U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  S T R A T E G Y  F O R  
C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  1 
UNITED  STATES  
GOVERNMENT   
NATIONAL  STANDARDS  
STRATEGY  FOR   
CRITICAL  AND   
EMERGING   
TECHNOLOGY  
MAY 2023  
  
 
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
2 Table of Contents  
Executive Summary  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  3 
What Standards Are and Why They Matter  ................................ ................................ ....................  4 
Standards for Critical and Emerging Technology  ................................ ................................ ..........  6 
The Objectives of the Critical and Emerg ing Technology Standards Strategy  ..............................  8 
Conclusion  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 14 
  
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
3 Executive Summary  
Strength in standards development has been instrumental to the United States’ global 
technological leadership.  Standards development underpins economic prosperity across the 
country and fortifies U.S. leadership in the industries of the future at the same time.  Bolstering 
U.S. engagement in standards for critical and emerging technology (CET) spaces will strengthen 
U.S. economic and national secu rity. The U.S. Government has long engaged in these standards 
development processes through an approach built on transparency, private sector and public 
sector leadership, and stakeholder engagement —a process that reflects the United  States’ 
commitment to free and fair market competition in which the best technologies come to market.  
Government support for scientific research and development (R&D), an open investment 
climate, and the rule of law have also been critical for U.S. standards leadership.  America ’s 
workers, economy, and society have benefited significantly as a result, as have those of 
like-minded nations alongside which the United States has collaborated to forge technological 
progress.   
Today, however, the United States faces challenges to its l ongstanding standards leadership, and 
to the core principles of international standard -setting that, together with like -minded partners, 
we have upheld for decades.  Strategic competitors are actively seeking to influence international 
standards development , particularly for CET, to advance their military -industrial policies and 
autocratic objectives, including blocking the free flow of information and slowing innovation in 
other countries, by tilting what should be a neutral playing field to their own advan tage.  
The United States must renew our commitment to the rules -based and private sector -led 
approach to standards development, and complement the innovative power of the private sector 
with strategic government and economic policies, public engagements, a nd investments in CET.  
By supporting our unrivaled innovation ecosystem and related international standards 
development as part of a modern industrial strategy, we can ensure that CET are developed and 
deployed in ways that benefit not only the United Stat es but all who seek to promote and 
advance technological progress.  Strengthening the U.S.  approach to standards development will 
lead to standards that are technologically sound, earn people’s trust, reflect our values, and help 
U.S. industry compete on a level playing field.  
This strategy outlines how the U.S. Government will strengthen U.S. leadership and 
competitiveness in international standards development, and ensure that the “rules of the road” 
for CET standards embrace transparency, openness, impar tiality and consensus, effectiveness 
and relevance, coherence, and broad participation.   
  
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
4 What Standards Are and Why They Matter  
From computers and smartphones to cars and lightbulbs, societies rely on technology standards 
for everyday life.  In the broadest sense, standards are the common and repeated use of rules, 
conditions, guidelines, or characteristics for products or related processes, practices, and 
production methods.1 They enable technology that is safe, universal, and interoperable.  Standards 
define the requirements that make it possible for mobile phones sold in different countries to 
communicate across the world, for bank cards issued in one country to be recognized at ATMs in 
another, and for cars to run on fuel purchased from any ga s station.  Standards also help manage 
risk, security, safety, privacy, and quality in the development of new innovations.  In short, good 
standards are good for business, good for consumers, and good for society.  
Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs) co nsist of experts from industry, academia, civil 
society groups, and government, all of whom share a common goal of ensuring safety, 
interoperability, and competition in a particular technology or technology application.  In well -
functioning SDOs, ideas are selected not on the basis of the nationality, employer, or personality 
originating them, but instead on the basis of technical merit.  Six principles govern the 
international standards development process:  transparency, openness, impartiality and consensus,  
effectiveness and relevance, coherence, and a commitment to participation by low - and 
middle -income countries.  
