Is it time for a European market surveillance coordination body? Redefining monitoring, verification, and enforcement of European product policy

Panel: 7. Appliances, products, lighting and ICT

This is a peer-reviewed paper.

Author:
Alun Lewis Jones, Belgium

Abstract

Less than 1% of the European market is currently verified via testing as either reaching the minimum performance standards laid out by the Ecodesign Directive, or that the energy class declared is indeed correct. Despite this, the complexity of these regulations is set to grow, both in terms of the number of products covered (Ecodesign work plan 2015–2017), and the range and scope of areas within each product regulated (possible combination and inclusion of circular economy – resource efficiency). Furthermore, whole new models for compliance on smart appliances will need to be developed, as well as addressing concerns of circumvention devices in product software.

Member states are the sole bearers of the responsibility of market surveillance, yet despite tireless efforts, are barely able to scratch the surface in terms of the work needed to be done to reduce the estimated 15-25% non-compliance rates found in this sector. With up to 100TWh of lost savings at stake, and possibly many times more than that in the future, is it time to consider a more formal and centralised market surveillance body that would assist and facilitate market surveillance actions across Europe?

Such a coordinating body would not take over the role of the national MSAs, nor would it have or need the authority to impose sanctions on non-compliance. Instead it could draw upon the success of pan-EU projects such as Ecopliant, EEpliant, ATLETE, ATLETE2, ComeOnLabels, MarketWatch, INTAS, and ComplianTV. These project have shown that central coordination both improves cooperation, and helps to better identify key causes of non-compliance and identification of suspicious products.

This paper outlines the potential model for a European coordination body, and highlights key areas where such a body would improve market surveillance across the whole of Europe by increasing efficiency and enabling market surveillance to take place in a more cost-effective way.