Which indicators are most useful to measure political commitment for sustainable development ?
The assessment of the political commitment for sustainable development needs to evaluate the social,
economic and environmental integration of decisions taken at the highest level, using both qualitative and
quantitative indicators, including on Gender equality, equality treatment and opportunities and non
discrimination.1
Quantitative indicators (i.e. budgetary allocation and financial support) can be most effective but are not
always easy to measure. Qualitative indicators (i.e. new policy reforms, public opinion and media interest) ,
applied to key priorities for sustainable development allow the evaluation of the sustainability framework,
highlighting conflicts and trade-offs.
The following are useful indicators:
- The enshrinement of sustainable development into existing laws or terms of references. For example:
Sustainable development as set out in Articles 3(3) and 21(d) and (f) of the new Treaty on European Union
(TEU) as an overarching and long-term goal of the EU.
- The passing of new legislation or policy instruments at the national, regional and Global level. For instance
the number of National (or Federal) Sustainable Development Strategies. Their progress is a measure of
political commitment which can be measured through the comparison of successive National Sustainable
Development Strategies (NSDS) and through the implementation of Sustainable Development Plans when
these are assessed and monitored.
- The size and mandate of relevant institutions installed by these legislations to see to real implementation,
measured by clear and comparable indicators. For instance: staff employed to promote and monitor horizontal
integration, existence of inter-agency co-ordination unit with a special focus on sustainable development, etc.
- The setting of (quantified) political targets with time frames and with budgetary allocation e.g. objectives
of EU 2020 strategy or EU-SD-Strategy / EU SD indicators.
∗ References to the EU should be understood as referring to the EU and its 27 Member States
1 EC Impact Assessment Guidelines 15 January 2009
2
- The level at which the government is involved in sustainable development policies; e.g. involvement of
Parliament in these policies or Government Policy Programme which, in Finland for instance, is the most
important political document and guides measures of the ruling government with regular monitoring and
assessment and high-level government involvement and participation in the work of the Finnish National
Commission on Sustainable Development (FNCSD).
- The most relevant indicator is how extensively and cross-cuttingly the principles, objectives and measures,
which are defined in national sustainable development strategies and programmes, are also included in the
Government Policy Programmes and sectoral plans or primary legislations (see also answers to A.2). This is
also the main channel for getting and keeping sustainable development high on the political agenda and for
distributing ownership among all sectors and ministries..
- There are also indicators measuring specific commitment at the sub-national levels, including the number of
climate plans, research and innovation plans and of sustainable development strategies/Local A21s set up by
sub-national and local authorities ; indicators ?in the making?, such as the percentage of local authorities
which in the process of setting up a local A21, population coverage by a local A21, proportion of votes by
local authorities on issues with an explicit reference to a local A21.
- And, finally, the level of public awareness about SD and power of media and influential persons cannot be
underestimated. Sustainable development would need its sustainable development ambassadors (like "Al
Gores","Nicholas Sterns",?), in order to attract front page publicity and the interest of political leaders
nationally and worldwide .

New international and regional conventions have been adopted in the environmental field, leading to an
estimated total of 500 international conventions and instruments since 1992, when the concept of sustainable
development was formally recognized and placed at the heart of the Rio agenda. This expansion reflects a
growing awareness of the importance and urgency of sustainable development issues.
However the political commitment of the international community compared to 1992 should not be measured
only by the number of adopted conventions and declarations, but also by their implementation. Every two
years´ reviews undertaken by CSD as a global platform for SD suggest that number of pressing challenges
regarding poverty, social development or environmental degradation have not been reversed yet, although
some progress has been made worldwide.
Since 1992 steps forward have been made in most of the key challenges, especially through better regulation,
that has progressively allowed integration of policy objectives and improved cost-efficiency of policy
decisions. The EU and the Member States have made considerable concrete efforts in enhancing the political
commitment in most of the key sectors identified by the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (see also
question A.3): .
- The political commitment today seems to perform better than in 1992, taking into account the established
institutional framework for SD (even if sometimes in danger of weakening of its status) and legislation and
strategic documents, which did not exist in 1992. A number of plans and programmes have been published at
all levels in areas such transport, energy, green economy, smart economy and social inclusion etc. Also, the
level of public awareness about SD and environmentally sound behaviour, including at the local level has
been increased although the period without institutional framework for sustainable development was marked
by significant efforts of civil society promoting environment protection and sustainable development.
- The evaluation of political commitment can be made through the level of mainstreaming of Sustainable
Development in existing legislation and the variety of ways this concept may be referred to. In UK, for
instance, Sustainable development has been enshrined into national laws and included in the terms of
3
references of national bodies (as part of the UK Climate Act, and at the heart of the UK Governments
Environmental Audit Committee). Sustainable development is also included in the following primary
legislation: Environment Act 1995, Government of Wales Act 1998, Regional Development Agencies Act
1998, Greater London Authority Act 1999, Local Government Act 2000, Railways Act 1993 (introduced by
the Transport Act 2000), Transport Act 2000, International Development Act 2002, Export Control Act 2002,
Water Industry Act 1991 (introduced by the Water Act 2003), Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Political commitment remains high, as demonstrated in the number and variety of ways it remains in use, for
example, many of the organisations and programmes established following the 1992 Rio Conference remain
active (e.g REAP, The travel foundation, The SEED initiative. Sustainable Development has been included in
many policy planning measures (eg UK building and planning law) and the UK Environmental Audit
Committee are currently undertaking a review into how to embed SD across UK Government;
- At the local level, political commitment can be measured by indicators based on local A21s. The year 1997
marked for instance in France the start of Local A21s, particularly stimulated by governmental incentives and
tools provided for the launching of local A21s. The involvement of local authorities was gradual. Many had
already implemented local environmental charters and therefore only launched local A21s 10 years later.
Hence the votes passed by local authorities relating to local A21s grew gradually and accelerated from 2002:
2 projects in 1997, 42 in 2002, 257 in 2008. In 2010, 600 local A 21 initiatives were identified. In total, 60%
of the French population is covered by at least one local A21.