The private sector has led U.S. engagement with SDOs for more than 100 years.  An example of 
how this system works comes from the communications industry.  Qualcomm Technologies 
provided the proposal in the 1990s that became the basis for all 3G  standards, while NTT 
Docomo, a large mobile phone operator in Japan, provided the proposal that later became LTE, 
the predominant standard for wireless broa dband communication for mobile devices and data 
terminals.  
This private sector leadership has come with significant assistance from government and 
academia.  In 1901, the Congress established the National Bureau of Standards —which has since 
become the Nati onal Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) —as the authoritative 
domestic measurement science research and standards laboratory.  Not long after, five 
engineering societies and three Federal agencies banded together to establish a national non -
governm ental body now known as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).  ANSI is a 
private, nonprofit organization that administers and coordinates the U.S. standardization system 
and is the sole U.S. representative to the International Organization for S tandardization (ISO) 
and the International Electrotechnical Commission.  Industry, consortia, and private -sector groups 
often complement the roles of NIST, ANSI, and ANSI -accredited SDOs, working together to 
develop standards to solve specific challenges.  To date, this approach, supported  by U.S. 
leadership, has fostered an effective and innovative system that has supercharged U.S. and global 
economic growth.  
In an era of rapid technological transformation and global scale, standards will conti nue to define 
and drive the markets of the future.  Standards for CET —advanced technologies that are 
 
1 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2020/07/revised_circular_a -119_as_of_1_22.pdf   
 
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  5 significant for U.S. competitiveness and national security - carry strategic significance.2 The 
United States will work with all nations committed to an op en and transparent standards system 
to lead the way in these new arenas - just as we did with previous internet, wireless 
communications, and other digital standards.  Failing to do so will risk the United  States’ —and 
the world’s —innovation, security, and p rosperity.  
 
2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2022/02/02 -2022 -Critical -and-Emerging -Technologies -List-
Update.pdf   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
6 Standards for Critical and Emerging 
Technology  
The United States will prioritize efforts for standards development for a subset of CET that are 
essential for U.S.  competitiveness and national security, including the following areas:  
• Communication and Networking Technologies , which  are enabling dramatic changes 
in how consumers, businesses, and governments interact, and which will form the basis 
of tomorrow’s critical communications networks;  
• Semiconductors and Microelectronics, includi ng Computing, Memory, and  Storage  
Technologies , which affect every corner of the global economy, society, and 
government, and which power a panoply of innovations and capabilities;  
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning , which promise transformative 
technologies and scientific breakthroughs across industries, but which must be developed 
in a trustworthy and risk -managed manner;  
• Biotechnologies , which will affect the health, agricultural, and industrial sectors of all 
nations, and which will need to be  used safely and securely to support the health of our 
citizens, animals, and environment;  
• Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Services , which are a largely invisible utility for 
technology and infrastructure, including the electrical power grid, communica tions 
infrastructure and mobile devices, all modes of transportation, precision agriculture, 
weather forecasting, and emergency response;  
• Digital Identity Infrastructure and Distributed Ledger Technologies , which 
increasingly affect a range of key economic  sectors;  
• Clean Energy Generation and Storage , which  are critical to the generation, storage, 
distribution, and climate -friendly and efficient utilization of energy, and to the security of 
the technologies that support energy -producing plants; and  
• Quantum Information Technologies , which leverage quantum mechanics for the 
storage, transmission, manipulation, computing, or measurement of information, with 
major national security and economic implications.   
