’s difficulties reaching consensus. So the action plan is not necessarily the underlying problem. Still, it is an important management tool enabling a product panel to formulate a common platform for further development. A poor action plan may well disrupt a product panel’s work process, even though the panel members originally supported a common strategy.
5.1.4 Danish EPA
Several of the panel members point out that the annual operating budget granted by the Danish EPA is vital to a product panel’s work. It is difficult imagining that the panel members contribute such funds out of their own pockets. At the same time, constantly having to apply for small amounts to cover incidentals would constitute a great source of irritation. Furthermore, it is important for the panel members’ motivation that the Danish EPA and the Environmental Council for Cleaner Products have widely chosen to follow the product panels’ recommendations for new initiatives and projects.
The panel members generally commend the Danish EPA on the way it handles a very difficult role in the product panels. According to several panel members, the fact that Danish EPA representatives in the panels have remained relatively neutral is very important. The goods transport panel has found it particularly important that the panel’s activities are in keeping with increased sector integration in the environmental area. As mentioned above, no action plan was adopted for 2000 because the Road Safety and Transport Agency and the Danish EPA needed to discuss the action plan on a bilateral basis.
5.1.5 Knowledge dissemination
The product panels’ work will have a major impact only if the panels manage to spread knowledge, tools and methods in the fields of environmental issues and products to a broad target group rather than to the panel members only. The product panels need to develop a strategy for disseminating information and knowledge. In addition, the product panels can profit from establishing a setup that ensures that knowledge is spread on a regular basis. In this connection, the textiles panel has been able to draw on the knowledge centre established with funds from the Federation of Danish Textile and Clothing, a trade association. Since its establishment, the knowledge centre has undertaken a good deal of fieldwork in the textiles industry. Moreover, the centre has accumulated a wealth of knowledge and consulting opportunities for the entire industry in respect of textiles and environmental issues.
Using the Internet to inform about reports, guidelines, tools, etc., is only natural in a knowledge dissemination strategy.
5.1.6 Industry-specific factors
Product panel work requires that outside parties and especially the remaining part of the industry support the panels in putting the development and sale of cleaner products on the agenda. For example, the Danish electronics industry seems reluctant to accept the use of eco-labels. Only few electronics products in Denmark are eco-labelled, but in some cases the very same products are eco-labelled when sold in Sweden. This constitutes an important barrier to the electronics panel as it has yet to reach consensus on how to use eco-labels and/or environmental declarations to promote the development and sale of cleaner electronics products.
Industries boasting high import and export rates operate in a global market where product life cycles can be spread over a number of countries. This may impede the process of measuring and checking environmental impacts from a product life cycle perspective. At the same time, the Danish market is small, making it difficult for Danish importers to place environmental demands on non-Danish suppliers.
Industrial structure impacts on the product panels’ activities. Industries with many small suppliers may have difficulty promoting the widespread implementation of new knowledge and new tools in the environmental field. Many of the small suppliers think that they have insufficient resources for environmental investment. Industries with several large suppliers typically find it easier to involve these players as large suppliers often compete to be at the forefront of new technology.
Demand trends may also slow down the process of making the environment a greater consideration than is currently the case. In the goods transport industry, trends point towards faster delivery, greater flexibility and higher use of door-to-door delivery. This makes it difficult for hauliers to improve route planning and thus increase capacity utilisation for the purpose of reducing pressures on the environment. Furthermore, it limits the possibilities of using other transport methods that are typically less harmful to the environment, but more inflexible.
5.2 Product panel dilemmas
The product panels are an experiment in the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. The Danish EPA has had the development task of setting the scope for product panels, and the Agency has made a clear choice in providing a relatively broad framework for product panels to define their own target areas and work methods. Yet previous experience shows that a number of dilemmas are associated with the product panels’ activities and work methods. This section discusses these dilemmas, while section 5.3 (Are adjustments needed?) contains recommendations in respect of these dilemmas.
