REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of the Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 from 2013 to 2015
Date: 2016-06-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, European standard, European standardisation body, harmonisation of standards, technical specification, technical standard

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.6.2016  COM(2016) 212 final   REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of the Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 from 2013 to 2015 {SWD(2016) 126 final}  
 
 
1.  

INTRODUCTION 

According  to  Article  24(3)  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1025/2012  on  European  standardisation 
(hereinafter the Regulation)1:  

By 31 December 2015 and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall present a 
report to the  European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this 
Regulation. This report shall contain an analysis of the annual reports referred to in 
paragraphs  1  and  2,  an  evaluation  of  the  relevance  of  the  standardisation  activities 
receiving  Union  financing  in  the  light  of  the  requirements  of  Union  legislation  and 
policies as well as an assessment of potential new measures to simplify the financing 
of  European  standardisation  and  to  reduce  the  administrative  burden  for  the 
European standardisation organisations. 

This is the report drafted to respond to such Article 24. 

2.   THE PERFORMANCE OF THE EUROPEAN STANDARDISATION SYSTEM 

This  report  (and  the  accompanying  evaluation)  assesses  the  performance  of  the  European 
Standardisation System (ESS) including the Regulation since its entry into force in 2013, in 
terms  of  effectiveness,  efficiency,  coherence, relevance  and  EU  added  value,  in  response  to 
the review clause set in Art 24(3) of the Regulation. It includes: 

  Analyses of the implementation of the Regulation, through the reports provided by the 

ESOs and the Annex III organisations concerning the years 2013 and 2014; 

  Evaluation of the relevance of standardisation activities receiving Union financing; 
  Assessment of opportunities for simplifying the financing of European standardisation 

and reducing the administrative burden. 

This  evaluation  is  linked  to  the  Regulatory  Fitness  and  Performance  Programme  of  the 
Commission2  because of the importance of standardisation as a way to harmonise the Single 
Market  and  of  its  impact  on  the  competitiveness  of  the  EU  economy.  This  evaluation  is  of 
particular  relevance  to  regulatory  fitness:  it  draws  upon  studies  or  reports  in  relation  to  the 
ESS and its processes, specifically in relation to further involving particular stakeholders such 
as SMEs, refining Union financing and addressing the issue of administrative burden on the 
European  standardisation  organisations  (ESOs)  and  the  National  standardisation  bodies 
(NSBs). 

Given the recent entry into force of the Regulation a full ex post evaluation of the Regulation 
cannot be achieved due to the fact that a full cycle of the standardisation work requested by 
the Commission since 2013 has not yet been completed. This report (and the accompanying 
SWD)  assesses  whether  the  ESS  is  on  track  with  achieving  the  objectives  expected  by  the 
legislator when it reformed the standardisation system and adopted the Regulation and makes, 

1  Regulation  (EU)  No  1025/2012  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25  October  2012  on 
European  standardisation,  amending  Council  Directives  89/686/EEC  and  93/15/EEC  and  Directives  94/9/EC, 
94/25/EC,  95/16/EC,  97/23/EC,  98/34/EC,  2004/22/EC,  2007/23/EC,  2009/23/EC  and  2009/105/EC  of  the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  and  repealing  Council  Decision  87/95/EEC  and  Decision  No 
1673/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 12-33. 
2  COMMUNICATION  FROM  THE  COMMISSION  TO  THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT,  THE  COUNCIL,  THE 
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 
Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT): State of Play and Outlook, COM(2014) 368 final, 18.6.2014 

2 

 
 
                                                 
where appropriate, recommendations (see annexes 1 and 2 of this report) on how to improve 
the implementation of the Regulation and the ESS.  

It mainly evaluates the processes put in place by the ESS and the Regulation and does not aim 
at assessing comprehensively the wider impacts of standardisation on the internal market or 
on the competitiveness of EU business (see also section 3.2 of this report). 