There are also specific applications of CET that departments and agencies have determined will 
impact our global economy and national security.  The United States will focus standards  
development activiti es and outreach on these applications, which include:  
• Automated and Connected Infrastructure , such as smart communities, Internet of 
Things, and other novel applications;  
• Biobanking , which involves the collection, storage, and use of biological samples;  
• Automated, Connected, and Electrified Transportation , including automated and 
connected surface vehicles of many types and unmanned aircraft systems, many of which 
may be electric vehicles (EVs), along with the safe and efficient integration into smart  
 
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  7 comm unities and the transportation system as a whole, including standards to integrate 
EVs with the electrical grid and charging infrastructure;  
• Critical Minerals Supply Chains , where we will promote standards that support 
increased sustainable extraction of c ritical minerals necessary to manufacture  renewable 
energy technologies, semiconductors, and EVs;   
• Cybersecurity and Privacy , which are cross -cutting issues that are critical to enabling 
the development and deployment of emerging technologies and promote  the free flow of 
data and ideas with trust; and  
• Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization and Storage , which can build on evolving 
standards for CO 2 storage, and emerging standards for point source carbon capture, 
removal, and utilization, especially as those st andards relate to monitoring and 
verification.   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
8 The Objectives of the Critical and Emerging 
Technology Standards Strategy  
The lifeblood of SDOs is good -faith engagement on the technical merits.  As such, this strategy 
focuses on increasing U.S.  private and public sector engagement with SDOs that will sustain and 
strengthen this foundational ethos.  The U.S. Government and its partners in the public and 
private sectors will launch new efforts to do this.  In so doing, we will foster U.S. and likemind ed 
nations’ competitiveness in emerging markets and work to vigorously promote our shared values 
and market economies based on impartial and effective standards.  
The U.S. Government will pursue the following four objectives and corresponding eight  lines o f 
effort in its strategy:  
Objective 1:  Investment   
Science, technology, research, experimentation, and innovation have been the keys to the 
United  States’ long standing as a global leader.  Continued broad bipartisan support for Federal 
investment in cutting -edge R&D will enable the United States to achieve the greatest aspirations 
of this century.  Standards are substantially driven by technical contributions that flow from 
R&D, and greater U.S. investment in pre -standardization research and analysis h elps facilitate 
contributions to standards -setting discussions.  
Context:  Novel discoveries, technical insights, and refinements are at the core of many new 
standards, especially in CET.  Historically, the U.S. Government has facilitated this vital 
innovati on. Government R&D investments catalyzed U.S. standards leadership and shaped 
successful standards that include Wi -Fi, the C  computer programming language, and the suite of 
technologies comprising cellular communications.  
Action:  The U.S. Government  will bolster its support for R&D in CET and further increase 
investment in pre -standardization research.  Innovation, cutting -edge science, and translational 
research will remain the drivers of U.S. influence and leadership in international standards 
development . To this end, the Biden -Harris Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 budget funds CHIPS and 
Science Act discretionary investments at over 80 percent of the FY24 authorized levels.   
• Line of Effort #1 : Increase R&D funding to ensure a strong foundation for future 
standards  development.  The Administration will work with the Congress to increase 
funding for R&D through appropriations as requested in the  
Biden -Harris Administration FY24 budget.  This budget features spending levels for basic 
and applied research that top $100  billion.  Total Federal R&D is $210 billion, an increase 
of nearly $9 billion over the FY23 level and an historic amount.  As part of these efforts, 
we will accelerate fundamental research to drive technical contributions to international 
standards, fosterin g the translation of these research results and measurement science into 
globally accepted specifications and features.  In addition, we will explicitly recognize as 
within scope SDO participation by Federal R&D grantees and funding recipients, when 
appropr iate. For example, the National Science Foundation is currently updating its 
proposal and award policies and procedures to include participation in standards 
development activities.   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  9 • Line of Effort #2:  Support the development of standards that address risk , security, 
and resilience.  The U.S. Government is uniquely suited to lead standards development 
on topics of national security.  For example, it has developed standards that support 
priority access for public safety and emergency services during disasters and wide -scale 
emergency events.  U.S. Government support —including through our national labs —for 
standards like these will enable future innovation and development to be done in as 
secure and resilient a manner as possible.  We will continue to support the development of 
standards that consider the impacts and effects of risk (comprised of threats, 
vulnerabilities, and consequences) and account for security concerns.  
Objective 2:  Participation  
U.S. organizations confront difficult choices on where to focus r esources in a more diversified 
standards landscape, at times resulting in little to no U.S. participation in potentially disruptive 
technological fields.  
