05 2011 Resource Efficiency in Europe

7/31/2019 05 2011 Resource Efficiency in Europe

1/84

EEA Report No 5/2011

ISSN 1725-9177

Resource efficiency in Europe

Policies and approaches in 31 EEA member and cooperating countries


2/84


3/84

EEA Report No 5/2011


Policies and approaches in 31 EEA member and cooperating countries


4/84

Cover design: EEACover illustrations EEALeft photo EEARight photo EEALayout: EEA/Pia Schmidt

European Environment AgencyKongens Nytorv 61050 Copenhagen K

DenmarkTel.: +45 33 36 71 00Fax: +45 33 36 71 99Web: eea.europa.euEnquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries

REG.NO.DK-000244

Legal noticeThe contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commissionor other institutions of the European Union. Neither the European Environment Agency nor any person orcompany acting on behalf of the Agency is responsible for the use that may be made of the informationcontained in this report.

Copyright notice EEA, Copenhagen, 2011Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated.

Information about the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa

server (www.europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2011

ISBN 978-92-9213-225-5ISSN 1725-9177doi:10.2800/81065

EEA, Copenhagen, 2011

Environmental productionThis publication is printed according to high environmental standards.

Printed by Schultz Grafisk Environmental Management Certificate: DS/EN ISO 14001:2004

Quality Certificate: ISO 9001: 2008 EMAS Registration. Licence no. DK 000235 Ecolabelling with the Nordic Swan, licence no. 541 176

PaperReprint Delux 90 gsm.CyclusOffset 250 gsm.

Printed in Denmark
http://www.eea.europa.eu/http://www.eea.europa.eu/enquirieshttp://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/schmidt/Local%20Settings/Application%20Data/Adobe/InDesign/Version%207.0/en_GB/Caches/InDesign%20ClipboardScrap1.pdfhttp://c/Documents%20and%20Settings/schmidt/Local%20Settings/Application%20Data/Adobe/InDesign/Version%207.0/en_GB/Caches/InDesign%20ClipboardScrap1.pdfhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/enquirieshttp://www.eea.europa.eu/


5/843

Contents


Contents

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 5

Executive summary .................................................................................................... 8

1 Background and scope of work .......................................................................... 13

2 Definitions of 'resources' and 'resource efficiency' ............................................ 16

3 Resource efficiency in economy-wide strategies or action plans ........................ 18

4 Resource efficiency in sectoral policies .............................................................. 21

5 Product-oriented resource efficiency initiatives ................................................. 26

6 Priority resources .............................................................................................. 28

7 Strategic objectives and targets.........................................................................32

8 Indicators .......................................................................................................... 40

9 Institutional set-up ............................................................................................ 44

10 Main drivers for resource efficiency policies ...................................................... 48

11 Examples of policy instruments and initiatives to promoteresource efficiency .............................................................................................51

12 Information needs and knowledge gaps ............................................................ 56

13 Some EEA considerations for future European policies onresource efficiency .............................................................................................58

References ............................................................................................................... 61

Annex 1 Countries that responded to the survey ..................................................... 62

Annex 2 Survey questionnaire ............................................................................... 63

Annex 3 Economy-wide policies with resource efficiency components .................... 64

Annex 4 National targets related to resource efficiency .......................................... 66

Annex 5 Policy instruments presented by countries as good practicefor promoting resource efficiency .............................................................. 73

Annex 6 Overview of information needs and knowledge gaps reportedby countries .............................................................................................. 77

Annex 7 Economy-wide material flow accounts and derived indicators ...................79


6/84


7/845

Acknowledgements


Acknowledgements

This report would not have been possible withoutthe dedication and commitment of Eionet staffand other national experts in the thirty-one EEAcountries that provided information on theirresource efficiency policies and instruments.

EEA thanks its national reference centres onsustainable consumption and production andresources, and its national focal points for theirsupport and contributions.

Prepared by:

Pawe Kamierczyk, Mikkel Stenbk Hansen,Jens Gnther, David McKinnon, Christian Loewe,Fredrik Lingvall, Tamas Kristof Kallay,Jozsef Szlezak, Bettina Bahn-Walkowiak,

Marton Herczeg, Dominic Wittmer.

ETC/SCP Task Managers:

Mikkel Stenbk Hansen and Jens Gnther.

EEA Project Manager:

Pawe Kamierczyk.


8/84

20

10

10

0

0-10-20-30

60

50

40

AUSTRIA

BELGIUM

CROATIA

CZECH

REPUBLIC

DENMARK

F R A N C E

G E R M A N Y

H

IRELAND

ITALY

LIECHTENSTEIN

NETHERLANDS

P O L A N D

PORTUGAL

SLO

SLOVENIA

SWEDEN

UNITED

KINGDOM

S P A I N

- National Programme onNatural Resources

- 100 % sustainable publicprocurement target

- Waste & Resources ActionProgramme (WRAP)

- Product Roadmaps

- Sustainable MaterialsManagement Strategy (Flanders)

- Marshall Plan 2.green(Wallonia)

- Resource Efficiency ActionPlan (forthcoming)

- Raw Materials Plan

- Green Economy Programme

- Masterplan Cleantech

- Second National Program forEfficient Use of Water

- Plan for municipal wasteprevention

- Sustainable Economy Law

- Law on the Natural Heritageand Biodiversity

- Action Plan on Recycling- Concrete in Public Buildings

- Agenda 2020

- National developmentprogramme

- National Forest Programme

- 2050 Energy Action Plan ona fossil fuel free Denmark

- Green taxation on water andraw materials

- Mandatory CSR reporting forcorporations

- Economic and EnvironmentalAccounts Statistical System

N O R W A Y

SWITZERLAND

- Local Authority PreventionNetwork (LAPN) on resourceefficiency and waste prevention

- SMILE Resource Exchange

- Grenelle de lenvironnement(Environment Roundtable)

- Strategic Metals Plan

- Fair Purchasing Groups

- Target to reduce Italys TMRby 25 % by 2010, 75 % by2030 and by 90 % by 2050

- National Raw Material Strategy

- Targets on doubling materialand energy productivity

Selected examples of resource efficiency policies, instruments or targetspresented in the country profiles


9/84

706050

40

40

20

50

40

30

B U L G A R I A

CYPRUS

ESTONIA

F I N L A N D

THE FORMER

YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC

OF MACEDONIA

GREECE

G A R Y

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

R O M A N I A

IA

T U R K E Y

- Objective on environmentalimpacts from consumption

- National Program for WastePrevention

- National Development Plan forUse of Natural Building Materials

- Plan for Enhancing Use ofBiomass and Bio energy20072013

- Natural Resources Protectionand Sustainability Programme

- Law on Taxes on State NaturalResources

- Strategy for Innovation andEfficiency of the Economy

- Strategy for Energy Securityand the Environment

- Strategy for a HigherUtilization of RenewableEnergy Sources

- Mining Industry Strategy20042010

- Biomass Masterplan

- Resource efficiency and SCPin the Ninth Development Plan

- SME strategy and actionplan

- A Natural Resource Strategyfor Finland: Using naturalresources intelligently

- Bioeconomy working group

- Target to increase renewableenergy share to 49.3 % by 2010

- Objective to become EU leaderinpreservation of natural capital

- National EnvironmentProgramme 20092013

- National Industrial SymbiosisProgramme

- National Reform Programme20102013

- 8 % of arable land to befarmed organically by 2013

- Green Tax Reform

- Energy EfficiencyStrategy

- Greek Green GrowthStrategic Action plan

- Green Fund

- School Ecological FootprintProgramme

- Raw Material Policy

- Framework of Programmeson Sustainable Consumptionand Production

- Reviewed nationalsustainable development- strategy 2010

- 100 % high efficiencyhousehold appliances by

- 2020

- SCP action plan(forthcoming)

- Action plan on Adriaticsea, coast and islands

Further information about resource efficiency policies, including the 31 detailed country profiles, are available onthe EEA website: http://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiency
http://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiency


10/84Resource efficiency in Europe8

Executive summary

Executive summary

Rationale and objectives of the survey

Resource efficiency is now a key priority forpolicymakers across Europe as the EU underlinedwhen it designated resource efficiency as one ofseven flagship initiatives in its Europe 2020 strategy

for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.

