National Academies Press: OpenBook

Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century (1995)

Chapter: Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary

« Previous: 5 Recommendations to Address Future Challenges and Opportunities
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Appendix A New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary

John S. Wilson, John M. Godfrey, Holly Grell-Lawe

On March 30, 1994, the International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project and the Academy Industry Program of the National Research Council convened a conference to explore new developments in international standards and global trade. Conference participants included leaders from industry, government, academia, and private-sector organizations. Participants discussed standards as technical barriers to trade and the economic benefits of international trade in the post-Uruguay Round trade environment; national standards and conformity assessment systems in overseas markets; the U.S. government role in standards and conformity assessment; and standardization in the information technology and telecommunication industries.

This appendix summarizes the conference presentations and discussions, highlighting key points and issues raised by the participants. It does not represent a consensus opinion of the panels or participants, nor does it contain policy recommendations.

The Post-Uruguay Round Trade Outlook: Economic Benefits Of International Trade

From a government perspective, trade is a tool of domestic policy. Since

John S. Wilson is Project Director/Senior Staff Officer, National Academy of Sciences. John M. Godfrey is Research Associate, National Academy of Sciences. Holly Grell-Lawe is Senior Research Associate, Center for International Standards and Quality, Georgia Institute of Technology. Special thanks to Patrick Sevcik, Project Assistant, National Academy of Sciences, for assistance in the coordination of the conference and preparation of this report.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

conclusion of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), policies to reduce barriers to trade and expand the total volume of trade are among the principal tools available to enhance the long-term U.S. economic growth rate.

A senior U.S. government trade official noted the desire of Congress and the public for empirical evidence that trade liberalization agreements enhance long-term growth prospects and prosperity, and reported some empirical findings, which are outlined below:

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) examined the wage levels of U.S. export workers in 1990, building on work done by the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC), which had calculated that 7.2 million jobs are supported by U.S. merchandise exports. Matching the DoC data with average wages per industry, USTR found that U.S. workers in export-related sectors earn 17 percent more than the U.S. national average wage.

The USTR also reviewed economic research on the wage levels of workers in import-competing sectors. One study found that U.S. workers in import-competing sectors earned 16 percent less than the U.S. national average wage. The general conclusion reached by many studies is that policies lowering barriers and expanding market-driven trade will gradually shift the growth of job opportunities from lower-paying jobs toward higher-paying jobs.

In connection with the Uruguay Round, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis explored both dynamic (growth) effects and static efficiency effects from a one-third cut in global barriers to trade, a primary goal of the Uruguay Round negotiations. It was found that for the United States at the end of 10 years there would be a growth enhancement of about 3 percentage points of Gross Domestic Product. The U.S. trade official noted that few policy levers can add an annual three-tenths of a percentage point to the country's long-term growth rate.

Developing nations around the world are moving toward more market-oriented policies, both internally and in their trade policies. In doing so, they have the potential for real economic growth rates far exceeding anything achievable in the United States, the European Union (EU), or Japan. Most of these countries have very broad needs—from telecommunications systems to road-building equipment to hospital equipment. This presents a tremendous opportunity for U.S. exporters.

Standardization is one of many areas that must be addressed to enhance the U.S. ability to take advantage of these opportunities. Standards can facilitate U.S. exports. Standards, however, may also pose barriers to trade. The United States needs to decide how to deal with standards issues more fully with developed country trading partners. The United States also has an interest in ensuring that as developing countries are more integrated into the global trading system, they adopt open standards models in which government's ability to interfere and

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

distort trade flows and reduce growth is limited and can be addressed through negotiation where it does exist.

The Post-Uruguay Round Trade Outlook: Standards And Technical Barriers To Trade

Significant changes in the global trading system have occurred over the past decade. The Uruguay Round of the GATT has been concluded, lowering tariff barriers to international trade in many industry sectors. Non-tariff barriers to trade, such as standards, however, have become a growing source of international friction. Standards have been identified by U.S. industry as a problem area in trade relations, which means standards have become increasingly important to the USTR.

Standards can serve as technical, non-tariff barriers to trade in several ways. In the setting of standards, it is possible that the standards adopted, their method of application, and the procedure to assess conformity will discriminate against foreign suppliers. Lack of access to information about what standards are and how they should be met also impedes global trade. Every country has the right to maintain its own standards, when necessary to protect health, safety, and the environment. Without harmonization of international standards wherever possible, however, differences in standards can result in barriers to trade. Trade is also restricted, and potential growth and economic welfare are reduced when there are (1) differences in standards, (2) needlessly burdensome conformity assessment processes, and (3) failure to reduce the costs of those processes by establishing methods and procedures to facilitate conformity assessment.

Standards And Technical Barriers To Trade: The European And Gatt Approaches

Both the Single Internal Market program of the EU and the Uruguay Round have wrestled with the issue of standards as technical barriers to trade. As a result, the EU has adopted a comprehensive approach to standards harmonization among its member states. The Uruguay Round addresses this issue by establishing a code of rules for governments and standards-setting bodies.

Prior to 1985, standards were a major stumbling block to European integration into a single market. Standards in Europe were created by governments. Harmonization required governments to agree on details of a common approach, but this proved impossible. In 1985, however, a new approach emerged. The solution gave industry responsibility for the development of standards that would meet ''essential safety and health requirements" mandated by EU legislation. This solution limited the role of the EU Commission to the definition, through legislation, of broad safety and health objectives to be met. Industry and private

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

standards-setting bodies provide the details of how those objectives are to be achieved.

The Uruguay Round addresses standards at a global level by establishing a system of rules, the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), by which government and private standards-setting bodies are to act in the future. In the view of one European panelist, this is a significant achievement of the Uruguay Round. Standards can serve as barriers to trade, and further problems can be anticipated over time, for example, as environmental concerns generate new standards and regulations.

