Conference on

Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

Organised by the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN and the World Economic Forum Berne, 10 October 2006

Table of contents

Report on the “Conference on Sustainable Use of Natural Resources” of 10 October 006, organised by the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN and the World Economic Forum

Introductions André Schneider, World Economic Forum, and Bruno Oberle, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN

3

Joint statement by the FOEN, World Economic Forum and WWF Switzerland

4

Plenary session Protection and use of natural resources Stefanie Engel, ETH Zurich: Switzerland’s new environmental policy Bruno Oberle, FOEN: New goals in environmental policy Luzius Wasescha, seco: Consequences for economic policy

6

Workshop 1: Production 8 Part A: Best practices Fritz Günter, Ciba Specialty Chemicals; Barbara Dubach, Holcim Part B: Framework conditions Richard Gamma, SGCI Chemie Pharma Schweiz; Roland W. Scholz and Daniel J. Lang, ETH Zurich Workshop : Consumption Part A: Best practices Christian Waffenschmidt, Coop Part B: Framework conditions Jacqueline Bachmann, Stiftung für Konsumentenschutz; Heinz Beer, SWICO

10

Workshop 3: Mobility Part A: Best practices Edgar Schorderet, Touring Club Schweiz; Stephan Lötscher, IKEA Part B: Framework conditions Ruedi Ott, Tiefbauamt der Stadt Zürich; Franziska Teuscher, National Councillor

1

Workshop 4: Financing Part A: Best practices Marc Hechler, Zürcher Kantonalbank; Cécile Koller, responsAbility Part B: Framework conditions Beat Bürgenmeier, University of Geneva

14

Imprint Publisher Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, CH-3003 Berne, www.environment-switzerland.ch, in cooperation with the World Economic Forum, CH-13 Cologny, www.weforum.org FOEN is an office of the Federal Department of Environment, Transport, Energy and Communi­ cations (DETEC) © FOEN, Berne, 007 Concept, editing and production Thomas Streiff, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd., Zurich

Panel discussion 16 Heinz Beer, SWICO; Rolf Büttiker, President of the Council of States; Daniel Hofer, MIGROL; Volker Hoffmann, ETH Zurich; Bruno Oberle, FOEN; Thomas Vellacott, WWF Switzerland Conclusions

18

Conference programme/Participants

19

Author Stefan Moser Project management Ursula Finsterwald, FOEN Sarah Saffar, World Economic Forum Design and layout Markus Galizinski and Katharina Gassmann, d signsolution, Zurich Publication www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen This publication is also available in German German: DIV-110-D English: DIV-110-E Photographs All photographs from the conference:

copyright with Swiss-Image GmbH, Andy Mettler



Introductions

We need an effective resource policy

From environmental to resource policy

More than ever, environmental policy is resource policy. In order to secure an adequate supply of natural resources such as water, land, air, landscape, forests, but also tranquility etc. in the future, their use must be regulated.

The environmental policy of recent years has no bad record at all. In many areas (forest conservation, water protection, waste treat­ ment, air pollution control, noise abatement) successes have been achieved. The national implementation structures have been established, while the participation in international agree­ ments attests to the desire to adopt harmonised policies.

Production, consumption, mobility, environmental risks and their financing increasingly need to be regarded from the viewpoint of resource management. Only if these challenges are met both on a national and an international level, will business and society be fit for the future. The precondition for this is that business, governments and civil society constructively work together. For this reason, the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN and the World Economic Forum together held a conference in October 2006 which allowed for a detailed discussion of the resource policy topic. Following the conference WWF Switzerland, the FOEN and the World Economic Forum issued a joint statement. The joint statement comprises the following elements: 1. Resource policy must neither lead to a lowering of the level of environmental protection nor to an ecological command econ­ omy. 2. Resource policy needs to set binding targets, in order to ensure consistency and security of investment. 3. Resource policy must be based on a dialogue between busi­ ness, the government and civil society. Solutions must be found that are supported by all those involved. This undertaking would not have been possible without the very positive cooperation with the FOEN. I would like to thank FOEN Director Bruno Oberle for this and for the active shaping of the new policy approach. I am convinced that we will continue to work on a common platform for politics, administration, civil society and business to address the challenge of sustainable resource use.

This is no reason for environmental policy to rest on its laurels, however. Among the most serious problems today are the effects of climate change and the use of natural resources. One of the key challenges of the coming years will no doubt be to steer the sustainable use of these resources. For population growth along with living and consumption habits are undoing the advances made in environmental policy. At their third joint conference, the World Economic Forum and the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN reflected on how the sustainable use of natural resources may look like. Along with environmental policy, economic policy carries special responsibil­ ity in this respect. Important focus areas are production, con­ sumption, mobility and the financing of sustainable resource use. The FOEN is fully aware of the challenge it faces. In its strategies, targets, instruments and organisation it takes into account the requirements of the new environmental and resource policy. Key elements in this respect are improving the productivity of natural resources, promoting the innovative ability and competitiveness of the economy and strengthening international harmonisation. In shaping this policy I know I enjoy the support of the World Economic Forum. I would like to thank Managing Director André Schneider for the dialogue already spanning several years and am looking forward to our further cooperation for the benefit of sustainable resource use.

Bruno Oberle, Director Federal Office for the Environment André Schneider Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer World Economic Forum

3

Joint statement

Introduction Switzerland today uses substantially more natural resources than it will have at its disposal in the long term. Its ecological footprint is several times higher than the available biological capacity. The protection and use of natural resources is increasingly coming to the fore. Tradi­ tional environmental policy is thus evolving into a policy of using natural resources in a sustainable way. It governs access to natural capital. Authorities, business and society want to embrace this new challenge and follow a common guiding idea.

Guiding idea

1. The use of natural resources is to be shaped in a way that does not threaten the country’s natural capital in the long term. It must be ensured that its quality and quantity are maintained, improved where necessary and stabilised over time. The country’s security, health and natural diversity remain the principal goals of resource policy. . Within the limits of the available natural capital, resource policy provides resources for the Swiss economy. This strengthens and secures the coun­ try’s innovation and long-term competitiveness. 3. Resource policy sets binding long-term goals. These are in the interest of the environment (con­ sistency) as well as that of the economy (security of investment).

4

Next steps

4. Resource policy draws on a broad range of instru­ ments. These include voluntary measures as well as market-based instruments and norms. Meas­ ures are results-driven, avoid unnecessary transac­ tion costs and are aligned with international devel­ opments as far as possible.

In a dialogue with the affected groups, the choice of measures, stages of implemen­ tation and distribution of costs and bene­ fits of resource policy will be continuously reviewed. As a result, decisions and imple­ mentation will be facilitated and acceler­ ated. The signatories will assess progress made at the end of 008. The indicator will be the number of positive trends.

. Intelligent resource policy leads to win-win situ­ ations. It strengthens environmental protection, creates growth opportunities and promotes social well-being.