In November 2010, anticipating the need forcountries to respond to the Europe 2020 ResourceEfficiency Flagship Initiative and in view of theEuropean Commission's interest in expandingthe knowledge base on the topic, the EuropeanEnvironment Agency (EEA) and its European TopicCentre on Sustainable Consumption and Production(ETC/SCP) initiated a survey of resource efficiencypolicies and instruments with its member andcooperating countries network (Eionet).

The survey aimed to collect, analyse anddisseminate information about national experiencesin developing and implementing resource efficiencypolicies, and to facilitate sharing of experiences andgood practice.

A total of 31 countries provided information,including 25 Member States of the EU-27.Information on national resource efficiency policieswas provided by Eionet's national reference centresfor sustainable consumption and production andresource use or by national focal points, following

the same approach used in the country assessmentsin the EEA's report The European environment stateand outlook 2010 (SOER 2010).

To maximise the consistency of country reports,a standardised set of questions was used to elicitinformation on policies, targets and indicators inplace; priority resources; the institutional set-upand main policy drivers; and knowledge gaps andinformation needs. The project team reviewedinitial country responses to identify the possibleneed for additional information, to suggest areasto strengthen and to ensure maximum consistencyacross countries. Revised country responses werepublished as 'country profiles on resource efficiency

policies' and are available on the EEA website:www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiency.

Key points from the analysis of theinformation provided by countries

This summary report presents an overview offindings from the analysis of information provided

by countries. It reviews national approaches toresource efficiency and explores similarities anddifferences in policies. The analysis is illustratedwith short examples of policy initiatives in thecountries, which are described in more detail in thecountry profile documents. The key findings are setout below.

Defining 'resources' and 'resource efficiency'

One of the key goals of the survey was todetermine how the countries define or interpretthe terms 'resources' and 'resource efficiency',so the survey included no definitions for them.The country submissions indicate that thereis neither a clear definition nor a commonunderstanding of key terminology. Terms suchas 'resource efficiency,' 'decoupling,' 'sustainableuse of resources' or 'minimising use of naturalresources' often seemed to be used as synonyms.However, this could partly result from problemstranslating terminology into various languages.

Only five countries (Austria, Cyprus, Hungary,Poland and Spain) formally define the term'resources' in their policies, and some of thoseuse a more narrow term, 'raw materials', whenaddressing resource efficiency. Generally, mostcountries seem to interpret resource efficiencyquite broadly, including raw materials, energysources, biomass, waste, land and soil, waterand biodiversity. This is largely in line withthe European Commission's interpretation indocuments published to date.

Several countries noted difficulty in interpretingwhat is covered under the heading 'resourceefficiency' and how this new policy priorityis related to 'sustainable consumption and
http://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionethttp://www.eea.europa.eu/soerhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/soerhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionethttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htm


11/84

Executive summary

9Resource efficiency in Europe

production (SCP)', 'sustainable use of naturalresources', 'green economy', etc.

Resource efficiency in strategies and action plans

Very few countries (Austria and Germanyas well as the Flanders Region in Belgium)report having a dedicated strategic policydocument (e.g. a strategy or a national actionplan) for resource efficiency. Instead, six broad'economy-wide' types of strategies or actionplans commonly include references to resourceefficiency. The most common were nationalsustainable development strategies and nationalenvironmental strategies and action plans,followed by SCP action plans; raw materials

plans and strategies; strategies and plansrelated to climate change; and economic reformprogrammes.

About a half a dozen countries seem to beshifting from classical 'environmental' policies(targeting energy efficiency, water, waste, etc.in a standalone fashion) to more integratedresource efficiency policies. A couple of countriesreported applying an holistic approach focusingon greening the whole economy, instead ofgiving attention to particular resources.

Concerning resource efficiency featuring insectoral policies, the two sectors most frequently

mentioned were energy (including supply ofenergy, energy efficiency, use of renewableenergy sources and climate change) reportedby 28 countries and waste (management ofwaste, and recycling and recovery) notedby 22 countries. Additionally, the publicsector (mainly in the context of green publicprocurement), building and construction, watermanagement, forestry and transport werefrequently mentioned. Some countries also listedtechnological innovation, mining and quarrying,agriculture, industry and fisheries.

Except for transport, the services sector doesnot appear to be a target of resource efficiencypolicies at present.

Priority resources

The priority resources most commonly reportedby countries were energy carriers (22 mentions)and waste (18), followed by minerals and rawmaterials (16) and water (14). These four werefollowed by forests and timber, biodiversity,biomass and renewable energy sources. Beyondthose, a large diversity of resources werementioned reflecting local conditions: land andsoil, construction materials, agricultural crops, air,fish, metals, the sea and coast, and others.

When individual priority resources reported bycountries are grouped into broader categories(e.g. timber, agricultural crops and fish can becombined into the category 'biomass') the picture

changes somewhat and the top three priorityresources become: energy sources (includingfossil fuels and renewables), biomass (includingagricultural crops, timber and fisheries) andraw materials (including minerals, constructionmaterials and metals). These were priorities inabout three quarters of the countries. About halfof the countries listed waste, land and soil, andwater as priority resources.

Strategic objectives, targets and indicators

Information provided by countries on strategicobjectives, targets and indicators for resourceefficiency reveals a large variety of approaches,directions and levels of detail. Strategic objectivesfor resource efficiency tend to be fairly generalin nature, most often referring to ensuring moreefficient use of natural resources, materials andenergy; increasing recycling of waste; improvingthe share of renewables in the overall energymix; and preventing waste or decoupling wastegeneration from economic growth (all reportedby more than half of the countries). Other fairlycommon strategic objectives focus on reducing

use of water and protecting water resources,sustainable forest management, and halting theloss of biodiversity.

Half a dozen countries have strategic objectivesaddressing absolute quantities of resources used,such as reducing resource use by a certain factoror percentage. Some countries aim to reduce theuse of fossil fuels.

Only Sweden reported having strategic objectivesrelated to global environmental impacts ofnational consumption, while the Netherlandsreported addressing the environmental impacts

embodied in international trade. In the context of promoting resource efficiency,

a large number of countries reported havingstrategic objectives related to SCP, indicating thatthey consider resource efficiency as a challengerelated to the entire production-consumptionsystem in the economy.

Concerning consumption areas with significantenvironmental impacts, several countriesreported having objectives and/or targets in thefields of housing (typically for energy efficiencyin buildings and sometimes for appliances andelectricity use); mobility (typically for increaseduse of biofuels in transport and fuel-efficiencystandards for cars); and food (typically onthe amount of land under organic farming).


12/84

Executive summary

10 Resource efficiency in Europe

However, in most cases objectives and targetsaimed at improving technological efficiencyrather than addressing consumption bymanaging demand.

The country responses indicate that concreteand measureable targets related to resourceefficiency are most commonly set for waste,energy use and energy efficiency, reducing GHGemissions, and increasing the share of land usedfor organic farming. Most targets tend to bedriven by EU requirements.

Only six countries reported targets addressingmaterial efficiency and use of materials.

The level of detail and focus of indicators onresource efficiency varied widely, possiblyreflecting the rather broad understanding of

the term. The most widely used indicators(identified in between half and two thirds ofthe countries) seem to be in the areas of waste,energy and material use. Indicators related towater, land use and forestry are also relativelywidespread. Only a few countries reportedindicators that take account of pressuresembedded in imported goods. A handful ofcountries reported indicators on patterns ofconsumption and on environmental awareness.Four countries reported using indicators on theenvironmental impacts of resource use.

Experience with resource efficiency policyinstruments

Countries were invited to present those policyinstruments and initiatives that they considergood practice for improving resource efficiency.No attempt was made through this questionto make a methodical and comprehensiveanalysis of policy instruments used. However,the examples presented indicate that countriessee most value in sharing experience regardingeconomic instruments and information-based

instruments. Only a few countries mentionedresearch programmes or initiatives addressinghousehold consumption.