Universality is another important achievement of the Uruguay Round TBT agreement. There are more than 115 signatories to the GATT, as amended, agreeing to abide by one comprehensive set of rules. A previous attempt in the Tokyo Round of the GATT to adopt a separate, optional technical barriers to trade code, the Standards Code, resulted in only 38 countries agreeing to exchange information on standards.

It is also important that the new TBT agreement, an integral part of the GATT, invokes a higher level of obligation. The signatories (sovereign governments) agree to take full responsibility in their respective countries for the application of the terms of the code to whatever level of government or private sector is involved.

In addition, both public and private standards-setting bodies are enjoined not to act in a discriminatory fashion or to use standards as hidden barriers to trade. It was noted that the EU was anxious to have the United States agree to this provision. In exchange, the EU agreed to submit itself to national treatment and be considered the responsible level of government. This will require all lower levels of government to adhere to the TBT. As one conference participant noted, the United States agreed to a certain degree of coverage of its private-sector standards bodies in return for more direct coverage through Brussels of European standards bodies, including the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC). In the view of a European panelist, this mitigates the danger of discriminatory application of the European standards system in the future.

With respect to government obligations concerning private standards bodies under the Uruguay Round agreement, there is a Code of Good Conduct under which private-sector bodies can submit to the Most Favored National Clause. If a private-sector body signs the code, it must treat others in a nondiscriminatory fashion. This means, for example, that if a standards organization admits some foreign participation in its procedures, it may not block other foreign participants.

Another achievement of the Uruguay Round has been to put in place not only agreements on technical standards, but also a multilateral trade body, the World Trade Organization. The dispute settlement system of this multilateral trade organization applies directly to technical standards as barriers to trade. Since the GATT is an intergovernmental organization, private organizations or firms can

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

access the dispute settlement system only through their government. On the other hand, the development of private diplomacy among standards-setting bodies at a global level is possible and encouraged in the text of new international trade agreements.

U.S. industry participants expressed concern about the dispute settlement system under the GATT. Improving the dispute settlement mechanism and integrating it into the Uruguay Round represented a very high priority for the United States. It was pointed out, however, that how often the dispute settlement mechanism will be invoked with respect to specific unfair trade practices is an open question.

The USTR was encouraged to draw on the advice and resources of private companies in bringing cases to the GATT. With respect to dispute settlement, the TBT agreement will have no practical effect unless companies bring cases to the GATT. The USTR requires this kind of assistance. It was also pointed out, however, that the GATT dispute settlement procedure is the end of a long process. Most disputes should not end up in the formal dispute settlement procedure, but should be settled privately.

The topic of access to the European standards system by non-European private-sector standards bodies elicited considerable discussion. The EU and Uruguay Round texts enjoin the private standards-setting bodies to participate actively in horizontal communication between groups, as well as in the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and its subgroups. A European panelist noted that the easiest way to gain access to the European standards-setting system is via the ISO and strongly urged that U.S. firms (1) work to ensure full representation in the work of the ISO and (2) work to establish international standards. Where international standards exist, there is a general obligation, in the EU and GATT texts, for standards bodies to incorporate them in their own standards to the greatest possible extent.

The importance of the private sector in the standards process was highlighted during conference discussions. In the view of a European participant, if there is a full commitment in the United States and in Europe to develop international standards, the new processes outlined in the Uruguay Round will function properly. If there is no private-sector commitment, they will not work. The private sector needs to be an active participant where its interests lie. The hope was expressed that the idea that domestic markets can be protected with standards will be left behind as we enter the twenty-first century.

The emphasis on participation in international standards for access to European standards setting is not new. For example, as one U.S. industry participant commented, over a period of four years, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has had a highly productive dialogue with CEN, CENELEC, and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute. ANSI receives these organizations' standards for comment and has an opportunity to comment on their

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

processes. The challenge has been to motivate U.S. industry to use these opportunities for access more effectively.

Only U.S. multinational firms with operations in Europe have direct access to CEN and CENELEC committees. The answer to the problem of access, according to a European participant, is for private standards-setting bodies to develop international standards. It was noted that the United States does participate in many areas of international standards activities. For example, the United States holds 35 technical committee secretariats in the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and is the largest single holder of secretariats in ISO.

National Standards And Conformity Assessment Systems In Overseas Markets: A U.S. Perspective

In the early part of the twentieth century, the world marketplace comprised strong, individual, independent trading markets. It now comprises a number of economically strong nations and trading regions. The integration of international markets has impacted product certification and standardization activities in a number of ways. Important changes are taking place in standards and conformity assessment systems in Europe, Asia, and emerging markets, affecting both regulated and unregulated product sectors.

Worldwide, standards harmonization activities have increased. For example, the countries of the EU and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) are involved in harmonization efforts, while Japan is examining international standards harmonization, particularly as it relates to quality. Under NAFTA, Mexico is harmonizing its standards with the United States and Canada. Product certifiers involved in standards have increased their participation in international activities and standards harmonization. One U.S. organization participates in more than 150 international standards committees and 60 harmonization initiatives around the world.

A conference panelist from a U.S. testing laboratory reported that in response to changes in international trade, product testers and certifiers in the United States and other developed markets are internationalizing their activities and introducing new services to meet changing international service demands of their customers. The evolution of global manufacturing gives certifiers incentives to develop a global presence.

The need for multiple market access has led to increased cooperation between certifiers through the establishment of memoranda of understanding, bilateral agreements, and other arrangements. These have built confidence in a capacity to certify, test, quality register, and provide other elements of conformity assessment services worldwide. U.S. certifiers have built agreements with certifiers in countries that are primary markets for U.S. products.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

The experience of one U.S. product certifier suggests that the keys to cooperation in assessing and certifying products locally or supplying data locally in foreign markets, are confidence building, cross-training, audits, and the right to reject.

