Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

##### `COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES`

```
                           C0M(91) 521 final

                           Brussels, 16 December 1991

             COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

       Standardization in the European Economy

  (Follouj-up to the Commission Green Paper of October 1990)

```

###### **-**
### **"U**

**COMMUNICATION** **FROM THF** **COMMISSION**

```
      Standardization in the European Economy

 (Fol lotu-up to the Commission Green Paper of October 1990)

             Table of Contents

I. Introduction

I I . The Response to the Commission Green Paper

III. Comm I ss l on recommendat i ons for f o I I ouu-up act i on

IV. Future Directions for European Standardization

   (i) Priority-setting and programming;
   (ii) Efficiency and openness;
   (iii) Effective participation by interested parties;
   (iv) Structures for coordination and consultation;
   (v) Stronger links with international
        standardization;
   (vi) Implementation and visibility of European
        standards ;

   (vii) Information about European standardization;
   ( v iii) Access to European standards
   ( ix) External cooperation in Standardization;
   (x) Partnership uiith public authorities,
   (xi) Other issues

V. Standardization and Community legislation.

```

**-** **2** **-**

**STANDARDIZATION** **IN THE EUROPEAN ECONOMY**

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

```
I. Introduct ion

1. On 28 January 1991 the Commission published in the
   Official Journal a Green Paper on the development of
    European Standardization* [1] ), a consultation paper open
    for comment by all interested parties. The comment
    period ended on 28 April 1991.

2. The Green Paper was intended to be the most wide    ranging review to date of European standardization.
    Although its publication was mainly stimulated by
    concern that the European standards needed for
    Community product legislation would not be produced in
    time, it addressed wider issues, in particular the
    place of standardization in the European economy and
    the responsiveness of European standardization to new
    demands from legislators and the market. While
    recognising the private and voluntary character of
    standardization, the Commission made over forty
    detailed recommendations aimed at promoting more
    efficient and market-responsive European
    standardization as a means of achieving the full
    benefits of a single European market. The Commission
    invited all those concerned to express their views on
    the Green Paper.

3. . This second Communication summarizes the response to

    the Green Paper, makes recommendations for the
    development of European standardization in the 1990's
    and proposes greater use of European standardization in
    Commun i ty poIi cy.

    The Council is asked in particular to confirm its
    agreement with the content of this Communication by

    means of a Resolution outlined later in the text.

(1) Ref: OJ N* 120, 28.01.1991, p.1

```

```
                   - 3

I I . The Response to the Commission Green Paper on the
   Development of European Standardization

4. The Green Paper has been widely recognized as
   addressing an important issue for the success of the
   Community's internal market. A debate has been
   organized in all Community Member States, within the
   Community institutions, and within European
   standardization bodies and European-level industrial
   and professional organizations. The Commission has
   received more than 250 comments from interested

   parties, a good number of which reflect extensive
   consultation at national or European level; a number
   of comments were also received from third countries.

    In terms of focussing public attention on
   standardization, the Green Paper has been an
   unqualified success.

5. The Commission has received overwhelming support for
   its objective - the establishment of a more efficient
   and market-responsive machinery for European
   standardization, which is recognized as a fundamental
   instrument for achieving the full economic benefit of a
   s i nôle market.

6. On the issues identified by the Commission as
   priorities - greater efficiency and flexibility in the
   standardization process, wider representation of
   economic interests and greater openness to
   international standardization - there is a wide measure

   of agreement on the need for change and the methods
   proposed. On other points, such as new organizational
   structures and a distinct status for European
   standards, there are reservations as to whether such
   radical change is necessary or useful. Even on these
   points, however, there is a willingness on the side of
   the standards organizations to go some of the way and
   respond to the underlying concerns of the Commission.

   Comments on the main points of the Green Paper

   A summary of the comments received is provided below.
   A more detailed review, giving the reactions to each of
   the Commission's recommendations, will be sent to those
   who commented on the Green Paper and is also available
   on request from the CommIssion* [2] ).

   (i) The role of industry:

7. The importance of standardization for European industry
   was universally accepted. Most commentators, however

(2) Copies may be obtained from : Directorate General for
    Internal Market and Industrial Affairs. Unit III.B.2,
   Rue de la Loi, 200, B-1049 Brussels.

```

```
               - 4 
felt that it was unreasonable to ask for a greater
financial contribution from industry, as opposed to
government. Industry also expressed a strong wish for
clearer priorities to be set for European
standardization work and better management of the

process.

(II) Standards Organizations

Eff ic iency

Comments have confirmed the need, particularly in CEN,
to improve efficiency. The standardization bodies have
committed themselves to better programming of
standardization, the establishment of clearer
priorities, and more effective monitoring of the
progress of work. (The Commission and Council are also
urged to assist the standardization bodies by giving
clearer guidance for their work).

Particular recommendations that have received support
are more flexible working methods (including the use of
project teams, feeder organizations or Associated
Standardization Bodies), the use of new technology, and
clear rules on the use of majority voting. Other
practical suggestions include the use of a single
working language in European standardization, and
accelerated translations for adopted texts; it has
also been proposed that the an external management
audit of European standards bodies should be carried

out.

A general cautionary note has been expressed: quality
is as important as speed in standardization, and undue
acceleration of the standardization process could
reduce the opportunity for all interested parties to be
i nvoIved.

Coordination and structures

The suggestion that there could be more European
standardization organizations in addition to CEN,
CENELEC and ETSI has been strongly rejected.
Similarly, there has been considerable opposition to
the creation of new bureaucratic layers to supervise or
direct the activity of existing bodies (such as the
European Standardization Council).

Nevertheless, the three European Standardization
Organizations have accepted that there are political
arguments in favour of establishing a common
consultative body (to be called the European
Standardization Forum) in which economic interests
could be directly represented, and to reinforce their
cooperation within the CEN/CENELEC/ETSi Joint
Presidents Group. The precise character, tasks and
composition of the Forum is still open for discussion.

```

```
                    - 5 
    Membership and International cooperation

10. The recommendation that the standardization bodies of

    all European countries be eligible for "affiliate"
    (observer) status in CEN, CENELEC and ETSI has been
    accepted. Most of the bodies concerned have now
    applied and been accepted.

    Cooperation with the international standardization
    bodies has been recently Improved by CEN and CENELEC
    and this process is expected to continue further. Most
    commentators on the Green Paper have confirmed that
    international rather than European standards must
    remain the main objective of standardization activity

    and would be concerned if more effective

    standardization within Europe seriously undermined the
    longstanding commitment of Europe to international

    standards.

    Accountab i I i ty

11. CEN and CENELEC have recently announced measures which
    are intended to increase the representation of
    European-level organizations in their work alongside
    national delegations; however, implementation of these
   measures may still take some time and will have to be
    closely monitored.

    F inane i ng

12. Most of the Commission's proposals, and in particular
    the scheme for direct funding of European
    standardization through sales of European standards,
    have been rejected by the standards bodies and have not
    received strong support from other quarters.

   There has, however, been general agreement on the need
    to assure longer-term planning in the financing of
    European standardization, and all organizations are
   work i ng on this.

    Informat ion

13. The Commission's criticism of the poor quality of
    information concerning European standardization was
   very widely supported. All of the European
   standardization bodies, and CEN in particular, have
   accepted that measures must be taken quickly to give a
    higher profile to their activity.

   Status of European Standard

14. The Commission's proposal that European standards
    should exist in their own right was among the most
    controversial. It was strongly supported by a number
   of industrial sectors (particularly for new