Federal Office for the Environment FOEN

World Economic Forum

WWF Switzerland

Bruno Oberle Director

André Schneider COO

Thomas Vellacott Programme Director



Plenary session Protection and use of natural resources

Stefanie Engel, ETH Zurich: Switzerland’s new environmental policy Environmental protection in Europe and the OECD countries has achieved remark­ able results in certain areas, for example in fighting urban air and water pollution and forest destruction. These successes were due to an ambitious environmental policy based on regulatory interventions, substantial financial funds and high aware­ ness among the population. Nevertheless, we need to acknowledge that nearly two

Engel: «Since resource policy must also be understood as economic policy, particular interest is drawn to the question what voluntary agreements in the private sector can achieve.» thirds of global ecosystem services have declined, which means that economic development is taking place at the expense of natural capital. The most persistent problems include greenhouse gas emis­ sions, the loss of biodiversity, chemicals in the environment and land use. In the face of these problems, which are frequently caused by the “normal” functioning of spe­ cific economic and social sectors, it is real­ istic to regard environmental policy as resource policy. Environmental protection involves economic and social costs, so there is a need to set priorities and to weigh various environmental activities from a comprehensive environmental eco­ nomics perspective. This is in line with Switzerland’s sustainability concept as 6

defined in its federal constitution. But envi­ ronmental economics emphasises that the environment not only has market val­ ues but existence values as well (e.g. bio­ diversity). Furthermore, there is contrast between an economic and a commercial view, due to external effects, public goods and differing time preferences. A sustain­ able resource policy needs to correct such market failures, achieve a long-term bal­ ance between today’s and future genera­ tions and, in view of the uncertainties about costs and benefits of environmen­ tal protection, apply a precautionary approach. Since resource policy must also be understood as economic policy, particular interest is drawn to the question what vol­ untary agreements in the private sector can achieve. There are a number of argu­ ments both for and against voluntary action by companies. Likewise, voluntary agreements have advantages as well as disadvantages. However, economic nego­ tiation theory yields certain success fac­ tors that raise the effectiveness of such agreements. They include: 1) a less favourable outcome in the event of unsuccessful negotiations, ) monitoring and enforce­ ment powers of the state, 3) higher expected benefits to the companies, 4) lower costs for the companies, ) greater negotiating power for governments or NGOs, 6) a small number of “polluters”. In sum, it can be argued that cooperative approaches should be part of “good gov­ ernance” in environmental policy. Their potential must not be overestimated, how­ ever, and state institutions are indispensa­ ble for their proper functioning.

been solved, for example in the areas of water protection and waste treatment. But it has become clear that many problems cannot be solved by “command and con­ trol” regulations, and in my view the mar­ ket instruments introduced with the revi­ sion of the environmental law of 199 do not go far enough. Ultimately, environmental policy is always about managing natural resources. On the one side these are a component of welfare, on the other they are a classical production factor. The use of a resource always involves a weighing of these two functions: the restriction of a resource leads to higher (private) costs, its overuse results in external costs and economic inefficiency. Market societies introduce a regulation in such cases. Concerning the production factor of capital, for instance, the Swiss National Bank regulates the money supply with the principal goal of ensuring the long-term stability of the cur­ rency. An analogous principle for resource policy could be not to jeopardise natural capital in the long term and to promote the country’s competitiveness by providing natural resources. It would then be possi­ ble to derive long-term targets linked to

Bruno Oberle, FOEN:

New goals in environmental policy

Right at the outset I would like to point out that the legal basis for environmental pol­ icy has not changed. At the moment the focus is on making better use of the oppor­ tunities offered by current legislation and on finding ways to make environmental policy more efficient. This puts the spot­ light on principles, targets and instru­ ments. Traditional environmental policy is not all that bad; numerous problems have

Oberle: «Resource policy is at a very early stage; plenty of educa­ tional work will be necessary to dis­ pel various fears.»

concrete achievements in the areas of safety, health, natural diversity and eco­ nomic services. To achieve these targets instruments are needed. Presently, a multitude of such instruments exist in resource policy, and there may be a case for simplifying them, for example by making stronger use of prices. The instruments need to fulfil three basic criteria: They should reach their goals in a way that is economically efficient, they should avoid unnecessary transaction costs by using the market’s collective intel­ ligence and they should be harmonised internationally as far as possible. With respect to the first point, the FOEN has launched an economic review of targets and measures and concerning the second it maintains an ongoing dialogue with the affected groups. With regard to interna­ tional harmonisation, lastly, there are no obvious contradictions with EU environ­ mental policy, at least not on a qualitative level. Resource policy is at a very early stage; plenty of educational work will be necessary to dispel various fears. FOEN wants to continue on the chosen path in a pragmatic but consistent manner and in doing so asks for criticism as well as support.

emissions are currently not under control and agriculture has a strong impact on the environment. Environmental measures in the areas of sewage, waste, clean air con­ trol and noise abatement cause costs equalling about 1.4 percent of GDP. In its latest survey of Switzerland’s envi­ ronmental performance, the OECD states that since 1998 a partial uncoupling of economic growth and environmental impacts has been achieved, in particular with regard to air pollutants, pesticides and water protection. The survey also notes that the various civil service depart­ ments have improved cooperation – a com­ parative advantage of our relatively small administration – and that the implementa­ tion of the “polluter pays” principle and the internalisation of external costs have pro­ gressed. However, criticism is levelled at the lack of a long-term policy, though FOEN has made a decisive step in this direction with its new focus on resource policy.

tional environmental treaty, it shall then be assumed that it is in conformity with the WTO. Further, there are the general terms and conditions in all WTO treaties, which provide an exception clause for measures to protect human life and health. Through the jurisdiction in this area environmental concerns are incorporated more frequently. At the moment there is also discussion on exempting environmental goods from cus­ toms duties, though developing countries still offer some resistance to this. With Saudi Arabia and – soon – Russia joining the WTO, energy is bound to become a topic: This will make it even more difficult for us to get support for our agenda. To finish, I would like to make a couple of remarks on the future challenges. In my view, these include resource scarcity and, linked to this, access to resources, popula­ tion growth, steering processes in intergov­ ernmental institutions concerning global challenges, the effects of rising mobility, for example on pandemics and local cul­ tures and, finally, the ubiquitous use of plastic. The question will be how Switzer­ land responds to these challenges.

