Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing of European standardisation  (COM(2005) 377 final — 2005/0157 (COD))
Date: 2006-03-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU financing, European standard, cooperation policy, standardisation, technical regulations

C 110/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the
European Parliament and of the Council on the financing of European standardisation

(COM(2005) 377 final — 2005/0157 (COD))

(2006/C 110/03)

On 16 September 2005 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 February 2006. The rapporteur was Mr
Pezzini.

At its 425th plenary session, held on 15 and 16 March 2006 (meeting of 15 March), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 140 votes to one with one abstention.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal to
1.1
establish an explicit, clear and transparent legal framework for
the financing of European standardisation, given the important
role that the regulatory system plays in the proper functioning
the competitiveness of European
of
industry, and the role of European technical standards in
supporting Community legislation and policies.

the internal market,

1.2
The Committee reiterates that European standardisation
is, and must remain, a voluntary activity, exercised by and for
the benefit of interested parties, with the specific task of devel-
oping standards and other standardisation products that can
meet their needs.

1.3
The Committee urges the Council, the European Parlia-
ment and the Commission to take a more proactive approach
to European standardisation policy. It must be considered as
one of the European Union's key policies to help implement
the recently reinvigorated Lisbon Agenda; it must also help to
create a true ‘culture of standardisation’ in both European and
institutions and businesses, as this is a strategic
national
element at national and international level.

The Committee believes it is essential to ensure the full
1.4
participation of all stakeholders in an enhanced European stan-
dardisation system, and particularly the participation of NGOs,
SMEs and consumer and environmental protection organisa-
tions, by ensuring that support — including financial — is
provided for training qualified practitioners.

The Committee stresses that European standardisation is
1.5
vital for the operation and consolidation of the internal market,
particularly through the ‘new approach’ directives in the areas
of health, safety and environmental and consumer protection,
and to ensure interoperability in many areas, particularly in
transport and telecommunications. Moreover, since European
standardisation facilitates the free movement of goods and
services in the internal and global markets, it ensures that busi-
ness competitiveness is enhanced.

1.6
Given that the European standardisation system is a stra-
tegic and essential resource, the Committee believes that sound
and sustainable management of
financed activities must be
ensured, as must the ability to pursue the common cooperation
objectives and the administrative and financial conditions
necessary to preserve the independence and neutrality of the
system and to enhance its operational efficiency and standards
production.

1.7
The Committee believes that, for the five-year period in
question, the proposed figure is insufficient to cover the entire
should be
European standardisation system and that
increased beyond the current 2 % threshold in order to ensure
that
standards can be freely produced and disseminated,
thereby enabling it to meet the needs of both the enlarged EU-
25 and the EU candidate countries.

it

1.8

The Committee stresses the importance of:

— ensuring maximum transparency and certainty in financing
the main European standards organisations by clearly
defining the permissible costs for the infrastructure and
procedural services offered by European Standards Organi-
i.e. the products
sations (ESOs) for producing standards,
prepared by the technical committee experts;

— simplifying and speeding up funding procedures,

thus
ensuring the eligibility of unit, standard-rate costs, thereby
avoiding complex financial reporting, given that this often
eats up about 30 % of the sums released;

— introducing, for services such as those provided by ESOs,
procurement procedures which genuinely reflect an equal
partnership between ESOs and the European Commission,
i.e. between the services provider and user; in any case, this
must not affect the voluntary standards produced, which
remain the property of standardisation organisations.

1.9
ESOs provide the infrastructure and services that are
needed to produce standards but they do not produce them
themselves; this is the technical experts' task. In the Commit-
tee's view, this should be highlighted as an important point to
be included in the recitals.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/15

The

European Commission's proposed

1.10
total of
EUR 134 million for the period 2006-2010 would appear to
be barely sufficient.

2. Reason

2.1
The Committee has always called for a more extensive
use of European standardisation in EU policies and legislation
in order to extend, in line with the needs of both society and
businesses, the expansion of standardisation into new areas
such as services,
information and telecommunications tech-
nology, transport and consumer and environmental protection.

2.5
The Committee has also come out in support of a stable
financial framework for European standardisation, on a solid
legal basis. Similarly, it must be ensured that Member States
and the Commission co-finance standardisation procedures,
European infrastructure and measures to improve synergies
between ESOs, in order to enhance efficiency in the European
standardisation process and in promoting international stan-
dards.

2.5.1
Greater involvement of Member States' representatives
could lead to better, more specific production of standards
geared to stakeholders.