Institutional and organisational arrangements

There is a great variety of institutional settingsand organisational arrangements for developingand implementing resource efficiency policies.Typically four types of ministries are involved those addressing environment, energy, economyand agriculture, often with responsibility for asingle sector or type of resources. Quite often

national environmental agencies or variousspecialised 'efficiency agencies' also play arole. This abundance of actors sometimesleads to overlapping competencies or unclear

responsibilities. Only a few countries have established

mechanisms to coordinate work on resourceefficiency nationally. Some countries have setup 'specialised agencies' or research consortia tosupport policy development. The involvementof regional and local level administrations inpolicymaking seems to be limited (although thesurvey did not ask specifically for informationon activities at the regional and local levels).

Policy drivers

Factors frequently reported to drive resourceefficiency policy can be roughly grouped intothose related to the environment (e.g. concernsabout environmental degradation orsustainable development) and those related tothe economy (e.g. the energy crisis, rising costsof resources, the need for a deep economicreform, future resource scarcity or reducingdependence on imports). There was no clearconclusion as to their relative importance,except when policy priorities were driven by anacute shortage of a critically important resource

(e.g. water). EU policy initiatives appear to be a strong

driver of policy development at the countrylevel. A dozen countries reported alreadyincluding various aspects of resource efficiencyin new policies and strategies prepared inresponse to the Europe 2020 Strategy and itsflagship initiatives, as well as the EU RawMaterials Initiative. EU accession requirementswere a major factor for candidate countries.

Knowledge gaps and information needs

From the responses on knowledge gaps andinformation needs, it appears that countries aremost interested in information on how best tointegrate resource efficiency into other policiesand in sharing information and experienceon good practice in policy implementation.Other topics of interest to several countriesincluded strategic objectives, targets andindicators to monitor progress, and assessingthe effectiveness of various policy instruments.However, with almost fifty separate issues,there was a large variety of needs and interests.


13/84

Executive summary


Some EEA considerations for futurepolicies on resource efficiency

Building on the survey's findings, some EEA

reflections on the analysis of country informationare presented below. These could be considered indeveloping future resource efficiency policies at theEU and country levels.

Benefits of resource efficiency policies: synergies andtrade-offs

Reflecting on the drivers for resource efficiencypolicymaking, the countries indicated a combinationof environmental, economic and political factors. Indoing so, they highlighted the potential synergies

between efforts to achieve environmental andeconomic goals. For example, one of the mostcommonly reported priority resources is waste,now widely recognised as economically important

because it is a secondary raw material and asubstitute for primary resources. At the same time,better waste management has the additional benefitof reducing greenhouse gas emissions and otherpressures on the environment, with potentiallysignificant economic and social benefits.

Efforts will be needed to ensure that resourceefficiency policies are coherent with other key

policies. In some instances, decision-makersface the need for trade-offs. For example, theintroduction of 'biomass for energy' strategies inmany countries, driven by the need to increasethe share of renewable energy sources in theoverall energy mix, means that biomass resourceefficiency could become a key policy area in the nearfuture. This could draw in agricultural or forestrypolicy and necessitate compromises betweenenergy policy, agricultural and food policy, spatialplanning, biodiversity preservation and ecosystemmaintenance.

EU policies can play a key role as a driver ofresource efficiency policymaking

While countries often adopt sectoral andresource-specific policies due to the importance ofparticular resources or sectors, other policies resultfrom EU and international requirements. Indeed,EU policy initiatives appear to be a strong driver ofnational policies, indicating both an opportunity anda need for EU resource efficiency policies to provideguidance and strategic direction.

In addition to elaborating specific policies,EU contributions could include helping to develop

a common understanding of key concepts aroundresource efficiency, enabling sharing of knowledgeand experience, and guiding work on developmentof indicators. They could also include stimulating

a discussion on targets for reduced consumptionof certain materials or reducing overall use ofresources.

Towards a common understanding of resourceefficiency

The survey responses revealed fairly widespreaduncertainty about the definition of 'resourceefficiency' and its relationship to other conceptssuch as 'sustainable consumption and production'and 'the green economy'. This uncertainty appears

to complicate efforts at the country level to developpolicies and to set targets and policy objectives.

To support policy coherence, it could be helpful todevelop and communicate an understanding of theinterlinkages, overlaps and synergies between theseand related concepts. One possible approach could

be for EU resource-related policies to use broadinterpretations of 'resource efficiency' but leave it tothe countries to decide which policies and resourcesare most relevant in their national context.

Targeting resource efficiency policyMost countries identify resource efficiency as apriority in economy-wide strategies but policymeasures to increase resource efficiency areprimarily located in environmental or sectoralpolicies. This mismatch raises a question aboutwhere to focus policy intervention the economyas a whole, selected sectors or priority resources.

Consumption appears to be a priority area forstrengthening policy if resource efficiency is toimprove significantly. Very few countries presented

examples of policies and instruments addressingconsumption. Those that did mainly referred toinformation instruments (e.g. various labels), orfocused on technical efficiency improvements ratherthan on managing demand.

Usingeconomic instruments to changeconsumption behaviour could be particularlyimportant, given the apparently limited nationalexperience with policies addressing consumption,except for information-based instruments. Anothertopic of interest important although raised byonly a few countries could be how to address therebound effect and steer consumption towards low-impact products or services.


14/84

Executive summary


Product-oriented resource efficiency initiativesdid not feature prominently in country responses,with the exception of a general emphasis on

green public procurement and some mentionof integrated product policy, both driven byEU initiatives. This indicates that resource efficiencycould be strengthened through an increased focuson products (and thus also on consumption).Furthermore, increasingly globalised product chainsand ever growing international trade imply thatEU product-oriented initiatives could also havea global knock-on effect for improving resourceefficiency.

Financial sector and business community

participation in developing policies on resourceefficiency appears to be limited, judging by countryresponses. This highlights the importance of makinga business case for resource efficiency. Threeparticularly relevant aspects in this context includedecreasing dependence on imports of strategicresources, creating green jobs and maintaining thecompetitive edge of European industries.

Global environmental impacts of a country'sconsumption are increasingly the focus of policydebate and some emerging national initiatives. Thisindicates a desire for policies that take into account

resources 'embedded' in global trade, in additionto the traditional focus on 'domestic' resourceefficiency (within national borders).

Setting policy objectives and targets

Strategic objectives and targets vary substantiallyacross countries. Future EU policies could playan important role in defining common EU-widestrategic objectives and targets on resourceefficiency, perhaps with differentiated timeperspectives. While agreeing and setting targets

is a politically complex process, the surveydemonstrated that common EU targets can be animportant driver for policy development at thecountry level. New policies could include specifictargets where feasible, or provisions for settingtargets at a later date, or provide a framework fordiscussing aspirational targets.

Indicators and measuring resource efficiency

Building on current Commission work on resource

efficiency indicators, future efforts could emphasisethe need for EU-wide integrated resource efficiencyindicators. Among other things, these would addresstrade-offs and resources embedded in tradedgoods, and would include impact indicators thatcombine economic and ecosystem objectives. Severalaccounting methods (e.g. material flow accounting,NAMEA and environmentally extended input/output analysis, lifecycle assessment, ecosystemcapital) offer the potential to produce a coherentindicator package of this sort.

Targets and indicators are one of the areas identifiedby countries as a priority for exchanging experienceand sharing good practice. One important elementin this context would be to intensify cooperation

between policymakers and the statistical officesor research institutes responsible for producingresource efficiency indicators.

Strengthening the knowledge base for resourceefficiency

Reflecting on their information needs andknowledge gaps, countries identified over fifty

different issues. Among the more commonneeds were information on how best to integrateresource efficiency into other policies; goodpractice in policy implementation (includingassessing policy effectiveness); and setting strategicobjectives, targets, and indicators. Further workon strengthening the knowledge base for resourceefficiency could target some or all of these areas.

Initiatives on institutional development andcapacity-building could focus on better integrationof resource efficiency within existing institutions;

stimulating closer inter-institutional collaborationand strengthening coordination mechanismsto improve policy coherence and consistency;and fostering stakeholder dialogue and publicparticipation to mobilise broad support for policyimplementation.