Key measures/actions at EU level
Sustainable development is set out in Articles 3(3) and 21(d) and (f) of the Treaty of the European Union
(TEU) as an overarching and long-term goal of the EU. It is based on democracy, gender equality,
solidarity, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights.2
The EU has strived for integrating as far as possible sustainable development into regular political planning
processes, adopting measures and actions at the highest political level. Among these measures, the
enhancement of vertical integration at regional, national and sub national level of policy making has been put
forward, so as to improve coordination mechanisms and reach a better integration of the social and
environmental requirements into the economic development process.
The EU Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) adopted in 2001 and revised in 2006 is a framework for a
long-term vision in which environmental protection, economic prosperity, social cohesion and global
responsibility are mutually supportive. In recent years, the European Union has mainstreamed the objective of
sustainable development (SD) into a broad range of policies. It has, in particular, taken the lead
internationally in the fight against climate change and is committed to promoting a low-carbon, knowledgebased,
resource-efficient economy. At the same time unsustainable trends persist in several areas, despite a
host of positive policy developments.
The following key measures have been introduced at the EU level in support of sustainable development3:
? Combating climate change is a cornerstone of the SDS and an issue of the highest political
importance. It is a good example of an issue which has been permeated by sustainable development
and long-term considerations. The EU will maintain its leading role in the global efforts to mitigate
climate change and limit the increase of global warming to a maximum of 2°C above pre-industrial
levels. Relevant EU policies have been agreed in the last few years through the EU Climate and
Energy package of measures as well as the EU Energy efficiency package.
2 Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy
3 2009 Review of SDS Strategy: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st16/st16818.en09.pdf
? Transport has impacts on the objectives of several of the other key challenges in the SDS, in
particular climate change and clean energy, management of natural resources and , air pollution,
noise, public health and biodiversity. Relevant EU policy measures here include the EU Green
Transport package, the EU Fuel Quality Directive, etc. An important issue is the urban dimension of
transport and its associated problems like air quality, noise, congestion and, to a lesser extent,
greenhouse gas emissions. It is necessary to further advance actions to ensure that the above issues
become integral components of a sustainable transport policy where the "polluter pays" principle is
applied by internalising external costs in all modes of transport, whilst taking into account the
specificities of Member States, and to encourage modal shift to more environmentally friendly modes
of transport.
? Sustainable urban development is key, both in quantitative ?currently over 70% of European
population live in urban areas- and qualitative terms. Cities are not only the engines of economic
growth and innovation, or the places where a large part of Europe?s human, social, cultural and
economic capital is allocated, but at the same time, the principal nodes where most of the resources
consumption (materials and energy) and the production of waste and emissions (including, most
significantly, greenhouse gases) are concentrated. From a social perspective, cities are also the places
where the challenges of demographics, inclusion and social cohesion, the integration of immigrants,
unemployment, education, poverty, multiculturality challenges, etc., are felt most intensely.
EU Ministers in charge of urban development and the EU institutions have been working together in
order to implement a more sustainable urban development.4
? In terms of decoupling environmental degradation and the use of natural resources from
economic growth, some progress has been achieved. Progress has also been made concerning
production patterns, but some consumption patterns, mainly regarding energy consumption, show
clear unfavourable developments. There also seems to be considerable potential to reduce the use of
natural resources and raw materials in production in a cost-effective way. SCP policies contain
several instruments that contribute to the objective of sustainable development in other key areas,
such as climate change and clean energy, energy saving and energy efficiency, efficient use of natural
resources, specially water and handling of chemicals and waste. It comprises social impacts and is a
global issue. Economic incentives are examples of tools to facilitate sustainable lifestyles. Other
preconditions for sustainable consumption are housing and planning and efficient infrastructure.
Education, training and awareness raising are prerequisites to equipping citizens to achieve
sustainable development goals. In this context it is important to develop strategic approaches to
sharing knowledge and good practice and incorporate sustainable development challenges in the
education systems.
? Conservation and management of resources is a key area where the EU has undertaken some
important EU policy initiatives (such as the Raw Materials initiative, the Waste and Water
Framework directives and Resource Efficiency in Europe 2020 initiative) in order to curb
unsustainable trends. There have been positive developments in the areas such as water and air
although further efforts are required. There is a growing demand for natural resources which by far
exceeds the carrying capacity of the Earth. This is a challenge which must be addressed with urgency.
Biodiversity is in decline globally and in the EU not least because of the related deterioration of
ecosystems, and the targets of 2010 will not be met. The loss of nature's capital, and of the capacity of
ecosystems to deliver vital services and buffer climate change, will have severe economic and human
consequences. Eurostat states that, although in the EU resource productivity has increased, domestic
4 The ?Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities? (May 2007), introduced the concept of the
integrated approach in urban policies, and the need to pay special attention to deprived
neighbourhoods within the context of the city as a whole, the ?Marseille Statement?( November
2008), was the starting point of the development of a common European Reference Framework for
Sustainable Cities and the ?Toledo Declaration?( June 2010)
material consumption itself showed an unfavourable trend, as did electricity consumption in
households and the motorisation rate. Today's land use practices often affect ecosystems negatively,
causing increased green house gas emissions, while healthy and resilient ecosystems facilitate
adaptation to climate change. Finally, a particularly alarming tendency is the drastic decline of some
fish stocks, which needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency in the context of the Common
Fisheries Policy.
? The overall development of health is mixed. Progress is shown regarding Europeans' years of
healthy life and falling death rates due to chronic diseases. However, there is increasing exposure to
man-made toxic substances and air pollution, mainly to ozone and particulate matter. Recently
published data on noise show that the majority of the EU's urban population is exposed to harmful
noise levels. Furthermore, it has been found that it is vital to ensure that by 2020 chemicals, including
pesticides, and especially those that persist and accumulate over time, are produced and used in a way
that will minimise adverse effects on the environment and human health. The EU chemicals
regulation REACH is a milestone in that direction. Ageing is another important characteristic of the
EU population, which is getting older at a fast pace. Ageing related illnesses, especially
neurodegenerative ones (Alzheimer) are being considered at the Joint Programming Initiative by most
of the Member States.
? On Social inclusion, demography and migration, the Commission is contributing to a number of
pilot projects on green economy in developing countries, including on environmental fiscal reform, in
order to explore options for future support in these areas. The review (?) showed that the numbers of
jobless households and long-term unemployment had been reduced over the period up to 2007 but the
number of working poor and the overall risk of poverty have not changed. The EU's workforce will
begin to decline in 2013 and will decrease by approximately 30 million by 2050. The potentially
negative effects on the EU's labour markets could be addressed by promoting higher labour force
participation through active labour market policies in combination with active social security policies.
A well-managed migration policy can also be supportive in this respect. Gender equality issues
should be better taken into account. The economic crisis has exacerbated inequalities and risks. With
current and expected job losses throughout the EU, unemployment is clearly one of the biggest
concerns. The hardest hit are young people, women, low-skilled workers and those who have been
unemployed for a long time. But it also renders the situation of migrants wishing to integrate into a
new society even more difficult. As the recession was rooted in a financial crisis, the economic
recovery may be slow with subdued job creation and a long process of absorption of unemployment.
Therefore it is crucial that the clear long term growth potential in a few areas is fully seized, including
its gender impact such as jobs created by the transition towards a greener economy. Balanced
approach to combining flexibility and security together with comprehensive active inclusion
strategies and integration activities is not only crucial to support all those affected by the crisis,
including the most vulnerable, but also to limit losses in human capital associated with prolonged
unemployment and to equip the workforce with the right skills required to take up future job
opportunities associated with prolonged unemployment. The current paradigm of women
underrepresented in most green job occupations will require direct policy and program action.
? On financial instruments, progress is being made to progressively phase out environmentally
harmful subsidies in some sector,. Moreover, the EU is currently examining a Commission proposal
for a Council Regulation on State aid to facilitate the closure of uncompetitive coal mines by 1st
October 20145. This proposal aims at a phase-out of all production subsidies by then. Transparent and
non-discriminatory market-based instruments are a promising way forward, as they can be used
effectively to guide the choices of consumers and producers into a more sustainable direction.
Currently, the Commission explores ways that New Innovative financial instruments and mechanism
can be further used in the future EU budget for the period starting from 2014. These will seek to
respond better to the changing global economic environment, to allow for flexible approaches for the
participation of the private sector in EU co-financing and support and to mobilise more than EU
actions in climate change, energy security, innovation, new technologies, RTD, etc. In the
area of state aid, more favourable provisions have been introduced with regard to the financing of
environmental projects.
? The EU is firmly committed to support the achievement of the MDGs globally by 2015, as we
clearly reiterated at the High Level MDGs Summit held last September in New York in the
framework of the 65th UNGA, where world leaders agreed to keep the promises made to achieve the
MDGs by 2015 and adopted an Action Plan to accelerate progress. MDGs are still achievable, if all
partners in the international community demonstrate strong political commitment, implement
necessary policy changes and take concrete action. Global challenges call for collective responsibility
by all stakeholders. There has been good progress on MDGs and there are plenty of success stories
and lessons learned to build upon. However, progress has been uneven and considerable work
remains to be done prioritising MDGs most off-track, notably in the regions and countries most
lagging behind, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
Countries in situations of conflict and fragility need special attention. Developing countries have
primary responsibility towards achieving the MDGs. The EU finds it vital that the developing
countries reinforce their ownership and leadership, notably by incorporating the MDGs into national
development strategies and by mobilizing domestic resources for development efforts. The recently
published booklet on the EU and MDGs provides useful information, as it summarises progress and
key achievements of EU support. Info on the MDGs and EU actions (both the booklet and the
interactive map) can be found here : http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/millenium-developmentgoals/
index_en.htm
? Official development assistance (ODA) is an indispensable element of a meaningful global
development partnership. The EU and its Member States account for more than half of global ODA
and reaffirms its commitment to increasing its aid spending to reach 0.7% of GNI by 2015. The EU
calls on all other international donors including new and emerging partners ? to raise their level of
ambition and to increase their ODA efforts to a level similar to the EU, thus contributing their fair
share to the global development efforts. Examples of EU development initiatives and instruments
particularly focused on sustainable development include: The ACP-EU Water Facility and the EUAfrica
Energy Partnership, building on existing EU initiatives and instruments: Thematic programme
for Environment and sustainable management of natural resources including Energy; ACP-EU
Energy Facility and EU-Africa Partnership on Infrastructure
? Concerning trade with developing countries and on top of the Economic Partnership Agreements
(EPAs) with ACP regions and countries, the EU continues promoting FLEGT voluntary agreements
in partnership with developing countries, and we are currently discussing with the European
Parliament a proposal for a Regulation laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and
timber products on the market. Both initiatives are complementary and aim at promoting sustainable
forest management (SFM) and banning illegal logging through a combination of measures, including
trade measures. This being said, some positive long-term development trends can be seen, in
particular from least developed countries. Another positive long-term trend is that overall financial
flows to developing countries have been increasing. However, during the last year?s financial crisis
most financial flows, including remittances, foreign direct investments and export revenues have been
interrupted. There is a need to explore how these trade and financial flows contribute to sustainable
development in the respective countries.
Key measures/actions at the level of Member States concerning National Sustainable Development
Strstegies (NSDSs)
The EU Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) adopted in 2001 and revised in 2006 has also been
instrumental in increasing the coherence between sustainable development strategies at national and regional
levels. Sustainable development is primarily promoted and monitored in the context of individual EU policies
while the EU SDS plays a central role in promoting the overall objective of sustainable development.
Today, almost all EU Member States have their own national sustainable development strategies (NSDS) in
place, in line with international recommendations of best practice. National SDS coordinators provide a link
between the EU SDS and NSDS. The European Sustainable Development Network (ESDN) facilitates the
exchange of good practices and experiences with Member States. Information on NSDS is available on the
ESDN website6.
The most recent ESDN report of September 2010 provides a comprehensive update on National Sustainable
Development Strategies (NSDSs) of 29 European countries (27 EU Member States, plus Norway and
Switzerland) 7. After a general overview of NSDS processes, objectives and differences between countries,
the situation and recent developments in NSDSs is described and analysed along several aspects, including
(a) basic information and institutional anchoring of NSDSs, (b) vertical policy coordination mechanisms, (c)
horizontal policy coordination mechanisms, (d) evaluation and review, (e) monitoring and indicators, and (f)
participation and consultation processes.
Many countries started preparing their own NSDSs towards the end of 1990s, culminating in a relatively
speedy preparation in most of the European countries shortly before the 2002 UN World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. In addition to Agenda 21 and the linkage to the Rio
commitments, NSDS development was spurred by further UN work (a 1997 Special Session of the UN
General Assembly urging for governments to prepare their own NSDSs until 2002; effort of UNDESA and
UNECE; UNDP?s Capacity 21 initiative, relevant especially for European countries which were not EU
Member States at that time), work of the OECD (the Sustainable Development publication series, work of the
Development Assistance Committee as well as linkage to one of the seven OECD?s international
development goals) and by the EU through the European Council?s Presidency Conclusion from Gothenburg
2001 which marked the first EU Sustainable Development Strategy (EU SDS).
An analysis and comparison of NSDSs is complicated by the fact that they are very different from country to
country. (?) Mixed approaches with the NSDSs serving as framework documents but still containing very
detailed policy actions are quite common. In addition, NSDSs to a significant extent differ in scope,
objectives, topic areas and measures (as well as the mechanisms of their implementation). The number of
objectives varies from 4 to 16 and they are formulated with various structuring principles in mind: along
visionary concepts, along dimensions of human well-being, along environmental sectors or along problem
areas. Topic areas also vary considerably with the less common being protection of culture, economic
sustainability of the government or material welfare and economic growth. Of course, there are many reasons
for this: countries vary in their natural and economic assets, in their histories of political discourses etc.
(?)The NSDS implementation at the governmental level has provided impulses to parliamentarians acting in
the SD field to set up institutional settings in order to increase the control towards the NSDS process in the
government (e.g. Germany). There is a new trend towards the establishment of parliamentary institutions in
this respect (e.g. Latvia, Czech Republic in 2010 and Germany in 2004). Their purpose is to raise awareness
of SD issues at the parliamentary level, to submit proposals for the NSDS process, and to provide
recommendations on individual topics.
NSDSs: policy-making processes and legislation
According to interviews, the NSDSs have mixed effects on policy-making, sectoral-planning or legislation
processes. Half of the interviewees claimed that NSDSs have a rather strong influence in policy making; the
other half was sceptical (e.g. Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg, Greece, Switzerland) or
6 http://www.sd-network.eu/?k=country%20profiles
7 The following paragraphs are taken from ESDN QUARTELY REPORT ? SEPTEMBER 2010 National Sustainable
Development Strategies in Europe: Status quo and recent development (Author: Michal Sedlacko, Nisida Gjoksi &
Gerald Berger)
believed that the NSDSs were not affecting at all their policy-making and planning (e.g. Slovenia, Estonia,
Hungary). Most NSDS coordinators, who were skeptical, believed that the NSDSs are overshadowed by
other policy topics such as crisis management or climate change that proved to have more political attraction
than SD4. In general, NSDS coordinators had difficulties in evaluating the extent to which the NSDSs or
other policy strategies affected policy-making processes. Several interviews revealed that the NSDSs remain
a very broad and general platform which offers established-mechanisms for an exchange and coordination of
strategies at the administrative level. Accordingly, the NSDSs have created a ?participative culture of policy
preparation or policy planning processes?. In some countries, these processes have been extremely relevant,
also beyond SD (e.g. Austria for transport policy, construction, etc.).
Reference in political debate
The interviews revealed that NSDSs were rarely referred to in political or public debates. And when this
happened, it was mostly due to those who are either involved in the NSDS processes or interested in topics
such as environmental policy. Several reasons account for this: Firstly, the economic crisis absorbed political
debates. Secondly, the NSDSs are just one strategy among several other policy strategies. Thirdly, where and
when mainstream economic thinking is dominant, there is little place for debates on SD issues. Finally, due
to SD being a rather complicated and an abstract concept, the public has often difficulties in understanding its
terms, despite all awareness raising efforts.
Obstacles and challenges in the transition to sustainability
Most interviewees believe that the NSDSs alone, as a policy tool, will not suffice to move countries in the
transition towards sustainability. Several obstacles are to be overcome:
Economic factors: The countries' key concern is to recover from the economic crisis, budgets are constrained,
and politicians want to employ the few resources in the most effective way. This may have mixed results on
SD. Budget constraints might attribute priorities only to sectoral issues and not to cross-sectoral topics, and
the reductions may result in loss of expertise (e.g. UK SD commission will be dissolved in 2011).
Political factors: The main obstacle for the NSDS integration in policy making is the politicians' concerns for
short-term policies. This is in conflict with the long term SD concept. Nonetheless, some chances are
detectable in the political culture: for example, countries are more and more concerned with issues like green
growth.
International and European incentives: At the moment, there is no incentive from the international level for
strengthening SD policies at the national level. Firstly, the EU SDS has not provided enough guidance to
national NSDS processes. Secondly, the failure of reaching common goals in the climate change debate
might also paralyze SD policies at the national level.
Way of thinking: The complexity of SD requires a holistic approach in thinking. However, neither policymakers
nor the public is willing to follow and understand the pillars of SD.
Institutional factors: Current institutional structures (e.g. sectoral orientation of political actions) hinder or
complicate the coordination mechanisms of NSDSs.
The interview partners suggested several solutions to address current challenges. In particular, they
underlined the need of better coordination mechanisms, stronger participation, and a change in SD incentives
models. For achieving wider political visibility, the role of stakeholders (business and public) should be
further strengthened. Finally, in order to overcome vertical coordination problems, EU institutions should put
more pressure and should show more guidance for implanting SD objectives.
A summary of information collected concerning more specifically Member States responses to questions A.3
(and B.5) is made in a document called Annex to questionnaire A and B

