This paper has been developed in order to contribute to the legislative debate on the Construction Products Regulation (CPR) proposal.
Our core messages:
- We see the need for a clearer definition of a construction product. While we understand the Commission’s goal to broaden the scope of the regulation, we believe that the new definition of “permanent” regarding construction products is not fit for purpose.
- Double regulation of products between ESPR and CPR should be avoided.
Two different and conflicting models of Digital Product Passports in the two regulations will increase administrative burdens and create confusion in the market.
