1. PERFORMANCE TARGETS – CLEAN, CLEVER AND COMPETITIVE A think tank meeting 29/9-04 – 1/10-04 in Göteborg on a mission from DG-Environment. Participants from several major European research institutes and universities.

2. Background “Improve market conditions” Create, promote and focus ambitions regarding environmental technologies No legislation Improve competitiveness? PT not isolated from other activities A common concept for market actors Toprunner in Japan - benchmark

3. Background (cont.) Market – two parts – producers and customers –Producers, the pro-active companies need support, mostly in form of a better/guaranteed market –Consumers, the pro-active consumers need guidance and more consumers could be inspired

4. Description (cont.) Products, processes and services ! Easily communicated - clear signal A common concept for all actors Technology neutral Long-termed and progressive

5. Description (cont.) Objective: –Promote innovation and/or –Lift the average and/or –Phase out the worst Several levels? Toprunner ?

6. Description (cont.) Aggregation level Possible to be combined with –eco-labelling –eco-design –policy instruments of different types –…….

7. Justification of the PT concept Reduction of environmental pressures and risks Clear signals to producers and customers/purchasers for continuous improvement Reward the first movers and the well performing producers, and perhaps punish the laggards Create market for driving innovation Improve competitiveness on the globalizing markets Unwanted side-effects that have to be taken into account when the target system is designed, and in the following up process.

8. Implementation Suggestion for a process Selection of applications Diff. stakeholders Comm/ DG-Env decision Design of targets Good analytical work Diff. stakeholders Comm/ DG-Env decision High level group ETAP EPET Evalu- ation Selection of more applications

9. Implementation Aims of targets i) Promote innovation Ii) Lift the average and/or Iii) Phase out the worst Differentiated levels? Toprunner: 10% best today – average tomorrow ! LEV in California - a hybrid system ”Learning by doing” – Design group

10. Implementation Additional tools –Green procurement –Technology procurement (contest) –Eco-labelling –Ecodesign actions –life cycle costing calculations –Other ETAP actions –…….

11. Implementation Additional tools (cont.) –Public awareness campaigns –Educational efforts –Policy instruments of different types like legislation or economic incentives –…….

12. Implementation Monitoring important Time perspectives – case-dependent If possible – link to other objectives Selection of products –Large env. impact –New env. technologies available or nearly available Follow up systems – legislation? ……….

13. Way forward ! Pilot cases (see process chart) Technology foresight studies very useful Start with well defined cases – move on to a more systemic approach EPET could guide the process A specific on PTs in production processes, in relation with the IPPC scheme A correlation with IPP is necessary