From
Helsinki to GothenborgEvaluation of environmental integration in the European Union
Study commissioned by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Environment and Water Management
Here you find the different parts of the study:
"From Helsinki to Gothenborg" - Main Study
Since the reform of the Amsterdam Treaty environmental protection requirements are supposed to be integrated in other EU policy fields. Thus the EU aims at balancing social, economic and ecological objectives of the Community with regard to the principle of sustainable development.
In the follow-up of the Austrian EU Presidency (1998), the study "From Vienna to Helsinki", conducted by the Wuppertal Institute , outlined environmental policy requirements for the integration process with regard to the Finish EU Presidency (1999). Since then the dynamics of the environmental integration process has significantly increased with the issuing of various sectoral integration strategies. Therefore, the Austrian Ministry for Environment charged the Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI) with the study "From Helsinki to Gothenburg".
The study "From Helsinki to Gothenburg" comprises 4 dossiers: a general part and the evaluations of integration strategies and reports for
- the Single Market;
- Transport and
- Energy.
First, the general part outlines the integration process with special emphasis on the legal foundations and the existing Council decisions. After that criteria for evaluating the three sectoral strategies are explained in detail. The sector integration strategies and reports of the Council of Ministers are evaluated with regard to the following content:
1.
political strategy;
2. indicators;
3. reporting mechanisms;
4. time-tables.
SERI concludes that policy coherence and cross-sectoral evaluation of the strategies can only be achieved, if all strategies, targets and reporting mechanisms address the same problems. Thematic headlines should summarise policy objectives of the Community. The achievement of these objectives should be measurable, intelligible and comparable from the micro level (enterprises and households) to the macro level (Member States or the Community).
The
three evaluations make very different impressions. As the Commission has
already stated in an interim evaluation, the progress in sectorial integration
is uneven.
So far all evaluated Councils have only taken first steps towards the implementation of the European Council's decisions.
Only a thorough analysis of the institutional and procedural implementation of the Council decisions could corroborate this statement in individual cases. But the proceedings of several Council meetings and, above all, the content of the integration papers submitted to the European Council indicate that the decisions of the European Heads of State have been treated rather negligent.
"From Helsinki to Gothenburg" thus confirms the analysis of the preceding study "From Vienna to Helsinki": A clear understanding concerning the contents and goals of sustainable development, which should have been catalysed by the integration process, is still missing. In particular a lack of a political discourse on obliging targets and indicators could be observed. Such a debate on policy objectives would be precondition for a political strategy, which so far is underdeveloped in all analysed Councils. In this situation the Prodi-group on "growth, competitiveness, employment and sustainable development" could play an important role. In the context of the EU sustainable development strategy Prodi and the Commissioners could initiate processes and institutions for a comprehensive political discourse on economic, social and ecological objectives of sustainability in the European Union.
In general
all participating institutions on the European level as well as in the
Member States should be urged to implement the decisions of the European
Council. To ensure that the environmental integration process shows real
effects after Gothenburg, the Council and the Commission should develop
a perspective on the Helsinki presidential conclusions, which foresee
"immediate implementation" of the strategies. SERI suggests
instruments for the requested "regular evaluation, follow-up and
monitoring" and describes how "adequate instruments and applicable
data for these purposes" could be established.
"From Helsinki to Gothenborg" - Internal Market
The internal market is one of the core areas of the European Union. Its main focus is the establishment, adopted in the Single European Act of 1986, of an economic area without internal borders in which the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital (i.e. the "four freedoms") is ensured. These freedoms are put into concrete terms (and restricted) in numerous legal provisions - ranging from the harmonisation of legislation to public procurement and issues of world trade. Additionally, the report presented by the Internal Market Council discusses a series of measures for which other council formations are actually responsible. The agenda of the Internal Market Council, thus, comprises highly diverse policy areas. On the one hand, this is advantageous since the Internal Market Council has always had numerous cross-cutting tasks of relevance to the environment. On the other hand, the complexity of these tasks could make it more difficult to develop a coherent overall strategy for the integration of environmental aspects into this policy area. Hence, the field of activities of one sectoral council already gives rise to a problem that is inevitable in a global view of all relevant Council activities: the integration of the integration processes.