```

```
                  - 6 
   technologies) and even by some of the smaller national
   standards organizations. The majority view, however,
   appears to be that presentation of European standards
   at national level is a key factor in their market
   acceptance, at least for the next few years.

   CEN and CENELEC have accepted the need for greater
   visibility for the European standard at the national
   level and much faster transposition: discussions on
   the details are still going on.

   Testing and Certification

15. The Commission proposal for a single mark of conformity
   to European standards was strongly supported by some
   parts of industry, but dismissed as unrealistic in the
   short term by others. CEN has now initiated
   discussions on the possibility of a single mark of
   conformity to European standards, to be accompanied by
   the relevant national mark or mark of the body that
   carried out the certification.

   (iii) The role of governments

16. There was general support for a renewed Council
   commitment to European standardization which might
   include a provision for pluriannual funding. Most
   commentators expressed the view that governments should
   do more, not less, to fund standardization, in view of
   its general economic benefits.

   Some commentators have also questioned whether
   Community financial support can be limited to payment
   for services (through "mandates"); they believe that
   an element of permanent but limited subsidy will be
   necessary at the European level (as Is already
   recognized at national level).

```

```
                   - 7 
III. Commission Recommendations For Fol low-up Action

17. In the light of the comments received the Commission
    has consulted each of the European standardization
    bodies and the CEN/CENELEC/ETSI Joint Presidents Group
   on the Green Paper. These discussions produced a
    reasonable degree of consensus on most points, although
    important differences remain on some issues. On this
    basis the Commission is now in a position to put
    forward to the Council and to the main parties
    concerned strategic guidelines for future European
    standardization policy, based on closer cooperation and
    partnership between all the interested parties.

18. The Commission wishes to underline, as it previously
   did in the Green Paper, that the main responsibility
    for the management of standardization remains with the
   standardization organizations and the interested
   parties themselves. It is they, rather than public
    authorities, who will decide the pace and the direction
   of change. This second Commission Communication is,
    however, intended to assist and promote democratic
   self-management of standardization by indicating the
   changing political context in which European
   standardization takes place, the fundamental principles

   on which standardization should be based and the

   organizational changes which may be needed to ensure
    that those principles are fully observed.

19. The Commission's main recommendations can be summarized

   as fo ilows :

   European standardization organizations

      Rapid implementation of measures designed to improve
      day-to-day management and efficiency;

      Implementation of their commitment to provide for
      observer (non-voting) participation by relevant
      European interest groups at every level of their
      work ;

   - Publication of the statutes of the CEN/CENELEC/ETSI

      Joint Presidents Group and its rules of procedure;

      Establishment of a European Standardization Forum in

      the light of the Luxembourg Conference of December

      1991;

      Amendment of internal rules to provide for
      transposition by endorsement of adopted European
      standards and other measures to improve their
      visibility and availability at national level;

```

```
                - 8 
  Development with EOTC and the other parties involved
  of a single mark designating conformity to a
  European standard;

   Increased coordination of technical assistance to

  third countries, especially in central and eastern

  Europe.

The Commission

  Conclusion of new guidelines for cooperation and a
  new framework agreement with CEN/CENELEC/ETSI ;

  Follow-up reports on:

  (I) the effect of measures taken by the European
      standardization organizations to improve on
      efficiency; and
  (ii) new possibilities for reference to standards
       in other areas of Community policy.

  Introduction of programming mandates for major new
  areas of standardization;

  Direct reference in future proposals for Community
  legislation to European standards rather than to
  national standards transposing them;

  Presentation of a proposal in early 1992 to amend
  the notification procedure for national standards In
  Directive 83/189/EEC.

  Development and implementation of its current
  programme of technical assistance to Central and
  Eastern Europe and other third countries.

The Council of Ministers

Adoption of a Council Resolution confirming agreement
with the broad policy guidelines of this Communication
and drawing particular attention to:

  the commitment of the Community to international
  standard i zat ion ;

  the political importance of a European
  standardization system based on transparency,
  openness to all interested parties, independence of
  vested interests, efficiency and decision-taking in
  accordance with the basic principles which govern
  decisionmaking at the political level;

  support for the proposed European Standardization

  Forum, which will increase the cohesion and

```

```
              - 9 
  responsiveness to market needs of European
  standard i zat ion ;

  the willingness of the Council to pursue a policy of
  reference to standards in Community legislation in
  appropriate areas, subject to respect of the basic
  principles indicated above;

  the intention of the Council to continue, subject to
  overall budgetary constraints, to give adequate
  financial support to European standardization bodies
  (at current levels over the period 1992-1994), in
  order to permit the delivery of standards needed for
  Community legislation and of other standards
  required in order to complete the internal market,
  particularly in areas which affect a wide range of
  sectors, such as energy.

The Budgetary Authority (Council of Ministers and
European Parliament)

  Support for maintenance of current levels of
  Community financial support to standardization for
  the period 1992-1994.

European Economic and Social Interests

  More effective coordination in order to ensure input
  into the standardization process.

The Member States

  Appropriate measures at national level to ensure
  compliance of national standardization bodies with
  common rules relating to notification of national
  activities and the transposition of adopted European
  standards.

  Maintenance and, where necessary, increase of
  financial support to national standardization
  bod ies.

  Consideration of support to non-manufacturing
  interests to facilitate their participation in
  standardization, having regard, inter alia, to the
  Council Resolution of 4 November 1988 on the

  improvement of consumer involvement in
  standard i zat ion.

```

```
                  - 10 
The following sections of this Communication explain these
recommendations in more detail:

   Section IV (Future Directions for European
   standardization) outlines policy guidelines for
   European standardization in the 1990's;

   Section V (Standardization and Community legislation)
   proposes that European standardization should be used
   more within the framework of other Community policies

```

```
                    - 1 1 
IV. Future Directions for European Standardization

20. This chapter addresses the main themes which have
    emerged from the Green Paper debate rather than

    individual recommendations in that document. Its

    objective is to identify the direction of future
    standardization policy in the context of a single
    European market.

    The themes to be addressed are:

    (i) Priority-setting and programming;
    (ii) Efficiency and openness;
    (iii) Effective participation by interested parties;
    (iv) Structures for coordination and consultation;
    (v) Stronger links with international
          standard i zat ion ;
    (vi) Implementation and visibility of European
          standards;
    (vii) Information about European standardization;
    (viii) Access to European standards;
    (ix) External cooperation in standardization;
    (x) Partnership with public authorities.
    (x i) Other i ssues

    ( i ) Priority-setting and programming

21. A major concern of those commenting on the Green Paper,
    in particular from the point-of-view of industry, has
   been the absence of clear priorities for European
   standardization work. A common reaction to the large
   number of standards now under preparation within the
    three European Standardization bodies, CEN, CENELEC and
    ETSI, has been to question whether all of those
   standards are really necessary for the operation of the
   single Community market. Industry is worried that
   scarce technical expertise is being dissipated in over   ambitious standardization programmes, rather than being

   concentrated on what is essential in the short term.

22. Criticism for failing to set priorities has been
   directed at the Community institutions, especially the
   Commission, and at the standardization bodies. The
   Commission, it is alleged, has not set sufficiently
   clear priorities in its standardization mandates and
   has left the detailed programming to the European
   standardization bodies. The latter, it is suggested,
   have not been able to establish priorities either and
    have tended to include within the European
   standardization programme all or most of the proposals
   put forward by the nationally-organized membership
   without any serious process of selection. Thus
    although the total programme of CEN, for example, has
   expanded rapidly to about 4000 work items, it does not
    yet cover all the priority subjects linked to
    achievement of the Community 's Internal Market
    legislation and would have to expand still further in