It could also be worth exploring if and how aplatform for sharing good practice in resourceefficiency policy could assist policymaking at thenational, regional and local levels.


15/8413

Background and scope of work


Resource efficiency is now a key priority forpolicymakers across Europe as the EU underlinedwhen it designated resource efficiency as oneof seven flagship initiatives in its Europe 2020strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusivegrowth (European Commission, 2010).

In November 2010, anticipating the need forcountries to respond to the Europe 2020 Resource

1 Background and scope of work

Efficiency Flagship Initiative (EuropeanCommission, 2011) and in view of the EuropeanCommission's interest in expanding the knowledge

base on the topic, the European EnvironmentAgency and its European Topic Centre onSustainable Consumption and Production initiated

a survey of resource efficiency policies andinstruments with its member and cooperatingcountries network (Eionet).

Note: Further details about the survey, including the 31 country proles, are available on the EEA website:

http://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efciency.

706050

40

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

0

0-10-20-30

60

50

50

40

40

30

AUSTRIA

BELGIUM

BULGARIACROATIA

CYPRUS

CZECH REPUBLIC

DENMARK

ESTONIA

FINLAND

THE FORMER

YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC

OF MACEDONIA

GERMANY

GREECE

HUNGARY

IRELAND

ITALY

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

LIECHTENSTEIN

NETHERLANDS

NORWAY

POLAND

PORTUGAL

ROMANIA

SLOVAKIA

SLOVENIA

SWEDEN

SWITZERLAND

TURKEY

UNITED

KINGDOM

0 500 1000 1500 Km

FRANCE

SPAIN
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionethttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionethttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/tools/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htmhttp://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/documents/related-document-type/index_en.htm


16/84



The survey aimed to collect, analyse anddisseminate information about national experiencesin developing and implementing resource efficiencypolicies, and to facilitate sharing of experiences and

good practice.

A total of 31 countries provided information,including 25 countries of the EU-27. A full list ofparticipating countries is provided in Annex 1.Information on national resource efficiency policieswas provided by Eionet's national reference centresfor sustainable consumption and production andresource use, following the same approach used inthe country assessments in The European environment state and outlook 2010 (SOER 2010) (EEA, 2010).

The results comprise the following components:

A set of 31country profiles on resourceefficiency policies self-assessments prepared

by countries with assistance from the EEA andthe ETC/SCP. These documents broaden theknowledge base for policymaking by describingthe current status of resource efficiency policiesin each country (including an inventory ofpolicy initiatives, priority resources, strategicobjectives, targets and indicators, institutionalset-up, information needs and examples ofpolicy initiatives or instruments proposed by

each country). This summary report prepared by the EEA

and the ETC/SCP. It presents an overview offindings from the analysis of final information

provided by 31 EEA member and cooperatingcountries on resource efficiency policies andinstruments. It reviews national approaches toresource efficiency and explores similarities and

differences in policy responses. The analysis inthe report is illustrated with examples of policyinitiatives in the countries.

As an interim deliverable, an informal paper drawingon initial information from the countries wasprepared in March 2011 to inform the development ofthe Commission's forthcoming Communication on aRoadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (EuropeanCommission, 2011b). The paper presented initialfindings from an analysis of country information andwas accompanied by draft country profiles. Neither

the initial findings nor the draft profiles were broadlydisseminated, however, as they were based onpreliminary information.

The survey used a standardised set of questions toelicit information on policies, targets and indicatorsin place; priority resources; the main policy driversand institutional set-up; and knowledge gaps andinformation needs. The eight questions, set out inAnnex 2 to the present report, were accompanied bydetailed guidance and supplemented with examplesof country profiles as they became available. Theproject team reviewed initial country responses

to identify the possible need for additionalinformation, to suggest areas to strengthen, andto ensure maximum consistency across countries.Revised responses underwent a light language
http://www.eea.europa.eu/soerhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/com2011_571.pdfhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/soer


17/84



Eionet: a partnership network

Eionet is a partnership network of the European Environment Agency (EEA) and its member and cooperatingcountries. It consists of the EEA itself, six European Topic Centres (ETCs) and a network of around 1 000 experts

from 39 countries in over 350 national environment agencies and other bodies dealing with environmentalinformation.

In-country networks consist of the national focal points (NFPs) and the national reference centres (NRCs).NFPs are the main contact points for the EEA and organise national coordination of activities related to theEEA. NRCs are nationally funded groups of experts in organisations nominated by member countries, whichpossess relevant knowledge on various environmental issues. NRCs are established in twenty-six specific areasof environmental activity, for example air quality, climate change, river quality, waste generation, biodiversity,energy, or sustainable consumption and production including resource use.

Through Eionet, the EEA gathers timely, nationally validated, high-quality environmental data from countries,which contribute to the integrated environmental assessments and other analysis available on the EEA website.The Eionet partnership is crucial to the EEA in helping collect and organise data and develop and disseminateinformation.

More information is available at http://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionet.

edit, and after a final check for consistency with thestructure, were used to publish 'country profiles onresource efficiency policies'. After confirmation bythe countries that they represent the best availableinformation, these were made available on the EEAwebsite.

The participation rate in this voluntary initiative wasvery high. This was most likely due to a combinationof policy relevance (notably regarding the Europe

2020 Resource Efficiency Flagship Initiative and theforthcoming Communication on a roadmap to aresource-efficient Europe), internal country needs,the initiative's focus on exchange of information andgood practice, and the motivation and dedication ofEionet contributors.

Further information about the survey, including the31 country profiles, is available on the EEA website:http://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiency.

Important note:

The analysis in this survey is based solely on the information in the country profiles providedby EEA member countries through the national reference centres on SCP and resources andthe national focal points. Substantial efforts were made to ensure that the responses from thecountries are as complete and comprehensive as possible. This included providing guidance atthe outset of the survey about the types of national institutions that are relevant to resourceefficiency and whose input could be sought, and carrying out a thorough review of initial countryresponses to suggest possible additional topics to consider. However, it was ultimately left to thecountries to decide the scope of the responses. Thus, no claim is made that this report covers allpossible facets of resource efficiency it is possible that countries have policies, instruments ortargets related to resource efficiency that remain unreported.
http://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionethttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/resource-efficiencyhttp://www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/countries-and-eionet



Definitions of 'resources' and 'resource efficiency'

Before presenting the analysis of countryinformation, it is necessary to reflect on how thecountries interpret and use the terms 'resources' and'resource efficiency'.

By design, the survey did not define the two terms,

nor did it point to the terminology used in theThematic strategy on the sustainable use of naturalresources, or in the material flow accountingframework developed by Eurostat. Indeed, theguidance provided to countries explained thatone of the goals of this work was to examine howthe countries themselves interpret the terms andapproach the topics.

In the forthcoming Austrian Resource EfficiencyAction Plan, the term 'resources' mostly applies to'materials' such as metals, minerals, biomass andfossil-based substances. However, there are alsolinks to energy efficiency and efficient use of 'othernatural resources' such as water or soil.

For more details, see the country profile documents.

2 Definitions of 'resources' and 'resourceefficiency'

Spain defines natural resources as 'everycomponent in nature susceptible to use by ahuman to satisfy his or her needs and with a real orpotential value, such as natural landscapes, surfaceand underground water, soil, subsoil and agriculturalland, forest, hunting and protected land, biodiversity,geo-diversity, genetic resources and ecosystems thatsupport life, hydrocarbons, hydroelectric, aeolian,solar, geothermal and similar resources, air, radio-electric spectrum, minerals, rocks, other geologicalrenewable and non-renewable resources.'

(Spanish Law 42/2007 of the Natural Heritage andthe Biodiversity).

For more details see the country profile documents.

The country reports present two possible routes to

arrive at national interpretations of the terms. First,national policies and legislation sometimes albeitrarely include explicit definitions. Second, adefinition or scope can be 'deduced' by reviewingcountries' policies, action plans, priorities, objectivesand targets.