The report presented by the Internal Market Council (Doc. 13622/99) itself states: "It should be stressed that this report represents only the beginning of the integration process …" It presents first steps in the ongoing work of developing a comprehensive strategy that should identify objectives, timetables and indicators in the course of time (Paragraph 3). Except for the fields of harmonisation and standardisation, the report is very general. On the whole, it does not go beyond a mere listing of tasks and activities relevant to integration, without pointing out the way in which integration could actually be achieved in this field.
From a one-sided point of view of trade liberalism, the consideration of environmental aspects (differing legislation) impedes the practical application of the four freedoms. In this context, the detailed report of the Council (15 pages) points out that there was general agreement that "there is not necessarily a conflict between a high level of environmental protection and free movements of goods and services" (Paragraph 11). This implies that problems may and did already arise. The report, however, does not describe any of these potential/actual conflicts. Furthermore, it does not specify any criteria to be used in case of conflicts on the way towards integration. Likewise, it does not elaborate on synergies that could be realised and promoted ("positive efforts should be made to develop synergies between the two principles" (Paragraph 12)). This would require an appropriate new understanding of the relation between ecology and economy ("systemic competitiveness"), which can not be perceived in the report.
The EU's internal market policy has both internal and external aspects. The report includes detailed information on the relations to WTO, Kyoto, Eastern enlargement, the Euro-Mediterranean partnership and co-operation in the Baltic Sea Region. However, the reader gets the impression that these aspects (under "Points of departure") are rather identified as a framework and not as areas in which environmental integration has to be taken into account with a view to a comprehensive sustainability assessment.
The (horizontal) relation to other integration processes is merely mentioned. A multi-facetted approach is necessary, and the efforts in the different sectors have to be co-ordinated; however, the report does not even include hints on how this could be done. Concrete forms of possible co-ordination, for example in the field of transport or energy, are not mentioned, while reference is made to the subsidiarity principle. But precisely in this area, a higher level of detail would be helpful for identifying synergies and avoiding conflicts between the needs of environmental protection and those of the internal market.
In several places, you cannot help feeling that a potential restriction of the "four freedoms" (being essential requirements of the functioning of the internal market) are considered to be less severe than possible restrictions of environmental protection - even though this is not stated explicitly.
With regard to the essential criteria of an integration policy, we can note that no concrete statements are made on the assessment of the environmental impact of major policy initiatives. Accordingly, possible mechanisms for institutionalising such assessments are not dealt with either. The policy strategy is insufficient, and timetables are lacking. Only the fields of indicators and progress evaluation are given more room in the strategy.
Therefore,
we propose the definition of objectives in line with the "headlines"
developed by us for practically all areas falling under the responsibility
of the Internal Market Council. Measures in the field of standardisation,
public procurement and macro-economic policy strategies to promote competition
should be systematically orientated to these objectives.
"From Helsinki to Gothenborg" - Energy
The energy sector plays a key role in the transition to sustainable development. Many of the most pressing ecological problems can be attributed directly or indirectly to the high energy consumption in the EU countries, in particular the climate problem. Previous efforts in this filed - in most cases technological solutions for making energy generation cleaner and more efficient - usually have been outweighed by rises in total energy consumption. The most common alternative, i.e. higher energy prices, meets with increasing resistance from consumers and entrepreneurs unless it is complemented by additional measures.