2.1 Methodology 

The evaluation has built on studies and reports carried out since 20133 such as the results of 
the  Independent  Review  of  the  European  Standardisation  System  (ESS)  published  in  April 
2015  after  a  validation  event  in  March,  the  Commission  report  to  the  Council  and  the 
Parliament on the basis of Article 25 of the Regulation4 adopted in May 2015, the Article 24 
study aimed at assessing the relevance of the activities and their financing5 based on annual 
reports  and  the  meeting  report  from  the  'Friends  of  Standardisation  Roundtable'  held  on  1st 
July 2015, which was also a validation event of the Independent Review. Practical experience 
of the Commission services applying the Regulation has also been taken into account. 

2.2 The main objectives of the  Regulation and of  the European Standardisation 
System 

The  main  general  objectives  of  the  Regulation  are  to  increase  the  contribution  of  standards 
and European standardisation to a better functioning internal market, to stimulate growth and 
innovation and to foster the competitiveness of EU enterprises, especially SMEs.  

The specific objectives of the Regulation are to: 

 
 

 

 
 

enhance the transparency of EU standardisation; 
set  revised  rules  for  financing  European  standardisation  including  SMEs,  social  and 
societal stakeholder organisations at the European level; 
ensure  that  SMEs,  social  and  societal  stakeholders  are  adequately  represented  in  the 
standardisation  process,  especially  for  standards  developed  at  the  request  of  the 
Commission; 
reduce the time taken by the Commission requested standardisation process; 
enable Member States to reference ICT technical specifications developed outside the 
ESS in public procurement. 

The  Communication  COM  (2011)311  established  the  guiding  principles  of  the  European 
Standardisation system (ESS), expressed through five strategic objectives: 

• 

• 

• 

European standards need to be quickly available; 

European  Standards  are  powerful  strategic  tools  for  businesses  to  increase  their 
competitiveness; 

European  standards  need  to  respond  to  an  increasing  demand  as  a  tool  to  support 
European policies and legislations; 

3  All  relevant  studies/reports  are  available  at 
market/european-standards/notification-system/index_en.htm 
4 COM(2015)198 final  
5 Study on the implementation of the Regulation 1025/2012 (Article 24), EY (2015) 

the  following 

link:  http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-

3 

 
 
                                                 
• 

• 

European  standards  will  affect  more  and  more  groups  in  European  society.  The 
European Standardisation System must, therefore, become as inclusive as possible; 

European  standards  must  play  a  role  in  supporting  the  competitiveness  of  European 
business in the global market. 

The  Regulation  entered into  force  on  1st  January  2013.  Therefore,  the  evaluation  covers  the 
two (2) first years of its implementation. As to the Independent Review, it took a long-term 
perspective and all available data since the establishment of the ESOs6. 

3. ANALYSIS 

3.1 Effectiveness 

Areas where effectiveness has been fostered and which would indicate that progress is being 
made towards refining the ESS, as a result of the introduction of the Regulation, are briefly 
summarised below. 

- 

Transparency: 

The Commission's standardisation measures to date and the Annual Union Work Programme 
(AUWP), a novelty introduced by the  Regulation, contribute to the transparency, ownership 
and quality of the activities. 

Progress  has  been  made  in  ensuring  the  transparency  of  the  work  of  the  European 
standardisation organisations (ESOs) and National standardisation bodies (NSBs), through the 
publication of their work programmes on their web sites. Significant investments in the use of 
IT tools have been made by ESOs and NSBs. The proper transparency of work programmes 
of standardisation bodies within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the Regulation is an essential 
precondition  for  ensuring  the  inclusiveness  of  standardisation  activities.  However,  room  for 
improvement in implementing Article 4(3) to (4) of the Regulation in terms of clarity and of 
the availability of the work programmes of the NSBs still remains. 

- 

Inclusiveness: 

Participation by relevant stakeholders in standardisation has improved but could still be more 
effective. According to key stakeholders, there are still difficulties for SMEs in taking part in 
standardisation  and/or  to  make  use  of  standards.  Similarly,  and  despite  the  improvements 
introduced, the participation of stakeholder organisations, representing consumers’, workers’, 
SMEs and environmental interests, is still challenged by some limitations at the European and 
international levels, raised by the Annex III organisations during the Independent Review and 
in their reports on the implementation of the Regulation. 