The EU Sustainable Development Strategy: a long term vision and overarching policy framework
Sustainable development remains a fundamental objective of the European Union under the Lisbon Treaty.
The work to promote sustainable development is primarily carried out the context of individual EU policies,
whilst the EU?s Sustainable Development Strategy (EU SDS), revised in 2006, promotes the overall objective
of sustainable development.
As emphasised in the Presidency's report on the 2009 review of the Union's Sustainable Development
Strategy (16818/09), the strategy (the EU SDS) will continue to provide a long term vision and constitute the
overarching policy framework for all Union policies and strategies. The EU SDS review states that in the
future the EU SDS should focus on EU's long-term goals in crucial areas, notably by:
- Contributing to a rapid shift to a low-carbon and low-input economy,
- Intensifying environmental efforts for the protection of biodiversity, water and other natural resources,
- Promoting social inclusion.
- Strengthening the international dimension of sustainable development.
The core priorities in the Europe 2020 Strategy
Next to the EU SDS, which provides a longer-term perspective, the core priorities for the EU are set out in the
Europe 2020 Strategy8 (the EU2020) and in its 7 flagship initiatives. Our earlier Lisbon strategy was about
growth and jobs. Now it is about how Europe can be turned into a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy
delivering high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion. Europe 2020 has three mutually
reinforcing priorities:
? Smart growth: developing an economy based on knowledge and innovation.
? Sustainable growth: promoting a more resource efficient, greener and more competitive economy.
? Inclusive growth: fostering a high-employment economy delivering social and territorial cohesion.
The EU Europe 2020 set five measurable EU targets for 2020 that will steer the process and be translated
into national targets: for employment; for research and innovation; for climate change and energy; for
education; and for combating poverty. They represent the direction we should take and will mean we can
measure our success. They are backed up by concrete proposals to make sure they are delivered. The flagship
initiatives set out in this paper show how the EU can make a decisive contribution. Flagship initiatives are:
- Innovation Union ? re-focusing R&D and innovation policy,
- Youth on the Move ? improving the performance of EU higher education system,
- A Digital Agenda for Europe ? development of fast Internet and interoperable applications,
- Resource efficient Europe ? shift towards a resource efficient, low carbon economy,
- An Industrial Policy for the Globalisation Era,
- An Agenda for New Skills and Jobs ? modernising labour markets,
- European Platform against Poverty.
EU priorities are made more specific in the Integrated Guidelines, which are essentially directed at
Member States to provide them with guidance in defining and implementing their national reform
programmes. Guideline 5 specifically addresses issues pertaining to improving resource efficiency and
reducing greenhouse gases.
Resource efficiency is also a key part of the Europe's 2020 strategy (also backed up by a flagship initiative);
it aims to support the shift towards a resource-efficient and low-carbon economy.
8 Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth: http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/index_en.htm
10
The Europe 2020 strategy finally includes consideration on the international dimension of the policies it
prescribes. The strategy has a specific section on deploying EU external policy instruments for the purposes
outlined above; particularly relevant is what the strategy says about EU external economic policy.
The European Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities (RFSC)9.
Following the Marseille Statement on the need to continue supporting sustainable urban development and the
integrated approach, and to implement the principles of the Leipzig Charter at local level, a common
European Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities is being developed, through a process of broad
participation and with the involvement of the European Commission, Member States, cities, experts, etc.
The Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities (RFSC) is an open, non-binding, on-line toolkit to assist
actors of urban management and development to improve dialogue and action on sustainability at local level.
It offers a multi-purpose decision-making and communication tool for promoting sustainable urban
development. It is not place-specific and can be adapted to suit local priorities and different circumstances.
The tool shows and explains step-by-step what actions are possible or necessary to organise the process in a
city or municipality, that is to say to help the city develop in an integrated manner. The users are guided
through a series of questions to explore their city?s approach to sustainability and provide them with tools for
improving this. Tools and supporting guidance are also given to monitor implementation and to evaluate the
results.
The tool is designed in a flexible way, in order to be adapted and enriched according to the particular situation
of the city or municipality, and also in each national context (translation, specific documentation or
indicators, etc.).
The SCP-SIP Action Plan
The EU is also about to review the SCP-SIP Action Plans in 2012, In particular, an analysis is planned on
the need for further action to improve the energy and environmental performance of products, in particular by
extending the Eco-design and Labelling Directives to cover non energy-related products. The Thematic
Strategies on Natural Resources and on the Prevention of Waste and Recycling are both under review.
A Strategy covering the implementation of the Environment and sustainable management of natural resources
including energy Thematic Programme (ENRTP) for the period 2011-2013 is in preparation. The EU policy
priorities to be addressed through the revised Strategy are 1) to support adaptation to the impacts of climate
change in developing countries, in particular in the most vulnerable ones; support the development of
mitigation actions, including on REDD+, and key implementing tools10; promote the conclusion of an
ambitious and global climate agreement; and provide a framework for supply of sustainable energy in
developing countries; 2) to support sustainable management of natural resources with a focus on forest
governance through the implementation of the FLEGT Action Plan and the EU's forthcoming Biodiversity
Strategy11 as well as to reduce the ecological footprint of the growing population and protect human health by
promoting the green economy; and 3) to implement the international environmental and climate dimension of
the EU's 2020 vision.
The Innovation Europe Flagship initiative
Other important EU policies related to Green Economy also include the Innovation Europe Flagship
initiative (Eco-innovation action plan under development) and Sustainable Consumption and Production
policies (SCP), where the current policies are also planned to be reviewed in 2012 in order to put forward a
9 http://www.rfsustainablecities.eu
10 e.g. low emission development strategies, market readiness mechanisms, Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
[MRV]
11 to be developed in 2010
11
range of possible actions including product policies, binding European rules. There is now also a significant
interest of European businesses that would benefit from resource efficient policies, partly due to global trends
in resource scarcity (eg. phosphate, metals) as the global economy expands, and partly due to past changes to
a legislative framework creating environmental sectors.
The EU eco-industry is already one of Europe's biggest industrial sectors. It contributes to EU economic
growth and employment. Its estimated annual turnover of 319 billion euro is about 2,5% of Europe's Gross
Domestic Product (GDP). Already around 3.4 million people are directly employed in the EU eco-industry,
which is around 1,5% of all Europeans in employment. It is a significant sector of the economy ? employing
more than the steel sector, pharmaceuticals or even the automotive sector.
The strengthened eco-industry is also a consequence of strong support for eco-innovation, which has been a
priority for the European Union since 2004 with the introduction of the Environmental Technologies Action
Plan (ETAP). In its five years of implementation ETAP was successful in to facilitating the transition from
research to market, breaking down market barriers to the uptake of green technologies and opening global
markets to eco-innovations. The priority actions include: influence and increase R&D, verify new
technologies, mobilise financing and investments, use green public procurement to expand the market for
environmental technologies; improving the information base on eco-innovation.
A Communication on integrating environment in development cooperation is in preparation in response
to the Council Conclusions of 25 June 2009. The purpose is to outline a joint approach of the Commission
and EU Member States for integrating environment and climate change in development cooperation by
working closer together, better use of tools, expanding the knowledge base, etc, taking into account the code
of conduct, recent developments in the development policy (development consensus and green paper), as well
as the challenge of dealing with climate change in an integrated manner (i:e. not as a self standing issue) and
access to renewable energies.