Context:  Private -sector and academic innovation fuels effective standards development.  New 
standards often start with a proposal that contains technical specifications or performance metrics 
that relate to companies’ own products.  In other cases, companies put forward proposals 
containing their proprietary technologies for use in products made b y other firms.  Where 
standards include patented technologies, licensing revenues allow industry to recoup R&D 
expenditures and re -invest in future innovations.  Despite competition among technology 
contributors, industry collaborates in standards developmen t because it is good for business:  
Widely adopted standards facilitate access and growth in new markets.  
However, in some commercially competitive areas, U.S. companies may choose not to 
participate in standards development for a variety of reasons.  For e xample, technology may still 
be under development and standardization is therefore premature.  Firms also may have concerns 
about protecting intellectual property and proprietary information.  This is particularly true for 
critical and emerging technologies.  In other cases, a company may opt to focus limited resources 
on nearer -term priorities, given the sustained and often long -term investment needed for 
standards development.  Still other firms may be new entrants to the technology market and may 
not be awar e of opportunities to engage and influence standards development, or of the risks or 
opportunity costs of remaining on the sidelines.  Regardless of the reason, however, reduced U.S. 
participation in standards development will put the United States at a str ategic disadvantage.  
In some cases, the need for standards begins in the public sector.  This includes interoperable 
infrastructure like traffic signals, where there is significant public benefit, but there may be less 
of a business case for private sector  to support sufficient voluntary engagement in standards 
development without some public sector assistance.  
Academic and other research institutions are also critical stakeholders in international standards 
development.  Subject matter experts and research ers make essential contributions to standards 
development and provide important non -vendor perspectives.  Academia is also a critical partner 
in increasing U.S.  engagement in standards and training the next generation of standards 
professionals.  Institution s of higher education should renew a commitment to teaching and 
highlighting the value, development, and use of standards and standardization in a range of 
career fields.   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  10 Action:  The U.S. Government will work closely with the private sector and academia t o 
minimize gaps in coverage within SDOs, work collectively to address challenges to accelerate 
standards development in CET, bolster private -sector participation, and ensure that the 
government plays an active —but appropriate —role in the private sector -led system.  The U.S. 
Government will also continue to meaningfully contribute to multilateral, treaty -based standards 
organizations such as the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).  
• Line of Effort #3:  Remove and prevent barriers to private sector part icipation in 
standards development.  We will coordinate policy and regulations to create an 
environment that facilitates U.S. private sector engagement and influence in international 
standards.  We will continue to create programs to foster U.S. stakeholders ’ participation 
in international standards development and remove barriers to involvement.  For example, 
in 2022, the Department of Commerce revisited and revised an export control interim 
final rule authorizing the release of certain technology and softwar e in the context of 
standards setting and development.  Additionally, after receiving inputs from industry, the 
Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and 
NIST took action to increase innovation and competitiveness  in the marketplace by 
withdrawing their policy statement on Standards Essential Patents, which often cover 
breakthroughs at the core of new technologies.  Taken together, these actions will 
strengthen the ability of U.S. companies to engage and influence i nternational standards 
that are essential to our nation’s technology leadership.  We will also consider 
opportunities to promote standards meetings held in the United  States in order to enable 
broad participation, including through reducing the wait times f or visa processing for 
attendance at priority meetings.  
• Line of Effort #4:  Improve communications between public and private sectors on 
standards.  We will expand communication with the private sector, including through 
strategic partnerships, information sharing arrangements, and other cooperative efforts 
between U.S. Government agencies and private sector standards stakeholders, including 
SDOs, industry associations, civil society, and others that participate in international 
standards activit ies. The U.S.  Government will look to the private sector to inform or 
otherwise work with senior government leaders regarding the changing standards 
landscape.  Together we can identify areas where the United States can propose the 
development of new intern ational standards committees and prioritize areas for 
participation and leadership.  The U.S. Government will also more clearly articulate 
government interest in technology areas.  Finally, through public -private partnerships, we 
will offer roadmaps for CET,  as we did with the NIST Cloud Computing Standards 
Roadmap and the ANSI Nanotechnology Standards Panel.  