Certifiers can also provide global assistance to customers that want to export to new markets by identifying the requirements, codes, standards, and laws that a product must meet, including the processes by which a product must be evaluated. In the view of one participant, the certifiers of the future will need not only experience and flexibility, but also foreign market intelligence, transparency in foreign standards and certification processes, and the backing of national treatment before they can help producers reach U.S. export markets.

National Standards And Conformity Assessment Systems In Overseas Markets: A European Perspective

A European perspective on conformity assessment was provided by a panelist from the European testing and certification community. Conference participants were advised that a new industry is developing around conformity assessment. There is the danger that it could develop in such a way that customers will reject it as an obstruction and try to find a way around it, at either the national, the European, or the international level.

Via the European Organization for Testing and Certification (EOTC), Europe is attempting to harmonize accreditation in nonregulated industry sectors through the calibration, certification, and laboratory accreditation communities in 18 countries. A private-sector, not-for-profit association, the EOTC seeks to establish confidence, through mutual recognition agreements, among parties concerned with conformity assessment issues.

To accomplish this, the EOTC uses sectoral committees and agreement groups that represent the interests of manufacturers, users, and third parties in a specific economic sector, and of the laboratory, certification, and accreditation communities. Comprising national delegations from at least five EU or EFTA countries, sectoral committees discuss mutual recognition arrangements where they perceive a market need for harmonized conformity assessment. Agreement groups are formed among organizations from at least three EU or EFTA countries that have agreed to operate in conformance with similar European or international standards. This requires that the national conformity assessment accreditation system be available to both domestic and foreign laboratories. One panelist noted that such systems are not presently in place in some European countries.

EOTC is working to promote conformity assessment arrangements whereby a product is tested once, certified, and accepted everywhere within the market, whether in Europe or in another country through a mutual recognition arrangement. It was noted that harmonized or compatible conformity assessment arrangements

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

within the EU or other countries would remove the requirement that U.S. products be sent to European laboratories or certification bodies for tests.

In the discussion of conformity assessment in overseas markets, several U.S. industry participants stressed the need to maintain reliance wherever possible on self-certification, by using the supplier's declaration of conformity rather than services provided by an independent third party.

The Administration's Defense Acquisition Reform Policies

An overview of the recommendations of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Process Action Team (PAT) for Specifications and Standards was provided by a conference participant from DoD.

The PAT was chartered to, among other tasks, develop a comprehensive strategy for permitting reliance in defense procurement on commercial products, specifications, and standards, as well as practices and processes. The team works to ensure that (1) system and data requirements do not unnecessarily preclude the use of commercial products and practices in form, fit, and function; (2) unnecessary specifications and standards are eliminated; (3) nongovernmental standards and commercial item descriptions are used to the maximum extent practical; (4) industry is encouraged to propose alternative technical solutions; and (5) standards and specifications are applied correctly to contracts.

Several of the team's primary recommendations include the following:

  • Performance specifications: For all Acquisition Category programs for new systems, major modifications, technology generation changes, nondevelopmental items, and commercial items, DoD's need shall be outlined in terms of performance specifications. The contractor, rather than DoD, will be responsible for designing and developing solutions to meet these performance requirements.
  • Manufacturing and management standards: Management and manufacturing standards shall be canceled or converted to performance or nongovernment standards. Contractors will be given the option, in complying with military specifications (milspecs), of proposing relevant nongovernmental standards or industry practices as substitutes that meet the intent of the specific milspecs or military standards.
  • Innovative contracting processes: All new high-value solicitations and ongoing contracts will include a statement encouraging contractors to submit alternative solutions to milspecs and standards. Incentives will be provided to allow current contractors to switch to a new specification or standard.
  • Partnerships with industry associations: DoD will encourage partnerships with industry to help replace milspecs and standards with nongovernmental standards, where practical.
  • Reduction of oversight: DoD's recent directive authorizing the use of the
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
  • ISO 9000 series of quality management system standards allows, but does not mandate, the use of the series. DoD will no longer dictate how contractors establish quality systems. Contractors will be responsible for establishing systems, processes, and standards.
  • Establish goals to reduce the cost of contractor development and production test and inspection: The team recommended that DoD set a specific goal of reducing the cost of contractor development, production, testing, and inspection, as well as the use of innovative techniques utilized in industry. These include simulation, environmental testing, dual-use test facilities, process controls, metrics, and continuous process improvement.

It was also noted that in the acquisition of commercial products, DoD will rely on third-party certification of compliance with standards in place of DoD certification where possible. Where such programs do not exist, DoD will cooperate with industry to establish them. DoD is working to make maximum use of third-party organizations.

It was acknowledged by a DoD participant that it will be difficult to change the culture in DoD and reengineer the acquisition process. The key to this effort is leadership in management. Metrics of success developed by teams will help determine both the progress and the impact of changes.

The U.S. Government Role In Standards And Conformity Assessment

The U.S. government plays an active role in many aspects of standards and conformity assessment. Participants discussed existing and potential missions for the U.S. government in these areas. Also considered were the desirable mix of government and private-sector activity in standards and conformity assessment and ways to arrive at those desired relationships.

A Government Agency Perspective

In the changing international trade environment, according to a U.S. government panelist, many of our previous assumptions that others will generally adopt U.S. standards and buy U.S. products are no longer valid. In addition, international standards are often developed without active U.S. input or representation. Exporters also face aggressive trade practices by other countries, including the use of standards as barriers to trade. On the positive side, international cooperation is increasing as evidenced by both GATT- and NAFTA-related activities.

