Joint NGO/TC207 Discussion Paper

Regarding NGO Participation in ISO 14000
Environmental Management System Standards

Excerpts from the Interim Discussion Paper (March 2000)

INTRODUCTION

International institutions face challenging questions about their role in developing and influencing global and national environmental policies and practices...

ISO was created in 1946 to facilitate international trade through the harmonization of technical standards. For most of its history, it focused on developing technical engineering specifications that had little influence on public policy.... In 1993, ISO/TC 207 was formed to develop and promote the ISO 14000 series of environmental management standards.

This paper discusses why ISO's evolution from an institution that promulgates technical engineering standards to one that defines environmental management standards that can have social and public policy implications has led to significant concerns by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). It examines why very few NGOs have participated in ISO/TC 207 activities to date, and explains why it is important that they become more involved. The paper documents recent linkages between public policy and the ISO 14000 standards, and highlights some of the deficiencies of the standards in this context. Finally, it outlines the potential benefits of greater NGO involvement and concludes with general recommendations on ways to enhance the level of NGO involvement in ISO/TC 207.

By jointly examining the growing linkages between ISO 14000 standards and public interest/public policy issues with NGOs who have participated in the ISO 14000 standards development process, the ISO/TC 207 leadership intends to stimulate informed debate at the Stockholm plenary meetings in June 2000. This paper and the discussions held at Stockholm are intended to serve as a basis for exploring future ISO/TC 207 policies as they relate to NGO involvement in ISO 14000 standards development.


 

BACKGROUND

Public interest-based NGOs met for the first time with the ISO/TC 207 leadership in San Francisco in June 1998. This was an important event, allowing NGOs to express concerns regarding the ISO 14000 standards, the ISO standards development process, and effective NGO participation in ISO/TC 207. Following this meeting, ISO/TC 207 passed a resolution to form an NGO Contact Group and to investigate NGO concerns expressed during the San Francisco meeting.

Following the meeting, the NGO Contact Group met with NGOs from around the world and collaborated on a survey for the national standards setting bodies. The survey requested information regarding the nature and extent of NGO participation in national standards setting processes. The results of this survey confirmed NGO concerns that public interest organizations are poorly represented in the ISO 14000 standards setting process.

...

At the June 1999 ISO/TC 207 meetings in Seoul, the results from the NGO Contact Group survey were discussed with the ISO/TC 207 leadership. ... NGOs and the ISO/TC 207 leadership agreed to jointly undertake an effort to produce a discussion paper to be presented at the Stockholm meetings in June 2000 which should examine:

  • The value of NGO input into the ISO/TC 207 standards setting process;
  • Motivations for NGO participation in the ISO/TC 207 standards setting process, including those associated with public interest concerns;
  • Procedures for improving NGO capacity to interact with ISO/TC 207; and
  • Examples where ISO/TC 207 standards are used in non-business applications.

 
MOTIVATIONS FOR NGO PARTICIPATION IN ISO/TC 207

NGOs that participate in ISO/TC 207 do so because they understand the potential of the ISO 14000 series standards to influence environmental policy and protection. This potential influence is regarded as both positive, in that these NGOs want to promote the standards to improve environmental performance by organizations, and negative for those NGOs, in that many NGOs not participating in ISO/TC 207 continue to believe the ISO 14000 standards are related to, and exacerbate, the recent trend towards government downsizing, de-regulation, and off-loading of responsibilities to the private sector. There are major concerns by almost all NGOs familiar with the subject about how the ISO 14000 standards are being presented to and understood by the public, and many NGOs are waging "rearguard" campaigns to prevent ISO from being presented as something it is not suited to be. Thus, NGO involvement in ISO 14000 standard setting is both forward-thinking and reactive.

...

The societal implications of the ISO 14000 series standards can be significant. For example, while local communities may have little interest in standards relating to the thread width of a screw used in a company's product, they are likely to be profoundly concerned about the methods by which an organization manages its environmental risks, given the potential impact on the community's welfare. In this sense, unlike other ISO standards, which primarily affect their users (and customers), the ISO 14000 series standards have direct effects on a much larger set of stakeholders. This could motivate NGO participation in the standard setting process, but has tended instead to evoke negative reactions by much of the NGO community.

