INNI
Online Update | Issue #10
October 2005
|
UPDATES BY
ISSUE AREA HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE ISO Takes Incremental –
Yet Essential – Step Forward on Social Responsibility By most accounts, the recent meeting of ISO's Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG SR) was a notable success. The key achievement of the group's second plenary meeting, held in Bangkok September 26-30, was the approval of a design specification. (The design specification is basically an annotated outline of future standard's main clauses, as well as guidance for the standard's drafters as to the general contents of each clause.) In addition to completion of the design specification, the Group's Swedish-Brazilian co-leadership had set two other main objectives for the Bangkok meeting, both of which were procedural in nature, and both were accomplished by meeting's end. The first was the establishment of sub-entities within the WG (known as Task Groups) that will be responsible for actually drafting designated clauses of the standard. (Three such Tasks Groups were formed by resolution of the WG, and they compliment three pre-existing "operational" Task Groups, making six in total.) The second outcome was agreement on a process for establishing the permanent leadership of the newly formed Task Groups. The nomination/selection process, which will take two to three months based on various contingency scenarios, was approved at the WG's closing plenary session. Most WG experts (including NGOs) expressed some degree
of satisfaction with the outcomes of the meeting, and the final
design specification in particular, while simultaneously pointing
out that the document was written broadly enough to obscure outstanding
(and potentially fundamental) differences that remain among the
stakeholder groups. After considerable debate over the course of
the week, it was recognized that due to limited time, a number of
the more contentious issues could not be resolved in Bangkok, and
instead would have to be deferred to the Task Groups charged with
developing the standard. Among those issues were: The WG did resolve one controversial topic, and that was how the standard will address the issue of stakeholder engagement, at least at the most general level. After lengthy discussion, it was agreed by consensus not to have a stand-alone clause on stakeholder engagement, but instead to address the issue in the relevant parts of other clauses. Some NGOs remain concerned that taking such an approach runs the risk of having the critical issue of stakeholder engagement "lost" in scattered form throughout the document. Other NGOs, as well as a large majority of the WG experts as whole, felt the issue was so essential to the concept of SR that it had to be addressed in numerous areas of the standard. In part to mollify those who preferred a stand-alone clause on stakeholder engagement, but also to ensure that other key SR concepts that transcend individual clauses of the standard are handled effectively and efficiently, the WG agreed to establish a formal liaison mechanism among the three Task Groups developing the standard. Improving Balanced Stakeholder Participation A related concern was raised by NGOs (and other experts) that quite a few national delegations at the Bangkok meeting were not adhering to the ISO Technical Management Board's directive that each national delegation consist of no more than six experts (one from each stakeholder category), and that no more than two experts from any single category be included on a national delegation. In recognition of this problem, the WG leadership at the closing plenary requested national delegations to more strictly adhere to the TMB's guidance for balanced stakeholder involvement in the ISO SR standard-setting process. The leadership also pledged to play a more significant oversight role during the registration process for future WG meetings. On the heels of only limited success in 2005 with fundraising to support developing country and balanced stakeholder participation in its work, the WG SR passed a resolution requesting the ISO Central Secretariat and the Technical Management Board to allocate necessary resources, and to collaborate more closely with the WG in working to secure future funding. The WG's fundraising success to date has largely been linked to pre-existing mechanisms within ISO oriented toward providing financial assistance to developing country participants. However, there also remains a need for funding for under-resourced constituents in industrialized countries (i.e., NGOs, consumers, labor), considering that the WG SR represents ISO's first attempt to actively facilitate balanced stakeholder participation. With that in mind, the WG SR passed another resolution expressing appreciation of the national governments that have been financially supporting the development of ISO SR to date, and calling upon ISO Central Secretariat to request, through appropriate channels, that other national governments support ISO's SR initiative with financial contributions. You can find more information on the WG SR's Bangkok meeting in a report by Paul Hohnen representing Global Reporting Initiative, as well as in a recent Crosslands Bulletin article. Report from the ISO/TC 207 2005 Plenary Meeting ISO Technical Committee (TC) 207 - Environmental Management
held its 13th annual plenary meeting in Madrid, Spain, September
12-16, 2005. Progress was made on several draft standards (discussed
in more detail below), with four environmental standards nearly
finalized. In addition to the actual standards development work,
the committee took decisions on a number of policy-related topics
including: For a more detailed
summary of the TC 207 annual meeting click here. Several ISO Environmental Standards Nearing Their Final Stage Four of ISO's environmental standards are now being finalized and are scheduled for publication in the first half of 2006. The ISO Working Group on Climate Change (WG5) met in Sydney in July 2005 to discuss and incorporate member country comments on its three-part Draft International Standard (DIS) on greenhouse gas accounting. While there, WG5 also decided to elevate and circulate the revised draft as a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) on which all the member countries will be asked to either approve or reject verbatim. Some from industry, however, have found the changes made to the DIS in Sydney unsatisfactory. The International Chamber of Commerce, immediately prior to the TC 207 Madrid meeting, submitted a statement to the committee that among other things asked it to reconsider WG5's decision to elevate the greenhouse gas accounting standard to FDIS. At its plenary meeting, TC 207 nevertheless affirmed the decision taken by WG5. A two-month ballot period will start in October 2005, and if approved, the final standard is scheduled for publication in early 2006. TC 207's Working Group 6, which has been developing the requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies also met at the TC 207 Madrid meeting, and incorporated the comments received on the Draft International Standard, "ISO 14065: Greenhouse gases - Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition." The revised draft was then elevated to Final Draft International Standard. The development of this new standard has been on a fast track, in order to catch up with the scheduled completion of the ISO 14064 GHG accounting standard. Approval of the FDIS is all but certain, and the final standard is expected to be published mid 2006. TC 207 Working Group 4 incorporated the comments received on its Draft International Standard ISO 14063 - Environmental Communications - Guidelines and Examples and has submitted the revised standard as FDIS to the ISO Central Secretariat for a two-month ballot. Considering that the DIS 14063 was approved by an almost unanimous majority of ISO member bodies, it is very likely that the FDIS will be published as an ISO standard in the second quarter of 2006. TC 207's
Draft International Standard (DIS) for environmental declaration,
ISO 14025 - Environmental labels and declarations - Type III environmental
declarations - Principles and procedures was approved overwhelmingly
in August 2005, with 42 out of 44 countries voting to approve the
DIS. South Korea and Austria cast disapproval votes, and a liaison
group, European Environmental Organizations in Standardisation (ECOS)
also submitted comments
critical of the DIS. Type III environmental declarations, which
are based on life-cycle assessment (LCA), are used to communicate
to businesses and/or end-use consumers information about the composition
and environmental characteristics of products. The ISO 14025 standard
describes the procedures and requirements regarding how to establish
and implement Type III environmental product declaration programs.