International co-operation can strengthen support for sustainable development through:
- providing the platform for exchanging best practise, lessons learned and building capacity.
- coordinating resources, maintaining political pressure for implementation of internationally agreed goals
and targets etc.
- intensifying the cooperation between regions in comprehensive, multi-level and multi-stakeholder processes
aiming at finding common approaches to successfully meet the Millennium Development Goals, and
providing support to regions in the form of tools and instruments for the development of practical solutions to
overcome respective challenges.
- providing in the international economy a supportive climate for achieving sustainable development, by
making trade and environment mutually supportive, providing adequate financial resources to cooperation,
and encouraging macroeconomic policies conducive to environment and development.
- basing international cooperation on sustainable development principles to ensure that initiatives,
partnerships or projects have multiple positive effects and that by improving one target area (e.g. economic
development) another interlinked area (social or environment), which is not in focus of such an initiative, is
not worsened.
- basing cross-border cooperation on nature conservation (like Hungary with Slovakia, Austria, etc.) or in the
field of employment (like Hungary with Slovakia, Romania, etc.) by easing getting work permit and
streaming on the labour market. Those in water management ensure coordinated water protection and flood
control, early warning and mutual assistance.
The global community should strongly recommit itself to sustainable development and create a clear vision
for green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication and for institutional
framework for sustainable development.
12
In this regard, the achievement of strengthened cooperation among regions as outcome of UNCSD could
enhance the efficiency of the current UN system in the area of sustainable development, and ease a better
coordination for the implementation of environmental agreements. UNCSD should:
- renew commitment of key stakeholders, in particular governments, for achieving sustainable development
paths integrating the environmental, social and economic dimension. International cooperation, both bilateral
and multilateral can only be successful if it is based on the (political) commitment as well as the will to
develop and implement strategies for achieving this goal.
- highlight understanding of embedding MDGs in the framework of sustainable development.
- promote closer monitoring of SDS at all levels against an agreed core-set of indicators.
- contribute to strengthening cooperation of different stakeholders, especially enhanced engagement of private
sector.
- contribute to enhancing international cooperation focusing on addressing transboundary issues.
- Address ?green economy and institutional frame for sustainable development.