Luzius Wasescha, seco: Consequences for economic policy First we should cast an eye on everyday global life: during the time we will be spend­ ing together today, 00 ships will leave Chinese ports, resources will be used all over the world – not always in a sustaina­ ble way – and individuals will think about how they can maximise their piece of the cake. We are thus dealing with a tension between a sustainable longer-term per­ spective and the short-term perspective of business and politics, which leads to a conflict of targets. As we know, a consensus has emerged among the Swiss government parties that growth is something good, precisely at the moment when we ceased to have any growth. This has had a beneficial effect on our resource policy, but we did of course make corresponding efforts too. Still: energy consumption is increasing, CO

Wasescha: «Originally instigated by the Swiss delegation, trade and environment has successfully been made a negotiation topic at the WTO. What are the global framework condi­ tions at present? Originally instigated by the Swiss delegation, trade and environ­ ment has successfully been made a nego­ tiation topic at the WTO. One of three pro­ grammatic points is the codification of WTO law in line with legal thinking in Conti­ nental Europe: when a government intro­ duces a new measure based on an interna­ 7

Workshop 1: Production

Part A: Best practices Fritz Günter, Ciba Specialty Chemicals Sustainability was defined by Fritz Günter as economic, ecological and social respon­ sibility and durability – or long-term suc­ cess. He stressed that there is no “per­ fect” solution to reach these goals. Hence discussions are very helpful and can pro­ vide new insights. At Ciba an important focus area is the procurement of raw mate­ rials. In 00, the company obtained 8 percent of its raw materials from renewa­ ble sources, thus making an important contribution to preserving fossil resources, supporting CO sinks and reducing CO emissions. However, the growth of mono­ cultures and unsustainable production methods of such raw materials can also create problems. The Ciba Supplier Assess­ ment Program therefore evaluates suppli­ ers worldwide against a range of environ­ ment, health and safety (EHS) criteria. The programme includes a number of exclusion criteria: if any of these is violated, Ciba ter­ minates its business relationship with the supplier. In production Ciba has set group targets under the motto of “0 – 10 – 10”. For the period between 004 and 006 this stood for zero accidents, reducing water use by 10 percent and cutting CO emissions also by 10 percent. Fritz Günter concluded that sustainability is possible in production as well as along the value chain and, at least in part, has been realised. In his view, the greater challenge lies in sus­ tainable consumption.

8

Results from workshop 1A Barbara Dubach, Holcim Ltd. Barbara Dubach stressed that sustainable development forms a core element of Hol­ cim’s corporate philosophy and an integral part of its strategy. The priorities are fair business principles, energy and climate issues, operational health and safety, social engagement, stakeholder dialogue and sustainability in the construction industry. In the climate change area, Hol­ cim has made a voluntary commitment to reduce specific net CO emissions (kg CO per tonne of produced cement) until 010 by 0 percent from 1990 levels. This is to be reached mainly by raising the energy efficiency of existing and new plants and the use of alternative fuels and raw materi­ als. In 00 specific CO emissions were 14 percent below the 1990 benchmark. The systems used for monitoring and reporting the emissions underwent inde­ pendent third-par ty verification. The increasing use of alternative fuels and raw materials helped to cut the clinker factor in cement production to less than 7 percent by 00. In the ongoing dialogue with its various stakeholders Holcim took a leader­ ship role in the Cement Sustainability Ini­ tiative of the WBCSD and launched a part­ nership with GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit) to develop guidelines for the use of waste materials in cement production.

Strengths and drivers • Fewer political and technological risks. • Market benefits through leadership role and reputation. • Discussions facilitate the search for solutions. Weaknesses/Risks • Renewable raw materials vs. mono cultures. • Unreliable incentives set by political process. Need for action • Awareness of sustainable resource policy needs to be transferred to consumption. • “What is available in the market cannot be harmful since it is legal”: this assumption is wrong. • Transparency and/or communication on production methods.

Part B: Framework conditions Richard Gamma, SGCI Chemie Pharma Schweiz According to Richard Gamma good frame­ work conditions are created when environ­ mental targets and respective timeframes are defined in a joint effort, but industry is then given maximum freedom in choosing the appropriate means to reach these tar­ gets. Furthermore, framework conditions need to be reliable – which means that they must avoid moving targets – and take into account the international context. The Swiss chemical and pharmaceutical indus­ try has grown by 1 percent per year since 199 and, with a volume of CHF  billion, is the country’s second most important export industry today. Measured by its trade surplus of CHF  billion it is actually the most important. At the same time, the industry has achieved an impressive eco­ logical record based on its worldwide “Responsible Care” programme: since 1993, it has managed to cut CO emis­ sions by 1 percent, make significant sav­ ings in water consumption, reduce the release of heavy metals to water by 90 per­ cent and halve the number of operational accidents in Switzerland. For Richard Gamma the upshot is that we need clear and unanimous targets, with controlling and monitoring as well as tangible conse­ quences if they are not met. Depending on the nature of targets and the market envi­ ronment, command and control measures, market mechanisms as well as voluntary commitments all come into question, but the important thing is to involve the affected industry as early as possible.

Results from workshop 1B Roland W. Scholz and Daniel J. Lang, ETH Zurich All economies involve a large number of material flows, principally in the areas of agriculture/forestry/food production, con­ struction, industry and mobility/consump­ tion. In their presentation, Roland Scholz and Daniel Lang showed how the “direct material input” is composed in Switzerland and how it has evolved over the last 0 years. All in all, material efficiency meas­ ured against gross domestic product has increased by more than 30 percent since 1990, but at the same time there has been a strong volume increase in industrial minerals and in the “hidden flows” due to imports. Based on their research, the speakers proposed three theses on how to build efficient framework conditions for sustainable natural resource management. First, there is a need for comprehensive principles and systematic knowledge on the steering, regulatory and feedback mechanisms in “man/environment sys­ tems”, which may partly vary for each indi­ vidual system, however. Second, the speakers identified a risk that necessary fundamental change may be delayed or even prevented by small incremental improvements. Framework conditions therefore need to create space for funda­ mental change. Third, there is a need for a shared vision that expresses where the journey shall go. Realising this vision then involves the traditional political instru­ ments of information, voluntary commit­ ments, command and control regulations and levies.

Strengths/Weaknesses • First mover advantage. • How many autonomous regulations can be borne by business? • Continuous improvements may prevent fundamental change. Need for action • Two key requirements: – No moving targets – International compatibility. • Set targets jointly but leave the industry the freedom in choosing appropriate means. • Controlling and monitoring plus fines are important. • Role of information and transparency.

9

Workshop :

Consumption

Part A: Best practices

Results from workshop 2A

Part B: Framework conditions

Christian Waffenschmidt, Coop The four VIVA “competence brands” form an integral part of Coop’s product range. Under the Naturaplan, Naturaline, Oeco­ plan and Max Havelaar labels, the company sells 1,400 organic products, 400 meat and egg products from animal-friendly free­ range farming, more than ,000 textiles produced from organic cotton and under fair trade conditions, and more than 1,300 environmentally friendly non-food products. Thus, the four brands have developed very successfully since their launch in 1993. In Christian Waffenschmidt’s opinion, this was due to the following factors: the prod­ ucts are of a high quality; substantial investments in communication and public relations have helped to create strong brands; and cooperation with independent, reliable partners has succeeded in build­ ing up trust and credibility among custom­ ers. This was only possible because Coop made a long-term commitment instead of seeking quick gains, though. The four brands were fully integrated in the compa­ ny’s strategy, which was then implemented at all levels. Having said that, Christian Waffenschmidt also pointed out that the retail business today increasingly faces “hybrid” customers. Alongside ethical and ecological values these customers look for event experiences, convenience and value for money. In view of this, Coop needs to offer its customers alternatives and ensure that its sustainable products meet actual needs.