```

```
                   - 12 
    order to do so. The effectiveness of European
    standardization will depend on the careful
    identification of priorities and self-discipline in
    taking on more work.

23. The Commission and the European standardization bodies
    have recently discussed ways of improving priority    setting, especially (but not exclusively) in respect of
    those European standards to be referred to in Community
    product legislation. It has been agreed that in future
    the planning and programming of European
    standardization should be separated as far as possible
    from the drafting of the standards. The Commission
    will give "programming mandates" to the European
    standardization bodies in areas where a significant
    number of European standards are required for EEC
    legislation, under which a full programme of

    standardization work for the sector concerned will be

    drawn up after consultation with all parties. On the
    basis of this proposed programme the Commission will,
    after consulting the Standing Committee for Technical
   Regulations and Standards, determine what work will be
   covered by a standardization mandate.

24. This two-step mandating procedure would have a number
   of advantages:

      the programme developed under a programming mandate
      would in principle cover all aspects of
      standardization in the sector concerned, not Just
      those relevant to EEC legislation, and would thus
      provide an opportunity for interested parties to set
      priorities for other, market-led standardization;

      consultation on the work programme would give
      European industry and other parties an opportunity
      to express their views before standardization work
      is under way;

     programming would allow the standards bodies to
      identify alternative sources of technical input into
      the work and new working methods (such as use of
     project teams, "feeder organizations" or Associated
     Standardizing Bodies);

      the Commission and Member States could better verify
      that proposed standardization work was matched to
      the essential requirements and the needs of the
     conformity assessment procedures of Community
      legislation, as this would be indicated in the
     proposed programme;

     the programming mandate would provide an opportunity

     for the standardization bodies to draw attention to

     difficulties arising from insufficiently precise
     essential requirements in proposed legislation;

```

```
                   - 13

      the programming would allow to better delineate the
      scope for standardization with respect to related
      areas or areas which the legislator wants to
      reguI ate.

25. A first set of programming mandates will be given in
    sectors where Community legislation is either in place
    or to be proposed (machinery, medical devices, pressure
    systems). A seperate priority-setting exercise for the
    construction products Directive is being managed by
    Commission with the assistance of the Standing
    Committee of that Directive. In parallel, the
    Commission is re-examining with the European
    standardization bodies standardization work already
    under way for existing mandates (e.g. for machines or
    construction products) in order to ensure that
    priorities are properly followed.

    A second potential area for standardization programming
    concerns the development of trans-European networks,
    where, as the Commission has already stated In its
    Communication to the Council of 10 December 1990, a
    significant effort of coordination of standardization
    will be needed in order to establish clear priorities

    for the creation of such networks.

    (il) Efficiency and openness

26. The comments on the Green Paper have shown that there
    is general agreement on the need to make European
    standardization more efficient. This has already led
    the European standardization bodies to consider how
    better management control, new working methods and
    quicker procedures may be applied to make agreement on
    standards as rapid as possible, while keeping in mind
    the need to maintain a high level of quality in
    European standards. Examples of successful new working
   methods are the CENELEC "Vilamoura" procedure for
    information and cooperation on national standardization
    projects and the programming of standardization work

    in ETSI and EWOS.

27. A recurring theme in discussions on efficiency in
   standardization, however, is that no single formula can
   meet all situations. On the contrary, efficiency is
    dependent upon flexibility, that is, an ability to
   match the standardization method to the particular
    circumstances, as the following examples may show:

      small, full-time project teams may be useful where
      original working documents are needed to advance
      discussion, but less so in areas where a large
      number of national standards already exist;

      more sectoraI Iy-based industrial organizations could
      be encouraged to contribute to the standardization

```

```
                   - 14 
      process, perhaps through the creation of Associated
      Standardization Bodies, but the sector concerned
      must be relatively autonomous so as to limit the
      need for managing the interface with other
      standardization work;

      public enquiry periods can be shortened in cases
      where European standardization is limited to taking
      over international standards, but this is more
      difficult for innovative European work and where due
      account must be given to the needs of small, medium
      and craft enterprises.

28. The rules of the European standardization bodies
    already provide for some flexibility of approach, but
    too little use has been made of these possibilities so
    far. It is now accepted that the options available
    should be better publicized and more frequently used,
    and that new working methods may still be necessary in
    order to widen the base of European standardization.
    The Commission notes that CEN, for example, has
    announced its intention of making known among
    industrial circles its various working methods and is
    prepared to explore the possibility of working with
    more Associated Standardization Bodies. CENELEC, too,
    is discussing how it can cooperate with so-called
    "feeder organizations" which can submit their own
    technical documents for acceptance as European
    standards. Such changes in procedures will require an
    educational process amongst the national membership,
   who are mainly responsible for the work of the European
   organ i zat ions.

29. In parallel with the introduction of more flexible
   working methods there is a concern within the European
    bodies, and particularly CEN (which is responsible for
   most European standardization work), to develop more
   effective management control over a highly   decentralised system for technical work in which
    individual Technical Committees organized by a national
   member body have enjoyed considerable autonomy. The
    contractual commitments made by CEN, for example, to
    deliver a large (and still growing) number of European
    standards to the Commission within a given time is
    forcing that organization to demand more accountability
    from the Technical Committees which actually carry out
    the work. The progress of work against agreed
    timetables is being more carefully monitored and the
   possibility of changing the allocation of secretariats
   between member bodies in the event of poor performance
    is now being considered. The Commission, and, more
    important, European industry, would welcome a more
   businesslike approach to the delivery of European

    standards.

30. It is not yet possible to assess how much the
   efficiency of European standardization will be improved

