WTO Symposium on conformity assessment procedures

In order to further the objectives of the Agreement, the Committee decided to organize a Symposium on Conformity Assessment Procedures to deepen its understanding of a number of different issues, including: (i) relevant international guides and recommendations for conformity assessment; (ii) the types of CAPs and the conditions for their application; (iii) the various approaches for the recognition of the results of CAPs; and (iv) the role of international and regional systems for conformity assessment. Each of the above themes were taken up in a separate session, and a rapporteur assigned to each of the sessions. This report is based on the contributions which I have received from the rapporteurs. It will attempt to highlight the main issues that have been presented in their reports.

The Symposium began with a brief presentation of the main provisions of the Agreement on CAPs, and presentations by a number of speakers on the CAPs that are used for business transactions in the market-place. It was recognized that CAPs should not create unnecessary obstacles to trade, at the same time it was noted that effective CAPs are a necessary mechanism to establish confidence between the different players in the market-place.

Session I of the Symposium addressed the issue of Relevant International Guides and Recommendations for Conformity Assessment. It focused on ISO/IEC Guides, Members' experience in the use of relevant international guides, and the extent to which those guides and recommendations have served as a basis for the recognition of CAPs by bodies in their territories, and have helped ensure a harmonized approach to conformity assessment. The Guides are widely used by developed and developing countries. It was noted that it is important to develop guides reasonably quickly so as to meet the needs of the market-place. It was also noted that while the same international standards could in theory be used by different players of conformity assessment, variations in interpretation (based on language and geographical differences for instance) could lead to different applications. It was suggested that international trade could stand to benefit from CAPs which are transparent, impartial and based on international standards.

Session II of the Symposium dealt with the Various Types of Conformity Assessment Procedures and Their Conditions of Application. It was noted that third party’s evaluation of conformity is widely used, supported in many cases by national accreditation systems as a tool for demonstrating the technical competence of conformity assessment bodies. It is used for the assessment of conformity to both voluntary standards (for products and quality systems) and to mandatory regulations. A number of issues were raised e.g., the need for harmonized and consistent accreditation procedures, and a code of good practice for conformity assessment bodies.

It was indicated that some regulators accept supplier’s declarations of conformity (SDOC) in certain sectors. In some instances, SDOC has to be underpinned by test results obtained from an accredited conformity assessment body. It was recognized that while SDOC is appropriate in some cases, it is not appropriate in areas of greater risk, and that it has to be accompanied by appropriate legislation, for example, on liability, and effective post-market surveillance. In this respect, concerns were raised regarding the responsibility for products originating abroad.

Session III of the Symposium addressed Approaches with Respect to the Recognition of the Results of Conformity Assessment Procedures. It was noted that numerous mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) had been concluded, and that several different types of MRAs existed e.g., between regulatory (i.e. government to government) and non-regulatory bodies (i.e. private sector). In addition, MRAs could be multisectoral or focus on a single sector. It was recognized that the cost-effectiveness of MRAs was an issue that needed to be carefully assessed. Costs tend to be particularly high when conformity assessment systems are very different in participating countries. While the numerous benefits of MRAs were stressed, it was explained that MRAs are not the only option for addressing recognition issues, and may not be the appropriate option in a number of cases. It was also noted that they do not remedy serious market access problems. Some concerns were expressed with respect to the discriminatory trade effects of some governmental MRAs.

MRAs in the non-regulatory sector were also discussed. It was stated that the principle of national treatment for third party conformity assessment bodies from other territories could enable those parties to participate in conformity assessment activities under conditions no less favourable than domestic bodies. MRAs in the non-regulatory sector could create a global network of organizations authorized to conduct conformity assessments for different requirements imposed in a variety of markets, and facilitate expeditious market access.

In addition to MRAs, attention was drawn to the autonomous recognition of conformity as a tool for the recognition of conformity assessment results, and in accordance with Article 6.1 of the Agreement. Although reciprocity should not be set as a precondition for autonomous recognition, the establishment of confidence was essential. While participation by relevant conformity assessment bodies in international or regional accreditation systems could facilitate this process, other means, such as peer evaluation, could also be employed.

Session IV addressed the Role of International and Regional Systems for Conformity Assessment. A number of international and regional bodies introduced their systems and work in the field of conformity assessment. It was recognized that: (i) international guides are commonly used by these systems; (ii) these systems play a useful role in coordinating conformity assessment bodies; (iii) through these systems, technical assistance could be provided and technical know-how could be transferred to developing countries; (iv) regional systems could be tailored to address the particular situation of different regions; and (v) there is the need to avoid duplication of work among different systems at all levels.