The European Eco-labelling Board Marketing Management Group 26 September 2005, 14:00 17:30 Draft Minutes Participants Link Inc (Belgian Aendekerk Veerle Consultancy) veerle.aendekerk@linkinc.be Michielssen Jill EC +3222961557 jill.michielssen@cec.eu.intt DANIEL Nathalie Belgian Ministry of Environment +32 2 524 95 56 nathalie.daniel@health.fgov.be ATAUGA Rasa Latvian Environmental Agency +37 1 70 84 282 rasa.atauga@lva.gov.lv FRISENBORG Lisbeth Ecolabelling Denmark +45 72 300 450 lif@ecolabel.dk MAZZON Antonio Competent Body Italy +393356493276 amazzon@kadmos.com BUCHELE Martin BMLFUW +43 1 51522 1625 martin.buechele@lebensministeriu m.at KUODYTE Maryte Lithuanian Environmental +370 85 266 28 25 m.kuodyte@aaa.am.lt Protection Agency TKACZYK Joanna Polish Centre for Testing and Certification +48 22 46 45 208 joanna.tkaczyk@pcbc.gov.pl SAHLEN Kerstin SIS Ecolabelling +46 8 5555 2406 kerstin.sahlen@sismab.be DOLLEY Phil AEAT +44 870 190 6457 phil.dolley@aeat.co.uk PROIA Patricia AFNOR Certification +33 1 41 62 86 10 patricia.proia@afnor.fr COX Charles Defra +44 207 082 8672 charles.cox@defra.gsi.gov.uk MORCH ANDERSEN Soren Danish EPA +45 326 60 403 san@mst.dk B. ESKELAND Marianne Ecolabelling Norway +47 22 36 57 45 marianne.b.eskeland@ecolabel.no FLEUR Maaike Stichting Milieukeur +31 70 35 86 300 mfleur@milieukeur.nl KOPAC Samo Slovenian Ministry of Environment +386 1 478 7302 Samo.Kopac@gov.sl MINESTRINI Stefania APAT +390650072231 minestrini@apat.it VON DER KAMP Lonneke Beco Group +31 10 2985263 kamp@beco.nl KEESMAN Bert Beco Group +31 10 2985260 keesman@beco.nl DES ABBAYES Cécile BIO Intelligence Service / +33 1 56 20 28 98 ecolabel@biois.com Helpdesk HERMITE Corentine BIO Intelligence Service / +33 1 56 20 28 98 ecolabel@biois.com Helpdesk KOUTROUMANI Athina CE DG ENV +32 2 299 0134 athina.koutroumani@cec.eu.int
The Chair opened the meeting and the agenda was adopted. Adoption of May minutes May 2005 MMG minutes were adopted without changes. Presentation of the results of a marketing strategy for the development of the number of eco-labelled products in four sectors in Belgium Ms Veerle Aendekerk from Link Inc communicatie-advies bureau presented the results of the study of the implementation of a marketing strategy in Belgium towards producers for textiles, indoor paints and varnishes, tourist accommodation service, and tissue paper product groups. The recommendations to the Belgian CB were to nominate a person in authority to propagate the EU Eco-label, elaborate a marketing strategy towards potential license holders, and establish a counter for multinational enterprises. This presentation can be downloaded on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/marketing/managementgroups_en.htm France pointed out that federations were against the eco-label but it is not necessary to work with them. For example France works with the purchasers and retailers who then ask their suppliers for eco-labelled products. Ms Veerle Aendekerk agrees that this can happen (example of Delhaize and Colruyt) but it is not true for small companies that do not supply directly the distributors so there is still the need to promote the eco-label among producers. On the lack of a global European marketing approach by big international groups pointed out by the Belgian study, APAT mentioned the example of Carrefour which was contacted for the Flower Week in Italy and in France but whose answer was up to the manager in each country and therefore could vary. The situation is different for tourist accommodations where the manager of each structure or hotel takes the decision. Ms Veerle Aendekerk answered that it is important to bring people together at the same time or at least do a follow-up of contacts in the different countries. APAT asked what was meant by mentioning the need of a person to propagate the eco-label. Ms Veerle Aendekerk thinks that it is important at a national level to have a person of authority that the people know, such as a Minister, publicly support the eco-label. She added that the marketing effort towards retailers should begin at the European level. For example a meeting with retailers should be organised at EU level with a person from the EC as part of the implementation of the European marketing strategy. Ms Veerle Aendekerk added that even the Flower Week was actually an activity at a national level. France is not sure that this is a good solution because retailers are very busy so it would be difficult to organise a meeting. The contact should therefore be made at a national level where it is easier to meet them often and send information to them. Ms Veerle Aendekerk answered that it depends on the country and mentioned the example of Akzo Nobel who does not have eco-labelled products in Belgium but proposes them in Sweden. She added that C&A has a European strategy and does not think at a local level.