2.6
A European technical standardisation culture is vital to
ensure an efficient and balanced internal market for the EU-25.
It is therefore important to ensure that structures are developed
at EU level which can respond effectively to:

2.2
In particular, there is greater awareness among business
leaders and other stakeholders of the benefits of standardisation
for business: this awareness is reflected in the strengthening of
the key European standards bodies (CEN, CENELEC and ETSI)
and the full participation of all stakeholders in the standardisa-
tion process, SMEs in particular.

— the requirements of the ‘new approach’,

— market interoperability needs,

2.2.1
Given these bodies' potential contribution to the
achievement of the Lisbon objectives, the Committee calls for
organised civil society to be well represented on their executive
boards.

2.3 With a view to increasing the presence and participation
of
the various civil society players in the standardisation
processes within CEN, CENELEC and ETSI (1), these are carried
out with the full participation of bodies such as ANEC, ETUI-
REHS, NORMAPME and, most recently, ECOS (2), which was
set up in November 2002.

The Committee has, on several occasions (3), called for a
2.4
review of the current legal framework on standardisation so
that it can respond to the latest developments and challenges in
European standardisation and simplified legislation, which
would be more
‘better
lawmaking’ (4), the approach taken by Industrial Policy in an
Enlarged Europe (5) and the internal market strategy priorities for
the period 2003-2006 (6).

in line with the principle of

(1) CEN = European Committee for Standardisation. CENELEC = Euro-
pean Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation. ETSI = Euro-
pean Telecommunications Standardisation Institute.

(2) ANEC represents consumers; ETUI-REHS (formally TUTB) represents
employees; NORMAPME represents small and medium-sized enter-
prises. ECOS is a consortium of environmental organisations.

(3) OJ C 48 of 21.2.2002 and OJ C 74 of 23.3.2005.
(4) COM(2002) 278 final.
(5) COM(2002) 714 final.
(6) COM(2003) 238 final.

— competitiveness constraints and opportunities, which are

increasingly important in international markets.

2.7
The total number of European standards produced in
2004 by CEN was approximately 1 200 and about 400 were
produced by CENELEC: this has brought the total number of
European standards adopted by the two committees to 15 000.

The Committee believes that

2.8
the elements that have
contributed to this success must be consolidated and, if neces-
sary, further developed. The new legal framework, which is
based on Articles 95 and 157 of the Treaty and which regulates
the financing of standardisation processes must not,
in the
Committee's view,
invalidate the fundamental nature of the
standardisation process, which must remain free, voluntary and
consensual.

2.9 Moreover, the Committee is aware of the importance of
streamlining, consolidating and securing a long-term financial
framework for the main European structures, not least in rela-
tion to the increasing use of technical standards over the last
few years.

2.9.1
There is, in fact, a growing interest in avoiding new
barriers to trade through a standardisation system capable of
fostering the competitiveness of products, services and Euro-
pean industrial processes, with a view to developing the
economic, social and environmental aspects of development, in
line with the Lisbon strategy.

C 110/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

So far there is no legal reference at European level that
2.10
explicitly regulates
standards
the financing of a technical
system or enables the Commission to financially support, via
additional resources, all standardisation work.

— an option whereby it is fully financed by the Member States

and national standards organisations;

— an added value option, with financial support from the

European Community.

2.10.1
As is widely known, these processes cover a spec-
trum ranging from information and communication technology
to transport; from environmental and consumer protection to
the safety of food processes and products; from pre-normative
and co-normative research to the services and new deliver-
ables (7) sector.

A shortcoming of the arrangement whereby full finan-
2.16
cing is provided by industry and other stakeholders would be
that it would focus almost exclusively on the production of
market driven technical standards, i.e.
it would be geared to
improving European competitiveness on the global market.

2.11 Moreover, the central structures of CEN, CENELEC and
ETSI must be better coordinated and consolidated, particularly
following the accession of the new Member States and in view
of future EU enlargements.

standards organisations

can be
2.12 Whereas national
financed via direct contributions on products and services,
Community institutions depend only on membership fees and
additional funding from the EU and EFTA, which, for various
reasons, seem to be inadequate to ensure an effective, solid
European standards system.

2.13
In its Conclusions adopted in 2002, the Council called
on the public authorities to acknowledge the strategic impor-
tance of standardisation and to make a clear commitment to
that end, particularly through a specific contribution with a
view to maintaining effective and efficient standardisation infra-
structure.

2.14
In December 2004, the same Council took note of the
Commission's initiative to reform the institutional framework
and propose a new legal basis for the financing of European
standardisation (8); it therefore called on the European Commis-
sion, the Member States and the European and national stan-
dards organisations to consider ways of optimising the Euro-
pean standards system, with a view to making the best use of
available resources and exploring other options to ensure viable
financing of standardisation in Europe (9).