Strengths/Opportunities • There is growing consumer demand for sustainable products. • Sustainable products have great potential if they are fully incorporated in the company’s strategy, which is then implemented at all levels.

Jacqueline Bachmann, Stiftung für Konsu­ mentenschutz Jacqueline Bachmann began her speech by emphasising that the responsibility for a sustainable use of natural resources along the increasingly global flow of goods ultimately lies with each individual. But the ability to assume this responsibility rests on certain preconditions. First, consumers need to be able to recognise sustainable goods, which can be supported through the use of declarations and labels. Sec­ ond, consumers must be willing to acknowl­ edge the value-added of such products and pay for it. This is facilitated through goods that meet comprehensive sustaina­ bility criteria, through information and awareness building and through the crea­ tion of trust. Third, tolerance for shams is very small when it comes to sustainable products. Preventing abuses requires appropriate framework conditions such as legal norms, certification according to broadly based criteria and independent checks. Fourth, there are simply not enough sustainably produced goods avail­ able yet. As a result, consumers can use their theoretical market power only to a lim­ ited degree, though there are substantial differences between individual industries. Concluding her arguments, Jacqueline Bachmann offered a future vision for con­ sumer protection: according to this, con­ sumers would no longer have to worry about whether a specific good is sustain­ able, because others are simply not avail­ able anymore.

10

Weaknesses/Risks • Labels that make exaggerated sustainability claims quickly damage credibility. • Consumers frequently have conflicting values and want freedom of choice, which poses a challenge to product ranges. Need for action • Visible, credible commitment to sustainable strategy. • Lack of regulation on fair trade requires the involved actors to take responsibility. Vision Consumers want to consume and suppliers ensure that this occurs in a sustainable way.

Results from workshop 2B Heinz Beer, SWICO In the first part of his speech, Heinz Beer sought to show that industry has made sig­ nificant efforts to reduce the environmen­ tal impacts of its products. He illustrated this with three examples: the S.EN.S, SLRS, Inobat and SWICO recycling initia­ tives, the much improved energy efficiency of consumer electronics and the standards set by the “Ordinance on Risk Reduction related to Chemical Products (ORRChem)”. A point of particular interest is that the vol­ untary recycling efforts by Swiss industry have led to the creation of technological know-how that can now be exported. Look­ ing back, a large number of individual measures have been introduced both in Switzerland and the European Union, but recently a clear trend towards taking a more comprehensive view could be observed (keyword: “Integrated Product Policy”). In the second part of his speech, Heinz Beer presented some thoughts on consumers’ freedom of choice. Would it be legitimate, he asked, to construct a wash­ ing machine that can only be run if full? Would it be acceptable from a social point of view to ban low-priced but unsustainable goods? The better solution might be to develop different grades of declarations and labels – ranging from those that con­ sider one specific criterion to those that pay attention to comprehensive eco-social responsibility. Finally, the speaker briefly talked about the principles that an effec­ tive environmental policy needs to observe. These were said to include international harmonisation of regulations, clarity of goals, thinking in life cycles, sensible allo­ cation of decision-making powers and responsibilities, plus integrated and lean administrative procedures.

Strengths/Opportunities • Credible brands/labels with strong content promote visibility. Weaknesses/Risks • Low consumer tolerance for shams. • Genuine choice is still inexistent in many industries. • Too many brands/labels lead to consumer uncertainty. Need for action • Stakeholder dialogue presents a challenge (new quality required, method: pressure and dialogue). • Sustainable products need to be easily recognisable. • Consumers must be willing to pay for the value -added of sustainable products. • Effective environmental policy needs to observe certain principles.

11

Workshop 3: Mobility

Part A: Best practices Edgar Schorderet, Touring Club Schweiz In his speech, Edgar Schorderet first described four aspects he sees as charac­ terising the current state of mobility in Switzerland. At a political level several transport and energy initiatives have been rejected since 000, some of them clearly. Just under 80 percent of the demand for mobility comes from private transport and the road network is about 14 times as long as the railway system, while the direct costs of both carriers are roughly equal today. The environmental impacts caused by nitrogen, hydrocarbons, lead and par­ ticulate matters first rose strongly from the fifties but have fallen substantially again since the eighties; in contrast, carbon diox­ ide emissions have continued to rise steadily. Thus the key mobility challenges are the strong increase in individual car traffic and the associated carbon dioxide emissions. Possible countermeasures have different time horizons. In the short term more efficient driving styles (keyword “eco-drive”) could be promoted, while improved traffic management would elimi­ nate structural obstacles to smooth traffic flows. The savings potential of such meas­ ures should not be underestimated, Edgar Schorderet argued. In the medium term the focus should be on advancing energy efficient motor vehicles and alternative fuels. In the long term, finally, the greatest potential lies in the development of new technologies, for example fuel cells, and in the interplay of infrastructure investments and spatial planning.

1

Results from workshop 3A Stephan Lötscher, IKEA While IKEA’s vision is to offer its range of furniture to as many people as possible thanks to its low prices, the company also pursues tangible social and environmental goals in its various business areas. For example, the two newest furniture stores in Switzerland – in Spreitenbach and in St. Gall – meet the MINERGIE® standard for energy efficient buildings. In the busi­ ness proper IKEA’s concept is based on the three principles of self-serve, self-deliv­ ery and self-assembly. In addition a number of services are offered at the buyer’s request, for example home delivery, rental cars, “goods taxis” and home shopping. Starting in July 00, IKEA has converted its fleet of rental vans to bi-fuel vehicles. This technology allows engines to run on petrol as well as ecologically friendly natu­ ral gas: initially the vans run on natural gas and in this mode have a range of about 300 kilometres. When the gas is used up, the engine switches automatically to pet­ rol. By cutting prices for the first rental hour IKEA managed to double the number of rentals. The experiences made in Sprei­ tenbach show that the average journey per rental is about 0 kilometres. Two thirds of the time the engines run on gas, which has led to a 70 percent reduction of CO emis­ sions in comparison with cars running on petrol only.

Strengths/Opportunities • The micro level can be managed/ influenced with individual measures. • Individual measures can be quickly implemented, are of a practical nature and have tangible local effects. • In the medium to long term the potential lies in technological developments. Weaknesses/Risks • Complex topic: traffic volumes, spatial planning, technology, emissions (noise, air), etc. • Individual measures are insufficient, because they do not produce a trend change. • The key challenges are the growth of individual car traffic and carbon dioxide emissions. • At the political level several initiatives have been rejected by the voters. Need for action • Individuals need to change their behaviour. • A decision has to be taken on the future direction of resource use.