The role of the Danish EPA in the product panels is definitely a dilemma for product panel activities. The Danish EPA uses a wealth of direct and indirect management tools in the present product panel concept. One could question whether the product panels are able to "lead their own lives" when
| an existing agenda lays down the strategic selection of product panel members; |
| at least two Danish EPA representatives sit on each panel; and |
| the Danish EPA is free to recommend proposals in the product panels’ own action plans for subsidisation under the Programme for Cleaner Products, etc. |
The advantages of giving product panels free scope for action are that it may encourage panel participation and make product panels more independent of the political system. In 2000, the goods transport panel had to operate with no action plan because the Danish EPA and the Road Safety and Transport Agency bilaterally needed to clarify their common stance on the action plan.
On the other hand, other examples show that the Danish EPA has played important roles in the three panels. The Danish EPA was in charge of the electronics panel during a transition period between the first and second chairmanship. The Agency is now a key member of the panel, deeply involved in a number of its projects. The remaining panel members fully accept and support this fact, for one thing, because administrative requirements specify that the Danish EPA must head the steering committees of such projects. Several members of the textiles and goods transport panels stress the importance of the input that the Danish EPA provides when briefing the panels on political developments in this area, giving technical response and providing advice in respect of project funding.
The problem surrounding the Danish EPA’s role in the product panels is closely related to the functions that the Agency wants the product panels to perform. The Danish EPA does not want the product panels to replace the political processes involving NGOs and other parties. However, the panels show an increasing tendency to want to become involved in the process before or during consultation. In several cases, the product panels have jointly attempted to submit consultative comments on political proposals. For example, the electronics panel tried – in vain – to issue consultative comments on a bill to amend the Danish Sale of Goods Act. It seems that product panels are attempting to bind the Danish EPA and the political system through panel participation. But if a product panel – probably through tough political negotiation and compromise – succeeds in issuing a joint set of consultative comments, does this mean that the political debate has shifted to an exclusive forum to which the individual parties are invited? The question is whether this type of consultation is particularly democratic. Furthermore, it is impossible to maintain an objective specifying that panel members who are negotiating comments do not generally bind their workplaces.
The general idea behind introducing product panels is to allow the panels, through mutually binding cooperation between players, to promote the development and sale of relatively cleaner products and test instruments in the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. This objective puts great weight on the implementation and development of the supply and demand sides of cleaner products. Yet implementing and developing an actual market for cleaner products depend on the existence of knowledge, tools and competence. The electronics and goods transport panels have had to work harder to build this foundation than has the textiles panel. Are the product panels a suitable concept for building a foundation and for developing and implementing a market? Or should the composition of panel members be adjusted to match the primary challenges of a product panel?
The distribution of interests is one obvious dilemma for the product panels. On the one hand, political and methodical aspects must be taken into account by involving all players in a product life cycle. In theory, everybody has a right to be involved in the process, and the product life cycle approach ensures optimum synergy and development in the interaction between all players. Moreover, several panel members point out that the broad representation of interests in the panels has triggered inspiring and many-sided discussions. At the same time, the broad internal distribution of interests in the panels has caused the surrounding world to regard the recommendations proposed by the individual product panels as reliable and to support these on a broad basis. On the other hand, the broad distribution of interests constitutes a procedural challenge since the many sides to an issue do not make it any easier to maintain focus and – ultimately – to reach a joint decision/strategy. The risk is that interests will conflict to an extent that prevents a panel from agreeing on anything or that forces a discussion to end in a useless consensus solution based on the lowest common denominator. Power of decision is an important question in this connection because the more individual power of decision an individual panel member has, the more likely a discussion is to result in negotiations and a more far-reaching compromise solution.
Respect for the environment A network of European business executives called Respect Table was established in 2000. Companies represented in this network include Ikea, British Telecom, Poseidon and Scandinavian Leisure Group. Unlike the more traditional part of the industry, these companies have drawn up an environmental action plan that reaches beyond the scope of the original Kyoto agreement. Respect Table has held several meetings with the EU environmental commissioner and also participated in the EU summit in Gothenburg in June 2001. In cooperation with the EU commissioner, Respect Table has submitted a draft action plan termed BLICC (Business Leaders’ Initiative on Climate Change). Respect Table was established on the initiative of Respect Europe, a network of European companies engaged in the social and ethnical areas. Respect Europe provides secretarial assistance to Respect Table and has also set up an internal information system that enables participating companies to share knowledge on a regular basis. Unlike product panels, Respect Table is made up of private enterprises only. Yet it is an exclusive club of front-runner companies having quickly gained significance in EU circles. Source: www.respecteurope.com |
The allocation of resources to product panels constitutes another dilemma.