```

```
                   - 15 
    by the changes now under discussion in the European
    standardization bodies. Even if all the proposed
    changes are agreed, their implementation will take some
    time. The Commission Intends, however, to monitor the
    implementation of these measures and will produce a
    further progress report in due course.

31. In any event, the Commission concludes from the Green
    Paper comments that there is a link between the
    efficiency of standardization and public awareness of
   what is going on. The demand for information about
    European standardization is practically unlimited, from
    both within and outside Europe. It comes from
    potential users of European standards and potential
    contributors to the standardization process. If the
    European standards organizations can better publicize
    their current and planned activity (and the programming
   mechanism discussed in the previous section would
   provide an additional opportunity) they will increase
    the range of expertise available for their work as well
   as the market for their end-product. Industrial and
   other interested partners may provide additional
    resources, by making experts available or by putting
    forward technical documents as a basis for European
   standardization. Hence the importance of an effective
    information policy (see section VII below).

    (iii) Effective participation by interested parties

32. The Green Paper debate has shown that national
    representation in standardization discussions and
   national decision-making on proposed European standards
   are regarded as fundamental to the European
   standardization process. Most interest groups, and
   some in particular, such as craft, small and medium   sized companies, look to their national standards body
   as the natural means for advancing their poInt-of-vlew
   at the European level, and consider the development of

   a national position which takes account of all
    interests as the most practical way to negotiate
    European standards.

33. The primacy of the national route to European
   standards-making should not, however, be a monopoly.
   The responses to the Green Paper also indicate that in
    the fast-changing Europe of today many economic and
    industrial interests are organizing themselves at
   European level and expect direct input into European    level standardization; examples are the railways,
    banking, electrical power, gas and medical device
    industries (besides telecommunications and

   e lectrotechnology which already have sectoral
   standardization bodies at the European level).
   European-levé I input into the standardization process
   may be particularly important for industries which are
   coming to standardization for the first time, such as

```

```
                   - 16 
    those operating public transport and utility networks.
    In other sectors too, European industrial trade union,
    consumer, craft and SME federations can help to
    identify common interests or priorities as a complement
    to the nationally-based consensus-building process.
    For some sectors, it may even be possible to organize
    standards-related work at the European level under the
    aegis of an industry-led association, which will then
    pass on the results of such work to the European
    standardization bodies for consideration as European

    standards.

34. For these reasons the European standardization bodies
    must allow the direct participation of representative
    European-levé I organizations in their work. Such
    participation, even in the form of non-voting
    observership, must be possible at every stage of the
    standardization process and at every level of the
    standardization body concerned, from Working Group to
    General Assembly. In the case of the social partners,
    the Commission considers, with the European Parliament
    and Economic and Social Committee, that such direct
    participation is a political pre-condition for the
    acceptability and further development of European

    standard i zat ion.

35. CEN has, following an open session of the General
    Assembly in Milano on 23 October 1991, taken note of
    the intent of CEN's main national European economic and
    social partners to become more directly involved in the
    policy-making of CEN and has confirmed its intention to

    address the issue of involvement of CEN's social and

    economic partners within the constitution of CEN.
    CENELEC, following its General Assembly in Toulouse
    29-30 October 1991, has decided to submit for approval
    to its members draft decisions according to which
    representatives of European-levé I industry
    associations, trade unions and consumer groups should
    be invited to attend, as observers, future General
   Assembly sessions and, during discussion of relevant
    agenda items, Technical Board meetings. ETSI already
    provides for the possibility of interested parties to
    become members of the organization.

   The Commission welcomes the initiatives of CEN and

   CENELEC and will be interested to see how these policy
    decisions will in future allow for genuine direct
   participation. The Commission believes that the
   Council should unequivocally confirm the importance of
    the right to direct representation of European-levé I
   organizations in European standardization.

36. For interested parties the possibility to participate
    constitutes an important responsibility and a
   challenge. Success of their involvement will depend in
    their ability to get properly organized at European
    level to develop a clear position and to feed

```

```
                     17 
    substantial input into the standardization process.
    For some parties, however, the right to participate in
    standardization may be an empty letter without the
    means to do so. Comments on the Green Paper coming
    from user interests, ranging from consumers
    organizations and trades unions to professional
    groupings such as architects or the medical profession,
    have pointed out that without some public financial
    support for their participation in standardization the
    outcome is likely to be determined by manufacturer
    interests, which may not be appropriate in the case of
    standards linked to Community legislation whose purpose
    is to achieve high levels of safety.

37. The Commission is sensitive to these difficulties. It

    has already provided financial support to the European

    trades unions to establish a Technical Bureau to

    coordinate views on standardization matters, as well as
    to European consumer organizations for their effective
    participation in standardization work, and it has
    assisted, because of the distances involved, the
   participation of experts from certain Member States
    (Portugal, Ireland and Greece) at some meetings related

    to mandated standardization work. These measures have

    not been a significant charge on the Community budget.
   Similar assistance is also being considered for small
   and medium-sized enterprises. Such aid will, however,

   have to remain modest if it is not to raise the cost to

    the Community budget of European standardization
   significantly. Supplementary efforts may therefore be

   needed at national level.

( i v) Structures for Coordination and Consultation

38. As a complement to the effective participation of all
    interested parties in each European standardization
   body there is a need to ensure that the work of all
   European standardization bodies, taken together,
   corresponds to the objectives of those operating in the
   market and to the principles of openness, independence
   and fairness which must govern European
   standardization. The view Is widely held that the
    links between the European standardization bodies
   should be strengthened and that the European
   standardization system as a whole should demonstrate
   support of the parties at European level.

39. The Green Paper debate has shown that, although the
   detailed proposals on structure suggested in the Green
   Paper are not acceptable, further consolidation of the
   existing standardization organizations at European
    level would be welcome. The purpose of such

   consolidation would be two-fold:

      to ensure permanent coordination between CEN,
      CENELEC and ETSI by formalising, making public and

```

```
                   - 18 
      strengthening the tasks of the Joint presidents
      Group as an alternative to the European
      Standardization Board; and, secondly

      to establish a permanent dialogue between the
      European standardization bodies, on the one hand,
      and the main economic and social partners engaged in
      standardization activity, on the other hand, by
      setting up a European Standardization Forum as an
      alternative to the European Standardization Council.

    Joint Presidents Group

40. The Joint Presidents Group (JPG) of CEN/CENELEC/ETSI is
    intended to coordinate the work programmes of the
    three European standards bodies and, where possible, to
    develop a common approach to issues of common concern
    (such as, for example, the Commission Green Paper,
    information policy on European standardization or the
    relationship between intellectual property rights and
    standardization). It Is also beginning to address
    other tasks such as the development of common rules for
    European standardization or a common database for
    standardization projects. It represents, at the
    highest level, the management function of European

    standard i zat ion.

    The Commission accepts that through proper functioning
    of the JPG, coordination needs in European
    standardization can be met. At the request of the
    Commission the JPG is now preparing a consolidated
    version of its statutes, as well as those of its

    subsidiary committees, in order that its role and
    functioning can be more clearly perceived.

    The European Standardization Forum

41. The idea of a European Standardization Forum (ESF) has
    been put forward in comments to the Green Paper and
    discussions with the European standardization
   organizations as an alternative to the European
    Standardization Council. The ESF would be a broadly    based body, intended to be the focal point for debate
   on major standardization policy issues in Europe. It
   would bring together all the principal interested
    parties at European level in order to develop, where
    possible, consensus-based recommendations on future
    strategy in European standardization. It would also
    provide a regular and wide-ranging dialogue between the
    European standardization bodies and the "customer"
    interests they serve, both public and private.

42. The Commission agrees that such a consultative body can
   play a useful role in European standardization and that
    therefore its setting up and operation should be given
   careful thought. As far as the Commission is
   concerned, the following elements should be examined:

```

```
                  - 19 
  a) Tasks :

  The ESF would be able to address any issue which it
  considered relevant to the success of European
  standardization. Among these might be:

    The current activity of the European standards
    bodies (as presented in reports by the Joint
    Presidents Group);

    Application of the basic principles of
    standardization by European standardization bodies
    (such as openness, the right of participation for
    interested parties, independence of vested
    interests, e t c . ) ;

    The criteria for représentât Iv I ty of European
    organizations wishing to participate in
    standardization work;

    Relations between public authorities and the
    European standardization organizations;

    Information on and access to standardization work;

    Conditions of access to adopted standards (including
    sales and distribution systems, the price of
    standards and information on standards);

    New subjects for standardization;

    The interface between standardization and conformity
    assessment activities;

    Relations with international standardization;

    Technical assistance from standardization bodies to

    non-member countries and cooperation with affiliate

    members.

  b) Output :

  The conclusions of the ESF could take the form of

  Resolutions addressed to all or any of the parties
  concerned with European standardization, that is to
  say, standardization bodies, users of standards,
  manufacturing industry, the social partners, or public
  authorities. ESF Resolutions, although not binding,
  would be likely to carry considerable weight.

•^ Compos i t ion

  The composition of the ESF should ensure the widest
  possible participation of interested parties and a

```

```
                   - 20 
    reasonable balance between national and European-1 eve I
    interests. The Commission would therefore suggest the
    foIlowi ng:

    - One delegate from each Member State of the Community
      and each EFTA country, to be designated by national
      author i t ies;

      Five representatives of the Joint Presidents Group;

      Twelve representatives of European manufacturing and
      service Industries (including small and medium
      f i rms) ;

      Three representatives of consumers;

      Three representatives of trades unions;

      Three representatives of professional users of
      standards (such as architects, doctors, insurance

      companies, testing organizations);

      One representative of the European Organization for
      Testing and Certification;

      One representative of the Commission of the European
      Commun i t i es ;

      One representative of the EFTA Secretariat.

    As proposed in the Green Paper concerning the European
    Standardization Council, the President of the ESF could
    be a European industrialist.

    d) Act ivity :

    The ESF should decide its own rules of procedure and
    the frequency of its meetings; the Commission
    recommendation would be, however, that during its
    start-up phase it meet at least twice a year. Members
   of the Forum would bear their own costs; secretarial
    costs should be borne by the Joint Presidents Group.

43. Following discussion with Commission Vice-President
   Bangemann in July the Joint Presidents Group announced
    that it intended to organize a two-day conference open

    to all the main interests on 3-4 December 1991 in order

    to discuss the recent development of European
    standardization and the role and tasks of the European

    Standardization Forum. Results of the conference would

    be coordinated with the Commission and EFTA.

    (v) Stronger links with International standardization

44. The overwhelming majority of those responding to the
   Green Paper confirmed the Commission view that

```

```
                   - 21 
    international standards should remain the main

    objective of standardization work. European standards,
    although more important for the European economy than
    purely national standards, will often be second-best.

45. The European standardization bodies have already taken
    steps to improve coordination with their international
    counterparts. CEN and CENELEC have concluded
    agreements with the ISO and IEC respectively for
    regular discussion of their work programmes with a
    view to avoiding overlap and deciding where the work
    should take place. CENELEC and IEC have gone further,
    by providing for arrangements for "parallel voting" on
    each others' draft standards, which may lead to the
    simultaneous adoption of the same text as a European
    and international standard (at present, 54 IEC draft
    standards are being dealt with under this procedure).
    ETSI is also cooperating with its Japanese and United
    States counterparts to Improve coordination of
    standards-making in the telecommunications sector.

46. The achievement of the internal market and the

    implementation of the Community's new approach to
    technical regulation must take account of this
    commitment to international standards. Where possible,
    the Community should have recourse to international
    standards rather than devise standards at the regional

    level. This idea could be extended to include use of

    current international standardization work in areas

    where new standards are requested of CEN or CENELEC for
    EEC product legislation, so long as the following

    conditions are met:

      the standards can still be delivered by the
      international standardization body within the
      timescale imposed by EEC legislation;

      the essential requirements laid down in EEC
      legislation are fully taken into account;.

      the European standardization bodies retain final
      contractual responsibility for delivery of the

      standards.

   This procedure of European standardization bodies
    referring some mandated standardization tasks to the
    international standardization bodies in appropriate
   circumstances would not affect the operation of the
    Framework Contract governing relations between the
   Commission and the European standardization
   organ i zat ions .

47. The international standards bodies may find it
    difficult to meet these conditions. The average time
    accorded to CEN/CENELEC and ETSI under Community

    standardization mandates to deliver new standards is

    between two and three years; the time taken to deliver

```

```
                   - 22 
    an ISO standard is usually double that. Other parties
    in international standardization may not wish to aim at
    the high level of performance required by the standards
    needed for Community product legislation, or may not be
    interested in the development of some standards because
    their national authorities directly regulate the sector
    in question. In spite of these uncertainties, the

    Commission has invited the international

    standardization organizations to take up the challenge
    implicit in the Community's commitment to give them an
    opportunity to meet European needs. A similar position
    has also been expressed by other international
    partners; following poI 111caI-levé I contacts between

    the Commission and the United States Government in June

    this year, the main European and US standards
    organizations have agreed Jointly to promote the faster
    development of international standards in the
    international standardization organizations and to
    identify priority areas in which international work

    could be intensified.

48. The Commission must, however, repeat what it said in
    the Green Paper concerning the need for commitment to
    international standardization to be shown by all
    participants, particularly by taking over at the

    national level international standards that have been

    agreed with a large measure of consensus. It would be
    pointless and politically unacceptable for the
    Community to transfer work to the international
    standardization bodies if only standardization bodies
    in Europe were to take over the international results.

    ( v I ) Implementation and visibility of European

        Standards

49. The Commission Green Paper recommended that "European
    standards should exist in their own right and should
    not have to be transposed at national level before they
    can be used" (para. 8 3 ) . Comments on this suggestion
    indicated that there are divergent views. European
    industry, through UNICE, has declared in favour of the

    recommendation. The same is true for the

    telecommunications sector. Similarly, European
    interest groups, such as consumers, have given
    support. Most Member States that have commented on
    this issue can agree with the principle of direct
    applicability, provided an appropriate solution can be
    found for practical problems, and only a few have
    rejected the idea. Within the European standardization
    bodies themselves, opinion is divided.

50. One of the difficulties raised by direct applicability
   of European standards is the need to ensure that new
    standards are brought to the attention of those who use
    them. This is even more important when the standards
    are given particular status under Community
    legislation, either by conferring presumption of