At the European level, four stakeholder organisations have been selected in 2013 and 2014 
as  eligible  for  Union  financing  (SBS:  Small  Business  Standards,  ANEC:  The  European 
Consumer  Voice  in  Standardisation,  ECOS:  European  Environmental  Citizens  Organisation 
for  Standardisation  and  ETUC:  European  Trade  Union  Confederation)  in  line  with  the 

6 For example, for the analysis of the standards development time, were compared data from 2009 to 2013 (see 
page 70) 

4 

 
 
 
                                                 
Regulation  Article  16:  these  have  launched  activities  to  strengthen  their  presence  in  and 
contribution  to  European  standardisation.  Their  activities  have  been  mainly  focused  on  the 
training of experts, participation in ESOs at policy and technical level, and the setting up of 
tools for communication. 

At  the  national  level,  NSBs  report  on  the  participation,  at  policy  and  technical  levels,  of 
representatives  of  the  four  stakeholder  groups:  SMEs,  consumers,  social  and  societal 
stakeholders.  The  number  of  NSBs  in  which  SMEs,  consumers,  social  and  societal 
stakeholders are represented has increased between 2013 and 2014 (especially within ETSI). 
However, while at the European level SMEs appear to be largely represented at policy and 
technical level (e.g. in 2014, SMEs were represented at technical level in more than 80% of 
CEN’s  and  Cenelec’s  technical  bodies  and  ETSI’s  working  groups),  the  involvement  of  the 
other  stakeholder  groups  is  more  limited.  This  might  be  due  to  the  more  limited  interest  of 
consumers, social and societal stakeholders in standardisation as they are not direct users of 
standards. 

- 

Timeliness: 

The time to develop new standards requested by the Commission decreased from 5 years, 
on average, in 2009 to 3 years in 20137; this progress is not resulting from the implementation 
of  the  Regulation  but  from  industry  needs.  The  new  Framework  partnership  agreements 
(FPAs) and the Operating Grants (OGs) between the Commission and the ESOs aim at further 
reducing  the  development  time  of  standards.  Together  with  the  FPAs,  which  include  key 
performance indicators8, the introduction of the AUWP and the revision of the procedure to 
adopt  standardisation  requests9  according  to  Article  10  of  the  Regulation  are  expected  to 
contribute  to  speeding  up  the  standardisation  work  following  Commission  requests.  This 
could  bring  significant  improvement  while  maintaining  quality  and  inclusiveness.  Overall, 
this would make the ESOs even more attractive notably for specific high-tech projects where 
competition is global. A closer relationship between the R&D community and standardisation 
would also help for that purpose. Quicker standardisation results are also expected from the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation  due  to  the  earlier  involvement  of  stakeholders,  increased 
backing  consensus  to  standardisation  requests, more  detailed  requirements  for  the  requested 
European  standard  or  standardisation  deliverable  and  deadlines  for  the  adoption  of  the 
requested deliverable. 

As  regards  interaction  between  the  Regulation  and  other  EU  legislation  making  use  of 
European  standards,  there  is  room  for  streamlining  of  the  procedures  when  such  a  sectorial 
legislation is revised. For example, the proposal for a Regulation on Consumer Product Safety 
(8)  aims  at  shortening  these  processes  through  alignment  with  the  processes  set  in  the 
(standardisation) Regulation.    

- 

Union financing of Standardisation activities: 

Union financing of activities of the ESOs and the Annex III organisations is limited to a range 
between  EUR  20  to  25  million  annually.    The  Commission  contributes,  on  the  basis  of  the 

7 Independent Review of the European Standardisation System, Final Report (2015, p.109) 
8 Including a 50% reduction in the standard development time by 2020 
9  SWD(2015)  205  final  of  27.10.2015  "Vademecum  on  European  Standardisation  in  support  of  Union 
Legislation and policies" 
http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/european-standards/vademecum/index_en.htm 

5 

 
 
                                                 
Regulation,  on  average  between  35  and  40 %  of  the  total  income  of  the  three  non-profit 
ESOs10 (…) and from 75% to 100% of the total income of the Annex III organisations11.  