From the perspective of one U.S. government agency, the private voluntary standards system represents the best approach for the U.S. economy. There is a need, however, for much better cooperation and communication among standards organizations, industry, and government to make this system work effectively.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

The U.S. government's general role in standards is, first, as a user of standards. Agencies use standards in the purchase of products (e.g., DoD) and through their incorporation into federal regulations (e.g., the Occupational Safety and Health Administration). The government also provides the technical foundation for many standardization activities and advocates for U.S. interests around the world.

The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) plays many roles in standardization. NIST provides the technical basis for standards through fundamental physical standards measurement, test methods, reference data, and production of standard reference material. NIST participates in voluntary standards committees, presently holding 1,143 memberships on 816 standards committees of 79 organizations. NIST chairs 118 of these standards committees. NIST also runs the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program. In addition, about 170,000 standards-related inquiries are handled annually by NIST's National Center for Standards and Certification Information. The center serves as the U.S. GATT Inquiry Point. NIST has begun to explore mutual recognition of accreditation bodies through its National Voluntary Conformity Assessment Systems Evaluation program. Finally, NIST is working to improve communication and cooperation among government agencies, standards organizations, and industry.

The U.S. standards system faces several challenges. The current process may not always be adequate to deal with the changing international environment. For example, ANSI is often the U.S. representative in the international standards arena. In one panelist's view, ANSI's lack of formal government backing can place it at a disadvantage relative to other parties. The United States often acts in a reactive mode in some areas of standards, rather than setting the agenda for the rest of the world. There is some movement by the private sector, however, to recognize the importance of participation in the international standards arena. This is evidenced by the growing number of U.S.-held ISO committee chairs.

A government participant proposed developing a systems approach to the standards process to achieve national goals more effectively. This would require (1) focusing on a clearly defined national goal; (2) delineating responsibilities and relations among standards organizations, industry, and government; and (3) improving communication among all parties in the voluntary standards process.

A Private-Sector Perspective

A private-sector panelist's perspective on the U.S. government's role in standards and conformity assessment emphasized the need for a more definitive relationship between the government and the private voluntary standards system. The panelist stressed that government must recognize and use the private voluntary standards system. In addition, U.S. industry should support ANSI as a credible mechanism for promoting integration of the voluntary standards system.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

The U.S. government must also organize to speak coherently as a sovereign nation on the issues of standards and conformity assessment, both internally and externally. This is particularly important in view of the new responsibilities and accountability of the sovereign government signatories to the Uruguay Round. Finally, the cost of standardization should be borne by those who gain value from the activity.

Many conference participants agreed that the United States must support an infrastructure that is competent, equitable, and credible. Some expressed the view that ANSI and the voluntary standards system should not be governed and funded by the present mixture of government, associations, standards developers, and a small percentage of industrial firms in the United States. This represents an uneven and inequitable distribution of governance and of financial support. A private-sector panelist maintained that revenue must be derived from value received and that ANSI should concentrate on activities that are of value, identifying who values them, and assessing revenue sources from that value structure.

The future will be substantially different from the past. Both private and public leaders need to seek improvements to the U.S. standards system in a way that involves the government. One participant pointed out that undesired levels of government control, which may accompany government involvement in private activities, can be mitigated through negotiation.

Industry–Government Cooperation in Regulation and International Standards

The medical device industry and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have developed and implemented a program to provide industry access to effective mechanisms to influence international standards, regulations, and trade. This program has been built on cooperation between industry and government. In 1989, the U.S. medical device industry instituted a program to influence international and European Community standards to promote harmonization of medical device standards and regulations. The industry administers most national standards and almost all horizontal medical device international standards.

The program's success could not have been achieved without the support of the FDA, according to an industry panelist. The program was enhanced by the fact that the U.S. industry's standards were used by many foreign governments. With FDA's support, the industry adopted as national standards all of the international standards that it administers in the United States. FDA support was critical to the medical device association's involvement with an ISO technical committee that will write, interpret, and coordinate medical device quality system standards for the international community. It is also working to harmonize medical device standards and regulatory requirements for all countries worldwide.

FDA provided leadership, resources, and credibility to this exercise. FDA also provided scientific and political leadership to industry's efforts to influence

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

ISO, IEC, CEN, and CENELEC standards. Through the FDA, the industry gained access to CEN and CENELEC committees. The U.S. medical device industry was able to join standards-writing committees by gaining the respect and confidence of the Europeans and making it clear to them that U.S. industry has as much interest in writing appropriate standards as they have.

The FDA has also assisted industry leaders in promoting the message that international standards activities are important, not only to industry but to the FDA. U.S. industry in general needs to make more of a commitment to international standards, and more companies should carry the burden, emphasized the industry panelist.

The FDA has benefited from this activity in several respects. First, FDA relies on standards for regulatory activities, almost all of which are based on some form of voluntary standards. These include manufacturing practices, product approval processes, and clinical investigations. FDA experts are also provided access to experts from all over the world. As a technical regulatory body, FDA needs to maintain its knowledge base. The most important reason for FDA's interest in international standards may be that harmonization of international standards and regulations can significantly reduce FDA's regulatory cost.

In the view of one industry participant, it is critical that FDA continue as a major participant in the international standards system. Its leadership, knowledge, resources, and management can contribute to industry's effort to ensure that standards expand global market access rather than limit it. For example, FDA experts support the formulation and acceptance of U.S. positions on international standards. Continued funding for participation in these international activities was encouraged by the industry panelist.

Finally, the medical device industry supports the notion that the government should be a full and equal participant in, but not the director of, private-sector international standards participation. It is important for the government and the private sector to speak with a unified voice. FDA has shown a willingness to share responsibility with the private sector in international standards, commented an industry participant.