Analysis of the information in the country profilesshows that only a few (5) countries formallydefine the term 'resources' in their policies. Austriaprovides such a definition in its Resource EfficiencyAction Plan, while Cyprus defines 'naturalresources' in its sustainable development strategy.

In a few other countries the term is defined inenvironmental legislation or policies (Hungary,Poland, Spain).

The analysis of country information also shows thatthe understanding of 'resources' is mostly based onclassical environmental policies focusing on singleresources or environmental media. Most of the

countries place primary focus on energy sources(28) and 'raw materials' like metals, minerals andbiomass (24 countries reported at least two of thethree as a priority) in their national resource-relatedpolicies. However, energy carriers (mainly fossilfuels) generally fall under a separate, energy-relatedpolicy area.

One interesting trend is that the majority of thecountries (24) now consider waste as a secondaryraw material to be a priority resource and seewaste recycling and recovery as an important toolfor reducing material consumption and improvingresource efficiency.

Eurostat's economy-wide material flowaccounting framework

To monitor economy-wide material flows, Eurostat hasdeveloped an accounting methodology and a numberof indicators that describe the material throughputand material stock additions in a (national) economyexpressed in tonnes. It accounts for all extractionof biomass, fossil fuels, metals and metal ores andindustrial minerals, and for imports and exports of allgoods, but it excludes water and air.

More detail on the MFA terminology is provided inAnnex 7.


19/84

Definitions of 'resources' and 'resource efficiency'


All in all, by addressing energy, waste, water, food,atmosphere, biodiversity, soil or land in the contextof resource efficiency, nearly all the countries seemto go beyond raw materials in their understanding

of natural resources. Several countries also includemore locally specific aspects like cultural andrecreational values of ecosystem services, gameanimals, fish resources, sea coasts and islands,landscape, brines and thermal waters or geneticresources (in relation to biodiversity).

Poland's National Environmental Policy for20092012 distinguishes between 'protection ofnatural resources' and 'improving the state of theenvironment and environmental security'. Topicscovered under the heading of 'protection of naturalresources' include nature protection, sustainableforestry, rational use of water resources, soilprotection, and sound management of geologicalresources. Areas under the heading of 'improvingthe state of the environment and environmentalsecurity' include health and environment, air quality,protection of water quality, waste management,noise and electromagnetic fields, and chemicals inthe environment.


Natural resources in the EU's Thematic strategyon the sustainable use of natural resourcesare defined to cover 'raw materials such asminerals, biomass and biological resources;

environmental media such as air, water and soil;flow resources such as wind, geothermal, tidal andsolar energy; and space (land area).' The 2011EC communication 'Roadmap to a resourceefficient Europe', is also based on a broadunderstanding of resources, including raw materials,energy, water, air, land and soil, biodiversity, stableclimate and ecosystem services.

None of the countries provided an explicit definitionof resource efficiency. Most (26) focused on raw

materials or material resources when referring toresource efficiency. Terms like 'resource efficiency','resource productivity' and 'decoupling' are usedinterchangeably, to express how 'efficiently' theeconomy is using resources. Several countries(Estonia, Italy, Norway, Portugal) referred to theconcept of double decoupling (i.e. decouplingeconomic growth from resource use and fromenvironmental pressure, as defined in the

Considerations for policy towards a common understanding of resource efficiency

In general, countries indicated uncertainties regarding terminological definitions. Many seem to use the terms'resource efficiency', 'sustainable use of resources' and 'minimising use of natural resources' as synonyms. Thereis also a wide range of understandings of the term 'resources'.

These uncertainties indicate that there is scope for reflecting on the advantages and disadvantages of providingclear definitions of the terms 'resource efficiency' and 'resources', rather than leaving them undefined. Onepossible approach could be for EU resource-related policies to provide strategic guidance based on the currentbroad interpretations but, when it comes to implementation, leave it to the countries to decide which policies andresources are most relevant in their national context.

Several countries reported difficulty in interpreting what is covered under the heading 'resource efficiency' andhow this new policy priority relates to concepts such as sustainable consumption and production, sustainable use

of resources and the green economy. It may be of value for policy coherence to develop and communicate anunderstanding of interlinkages between these and other key related concepts.

EU thematic strategy on the sustainable use ofnatural resources (European Commission, 2005) toclarify their understanding of resource efficiency.

This implies that their understanding of resourceefficiency relates the level of resource to totaleconomic output.

In general, most country responses indicate quitea broad interpretation of the term 'resources',corresponding loosely to the all-encompassingdefinition of natural resources given in theEU thematic strategy on the sustainable use ofnatural resources. This is also in line with theEuropean Commission's communication of26 January 2011, 'A resource-efficient Europe Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy'

(European Commission, 2011) and the subsequent'Communication on a Roadmap to a ResourceEfficient Europe' (European Commission, 2011b).

Finally, it is necessary to point out that, in additionto the vague definition or broad interpretations ofthe terms by countries, there are potential difficultiesand inconsistencies in translating key terminologyinto various languages.



Resource efficiency in economy-wide strategies or action plans

Only a few countries (Austria and Germany as wellas the Flanders Region in Belgium) reported havingdedicated strategic policy documents a strategyor a national action plan that address resourceefficiency as the main goal (1). In most countries, thetopic of resource efficiency is instead addressed in

various economy-wide strategies and action plans.

3 Resource efficiency in economy-widestrategies or action plans

Analysis in this report distinguishes between varioustypes of policy documents, including:

Economy-wide strategies and action plans,which affect all economic actors and haveoverarching themes. Examples include environmentalstrategies, sustainable development strategies,and sustainable consumption and production (SCP)strategies.

Sectoral strategies and action plans, which affectonly actors within the target sector. Examples include

waste strategies, energy strategies and transportpolicies.

Resource-specific strategies and action plans,which affect a single resource or group of resources.In practice, there is significant cross-over betweenresource-specific strategies and sectoral strategies.Examples include biomass strategies, fisheriesstrategies and forest strategies.

Product-oriented strategies and action plans,which focus on improving products and building amarket for more sustainable products. The principalapproach in this area is green public procurementbut other examples include product roadmaps and

information instruments such as environmentallabelling.

In 2010 Germany started preparing its NationalResource Efficiency Programme. TheProgramme's main focus will be on minimising theenvironmental impacts of raw material productionand consumption, with policy measures taken at alladministrative scales, from national to business level.The programme is due to be launched at the end of2011.


(1) The same is true for 'sustainable use of natural resources', which is significant because many countries use the term as a synonymfor 'resource efficiency'.

Austria's Resource Efficiency Action Planand Germany's National Resource EfficiencyProgramme, due to be adopted in 2011, both aimto reduce the use of raw materials. Other resourcessuch as land, biodiversity and water will beaddressed in separate strategies or action plans.

The Sustainable Materials Management Strategyof the Flemish Region in Belgium can also be

considered as a dedicated resource efficiencystrategy. The emphasis of the strategy is on rawmaterials (both renewable and non-renewable) andon using them sustainably and efficiently by closingmaterial cycles and maximising the use of secondaryraw materials in the production process.

In focusing on raw materials, these strategicdocuments reflect a fairly traditional understandingof the term 'resources'. Nonetheless, with measuresplanned at all administrative levels and in variouseconomic sectors, they treat resource efficiency asa cross-cutting policy field requiring a dedicatedstrategy.

Austria's Resource Efficiency Action Plan(REAP) is due to be adopted in 2011. It will providea framework and impetus for resource efficiencyand will focus on promoting ecodesign, cleaner

production and the 'green economy'. Public andprivate consumption will also be addressed.


Except for the few exceptions mentioned above, themajority of countries appear to address resourceefficiency through various economy-wide policies,strategies and action plans. Six broad types ofstrategies and action plans that commonly includereferences to resource efficiency are:


21/84



The UK's policy focus is on greening the wholeeconomy with the aim of delivering environmentaland financial benefits for individual businessesand the UK economy as a whole. The approach toresource efficiency has been to use various measuresto reduce product impacts, encourage action bybusinesses and improve government procurement.


national sustainable development strategies; national environmental strategies or action

plans; raw materials plans and strategies ;

SCP action plans; strategies and plans related to climate change; national reform programmes.