Part B: Framework conditions Ruedi Ott, Tiefbauamt der Stadt Zürich In the survey carried out by Mercer on the quality of life in cities, Zurich reached the top position worldwide in 006. According to public opinion polls traffic is seen as the city’s biggest problem, even though the situation slightly improved between 1999 and 00. Ruedi Ott presented some of the key principles with which Zurich seeks to address this challenge. A central premise is that there are limits to the fur­ ther development of traffic that have to be taken into account in mobility planning. Thus a comprehensive understanding of carrying capacity is needed that places equal weight on effectiveness, noise, design, safety and quality of life. In prac­ tice, this means aiming at a better coexist­ ence of the various modes of transport as opposed to separating them. To this end, Zurich strives to promote a respectful cul­ ture of mobility, “dominance reconciliation” in road areas and a smooth traffic flow. Pedestrian traffic in particular plays a deci­ sive role in a city. But if pedestrian and bicycle traffic as well as public transport are to carry a bigger share of the total traf­ fic volume, suitable development areas have to be planned and prepared early. This requires the close alignment of spa­ tial and mobility planning. To conclude, Ruedi Ott drew attention to some changes in the societal context. While it is true that the population as a whole places an increasingly high value on sustainable development, individuals are also more self-centred and interest groups less toler­ ant than they used to be. As a result, nego­ tiating compromises will become even more complex and conflict-prone.

Results from workshop 3B Franziska Teuscher, National Councillor Franziska Teuscher started her speech by stating that present-day mobility does not use the resources air, tranquility, climate, land and landscape in a sustainable man­ ner. She said that Switzerland had basi­ cally set itself the goal of a sustainable transport policy, but that the globalised economy was increasingly undermining environmental protection by sharpening competition between locations. She also argued that the coexistence of legal rules, voluntary measures and market instru­ ments was making policy implementation more difficult. In view of this she proposed to strengthen and simplify legal instru­ ments. In particular, an effective climate protection strategy and new fuel consump­ tion regulations would be required. But on the level of communications it would also be important to sensitise the target groups for sustainable mobility. A joint learning process involving public authorities, politi­ cal parties, associations and the media would offer an opportunity to disentangle contents, clarify goals and create accept­ ance for necessary measures. An impor­ tant element in this would be to convey messages tailored to the different target groups: safety and health aspects appeal to families, while cars with low fuel con­ sumption should be marketed as lifestyle items. At the end of her speech, Franziska Teuscher listed a number of practical pol­ icy examples, with regard to incentives, choosing the right means of transport in the right place, development of tourist areas, promotional efforts by the car indus­ try, an improved service culture in public transport and the possibility of Switzerland taking a leadership role in Europe.

Strengths/Opportunities • Joint action: broad political support enables actual implementation. • Setting appropriate incentives. • Exploiting technological possibilities. • Mobility is culture! Weaknesses/Risks • Current legislation is not being implemented consistently. • European orientation of national mobility strategy. • Contradictions between environmental and spatial law. • Compromises are more difficult to negotiate today because individuals tend to be more self-centred and intolerant. Need for action • Politics and legislation need to set preconditions for implementation of measures. • Cross-sectoral political measures are required. • Need for comprehensive understanding of carrying capacity. • Joint learning process can create acceptance.

13

Workshop 4: Financing

Part A: Best practices Marc Hechler, Zürcher Kantonalbank According to Marc Hechler, financing instru­ ments with a beneficial effect on resource use can basically be divided into credit finance and equity finance. The former includes mortgages and other loans, the latter public equity and venture capital/pri­ vate equity. Zürcher Kantonalbank (ZKB) offers products in all these categories. In the credit finance field for example, the “ZKB environmental loan” promotes MIN­ ERGIE® buildings, the ecological credit risk assessment examines the potential pollu­ tion of brownfield sites and the “environ­ mental assessment trade finance” serves to exclude unethical or environmentally hazardous deals. In the equity finance field, the “ZKB Basket Renewable Ener­ gies” promotes solar technology, while the provision of equity capital for start-ups supports the development of environmen­ tal technologies in general. Marc Hechler then focused on the ZKB environmental loan for a more detailed description. This product is a mortgage loan with reduced interest rates for MINERGIE® buildings, renewable energies etc. When ZKB launched the product in 199, it was the first financial services firm in Switzerland to have done so; since then, the product has been copied many times. ZKB benefits from the loan product because it helps to develop the business, raise the value of the real estate portfolio and boost the bank’s reputation. Clients benefit from favourable interest and tax conditions, alongside the desired environmental quali­ ties. If such a product generates tangible value-added, Marc Hechler concluded, winwin situations are a real possibility. How­ ever, active marketing efforts are essential and in individual cases a loss of income may have to be accepted.

14

Results from workshop 4A Cécile Koller, responsAbility Poverty is a principal cause for the overex­ ploitation of resources in developing coun­ tries, as Cécile Koller pointed out: the lack of investment funds leads to inappropriate cultivation methods, the prevention of damaging actions is difficult because many people work in the informal sector and there is little knowledge about the sustain­ able management of resources. The microfinance sector, which counts about 800 specialised institutions (microfinance insti­ tutions, MFIs), seeks to tackle poverty in developing countries by offering poor but entrepreneurial people access to essential financial services such as loans and money transfer. With regard to resource use, a basic distinction can be made between a direct and an indirect approach accord­ ing to Cécile Koller. In the direct approach microfinance is a means to an end: the goal is to finance certain technologies, for example biogas plants as in a recent project in Nepal. In the indirect approach microfinance links the supply of financial services to awareness building and in this way creates positive externalities: for example, ProCredit Holding, a group of 1 local banks with a loan portfolio totalling EUR . billion, uses a group-wide environ­ mental management system covering credit assessments, client advisory serv­ ices, exclusion criteria etc. Swiss-based responsAbility, which manages its own “Global Microfinance Fund”, also seeks to use its influencing powers for this purpose, in particular by sensitising MFIs, allocating funds specifically to rural areas, regular reporting on its activities and growing its client base.

Strengths/Drivers • Transparency, governance. • Reputation, customer retention, participation in innovative initiatives (framework conditions). • Market and product differentiation. • Awareness, demand. Weaknesses/Risks • Differing criteria and diversity of standards, resulting in transaction costs and complex monitoring. • Differing time horizons: short-term return expectations vs. long-term demands on resource management (and socio - ethical principles). • Negative associations made with sustainability (uncertainty, lower returns). Need for action • Convincing business case for internal and external communication. • Harmonisation of criteria, industry wide standards. • Shifting from stand -alone to integrated approaches (e.g. micro loans linked to environmental goals). • Provision of relevant information and training.