Current EU assessment of the progress made towards sustainable development
The measurement of sustainable development in the EU is based on core sets of indicators
relating to the three components, with the aim of monitoring in an effective and transparent
way the EU trends of sustainable development. In 2005, a first comprehensive assessment of
the progress towards sustainable development within the EU was made by Eurostat in its
publication ?Measuring progress towards a more sustainable Europe - Sustainable
development indicators for the European Union? covering the period 1990-2005 as a follow
up of the Work Program on Sustainable Development Indicators of the CSD. This assessment
was based on a set of more than 100 sustainable development indicators related to the EU
sustainable development strategy, launched by the European Council in Gothenburg in 2001.
Since the adoption of the EU renewed Sustainable Development Strategy (EU SDS) in 2006,
the monitoring and assessment of the Strategy are ensured by 2 types of report published each
two years: a progress report on the implementation of the SDS in the EU and the Member
States and a monitoring report describing a comprehensive set of sustainable development
indicators.
- The progress reports: The Commission's assessment of the implementation of EU
Sustainable Development Strategy is given in the 2007 Progress Report on EU SDS
implementation1 and the 2009 EU SDS Review2.
- The monitoring reports: These reports produced by Eurostat's provide a wide
summary of the progress towards sustainable development in terms of the objectives
and targets. They describe more than 100 sustainable development indicators (SDI)
structured as a three-storey pyramid distinguishing between three levels of indicators.
The indicators in the first level provide the headline indicators related to the seven key
challenges of the EU SDS, the indicators of the second level pertain to the operational
∗ References to the EU should be understood as referring to the EU and its 27 Member States
1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0642:EN:NOT
2 2009 Review of SDS Strategy: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st16/st16818.en09.pdf
2
objectives of the strategy and the indicators of the third level relate to actions
described in the strategy or explanatory variables. The first monitoring report was
published in 2007 and the second one in 20093. Its main results are summarized
hereunder (more detailed statistics are provided by Eurostat on its website4).
This summary based on the headline indicators illustrates the advantages but also the
limitations to work with a small number of indicators to measure the progress towards
sustainable development. For instance, although the share of Gross National Income spent by
the EU on official development assistance decreased between 2005 and 2008, the absolute
amount spent by the EU-27 on official development assistance significantly increased over
this period of time.
The trends of the list of Sustainable Development Indicators (SDI) have been assessed in the
monitoring reports with some reliability for the last 10 years, but for the previous years
various obstacles do not allow us to carry out effective assessment. In the 2009 monitoring
report, the evaluation of the progress since 2000 based on the headline indicators shows a rather
mixed picture.
Other assessments deliver relevant additional information on the progress towards sustainable
development at the EU level, such as for example the first assessment stemming from a G8+5
initiative and sponsored by Germany and the European Commission. This assessment points
to the growing pressures on biodiversity and ecosystem services across the world and the
need for improved valuation metrics for pricing natural resources. The main pressures come
5
from population growth, changing diets, urbanization, climate change and invasive alien
species. [The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity - Interim Report, European
Communities, 2008)].
Next steps to measure the progress made towards sustainable development
In order to improve the indicators used to measure the progress towards sustainable
development, several initiatives have been recently launched :
�� the report of the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission or Commission on the
Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. This Commission was
created at the beginning of 2008 on French government's initiative to identify the
limits of GDP as an indicator of economic performance and social progress, to
consider additional information required for the production of a more relevant picture,
and to discuss how to present this information in the most appropriate way. The report
of this Commission makes 12 concrete recommendations which in particular
emphasize the need to complement GDP by indicators on well-being
(http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/en/index.htm);
�� the communication "GDP and Beyond" COM (2009) 433. This Communication
includes actions to better measure progress in a changing world, in particular better
using and communicating environmental and social indicators, developing other
indicators on wellbeing and quality of life, developing a SD scoreboard, ensuring
more timely information for better policy making (also linked to chapter 40 of
Agenda 21);
�� the EU efforts to identify ecological sustainability thresholds to provide reference
values for the interpretation of indicators;
�� the work on environmental and eco-system accounting to measure the two-way
interaction between the economy and environment to support measures of green
growth.