According to many panel members, it can be difficult to allocate time and resources for
unpaid work in a product panel. NGO representatives, in particular, often have to make
clear-cut priorities when it comes to allocating scarce resources. Preoccupied as they
often are with the businesses that pay their salaries, the key players (decision makers)
in a product area find it difficult to spare both the time and efforts for a product
panel.
Under the current product panel concept, only secretarial duties are paid. Remunerating panel members would conflict with the Danish EPA’s underlying assumption that markets should really invest in these product panels themselves because the panels are likely to help place them at the forefront of future demand for environment-friendly products. Experience from the three product panels suggests, however, that no players other than the Danish EPA are likely to introduce and fund a product panel in any new product area. Instead, one or more key market players could take an initiative in establishing another type of organisation and member composition (see the example in the right-hand text box where a group of leading businesses in Europe set up a network whose task is meant to influence international environmental policy).
To some extent, these dilemmas are the starting point of the next section, which discusses whether adjustments are needed to the product panel concept. This section presents a number of recommendations for the future use of product panels.
5.3 Are adjustments needed?
Product panels are a good idea. Regulation and economic measures are not the only instruments. Denmark would never have seen a business and environmental success story in the wind turbine industry, had entrepreneurial business executives – in concert with authorities and other players in the area – not understood the necessity of putting words into action. All market players in a product life cycle have to be involved for Denmark to gain a competitive edge by becoming a leading country for cleaner products.
But just as regulation and economic measures are not the only keys to success, product panels do not necessarily represent the definitive Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative solution. The product panels can be but one element of this initiative. Previous experience suggests that several conditions must be met for the current product panel concept, based on the product life cycle approach, to be the optimum solution.
Above all, experience from the goods transport panel seems to show that product panels are best set up in areas whose product life cycles are clear. Implementing the product life cycle approach in the goods transport panel has been difficult. Goods transport is a service activity and functions as a market player in other product areas. Dealing with product life cycles in goods transport requires focusing on specific product areas or, alternatively, incorporating producers of transport means into product life cycles. In one project, the goods transport panel chose to focus on one product area (building and construction). Hence, this panel has been unable to develop as dynamic and strategic work processes addressing full product life cycles as those developed by the other two product panels. On the contrary, work in the goods transport panel seems to be concentrated on a relatively small group of dedicated panel members who have focused their attention on professional standards rather than strategic objectives. The 2001 action plan contains no overall objectives and appears to reflect a relatively low level of ambition in the panel.
The goods transport panel should not continue in its present form. It should be integrated into a product area where goods transport impacts heavily on the environment, or radical changes should be made in its composition. See section 5.3.2 below (Composition).
The success of product panels depends on the establishment of a clear strategy for selecting panel members to address the challenges existing in a given product area. In the electronics industry, the primary challenge has been to build a foundation of knowledge, tools and competence for the purpose of promoting the development and sale of cleaner electronics products. A technically and environmentally strong electronics panel is therefore needed. As a solid basis of knowledge, tools and competence already exists in the textiles industry, the textiles panel needs members with strong market focus in order to promote the sale of cleaner textiles in particular. Involving and engaging both front-runner companies and key decision makers, especially in the retail trade, in its work have been crucial to the textiles panel.
Against this background, the evaluators find that the present member composition of the electronics panel will make it difficult for the panel to lay down a more sales-oriented strategy once it has developed an adequate basis of knowledge, tools and competence. At the moment, the electronics panel has not yet internally developed any strategy for the use of eco-labels and/or environmental declarations, and apparently more front-runner companies and key decision makers need to be involved, for example from the retail trade, to initiate market development.