Part B: Framework conditions Beat Bürgenmeier, University of Geneva In Beat Bürgenmeier’s view, political dis­ cussions, and specifically those on envi­ ronmental policy, are marked by a general scepticism today. These are some of the more frequently heard arguments: there are too many laws and regulations, techno­ logical solutions are to be preferred, the government should push forward deregula­ tion and voluntary agreements by the pri­ vate sector need to play a bigger role. Against this background, it would make evi­ dent sense for a country like Switzerland to pay more attention to the strengths of the financial services sector and its potential contribution to sustainability. After all, financial markets are distinguished by their high ability to deal with risks and uncer­ tainties. The environmental discussion simply adds new kinds of uncertainties and risks, and analytically mastering these would be a key goal. This requires that all available information is being used, in order to assess environmental and social efficiency as well. According to Beat Bür­ genmeier the instruments for this exist. Specialised information providers have recently developed a range of indicators that allow for such evaluations. But as a result, companies are faced with a multi­ tude of new requirements, which is why a harmonisation of the various initiatives would be desirable. Some studies already show evidence that an investment portfo­ lio assembled according to sustainability criteria can beat the market. This led Beat Bürgenmeier to conclude that the trend towards sustainability in the corporate sec­ tor is a strong one in the long term, driven by advantages in recruiting employees, building reputation and creating trust. Thus, there is a case for regarding finan­ cial markets as probably the most impor­ tant instrument to incorporate environmen­ tal risks and uncertainties into social processes.

Results from workshop 4B Strengths • The Swiss financial sector is strong and can use its innovative ability for sustainable resource management. • Uncertainties and risks can be addressed with market instruments, financial markets anticipate changes. Weaknesses • Intransparent evaluation basis of various criteria. • Harmonisation of evaluation methods is lacking. • Harmonisation can also result in adherence to wrong accounting norms, cost vs. investment thinking. • Capabilities and tools of analysts to understand and quantify complex relationships. Need for action • Framework conditions and incentives promoting innovation. • Solid and broad financial analysis. • Active involvement of trade associations.

1

Panel discussion

Heinz Beer, SWICO

Thomas Vellacott, WWF Switzerland

Rolf Büttiker, President of the Council of States

In my understanding sustainability com­ prises three pillars: energy, materials or resources and recycling, that is, the reuse of materials. With regard to all three, Swit­ zerland has made substantial efforts, but this is no longer enough. These were indi­ vidual discussions and now the challenge is to integrate the different actions in order to create sustainability. The first thought that goes through my mind here is that we need to believe in our ability to achieve something. And we can achieve something – if we do not believe so, the whole thing makes no sense anyway. We need to share a conviction that solutions exist, that approaches exist; these must be adopted and implemented now. Even if the steps are small, we need to take them now, because we cannot wait for the big break­ through or a magic solution: these simply do not exist. In this context I have the impression that Switzerland has lost some of its dynamism. Looking to Brussels, not every initiative coming from there is fully mature, but at least things are moving. … And what is also remarkable is the attempt to move ahead in dialogue: a dialogue between industry, regulators, NGOs, the media, all stakeholders. They sit at a table, together reflect on the relevant environ­ mental impacts, together set priorities – and “together” means overcoming differ­ ences, otherwise this would not work – and then deliberate what is to be done. I think that we should adopt this approach in Swit­ zerland, too.

In the summary from the workshop on pro­ duction two key requirements were men­ tioned: first, no moving targets and, sec­ ond, international compatibility. Both of them seem crucial points to me, and par­ ticularly with regard to the first I would argue that if we do not want moving tar­ gets, then we need to have targets in the first place; in many areas of our environ­ mental policy we do not have that, though. If you look at climate policy, you will see that our time horizon ends in the year 010. There is nothing afterwards. When we speak about international compatibility, it is interesting to take a look at what other countries are doing in the discussion on long-term goals – and they are doing a lot. The United Kingdom, for example, has committed to cut CO emissions by 60 per­ cent until 00, Sweden has such goals, the European Union has them, even US American states have them, but Switzer­ land does not. We need these long-term targets, especially where such areas as energy and infrastructure are concerned. It is impossible to have a discussion here as long as we do not have long-term targets.

Traffic is the most difficult challenge, due to mobility needs and economic growth, but also because this is the area where we have the greatest international linkages. I do not think that Swiss transport policy can solve its problems in an environmen­ tally friendly way without international, or at least European, coordination. Traffic does not stop at the border. Difficulties lie ahead mainly in goods traffic, because Switzerland has a need for action here. We have made the mistake of giving Europe full access in the land transport treaty and at the same time issuing a law that limits journeys across the Alps to 60,000 per year. Ladies and gentlemen, this will never add up and therefore needs to be cor­ rected. On top of that, the policy of shifting goods traffic from the road to the railway has failed, at least as it is set down in the law. There will be a new bill now, but I need to tell you that this is going to be a difficult undertaking, because we can only tackle the problem in the European context. The core strategy must be this: over longer dis­ tances bulk goods are transported by rail. Full stop. And we must take the corre­ sponding measures.

16

Bruno Oberle, FOEN

Daniel Hofer, MIGROL

Volker Hoffmann, ETH Zurich

In my introductory speech I asked you to express criticism and provide ideas, and in this sense I feel richly rewarded. I con­ clude, then – and this is no surprise really – that such an approach works. It is pos­ sible to bring together different cultures in one place, to discuss a topic such as the long-term use of a production factor and people do not walk away with bloody faces, but actually manage to come to creative conclusions. It may be part of the formula for success of this country that we are small enough and already know each other through multiple networks, but this kind of dialogue works. What will be necessary now is to carry this approach to managing future resource policy to a wider audience. On the one side, this means the popula­ tion – both as consumers and as voters – and on the other side it means industry. I do not think that the business people present here are a representative sample of attitudes in the Swiss economy. There are more sceptical firms, with whom we need to have discussions as well. And before launching a dialogue on how to design a particular policy area, one must also ask the legislators, of course.

Switzerland is a very successful small nation. We are among the richest countries in the world and it is with this in mind that we have to move forward in the context of this whole discussion. In my view, we have only one chance: we need to stay abreast of technological progress, know-how, eve­ rything that is to do with knowledge gen­ eration and new technologies. Against this background the discussions on resources and energy offer significant possibilities. In all of them we have heard about biofuels and new forms of energy. These still need to be developed: there are some begin­ nings but it is important that work can be continued. We are very interested to do so, but we need certain framework conditions for this. Right now exempting biofuels from the mineral oil tax is on the agenda. If this gets through parliament, it will be possible to make investments in the area with a degree of certainty that one will get his money back one day. These are the con­ crete things that we can then do.

As I perceive the whole discussion, sus­ tainability is largely equated with risks that need to be fended off. But from my some­ what abstract, possibly more neutral, per­ spective this does not have to be the case: sustainability is as much an opportunity. There is really an unalterable business principle: who first identifies the right trend, will come out the winner. When the trend happens to be that people demand more organic food, the first to recognise this trend will win. When I think long-term, when I ask myself what the world will be like in 00 or 00 and link this, specifi­ cally, with the CO issue, I see such drasti­ cally changed value chains that there will indeed be a lot of losers but just as many winners. If, for example, the trend towards MINERGIE® buildings continues to grow, this will create plenty of opportunities for firms, and I do not really understand why people do not see it like this. Perhaps it is a question of a short-term vs. a long-term perspective, but from a scientific point of view it is regrettable that the opportunity aspect does not attract more attention.