2.16.1
The advantage of this type of funding would be that
it is willingly provided by businesses and reflects the needs of
the market without being influenced by external factors. At the
same time, however, it could have a profound impact on the
protection, and particularly balanced protection, of all the inter-
ests represented, and those of SMEs in particular.

2.17
The option whereby full financing is provided by the
Member States, via the ESOs which are members of CEN,
CENELEC and ETSI, could weaken the level of European coordi-
nation and coherence of the European standards system.

2.17.1
On the other hand, this option could, to a large
extent, satisfy the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality
laid down in the Treaty.

Greater Commission involvement would give a high
2.18
level of European value added to technical standardisation,
thereby leading to the abolition of non-compliant national stan-
dards and improving the operation of the single market, not
least in terms of economies of scale for the output of European
industry.

The European Commission could influence the stan-
2.18.1
dardisation process and steer it towards a Community stand-
point, with potential gains in terms of visibility, consistency
and effective support for its policies.

The Commission has drawn up several proposals (10)
2.15
on the possible scenarios as regards financing of the European
standards system:

— the non-intervention option;

the annual costs of

2.19 With regard to costs, recent studies (11) have shown
the CEN/CENELEC/ETSI standards
that
system amount
to about EUR 700 million, distributed as
follows:

— an option whereby it is fully financed by industry and

stakeholders;

— 26 % for the ESOs' institutional costs;

(7) New Deliverables:

technical specifications that are subject

to
faster, streamlined consensus procedures, providing a rapid reduc-
tion in market uncertainty without using longer, more laborious
formal standards. They are valid for a limited period and are used
by the Information Society. They are developed under the CEN
Workshop Agreements.

(8) Council Conclusions of 21.12.2004.
(9) Recommendation (b) 2 of the Council Conclusions of 21.12.2004.
(10) SEC(2005) 1050 of 19.8.2005 (Ex ante evaluation).

— 2 % for the management costs borne by the CEN Manage-

ment Centre (CMC);

— 72 % for the cost of the national experts' participation in

various standards committees.

(11) Ronald Berger & Partners GMBH, December 2000.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/17

2.20
funding are the following:

As regards revenue, currently,

the main sources of

ensure that it remains voluntary, consensus-based and market-
driven, it would be useful to insert a new recital as follows:

— 2 % from EU/EFTA contributions;

— 8 % from national government contributions;

— 90 % from industry and stakeholder contributions.

2.21
Currently, financial support for European standardisa-
tion is based on several acts which, for the most part, do not
contain explicit, specific provisions on financing conditions.
These acts provide the basis for the European Commission to
ask the European standards organisations (CEN, CENELEC,
ETSI) to draw up European standards in support of its policies.

support

Financial

2.22
for European standardisation is
governed by the partnership relations established between the
European Commission, EFTA and the European standards orga-
nisations, which are also specified in the General Guidelines for
Cooperation signed on 28 March 2003.

2.23
involves:

The financing of European standardisation mainly

— annual performance contracts with the ESOs to improve
the operation of their central secretariats as regards consis-
tency, efficiency, quality and visibility;

— improving the quality of European standardisation by
having recourse to external consultants to evaluate draft
harmonised standards, and by translating the final version,
if necessary;

— services for developing European standards or other stan-
dardisation products, which are to be drawn up in support
of Community policies and legislation;

— the promotion and profile of the European standardisation

system and European standards;

— technical assistance and cooperation involving third coun-

tries and international cooperation.

2.23.1
Similarly, standardisation helps in reducing the tech-
nical barriers to international trade through the WTO Agree-
ments, such as the TABD (Trans Atlantic Business Dialogue)
and the MEBF (Mercosur European Business Forum), and by
transposing European standards into international standards:
ISO, IEC, ITU.

3. Specific comments

standardisation process must

‘the
remain voluntary,
consensus-based and market-driven. These characteristics
must be retained and enhanced through the new Com-
munity legal basis for the financing of European standards
in line with the Action Plan for European Standardisation
adopted by the Commission in October 2005; the action
plan must be updated annually with the consent of ESOs
and stakeholders.’