The activities of the electronics panel have also been characterised by too many balls in the air (current projects) at the same time. The question is whether the broad panel composition based on the product life cycle approach is appropriate when a product area widely needs to build a foundation of knowledge, tools and competence. Alternatively, industrial initiatives implemented by fewer players could mean more focused action. In theory, a product panel should benefit from the many aspects of a product life cycle, but the panel must first agree on a joint strategy. Later in the process, a product panel will, however, face the same challenge as the electronics panel because it will have to shift from a technical/environmental focus to a market focus.
According to the evaluators, a certain amount of knowledge, tools and competence must exist in a product area to establish a product panel based on the product life cycle approach. Product panels appear to be a particularly effective instrument for starting a process of implementing existing knowledge and tools on the assumption that the panel members have a market focus.
The following sections contain recommendations for adjustments to the product panel concept. Generally, the evaluators recommend that the Danish EPA continue to use product panels as a tool in the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. Yet adjustments are needed to streamline the concept, thus reducing the uncertainty surrounding objectives, framework requirements, obligations, etc. At the same time, experience can form the basis for establishing a framework for product panels that supports a better and more constructive work process.
5.3.1 Functions
The emergence of dialogue forums in the environmental area that strengthen the product life cycle approach in the market is a positive and important innovation. They are a key instrument in changing the attitudes of the market and all other related players. Traditionally, a conflict of interests has often plagued the relationship between environmental and business issues. Product panels are a symbol of and an instrument for promoting joint objectives for cleaner products.
However, efforts must be made to streamline the strategy concerning the functions to be performed by product panels as well as the Danish EPA’s expectations for their work. It is recommended that the panels keep the overall product panel objective of promoting the development and sale of cleaner products and of testing instruments in the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. However, the product panels should focus more sharply on implementing the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative and on boosting the supply side. This means that a product panel’s strategy should specify – on a point-by-point basis – how and when to establish a market for cleaner products. To meet these strategic initiatives, a string of activities and projects for building knowledge, methods and competence will probably have to be launched, but the ultimate goal of promoting the sale of cleaner of products should be clear.
In the implementation process, it is important to point out that product panels also function as a link between environmental authorities and the market. This does not mean that product panels should take over the environmental authorities’ information activities targeted at the market, but product panels are under an obligation to initiate systematised knowledge dissemination. A later section will elaborate on knowledge dissemination.
Product panels should not, however, have any separate functions relating to consultation on new legislation and the like. First, it would be inordinately time-consuming and probably impossible for a product panel to agree on a joint set of consultative comments. Second, it would undermine the democratic principles of public consultation if a key part of public debate on new legislation were to take place in an exclusive forum of interests chosen by the Danish EPA.
5.3.2 Composition
A pivotal factor in determining the activities of a product panel is its composition. It is therefore important that the Danish EPA continues to select members for the panels on a strategic basis. To ensure a reliable and well-balanced dialogue forum, the Danish EPA should retain the use of the product life cycle principle as a basic criterion for selecting product panel members.
Every new product area in which the Danish EPA wants to introduce specific initiatives should be subjected to an analysis of barriers and challenges to the development of a market for cleaner products (forming the basis for the composition of a product panel). This analysis must identify core players in the product area, including front-runner companies and other key market players, capable of taking the environmental lead in the industry. One reason for the good results achieved by the textiles panel is that it has succeeded in persuading front-runner companies and/or key market players from both the production side and the retail trade to sit on the panel.
The number of panel members should be 15 or 16 persons, thus ensuring a broad representation of interests without jeopardising the work process. At least half of a panel’s members should be representatives of private enterprises – preferably front-runner companies or other key market players – to ensure that focus remains on implementation and market development. Trade associations can aid in disseminating knowledge, but the individual companies will provide the most direct market effect. The remaining product panel members should be selected for the purpose of securing a broad representation of market players in product life cycles.
Above all, when selecting members for a product panel, the Danish EPA should look for key resource persons in the product area in question, preferably people possessing power of decision and environmental experience. If neither criteria can be met or the Danish EPA prefers to invite a company/organisation, then power of decision is more important that environmental competence. Although panel members should have no formal obligations towards their workplaces, thinking that they will act independently of their companies/organisations is unrealistic. Consequently, the individual panel members should possess a certain power of decision allowing more latitude in discussions and panel strategy preparations.
