CD3 of ISO 26000 Maureen Breitenberg NIST 9/27/07 Status • • • • • • • • The third working draft (WD3) of the standard has been issued. Many significant issues have been identified by all stakeholder groups. Positions will continue to be formulated by stakeholder groups until standard reaches CD level, then normal development. U.S. stakeholder groups (except government and labor) met at the U.S. met before or after U.S. TAG Meeting held on August 7th. I sat in on the industry group’s discussion. They have a paperon issues and I gave them a copy of the major gov’t issues. The U.S. delegation (composed of representatives of stakeholder groups) will meet within their stakeholder groups in Vienna, Austria on 5th – 9th November 2007. U.S. government rep. will be Mary McKiel (EPA). We will only fill one of our two slots. First time USG will have any direct input into wording/requirements will be in Vienna when EPA attends. Outcome of Vienna meeting may be a WD4 or a CD. U.S. TAG wants a WD4. If it becomes a CD changes will be harder to make. • • NIST’s Role • NIST’s role is limited to monitoring the standard’s development for purposes of responding to inquiries and encouraging participation by USG stakeholders in the standard. • Standard not relevant to NIST’s metrologyrelated mission. • NIST has therefore not taken a leadership role nor will it participate at the international level. Current USG TAG Members • Maureen Breitenberg, NIST (national participation only) • Marcus Hambrick, USDA (national participation only) • Aston Hinds, Port of Houston Authority (Has not attended a TAG meeting to date) • New Member: Mary McKiel, EPA (international and national participation) General Concerns with CD3 • Too long– close to 100 pages. Length of sections not consistent. • Too much duplication. • Many inconsistencies. • “Help boxes” not always relevant, helpful, or consistent in the type of information they provide. • Part of the problem is that different sections of the standard are being written by different groups – each pushing their own agendas. • Good definitions currently lacking for many terms. Concern with Introduction • Really needs statement such as: Statements regarding conformity ISO 26000 is designed to be used solely as a guidance document. Any statements claiming or implying conformity to this International Standard are inconsistent with the purpose of this document International Standard and shall therefore be avoided. NOTE Statements claiming or implying conformity to this International Standard are thus inappropriate in any promotional and communication material such as press releases, advertisements, marketing brochures, videos, staff announcements, logos, slogans and catch lines for diverse media ranging from print and broadcasting, to Internet and multi-media applications, to product labels, signs, and banners. • • Similar statement now appear in FDIS of ISO 10001 and 10003 – Precedence. Major concern continues that this “guidance” standard will be used in certification schemes. Some Concerns with Principles • Principle of respect for internationally recognized instruments • Currently requires compliance with int’l law – no such thing. Doesn’t become law till country adopts it as such. • Suggested revision: – 5.2 Principle of Respect for Internationally Recognized Instruments – An organization shall observe all domestic laws that implement its government’s obligations under international treaties, directives, declarations, conventions, resolutions and guidelines. Where domestic laws are silent about an issue, an organization may also wish to consider other applicable international treaties, directives, declarations, conventions, resolutions and guidelines when developing policies and practices. Sustainable Development • Sustainable development is an important issue that should be factored into decisionmaking along with other societal welfarerelated issues. • Suggested revision: • 5.6 Principle of Consideration of Societal Welfare An organization shall consider the impact of its actions on the short term and long term welfare of society and take actions that are in the best interests of society as a whole. The Precautionary Approach Principle • Problem is obvious. • Suggested change: 5.8 Principle of Risk Management An organization shall analyze and manage the risk associated with its actions to eliminate or minimize societal harm or risk to the extent possible while maximizing benefits to its stakeholders. Risk analysis should incorporate the results of research undertaken using scientific principles and methods as well as other information that might be available to an organization. Note: ISO has a draft standard on risk management – may help. Other Issues with Principles • U.S. industry also has concerns with whether all principles in the principles section are really principles. • In addition to precautionary approach and sustainable development concerns, they also raised the issue of whether Human Rights and Diversity are actually principles or core issues that should be included in another section. Should not be both. Other Industry concerns • Terminology (e.g., supply versus value chain). • Mention of international treaties/document implies their endorsement. OK when USG is a signatory, not good when we’re not. • -Also a concern regarding limitations of “sphere of influence.” Companies cannot always control actions of suppliers and customers. Concern that they could be held accountable for actions of organizations that they don’t control. Another concern • 1603 When new materials and/or production methods such as nanotechnology or genetic • 1604 engineering are used, the full documentation of the risk assessment should be made publicly available. The • 1605 organization should not launch goods or services where a significant proportion of the population has • 1606 expressed strong reservations or even opposition (for example, genetically modified food). • Note that in the U.S., we would have little in the marketplace if nothing could be marketed where a group objects. Are there other concerns? • Many. • Issues like the “precautionary approach’ are littered throughout standard. • Sections ranging from climate change to labor law need to be reviewed by USG experts. USG Input So Far • USG has had no direct input into standard's content since it has not participated at international level in the government stakeholders group. • NIST has been working with industry stakeholder group to get some major USG concerns addressed – a limited, back door approach. • First opportunity for USG input will be in Vienna. Future • According to ITA attendee, at recent ISO General Assembly session on international standards and public policies, there was a significant degree of positive support for ISO's work on social responsibility. • ISO 26000 was heralded as a new model of inclusiveness in standards development. It was also put forward as the prototype for future ISO work in sustainable development. Speakers such as Bjorn Stigson from the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Georg Kell from the UN Global Compact, and Consumers International said they want the process to succeed. • Prof. Jonathan Koppell (Yale), the keynote speaker, said that ISO 26000 encourages participation of those not normally involved in ISO work and that this lends credibility to the effort. This buy-in by other groups increases the likelihood of the final product being accepted by all.
Pages to are hidden for
"CD3 of ISO 26000"Please download to view full document