Among the above six, most commonly reported werethe first two types of strategies and action plans. Anoverview of economy-wide strategies and actionplans addressing resource efficiency is provided inAnnex 3.

Several countries (6) apply an holistic approach,focusing on greening the whole economy, rather

than concentrating on particular resources. A shiftfrom classical environmental policies (addressingenergy efficiency, water, waste, etc.) to integratedresource efficiency policies is beginning to takeplace. The United Kingdom appears to take the mostcomprehensive approach in this respect, althoughthe Switzerland's Green Economy Programme,Greece's Green Growth Strategic Action Programme,Finland's Natural Resource Strategy and Germany'sBio-Economy Strategy seem to be moving in a similardirection.

Policies on (industrial) development andcompetitiveness were noticeably absent from country

responses regarding resource efficiency in economy-wide policies. The same was generally true of theresponses relating to sectoral policies (see Chapter 4).On the other hand, the impulse from the Europe 2020strategy linking resource efficiency to boostingEU competitiveness is increasingly being reflectedin national policies. About a third of the countries(11) reported that they are currently preparingnational reform programmes taking into accountthe Europe 2020 strategy and the flagship initiatives.It is expected that resource efficiency will featureprominently in these national strategies.

Countries with strategies to green the whole economypoint out that achieving a green economy can boostthe competitiveness of the whole country. Croatia,

Hungary and Slovenia adopt similar thinking in theirdevelopment strategies for national regions.

Nearly half of the countries (14) reported the need

to address possible future scarcity of raw materials,securing access to energy and resources, andmaintaining industrial and economic competitivenessas key drivers for developing resource efficiencypolicies (see Chapter 10). However, it would appearthat countries have only just begun to include thesepriorities in national policies, strategies or action plans.

Countries that report having a national raw materialstrategy (i.e. Austria, the Czech Republic, Finlandand Germany) highlight that securing supplies ofraw materials is important for the international

competitiveness of national industries. In doing so,they directly take up current discussions on rawmaterials scarcity and the EU Raw Material Initiative(European Commission, 2008 and 2011c).

The Flemish Sustainable Materials ManagementStrategy. In 2011 the Flemish Government(Belgium) started to translate the SustainableMaterials Management Programme into an economy-wide strategy. The main focus will be organising andmanaging sustainable material cycles, increasingthe use of secondary raw materials in the productionprocess and minimising impacts on the environment

resulting from raw material mining and processing.


In its National Programme on Natural Resources, theNetherlands provides a comprehensive overview ofexisting policies in various fields that can contributeto sustainable and resource-efficient managementand use of natural resources. The Programmeaims to provide the basis for discussions on anintegrated strategic policy on resources, and marks

an interim step towards a resource efficiency strategy.Interestingly, policy development in the Netherlandsappears to be strongly based on life-cycle thinking.Impacts are examined within national boundaries butalso globally by focusing on sustainable trade.

Similarly, Sweden's policies take the globalenvironmental impact of its consumption intoaccount by estimating, for example, the greenhousegas emissions, water use and land use abroadneeded to support domestic consumption.Although clearly an exception rather than a ruleat present, this consideration of consumptionand end-users indicates that policymakers aregradually recognising the need to address domesticproduction and consumption equally.


22/84



Considerations for policy integrating resource efficiency into economy-wide policies

Only a handful of countries report having a dedicated strategic policy document (e.g. a strategy or a nationalaction plan) for resource efficiency. Instead, most identify resource efficiency as a priority in various economy-wide strategies, even though actual policy measures to increase resource efficiency are mostly included inenvironmental or sectoral policies. This raises a question about where to focus policy intervention whetherresource efficiency policies should aim at the economy as a whole, focus on selected sectors or target specificpriority resources. Perhaps future EU resource efficiency policies could provide general guidance on all of theabove but with explicit leeway left to the countries to choose the mix appropriate for the local conditions.

Under the Europe 2020 strategy, Member States are required to prepare national reform programmes. Severalcountries, mainly from new Member States, reported using the process of developing national reform programmesto introduce aspects of resource efficiency into economic policy. In addition, some countries have integratedconsiderations from the EU Raw Material Initiative into national plans to ensure security of supply of raw materialsand to foster economic competitiveness. The fact that EU policy initiatives appear to be a strong driver ofeconomy-wide resource policies indicates both a need and an opportunity for EU resource efficiency policies toprovide guidance and strategic direction.

Many countries reported having different strategies or policies dealing with the concepts of sustainableconsumption and production, sustainable use of resources and the green economy. Combined with the already

mentioned difficulty in interpreting what is covered under the heading 'resource efficiency,' this indicates a needfor a discussion to clarify the overlaps and synergies between these concepts.

Resource imports are growing continuously and policy initiatives are beginning to emerge that address the globalenvironmental impacts of a country's consumption. This indicates a desire for policies that take into accountresources 'embedded' in imports and global trade, in addition to the traditional focus on 'domestic' resourceefficiency (within national borders).


23/8421

Resource efficiency in sectoral policies


In addition to examining the inclusion of resourceefficiency in dedicated strategies or action plansand in economy-wide strategies (see Chapter 3),the survey also reviewed how and where resourceefficiency appears in sectoral, and product- andresource-specific strategies or action plans. Table 4.1

provides an overview of sectoral strategies andaction plans related to resource efficiency asreported by countries.

The responses reveal that resource efficiencymeasures appear in a wide variety of sector-and resource-specific policy documents. Theirinclusion seems to be driven by the need to securea sustainable supply of resources, the aim of usingresources more efficiently, the economic and socialgains to be made from efficiency, and the need toprotect the environment. An overview of sectoralor resource-specific strategies and action plans

addressing resource efficiency, as reported bycountries, is provided below.

In all, 28 countries reported having strategiesor action plans related to the supply and use ofenergy containingreferences to resource efficiency.These can be broadly divided into overarchingenergy strategies, renewable energy strategies andenergy-efficiency strategies.

Overarching energy strategies tend to focus onproviding the economy with a secure supply of

energy. As such, they also include provisions forrenewable energy sources.

Renewable energy strategies, includingstrategies addressing specific technologicalsolutions (for example, use of biomass), focuson the need to diversify energy supply inthe light of economic, security and emissionsconsiderations. These strategies and action planshave been driven primarily by EU legislationand international commitments to reduceemissions. All EU-27 Member States deliveredrenewable energy action plans to the Europeancommission before the 30 June 2010 deadline.Energy strategies and action plans demandthat the energy sector consume an increasinglybroad range of resources, often including

With a view to addressing future population growth,resource scarcity and price volatility, Germany's

Ecological Industrial Policy is a policy frameworkthat seeks to increase the efficiency of energyand resource use, and increase the use of naturalrenewable resources to stem growing dependence onfinite resources. It aims to do this by strengtheningcurrent and future strategic industries, promotinginnovation, adapting the structure of industry andtransforming the industrial material base. Expectedbenefits include economic growth, new products andnew jobs.


4 Resource efficiency in sectoral policies

bio-resources. In reference to the latter,seven countries have specific strategies forthe exploitation of forests and other biomass(including waste) for energy generation.

Dedicated energy efficiency action plans(EEAPs), mandated for Member States by the

Energy End-Use Efficiency and Energy ServicesDirective (EU, 2006), were mentioned by22 countries. The deadline for Member Statesto communicate the second round of EEAPs tothe European Commission was 30 June 2011.As such, it is somewhat surprising that morecountries did not report the presence of EEAPs,as all EU-27 Member States submitted firstround EEAP drafts.

A fourth strand of these energy-related strategiesand action plans are the dedicated climate strategiesreported by seven countries (the Czech Republic,Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Portugal andSwitzerland, and the Wallonia Region in Belgium).These address energy as a core component but alsotend to cover a broader range of potential leveragepoints to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.