```

```
                   - 23 
    conformity to the requirements of a Directive or as an
    obligatory reference for purchasing entities falling
    under the public procurement Directives.

51. National standardization bodies are the usual source of

    information on standards at national level and are

    therefore best suited to ensure the "visibility" of
    European standards in the market. The Commission is
    prepared to take this situation into account, but
    believes that, in order to meet the sense of comments
    received on the Green Paper:

      European standards should be visible as such, even
      If transposed into national standards (many
      commentators agree that further action is necessary
      to make European standards visible);

      transposition should be rapid and effective:
      national standardization organisations themselves do
      not always attach sufficient importance to
      transposition, which has been slow in many cases

      and non-existent in others.

52. The Commission therefore proposes that additional
    measures be taken by the European and national

    standards bodies and national authorities to make

    transposition effective. These measures would be based
    on the principle that European standards exist and are
    made available for use immediately after their adoption
    at European levé I :

    (i) The internal rules of CEN, CENELEC and ETSI
        would provide for mandatory endorsement (i.e.
        publication of the common reference, title and
        number) of newly-adopted European standards by

        national standardization bodies within a short

        time of their adoption;

    (ii) National standardization bodies would commit

        themselves to completing within six months other
        action provided for in the internal rules, such
        as withdrawal of any conflicting national
        standards, as well as publication of the new
        standard in the national language where deemed
        appropriate by the national body, to be monitored
        under a centralised information system;

    (iii) The internal rules of the European

        standardization bodies would limit the right of
        those member bodies to sell European standards to

        those standards that have been endorsed in the

        country concerned;

    (iv) National standards bodies would apply a single
        numbering system for all European standards, in
        which only the designation of the national

```

```
                   - 24 
        standards body would accompany the designation
        "EN" or "ETS" and the European number, with no
        additional national number;

    (v) National authorities would agree to take all
        appropriate measures to ensure that national
        standardization bodies fulfill their obligations
        under European standardization rules.

53. Under Community law any national standard transposing
    harmonized European standard may be used for the
    purposes of compliance with EEC legislation,
    irrespective of the country of origin of the product or

    of the manufacturer. The Commission nevertheless

    considers that, in order to avoid any dependence on the
    national transposition of standards for the effective
    application of EEC legislation, it would be appropriate
    that such legislation refer In future to European

    standards rather than to the national standards which

    transpose them. Future proposals for Directives will

    contain such a formulation.

54. A single mark of conformity to European standards would
    be a further contribution to visibility for such
    standards, as well as a tangible indicator of high
    quality common to the whole European market. The Green
    Paper proposal in this sense was strongly supported by
    some industrial sectors, although concern was expressed
    that the competence and reputation of individual
    testing and certification bodies should also be
    reflected in marking. The Commission notes with
    interest that CEN is now discussing the possibility of
    introducing a common mark of conformity to European
    standards, to be accompanied by the relevant national
   mark or the mark of the body that actually carried out
    the certification of conformity. This could represent
   a significant step forward in achieving market
   visibility for European standardization if done with
    the firm support and participation of CENELEC, ETSI and
    the European Organization for Testing and Certification
    (EOTC).

    (vil) Information about European Standardization

55. Most commentators on the Green Paper strongly supported
    the Commission's recommendations for better-quality
    information about European standardization. There
 .- .&ppelars to be an urgent need for up-to-date information
   on the work-programme of each of the European
   standardization bodies, an indication of which

   standards are linked to Community mandates and which
   are not, much wider availability of working documents
   so as to allow non-participating parties the
   opportunity to comment and, not least, more rapid
   availability of European standards once they have been

```

```
                   - 25 
    adopted. Particular measures to improve access to
    information by craft, small and medium enterprises are
    also necessary.

56. The European standardization bodies are aware of this
    demand for information and are taking some steps to
    meet it. The CEN/CENELEC/ETSI Joint Presidents Group
    has decided to produce a new brochure in order to
    promote European standardization and to familiarize
    potential participants with the various organizations
    involved, as weJI as a common bulletin of European
    standardization to be issued regularly. CEN has
    developed a comprehensive (500-page) introduction to
    its entire technical programme, which may be regularly
    updated in future for subscribers. CENELEC now
    produces an Annual Report in addition to its sixth   monthly Report on Current Activities. ETSI, too, has
    produced its own publicity material. Publications of
    this kind, provided that they give complete and timely
    information, are certainly useful. The standardization
    bodies should, however, regularly consult interested
    parties in order to ensure that information about
    standardization is provided in the way they want. A
    closer partnership between standardization bodies and
    professional information service providers could also
    be helpful in accelerating the diffusion of this

    i nformat ion.

57. Besides information about current activities there is a

   need for information about existing standards, either
   European or national. The Commission has in the past

   discussed with the standardization bodies the creation

   of a single European Standardization Database (ESD)
   which would provide up-to-date bibliographical
    information on current standards. In parallel, the
    three major national standardization bodies (BSI, DIN
   and AFNOR) have, with Commission financial assistance,
    launched a commercial product, PERINORM, which provides
    to subscribers bibliographic information on the
   standards of each participant. The PERINORM system was
    initially limited to the standards produced by the
    three original participating bodies. It is now open to
   other CEN members, and it is expected that over time
    this system will contain information on most, if not
   all, existing standards in Western Europe. If PERINORM
   were to provide a comprehensive information system the

   Commission considers that there would be no need to

   press ahead with a publicly-funded ESD.

58. A final point concerns the need for better information
   on national standardization activity. The Commission
   proposed in the Green Paper that the standardization

   bodies should take the initiative to reinforce the

   procedure for mutual information on national

   standardization work laid down in Council Directive

   83/189/EEC, which has been the subject of criticism in
    two successive Commission reports on the operation of

```

**/**
```
                  - [ 2 6]
                    ;
                    )

    the Directive( [6] >. in particular, the Commission would
    like to see the introduction of a "status quo" system
    for proposed new national activity, in order to allow
    time for comment from other national and European
    standards organizations, as already exists in the so    called "Vilamoura Procedure" applied by CENELEC since
    1988. So far no action has been taken by CEN to
    reconsider the information procedure.

    In the absence of an effective information procedure
    applied on a voluntary basis (which it would much
    prefer) the Commission has decided to include in its
    forthcoming proposal for amendments to Directive
    83/189/EEC a revised information procedure for
    standards to ensure effective transparency of national

    standardization work.

    (vI Ii) Access to European standards

59. The comments made in the Green Paper concerning the
    conditions of distribution and sale of European
    standards were regarded by the standardization bodies
    is interference in a purely internal matter. The
    Commission disagrees. It considers that access to
    adopted European standards is an important element in
    the efficiency of the single European market. The cost
    of obtaining standards is a matter of public concern
    (as recent questions in the European Parliament have
    confirmed), and the conditions of sale of standards,
    including the degree of competition permitted, are
    critical in determining the final cost. While
    standards should not be made freely available (unless
    standardization costs are to be borne entirely by
    public funds) they should be marketted at a price that
    promotes their wide distribution, that is to say, the
    price set by the most efficient producer or distributor

    within the relevant market.

60. CEN has informed the Commission that previous
    restrictions on competition between its members in the
    sale of European standards have been lifted. The

    Commission does not have sufficient information

    concerning these new arrangements to know whether all

    its concerns have been met. Discussions on this

    subject should be pursued, not merely between the

    Commission and the standardization bodies but between

    all parties concerned and represented in the European

    Standardization Forum.

61. The effects on some national standardization bodies of

    more competition in sales of standards need, however,

    to be understood. The revenue from sales of standards

   of some national organizations, which can be an
    important part of their total income, could be reduced

(6) The most recent Commission report (for the years 1988    1989) is document C0M(91)108 final, 5.4.1991

