INNI
Online Update | Issue #9
July 2005
|
INTRODUCTION
LETTER UPDATES BY
ISSUE AREA HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE Dear INNI members, We are pleased to send you this 9th issue of the International NGO Network on ISO Online Update. As you will see below, there have been a lot of advances in ISO's development of environmental and social standards. And as we have predicted, ISO continues to expand the scope of its standards making and to broaden its influence on our society and environment. To help communicate to the wider public the significance of this evolution in the role of international standards, the INNI Secretary has developed a Frequently Asked Questions about ISO, which can be found on our website. We have also updated our INNI Fact Sheet, which summarizes how international standards affect our life, and why citizens and civil society groups need to get more involved. We hope these new materials will help raise awareness about international standards, and attract more NGO colleagues into the Network. Please pass this bulletin on to others in the NGO community who you believe might be interested in (or affected by) ISO's work in these areas. As always, feel free to email us at inni@pacinst.org
with any comments or feedback you may have. Best regards, Jason Morrison Update on the Development of ISO's Social Responsibility Standard Experts participating in ISO's Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG on SR) have been working diligently to complete various tasks assigned to them during the WG's inaugural meeting in March 2005. Six sub-groups called Task Groups (TGs), some of which are temporary, were created under the WG to resolve the contentious issue of what topics will actually be included in the guidance standard, as well as to advance various administrative, outreach, and funding-related issues facing the WG. (For more information on the tasks for each TGs, click here.) By the end of June, each TG circulated to the full WG membership a report of its preliminary decisions and findings for further discussion at the next WG meeting in late September in Bangkok, Thailand. The major task for that WG meeting will be to finalize the design specification (i.e., outline) of the standard, and to determine, if possible, the permanent leadership of the TG(s) that will carry out the actual standard development work. ISO SR Governance Controversy The fact that the resolution was passed without any consultation with the WG on SR or its leadership has raised questions about the function and authority of the WG, which from its inception has put a special emphasis on the multi-stakeholder process and consensus-based decision-making. In addition, the fact that the TMB resolution was substantively aligned with the industry position on the matter has spurred cynicism in some NGOs, who have grown increasingly concerned that ISO is incapable of meaningfully evolving from its historical basis as an industry-dominated institution. In response to an inquiry by the WG on SR leadership on the rationale for the TMB's decision, the chair of the TMB, Ziva Patir, released a letter explaining that the resolution was passed to clarify the intent of previous TMB resolutions and New Work Item Proposal for the SR standard. The letter, however, did not address one of the fundamental concerns conveyed by some WG participants that the TMB's top-down decision without any input from the WG erodes the validity of the multi-stakeholder decision-making model the WG is intended to operate under, and also could eventually undermine the credibility and legitimacy of ISO's SR standard. Concerned about this development, the consumer and NGO stakeholder groups within the SR WG issued statements in July, asking the TMB not to make future decisions that affect the contents of the standard without a request by, or consultation with, the WG's leadership. Definition of Stakeholder Groups In response to some of the categorization problems evident at the first WG meeting, several discussions on this topic started in parallel. Within the Chairman's Advisory Group (CAG), an advisory body for the SR WG leadership, the representative of the International Labour Organization (ILO) proposed a set of definitions and processes to frame how experts from each stakeholder category might be chosen. Also, at the national level, in order to select its delegates for the SR WG, the United States national mirror body to the WG developed its own definitions for the six stakeholder categories. In recognition that the definitions must be applied consistently across national member bodies, the US mirror body submitted its definitions to the WG leadership for consideration (and modification) at the international level. The NGO Group of the SR WG took a different approach, deciding to take it upon itself to define the concept of "NGO," as well as eligibility to the group. NGO Group participants also agreed that each of its constituent NGOs should be responsible for a self-assessment of whether it meets the NGO definition, and where necessary explaining this decision to the other NGOs. The NGO definition and organizational disclosure requirements for participation in the NGO Group can be found on the INNI website. Since the success of the ISO SR standard relies
heavily on the ability of the WG to establish a truly multi-stakeholder
process to develop the standard, we believe it is crucial to develop
clear stakeholder definitions that are accepted by consensus of
the entire WG. Considering that the use of stakeholder category
quota is the precedent-setting initiative within ISO, and that ISO
will likely look to produce more sustainable development-related
standards that would require balanced stakeholder involvement, this