(See also responses to A.1 and A.6 in questionnaire A and the annex to A and B
questionnaires)
Since early 90s sustainable development has become a fundamental objective of the EU, and
in 1997 it was recognized as an overarching objective of EU policies, through the inclusion in
the Treaty of Amsterdam. At the Gothenburg Summit, in June 2001, EU leaders launched a
sustainable development strategy (EUSDS), proposing objectives and policy measures to
tackle a number of key unsustainable trends in the EU and globally. In 2006 the Strategy has
been renewed, identifying new priorities, calling for a new approach to improve synergies
and reduce trade-offs, and calling for a more integrated approach to policy making, based on
better regulation (impact assessments) and on the guiding principles for sustainable
development.
The EUSDS invited Member States to elaborate National Strategies according with the
European key priorities and foreseeing that the biannual Reports elaborated by the EU
Commission should be built on the basis of Member States actions to implement the EUSDS.
In 2007 the EU Commission adopted the ?Progress Report on the Sustainable Development
Strategy 2007?, that reviewed results in moving towards the seven core objectives of the
Strategy and identified policy initiatives at both EU and Member States level that have
contributed to the results.
The December 2007 European Council asked the Commission to provide a second progress
Report on the EU SDS. In July 2009 the Commission adopted the 2009 Review of EU SDS
?Mainstreaming sustainable development into EU policies: 2009 Review of the European
Union Strategy for Sustainable Development?. It underlined that in recent years the EU has
mainstreamed sustainable development into a broad range of its policies but a number of
unsustainable trends require urgent action. The Report underlined, in the paragraph 4, that the
EU SDS ?has also been instrumental in developing sustainable development strategies at
national and regional levels. Today, almost all EU Member States have their own national
sustainable development strategies (NSDS) in place, in line with international
recommendations of best practice. A recently published study, commissioned by the
Committee of the Regions, provides a detailed analysis of these national strategies?.
(http://www.cor.europa.eu/pages/DocumentTemplate.aspx?view=detail&id=046e4f93-3757-
4e90-8297-9552c72f9271)
The 2006 EU SDS invited Member States to make use of the existing European Sustainable
Development Network (ESDN) ?to enhance the mainstreaming of sustainable development
issues, vertical integration and coherence between the EU, national and sub-national levels of
policy-making?. In 2007 the EDSN elaborated a document ?Objectives and indicators of
sustainable development in Europe: a comparative analysis of European coherence?. It gives
an overview of objectives and indicators of sustainable development in Europe and also of
the development of NSDSs in Europe, and it characterises them in terms of basic types focus,
structure and objectives.

The construction, step by step, of the scientific foundations necessary for a new governance
of global environmental issues owes much to technical entities of the UN.
We must welcome here, again, the role of the IPCC, which criticisms have reinforced, since
the IPCC is taking the opportunity of these criticisms to improve its functioning. Its
legitimacy remains. It is an imperative need of the international community to have the
advice of scientists for the decisions to be made on global environment issues.
We must also mention the importance of IPBES, which should be formally established by the
end of 2010, and the importance of an ambitious and realistic framework to be adopted for
biodiversity beyond 2010. The input of UN technical units in particular will be awaited.

The construction, step by step, of the scientific foundations necessary for a new governance
of global environmental issues owes much to technical entities of the UN.
We must welcome here, again, the role of the IPCC, which criticisms have reinforced, since
the IPCC is taking the opportunity of these criticisms to improve its functioning. Its
legitimacy remains. It is an imperative need of the international community to have the
advice of scientists for the decisions to be made on global environment issues.
We must also mention the importance of IPBES, which should be formally established by the
end of 2010, and the importance of an ambitious and realistic framework to be adopted for
biodiversity beyond 2010. The input of UN technical units in particular will be awaited.

The positive mutual reinforcement of the three pillars can be ensured by a consistent
promotion of common SD principles, which each ?pillar?/Ministry/actor/stakeholder would
follow. Transition to sustainable development is realised when environmental, social and
economic perspectives are considered in an integrated way as interdependent "components"
of a sustainable development, interacting on each other. Highlighting and advocating triplewin
-opportunities and good practices can simultaneously increase or reinforce social,
environmental and economic benefits.
One way to demonstrate the links between the different components is to identify the major
synergies but also conflicts or trade-offs across economic, environmental and social impacts
(such as short term economic growth externalizing social and environmental costs). The risks
of these trade-offs cannot be ignored when robust policy objectives are defined from one
dimension without simultaneously taking account of other ambitious targets. The risks are:
- that there is focus on economic growth to the exclusion of all other issues
- that there is no shared vision, no clear long term solution to problems
- that there is a lack of integration of and coherence between diverging strategies
The challenge is to prove that comprehensive sustainable development policy analysis can
overcome or event prevent various crises by bringing more coherent, legitimate and
sustainable decisions and solutions instead of (only) slowing down and complicating the
national and international decision-making processes.
To insure positive or virtuous interdependence and mutual reinforcement of the three
components of sustainable Development is possible:
- by making National SD Strategies , which have often been too strictly environmental (in
the "first generation"), more balanced strategies at all levels,
- by introducing a stronger social dimension in these strategies,
- by developing horizontal and cross-cutting policies such as Sustainable Consumption and
Production, which require a cross-cutting governmental approach and involve all
stakeholders in civil society.

None of the challenges mentioned in the chapeau of the questionnaire C can be considered
new or emerging. What might be considered as new/emerging challenges are the more often
happening concurrence or coincidence of several crises in different sectors/areas, which are
moreover multiplied by increasing global interdependence.
The European Union is not in favor of the dilution of the main themes of the UN Conference
on Sustainable Development (UNCSD). The Conference should focus on the two central
themes - the institutional framework for sustainable development and green economy in the
context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. Rather than identifying five new
and emerging issues, there is a need to focus on the integration of the ?emerging issues? in
?the Green Economy in the context of Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication?.
The sustainable development related challenges we need to face today can hardly be
characterised as new, but rather as ones that require stronger political attention and action
today even more than ever. Measures to tackle the present crisis must be compatible with
long-term sustainability goals1. A number of unsustainable trends require urgent action:
? The financial and economic crisis affects especially the most disadvantaged and
vulnerable groups. Unemployment is increasing, especially among young people.
According to the FAO, more than one billion people, the highest figure for the last 40
years, suffer from hunger and malnutrition.
? Significant additional efforts are also needed to curb and adapt to climate change, to
decrease high energy consumption in the transport sector and to reverse the current
loss of biodiversity and natural resources in the current scenario of increasing water
scarcity and desertification. The shift to a safe and sustainable low-carbon and lowinput
economy will require a stronger focus in the future. Priority actions should be
∗ References to the EU should be understood as referring to the EU and its 27 Member States
1 2009 Review of EU SDS Strategy
more clearly specified in future reviews. Governance, including implementation,
monitoring and follow-up mechanisms should be reinforced.2

The UNCSD should address the new degree of challenges by focussing its attention and
delivering concrete results in the two main topic areas, Green Economy in the Context of
Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication and Institutional Framework for
Sustainable Development. In particular potential solutions to the challenges highlighted in the
chapeau to the Part C of the Questionnaire can be found only by discussing and identifying a
new economic paradigm and through the support of a strengthened and renewed institutional
framework for SD.

