Circumvention is as old as regulation. In recent years, however, fighting this phenomenon became a political priority. The focus on circumvention in 2019, both from the regulatory and standardisation point of view, is the result of years of our work drawing attention to the need to effectively address this issue.

Circumvent – verb /ˌsɜr·kəmˈvent/ – to avoid something by going around it

In 2015, the automotive sector was shaken by “Dieselgate”, which exposed how car emissions testing had been manipulated to circumvent rules in place to control air pollution. Suddenly, circumvention became the hot topic and similar cases related to ecodesign products were brought to light.

When a manufacturer decides to invest time and money to circumvent rather than innovate, it is a lose-lose situation for everyone else in society. Circumvention greatly impacts not only the users or the environment, though, but also those companies that expect a fair playing field. As a result, the anticipated energy and environmental savings cannot be delivered, consumers are misinformed and pay higher bills, while everyone suffers the severe consequences of climate change. At the same time, a competitive market based on product performance is undermined and genuine innovation is stalled. The credibility of labels and even the policy itself is questioned, not to mention the irrevocable damage to the brand reputation of the producer at fault.

Anti-circumvention – noun /ˈanti ˌsəːkəmˈvɛnʃ(ə)n/ – in opposition to circumvention

For years, ECOS has been highlighting the importance of dealing with circumvention both within the standardisation and in the regulatory processes.

Some of our arguments were heard in 2016, when the European Commission published an omnibus amendment for all ecodesign and energy labelling regulations, thus closing a loophole that left verification tolerances open for abuse by manufacturers – a topic ECOS had long been pushing for. Together with the European Standardisation Body CEN-CENELEC, we decided to take it a step further, stating that verification tolerances must also be set at the right level.

Our 2018 discussion paper on circumventing the ecodesign and energy label requirements quickly became a reference whenever the topic was discussed, and throughout 2019 we contributed to the celebrated “Ecodesign Package”, a set of regulations improving the energy- and resource efficiency of eleven different product groups. We were extremely pleased to see circumvention addressed in the new product rules, a pre-emptive strike towards dishonest producers.

In parallel, we worked to make sure that circumvention remains a priority on the standardisation agenda. We took part in a number of IEC and CENELEC initiatives, such as the CEN-CENELEC Ecodesign Coordination Group, which is responsible for ecodesign-related standardisation work. Within the Group, we were Secretary to the Task Force on “Tolerances and Uncertainties”, which was also mandated to specifically focus on circumvention.

We are constantly developing and deepening our knowledge on this complex issue, also as an active partner in several EU projects, such as the H2020 ANTICSS project, aiming to assess and define circumvention in relation to the EU ecodesign and energy labelling legislation and relevant harmonised standards. 2019 saw the project advance significantly, particularly regarding the definition of circumvention, and the database of case studies.

Towards regulations that defy circumvention

We strongly believe that circumvention should be tackled holistically, with a wide variety of coordinated and comprehensive measures. Unfortunately, the existing efforts are still scattered, and missing reinforced test methods and capacity building for the relevant stakeholders.

It is a long way to go but ECOS will continue to influence the ecodesign and energy labelling regulatory processes to make sure that all future regulations disallow and effectively discourage circumvention. We will advocate for standards which make circumvention difficult. We will continue to call for stronger market surveillance. And we will keep raising awareness on this issue, so that it is properly dealt with before another “Dieselgate” breaks out.