24/84



Table 4.1 Policy areas that include elements of resource efficiency as reported byparticipating countries

Energy and climate Economy Materials Waste

Energystrategy

Renewablesstrategy

Energyefciency

Energyb

iomass

Climatechangestrategy

Economicstrategy

In

dustrialdevelopment

Eco-tech/clean-tech

M

aterialsstrategy/rawmaterialsplan

M

etals

Constructionmaterials

W

astemanagementplan

W

astepreventionprogramme

W

asterecycling

C&Dwaste

Hazardouswaste

Austria x x x x x

Belgium x (ii) x (i,ii) x (iii) x (iii) x (ii, iii) x (iii)(9) x (i,ii) x (i)

Bulgaria x x x x x

Croatia x x

Cyprus x x x

Czech Republic x x x x x x x x

Denmark x x

Estonia x x x x x x

Finland x x x x x x x x

Former YugoslavRepublic ofMacedonia

x x x x x

France x x x

Germany x x x x x

Greece x x

Hungary x x x x x x

Ireland x x x x x

Italy x x x

Latvia x x x x x (3) x

Liechtenstein x

Lithuania x x x (10) x

Netherlands x x x x

Norway x

Poland x x x x x x x x x x

Portugal x x x x x x x

Romania x x x x (5)

Slovakia x x x x x x x

Slovenia x x x x (6) x

Spain x x x (7) x x

Sweden x x

Switzerland x x x x x xTurkey x x (8)

United Kingdom x x x

Note: (1) environmental management in public sector(2) as part of Exemplary State Plan(3) Underground resources strategy(4) Energy Performance Certicates(5) Mining Industry Strategy(6) National Mineral Resource Management Programme(7) draft Sustainable Economy Law(8) including Turkish Industrial Strategy Toward EU Membership and SME Strategy and Action Plan(9) Better use of resources in the quarries sector(10) State Strategy for Use of Underground resource

(i) Brussels capital region(ii) Flanders

(iii) Wallonia


25/84



Table 4.1 Policy areas that include elements of resource efficiency as reported byparticipating countries (cont.)

Government/infrastructure Environment Agriculture

GPP

Eduaction

Transport

Buildings

Land/spacemanagement

Tourism

Healthcare

Biodiversity

Watermanagement

AirQuality

Agriculture

Fisheries/sea

Organicagriculture

Ruraldevelopment

Forestry

Hunting

Austria x x

Belgium x (i) x (i,ii) x (i,ii) x (i) x (iii)

Bulgariax x x x x x

Croatia x x x x x x

Cyprus x x x

Czech Republic x x x

DenmarkEstonia x (1) x x x x

Finland x x x

Former YugoslavRepublic ofMacedonia

x x x x

France x (2) x x x x

Germany x x

Greece x x x

Hungary x x x x x x x x

Ireland x x x x

Italy x x

Latvia x x x x x xLiechtensteinLithuania x x x x x x

Netherlands x x

Norway x

Poland x x x (4) x x x x x x

Portugal x x x

Romania x x x x

Slovakia x x x x x

Slovenia x x x x x x

Spain x x x x x x x x x

SwedenSwitzerland x x x x x x x x x

TurkeyUnited Kingdom x

Note: In addition, some countries reported additional policy initiatives:

Belgium: Federal Products Plan; Eco-efciency Scan programme (ii); DuWoBo (ii); Enhanced Landll Mining (ii); Chain

Management (ii); Eco-clusters (ii).Estonia: National development plan for Oil ShaleFinland: Energy smart built environment; Carbon Neutral Municipalities; Bioeconomy.Germany: Ecological Industrial Policy; circular ow economy at state level.Ireland: Green business initiative; Green Hospitality award; packaging waste prevention programme; CleanerGreener Production Programme; SMILE resource exchange; FreeTrade Ireland; Sector specic guides on waste prevention;Local authorit waste prevention network; StopFoodWaste campaign; Green schools.Netherlands: National Programme on Natural resource; Holistic approach to resource efciency.Poland: Horizontal industrial policy; Integrated Product Policy; cleaner production strategy.Portugal: Thematic Operation programme for territory Valuing; integrated pollution prevention and control; EcoDesign forenergy related products; EMAS; waste plans for edible oils, used tyres, municipal waste, industrial waste.Romania: support for the organisation and implementation of a functional cross-compliance; The rehabilitation andreform of the irrigation system; National Strategy for Drought mitigation, prevention and combating land degradation and

desertication on short, medium and long term.Slovakia: Plan for Municipal development in heat energy; energy security strategy;Switzerland: resource efcient ITCUnited Kingdom: Product roadmaps; WRAP and associated sectoral commitments in construction, utility, retail, drinksmanufacturers and DIY sectors.


26/84



Portugal's construction and demolition wastelegislation establishes a chain of responsibility thatbinds both owners and contractors of works andlocal municipalities to proper management of thewaste produced during construction and demolition.The aim is to prevent the production of waste wherepossible and recover as much waste as possible

when it does occur.


The introduction of 'biomass for energy' strategies,driven by the need to increase the share of renewableenergy sources in the overall energy mix, meansthat biomass resource efficiency could become a

key policy area in the near future. This could drawin agricultural or forestry policy and necessitatetrade-offs between energy policy, agricultural andfood policy, spatial planning and biodiversity.

The survey responses indicated that most countries(24) count the waste management sector and wastelegislation as essential components in the movetoward resource efficiency. These countries tend tosee waste as a secondary raw material, and considerwaste recycling and recovery an important tool forreducing virgin material consumption and improving

resource efficiency. This has implications not only forthe waste management sector itself (e.g. in the formof a mandated shift to waste treatment options thatexert less pressures on the environment, improvedwaste collection and separation, and materialrecovery), but also for upstream waste producers anddownstream users of recycled materials. Specifically,the construction and demolition sector, the retailsector (through packaging waste policies), and manyindustries (through hazardous waste policies) areall directly influenced by waste policies that includeresource efficiency elements.

Several (8) countries also reported waste preventionprogrammes, sometimes as stand-alone initiatives

but more often within the umbrella of overall wastestrategies. Waste prevention programmes tend toact within specific economic sectors or on particulartypes of waste rather than adopting a generic,economy-wide approach. For example, the Austrianwaste prevention programme, published in summer2011, targets the construction sector, households andindustry, the food sector and the reuse sector.

Households are affected by waste measures

that demand separate collection and returnablepackaging, and are also subject to local wastecollection practices. Few initiatives directly tacklewaste generation in households, although packagingwaste legislation targeted at industry does affect

household waste generation. Industries and sectorsthat use recovered and recycled materials (eitherdirectly or indirectly) are influenced by the manywaste policies that contain provisions on recycling.

Regulation of construction and demolition wasteencourages better use of materials in the buildingand construction sector. In all, 13 countries also havepolicies and strategies designed to modernise newand existing housing stock to minimise resourceuse (focusing exclusively on energy in the surveyresponses). This is typically achieved throughupdating building standards, retrofitting drives(for roof and cavity insulation and windows),energy-efficiency schemes and information tools suchas energy certificates. These schemes tend to focus

on reducing energy use. In terms of EU legislation,the resource efficiency of the construction industryis also affected by national implementation of theEnergy-Related Products Directive (EU, 2009).

The Belgium Flanders Energy RenovationProgramme 2020 is a comprehensive programmecontaining a variety of short- medium- and long-termprovisions to ensure that by 2020 no buildings inFlanders waste energy. Among the specific targets,the Programme provides that all buildings shouldhave floor and roof insulation, all windows shouldbe fitted with double glazing, and central heatingefficiency should be above 90 %. It also includessupport for outside insulation of exterior walls,hollow wall insulation and the replacement ofelectrical heating.


Transport also features prominently in the surveyresponses. Resource efficiency measures werereported in both overall transport strategies anddedicated action plans within particular transportsystems. Over a third of the countries (11) reportedpolicies in this area, including general transport

strategies and specific initiatives for promotingpublic transport or more sustainable forms of privatetransport.

Eighteen countries reported that policies in the watermanagement sector contained resource efficiencycomponents. The issue of efficiency was morepronounced in countries with limited water resourcesor periodic acute shortages, while those not short ofwater focused more on protection of water quality

The public sector as an economic entity can be animportant advocate of resource efficiency, and in thiscontext 15 countries and the Brussels capital region ofBelgium mentioned green public procurement as animportant resource efficiency policy.