discussion becomes even more significant. Key ISO Draft Environmental Standards Moving Forward Drafts of a number of ISO's environmental standards - on Climate Change, Environmental Communications, and Water Management - have taken a step toward their finalization after receiving strong support in recent balloting by member countries. In June 2005, ISO's ballot on its three-part Draft International Standard (DIS) on Greenhouse Gas accounting, ISO 14064, was approved overwhelmingly, with Australia casting the only negative vote out of 60 countries. Despite the broad member country support, some in the business community maintain reservations about certain aspects of the draft standard. Comments submitted by International Chamber of Commerce, for example, express concerns about a provision requiring organizations to include indirect emissions in their greenhouse gas reporting. The ICC is also critical of a procedural decision taken by ISO's Working Group on Climate Change to advance all three parts of the draft standard simultaneously, rather than elevate two of the more polished parts of the standard at this time, while holding the part on greenhouse gas reduction projects back for further work. The Working Group, at its next meetings in Sydney in late July and Madrid in mid-September 2005, will discuss member country comments submitted during the voting period. However, considering the very high approval rate and the relatively late stage in the standard's development (only one more step before final publication), it is unlikely that the present drafts will undergo substantial change. The group will now start preparing a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS), which member countries will vote to either approve or reject verbatim. If approved, the final standard is scheduled for publication in early 2006. In May 2005, ISO's Draft International Standard ISO 14063 - Environmental Communications - Guidelines and Examples was also approved by large majority of member countries, with 56 out of 57 countries voting to approve the DIS. Canada was the only country against advancing to the DIS stage, arguing among other things, that the inclusion of provisions relating to stakeholder engagement is beyond the intended scope of the standard. Technical Committee 207 Working Group 4 will now discuss comments submitted with the ballot, with a goal of preparing the FDIS by late this year and publishing the final standard by early 2006. Also in June 2005, Committee Drafts (CD) of ISO's water management standards passed the first formal vote by ISO Technical Committee 224 participating member countries. Guidelines for the service to users (ISO 24510) was approved by 16 out of 20 countries voting, and the other two standards, Guidelines for the assessment of wastewater services and the management of utilities (ISO 24511); and Guidelines for the assessment of drinking water services and the management of utilities (ISO 24512) were also approved overwhelmingly with 19 countries voting for, and Argentina the only country casting a disapproval vote. Two liaison organizations, European Union of National Associations of Water Suppliers and Waste Water Services (EUREAU) and Consumers International also submitted their comments, which were largely supportive of the documents. (Click here for EUREAU's position statement on the Committee Drafts) Although all three drafts were approved by the majority of the TC 224 member countries, the results of the ballot revealed that more than half of the developing countries participating in TC 224 did not cast their vote or submit comments. Further, four out of the five member countries that didn't vote on all the standards were from Africa (South Africa, Kenya, and Tunisia did not vote at all and Nigeria voted only on ISO/CD 24512), making Zimbabwe and Morocco the only African countries that fully participated in the voting process. This is especially concerning given the implications of these standards for Africa, as well as the fact that more meaningful participation by developing countries has been repeatedly recognized as important by the membership of TC 224. Several programs have been implemented by TC 224 to improve developing country involvement, such as the creation of a developing country ad hoc group, hosting of three regional fora, and capacity-building twinning arrangements between developing and developed country members. TC 224 will discuss all comments submitted during
the CD review phase at its next meeting in Berlin, Germany in October
2005. China Limits the Application of International CSR Standards According to the report by the Kenan Institute, China has announced it will limit and monitor certification to international CSR and labor standards. In November 2004, the Certification and Accreditation Administration of China (CNCA), the Chinese government's certification authority, announced that, among others things, no social responsibility certification, such as to Social Accountability (SA) 8000 may be conducted without approval from CNCA. It also stated the ISO Social Responsibility guidance standard being developed, and in which China is participating, should not be used for auditing or certification purposes. Further, in a seemingly contradictory move, it announced that the China State Standardization Management Commission will investigate the feasibility of a domestic Chinese CSR standard. Until that research is completed, foreign companies that have obtained international labor and environmental certifications in China must report them to the CNCA. Should China decide to establish its own national
CSR standard it would not necessarily be a negative development,
but it would certainly raise a slew of questions. For instance,
it is unknown how long it would take to publish such a standard,
nor is it clear whether the standard would be voluntary or mandatory,
and if the latter, whether it would be accompanied by a reliable
enforcement mechanism. Also unclear is whether China's new CSR standard
would be accompanied by monitoring/certification processes of any
kind, and if so, whether they would have the same public credibility
or effectiveness as international certification schemes such as
SA8000. Moreover, should China decide to create a national standard
and restrict the use of international ones, it would go against
the current trend toward greater harmonization and integration of
the numerous CSR standards and certification systems, such as is
happening in the context of ISO's SR standardization process. This
leads to further questions such as would China continue to participate
in the development of the international SR standard being produced
by ISO? And might China's standard differ substantively from the
international guidance established by ISO? Miscellaneous News ISO Releases Draft International Standard on Environmental Declarations ISO Technical Committee 207's Working Group on "Type
III" Environmental Labelling has released for ballot and comment
a draft of its standard under development, ISO
14025 - Environmental labels and declarations - Type III environmental
declarations -Principles and procedures. 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. Interested organizations can download
the standard at INNI's
Draft International Standard page, and are encouraged
to submit comments to their respective national standards bodies
or the INNI Secretariat. In May 2005, ISO released the first draft of
a new standard that sets out requirements for bodies that provide
validation or verification assessments of greenhouse gas emissions.