Standardization and harmonization processes in sectors other than medical devices can likely be furthered by cooperative relationships between industry and government. For some 25 years, industry—working in cooperation with the FDA rather than being directed by it—has produced a tremendous number of standards critical to FDA regulation. It also has made a major contribution to marketplace safety.

Comments and Concerns

A number of other comments and concerns about the U.S. government role in standards and conformity assessment were voiced by conference participants. Several of these are highlighted below:

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

There are several existing mechanisms that demonstrate significant interface among the U.S. government, industry, and standardization matters. One is the Government Member Council of ANSI, and another is the NIST-chaired Interagency Committee for Standards Policy.

There is a need for an exchange of information concerning standards developments among federal agencies. Another challenge is overall coordination of the government's role in standards, by taking into account the differing roles and missions of the various agencies involved in standards-related matters.

Some participants maintained that ANSI would benefit from a federal charter, while others did not see the need for the additional processes or potential bureaucracy that might result from such formalization.

The government can assume a more proactive role in standards by working to influence standards setting in developing countries or in emerging markets through the provision of technical support or training. Europe and Japan are active in this area. It was noted that NIST has such an effort ongoing with Saudi Arabia.

Sectoral Case Studies: Telecommunications And Information Technology

Standards issues are an increasingly important and contentious issue in the telecommunication and information technology industries. This has been driven by several forces. First, the number of players in the standards process has increased markedly as government policies have opened many markets to new entrants. In addition, the rate at which these industries need to develop new standards is accelerating as rapid technological progress leads to the introduction of both new services and new ways of providing old ones. The blurring of traditional industry lines in these sectors is also driving demand for changes in standards as firms capitalize on the convergence of industries and technologies to create advanced services for customers. Finally, as many firms have moved outside traditional domestic markets to compete internationally, foreign standards have become important to their success and the role of international standards has become more critical.

Telecommunications

The telecommunication industry is dependent on universality, which depends in turn on standards. In the wake of the dynamics mentioned above, it is critical that standards become adaptable at a much faster pace, according to a telecommunication industry executive. The key is to develop standards that from the outset adapt to the movement of the industry. To accomplish this objective, standards need to be open, scalable, and extensible: open in terms of being

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

available to all potential providers on a equitable basis; scalable in that they can adapt readily to improve performance in a given technology; and extensible to new technologies as they become available.

In evaluating the telecommunication standardization process, the question of whether formal standards are necessary arises. In some cases, not developing formal standards could lead to chaotic marketplaces or to inefficient or costly services. In other cases, standards may be better left to the marketplace. In yet other cases, adoption of standards could be counterproductive.

The government should not actually set standards, in the view of the telecommunication panelist. The government does not generally have the prerequisite technical expertise or marketplace savvy. Government can, however, encourage and participate in the standards process in order to meet public interest responsibilities. It was noted that the private sector is motivated to get involved in the standards process when adopting a common standard would produce a far larger market with less risk of failure than would a market consisting of multiple incompatible technologies.

Historically, most telecommunication standards bodies were not formed with the notion of creating standards that would invite open competition and rapid change. Instead, they were formed under the aegis of national monopoly service providers. Although telecommunication standards processes work, they have been generally slow. The implementation of accelerated procedures has improved the speed of the processes, but not enough, in the opinion of a telecommunication industry participant.

Rapidly changing telecommunication technologies and markets should force industry consideration of some fundamental goals: (1) acceleration of the standards process; (2) attention not only to the most current technology, but to technologies that can be anticipated and technologies that are available to competing countries; and (3) making standards as flexible, scalable, and extensible as possible, by anticipating improvements in present and future technologies.

Information Technology

Standards drive development in the information technology (IT) industry. Customers demand interoperability among networks, computers, applications, and people, as well as the freedom to choose between vendors. The IT industry has a broad range of formal and informal standards development processes. The U.S. industry has been successful in having its standards adopted internationally through private-sector processes.

Informal systems for IT standards development include a variety of consortia. The industry has formed multiple consortia to perform specific technical work, promote standards and ensure their implementation, test products, and build common software. Consortia are usually formed, however, to facilitate the timely completion of standards and ensure that they pertain to real products.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Consortia have done effective and efficient work in regard to the latter. However, there is no credible evidence that the consortium-based process is inherently faster than the formal standards process, according to an IT industry panelist. In particular, consortia sometimes fail to meet their objectives because they believe they can short-circuit the painful political process of developing consensus on a broad base. Relying one the willingness of the participants to passively follow the major players has not proved an ideal solution.

Consortia have nevertheless remained popular because (1) they are involved in activities other than standards development and (2) they focus on near-term success by concentrating on existing technology and product implementations. Consortia also appear to use effective methodologies. They tend to work more intensively than formal standards groups. They make better use of technology and therefore have the potential to be more efficient. Yet, unlike the formal standards process, consortia may exclude the small participant because of the higher level of resources required to participate.

Consortia will continue to be a factor in the IT industry. They add value and are easy to form. One problem, however, is that the number of groups has increased so dramatically that there is considerable confusion about which standards are the best technical solution. It has become difficult to judge the credibility of any particular standard or standards group. There is also a general inability to deal with mutually exclusive standards. Vendors react to this situation by participating in all the groups and implementing all standards. Users express their frustration and demand the formation of yet another new consortia to do it right. This results in inefficiency and added costs.

There is a need to take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of all these groups. Actions suggested by an industry panelist include, first, recognizing a preference for the formal processes at the national and international levels. At the same time, the formal standards process needs to separate technical development from formal approval. In this way, the IT industry can take advantage of good work being accomplished, while maintaining a system for establishing legitimacy and minimizing confusion. This will require changes in the standards process. One possibility would be to give international consortia nonvoting membership in international organizations.