```

```
                 - 27 
   by such competition, which may require that income be
   raised by other means, such as by payment for
   previously-free services or by increased financial
   support from the public authorities at national level.
   This Issue should also be addressed by the European
   Standardization Forum.

   External cooperation In standardization

   (a) EC Technical Assistance in Standardization

   Through the Commission's programme of external
   technical assistance, the Community is committed to
   assist the lesser developed economies of the world.
   Demand for assistance in standardization increases as

   the positive Implications of the Community's 1992
   programme is better understood. Helping the emerging
   market economies of Eastern Europe, South America, the
   Mediterranean, Asia, India and Africa to understand and
   apply European standards will greatly facilitate their
   future economic development.

   Many assistance programmes in standardization are
   already underway including projects in the ASEAN
   countries, India, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia as well
   as a regional quality assurance programme in Central
   and Eastern Europe.

   The Commission reaffirms its belief that European
   standardization bodies have an important role to play
   in these programmes. The first steps have been taken.
   CEN has established a third country unit to provide
   information on European standardization and to
   coordinate technical assistance projects for the
   European standardization organizations. The Commission
   has now concluded an agreement with CEN under which the
   third country unit provides services upon request to
   the Commission in administering technical assistance
   programmes to third countries.

   (b) Standardization in Central and Eastern Europe

62. The major political changes that have taken place in
   central and eastern Europe have opened the way to the
   development of a truly continental-scale European
   market economy in which standards and standardization
   will play a critical role. Helping the emerging market
   economies of the East to understand and to apply the
   standards of the West will greatly facilitate their
   future economic development. A massive programme of
   information, training and technical assistance will be
   needed in order to effect such a difficult transition.

   The Commission reaffirms its belief that the European
   standardization bodies must assume responsibility for
   the coordination and management of such a programme.

```

```
                   - 28 
63. CEN and CENELEC have admitted a number of other

    European countries to participate in their work as
    "affiliates", which will assist those countries to
    familiarize themselves with European standards; ETSI

    has admitted some of them as full members. The

    establishment of the CEN Third Country Unit and the
    agreement concluded with the Commission should
    considerably assist the implementation of the PHARE
    regional programme for technical cooperation In
    standardization, certification and quality which is
    designed to address the needs of central and eastern
    European countries; exploratory missions have been
    made to each beneficiary country in order to assess
    priorities and discuss practical arrangements. Further
    steps, such as the organization of conferences and
    exchanges of experts could also take place in future.

64. The likely needs of these countries in the field of
    technical cooperation pose an additional challenge to
    the European standardization system at a time when its
    work to meet the needs of Western Europe is already
    expanding quickly. Additional resources in terms of
    finance and expertise will have to be mobilised in
    order to ensure that the integration of these economies
    into the rest of European economy does not occur at the
    expense of the Community's internal priorities. The

    Commission intends to discuss further with the

    standardization bodies and other interested parties how

    to obtain these additional human resources.

    (x) Partnership with public authorities

65. European standardization is, and must remain, a
    voluntary activity managed by private organizations.
    Today's discussion within the institutions of the
    European Communities about its future development is
    not intended to change that fundamental principle. The
    Community authorities recognize the strengths of
    voluntary standardization and its importance for the
    promotion of efficiency in the European economy. Their
    main concern is to ensure that this private activity
    effectively serves the public interest, in terms of its
    openness to all parties and its efficiency. This
    interest is particularly acute when standardization is
    used to complement technical regulation, since in this
    case standardization bodies are often assuming
    responsibilities previously held by the public

    authorities themselves. Provided that this basic

    concern is met, public authorities should leave the
    parties concerned to manage the standardization system.

66. Most commentators on this issue in the Green Paper
    consider that the public benefit derived from

    standardization as an economic instrument and a means

   of managing the interface between regulation and
    technology must be matched by support for

```

```
                   - 29 
    standardization from the public authorities at European

    and national level. In return for the services

    rendered to the economy or to the legislator, public
    authorities must ensure that the European
    standardization system remains strong enough to respond
    to new demands. But the relationship between public

    authorities and standardization bodies is one of

    partnership and mutual dependence, not of authority and

    subservience.

67. As far as Community support for European
    standardization is concerned, the Commission considers
    that its relationship with the European standardization

    bodies should be that of a customer with a service
    provider. In other words, the Commission should pay
    for the services provided by the European

    standardization bodies under contract within the

    context of "mandated" standardization work. In line

    with what has been said in section (i) above, the scope

    of mandated work and the terms and conditions for

    carrying it out should be agreed beforehand between the
    two sides. The Commission is now close to reaching
    agreement with the European standardization bodies on a
    new Framework Contract, which will introduce greater
    clarity into the estimation of the costs of future
    standardization work and give those organizations the
    assurance that their actual costs will be reimbursed,
    subject to compliance with the other terms of the
    contract, such as delivery times.

68. Some commentators, particularly from within European
    industry, have suggested that Community financial
    support of European standardization should go beyond
    payment for contracted services to include an element
    of general subsidy for the overall costs of
    standardization organizations. Such subsidies are a
    general practice at national level. The Commission
    accepts that standardization is unlikely to be
    economically self-sustaining in all its activities and
    that its "public interest" character Justifies some
    degree of financial assistance from public authorities.
    In the case of European standardization, however, the
    Commission believes that any general subsidy at
    European level could lead to a risk of duplication with
    nationaI-levé I subsidies to standardization

    organizations and should therefore be avoided.

69. The Community may, nevertheless, wish from time to time
    to encourage certain activities within European
    standardization other than the delivery of particular
    standards. These could include, for example, the
    promotion of European standardization, the improvement
    of information systems, the reinforcement of management
    or accounting infrastructure, or technical assistance
    to third countries. In the absence of appropriate
    funding by the standards bodies themselves, such
    occasional public intervention should not be excluded.

```

```
                - 30 
70. The long-term budgetary implications for the Community
    of this policy are difficult to quantify but it is
    clear that substantial provision in the EEC budget for
    the financing of European standardization work will be
    necessary for the foreseeable future.

    For at least the next three years (1992-1994) the
    annual cost of new standardization work contracted by
    the Community will remain at, or close to, its current
    level in real terms (about 33 million Ecus), as

    important pieces of Community product legislation, such
    as the Directives on machinery, construction products,
    medical devices, measuring instruments, and so on are
    put into place and as standardization is stimulated in
    areas of industrial economic policy (such as in
    information technology, télécoms and energy supply or
    in sectors dominated by public procurement). (An
    indication of how current Community spending on
    European standardization is allocated is annexed).

    From 1995 onwards the amount of mandated work is likely
    to decline from its present high level, although demand
    from the Community authorities for European standards
    will continue from requests for the up-dating or
    improvement of existing harmonized standards or from

    the use of standardization in new areas related to

    legislation, or major industrial projects such as the
    trans-European networks. Incidental support for the
    infrastructure of European standardization would have
    to be added, as would payments for the translation of
    European standards into all official Community
    languages (which already costs 3 million Ecu per year).
    The long-term cost to the Community budget of
    maintenance of the European standardization system is
    estimated to be no less than 15 million Ecus per year
    at current prices. Any major policy initiatives
    requiring additional standardization effort, or any
    extension of financial support to interested parties to
    allow them to participate in European standardization
    would increase that figure.

    ( x i ) Other issues

71. In the Green Paper the Commission discussed the
    relationship between intellectual property rights (IPR)
    and standardization and called for the development by

    standards bodies of clear conditions for the inclusion

   of IPR in standards, based on practice in the
    international standardization organizations. In view
   of the importance and complexity of the issue for IPR,
    standardization, competition and trade policies, the
    Commission intends to produce a seperate Communication
    on this subject. Meanwhile work is going on in the
    European standardization bodies on a common approach to
    handling IPR in standardization and the results
    expected at the beginning of 1992 will be carefully

    exam i ned.