The new standard, "ISO
14065: Greenhouse gases - Requirements for greenhouse gas validation
and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms
of recognition," is a joint effort of ISO TC 207's Working
Group on Climate Change and ISO's Committee on Conformity Assessment
(CASCO). The joint working group was created in August 2004 and
has made very rapid progress on developing the new standard since
then. Unless unanticipated issues arise during the comment period,
this document will very likely be elevated to the Draft International
Standard stage by a resolution of TC 207 at its next meeting in
September 2005. The proposed target date for the standard's publication
is the end of 2006. ISO Articles on Water Management Standards ISO's monthly trade publication, ISO Focus, has released multiple articles providing an overview of its water management standards, as well as updates on standardization activities within ISO Technical Committee 224. Three of the articles, "ISO/TC 224 "Service activities relating to drinking water supply systems and wastewater systems - Quality criteria of the service and performance indicators", "Water - a worldwide challenge" and "Getting water to all: ISO/TC 224 studies how to optimize water supply," were written by the TC 224 leadership and give a summary of TC 224's work program, in addition to a review of the draft standards' contents. Another article, "Something for all or some?," by Robin Simpson, Consumers International's delegate to TC 224, examines how the concept of "a human right to water" can be integrated in the ISO water standards. Other ideas discussed in Simpson's article include: consumers' right to service without having a signed contract, managing water cuts in an equitable manner, and public supervision of service contracts during the drafting stage. Proposal Approved for New ISO Standard on Risk Management In February 2005, Japan, in partnership with Australia, submitted a proposal to develop a new ISO standard on risk management. Entitled "General Guidelines for Principles and Implementation of Risk Management," the proposed standard aims to provide practical guidance on the risk management process, including issues such as risk identification, evaluation, and treatment. The proposed structure of the standard follows the management system approach, such as the one used in ISO's quality and environmental management system standards. The standard is not intended for certification. The proposal passed overwhelmingly, with 25 member countries voting in favor, and only two countries, USA and Germany, voting against. European Consumer Organization Takes Position on Standardization of Information and Communication Technology ANEC, the European consumer voice in standardization, recently released a position paper on future challenges of standardization in the area of Information and Communication Technology (ITC). ANEC states that there is a genuine need to reform the standardization system so as to ensure effective consumer participation in order to develop standards that meet consumers' requirements, both in the ICT sector and in general. The paper lists five principles on which ICT standardization should be based: openness and transparency; enhanced consumer participation, consensus, implementation and assessment of standards, and cautious use of new deliverables and non-formal standard setting fora. For more information, visit ANEC's website:http://www.anec.org. ISEAL Makes Call for Public Comment on its Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards The ISEAL Alliance's Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards is undergoing its first review and revision process since its publication one year ago. ISEAL, a formal collaboration of international voluntary standard-setting and conformity assessment organizations, released the Code in 2004 to set out best practices for how voluntary social and environmental standards should be developed. ISEAL is inviting public review and comment on all aspects of the Code, including its applicability and usefulness. The comment period ends July 31st, 2005. For more information, visit ISEAL's website: http://www.isealalliance.org. |
|
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 go to the "click here
to change or remove your subscription" button at the bottom
of this message and follow the instructions, or 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. |
|