• Line of Effort #5:  Enhance U.S. Government and like -minded nations’ 
representation and influence in international standards governance and leadership.  
We will focus on expanding U.S. Government and like -minded nations’  participation and 
leadership in standards activities where the government is the official representative, in 
specific technology areas where it has significant national interest as defined above, and 
where the government can fill representational gaps, particularly in early -stage 
technology and related policy development.  We wil l elevate leadership and expand 
coordination across the government in support of standards activities, particularly in work 
with the ITU.  In these efforts, we will expand science and technology diplomacy to focus  
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  11 on CET standards development.  We will lever age opportunities to assume leadership 
roles on international standards committees in CET areas.  For early -stage technology 
development, the U.S. Government will convene experts to understand the appropriate 
time to promote technologically sound and impart ial standards development.  
Furthermore, we will catalyze U.S. attendance in standards development in high priority 
early -stage CET areas, such as quantum information technologies, where U.S. industry is 
nascent but standards work is ongoing.  
Objective 3:  Workforce  
The number of standards organizations and venues has increased significantly over the past 
decade, particularly with respect  to CET.  Meanwhile the U.S. standards workforce has not kept 
pace with this growth.  
Context:  A technically expert and stan dards -knowledgeable workforce, comprised of industry, 
academic, and government experts, is essential for success.  Unfortunately, standards successes 
are not recognized or celebrated in the same way as traditional academic or industry 
achievements such as p ublications, patents, and awards, which makes it difficult to attract new 
participants.  Standards work is ongoing in many fora, including formal consensus bodies, treaty 
organizations, and consortia.  It is essential that the United States participates acro ss the board, 
though too often it does not.  According to data collected by NIST on a select group of standards 
committees in 2019, U.S. entities led participation in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics 
Engineers, but lagged far behind in the ITU Te lecommunication Standardization Sector.  The 
number of leadership positions, such as secretariat or editorial positions, held by the United 
States has also declined in certain organizations; for example, U.S. -held positions were down 10 
percent in the ISO i n 2021 as compared to 20163—a trend that is beginning to reverse with the 
recent election of a U.S. candidate as the Secretary -General of the ITU.  
Action:  The U.S. Government will invest in educating and training a cadre of professionals that 
can effecti vely contribute to and drive technical standards development.   
We will work with the private sector to find innovative ways to educate and train those in 
academia and industry.  
• Line of Effort #6:  Educate and empower the new standards workforce.  We will 
increase opportunities for engagement in standards development among additional 
stakeholders, such as start -ups, small - and medium -sized companies, academia, and 
members of civil society, through standards development information, training, and 
education.  We will also expand efforts  to develop standards -related curricula with 
universities and educational institutions to address technical, business, and policy aspects 
of standards development and focus on developing standards skillsets on CET.  We will 
build ca pacity and resources for standards professionals, such as supporting a Standards 
Center of Excellence, to be led by non -federal entities, to engage the private sector, 
provide training, and assist in engagement with standards activities —particularly for 
small- and medium -sized companies.  We will also grow the technical capacity and 
standards workforce within government agencies, particularly in CET areas.  
 
3 https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publi cations/Draft -NSTAC -Letter -to-the-President -on-Standards -052022 -
508.pdf   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  12 Objective 4:  Integrity and Inclusivity  
In response to the increasing attempts of some nations to tilt the playing field to their parochial 
advantage, we must ensure that standards development processes are technically sound, 
independent, and responsive to broadly shared market and societal needs.  
Context:  International standards development is at an i nflection point.  Strategic competition, a 
complex global economy, and fast -moving technology trends combine to pose new challenges.  