As far as possible, product panels should operate independently of the political system. They should do their utmost to implement the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative and should generally be uninvolved in the political process. This separation will be made clearest if the number of representatives from political organisations is kept down when members are selected for a product panel. This means that only one Danish EPA representative should sit on each product panel. The following section contains recommendations concerning the role of the Danish EPA.
5.3.3 Role of the Danish EPA
The role of the Danish EPA in the product panels’ previous activities has been unclear – not least to the Danish EPA’s own representatives. For the sake of everyone involved, the role of the Danish EPA should be clearly defined.
Realistically, however, the Danish EPA will never be able to play a role as an equal product panel member because the Agency is responsible for launching product panels, providing operating budgets and approving recommendations to fund new projects. Rather, each panel should have only one Danish EPA representative to act as a link and technical guarantor. The Danish EPA should be under an obligation to brief a product panel regularly on political developments relevant to the panel’s work. At the same time, the Danish EPA representative should be a technical guarantor/partner participating in technical discussions. On the other hand, the Danish EPA representatives should not participate in discussions about strategic objectives for the panel’s work if there are no technical reasons for such participation.
5.3.4 Chairman and secretary
Although combining chairmanship and secretarial duties apparently works satisfactorily in the electronics and goods transport panels, separating these duties is preferable. Two different persons are needed to perform the tasks and duties of these two jobs.
The chairman is a key person in the product panel and should:
| be a motivating and inspirational chairman of the panel’s discussions |
| be enterprising, results-oriented and dynamic for the purpose of keeping the process moving |
| possess technical and industry-specific knowledge |
| be able to develop compromises (not just the lowest common denominator) |
| be able to preside over discussions and negotiations from a neutral position (not be too influenced by self-interest) |
| be able to represent the panel |
The chairman will automatically put a lot of energy and time into a product panel. The chairman should support and cooperate with the secretary in drawing up draft action plans, project descriptions and the like. So it is only fair for the operating budget to allocate remuneration to the chairman in an amount that reflects his or her workload.
Selecting a suitable chairman on the basis of the many criteria is difficult, and it can be particularly hard to find a person with technical and industry-specific knowledge as well as a neutral background. Hence, the person performing all secretarial duties should be neutral. This ensures that the preparation of meeting minutes, draft action plans and the like is trustworthy. Furthermore, the secretary should play an active role during meetings and discussions when the mediation of a neutral person may be needed. As with the textiles panel, the secretary could be a consultant.
5.3.5 Action plan
Product panels should use their actions plans as a management tool. Since product panels meet only every two or three months, a fixed reference point is needed to maintain focus.
The content requirements for an action plan should be strict to provide product panels with a good management tool. It is recommended that a two-year/three-year action plan be drawn up, containing clear objectives that lay down how and when to establish a market for cleaner products. The action plan must set milestones for the fulfilment of these objectives. The chairman, the secretary and the Danish EPA should be responsible for ensuring that the objectives of the action plan are as clear and operational as possible.
An action plan must be supplemented with an activity plan that is updated on a regular basis. Finally, a strategy should be laid down for disseminating knowledge (see the following section).
5.3.6 Knowledge dissemination
Product panels should be under an obligation to act as a link between environmental authorities and the market. Product panels have not been introduced to serve a minor group of key market players, but to benefit an entire market. As a result, knowledge dissemination is an important element of the panels’ activities, and an independent strategy should be laid down for this area.
Product panels should use an institutionalised form of knowledge dissemination. At best, other product panels will follow the example of the textiles panel and establish knowledge centres to handle some of the panels’ knowledge dissemination work. Knowledge centres will not necessarily be needed in all product areas, so they represent an initiative to be taken by the individual product panel or the individual market player. Knowledge centres or regional competence centres capable of fulfilling this role already exist.10 Instead, the Danish EPA should consider supporting the product panels in using the great opportunities inherent in the Internet for disseminating knowledge.