The experts who voluntarily participate in standardisation work at international, European and 
national level usually do so at their own expense. According to an estimation of the ESOs, the 
industry  experts  spend  around  EUR  1  billion  each  year  to  participate  in  and  contribute  to 
standardisation  work  (ie  the  estimated  total  value  of  working  hours  spent,  travelling  and 
accommodation  costs  etc…).  Some  difficulties  have  been  perceived  by  the  ESOs  and/or 
Annex  III  organisations  in  relation  to  this  Union  financing.  In  particular,  they  have  raised 
some  issues  concerning  the  Commission’s  provision  of  financial  support  that  can  be 
summarised as follows: 

  Timing for the signature of the Operating Grants (OGs) between the EC and the 

ESOs; 

  Management  of  Union  financing:  the  ESOs  and  the  Annex  III  organisations 
consider  that  a  certain  effort  is  required  to  process  and  assess  applications  for 
financial  support.  This  also  applies  to  the  technical  and  financial  reporting, 
especially in relation to the OGs; 

Estimates carried out in the Article 24 study show that a certain effort is required by 
the ESOs and the Annex III organisations to apply for the OGs (i.e. the drafting of the 
annual  plan),  and  for  reporting  on  their  execution.  However,  the  estimates  on 
administrative costs related to OGs suggest that these represent a reasonable share of 
the total amount received from the EC (around 1% for the ESOs, and between 2% and 
5%  of  the  amounts  respectively  received  by  the  four  Annex  III  organisations  in  the 
form of OGs);  

  Overall  reporting  requirements,  information  obligations  and  administrative  costs 
under  the  Regulation:  the  obligations  related  to  Union  financing  and  the 
accumulation  of  reporting  requirements  placed  on  the  ESOs  and  the  Annex  III 
organisations is considered to create a certain level of administrative burden.  

A certain effort is required for the reporting on the implementation of the Regulation 
by the ESOs and on the activities performed by the Annex III organisations (Article 24 
reporting);  

  Predictability and continuity of the financial support: the FPAs have  represented 
an  important  step  forward  in  ensuring  continuity  of  financial  support.  However, 
uncertainty  about  the  resources  available  each  year  for  specific  actions  is 
perceived among the ESOs and the Annex III organisations. This can prevent the 
proper  planning  of  the  activities  necessary  to  implement  the  annual  work 
programme or perform specific standardisation work. 

10  CEN  —  European  Committee  for  Standardisation  ,  Cenelec  —  European  Committee  for  Electrotechnical 
Standardisation  and ETSI — European Telecommunications Standards Institute 
11  Small  Business  Standards  -  http://sbs-sme.eu/,  The  European  consumer  voice  in  standardisation        - 
http://www.anec.eu/anec.asp  ,  The  European  Environmental  Citizens’  Organisation  for  Standardisation  - 
http://ecostandard.org/ and The European Trade Union Confederation - http://www.etuc.org/ 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
To  conclude,  there  is  a  perception  among  ESOs  and/or  Annex  III  organisations  that  the 
Regulation  has  increased  administrative  burden.  Although  the  assessment  of  such  burden 
showed that it represents a reasonable share of the amount provided by the EC funding, it is 
worth taking action to reduce perceptions of inefficiencies. 

The  Vademecum  on  European  Standardisation  in  support  of  Union  Legislation  and  policies 
and the recent Commission decision12  to implement lump sums in line with Article 17(4) of 
the  Standardisation  Regulation  are  expected  to  improve  the  situation  in  order  to  make  the 
access to Union funding easier and more predictable. This is a first step in the direction of a 
more performance-based approach to be assessed in due time.  

-  ICT:  technical  specifications:  In  the  ICT  domain,  the  Multi-Stakeholder  Platform  (MSP) 
generates  the  ICT  Rolling  Plan  as  a  collaborative  tool  to  bring  together  the  European 
Commission and the ICT standardisation stakeholders – EU and global- and to increase their 
coordination  and  cooperation.  It  also  fosters  the  transparency  of  the  ICT  standardisation 
process,  by  giving  a  relevant  list  of  activities  and  gathering  the  opinions  and  views  of  the 
different stakeholders involved in each topic addressed. Several ICT technical specifications 
for public procurement have already been adopted. 

