Further criteria for global relevance and harmonization
NWI arrives with Business Plan and Impact Assessment
Updating Standard submitted by standards body or Technical Committee
Global Relevance and Harmonization Forum Panel
The criterion, indicators and evidence validity would need to be developed, along with supporting materials for those carrying out the evaluation These could include: • How the standards are being utilised • Who is using them – e.g. governments, certification bodies, companies • Global status of technologies/ services the standard covers • Whether they have an impact (+ve or -ve) on other sectors • Priority/Importance and to whom • Cost implications
New Work Item (NWI) submitted by sponsor
Technical and Other support group to evaluate documentation Is there sufficient information to evaluate the NWI
NO
Potential NWI and Updating Process to ensure harmonization and global relevance are fully considered
Justification for Updating and Impact Assessment
International Standards Forum (ISF) to be represented by all the Standards Making Bodies – Panel for the evaluating standards updating meeting quarterly and/or electronically
NO
YES Agreement to update or develop standard and which body is the most appropriate to carry out the work Standard goes through normal development and upgrading processes with relevant stakeholders
FIGURE 5: PROCESS PROPOSED FOR NEW WORK ITEMS IN STANDARDISATION BODIES
process do so in addition to their day job, which restricts the time they have available. A lack of funding often means that there are significant peaks and troughs in how often the experts can engage in the development of standards. However, most experts are firm believers in the value of standardisation and dedicate an inordinate amount of time (often to the detriment of other projects) to developing and maintaining standards; they should be highly commended for their efforts. Without this invaluable effort, there would be no standards. Unfortunately time and fund- “I can’t afford a week ing issues mean that stand- out of my office on ardisation is sometimes a unpaid work and hostage to fortune, in terms even if I could the of the efforts that can be costs are prohibitive” devoted to it. In most cases a common comment everyone finds the time in befrom experts tween their other activities, although due to the increasing demands and development of the renewable energy sector, finding that time, effort
26
International Standardisation in the Field of Renewable Energy
and financial support is becoming even more difficult than was identified in the APEC 2006 report. Some of the time constraints for international meetings are the length of the meetings, as they typically stretch up to a week or more, and although they may only be held once or twice a year and coordinated to allow engagement in multiple working group activities, they have major cost implications. While the standards-making bodies are increasingly turning to electronic forms of working, such as webinars and conference calls, these are still not as effective as face-toface meetings. The limitations of electronic communication technologies and the time differences often make it difficult to achieve full participation. While every nation supports standardisation in different ways, it is important that governments ensure that those supporting the standards development process are recompensed in an appropriate way. Although in many cases