5.3.7 Organisation
It should generally be up to a product panel to organise its own meeting activities as it sees fit. Offhand, it seems a good idea for product panels to start, at some point during the process, decentralising the technical and detailed discussions of well-defined issues/projects to set up work groups. This would allow panel members to join the work groups in which they have a particular interest and to which they have particular resources to contribute. New members could regularly join these work groups, which would serve to involve more market players in a product panel’s work.
5.3.8 Funding
Experience from the three product panels in the areas of electronics, textiles and goods transport shows that the operating budget is crucial to the activities of a product panel. It seems unlikely that a product panel can exist and operate with the sole support of the Danish EPA.
The Danish EPA has a very high "rate of return" on the small amount of funds invested in product panels. A group of market players put in a good many hours of work in a product panel. It is recommended that the operating budget be adjusted to include funds for remunerating both the chairman and the secretary. Furthermore, the operating budget should allocate funds for Internet-based information initiatives.
Remunerating individual or all panel members for hours spent on panel activities, etc., is considered unnecessary. No evidence seems to support the fact that remuneration will improve a panel’s results. A lack of resources is not one of the primary barriers to a product panel’s work.
5.3.9 Summary of recommendations
Table 5.1 summarises recommendations for adjusting the product panel concept:
Table 5.1:
Recommendations for product panel concept adjustments
General recommendations |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Functions |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Composition |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Role of the Danish EPA |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Chairman and secretary |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Action plan |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Knowledge dissemination |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Organisation |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Funding |
||||||||
|
5.3.10 Product panels and the EU's Integrated Product Policy (IPP)
The European Commission is about to introduce a new environmental-policy concept, Integrated Product Policy (IPP), which largely resembles the Product-Oriented Environmental Initiative. The Commission has released a green paper on IPP, suggesting initiatives in three areas:
| The environmental impacts of products should be reflected in prices to a higher degree than is currently the case. |
| Consumers should be encouraged to buy cleaner products. |
| Producers should be encouraged to manufacture cleaner products. |
The green paper lists a number of instruments under each target area, singling out product panels – on the basis of Danish experience – as one solution to integrating and involving market players in IPP.11
The Danish textiles panel has submitted its comments on the green paper to the European Commission, presenting experience gained from the Danish product panel concept. The textiles panel also includes its recommendations for establishing product panels at European levels. Among other things, the panel stresses that it is important that environmental authorities support product panels; that product panels number players who are both dedicated and legally competent to transact business; that attention be focused on knowledge dissemination; and that product panels be able to draw on the services of a secretariat.
Undoubtedly, the EU can benefit from Denmark’s experience in introducing product panels as an environmental tool. At European levels, many problems will resemble those faced by the Danish product panels. Involving front-runner companies and other key market players capable of influencing a market for cleaner products on a large (geographical) scale and with great effect will probably be more crucial to the product panels’ dynamics at European levels than in Denmark. At the same time, it is becoming even more important to ensure efficient dissemination of knowledge, spreading to the entire European market.
The Danish product panels can submit an application for representation in European cooperation forums if product panels are set up in the same product areas as in Denmark. Formalised cooperation at European levels could strengthen the Danish product panels’ work simply because environmental legislation is increasingly being defined in EU forums and product life cycles are in many cases international. Finally, the European eco-label, the EU flower, is an important factor in environmental initiatives, and the criteria for using this eco-label are negotiated and defined at European levels.
If the Danish product panels fail to achieve representation in new European product panels, international contacts will still need to be cultivated so that Denmark can become an integral part of networks and knowledge dissemination. The electronics panel has been especially active in establishing international contacts in this regard.
| 8 | For example, key market players have large market shares,
thus possessing a dominant position. In the consumer non-durables industry, the two
purchasing managers of FDB and Dansk Supermarked represent about two thirds of total trade
in non-durables. |
| 9 | In this context, a front-runner company is a company choosing
to lead the way, for example by marketing itself as a manufacturer of environment-friendly
products. |
| 10 | Danish Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs:
"Regional Erhvervspolitisk Redegørelse .reg21", 2001. |
| 11 | European Commission: "Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy", 2001. |