27/84



Fourteen countries cited forestry as a key sectorin national resource efficiency. The majority ofthese policies focused on forestry as a means ofefficient timber production but some had other or

supplementary goals: one example is Romania'sNational Plan to Combat Illegal Logging.

Agriculture was mentioned by seven countries as apriority sector for resource efficiency, with organicagriculture highlighted by a further four countries.Again, given the importance of food security and therole agriculture plays in environmental protection,it is perhaps surprising that more countries did notreport the agriculture sector as important for resourceefficiency. Fisheries and the sea was also mentionedby nine countries, both as a means of securing and

protecting fish supplies, but also as general protectionfor sea water quality and in one instance (Estonia) forpreserving community income from fishing.

Finally, a few countries mentioned other areas suchas hospitality, health, retail, genetic resources, andbiological and landscape diversity. It is important tonote, however, that the summary in this chapter is

based exclusively on country reports prepared underthe survey and as such may not be an exhaustive listof resource efficiency policies, strategies and actionplans in EEA countries (see the 'important note' inChapter 1).

Six countries reported policies and action plansaimed at strengthening innovation, developmentand deployment of environmental technology.Environmental technologies can be used in all

economic sectors and influence the efficiency ofall resource use. However, initiatives are oftentargeted at priority sectors renewable energy,for example and as such eco-technology can alsoappear as a strand of broader environmental policy.Environmental technology strategies are drivenby both environmental goals and economic andcompetitiveness concerns.

Considerations for policy resource efficiency in sectoral policies

Many national sectoral and resource-specific policies and action plans are driven by the presence and importanceof a certain resource or sector. Others are driven by EU and international requirements. This means that Europeanprocesses for resource efficiency could aim to incorporate general principles where commonalities exist, whilealso acknowledging the differing needs and priorities of individual countries in terms of available resources andeconomic requirements.

According to the survey responses, energy and waste are the sectoral policy areas where resource efficiency

measures are most often applied. However, in dealing with primary material flows, these sectors also have asignificant impact on the resource efficiency of other sectors. Waste policies can encourage more efficient use ofmaterials during production (potentially regardless of the economic sector) and energy efficiency strategies candrive increased resource efficiency in a broad range of industrial and commercial sectors. As such these are strongleverage points for increasing resource efficiency.

The introduction of 'biomass for energy' strategies in many countries, driven by the need to increase the share ofrenewable energy sources in the overall energy mix, means that biomass resource efficiency could become a keypolicy area in the near future. This could draw in agricultural or forestry policy and necessitate trade-offs betweenenergy policy, agricultural and food policy, spatial planning, biodiversity preservation and ecosystem maintenance.

The cross-sectoral nature of resource efficiency means that it is important to ensure that sectoral policies do nothave adverse effects in other sectors. Some level of institutionalisation of resource efficiency could potentially actas a bridge between sectors and actors (see Chapter 9 on institutional set-up).

The fact that EU policy initiatives appear to be a strong driver of sectoral policies underlines that there is anopportunity and a need for EU resource efficiency policies to provide guidance and strategic direction. Thesepolicies should be coherent with the Europe 2020 strategy's other flagships initiatives, in particular those onindustrial competitiveness and on innovation.

The latter point could be a partial explanation forthe surprisingly low number of countries reportingindustrial and competitiveness policies containing

resource efficiency measures. Another possiblereason could be that efficient use of materialinputs in business is primarily, and perhaps mosteffectively, driven by financial concerns (the needto lower costs) rather than requiring policy-drivensolutions. In addition, material inputs to industry areoften regulated by resource-specific policies, whichthemselves encourage efficiency, potentially reducingthe need for dedicated resource efficiency measuresin industrial policy. Similarly, eco-innovation andeco-technology strategies, together with research,often implicitly promote resource efficiency ofindustry as a whole.



Product-oriented resource efficiency initiatives

In the framework of a voluntary agreement betweenthe Department for Environment, Food and RuralAffairs (Defra) and relevant supply chain actors, theUnited Kingdom has developed ten productroadmaps in four priority product groups (food anddrink, passenger transport, buildings, and clothingand textiles). The roadmaps, which are currentlybeing implemented, use a 'whole life cycle' approachto help improve the environmental performance ofproducts.


To capture a broad spectrum of possible policyapproaches, countries were asked whether they hadestablished resource efficiency strategies or actionplans for specific products or groups of products.

Only Belgium and the United Kingdom reported

having adopted policy documents directed atspecific product categories. The Federal ProductPolicy Plan of Belgium (20092012) targets productsand equipment for building (including heatingappliances); energy-consuming equipment; productsand substances for domestic use; vehicles and rollingstock; biomaterials and biofuels; and food products.The UK Product Roadmaps have been operatingsince 2007 and target ten product categories (seebox below). In addition, Bulgaria, Germany, Polandand Portugal highlighted in their responses theimportance of integrated product policies (IPP) forimproving resource efficiency in general.

5 Product-oriented resource efficiencyinitiatives

Just over half of the countries (16) reported that theyhad implemented or were planning to implementgreen or sustainable public procurement (GPP/SPP)initiatives, including preferential provisions forresource-efficient goods and products. The relativeenormity of the public purse can greatly expandthe market for green and sustainable goods andservices.

(2) The countries include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland,

Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.(3) Although the EU has defined a relevant indicative target, there were no mandatory requirements on the part of Member States

concerning GPP at the time of writing (summer 2011). Relevant EU policies include the Commission's communication on IPP andGPP, the 'greening' of Public Procurement directives, and a policy process aimed at defining common GPP criteria in the EU.

GPP initiatives tend to take the form of nationalaction plans or strategies (2) and are implementedat the national agency or ministry level. In somecountries they are also implemented at municipaland institutional (hospitals, schools) level. The factthat countries referred to promoting GPP/SPP is also

a good example of how voluntary EU initiatives cansteer relevant policy action at the national level (3).

Seven countries (Austria, Denmark, Finland, France,Germany, Ireland, and Slovakia) also referred tonational eco-labelling schemes as important tools toincrease the supply of and demand for sustainableand green products and thereby improve resourceefficiency. At the same time, there were onlysporadic references to initiatives promoting relevantEU labelling schemes (e.g. the EU Ecolabel or theEU Energy Label).

About half of the countries referred in theirresponses to a broad spectrum of product-orientedinstruments relevant for resource efficiency. Theseincluded promoting eco-design (although onlyNorway, Poland, Portugal and Turkey explicitlymention the Ecodesign Directive); product life cycleassessment (LCA); deposit-refund schemes; reuseand repair schemes; product labelling; and economicinstruments targeted at products. Extendedproducer responsibility (EPR) was also mentioned,although countries have seldom applied it inconcrete policy measures.

A selection of resource efficiency initiatives targetingproducts is presented in the following box.

Although extending the lifespan of products asa general objective of resource efficiency policywas mentioned sporadically, countries reportedfew concrete initiatives. Also, very few countriesmade reference to environmental or sustainabilityconsiderations from the product life-cycle


29/84

Product-oriented resource efficiency initiatives


Examples of product-oriented resource efficiency initiatives at the national level:

Austria's Sustainable Weeks for promoting sustainable products. As a public-private partnership, the annualSustainable Weeks are jointly organised by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and WaterManagement, the Federal Ministry of Economy and participating trade associations and shops. The promotioncampaign lasts for one month each year and focuses on products that comply with predefined sustainabilitycriteria and guidelines. The participating products bear the official label of the campaign 'It brings somethingsustainable'.

Belgium (Flanders)'s network of repair and reuse centres. A network of reuse centres has been establishedin the Flemish Region, with the active collaboration of OVAM, the Flemish Public Waste Agency. The mission ofthe reuse centres is to collect and repair discarded but usable goods and then resell them at an affordable price.The centres are subsidised based on the levels of reuse they manage to achieve. The long-term objective of thisinitiative is that the reuse sector will achieve an average of 5 kg of reused goods per