With respect to the government role in IT standards processes, several suggestions were made. These included (1) continued active participation in the voluntary standards process on the same basis as other interested parties; (2) a greater funding role through, for example, coverage of specific infrastructure items (e.g., ISO and IEC dues, hosting of international standards meetings in the United States); (3) R&D tax credits for standardization activities; (4) negotiation of mutual recognition agreements, where required; (5) offering such services as accreditation of laboratories or recognition of private-sector accreditation programs; and (6) formal recognition of the existing private-sector standards system through, for example, the granting of a federal charter to ANSI.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

New Developments In International Standards And Global Trade

International Standards, Conformity Assessment,

and U.S. Trade Policy Project Committee

and

The Academy Industry Program

Wednesday, March 30, 1994

National Academy of Sciences Building

Washington, D.C.

The Lecture Room

- Agenda -

 

 

 

8:30-9:30 a.m.

Continental Breakfast and Registration

 

9:30-9:40 a.m.

Welcome

STEPHEN A. MERRILL, Executive Director, Science, Technology, and Economic Policy Board

Director, Academy Industry Program

Introduction

JOHN SULLIVAN WILSON, Study Director, International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project

 

9:40-10:20 a.m.

The Post-Uruguay Round Trade Outlook: Standards and Technical Barriers to Trade. The panel will address the status of standards and conformity assessment systems as barriers to trade in the post-Uruguay Round trading system.

 

Moderator:

Gary Hufbauer, Senior Fellow, Institute for International Economics

David Walters, Acting Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Economic Affairs and Chief Economist, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Victoria Curzon-Price, University of Geneva

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

 

10:20-10:50 a.m.

Open discussion: Uruguay Round and changes to technical trade barrier provisions—effects on U.S. firms' technology development and export strategies; industry perspective on emerging standards-related trade issues, such as environmental standards, quality standards, and intellectual property protection

 

10:50-11:00 a.m.

Break

 

11:00-11:50 a.m.

National Standards and Conformity Assessment Systems in Overseas Markets. The panel will address trends in national standards and conformity assessment systems in prominent and emerging U.S. export markets.

 

Moderator:

Lawrence Wills, Director of Standards, IBM Corporation

David Stanger, Secretary General, European Organization for Testing and Certification

Laszlo Belady, Chairman, Mitsubishi Electric Laboratories

S. Joseph Bhatia, Vice President, External Affairs, Underwriters Laboratories

 

11:50-12:30 p.m.

Open discussion: impact of standardization and conformity assessment trends in U.S. trading partner countries on U.S. exports; firms' experiences and participation in standards development in these countries

 

12:30-1:30 p.m.

Lunch

 

1:30 p.m.

The Administration's Defense Acquisition Reform Policies

Coleen Preston;

Deputy Under Secretary for Acquisition Reform, U.S. Department of Defense

 

2:00-2:50 p.m.

The U.S. Government Role in Standards and Conformity Assessment. The panel will discuss current roles and potential new initiatives for the federal government in standards development, conformity assessment, and quality assurance.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

 

Moderator:

Richard Schulte, Senior Vice President, Laboratories, American Gas Association

Belinda Collins, Program Analyst, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Robert Hermann, Senior Vice President, Science and Technology, United Technologies Corporation

Michael Miller, President, Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation

 

2:50 p.m.

Open Discussion

 

3:20 p.m.

Break

 

3:30-4:20 p.m.

Sectoral Case Study: Information Technology (IT) and Telecommunication. The panel will discuss the link among standards, technology, and development of new products and services in the context of rapid technological change and the ongoing convergence of these industry sectors.

 

Moderator:

Stanley Besen, Vice President, Charles River Associates

Richard Liebhaber, Chief Strategy and Technology Officer, MCI Communications Corporation

Stephen Oksala, Director, Corporate Standards, Unisys Corporation

 

4:20-4:50 p.m.

Open discussion: emerging trends in standards and technology development in the IT and telecommunication industries; role of international standardization in strengthening U.S. export performance

 

4:50 p.m.

Concluding Remarks

GARY HUFBAUER

 

5:00 p.m.

Reception

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Participants List

Melvyn R. Altman

Associate Director

Office of Standards and Regulations Center for Devices and Radiological Health

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Guy A. Arlotto

Deputy Director

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Diana Artemis

Associate Director

Chemical Manufacturers Association

Daryl Back

Counselor, Industry, Science and Technology

Embassy of Australia

Earl S. Barbely

Director, Telecommunication and Information Standards

CIP Bureau

U.S. Department of State

James Baskin

Director, Standards

NYNEX Corporation

Cora Beebe

Office of Management and Budget

Executive Office of the President

Laszlo Belady

Chairman

Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc.

Diego Betancourt

Manager

Office of Strategic Standardization

Polaroid Corporation

S. Joseph Bhatia

Vice President, External Affairs

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

Eric Biel

Trade Counsel

Senate Finance Committee

Ezra L. Bixby

President

Lovell Associates

Judy P. Boehlert

Vice President, Quality Control

Roche Pharmaceuticals

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

Barbara Boykin

Standards Coordinator

American Petroleum Institute

Richard Bradshaw

Vice President

North Atlantic Research, Inc.

