WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/TBT/GEN/131 
30 April 2012  
 
(12-2284) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:   English 
  
 
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE UNECE ON ACTIVITIES IN WP.6 
 
 
This document contains information provided  by the UNECE at the TBT Committee meeting 
of 20-21 March 2012 under Agenda Item 5 (Update by Observers). 
_______________ 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The Working Party on Regulatory Cooperati on and Standardization Policies promotes 
regulatory cooperation so as to avoid unnecessary barriers to trade while promoting sustainable 
development, protecting consumers and workers'  health and safety and preserving the natural 
environment  
2. The Working Party on Regulatory Cooperation a nd Standardization Policies (WP.6) is an 
intergovernmental body, open to the participati on of business, standards-making bodies, civil society 
and other international organizations as well as pr ivate individuals, from any of the United Nations 
Member States.  It holds one plenary session every year, while working on a continuous basis through 
groups of experts.  
3. It develops and shares best practices in the areas of:  technical regulations and regulatory 
cooperation; standardization policies, confor mity assessment; consumer protection; market 
surveillance; and related activities at national, regiona l and international level.  A recent area of focus 
for the Working Party has been how regulatory activ ities within this mandate contribute to manage 
risks that confront citizens, businesses and communities.  
4. Its main deliverables are:  
(a) Recommendations aimed at facilitating intern ational trade through the harmonization 
of national policies and the promotion of  best practices based on good-governance 
principles in all the areas within its mandate; 
(b) Common frameworks of technical regulations for key sectors of economic activity 
based on international standards. These fra meworks can set the basis for national 
legislation or be used as a basis for regulatory convergence among countries;  
(c) Advisory services and capacity-building projects for countries or regional groups 
aimed at implementing best practices in standardization, regulatory cooperation, conformity assessment and market surveillance. 
5. This report provides an update on the work of  WP.6.  For more detailed information, 
connections with our network of e xperts or any other queries, contact 
Regulatory.Cooperation@unece.org .    
 G/TBT/GEN/131 
Page 2  
 
  II. MAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITY 
6. WP.6 works both at a vertical level – by prom oting convergence of regulations in specific 
sectors – and at a horizontal level, by sharing best  practices in regulatory activities related to the 
development and implementation of technical regulations, including: 
(a) The principles on which regul atory cooperation is based; 
(b) The related initiatives for regulatory coop eration developed at a sector level; 
(c) The work related to risk management in  regulatory frameworks, which aims at 
building regulatory systems that provide th e desired level of safety without creating 
unnecessary barriers to trade; 
(d) The work related to market surveillance; and  
(e) On-going work in related areas.   
III. THE DRIVING PRINCIPLES OF OUR WORK 
7. Regulatory cooperation in the UNECE starts from the assessment of a need for regulatory 
convergence in a specific sector.  This assessment may come from one  or more UN Member States 
and is generally based on the excessive costs of trad e, the safety concerns arising from the coexistence 
of different safety rules, and the wish to avoid the delays related to duplicate tests and certification.  
The activity starts with the definition of the objec tives Governments are aiming at by regulating the 
sector of concern.  
8. The "international model", as contained in WP.6 "Recommendation L"
1, sets out a clear 
roadmap for countries wishing to align their regulat ory frameworks in a specific sector, or for free 
trade areas or customs unions that aim at approxima ting their technical regulations across the board. 
9. This leads to the first core output: Common Regulatory Objectives (CROs) which address 
legitimate concerns that usually relate to public health, safety or environmental protection.  They 
include:  
(a) International standards that cont ain product-related requirements;  
(b) How compliance with the CROs will be assured and demonstrated; 
(c) If third-party-assessment bodies are going to  be involved, which conformity 
assessment bodies are recognized as competen t and how they will be accredited or 
assessed; 
(d) How post-market surveillance will be performed. 
10. By using CROs, whenever appropriate, the means of assuming compliance should be a 
Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (SDoC).  Howe ver, in other cases, Countries participating in a 
sectoral initiative may decide to use more stringent conformity-assurance procedures. 
11. The "international model" refers extensively to the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to 
Trade (TBT Agreement).  For example, it explic itly acknowledges the TBT provisions relating to the 
                                                      