Miscellaneous News International Accreditation Forum Suspends Its Work to Examine Relationship Between Regulatory Compliance and ISO 14001 The International Accreditation Forum (IAF), an association of standards conformity assessment accreditation bodies worldwide, decided to suspend its examination of the relationship between ISO 14001 certification and compliance with environmental regulations. The first draft of the white paper was released in September 2004 and aimed to clarify how certification bodies should evaluate an environmental management system with respect to legal compliance. The drafting group tasked with producing the white paper had been experiencing difficulty moving forward due to the diversity of positions among its members, as well as the negative industry feedback the group received on its second draft. In particular, the group could not reach consensus on how to reconcile the significant differences in practice with regard to how accreditation bodies, certification/registration bodies, and the regulatory community in various parts of the world audit the requirements of the standard that relate to regulatory compliance. The IAF decided to withdraw the work in this area at its September 2005 meeting, however, it kept this topic on its agenda, and asked its members to pay attention to the related publications and research by other organizations and public/industry reaction to them. Two NGOs Develop Stakeholder Engagement Guidance Documents Two NGO groups recently published guidance documents focusing on two vastly different aspects of stakeholder involvement. The ISEAL Alliance released "Stakeholder Consultation Practices in Standards Development," which builds on its work to promote good practices in social and environmental standard setting. The paper presents a summary of stakeholder consultation issues to be considered in the standard-setting process, both conceptually and practically. AccountAbility, a developer of assurance and accountability management tools and standards, also recently released its draft Stakeholder Engagement Standard. The standard, which is part of the group's AA 1000 series, aims to provide a generally applicable framework for organizations to design, implement, assess, communicate, and assure the quality of their stakeholder engagement efforts. The draft version of the standard has been publicly circulated to users for review and comment, and AccountAbility plans to revise and publish the final version in late 2006. Pacific Institute Reviews ISO's Development of Water Management Standards The Pacific Institute produced a paper entitled, "Developing Voluntary International Water Management Standards: A Case Study of ISO Technical Committee 224" that was published in the July 2005 edition of Water Resources IMPACT, a journal of the American Water Resources Association. The paper summarizes ISO's ongoing work on the topic and identifies issues and challenges facing the standards' drafters. Development of a New ISO Management System Standard Raises Concern Without being noticed by many ISO member bodies, a new ISO management system specification document has reached the Committee Draft (CD) level. The ISO Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 28000 "Specification for security management systems for the supply chain" was developed by ISO/Technical Committee 8 - Ships and Marine Technology without the completion of a justification study in accordance with ISO Guide 72, nor consultation with ISO TC 176, both of which are required for the development of any ISO management standard according to the ISO Directives. The release of the draft PAS has raised concerns in ISO circles, and particularly by industry, mainly because it is a generic specification document and can be applied to any sector, even though it was developed within the context of ships and marine technology. Some ISO member countries have already issued statements voicing their objections and casting a negative vote against approval of the draft. New ISO Management System Standard for Occupational Health and Safety Considered British Standards Institute (BSI) is drafting a proposal for the development of an ISO Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Management Systems Standard. There are already several national and international OH&S standards, such as the International Labor Organization's OSH Guideline, the U.S. standard ANSI Z10, the Canadian standard CSA Z1000, and the British guidance BS 8800 and specification OHSAS 18001, among others. Since its release in 1999, the British standard OHSAS 18001, Occupational health and safety management systems - Specification has gained increased use and recognition for third-party certification of OH&S management systems throughout the world. It is still uncertain whether ISO members will decide to develop a new certification standard in this area, however, considering that many organizations have traditionally combined their environmental and OH&S programs, alignment, consistency, and compatibility between such standards and ISO 14001 will be key for the new standard. New International Standards on Tourism Being Developed New International Standard on Desert Management
Considered |
|
The
INNI Online Update is a quarterly bulletin on the activities of
the International Organization for Standards. If you do not wish
to receive future communications, please reply to this email message
with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line. For problems or questions: newsletter_editor @ pacinst.org This update was created by the Pacific Institute, 654 13th Street, Oakland, CA, 94612. Copyright 2004. |
|