Maureen Breitenberg

Economist

National Institutes of Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Commerce

Dennis Brining

Director, International Program Development

Lockheed Corporation

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

George Brubaker

Deputy Director

Office of Standards and Regulations

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Milton M. Bush

Director of Public Affairs

American Council of Independent Laboratories

Amy Cheng

Industrial Engineer

Facilities Management Division

U.S. General Services Administration

Colin B. Church

Voluntary Standards and

International Activities Coordinator

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Belinda Collins

Program Analyst

National Institute of Standards and Technology

James D. Converse

Director of Corporate Standards

Eastman Kodak Company

Hugh Conway

Director

Office of Regulatory Analysis

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

U.S. Department of Labor

Stephen Cooney

Senior Policy Director, International Investment and Finance

National Association of Manufacturers

Lori L. Cooper

Director, Internal Market Staff

Office of European Community Affairs

U.S. Department of Commerce

Francis L. Criqui

Manager, Technical Document Management

General Motors Corporation

Helen Davis

Washington Representative

American Society for Testing and Materials

Lester Davis

Chief Economist

Department of Commerce

Myles Denny-Brown

International Economist

U.S. Department of Commerce

Helen A. Domenici

Associate, Federal Relations

Corporate Affairs Division

Pfizer Inc.

John Donaldson

Chief, Standards Code and Information Program

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Helen Donoghue

First Secretary

Washington Delegation of the European Commission

Anita Drummond

American Council of Independent Laboratories

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Lester F. Eastwood

Director, Standards Strategy

Motorola, Inc.

Williams Edmunds

Manager, Codes and Standards

Owens Corning Fiberglas

George L. Edwards

President

Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions

Thomas Ehrgood

International Trade Counsel

Digital Equipment Corporation

Fara Faramarzpour

Director

Office of Strategic Standardization

Polaroid Corporation

Wendell Fletcher

Senior Associate

Office of Technology Assessment

Thomas B. Fowler

Principal Engineer

The MITRE Corporation

Kim Frankena

Chief, Major Trading Nations Branch

U.S. International Trade Commission

James French

Director of Standards

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Louis Geoffrion

Manager, Corporate Quality Assurance

Raytheon Company

Richard B. Gibson

Technical Standards Director

AT&T Bell Laboratories

Neal Goldenberg

U.S. Department of Energy

Melvin R. Green

Associate Executive Director, Codes and Standards

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Alf S. Gunnersen

Associate Technical Director

The MITRE Corporation

Joseph K. Haeglin

General Manager, Central Engineering and Purchasing

Texaco Inc.

William F. Hanrahan

Senior Director

Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers Association

William Hendrickson

Senior Editor

Issues in Science and Technology

Robert J. Hermann

Senior Vice President, Science and Technology

United Technologies Corporation

Peter L.M. Heydemann

Director, Technology Services

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Derek Holden

Vice President, Industry and Government Relations Market Development

Owens Corning Fiberglas Corporation

Virginia A. Huth

Office of Management and Budget

Executive Office of the President

Charles W. Hyer

Editor/Publisher

The Marley Organization, Inc.

Brian Kahin

Director, Information and Infrastructure Project

Science, Technology and Public Policy Program

John F. Kennedy School of Government

Harvard University

Sheldon Kimmel

U.S. Department of Justice

Louisa Kock

Program Examiner

Office of Management and Budget

Roy E. Lancraft

Division Manager

United Parcel Service

Holly Lawe

Senior Research Associate

Georgia Institute of Technology

Center for International Standards and Quality

Mary Anne Lawler

Director of Standards Relations

IBM Corporation

William Lehr

Assistant Professor

Graduate School of Business

Columbia University

Walter G. Leight

Deputy Director, Office of Standards Services

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Richard Liebhaber

Chief Strategy and Technology Officer

MCI Communications Corporation

Henry Line

Director, Global Products Standards

AMP Incorporated

John W. Locke

President

American Association for Laboratory Accreditation

Charles Ludolph

Director

Office of European Communities Affairs

U.S. Department of Commerce

Mark Mahaney

Council on Competitiveness

William A. Maxwell

Director, Government Relations

Convex Computer Corporation

Leroy M. May

Senior Staff Member and Standards Consultant

AT&T

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Sergio Mazza

President

American National Standards Institute

Nina I. McClelland

Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer

NSF International

Mary McKiel

National Coordinator, EPA Standards Networks

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Barbara McLennan

Staff Vice President, Government and Legal Affairs

Electronic Industries Association

Kenneth McLennan

President

Manufacturers' Alliance for Productivity and Innovation

Richard Meier

Deputy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for GATT Affairs

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Michael J. Miller

President

Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation

Thomas P. Monkus

Compliance Officer, Director QA/RA

Medical High Technology

International, Inc.

Keith A. Mowry

Manager, Governmental Affairs

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

Robert W. Noth

Manager, Engineering Standards

Deere & Company

Stephen Oksala

Director, Corporate Standards

Unisys Corporation

Anthony R. O'Neill

Chairman of the Board

American National Standards Institute

J. Paul Oxer

Executive Assistant to the President

Ecology and Environment, Inc.

John P. Palafoutas

Director of Federal Relations

AMP Incorporated

Bernard J. Phillips

Head of the Competition and Consumer Policy Division

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

Herbert Phillips

Vice President, Engineering

Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute

Kyle Pitsor

Manager, Energy and Trade

National Electrical Manufacturers Association

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

George Porter

Quality Systems Manager

ISO 9000

Roche Pharmaceuticals

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

Joseph Potts

Director

Technical Support Group

GTE Laboratories

Ernest H. Preeg

William M. School Chair in International Business

Center for Strategic and International Studies

Colleen Preston

Deputy Under Secretary for Acquisition Reform

U.S. Department of Defense

Victoria Curzon-Price

Professor of Economics

University of Geneva

Anne Rafferty

Economist

U.S. Department of State

Kim Ritchie

AVX Corporation

Sadi Ubaldo Rife

Counselor, Science & Technology Attache

Embassy of Argentina

Lloyd Rodenbaugh

Promega

Richard Rounsevelle

Chief, Recreational Boating Product Assurance

U.S. Coast Guard

Deborah Rudolph

Manager, Technology Policy

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - USA

William A. Ruh

Associate Technical Director

The MITRE Corporation

Francine Salamone

Associate Director, Medical Operations

International Pharmaceuticals Group

Pfizer Inc.