1 http://www.unece.or g/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/ Recommendations/Rec_L.pdf   G/TBT/GEN/131 
 Page 3 
 
 
  use of international standards in technical regul ations and conformity-assessment procedures, as well 
as the TBT exhortatory language aimed at fosterin g the creation of mutual recognition mechanisms 
whenever and wherever feasible.  The model adds to this framework by suggesting solutions for the 
practical implementation of technical harmoni zation and draws from existing schemes for good 
regulatory practice to be used in the pro cess of international technical harmonization." 
12. Included in the overview of the specific areas in which the international model has been or is 
being applied are the following four sectoral initiatives:  
(a) Equipment for Explosive Environments; 
(b) Pipeline Safety; 
(c) Earth-moving Machinery; 
(d) Telecommunications Terminal Equipment. 
13. The is also on-going WP.6 work in risk ma nagement, crisis management and market 
surveillance.  
IV. KEY AREAS OF WORK AND RELATED DEVELOPMENTS 
A. REGULATORY COOPERATION THROUGH SECTORAL INITIATIVES  
1. Equipment for Explosive Environments 
14. Explosions in offshore facilities, on vessels or in  mines, refineries, chemical plants or mills 
entail high risks for individuals and the natural environment.  Equipment used in explosive 
environments must therefore have a high level of safety. 
15. The initiative to develop common regulations in this specific sector was based on the 
international model of Recommendation L.  It was launched in 2006 with a view to developing CROs 
covering the definition of area classification, ve rification of the equipment and its production, 
installation, inspection, maintenance, repair a nd the related conformity-assessment procedures for 
products, services and competency of personnel.  Th e general goal of this sectoral initiative is to 
promote and enhance safety, while eliminating barrier s against the free trade and use of equipment for 
explosive environments. 
16. The Working Party finally approved the CROs in 2010. 2  A questionnaire was distributed to 
participating member States to share information about the national norms re gulating this industrial 
sector.3  
17. Meeting in Split, Croatia, on 7 and 8 September 2011, policymakers from Australia, Brazil, 
the European Union (EU), the Russian Federati on and the United States declared that "global 
harmonisation promoted and adopted at UNECE is be neficial", in particular because it "allows for 
reduced government liability without increasing risk to  workers, and consequently enables authorities 
                                                      
2 
"http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/SectoralInitiativ es/EquipmentForExplosiveEnvironment/SIE
EE_CRO.pdf " 
3 Available at: 
"http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/SectoralInitiativ es/EquipmentForExplosiveEnvironment/SIE
EE_updatedreplies.pdf "  G/TBT/GEN/131 
Page 4  
 
  to allocate more resources to fiel d work" and it is "fully consistent  with international obligations 
under the WTO agreement".
4  
18. The latest development relating to this sector al initiative will be the 2012 gathering of 
business and governmental representatives with a stake in the International Electrotechnical 
Commission System for Certification to Standards Relating to Equipment for Use in Explosive 
Atmosphere (IECEx).  This international conference  takes place in Dubai and is organized jointly by 
the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the Emirates Authority for Standardization and 
Metrology (ESMA) and UNECE.  
19. The UNECE could not have drawn up CROs in this sector without the partnership with 
IECEx and the support from the Government of Germany and the Physikalisch-Technische 
Bundesanstalt  (PTB). 
2. Pipeline Safety 
20. Accidents on international pipelines endanger hum an lives and the environment, cause serious 
revenue losses and generate a clim ate of public hostility towards pipelines.  Meanwhile, if designed, 
constructed and maintained according to the proper norms and standards, pipelines can be one of the 
most efficient and environmentally friendly m eans of energy transportation and distribution.5  
21. A sectoral initiative aimed at developing a common regulatory basis in this sector was 
formally proposed in 2007.6  If officially launched, the initia tive will be based on Recommendation L 
and will identify best regulatory practices in te chnical regulations concerning project design, 
construction, testing, use of materials, operati on, maintenance, conservation and utilization of 
pipelines for oil and gas industry products.  The initia tive could capitalize on: (a) an advanced set of 
177 international standards already developed by the Technical Committee 67 of the International 
Organization for Standardization (ISO) to address specific technical issues related to pipeline safety7; 
and (b) the UNECE expertise in administering the 1992 Convention on the Transboundary Effects of 
Industrial Accidents8, which resulted inter alia  in the formulation of Safety Guidelines and Good 
Practices for Pipelines for the Prevention of Accidental Water Pollution.9   
22. The key points of this initiative, highlighted in  particular by the Russian Federation's Service 
on Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Supervis ion, are the need to coordinate mandatory 
requirements for industrial and ecological safety, and to harmonize national approaches to safety regulations. 
23. All interested parties are encouraged to contact WP.6 at Regulatory.Cooperation@unece.org  
if they wish to join the preparatory work for this initiative or receive further information or updates on 
its progress. 
                                                      