3.2
The Committee believes that the rapid pace of technolo-
gical development does not justify the industry's involvement
in boosting the spread of consortiums and forums for the crea-
tion of technical specifications outside the official process of
European standardisation. This would in fact weaken the key
elements of European standardisation: participation open to all
experts, particularly small businesses; the transparency of the
entire process; and extending the basis for voluntary consensus.
It therefore feels that it is important to include the following
new recital:

‘The new legal basis for financing must ensure that standar-
disation is more effective and stronger, with a view to
meeting, as part of a transparent, open and voluntary
process, the requirements of the new deliverables: technical
specifications, reports and guides. The ESOs should be
allowed to monitor these deliverables (12) in order to ensure
that
the demands of all stakeholders, particularly those
which are less structured and smaller in size, and the legiti-
mate requests of consumer organisations, are met.’

3.3
In the Committee's view, it would be advisable to amend
the current 4th recital in order to show that the objective to be
attained is not only to provide a legal basis ‘for the Communi-
ty's financing of all the European standardisation activities
required to implement its policies and legislation’ but also
to enhance the European standardisation process, as this is a
key element underpinning the competitiveness of European
industry, consumer protection and the protection of the health
and welfare of European citizens:

‘This Decision must provide an explicit, complete and
detailed legal basis for the Community's financing of all the
European standardisation activities required to implement
its policies and legislation and to enhance the European
standardisation process itself, as it is a key element under-
pinning
industry,
consumer protection and the protection of the health and
welfare of European citizens’.

competitiveness

European

the

of

3.1
In the Committee's view, in order to retain the essential
characteristics of the European standardisation process and to

(12) Cf. footnote 7.

C 110/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

3.4
The Committee believes that it should be more clearly
emphasised that ESOs do not produce technical standards but
that they provide a European infrastructure service through
which standards can be developed by experts representing the
participating stakeholders; a new recital should therefore be
inserted after the 8th recital as follows:

‘European standards organisations essentially provide infra-
structure services for the production of technical standards,
which result primarily from a consensual approach to tech-
nical standards production by stakeholder representatives’.

The Committee suggests that

3.5
the
Proposal for a Decision — Standardisation activities eligible for
Community financing — two new points g) and h) be inserted
after point f) as follows:

in Article 3(1) of

3.5.1
As stated in point 1.4 above, training of stakeholders
on standardisation issues is particularly important. Article 3,
new point g):

‘the training of stakeholder representatives, particularly for
small businesses, the services and distribution sector and
less structured organisations, both in terms of the general
and the technical standardisation process, with a view to
enhancing the capacity for 'co-producing' European and
international standards’.

In order to ensure increasing participation of

3.5.2
the
standardisation
numerous
processes, it is essential to improve networking between them.
Article 3, new point h):

stakeholders

society

civil

in

‘enhancing the interdisciplinary coordination of methods,
interactive European computer
procedures and policies;
networks allowing national and regional standards organi-
sations to communicate’.

3.6 Financing arrangements

The Committee believes that

3.6.2
the
central secretariats of European standards organisations could
be financed through both ‘grants for actions’ and ‘operating
grants’ (13) and by launching calls for tender (procurement) in
line with public procurement procedures. Essentially, a more
flexible approach is needed.

the activities of

it would be advisable to ensure that

3.6.3
Article 5. Financing arrangements, point 5. As regards
the framework partnership agreements between the ESOs and
the Committee
the European Commission (ex. Article 5),
believes that
these
contracts are the result of a genuinely equal partnership and
are not dictated unilaterally. It would also be useful to reduce
red tape and administrative supervision, avoiding burdensome
certification and auditing procedures of costs incurred, by
introducing flat-rate systems, which would cover 100 % of all
marginal costs.

3.7 Environmental aspects

3.7.1
In addition to the primary objectives of standardisa-
tion, i.e. facilitating trade, improving the quality of life, health
standards and the safety of industrial processes and services,
environmental protection must also be given particular atten-
tion.

The Integrated Product Policy, which focused on the
3.7.2
life cycle’ (14), provides a template here. The
‘environmental
analyses of environmental aspects at enterprise and ‘site’ level
have already been integrated into EN/ISO 14001, which has
been adopted as a European standard. The other standards of
the ISO 14000 (environmental management systems) category
have also been introduced into European practice: ISO 14020,
environmental
ISO 14030, environ-
mental performance assessment; ISO 14040, LCA (Life cycle
assessment).

labels and declarations;

The work carried out by standards organisations is on
3.6.1
a par with activities of general economic interest, since it
produces services that are vital for health, the environment and
sustainable development.

3.8 Management, implementation and monitoring arrangements

3.8.1
amended in line with the amended 4th recital.

The Committee considers that Article 6(2) should be

Brussels, 15 March 2006.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(13) COM(2005) 377, Article 5(2).
(14) COM(2003) 302 final.