To  sum  up,  the  Regulation  has  increased  the  contribution  of  standards  and  European 
standardisation  to  a  better  functioning  of  the  internal  market,  stimulating  growth  and 
innovation and fostering the competitiveness of EU enterprises, especially SMEs. Steps have 
been  taken  to  improve  the  transparency  of  the  development  of  the  Commission's 
standardisation  requests  in  support  of  EU  legislations  and  policies  and  the  participation  of 
SMEs and underrepresented stakeholders. The Regulation also facilitates  the exploitation of 
the  potential  of  innovative  ICT  technologies  and  contributes  to  the  realisation  of  the  Single 
Market. 

3.2 Efficiency  

The  contribution  of  European  standardisation  to  the  competitiveness  of  EU  businesses  has 
been confirmed by earlier studies13  carried out at the national level in France, Germany and 
the UK. 

The current data does not however allow for a complete and comprehensive analysis of 
the efficiency of the ESS as influenced by the activities supported by the EC within the new 
framework of the Regulation. It is anticipated that sufficient data will be available to make a 
proper assessment in the next report due under Article 24 in 2020. 

However,  the  foregoing  comments  should  be  understood  in  the  light  of  the  fact  that  the 
broader  range  of  factors  that  influence  the  economic  impact  of  the  ESS  cannot  be  captured 

12 C(2015) 3697 final 
13  BSI (2015): The Economic Contribution of Standards to the UK Economy, DIN (2000): Economic Benefits of 
Standardization, 3 volumes. Berlin: Beuth. (Update 2011), DTI (2005): The Empirical Economics of Standards, 
DTI  ECONOMICS  PAPER  NO.12.  London  and  AFNOR  (2009):  The  Economic  Impact  of  Standardization  – 
Technological Change, Standards and Long-Term Growth in France. Paris. AFNOR (2016): economic impact of 
standardisation, January 2016, Paris, France. 

7 

 
 
                                                 
 
without  a  more  wide-ranging  study,  which  the  Council  invited  (in  March  201514)  the 
Commission to consider undertaking at an appropriate time. 

While there is a perception by the ESOs and the Annex III organisations that the Regulation 
has  increased  the  administrative  burden  on  their  part  (see  section  3.1  on  effectiveness),  this 
perception is not supported by available data. Still, the Commission will consider actions to 
decrease such perceived inefficiencies. 

3.3. Coherence, EU added value and Relevance 

Each of the current 20,000 European standards (mainly for products) potentially replaced up 
to 33 sets of conflicting national ones. But still it is difficult to measure the EU added value of 
the ESS. However, European standardisation is designed to play a key role in the creation and 
functioning  of  the  single  market  for  products  and  services  by  gradually  harmonising 
conflicting  national  standards  that  may  create  technical  obstacles  for  access  to  national 
markets. It can thus eliminate barriers to trade, whilst ensuring a high level of protection of 
public  interests,  in  particular  health  and  safety.  Such  voluntary  harmonisation  can  therefore 
contribute  to  increasing  the  competitiveness  of  European  industry  but  only  when  European 
standardisation  is  wide-ranging,  internationally  recognised  and  easy  to  comply  with 
(especially by SMEs). 

The  need  for  an  efficient  and  effective  standardisation  process  at  the  EU  level  which  is  the 
objective of the ESS and the Regulation is confirmed, while more development of European 
standards  for  services  could  be  considered.  But  the  needs  identified  at  the  time  of  Impact 
Assessment  are  still  valid.  Financing  remains  relevant  as  new  trends  (such  as  globalisation, 
ICT/non ICT juncture etc) are emerging. Moreover, it is also important that a good balance is 
found between the interests of patent holders and users when it comes to Standard Essential 
Patents (SEPs). 

The typology of activities supported by Union financing is also relevant to and coherent with 
the AUWPs: activities financed by the  Union are those not funded by industry or not to the 
magnitude and at the time required. 