4 See: http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=26114 .  
5 See e.g. Goodlan d, R. (Ed.), Oil and Gas Pipelines: Social and Environmental Impact Assessment – 
State of the Art , International Association for Imp act Assessment, 2005, available at 
<http://www.unece.org /index.php?id=26114 >, visited 8 March 2012.  
6 See UNECE Document ECE/TRADE/C/WP.6/2007/6, available at 
http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/docu ments/2007/WP6_07_006e.pdf .  
7 
"http://www.iso.org/iso/standards_development/techni cal_committees/list_of_iso_technical_committees/iso_tec
hnical_committee.htm?commid=49506 "  
8 http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2 006/teia/Convention%20E.pdf   
9 See UNECE Documents ECE/CP.TEIA/2006/11 and ECE/MP.WAT/2006/8.  G/TBT/GEN/131 
 Page 5 
 
 
  3. Telecommunications Terminal Equipment 
24. Compatibility of products of the telecom indus try often causes problems to end-users, who 
can find themselves unable to use imported material  or equipment they ha ve bought in another 
country. Most incompatibility issues could be solved  through harmonizing the standards in this sector. 
25. In April 2002, an informal meeting was held in Geneva to discuss the need for improved 
market access on the telecom market.  It was atte nded by representatives of the European Commission 
(EC) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), telecom companies from the UNECE region and business associations from Australia and Japan, and by members of the Ad Hoc Team of 
Specialists on Standardization and Regulatory Techniques.
10  Participants suggested initiating a 
dialogue following the model of Recommendation L to explore the possibilities of regulatory 
convergence.  
26. CROs in this sector, covering for instance persona l computers (PCs), PC peripherals, legacy 
Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) terminals, Bluetooth, Wireless Local Area Network 
(WLAN), Global Standard for Mobile Teleco mmunication (GSM) and International Mobile 
Telecommunications (IMT-2000), were drawn up in 2004.  However, they have not yet been applied 
in national legislations or in the context of mutu al recognition arrangements.  They remain relevant 
nevertheless in other key negotiating arenas:  the WTO non-agricultural market access (NAMA) 
negotiations, and the consultati ons at ITU on "conformance assessment and interoperability". 
27. In the context of the NAMA talks, several  proposals have addressed the possibility of 
simplifying conformity assessment procedures as they apply to trade in electronic products.11  T h e  
proposed CROs could be applied to the results of this chapter of the NAMA negotiations in a way that 
would further the latter's objectives while as suring compliance with the overall WTO legal 
framework. In the context of the ITU consulta tions, on the other hand, the proposed CROs could 
represent a complement and a tool for implem enting the relevant standards once agreed.  
4. Earth-moving Machinery 
28. Cranes, bulldozers and other Earth-moving Machinery (EMM) have been part of a global 
industry for years. ISO standards (ISO/TC127) have  been used as a common denominator to minimize 
safety risks.  However, the mark et remains segmented owing to th e rarity of mutual recognition 
agreements in this sector, and, as a consequen ce, repeated testing and certification—which are 
particularly costly and lengthy in this sector —unnecessarily elevate prices and distort competition.  
29. In 2003, WP. 6 set up this sectoral initiative on  EMM to increase the scope of application of 
the existing ISO standards while fostering th e mutual recognition of conformity-assessment 
procedures on the basis of Recommendation L.  The initiative's underlying rationa le being to enhance 
safety while reducing barriers to international trade. 
30. In 2004, a first model regulatory framework via draft-CROs was adopted. It was revised in 
2009. The draft CROs are primarily based on the ISO/TC127 standards.  In 2010, the EMM project initiated a model certificate of conformity that, if  broadly adopted, would simplify the exchange of 
data between the producers, machine users, third- party certifiers and the authorities of exporting and 
importing countries. 
                                                      
10 http://www.unece.or g/trade/wp6/SectoralInitia tives/START/START.html   
11 See e.g. WTO Documents TN/MA/W/105/Rev.3 of 26 November 2010; TN/MA/W/125 of 
4 December 2009; and TN/MA/W/119 of 9 September 2009.  G/TBT/GEN/131 
Page 6  
 