In this moment of change, strategic competitors such as the People’s Republic of China (PRC) 
seek to undermine the integrity  of longstanding standards development processes, pushing top -
down approaches to dominate future markets and reinforce coercive leverage.  The PRC, in 
particular, is seen as using foreign investment and coercive economic influence to cajole or 
compel suppor t for its standards proposals, and to drive standards development toward SDOs in 
which it is likely to wield maximum unilateral influence.  Furthermore, in some sectors, the PRC, 
often acting through proxy companies, promotes prescriptive standards, irrespe ctive of technical 
merit, designed solely to entrench market dominance.  The United States, together with our allies 
and partners, supports broad and inclusive participation that enables global standards -setting, but 
participation must occur on terms that s upport the integrity and impartiality of the system.  
Action:  We will harness the support of like -minded allies and partners to promote the integrity 
of the international standards system and work to  ensure that international standards are 
established on t he basis of technical merit and fair -processes.  We will also promote greater 
inclusion in the international standards system, and look to facilitate broad representation from 
countries across the world, in order to build inclusive growth for all.    
• Line of  Effort #7:  Deepen standards cooperation with allies and partners to support 
a robust standards governance process.  We will continue to expand coordination with 
partners to enhance and protect the private sector -led international standards process and 
seek to increase U.S. and partner leadership in SDOs.  We will seek to include standards 
activities in bilateral and multilateral science and technology cooperation agreements.  We 
will leverage the U.S. -EU Trade and Technology Council Strategic Standardization 
Information mechanism to enable information sharing on international standards 
development, such as sharing of best practices and lessons learned in our respective 
standards systems.  We are joining with like -minded partners in the International 
Standards C ooperation Network, which will serve as a sustainable mechanism that 
connects government stakeholders responsible for broad standards coordination across 
their own government with international counterparts for inter -governmental coordination 
and cooperati on. Trade agencies, led by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, will 
continue to promote the adoption and use of international standards, as defined in 
bilateral, regional, and international trade agreements on sanitary and phytosanitary and 
standa rds-related trade measures.  We will also support the use of international standards 
through trade agreement chapter committees, technical assistance, and capacity building 
efforts, including by seeking funding from national, regional, and international for a to 
support this goal. Models of such cooperation are found in fora such as the Asia Pacific 
Economic Cooperation and the U.S. partnership with Association of Southeast Asian 
Nations.  Additional vehicles to address such standards include commercial dialog ues, 
trade missions, and other trade tools to ensure U.S. exporters can compete on even 
ground.   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  13 • Line of Effort #8:  Facilitate broad representation in standards development.  We will 
support the development of a diverse and inclusive generation of emerging e conomy 
standards professionals who can effectively participate in international standards 
development and promote the adoption of international standards.  In partnership with the 
U.S. academic and private sectors, we will look to engage with influential em erging 
economy academic institutions or other related organizations to ensure longer -term 
sustainability and identify opportunities for additional training on coalition building, 
including through programming from the U.S. Agency for International Developm ent. 
We will foster participation of small and medium enterprises, including from like -minded 
countries, and further advance the design and implementation of technical assistance 
programs to enable broad and inclusive participation in international standar ds 
organizations.   
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  G O V E R N M E N T  N A T I O N A L  S T A N D A R D S  
S T R A T E G Y  F O R  C R I T I C A L  AND  E M E R G I N G  T E C H N O L O G Y  
14 Conclusion   
A proactive and sustained long -term approach is required to ensure that the United States 
remains a global leader in contributing to the development of fair, merit -based standards for 
CET.  The changing international dynamics around standardizat ion for CET require the 
United  States to reaffirm and strengthen its private sector -led approach to standards development 
rather than abandon it, as many autocratic nations would like to see.  Key elements to continued 
success in standardization include str ong support for R&D in CET areas; strengthening public -
private, allied, and emerging partnerships; and expanding investments in a workforce 
empowered to engage and lead in international standards development.  These strategic 
investments will create new eco nomic opportunities for U.S.  industry, protect the integrity of 
international standards systems, and lead to CET standards that are durable and benefit 
communities both at home and abroad.