Overall, standardisation activities are coherent with the EU’s policy objectives  - notably the 
digital  single  market  (DSM),  a  fairer  and  deeper  single  market,  energy  union,  growth  and 
investments, the role of the EU as a global actor. On a practical level, coherence is achieved 
through  the  use  of  the  AUWP  (which  is  in  line  with  the  Commission  priorities15),  and 
subsequently  through  close  monitoring  of  the  process  inside  the  Commission  as  well  as 
through interaction with the Member States and relevant stakeholders. 

Potential  EU  added  value  is  inherent  to  the  ESS.  Each  new  European  standard,  whether 
requested by the Commission or not, replaces national standards: they reduce the cost of the 
movement  of  goods  in  the  single  market.  By  doing  so,  European  standards  can  positively 
influence economic growth, by reducing general industrial costs, improving interoperability, 
increasing  assurances  of  the  quality  and  safety  of  products  and  services,  and  facilitating 

14 The Competitiveness Council on 2 March 2015, "INVITES the Commission to finalize the Independent 
Review and analyse the impact of standardisation on the economy taking into account the interest of all the 
parties".  
15COM(2014) 910 final 

8 

 
 
 
                                                 
access  to  European  and  global  markets.    Moreover,  European  standards  can  promote  EU 
policies in several different respects, including accessibility to energy efficiency and safety of 
products, to name but two. 

Removing trade barriers and fostering a Single Market represent by far the major potential for 
EU added value of European standardisation. As such, the ESS assumes a direct relevance to 
the  functioning  of  the  EU  and  pursues  objectives  that  could  not  be  achieved  at  the  national 
level. Companies, in particular, can benefit from a reduction of transaction costs, an increased 
level  of  interoperability  and  the  development  of  a  common  technical  language  within  the 
European Single Market. 

4. CONCLUSIONS 

The  Regulation  has  increased  the  transparency  and  inclusiveness  of  the  ESS,  enhanced  the 
contribution of standards and European standardisation to a better functioning internal market 
and revised the rules for EU financial support to the European Standardisation Organisations 
and Annex III organisations. 

In the ICT domain, the ICT Rolling Plan as a collaborative tool has managed to bring together 
the European Commission and the ICT standardisation stakeholders  – European and global- 
and to increase their coordination and cooperation. It also fosters the transparency of the ICT 
standardisation process, by giving a relevant list of activities and gathering the opinions and 
views of the different stakeholders involved in each topic addressed. 

At  this  stage,  the  Commission  considers  that  non-legislative  initiatives  in  the  area  of 
governance,  interaction  and  communication  might  be  justified  to  improve  the  ESS  (see 
Annexes 1 and 2). 

The  Joint  Initiative  on  European  standardisation  announced  under  the  Single  Market 
Strategy16  is  expected  to  contribute  to  that  purpose.  The  Joint  Initiative  on  Standardisation 
will  also  explore  how  the  gap  between  research/innovation  priorities  and  European 
standardisation  could  be  analysed  in  a  more  systematic  and  forward-looking  way  and  more 
effectively  bridged,  as  well  as  how  to  produce  timely  standardisation  deliverables. 
Additionally, the Digital Single Market strategy17 , in its roadmap for completing the Digital 
Single  Market  announces  the  adoption  of  a  Priority  ICT  Standards  Plan      to  identify  key 
priorities for standardisation with a focus on technologies and domains that are deemed to be 
critical to the Digital Single Market. Accordingly, this plan will identify a number of priority 
areas  where  a  coherent  set  of  actions  aiming  at  the  identification,  production,  adoption  and 
promotion of use  of ICT standards in  response to  new technological trends,  EU legislations 
and policies would most urgently be needed.  

In addition, the Commission following the invitation from  the Council17 to analyse the impact 
of standardisation on the economy taking into account the interest of all the parties, foresees 
to launch this study in due time to exploit the results in the next Article 24 report. 

16 COM(2015) 550 
17 COM(2015)192  

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The Regulation has brought significant improvements in the ESS due to the timely availability 
of  standards  requested  by  the  Commission,  the  early  involvement  of  the  stakeholders,  the 
creation  of  consensus  around  the  standardisation  requests  under  preparation,  and  the 
improvement in the quality and detail of the requests issued.  