```

```
                   - 31 
v
 - Standardization and Community Legislation

72. The Commission has diversified its links with

    standardization since the adoption of the new approach

    to technical harmonization in 1985. Mandates for the

    development of European standards now go beyond the
    area of product safety legislation. They include
    information technology standards, standards for motor
    fuels, advanced ceramic materials, and measurement
    methods for emissions from waste incineration plants;
    mandates are currently being considered for power
    generation equipment, methods of analysis for
    foodstuffs, biotechnology equipment and auditing
    methods for monitoring compliance with EEC public
    procurement directives. The versatility of standards
    is becoming more widely appreciated by those
    responsible for Community policy.

73. If the European and national standardization bodies
    implement the measures aiming at efficiency and
    openness indicated in the preceding section of this
    Communication, Community regulations could and should
    make even greater use of standardization than they do
    today. The advantages of recourse to standardization
    as a method of determining technical requirements are
    worth repeat i ng:

      standardization is a highly-transparent process in
      which all interested parties may be involved;

      it combines the advantages of democracy with the
      ability to reflect the technological state-of-the
      art ;

      standards can be easily modified to reflect
      technological development;

      reference to standardization in legislation means
      that most of the costs of production of technical
      specifications are transferred from the public to
      the pr i vate sector ;

      to the extent that many sources of expertise are
      available for standardization work, and the final
      outcome must receive support from interested parties
      in order to be accepted, standardization may be more
      efficient than technical regulation, in so far as it
      will better reflect technical reality in the market.

74 Some of the broad economic sectors where more voluntary
    standardization will clearly assist in the creation and
    consolidation of the Community's internal market have
    been mentioned: information technology,
    telecommunications, energy and transport. The
    Commission is ready to take further action in these
    areas. Others where initiatives to encourage
    standardization may be considered are standards related

```

```
                   - 32

    to environmental protection and foodstuffs, although in
    these areas some specific regulations may still be

    necessary.

75. Standardization, whether national, European or
    international, cannot substitute for, weaken or

    contradict legislation. Standardization organizations
    however, remain free to elaborate standards within the

    limits set by regulation.

76. Where standardization is related to legislation, it
    will remain necessary for the public authorities to fix
    the parameters within which standardization may take
    place, and to monitor the standardization process, by
    direct participation If necessary, in order to ensure
    that these parameters are adhered to. The legislator
    must also be satisfied that interested parties are as
    directly involved in standardization as they would be
    in the regulatory process; hence the Commission's
    insistence, in the Green Paper and in this
   Communication, on the need for full transparency and
    the right to participate in European-levé I

    standard i zat ion.

77. For its part, the Commission intends to undertake an
    internal review of the possibilities for greater use of
    standardization in future Community legislation, and
   will report to the Council on its outcome.

78. This prospect of a developing partnership between
    regulators and standard Izers In the Community framework
   underlines the importance of the decisions now facing
    the European standardization system. For public

    authorities to have the confidence to make more use of

    voluntary standardization, standardization bodies must
   demonstrate that they are efficient, transparent and
    fair, and capable of producing high-quality output.
   The process of critical self-examination and reform now
   going on within the European standardization bodies is
   a promising sign, but there must be no doubt about the
   cost to the European economy of failure to carry this
    reform out. In the absence of an effectively-managed
   European standardization system the Community
    legislator will be forced to resort to technical
    regulation, with the inevitable risk of arbitrariness
   and loss of efficiency.

   The challenge to the European standardization system is
    to prove itself worthy of the responsibility now placed

   on it .

```

##### **_ 3 " î > -**

```
                  Annex

    Community financing of European standardization

The standardization work currently attributed to CEN,
CENELEC and ETSI relating to the Internal Market,
information technology and telecommunications concerns the
drafting of about 1,950 European standards, broken down as
foI Iows:

```

```
New Approach Directives Number of

                 Standards

Pressure vessels 42

Toys 7
Construction products 484
Mach i nes 184

Personal protective equipment 102
Med i ca I dev i ces 42

Gas appIi ances 54
Electromagnetic compatibility 23

Other work

```

```
  Amount f i nanced

   (million Ecu)

      1 15

      0 37

      13 33

      3 79

      3 17

      2 06

      2 91

      0 42

 938 27.21

      13.37

        57

        91

        69

        80

        59

        29

1 001 33,21

```

```
Information Technology
Te Iecommuni cat i ons

Public Procurement

Eurocodes

Steel

Advanced ceramics

Aerospace

```

```
257

 30

216

 27

129

 42

300

```

```
TOTAL 1,939 60,42

```

#### **-**
##### **3 M .**

```
During 1991, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI were asked to produce 828
standards for a sum of about 28 million Ecu, broken down as
foI Iows:

New Approach Directives

```

```
Toys 1
Construction products 220
Mach i nes 60

Med i caI dev i ces 42

Others

Information Technology 80
Telecommunications 5

Public procurement 216
Eurocodes 27

Steel 27

Aerospace 150

TOTAL

Other annual expenses
for support to standardization
(translations, information
procedure, etc.)

```

```
     0.10

     6. 37

     1 .93

     2.06

323 10.46

     7.00

      91

      69

      98

      80

```

```
505

828

```

```
17.38

27.84

 3.70

```

## **-** **3 J -**

```
     Commission Communication on Standardization

            in the European Economy

Financial Statement

This Communication has no direct financial implications for
the Community budget.

The Commission recommends that annual budgetary appropriations for support of European standardization work should be
maintained at their present level (about 33 MECU) for the
period 1992-1994, but detailed proposals will be decided in
the annual budgetary procedure

                     *

F i che F i nanc i ère

La présente communication n'a pas d'implications financières
directes pour le budget communautaire.

La Commission recommande que les crédits budgétaires annuels
attribués au soutien de la normalisation européenne soient
maintenus à leur niveau actuel (à savoir, 33 MECU) mais les
propositions détaillés à ce propos seront faites ultérieurement dans le cadre de la procédure budgétaire annuelle.

```

# **_If-_**

ISSN 0254-1475

**C0M(91)** **521 final**

## **DOCUMENTS**

###### **EN 10**

**Catalogue** **number** **: CB-CO-91-580-EN-C**

**ISBN 92-77-78764-3**

Office fhr Official Publications of the Buropean Coniniwiities

Lr2985 Luxcmbowg