17

Conclusions

“Sustainable use of natural resources” was the third conference jointly held by the Federal Office for the Environment FOEN and the World Economic Forum. It started from the premise that the protection of natural resources is increasingly coming to the fore. As a result, traditional environ­ mental policy is evolving into a resource policy that regulates access to scarce nat­ ural capital. The key question of the confer­ ence was on how public authorities, busi­ ness and civil society can effectively cooperate with regard to this objective. Three aspects were of particular interest: the specific contributions of the different sectors, best practices and framework conditions and the current need for action. As in the previous years, the lively dialogue between the participants managed to gen­ erate valuable insights. In the course of the event it became clear that the scope for voluntary action by the private sector and consequently the nature of cooperation varies. The case studies dis­ cussed in the workshops showed that at least in some industries individual firms can successfully invest in resource friendly products, services and processes, be it because they expect lower costs, reduced risks or new market opportunities. If such measures are to work, they need to meet certain conditions, though: they must have a long-term character and be fully integrated into company strategy and culture to build the necessary trust of customers, investors and other important stakeholders. Effective communication and public relations also play an essential role.

18

The success of resource friendly products and services obviously depends on cus­ tomers’ readiness to acknowledge and pay for their value-added. Transparent quality labels and declarations can make a valua­ ble contribution to this. It was emphasised, however, that customer tolerance of “shams” is very low for products with sus­ tainability claims. Thus there is a strong need for independent institutions that monitor and ensure the reliability of sus­ tainability labels. At the same time care should be taken that consumers do not get confused and frustrated by the growing number of labels. Frequently the private sector can only take resource efficient measures after the state has set clear and binding targets. As to their desired nature, business representa­ tives made very clear statements. First, targets need to be set for the long term. In this regard, Switzerland’s failure to develop any long-term climate targets was strongly criticised. Second, targets should be coor­ dinated internationally whenever possible. And third, they must not be changed all the time (no “moving targets”). Planning relia­ bility for business investments is a key con­ cern in this context, especially for the Swiss economy, whose strengths lie in the devel­ opment of know-how and technology. The participants also expressed strong views on the best way to develop resourcerelated targets at the national level. Accord­ ingly, industry must be involved in a dia­ logue early on, but later needs to be given maximum freedom in choosing the appro­ priate means and measures. At the same time, however, effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms are required in case the agreed targets are not met, which means that state institutions have an important role to play here. Concerning the willingness to establish agreement on new targets through broad-based dialogue, the European Union was cited as an example from which Switzerland may well be able to learn some valuable lessons.

Particular challenges exist for efficient resource use in the areas of mobility and transport. New technologies can make substantial contributions to reducing envi­ ronmental impacts, but the audience was reminded that the further expansion of traffic, especially of individual car traffic, simply faces limits today. Thus the objec­ tive must be to reconcile the various inter­ ests, which calls, amongst other things, for a close alignment of transport policy with spatial and urban planning. Reaching com­ promises was said to have become more difficult, however, because interest groups defend their individual interest more vigor­ ously than they used to. Communication, dialogue among the various stakeholders and participative processes will therefore grow in importance. Finally, attention was drawn to the signifi­ cant contribution the financial sector can make to sustainability in Switzerland. It was argued that financial markets are dis­ tinguished by their high ability to rationally assess opportunities and risks. In order to do so with respect to future resource use, they simply need to take into account new indicators, of which a large number was said to already exist. Problems were identi­ fied in the lacking harmonisation of these indicators and the overly narrow training of analysts and other financial specialists. This is primarily a challenge for the finan­ cial industry itself, including its trade asso­ ciations.

Conference programme/Participants

The Federal Office for the Environment FOEN and the World Economic Forum would like to thank the following participants for the success of the conference:

Workshop 3: Mobility Moderation: Oliver Johner, Consultant, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd.

Welcome and introduction André Schneider, Managing Director and COO, World Economic Forum

Speakers: Edgar Schorderet, President, Touring Club Schweiz, Stephan Lötscher, Social & Environmental Manager, IKEA Ltd., Ruedi Ott, Head Transport Planning, Tiefbauamt der Stadt Zürich, Franziska Teuscher, National Councillor and President of VCS

Plenary: Protection and use of natural resources Moderation: Thomas Streiff, Partner, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd. Speakers: Stefanie Engel, Professor, ETH Zurich, Bruno Oberle, Director, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Luzius Wasescha, Ambassador, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs seco

Workshop 1: Production Moderation: Otmar Wüest, CEO, Geschäftsstelle FoDK/KOK Speakers: Günter Fritz, Head, Division Environment, Health and Safety, Ciba Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Barbara Dubach, Head Sustainable Development Communications, Holcim Ltd., Roland Scholz, Professor, ETH Zurich, Daniel J. Lang, Assistant, Institute for Environ­ mental Decisions, ETH Zurich, Richard Gamma, Vice Director, SGCI Schweizerische Gesell­ schaft für Chemische Industrie Challenger: Volker Hoffmann, Professor, Group for Sustainability and Technology, ETH Zurich Participants: Hans-Joerg Althaus, Head of Materials Science & Technology Empa, Roman Bauer, Head of Logistics, IT and Administration, Vifor (International) Ltd., Manfred Bickel, Branch Manager, Swiss Textile Federation, Ruth E. Blumer Lahner, Head Corporate Quality, Environment, Safety and Health, Sulzer Ltd, Benjamin Buser, Project Manager, Avenir Suisse, Christian Dannecker, Consultant, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd., Markus Egli, Chief Officer, Office for the Environment, Canton of Solothurn, Burkhard Feldmann, Head of Section Environment, Ciba Specialty Chemicals Ltd., Ursula Finsterwald, Scientific Officer/Econo­ mist, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Max Fritz, Executive Director, Verband Schwei­ zerischer Papierindustrie ZPK, Adrian Gloor, Head EMS, SIKA Switzerland Ltd., Blaise Horis­ berger, Scientific Officer, Biocides and Plant Protection Products Section, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Rolf Iten, Member of the Management, Infras, Daniel Klooz, Chief Officer, Amt für Umweltkoordination und Energie des Kt. Bern, Hubert Klun, Director, Promotion of Sustainable Management, Frank Krysiak, Assistant Professor, Environmental Economy, Uni­ versity of Basel, Markus Lehni, Corp. Environment and Energy Manager, Novartis International, David Maradan, Lecturer, Dpt. of Economics, University of Geneva, Ueli Meier, President, Konferenz der Kantonsförster KOK, Claudia Meyer, Environment Manager, ABB Turbo Systems Ltd., Claudia Moerker, Chief Officer, Swiss Export Federation, Sonia Pellegrini, Economic Institute, University of Neuenburg, Dieter Reinker, Chief Officer, EcoSwiss, Markus Schmid, Head Resources, Kibag Management & Logistics, Roland Scholz, Director, Institute Natural and Social Science Interface, ETH Zurich, Salome Steib, Resort WTO, public procurement and OECD, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs seco, Michel Vogt, CEO, Ciments Vigier, Thomas Wengle, Executive Manager, Verband Schweizerischer Lack- und Farbenfabrikanten VSLF, Niklaus Zepf, Head Corporate Development, Axpo