  31. In 2011, the project formally embraced "risk ma nagement" and "market surveillance" (in this 
case "worksite surveillance") as key tools for achieving  the "zero injuries" long-term goal for machine 
operators and the people on the worksite.  This goa l was originally set by WP.6 members.  More 
specifically, it has been recognized that in the EM M sector the sole SDoC would not be acceptable for 
certain countries, and that third-party assessments of  conformity would still be  needed.  Moreover, the 
safety of EMM is dependent upon the safety of th e workplace where the mach ines are used.  These 
considerations increase the number of variables to  be taken into account for achieving the "zero 
injuries" goal and beg a holistic approach to the mana gement of risks connected to the use of EMM.  
32. The revised CROs, therefore, reflect these cons iderations by proposing a risk-based "Safety 
Process for EMM" and by reporting a "model global cer tificate of conformity".  In 2012, WP.6 is 
expected to adopt a consolidated version of the CROs for the EMM sector.
12   
B. REGULATORY COOPERATION ON RISK AND CRISIS MANAGEMENT  
33. In 2011, the Working Party approved the recommendations on "Risk Management in 
Regulatory Frameworks" and "Crisis Manage ment within a Regulatory Framework".13   
1. Recommendation "R" — Risk Manage ment in Regulatory Frameworks 
34. The Recommendation on Risk Management in Regulatory Frameworks14 (hereinafter 
"Recommendation R") sets out a checklist of best pr actices for preparing, adopting and implementing 
risk-based regulation. It aims at a consistent and systematic treatment of risk at a whole Country as well as at an international level by increasing c ooperation among stakeholders.  It lays out a common 
risk management process for: choosing areas to regul ate, analysing the existing stock of regulations 
with regard to risks that they had been set out  to address, and removing unnecessary regulations.  It 
draws on the principles set out in the general standard ISO 31000:2009 on risk management, but 
adapts that conceptual model to regulatory practice.  
35. The concept of "risk" applied to regulatory frame works refers to the effects of uncertainty on 
the achievement of one or more of the objectives of  a regulatory intervention.  The opportunity cost 
connected to the choice of regulating a specific sect or in a certain way or another is also a key 
variable to be taken into account.  For instance, suppose the core objective of a regulatory intervention 
is preserving the quality and safety of fresh waters by avoiding the risk of contamination from 
potentially  carcinogenic agents in imported auto parts.  
36. Once the existence itself of a risk has been id entified and assessed, the regulator has to set a 
risk treatment strategy where several options can be contemplated.  These could include, for example, avoiding the risk by banning the products at issue,  sharing the responsibility or mitigating the risk by 
reducing the probability of its occurrence (e.g. by establishing chain-of-custody standards for the 
traceability of the targeted group of products).  In ot her cases, the regulator may choose to tolerate the 
risk, or to choose non-regulatory actio n, such as information campaigns.  
37. In any event, according to the scheme propo sed in the Recommendation, the choice to 
regulate and the extent of the intervention will depend  on a wide range of variables, and will include a 
regulatory impact analysis (RIA).
15  In trade-related terms, all thi ngs being equal, this approach will 
                                                      
12 See the "Progress report on the sectoral initia tive on earth-moving machinery", UNECE Document 
ECE/TRADE/C/WP.6/2011/8, available at http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/docu ments/2011/WP6_2011_8e.pdf .  
13 See UNECE Document EC E/TRADE/C/WP.6/2011/21. 
14 http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/R ecommendations/Rec_R_Eng.pdf   
15 On RIA see e.g. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Regulatory 
Impact Analysis: A Tool for Policy Coherence , OECD Publishing: Paris, 2009.  G/TBT/GEN/131 
 Page 7 
 