Addressing the complex global interrelated challenges as those highlighted in this section
calls for an integrated approach to policy making. A stronger connection is required between
the generators of evidence (i.e. scientists) and the academic community and policy / decision
makers. To this extent a strengthened science policy interface building upon the experiences
carried out within MEAs could represent an added value to be upgraded and applied, where
appropriate, in other areas. National and regional experiences in this direction provide a
valuable input (e.g. NSDC, EEA SOER 2010 consultation process, UNEP GEO, and others)
to be considered.
In order to be able to better address SD challenges, it is important that research in these areas
is prioritized at international as well as at national level and that sufficient resources are
allocated to the three main areas of education, research and innovation3. There should be
strong communication among research and education bodies (esp. universities) and praxis.
Education, in the broader definition of formal non formal and informal learning processes,
represents a key tool to promote and support sustainable development global objectives. In
this sense, Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) can be included into curricula and
cross-curricular approaches, developed and implemented at all levels of education. Teachers,
Trainers and School Staff should be provided with the knowledge and competences required
to promote and include the principles underlying ESD, promoting a ?whole school approach?
To this extent, the UN Decade on Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014)
provides the global scheme of implementation aimed at integrating sustainable development
into learning processes at all levels. The UNESCO implementation scheme represents a tool
for countries and regions to strengthen, through the adoption of national and regional action
plans (e.g. UNECE Strategy on Education for Sustainable Development) the links between
science, education and policy making.
The alignment of research on sustainability goals is a crucial and irreversible thrust, ensuring
that research bears fruits for the European society. One of the key objectives of the EU
Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development for the period
2 Dec 2009 European Council Conclusions, see:
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/111877.pdf
3 The European Commission launched a structured dialogue with Member States on how the whole of European
research can be harnessed to sustainability goals. "RD4SD excercise"
http://ec.europa.eu/research/sd/index_en.cfm?pg=rd4sd
of 2007-2013 (FP7) is to contribute to sustainable development. In the current framework for
EU-funded cooperative research, it is more than 69% of the allocated EC funding over the
first three years of implementation that is expected to have a positive impact on at least one
of the seven key challenges of the EU SDS. In terms of budget, this leads so far to an amount
of ? 5.9 billion4. Two of the Joint Technology Initiatives (JTI) established under FP7, "Clean
Sky" and the "Hydrogen and Fuel Cells", are also linked to sustainability. The total EU
contribution amounts to ?1.3 billion.
Moreover, in the European economic recovery plan, the Commission proposed three major
public-private partnerships (PPPs) around three key issues for sustainability: "green cars",
"energy-efficient buildings", and "factories of the future".5
As an example of sustainability goals recently set by the EU, the 2009 Directive on
renewable energy6 sets ambitious targets for all Member States, such that the EU will reach a
20% share of energy from renewable sources by 2020 and a 10% share of renewable energy
specifically in the transport sector. It also improves the legal framework for promoting
renewable electricity, requires national action plans that establish pathways for the
development of renewable energy sources including bioenergy, creates cooperation
mechanisms to help achieve the targets cost effectively and establishes the sustainability
criteria for biofuels. This Directive should be implemented by all EU Member States
by December 2010.
The European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)7 has been recently set up to be a
key driver of sustainable European growth and competitiveness through the stimulation of
world-leading innovations with a positive impact on economy and society. The mission of the
EIT is to grow and capitalise on the innovation capacity and capability of actors from higher
education, research, business and entrepreneurship from the EU and beyond through the
creation of highly integrated Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs).
It is also important to mention the IU Partnerships created under the Innovation Union
Flagship Initiative in October 2010.

In order to address the interlinked challenges of emerging global problems described above
such as poverty eradication, lack of resources, pollution, biodiversity loss and climate change,
we will need to address the roots of the problem. We will need to "do more with less", embed
the life-cycle thinking in the current economic model, enforce the already existing Rio
principles (such as the "polluter pays" and the "precautionary principle") across borders and
make full use of available technologies to build partnerships between regions and nations.
The EU values UNCSD2012 as an opportunity to make further international progress on
policies that foster sustainable development, including poverty eradication. It should
contribute to and complement already ongoing processes in the field of sustainable
development A good example of this would be the achievement of the MDGs by 2015.
4Monitoring system on research for sustainable development www.fp7-4-sd.eu
5 source: 2009 Review of SDS Strategy, p.12)
6 Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the
use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and
2003/30/EC (OJEU L 140, 5.6.2009, p.16)
7 http://eit.europa.eu/about-eit/at-a-glance/eit-mission.html
The EU, as the world?s largest trading partner, the biggest donor of development assistance
and the leader in the efforts on climate change is aiming to show leadership also in areas such
as food and water security, health and education.8
International support should also be used for strengthening the capacity of countries to
address emerging challenges, through exchange of knowledge and best practices, pilot
projects, joint research activities, exchange of researchers and teachers, through the platforms
of international and NGO umbrella organizations.
International support should focus on prevention of problems, not only on addressing of
impacts. It should multiply effects and integrate solutions.

The consequences of challenges such as climate change, economic and financial crisis,
inefficient and unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, energy and food crisis
have adverse impacts on each society. Solutions to address these challenges require
additional capacities, investments and expenditure, as well as a more coherent approach and
stronger co-ordination between different sectors. These challenges are tightly interlinked with
one another and their potential solutions ought to be searched through the use of a sound
integrated approach to policy making in each and every area or sector of intervention.
Poorer and most vulnerable societies will be those affected first and greatest, and therefore
efforts should be focused in particular on these countries.

The development strategies which will have to be elaborated have to address not only
potential risks and challenges in general but must specifically include an assessment,
including from a gender perspective to what extent the poor or vulnerable populations are
likely to be affected.
They have to include targeted measures to improve their situation and the level of full,
productive and ?decent? employment at global, regional, national, sectoral and local levels,
which means a fair income, security in the workplace and social protection for families, better
prospects for personal development and social integration, freedom for people to participate
in the decisions that affect their lives and equality of opportunity and treatment for all women
and men, including the need to close the gender gap in green economy.
Definitions on what constitutes a green job are still evolving, but it is a fact that women have
very limited representation in occupations that predominate in the green jobs sector, as most
jobs tends to concentrate in non-traditional professions. Thus, it is necessary to prioritize
programs that both train women for these positions and help them make the challenging
transition into male-dominated occupations; as well as promoting balanced participation of
women and men in family and working life. Participation is key in order to meet the concrete
needs.