The Commission said that the Flower marketing strategy towards retailers as drawn by the MMG has to be implemented on a national level according to the particular needs and facts of every MS. With respect to actions at EU level, the Helpdesk had a meeting and a presentation to the with Eurocommerce members assembly, but follow-up with retailers has also to be done at national level. GPP presentation Jill Michielssen of the European Commission made a presentation on eco-labels and green public procurement (GPP), explaining the policy background of GPP, the direct links with eco-labelling and how it can work in practical terms. The future plans for promotion of GPP were also presented with a focus on the joint promotion of EU Eco-label in GPP. For more information check http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/gpp/ or ask for the handbook. The Chair said that eco-label criteria is very useful for GPP when setting the criteria for the tender so there is an opportunity to link eco-label and GPP. Norway asked if the EC used GPP when buying products. Jill Michielssen answered that some General Directorates of the Commission have been running a pilot project to implement EMAS. It is expected to be extended to the Commission as a whole. In this context, one important policy measure under EMAS was green purchasing and use of eco-label criteria where appropriate. The Commission said that GPP is an important pillar of the Flower marketing strategy. The preliminary results of the interviews carried out under the EVER evaluation study, show that producers expect significant competitive rewards deriving from strong presence of the Flower in GPP. Flower recognition by public purchasers is also perceived by manufacturers as a crucial marketing target. So it is important to strengthen the presence of the Flower in GPP and to coordinate actions done at national level. Actions are already on-going by the EC and also scheduled and implemented by the Helpdesk in 2005. The marketing plan for joint promotion of EU eco-label in national GPP shall be addressed from the MMG in view of drawing the marketing strategy for 2006. The United Kingdom mentioned that one of the feed-back that they get is the confusion due to the different eco-labels that exist. If a company has one type of eco-label, does it satisfy to all GPPs? What are the public requirements? Jill Michielssen said that there are no public requirements and it is up to each contracting authority to choose the eco-label criteria it is going to use in its tender documents, whilst respecting the conditions set forth in the public procurement directives. Once chosen the right criteria, the contracting authority can recognize the corresponding eco-label as proof of compliance, whilst also always mentioning that will be accepted equivalent ways of proving compliance with the eco-label criteria used. Austria said that it is important to clarify that in GPP you cannot ask for an eco-labelled product but only use the criteria in the tender. It is important to promote the EU eco-label so that the EU criteria are used. Norway started an investigation on how eco-label criteria are used in GPP. Norway was able to inform quite extensively thanks to the handbook. The results show that the criteria are starting to be used even for smaller orders that are under the limit above which a tender is necessary. For example, out of 58 tenders for textile products, 25 had used the criteria. Jill Michielssen agreed that contracting authorities have fewer legal constraints in the framework of public procurement contracts whose value is under the threshold of the public procurement directives, but that the core principles on o non-discrimination, equal treatment and transparency of specifications still apply on the basis of the general Treaty principles.
Slovenia asked if the brochure handbook was already available in all languages. Jill Michielssen answered that she only has 300 copies for the time being but it is possible to get more if you ask her. Some languages are not printed out yet but it is in process. They are all available on the website though and can be downloaded from http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/gpp/guidelines.htm#handbook. Marketing strategy for 2006 and Flower Week 2006 The Chair said that they received the marketing plans from only eight countries and asked what the others would be doing. The Chair pointed out that it is quite difficult to do a unique European strategy since all member states do not need the same type of actions. Actions will take place therefore at national level with European coordination. It was decided that the Flower week 2006 will take place on the 2 nd week of October. Austria stated that since it is at national level, the actions do not need to be carried out at the same time in all member states. APAT explained that if all actions are the same week it is better for the media review. Austria asked what resources will be available and pointed out that the concept in 2004 was joint promotion. There are activities going on but not in this framework. APAT asked if it would not be useful to coordinate all the activities. Austria said not to feel the need for coordination at European level since the activities planned are national. APAT clarified what was meant by coordination at European level saying that the actions would be carried out at the same time with common visible material and communication on the various initiatives. APAT added that consumers and applicants are more impressed by efforts made in promotion activities. The Chair mentioned the European Mobility Week as an example. France agreed with the synergies about advertising the same week but points out that the date must be decided by the end of 2005. APAT answered that the date and the printed material needed for the Flower week should be decided during the meeting. France said that it would be good to use the same type of tools as for the last Flower week and France will continue promotion with retailers mentioning that more retailers will participate in 2006 than in the Flower Week 2004 (Carrefour, Auchan). Freedom of choice for graphics and material would be preferable to them. The United Kingdom said that promotion is important even if there are barriers linked to the interim report of EVER. If there is a Flower Week next year, the campaign should adjust to the EVER study and focus on certain aspects especially since manufacturers have started to read it since it is available on the website. The Commission answered that the results of the evaluation study will be important for the review of the Scheme. It is important to remain dedicated to the goal of increasing Flower awareness and to engage in developing and implementing a Flower marketing strategy on a national level.