Workshop 2: Consumption Moderation: Barbara Rigassi, Partner, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd. Speakers: Christian Waffenschmidt, Project Manager Naturaplan, Coop, Jacqueline Bachmann, Executive Manager, Stiftung für Konsumentenschutz, Heinz Beer, Vice-President, SWICO Challenger: Martin Rohner, Executive Manager, Max Havelaar Foundation Participants: Christoph Böbner, Vice-Director, Federal Office for Agriculture FOAG, Urs Böhlen, Director, AEK Energy Ltd., Stefan Bürki, Supply Chain Director, Mc Donald's Switzerland, Hanspeter Burri, Product Manager, Pacovis Ltd., Hans-Peter Fahrni, Head Waste and Raw Materials Division, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Christoph Grosjean-Sommer, Communication/Market, Schweizer Milchverband SMP, Gabi Hildesheimer, Director, ÖBU, Lee Jong-wook, Director, World Health Organization, Maja Kälin, Division of Economic Poli­ tics, GastroSuisse – Association of the hotel business and restoration, Ingrid Kissling, Gene­ ral Secretary, Swiss Academy of Sciences (SCNAT), Arthur Mohr, Head Division Economy, Research and Environmental Observation, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, MarieThérèse Niggli, Head of the Resort, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs seco, Stephan Peterhans, General Manager, FWS Fördergemeinschaft Wärmepumpen Schweiz, Daniela Pauli, Executive Director, Swiss Biodiversity Forum, Karen Pittel, Scientific Assistant, ETH Zurich, Daniel Rüfenacht, Head of CI & PR, Switcher Ltd., Sarah Saffar, World Economic Forum, Silva Semadeni, President, Pro Natura – Friends of the Earth, Annetta Steiner, Member of the Management, Praktischer Umweltschutz PUSCH, Sarah Steinweg, Editor/Mem­ ber of the Management, Schweizerischer Gewerbeverband SGV, Daniel Wachter, Head of Sustainable Development Section, Federal Office for Spatial Development ARE, Daniel Wiener, CEO, ecos, Brigitte Zogg, Officer for Sustainability, Coop

Challenger: Karl Tschanz, Head Special Department Mobility, Umwelt- und Gesundheitsschutz Zürich (UGZ) Participants: Roger Bosonnet, Head Section Sachplan und Anlagen, Federal Office of Civil Aviation FOCA, Markus Braun, Chief Auditor, The Swiss Association for Quality and Manage­ ment Systems, Dirk Bruckmann, Engineering Specialist Planning, SBB Cargo, Michael Burkhardt, Director External Affairs, TDC Switzerland Ltd., Rolf Büttiker, President of the Council of States, Andreas Fischer, Divisional Manager Netzstrategie, SBB Cargo, Emanuel Fleuti, Head Environment Protection, Unique (Airport Zurich Ltd.), Giatgen Peder Fontana, Chairman of the Board, Mobility CarSharing, René L. Frey, em. Professor for Political Economy, CREMA – Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts, University of Basel, Jürg Gerber, Vice-President, Alcan Technology & Management Ltd., Markus Halder, BahnUmweltCenter, SBB Ltd., Christoph Hartmann, Project Manager, Novatlantis, Daniel Hofer, General Manager, Migrol Ltd., Jürg Hofer, President KVU, Amt für Umwelt und Energie Basel-Stadt, Michael Kaufmann, Head swissenergy, Swiss Federal Office of Energy SFOE, Simone

Krähenbühl, Scientific Officer, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Paul Kurrus, Presi­ dent/former National Councillor, Aeroswiss/Spedlogswiss, Rainer Langendorf, Executive Director, Quality Alliance Eco-Drive, Brigitte Marty, Project Manager Economic Policy, Hotelleriesuisse, Adrian Lukas Meier, President, Schweizerischer Forstverein SFV, André Schneider, Managing Director and COO, World Economic Forum, Ariane Schweg, Consultant, BHP – Brug­ ger and Partners Ltd., Ralph Stalder, Country Chairman, Shell (Switzerland), Mila Trombitas, Division Manager, Member of the Management, Schweizer Tourismus-Verband, Karl Tschanz, Head Specialist Department Mobility, Umwelt- und Gesundheitsschutz Zürich (UGZ), Ursula Ulrich-Vögtli, Divison Manager MGP, Federal Office of Public Health FOPH, Hansjürg Zollinger, Regional Director, Kibag Management & Logistics, Niklaus Zürcher, Director, ACS Workshop 4: Financing Moderation: Thomas Streiff, Partner, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd. Speakers: Marc Hechler, Head Environment Management, Zürcher Kantonalbank ZKB, Cécile Koller, Research Analyst, ResponsAbility, Beat Bürgenmeier, Professor, Department of Poli­ tical Economy, University of Geneva Participants: Christof Arnold, Sales Manager, GHP Financial Services Ltd., Priska Baur, Section Economy, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research HansPeter Burkhard, Managing Director, CCRS Center for Corporate Responsibility and Sustaina­ bility, Fabio Cella, CEO, R. Aerni Ingenieur AG, Stefanie Engel, Professor, Environmental Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich, Carl-Johan Francke, Senior Equity Analyst, SAM Group/ SAM research, Roland Furrer, Head Communication, Waldwirtschaft Schweiz, Viktor Grabik, Country Director, SOFI – Swiss Organisation for Facilitating Investments, Jost Hamschmidt, Managing Director, oikos Foundation for Economy and Ecology, Germain Hennet, Member of the Executive Comittee, SwissBanking, Reto Hoffmann, CSR Manager, Orange Communica­ tions Ltd., Heidi Hosbach, Head Steuerung Raum und Umwelt, General Secretariat Federal Department of Defence Civil Protection and Sport DDPS, Christoph Hugi, Project Manager, EBP Ernst Basler and Partners, Erna Karrer-Rüedi, Head of Marketing & Communications, Care Group, Cécile Koller, Research Analyst, ResponsAbility, Stefan Moser, Consultant, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd., Thomas Vellacott, Programme Director, WWF Switzerland, Luzius Wasescha, Ambassador, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs seco

Panel discussion Moderation: Barbara Rigassi, Partner, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd. Panellists: Heinz Beer, Vice President, SWICO, Rolf Büttiker, President of the Council of States, Daniel Hofer, General Manager, Migrol Ltd., Volker Hoffmann, Professor, Group for Sustainability and Technology, ETH Zurich, Bruno Oberle, Director, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Thomas Vellacott, Programme Director, WWF Switzerland

Final statement André Schneider, Managing Director and COO, World Economic Forum, Bruno Oberle, Direc­ tor Federal Office for the Environment FOEN

Organisation and support Ursula Finsterwald, Scientific Officer/Economist, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Arthur Mohr, Head Division Economy, Research and Environmental Observation, Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Sarah Saffar, World Economic Forum, André Schneider, Mana­ ging Director and COO, World Economic Forum, Thomas Streiff, Partner, BHP – Brugger and Partners Ltd.

19

0