Andrew Salem

Staff Director

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

Gregory E. Saunders

Acting Director for Manufacturing Modernization

Office of the Secretary of Defense

U.S. Department of Defense

Mary H. Saunders

Assistant to the Director

Office of Standards Services

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Jane W. Schweiker

Director of Government and Organization Relations

American National Standards Institute

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

C. Ronald Simpkins

Manager, Corporate Engineering Standards

E.I. DuPont DeNemours & Company

Anna Slomovic

Senior Policy Analyst

Rand Critical Technologies Institute

Oliver Smoot

Executive Vice President

Computer and Business Equipment

Manufacturers Association

Carlos Souto

Industrial Scientific Counselor

Embassy of Portugal

Michael B. Spring

Assistant Professor

Department of Information Science

University of Pittsburg

David Stanger

Secretary General

European Organization for Testing and Certification

Steve Stewart

Program Administrator, Public Affairs Telecommunications

IBM Corporation

Gene Strull

Consultant

Westinghouse

Marty Sullivan

Director, Standards

Bellcore

Audrey Talley

Office of Food Safety and Technical Services, Foreign Agriculture Service, ITP

U.S. Department of Agriculture

John C. Tao

Director, EH&S

Audits Department

Air Products & Chemicals, Inc.

Keith B. Termaat

Executive Engineer, Engineering Materials and Standards

Ford Motor Company

James Thomas

President

American Society for Testing and Materials

Marie Thursby

Professor and Director

Center for International Business Education and Research

Purdue University

Maria Tilves-Aguilera

Manager, Government Relations

Northern Telecom, Inc.

Robert Toth

President

R.B. Toth Associates

Suzanne Troje

Director, Technical Trade Barriers

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Executive Office of the President

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Francis J. Turpin

Director

Office of International Harmonization

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

Debra H. van Opstal

Fellow in Science and Technology

Political-Military Studies Program

Center for Strategic and International Studies

Jerrold L. Wagener

Senior Technical Consultant

Amoco Production Company

Caroline Wagner

Senior Analyst

Rand Corporation

William G. Wagner

Technical Standards Division Manager

Society of Automotive Engineers

David Walters

Acting Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Economic Affairs and Chief Economist

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Executive Office of the President

Les Weinstein

Attorney

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Martin Weiss

Assistant Professor

University of Pittsburgh

Fritz Whittington

Texas Instruments

Fred H. Williamson

Director, Imaging Technology Policy

Eastman Kodak Company

George T. Willingmyre

Vice President

Washington Operations

American National Standards Institute

Mel Woinsky

Senior Manager, Technical Industry Standards

Northern Telecom Inc.

Dorothy Zolandz

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Joseph F. Zimmer

Deputy Associate Administrator

Office of Management and Budget

Joseph S. Zajaczkowski

Staff Consultant

Standards Coordination

Storage Technology Corp.

International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project Committee (attending)

Gary Hufbauer, Chairman

Senior Fellow

Institute for International Economics

Stanley Besen

Vice President

Charles River Associates

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×

Dennis Chamot

Associate Executive Director

Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems

National Research Council

Leonard Frier

President

MET Laboratories

Steven R. Hix

Chairman

In Focus Systems

Ivor N. Knight

Vice President, Business Technology and Standards

COMSAT World Systems

Gerald H. Ritterbusch

Manager of Product Safety and Environmental Control

Caterpillar, Inc.

Richard J. Schulte

Senior Vice President, Laboratories

American Gas Association

Lawrence Wills

IBM Director of Standards

IBM Corporation

Academy Complex

Stephen A. Merrill

Executive Director

Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy and

Director, Academy Industry Program

Lois Perrolle

Associate Director

Academy Industry Program

Daniel LaRue Gross

Staff Associate

Academy Industry Program

Shirley Cole

Administrative Assistant

Academy Industry Program

John S. Wilson

Project Director

International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project

Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy

National Research Council

John M. Godfrey

Research Associate

International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project

Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy

National Research Council

Patrick P. Sevcik

Project Assistant

International Standards, Conformity Assessment, and U.S. Trade Policy Project

Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy

National Research Council

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 169
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 170
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 171
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 172
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 173
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 174
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 175
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 176
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 177
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 178
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 179
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 180
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 181
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 182
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 183
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 184
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 185
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 186
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 187
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 188
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 189
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 190
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 191
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 192
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 193
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 194
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 195
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: New Developments in International Standards and Global Trade: A Conference Summary." National Research Council. 1995. Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4921.
×
Page 196
Next: Appendix B: Legislative Request for the Study: Public Law 102-245 »
Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade: Into the 21st Century Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $69.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Mandated standards used for vehicle airbags, International Organization for Standards (ISO) standards adopted for photographic film, de facto standards for computer software--however they arise, standards play a fundamental role in the global marketplace.

Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade provides a comprehensive, up-to-date analysis of the link between standards, product testing and certification, and U.S. economic performance. The book includes recommendations for streamlining standards development, increasing the efficiency of product testing and certification, and promoting the success of U.S. exports in world markets.

The volume offers a critical examination of organizations involved in standards and identifies the urgent improvements needed in the U.S. system for conformity assessment, in which adherence to standards is assessed and certified. Among other key issues, the book explores the role of government regulation, laboratory accreditation, and the overlapping of multiple quality standards in product development and manufacturing.

In one of the first treatments of this subject, Standards, Conformity Assessment, and Trade offers a unique and highly valuable analysis of the impact of standards and conformity assessment on global trade.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!