Overall,  no  major  problem  in  the  application  of  the  Regulation  had  been  identified,  while 
some areas for improvement, listed in Annex 1 and 2, have been identified. The Commission 
will consider how to best tackle them, in particular via the Joint Initiative on Standardisation 
that aims at promoting the coherent implementation of the Regulation through non-legislative 
actions in co-operation with the main actors of the ESS.  

The Commission concludes  that there would be no justification  to revise the Regulation  for 
the  time  being.  The  Commission  will  revisit  the  situation  five  years after  completion  of  the 
present  evaluation,  in  the  context  of  the report that  it  will  present  to  the  Council and  to  the 
European Parliament on the implementation of the Regulation, under Article 24(3). 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  1  –  ISSUES  AND  RECOMMENDATIONS  ON  HOW  TO  IMPROVE  THE  IMPLEMENTATION 

OF REGULATION (EU) NO 1025/2012 AND THE EUROPEAN STANDARDISATION SYSTEM 

I. Areas of improvement identified to be addressed in relation to the overall European 

standardisation system18: 

Speed and timeliness 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Varying  interests  in  speed  and  difficulty  to  apply  a  “one  size  fits  all”  solution  to 
shorten time needed 

Need to better leverage on the early identification of standardisation needs  

Failures  in  the  early  start  of  standardisation  activities  (following  standardisation 
requests) 

Presence of few standards requiring extensive time for development 

Monitoring  data  not  consistent  or  not  allowing  a  full  assessment  of  the  speed  and 
tracking of the processes 

Support to the competitiveness of European businesses 

- 

- 

Barriers for SMEs to take part in standardisation and/or apply standards 

Still despite of many actions weak links exist between standardisation and innovation 
and research projects 

Support to Union legislation and policies 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Increasing demand for standards in support of Union’s legislation and policy, coupled 
with  bottlenecks  specific  to  requested  standards  (the  process  to  request  and 
compliance checks) 

Lack  of  operational  approach  in  defining  the  legislation  and  policy  needs  and 
prompting standardisation activities 

Gaps in the communication by the Commission to the ESOs during the standardisation 
process 

 Lack  of  alignment  between  the  Commission  and  standardisers  in  the  phase  of 
compliance checks 

Conflicting  national  standards  remaining  and  reducing  the  overall  efficiency  of  the 
ESS in eliminating barriers in the internal market 

Inclusiveness 

- 

Weak  position  of  the  Annex  III  organisations  and  different  capacities  in  terms  of 
stakeholders representation at national level 

18 Independent Review recommendations, p.141-143 

11 

 
 
                                                 
- 

Lack  of  inclusiveness  at  international  level  when  applying  Vienna  and  Dresden 
agreements with ISO and IEC respectively in lead 

Support to competitiveness of European businesses at global level 

- 

- 

Difficult  matching  between  European  stakeholders'  needs  and  standardisation 
processes at international level 

Increasing  relevance  of  standardisation  work  carried  out  outside  of  the  ESS  and 
ISO/IEC especially within ICT domains 

Governance 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Need for better communication from the Commission about the process of developing 
standardisation requests 

Information to all the stakeholders on the standardisation work ongoing or planned 

Differences  of  working  methods  (within  the  Commission,  the  ESOs  and  the  NSBs) 
which can undermine the consistent and efficient functioning of the ESS 

Complex  procedures  including  reporting  obligations  and  number  of  steps/actors 
involved 

Suitability for the future 

- 

- 

- 

Different layers in standardisation and need to adapt the approach to different needs 

Identify needs in sectors not covered by standardisation (e.g. services) 

Need for better patents declaration framework 

12 

 
 
 
 
II.  Areas  of  improvement  identified/issues  to  be  addressed  in  relation  to  the 

standardisation activities supported by EU funds: 

Speed up the process leading to the conclusion of the grant agreements (time to contract) 

The  procedure  to  approve  and  sign  the  grant  agreements  between  the  Commission  and  the 
ESOs or Annex III organisations is not yet fast enough. To this purpose, the following actions 
can be assessed and combined: 

- 

- 

- 

Defining a procedure and indicative time limits for the assessment of the ESOs or the 
Annex  III  proposals  by  the  EC/EFTA,  in  order  to  make  sure  that  the  timing  for  the 
agreement on the actions to be supported is reasonably limited. 

