This exclusive interview with Mr Edvard Kožušník, Rapporteur of the EU Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) Committee, was conducted for Talkstandards.com via email during July 2010 in relation to the Open Forum on Transparency in EU Standardization.
The IMCO recently hosted a public hearing on the Future of European Standardisation which Mr Kožušník co-chaired. The outline of the hearing, including the presentations made can be found here.
What value does the European model bring to the table in the context of international standards setting?
The commitment of the European Standardisation System (ESS) to international standardisation is acknowledged and reflected by the Vienna and Dresden Agreements and the working methods of ETSI. The ESS recognises the primacy of international standards developed by ICO and IEC. However the international approach of European standardisation cannot always be met as there is no formal obligation at international level to withdraw contradictory national standards. The ESS should support international standardisation wherever possible unless the need is uniquely European. Europe could promote the methodology of the New Legislative Framework, or equivalent standards-receptive regulatory models, in its regulatory trade-related cooperation with EU trading partners.
In what respects, if any, does the EU policy to standards developed by the ESOs limit the ability of the EU to foster innovation, particularly within the ICT sector?
For many years, the European Standardisation Organisations (ESOs) have had a policy of producing fast deliverables on innovative topics, in particular through the CEN and CENELEC Workshops Agreements or the ETSI Industry Specification Groups. On the other hand, several fora and consortia contribute considerably to the global standardisation system by providing, in the ICT domain, most notably, specifications with global relevance which are often more receptive to innovative technologies, thereby accelerating their acceptance by the market. We should implement improved mechanisms for cooperation between ESOs and fora/consortia within the European Standardisation System in order to foster innovation. Standardisation, in order to fully realise its potential benefits in support of innovation, must adapt itself to the needs of the market and respond to the challenges resulting from globalisation, the emergence of new economic powers, and the evolution of technology.
Is the European framework, which places greater emphasis on judicial guidance with regard to the direction of standardisation a necessity due to the significant fragmentation inherent in the European market?
Standardisation has been recognised over the last 25 years as a central element in the completion of the single market under the New Approach. However, the increasing role of standardisation as a tool to achieve the goals of EU legislation and public policy entails a strategic, and more public-oriented, approach to European standardisation in order for it to remain successful and fit to the needs of the forthcoming decade. The European Standardisation system should be capable of meeting the needs of society, business and public authorities and of responding to the rapidly changing needs of the world, including the development and convergence of technologies, the improvement of product safety, consumer protection and welfare for citizens, and the protection of the environment.
How will initiatives such as the Digital Agenda and the Europe 2020 influence the EU standardisation system?
Both initiatives include several references to standardisation as a policy tool to ensure competitiveness, growth and interoperability, although they do not seem to pay sufficient attention to the current and potential role of the European Standardisation System. The use in legislation and public procurement of ICT standards developed by certain global fora and consortia, as announced in the Digital Agenda, remains a contentious issue.
Similarly, how will these initiatives help guarantee the inclusion and integration of all stakeholders in the European system?
The inclusion and integration of all stakeholders in the standardisation process, at national and European level, is one of the main challenges of the ESS. It is difficult to see at the present stage whether indeed these initiatives will help guarantee the effective participation of societal interests in the European system.
Modern standardisation efforts are increasingly moving towards increasingly complex areas, such as Green IT and SmartGrid, which in many ways require a guiding hand due to factors such as the high degree of interoperability required and the public nature of the technology. How is this process handled most efficiently?
We need to ensure there is a proper understanding of what are the European needs for usable interoperable standards and then to match these against the overall global standards landscape. An inclusive process works best. On SmartGrid, for instance, the ESOs have created a joint working group to take a common view of what is becoming an unbearably fragmented standards approach and ensure that our European requirements are documented and met.
In some areas, such as eHealth, we are seeing the US trend towards a more European style approach. Do you think this is a trend that will continue internationally and what implications does this have for European reform?
There are important divergences between EU and US with regard to the structure of standardisation systems, the mode of cooperation between Commission/US government and standardisers and the perceptions on «international standards». The emphasis put by the US side on the role of sectoral agencies and the decentralised structure of the US standardisation system confirm that cooperation at the level of coordinating structures between Commission and US government in a regulatory context appears difficult. It might therefore probably be easier to identify common interest for cooperation following a case by case sector oriented approach. EU-US cooperation in the field of standardisation will be the subject of meetings next week in Washington of the Chairman of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, Mr Malcolm Harbour, with the American National Standards Institute and the US Department of Commerce.
In what respects should a reform in Europe encompass greater transparency within European standardisation?
The ESOs have made efforts over the last years to increase transparency and improve the participation of all stakeholders in the standardisation process. The national delegation principle is a cornerstone of the ESS, however, it has its limits and needs corrections where certain interests can systematically not be heard. The current imbalance between the business and public interest in the standardisation process, both in the European technical bodies and national mirror committees, is owed to the low participation of societal stakeholders, in particular at the national level. There is a need for additional efforts to improve transparency and reinforce stakeholder engagement, in particular for European standards meant to support EU legislation and policies.
One issue related to modernisation efforts, is the role of informal, international consortia in the European standardisation framework. How will their increased presence relate to the move towards greater transparency?
The ESOs and fora/consortia should operate on the basis of open, transparent and consensus-based development processes and should find ways of cooperation during the planning of their activities by transferring standards to the most appropriate level, international or European, in order to ensure coherence and avoid fragmentation or duplication. The ESOs could also develop and implement an improved mechanism for the adoption of fora/consortia specifications as European Standards, which should not restrict the possibility to submit those specifications to International Standards Organisations in order to seek a more global status.