 
  ensure the most efficient and effective level of pr otection with the least restrictive effects on trade 
flows. 
2. Recommendation "P"—Crisis Management within a Regulatory Framework 
38. The Recommendation on Crisis Management in  Regulatory Frameworks (Recommendation 
P)16 sets out a series of basic principles and best practices to be followed by regulatory authorities 
both to prevent and to deal with unexpected events .  It applies the general risk management model 
developed under Recommendation R to situations  where unexpected events need immediate 
responses.  The concept of "crisis", however, is not  defined in Recommendation P, but is understood 
as an unexpected event that th reatens strategic objectives. 
39. Recommendation P builds upon two main concepts: the social and economic desirability of 
acting within a pre-decided and well-structured set of actions when responding to crises, and the need 
for harmonizing those responses internationally.  It also acknowledges that a good level of 
preparedness for facing unexpected crises can be ach ieved using relatively modest resources such as 
training of personnel and good planning practices. 
3. Group of Experts on Risk Management in Regulatory Systems 
40. The texts of Recommendations R and P were prepared by the Group of Experts on Risk 
Management in Regulatory Systems (UNECE GRM).17  The GRM gathers experts in specific risk-
related areas from the private and public sectors, as well as academics and independent consultants.18  
41. In 2011, besides having carried out the technical work necessary for the preparation of 
Recommendations R and P, the GRM has, inter alia : 
(a) Participated in the preparation of th e draft-OECD Recommendation on Regulatory 
policy and Governance; 
(b) Participated in the preparation of a "Regul atory Annex" to a new ISO standard aimed 
at setting forth guidelines for the implementation of ISO 31000:2009;  
(c) Prepared a book on behalf of the UNECE (forthcoming) on "Risk Management in 
Regulatory Frameworks: towards a Better Management of Risk".19 
42. In its latest webinar in Februa ry 2012, the GRM decided to include in its work programme for 
the current year the preparation of a case study where the principles and guidelines of 
Recommendation R will be applied, as a starting point, to the sector of electrical and electronic appliances as currently regulate d under EU and Australian law.
20  
C. REGULATORY COOPERATION ON MARKET SURVEILLANCE  
43. In 2011, Working Party 6 approved a recommendation on "Good Market Surveillance 
Policies and Practices".  
                                                      
16 http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/R ecommendations/R ec_P_Eng.pdf   
17 http://www.unece.org/?id=3180  
18 The members of the GRM can be found at: 
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/Areas OfWork/RiskManagement/L istOfMembers_Dec2011.pdf  
19 More detailed information on the work of the GRM can be found in UNECE Document 
ECE/TRADE/C/WP.6/2011/3 of 18 August 2011. 
20 The report of the latest GRM webinar is available at: 
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/tr ade/wp6/AreasOfWork/RiskManagem ent/Report-Webinar_February2012.pdf   G/TBT/GEN/131 
Page 8  
 
  1. Recommendation "N" — Good Market Surveillance Policies and Practices 
44. The Recommendation on Good Market Surveillan ce Policies and Practices (Recommendation 
N) is a complementary tool to Recommendations R and P, and an essential element in a risk-management strategy.  Responding to the call of  the United Nations General Assembly decision 
54/449 of 22 December 1999 on United Nations  Guidelines for Consumer Protection, 
Recommendation N aims at facilitating the establishm ent and enforcement of national legislation 
protecting final users of potentially dang erous or counterfeit goods and services.  
45. Market surveillance and the fight against c ounterfeit and potentially  dangerous goods had 
already been addressed by Working Party 6 in 2007 with the approval of Recommendation M on the 
"Use of Market Surveillance Infrastructure as a Complementary Means to Protect Consumers and 
Users against Counterfeit Goods" (Recommendation M).
21  That Recommendation intended to 
capitalize on the synergies between actions aimed at enforcing intellectual property rights, and related 
actions of a more general nature aimed at c onsumer protection.  Recommendation N, however, 
expands the scope of application of by proposing a basic model for national regulators to set up and 
enforce market surveillance-related actions.    
46. Recommendation N, in fact, provides for a checklis t of actions to be undertaken in order to 
ensure that national authorities have the right tool s to enforce market surv eillance measures. These 
tools comprise the establishment of solid legal bases for enforcing market surveillance actions; a 
strong political commitment to the overall objective of consumers and final user s' protection; and the 
reliance on best practices in the field of market surveillance, su ch as those proposed by the UNECE 
Model for Market Surveillance Procedures.22  
2. The Advisory Group on Market Surveillance 
47. The Advisory Group on Market Surveillance (MARS Group)23 carries out the technical 
functions connected to the UNECE work on Market  Surveillance. It was up in 2003 and has produced 
several deliverables in its years of existence.  Besides Recommendations M, N, and the above-
mentioned UNECE Model for Market Surveillance Pr ocedures, the MARS Group has prepared or is 
in the process of preparing: 
(a) A system of information on market surveillance authorities and a related database24; 
(b) The UNECE publication Market Surveillance in the UNECE Region25;  
(c) The UNECE publication Glossary of Market Surveillance Terms .26 
                                                      