Encourage the ESOs and the Annex III organisations to present high quality proposals, 
based on the standard templates already available, as well as on practical guide on the 
most common issues encountered. 

Streamline  the  exchange  of  information  between  the  Commission  and  the  ESOs  or 
Annex III organisations for the discussion of comments and the provision of feedback, 
in order to reduce the “time to grant agreement” by improving mutual understanding. 

Streamline  of  administrative  and  financial  procedures  for  the  management  of  grant 
agreements 

The  administrative  and  financial  procedures  for  the  management  of  grant  agreements  are 
perceived  as  burdensome  by  stakeholders  whose  procedures  should  be  clearly  defined  and 
consistently applied across grant agreements. The elements of the financial and administrative 
procedures  causing  this  perception  should  be  taken  into  account  and,  as  a  result,  providing 
practical guidance to the EC services, the ESOs and the Annex III organisations in order to 
enhance  the  common  understanding  of  the  rules,  avoid  divergences  in  the  interpretation, 
rectify  and  anticipate  recurring  mistakes  and  inaccuracies  by  the  ESOs  or  the  Annex  III 
organisations. 

Simplify and rationalise the reporting requirements 

The  reporting  requirements  are  also  perceived  as  too  burdensome.  The  following 
recommendations could be considered after careful evaluation: 

• 

Simplifying reporting on Art. 24 of the Regulation: 

- 

- 

- 

Improve  the  reporting  on  Art.  24  in  order  to  ensure  the  consistency  and 
the  Annex  III 
comparability  of  data  reported  across  the  ESOs  and 
organisations, taking into account the limitations related to lack of clarity and 
comparability of information; 

Simplify  the  reporting  by  defining  a  common  set  and  a  list  of  synthetic 
indicators for each Article of the Regulation subject to reporting; 

Gather electronic and usable data and enable the creation of a database on the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation  to  be  used  for  monitoring  purposes,  on  an 

13 

 
 
ongoing  basis,  and  as  a  basis  for  the  EC  reporting  obligations  towards  the 
Council and the European Parliament. 

• 

• 

Streamline as far as possible the proposals for operating grants and action grants and 
the  interim  and  final  reporting  on  the  technical  activities  carried  out,  and  adapt  the 
reporting  requirements  on  a  case  by  case  basis,  in  order  to  make  sure  that  these  are 
proportionate  to  the  financial  support  received.  For  example,  this  objective  can  be 
achieved  by  establishing  key  qualitative  or  quantitative  indicators  expected  to  be 
realized  through  the  actions  proposed,  and  articulating  the  reporting  around  these 
areas. 

Optimise the reporting requirements and other coordination and monitoring activities 
(such  as  periodic  meetings)  involving  the  Commission  services,  the  ESOs  and  the 
Annex  III  organisations,  and  harmonise  the  formats  for  reporting,  in  order  to  enable 
the direct use of the same information to different reporting purposes. 

Regularly monitor the overall Union financing, the results of the simplification measures and 
the opportunities to move further towards a more performance-based system 

The  Commission  should  constantly  monitor  the  allocation  of  financing,  the  overall 
performance  of  the  financing  system  and,  when  relevant,  the  results  of  the  simplification 
measures implemented. 

In particular, in case of positive results of the implementation of the recent decisions on lump 
sums to finance the development of European standards and the verification of their quality, 
there  would  be  a  case  to  consider  the  extension  of  the  use  of  performance-based  grant 
agreements  to  other  standardisation  activities  characterised  by  verifiable  results  and  easily 
identifiable outputs. 

More generally, based on the data on financing, already collected on a constant basis by the 
EC, and on the feedback received by the stakeholders receiving the funds, regular insights can 
be gained on the different elements of the financing of standardisation, including: the timing 
for the finalisation of the agreements, the distribution of funding across the various kinds of 
activities eligible for support, the uptake of financing by the ESOs and the NSBs, the issues 
encountered  in  relation  to  the  administrative  and  financial  arrangements  that  have  caused 
recurring delays and/or other problems. 

14