In the course of the discussion on the ecological re-orientation of the energy industry, however, numerous approaches have been developed for overcoming the alleged conflict between ecological, economic and social requirements. A central element of many strategies is a focus on energy needs. Consumers do not demand electricity as such, but the services linked thereto, for example well lit and heated rooms. If we consider it the task of the energy sector to meet these needs and not to supply energy, higher energy prices and strategies for raising energy efficiency can also be designed in a way that is economically and socially acceptable. The objective of those strategies is the de-coupling of energy production - and the related environmental pressures - from economic growth: more prosperity is to be achieved while energy consumption and environmental effects decrease.
Upon the adoption of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1999 at the latest, the European Union defined the objective of integrating environmental issues into the planning and implementation of the individual sectoral policies. The Energy Council was one of the first three Councils invited to develop "comprehensive strategies [for environmental integration] …, including a timetable for further measures and a set of indicators."
But the strategy submitted by the Energy Council to the European Council of Helsinki (Doc. 13773/99) hardly includes initiatives going beyond "business as usual". It rather is a summary of ongoing actions combined with a confirmation that they will be continued. This is justified by the statement that social and ecological aspects have already been taken into account in the existing objectives of energy policy, i.e. security of supply, competitiveness and environmental protection.
The ecological concepts and headlines of energy policy itself are not adequately specified.
In the ecological field, the "protection of the environment" is identified as an objective. This is further specified by the two objectives of higher energy efficiency and an increased share of renewable energy sources. Concrete targets identified for the ecological field, however, only include those resulting from programmes already adopted and from the reduction obligations of the Kyoto Protocol.
The vagueness of the objectives is also reflected in the selection of indicators proposed: social indicators are completely lacking, and ecological indicators are limited to the emission of greenhouse gases, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
Since the ecological objectives are not adequately specified, an assessment of potential synergies and conflicting objectives is missing, too. For example, the report does not evaluate the ecological impact of the establishment of the internal energy market (and the price reductions related thereto).
Approaches for the strategy's horizontal integration also remain unspecific. In this context, the Council refers to the contribution to environmental integration made by other Council formations, such as Transport, Industry and Agriculture, without identifying any measures for co-ordinating the relevant policies.
It is only vertical integration that is mentioned explicitly: the approaches identified range from the co-ordination of activities at a national level and regional co-operation projects to initiatives at the level of individual enterprises and associations and to the role of the consumers. Unfortunately, the strategy only contains general statements also in this context, while concrete measures are lacking. The Commission's proposal of inviting the Member States to develop their own strategies (COM 98(571)) is toned down by the report only in a statement to the effect that the actions of the Council should complement the measures taken at the level of the Member States. This all the more deplorable because energy policy is largely defined by the Member States. Therefore, the Council can significantly influence developments only by suggesting initiatives by the Member States and by promoting an exchange of experiences about them.
With regard to instruments selected, the Council basically confines itself to existing programmes for raising energy efficiency and the utilisation of renewable energy sources. Possible approaches for deepening the strategy (e.g. development of sustainable consumption patterns) are only identified, but not described in greater detail.
The strategy of the Energy Council includes a bi-annual evaluation in order to monitor the progress made. In this context, the Council should, if necessary, modify the existing strategy based on reports presented by the Commission.
A "timetable for further measures", as requested by the European Council of Vienna, is not included in the strategy. Instead, the report only states that ongoing activities will be continued in accordance with the timetables of the relevant programmes and directives. Moreover, the strategy contains concrete measures only for the period up to 2002, which is much too short for achieving far-reaching changes. In particular in the capital-intensive energy sector, a future-oriented strategy must cover a period of several decades. Such a long-term perspective, however, is not included in the strategy presented. It is obvious that the strategy will have to be extended for the time after 2002 (which the Council also plans to do).
In
this and other respects, the report lags far behind the Commission's strategy
paper on "Strengthening environmental integration within Community
energy policy" (COM 98(571)), both with regard to the import of the
approach and the specificity of measures. Even though the report considers
the Commission's Communication to be a useful basis of an integration
strategy, it obviously does not share the Commission's opinion that environmental
integration cannot be achieved without a re-orientation of energy policy
and that, therefore, "business as usual" no longer is a viable
alternative.