21 http://www.unece.or g/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/ Recommendations/Rec_M.pdf   
22 Available at: 
http://www.unece.org/ fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/SectoralInitia tives/MARS/Slovakia_ Oct09/GMSP3.pdf .  
23 http://www.unece.or g/trade/wp6/SectoralIn itiatives/MARS/MARS.html   
24 For the system of  information see: 
http://www.unece. org/trade/wp6/AreasOfWork/Mar ketSurveillance/Contacts.html  and for the database see : 
http://apps.unece.org/WP6/  
25 Available at: 
http://www.unece. org/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/Sector alInitiatives/MARS/ ECE_TRADE_301.pdf .  
26 Available at: 
http://www.unece. org/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/docume nts/2009/WP6_2009_13e_final.pdf .   G/TBT/GEN/131 
 Page 9 
 
 
  V. EXAMPLES OF CAPACITY-BUILDING AND AWARENESS-RAISING 
ACTIVITIES 
Activity Description 
Model Programme on 
Standardization As part of WP.6 and UNECE Secretariat's standards-related awareness 
activities, a number of educational institutions in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) were approach ed to analyse how standardization 
and regulatory matters are reflected in their curricula. It turned out that such programmes exist only in speciali zed institutions (usually, under the 
umbrella of governmental standards -related bodies) offering high-school 
diplomas in the areas of standards, certification, etc.     The analysis of the existing courses highlighted differences in basic approaches and coverage of the ex isting programmes. Against this 
backdrop, the UNECE secretariat initiated work on drawing up a "Model Programme on Standardization". The basic idea is to provide future 
graduates with an introductory understanding of standards. The 
Programme will be based on a product life-cycle approach ("from cradle to grave"). It will include standard s, technical regulations, accreditation, 
conformity assessment, metrology, market surveillance and other functions.       
The first draft of the Programme was prepared in February 2012 by a 
group of experts representing educatio nal institutions from Europe and the 
CIS region. It was sent for comment s to international standard-setting 
organizations, and consultati ons are expected to be finalized by mid-April. 
In addition, Recommendation I of 1 970 on "Methodological Studies and 
Education"
27 will be reviewed at the next  Working Party 6 plenary session 
(October 2012) by using the "Standardization Programme" as a background for discussion. 
Needs Assessments in Economies in Transition The UNECE is currently undertaking a series of needs assessments related 
to regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in transition economies. The first Needs Assessment was carried out in Belarus and the final report is expected in the third quarter of 2012. The second Assessment will address Kazakhstan and is expected in late  2012. The section on standardization 
and technical regulations covers a wi de range of issues falling under the 
mandate of WP.6, such as regulatory impact assessments, risk management tools, metrology and market surveillance. 
Workshop on  Traceability: A Tool for Managing Risk  &  
Panel discussion on 
"Standards and Sustainable Development"  On 31 October and 1 November 2011, a workshop on "Traceability: a tool 
for managing risk" was held in para llel with the annual session of WP.6. 
Following the event, on 2 November WP.6 organized a panel discussion on "Standards and sustainable developm ent". Both events were aimed at 
raising awareness on:  (a) how the concept of traceability is currently 
defined and interpreted in legislation, and how it can serve as a tool for managing risk; and (b) how internatio nal standards can serve as tools for 
achieving sustainable development goals, considering, for example, that common standards and rules and procedures for measurement, reporting 
and verification are key to the success of the market-
based mechanisms 
set up under the UNFCCC.     
  
                                                      
27 http://www.unece.or g/fileadmin/DAM/trade/wp6/ Recommendations/Rec_I.pdf   G/TBT/GEN/131 
Page 10  
 
  VI. FORTHCOMING MEETINGS 
Date and venue Meeting 
17 April 2012  
Geneva (Palais des Nations) DCMAS – Network on Metrology, A ccreditation and Standardization fo r
Developing Countries.  
[4-6] May 2012, 
Stockholm Bureau Meeting - Annual planning meeting for UNECE Working Party 6 
activities  
22-24 October 2012  Geneva,  (Palais des Nations) Annual session of Working Party 6 
 
  
__________