The UNCSD 2012 conference should develop a common understanding of the concepts and
instruments related to the theme Green Economy and its benefits and challenges, firmly
embedded in the context of Sustainable Development and poverty eradication. In particular,
it should present best practices and develop recommendations and options for its
implementation, taking into consideration the varying needs of industrialized countries,
emerging economies and developing countries
The EU and its Member States consider that UNEP?s definition presented in the ?Introduction
to the Green Economy Report? can be a starting point for our thinking about Green Economy
in the context of Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication (GESDPE):
A green economy is one in which the vital links between economy, society, and environment
are taken into account and in which the transformation of production processes, production
and consumption patterns while contributing to a reduction per unit in reduced waste,
pollution, and the use of resources, materials and energy, waste and pollution emission will
revitalize and diversify economies, create decent employment opportunities, promote
sustainable trade, reduce poverty, and improve equity and income distribution.
This definition is helpful as it encompasses both the ?environmental? angle of the topic as well
as the social and economic dimensions, which is a constitutive part of the topic as formulated
in the Agenda 21 resolution.
The concept of GESDPE is a step forward in the field of sustainable development, which
calls for respecting the finite resources of the planet and the international social agenda as
formulated in the Millennium Development Goals, the international environmental agenda
and the Rio principles. Economic growth has to be decoupled from the ongoing rundown of
∗ References to the EU should be understood as referring to the EU and its 27 Member States
2
our natural capital and, rather than an end in itself, has to be regarded as a means to
securing human progress.
Whilst green economy aims to contribute to sustainable development, it is not sufficient for
sustainable development and is not in any way a substitute for sustainable development. A
green economy needs to be promoted jointly with the social dimension of sustainable
development in order to have a positive social impact. Thus rather than replacing sustainable
development, green economy should be understood as a set of tools and a roadmap to
accelerate and facilitate a transition to an economy that is consistent with sustainable
development, integrating social, economic and environmental concerns.
The green economy agenda is now developing as a multistakeholder agenda. However
actions are still needed at the individual, local, regional, national and international levels to
make this transition to a GESDPE a reality. Consistency between all these levels is
important.
There is a need to make concrete substantial progress on this theme as a contribution to
significantly closing the remaining gaps in implementation of the outcomes of the major
summits on sustainable development. In this context, the European Union and its Member
States seek to engage in a constructive dialogue to develop a common understanding of this
theme in order to speed up subsequent action to implement the existing international
agenda.
Approaches to Green Economy will have to take into account differences between countries
and therefore will need to offer certain flexibility. In this respect, the international community
needs to build on our commitments on global poverty eradication, taking into account the
diverse socio-economic contexts in developing countries, emerging economies and
developed countries while also addressing the social impacts of proposed measures.
The EU and its Member States so far have highlighted, inter alia, the following elements for
GESDPE: low carbon economy, sustainable use of natural assets, resource efficiency
(including resources like energy, raw materials, food, water, space and biodiversity), building
resilience to climate change, sustainable consumption and production patterns, private
sector and stakeholder involvement, sustainable public procurement, developing indicators to
measure progress towards sustainable development, including social welfare. This will be
driven by investment in technologies and infrastructure, which requires skills for green jobs
and addressing social and equity concerns associated with these.

Based on discussions at the Preparatory Meeting of the United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development (UNCSD 2012) and on analytical work of international
organizations on green economy, there is already a very useful set of suggestions for
possible outcomes of the conference. They vary form very general and political to very
specific and hands on. Based on these suggestions, the EU can envisage the following
general outcomes on the GEDSPE theme at UNCSD 2012:
1. A global commitment and common understanding of Green Economy in the context of
sustainable development and poverty eradication. Clarity that this concept will
contribute to the aim of sustainable development and that a transition is needed to an
economy which acknowledges the finite resources of the planet and social and equity
needs as committed to by the international community. This implies a renewed
3
commitment to sustainable development and poverty eradication. This will require
renewed efforts by governments, international organisations and civil society
including the private sector.
2. A UN Green Economy Road Map which clarifies and stimulates the steps which are
needed on the national and international level in order to remove the obstacles to
implement a GESDPE. This UN Green Economy Road Map could include a timeline,
the identification of key actors, (voluntary) targets and a monitoring mechanism.
3. A toolbox or best practice guide of needed actions, instruments and policies which
transform the concepts related to GESDPE to real action and can be implemented by
Member States or individual companies or other organisations after the conference.
Such a toolbox should take into consideration the varying needs and practices of
industrialized countries, emerging economies and developing countries. economies.
In addition, agreements on specific topics could be achieved, such as on indicators for
GESDPE,on the measurement of well-being, on standards for green products and on other
specific issues that require international response. The interlinkages between the themes
GESDPE and "Institutional Framework for Sustainable Development" should also be further
explored and strengthened. The strengthening of international governance structures for
environment and sustainable development could help the transition to a green economy.

The economy depends on the earth?s natural assets and on healthy and educated people for
its productivity. This shows that the theme GESDPE is very much linked to most other policy
domains.
A very important domain is consumption and production policy. The international negotiations
on the 10 Year Framework of Programmes (10YFP) on Sustainable Consumption and
Production are going to be concluded at CSD-19 in May 2011 to implement the very broad
goal of changing unsustainable consumption and production patterns globally. As such this
framework should also be considered as a major response to the need to green the
economies worldwide while addressing social concerns.
Other domains are also addressed in the great amount of international work related to
GESDPE, such as reports of UNEP, the preparation of an OECD Green Growth Strategy,
ILO work on green jobs and upcoming recommendations of the UN High Level Panel on
Global Sustainability.
It should be noted that the transition to a GESDPE addresses environmental and social
needs explicitly and will provide new economic opportunities, but also hamper some existing
economic activities. Enhancing the attention paid to social, environmental and equity
concerns in the economic realm will possibly influence trade and a number of other policy
areas.
In particular, GESDPE, by its own nature, is very strongly linked with development policies
and with the aim to meet the MDGs. It reflects the realization, that even though economic
growth is an important objective, especially for developing countries, the source of growth is
also very relevant. A resource efficient low carbon growth takes environmental concerns into
account, while at the same time strengthens competitiveness and long-term growth.
4
Meeting the development goals in the spheres of energy security, food security and drinkingwater
access depends critically on the ongoing availability of resources in sufficient quantities
and of sufficient quality. We have to see the sustainable management of scarce and valuable
resources, such as water, in relation to the ecological growth of core economic sectors, such
as energy and agriculture, and as fundamental to a sustainable path of economic
development.
A GESDPE will thus contribute to sustainable development, but without replacing the aim of
sustainability. Green economy policies will need to demonstrate that they can have positive
impacts not only on the environment, but also on employment, wellbeing and poverty
reduction which is very much related to progress in terms of gender equality.
Also, a transition to a GESDPE calls for a policy mix of supportive measures in all sectors
concerning a number of barriers which need to be overcome in order to make the needed
global transition.
Examples include:
- Externalities, like social and environmental costs not taken into account by the current
economic system, leading to suboptimal policy and business decisions.
- Financial and policy systems shaped in such a way that individual and business
decisions tend to put relatively little weight on the future, leading to underinvestment
in innovation and sustainable solutions. To overcome this obstacle, economic
decision making should much more work with value chain and full life-cycle of
products (looking at extraction, production, consumption, waste and possible re-use
and recycling) and the environmental and social impacts of the products.
- To a large degree we are locked into existing infrastructure, patterns of behavior,
policies and business models. This path dependency is an obstacle to necessary
structural change. This can not be overcome completely, but innovation leading to
new technologies, new processes improving eco-efficiency and new business models
contributes to overcoming the lock in effect.
- Even when more sustainable technologies and infrastructures are developed an
important hurdle is the skills of the work force. To overcome this hurdle retraining and
skills support will be needed to create new green and decent jobs and other good
social conditions in all economic sectors.
- Uncertainty about future policies is a major hurdle for private companies to invest
more strongly in sustainable solutions. It helps to involve the private sector and civil
society in the development of long term policies and commitments including the work
on a GESDPE.
Each of these barriers needs to be addressed carefully when designing GESDPE policies in
order to identify the cases of potential conflict and to solve them beforehand, through
relevant long term integrated strategies at all levels, aknowledging that in the long run
economic growth is only possible when we promote social and economic development within
the carrying capacity of ecosystems and when we respect the planet?s finite resources.