The Chair asked what economic resources will be available. France has 75 000 this year and next year for NF-Environnement and the Flower. Italy said that maybe the CBs needed more support from the Commission apart from brochures. The Commission answered that some support will be provided. For example, the Helpdesk marketing activities will include coordination for the Flower Week 2006. AEAT asked what should be the priority between GPP, consumers and retailers since there is not enough time and budget to do all. APAT answered that the same kind of activities as last time should be carried out, each country choosing according to its budget. Poland mentioned the European Quality Week saying that it would be nice to do the same for the Flower. In Poland quality and eco-label events are coordinated. There is one planned for November. Poland plans to use leaflets for all product groups and flags and do the same again next year. Poland suggested having posters that could be used in all Member States as well as articles prepared by the MMG for the media. Denmark asked what next year s budget is and remarked that some countries do not need leaflets so it would be better, if possible, to allocate the money for other marketing linked projects or to the new Member States where the EU eco-label is less known. Denmark added that they would need a 5 million TV campaign because they already reach 20% of the population and it is the only way to make substantial progress at this stage but they are aware that it is not possible so the question is: What is the target of the campaign? In Europe, how can the most people be reached at less cost? The Commission said that summing up the CB responses received so far, the target product groups would be the most successful and the most promising ones per country. The campaign reaches out to consumers, while involving retailers and manufacturers. CBs will have to draw their marketing plan and decide on specific marketing activities. The EC marketing budget for 2005 covered the Helpdesk, the marketing contracts for services and products, and the update of the consumer infokit. APAT said that the actions that will be undertaken depend on the resources of the CBs. APAT added that direct contact is very good as they have seen in their school and store activities. The United Kingdom added that the EC s trade fairs programme is very good for licensees because it is a direct contact. Latvia thinks that the translation of the brochures is a good idea and will use them for the Flower Week. Norway remarked that money is the key and to obtain more resources the two options are either to get more money from the ministries or to raise the fees. Norway also pointed out that their budget was 400 000 for the Nordic Swan and only 250 000 for the EU eco-label. Belgium said that it is difficult to give an answer now for the Flower Week because, contrary to the LIFE project last time, next year s budget is not known and they do not know if they will have sufficient material to carry out the activities. APAT repeated that each CB had to count on his own budget. Even if only one action is carried out, it is still worthwhile to implement it together the same week. The Commission said that support in coordination of activities at EU level and some material production is being planned, according to the information received by the CBs.
Market penetration measuring methodology and reporting mechanisms, MMG suggestions to the EUEB (update from last MMG meeting) APAT introduced briefly the discussion paper Proposal for the definition of market penetration indicators concerning the methodology and reporting mechanism for market penetration and asked CBs to check the availability of statistics in their country in particular on data concerning the number of products sold according to different product groups (i.e. the number of footwear products sold in 2003 in the country). Comments on the feasibility of the proposed indicators are expected at next MMG meeting. The Commission said that in the next meeting the CBs are requested to make suggestions on the already existing indicators and on their experience/problems encountered so far with them. Problems of consistency of reporting units within the product groups and between the years are addressed when working on the yearly statistics. France mentioned that they use a turnover of the products but they cannot find the number of items sold. APAT asked CBs to verify with license holders the feasibility of the parameters. Presentation of a web based tool for potential textile applicants prepared under a NL marketing project BECO, a Dutch consultancy, presented the tool that they developed to facilitate a quick compliance test with the criteria for the textile product group. The tool provides general information about the EU Eco-label, enables a potential applicant to check if a particular product is eligible or not, and develops a list of necessary actions and forms required in order to apply for the EU Eco-label for textiles. A demonstration of the tool was made. The tool is available in English, currently on: http://web.beco.nl/ecolabels/flowertest.html and will soon be added to the eco-label website on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/product/applications.htm MMG members thought that it was a useful tool. The Netherlands explained that several textile applicants do not really understand the criteria. The Chair asked if the tool confirms whether a textile article can obtain the Flower. The Netherlands answered that the tool gives the links to the documents that you need to apply and the CB makes the evaluation. France asked if the tool was available in other languages. BECO answered that it is only available in English. This presentation can be downloaded on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/marketing/managementgroups_en.htm Any other business Award certficate
A version of the common Eco-label certificate was presented. It was decided to take out the word quality and the addition of the word the Flower was suggested. Discussions were on the addition of the CB logo with Slovenia having to check with its authorities if it is ok, the fact that the award is an official document or not. A new set of propositions including different options will be made for next MMG meeting where a final decision will be taken. E-mail news alert The Helpdesk suggested starting to send in 2006 a monthly news alert by mail to holders because they feel that they are not informed enough. This suggestion was approved by the MMG members. The Chair closed the meeting.
Follow-up: Task Actor Deadline Minutes Helpdesk For next meeting Prepare the next meeting Chair, Helpdesk, EC For next meeting Circulate the Excel file detailing the CBs For 1 November Flower Week marketing activities for 2006 scheduled in every MS and complete it Final proposal for a common award Chair and Helpdesk For next meeting certificate for a final agreement Availability of statistics on the CBs For next meeting indicators suggested in the discussion paper Problems with the existing indicators, suggestions for improvement CBs For next meeting