Given the "necessity of creating conditions favorable to sustainable growth, responsible business behavior and durable employment generation in the medium and long term" the European Commission released, in October 2011, "A renewed EU strategy 2011-2014 for Corporate Social Responsibility"; the Communications Network, Content and Technology Directorate General (DG CONNECT) took the lead for Action 5, which proposed to "launch a process in 2012 with enterprises and other stakeholders to develop a code of good practice for self- and co-regulation exercises, which should improve the effectiveness of the CSR process".

After the development of a first version of the "Code for Effective Open Voluntarism: Good design principles for self- and co-regulation and other multi-stakeholder actions" in the first months of 2012, it was then submitted for public consultation from June to September that year. In order to reformulate and improve the original text, the outcome of this consultation was analysed, resulting in the publishing on February 2013 of the "Principles for Better Self- and Co-Regulation".

These best practice principles, which will be promoted, tested and improved by the stakeholders taking part in the Community of Practice, include the following codes:

  • Participants: they "should represent as many as possible of the potential useful actors in the field".
  • Openness: the "concept agreement for any action should be multi-stakeholder and developed in a concerned and collaborative way"; any actions envisaged "should be prepared openly".
  • Good faith: the "different contributing capacities" of participants "should be taken into account when designing the envisaged action"; "Participants should bring [...] all information available" and "are expected to commit real effort to success".
  • Objectives: they "should be set out clearly and unambiguously" and "should include targets and indicators allowing an evaluation of the impact".
  • Legal Compliance: "Initiatives should be designed in compliance with applicable law and fundamental rights".
  • Iterative improvements: "Successful actions will usually aim for a prompt start" and "annual progress checks should be made".
  • Monitoring: it "must be conducted in a way that is sufficiently open and autonomous" and the results "are shared by all actors [...] and made public" in a "transparent and objective" way.
  • Evaluation: it "will allow participants to assess whether the action may be concluded, improved or replaced".
  • Revolving disagreements: "disputes should receive timely attention" and "may be confidential". Also, "complaints by non-participants should be submitted to a panel of independent assessors" and "non-compliance should be subject to a graduated scale of sanctions".
  • Financing: participants "will provide the means" but "Public funders or others may in addition support the participation of civil society organisations lacking [...] means". "Financial support should be made publicly known".

While EPHA (who responded to the consultation and participated in a public meeting to discuss the first draft code) acknowledges the key role of the industry in the policies implementation process, it also reiterates that the private sector should never be involved in the policy and strategy development and norms or standards settings: EPHA strongly encourages the Commission to implement legislation in matters impacting on population health because, even if voluntary self and co-regulation could be useful tools, they have proven to be ineffective to achieve health policy objectives.

Next steps: The Community of Practice first meeting will be held during the second half of 2013 and, by the end of 2014, it might have provided some practical experience to report on.

For more information:


- EPHA related articles:

Last modified on March 3 2013.