Publicatie van de Maand: Augustus 2000

Tekst overgenomen met toestemming van:
ISO-BULLETIN, augustus 2000 (COMMENT)

Geschreven door: Georg Hongler, Secretary General CEN (European Committe for Standardization)



Regional Standardization - The European approach has much to be said for it

The Comment by Linda Lusby, Chair of the Standards Council of Canada (SCC) in the May ISO Bulletin was fair, but prompts a number of points that I would like to bring out. I say this because when we are asked to speak to other regional standards bodies or when they visit us we feel that there is a vital dimension that is not always understood, or which is tacitly ignored.

The point is quite simply that in Europe, regional standardization “the most successful example” according to Mrs. Lusby, takes place within a legal framework (Directive 1998/34/EC) that governs the behavior of those making technical regulations and those making standards, requiring notification of proposed new work and transparency.

This Directive, which was first adopted in 1983, also formally sets out the relationship between those who will initiate legislation represented by the ministries of the Member States and the standardization bodies, which are expressly named. A Standing Committee is established by the Directive, which can identify areas of European standardization to support its policies and propose mandates to CEN and its partners. In the past these mandates were sometimes viewed as sinister, underhand devices to carry out standardization that would erect barriers to trade. Actually they are an offer to the standardizers, to harmonize technical requirements, with the assumption that the States accept the results because they themselves have commissioned them. The other side of the coin is that the standardizers are committed to writing specifications that are actually suitable for use in support of legislation and to ensure that they arrived at democratically.

However, more than two-thirds of our work is not based on mandates from the Commission initiated by CEN's members and partners that have an interest in standardization. Such work must still be notified to the Commission and is published twice a year in our Work programme.

I do not know of any other part of the world which operates exactly like this. In any case it has given Europe a strong basis for its standardization and, dare I say, has actually buttressed the global endeavors of ISO by showing that standards in some areas can really support legislation by taking over the burden of detailed technical drafting

Whilst trying to clear up some misconceptions, the Vienna Agreement between CEN and ISO is not a privileged arrangement, as is sometimes stated The agreement in fact is for technical cooperation when it suits both sides, to maximize the efficiency of standardization It means that the Europeans want global standards where possible, provided they meet their (legitimate) requirements in time and contents, The results are clearly transparent in the dual designation adopted It may even require us to abandon familiar numbers (e.g. EN 45001 becoming EN ISO 17025). Again we do not always detect a similar strength of resolve in other parts of the world.

In short, if standards are to continue to matter and to play their part in de-regulation and if there is a sincere wish on the part of legislators, to give up some of their ground, the European approach is to be commended For those considering it a valuable way forward some cultural changes might be needed in some of their regions.