Summary and recommendations
Thus, the Energy Council only inadequately responds to the request made by the European Council of Vienna to develop "comprehensive strategies …, including a timetable for further measures and a set of indicators". Above all, there is a lack of clarity about the objectives of sustainable energy policy. As a result, the individual measures are largely isolated as they are not related to an overall objective.
Therefore, the deepening and further development of the strategy will mainly have to focus on rendering the ecological and social objectives more clear and on deriving quantified targets and appropriate instruments.
Special attention should be given to absolute reduction targets and measures related to them in order to complement the existing instruments and programmes that only refer to increased efficiency in energy generation and consumption. Moreover, these absolute reduction targets should be combined with a few, expressive indicators; an example for this approach is the set of six headline indicators recommended in the study "From Vienna to Helsinki" (GÖRLACH ET AL. 1999).
As is stated by the Commission, the capital-intensive energy system is part of the economic infrastructure and can only changed in the course of time. Therefore, a detailed timetable will become even more important, but it should cover a significantly longer period than today's three years.
Since
some of these views are also shared by the Commission it is to be expected
that they will be clearly reflected in the strategy review that will be
presented by the Commission to the Council as requested in the autumn
of this year.
"From Helsinki to Gothenborg" - Transport
Due to the strong relation between traffic volume and environmental pollution, the current transport increase is not sustainable. Since a de-coupling of traffic volume and environmental pollution cannot be expected for the future (in particular with regard to CO2 emissions), the great challenge of sustainable transport policy will be to achieve the de-coupling of economic growth and traffic growth. In the transport integration strategy, de-coupling is identified as an objective of sustainable transport policy, which is to be welcomed.
Nevertheless, the transport integration strategy presented in Helsinki lacks essential elements required for a strategy.
For example, the objective of de-coupling is only reflected cautiously in the integration strategy's part dealing with problem analysis and instruments. This is easy to understand since de-coupling is a complete reversal in transport (economic) policy that has been oriented to growth so far.
An in-depth problem analysis reveals two aspects characterising the relation between economic growth, transport and the environment:
1. Economic growth and traffic growth are almost directly proportional, i.e. when the economy grows by 2%, transport also increases by 2% (European Commission 2000; see also the table in Chapter 5). This connection has been neglected in transport policy to date.
2. The de-coupling of transport growth and environmental pollution, however, has almost been the sole focus of previous environment-related transport policy (or transport-related environmental policy). But this strategy, which is mainly based on technological measures (eco-efficiency), only succeeded in part. It was only successful in the field of acidification, i.e. SO2 and NOx emissions have been de-coupled in absolute terms. The remaining transport-related environmental problems (greenhouse effect, energy consumption and land use) still are directly proportional to traffic increase.
The measures identified in the strategy - which, by the way, constitute more or less a continuation of previous policy and are little specific - unfortunately do not reflect a distribution of priorities corresponding to these two objectives. A closer look shows that only a minor part of the measures identified aims at tackling the first problem, i.e. at a reduction of transport increase. Eventually, efforts and resources should at least be equally focused on both problem areas.
Moreover, it is unclear how effective the measures proposed will be with regard to achieving the objectives. We also have to assume that the impact of the measures proposed here will be severely reduced by other policies (lack of consistence). Mention also has to be made of the continual expansion of transport infrastructure, which intensifies transport growth (cf. Hinterberger et al. 2000).
The integration strategy does not contain quantitative objectives nor timetables for achieving the objectives. This applies both to unsustainable transport growth and to the reduction of traffic-induced environmental problems. In this context, sectoral targets will have to be defined for the most important environmental problems (headlines) in co-ordination with other sectors.
In summary, the integration strategy in the field of transport will require more specificity with regard to possible measures and an implementation plan including objectives, deadlines and clear responsibilities.