Furthermore, because the ISO 14000 standards aim to tackle issues relating to the environmental performance of companies, and sustainable development more generally, they enter realms that are of interest to regulatory authorities, policy makers and the public. The goal of the ISO 14000 series standards is to provide a common framework for managing environmental issues worldwide. More specifically, the mandate of ISO/TC 207 is to develop and promote the "worldwide acceptance and use of the ISO 14000 series of standards, provide an effective means to improve the environmental performance of organizations and their products, facilitate world trade, and ultimately contribute to sustainable development" (emphasis added). However, given ISO's 50-year history of developing technical standards almost exclusively of interest to industry, the institution remains heavily influenced by the private sector. The figure below provides an example of this imbalance within the United States' national committee. Within ISO/TC 207, in a majority of national member bodies, industry wields comparatively more influence than government and environmental groups. This discourages NGO participation, and will likely continue to do so until ISO/TC 207 actions ensure balanced stakeholder representation and influence on standard setting initiatives.


Source: Managing a Better Environment: Opportunities and Obstacles for ISO 14001 in Public Policy and Commerce. Pacific Institute report. March 2000. Oakland, California.

Thus, while ISO's scope of work has substantially expanded to encompass activities that may have significant societal impacts, there has not been a corresponding increase in representation of public stakeholders within the ISO 14000 development process. Poor representation of these stakeholder groups means that their perspectives and concerns are not adequately captured in the standards development process or, consequently, in the standards themselves. If the ISO 14000 standards (or future standards within the series) are to play a meaningful and credible role in sustainable industrial development, they must more equitably reflect the views of all stakeholder groups affected by the standards.


 
BENEFITS OF NGO INPUT IN THE ISO/TC 207 STANDARDS PROCESS

The inclusion of public interest organizations in the standards development process will improve the credibility of the ISO 14000 series standards in the eyes of external stakeholders, including not only NGOs, but also regulators, an organization's customers, and the public. Doing so will broaden the standards' acceptance and usefulness with external parties, which in turn will increase their value for all users.

Consider the ISO 14001 EMS standard as an illustration. The introduction to ISO 14001 states that "[EMSs] address the needs of a broad range of interested parties, and the evolving needs of society for environmental protection." However, ISO 14001 has come up short in this larger context, primarily due to a lack of accountability and transparency to external stakeholders. Because ISO 14001 is a systems standard, certification, even if credible, only reveals to external stakeholders that the system conforms with the management prerequisites spelled out in the language of the standard. Given that external parties, such as customers, local communities, and end-use consumers, are largely interested in the degree to which organizations impact the environment, some amount of environmental information on performance is needed if ISO 14001 certification is to have meaning for them. Significant participation by public interest organizations in the development of ISO 14001 would have brought increased attention to this shortcoming - leading to greater pressure for a public disclosure requirement in the standard.

It is arguably in the best interest of the users of the standard to include NGOs in the standards writing process, as doing so will lead to increased public confidence in (and support of) ISO 14000 certification. In the case of ISO 14001, organizations typically decide whether to implement and certify to the standard based on an estimation of positive returns, weighed against projected costs. External benefits, such as increased market share, a "green" corporate image, decreased liability and regulatory cost savings, are important determinants in the calculus of whether or not an ISO 14001 EMS will add sufficient value to warrant adoption. Until the confidence of external stakeholders is gained, the full value of certifying to ISO 14001 will not be achieved.

Full and equitable stakeholder involvement in the ISO 14000 standard setting process could lead to the following societal benefits:

  • Greater public credibility of the standards;
  • More robust standards that result in demonstrable environmental performance;
  • Increased economic value and reduced environmental liability to companies having ISO 14001 certification;
  • More efficient use of government resources as attention shifts to regulation of industry non-performers.

 
LINKAGES BETWEEN ISO 14000 AND PUBLIC POLICY

The ISO 14000 standards, particularly the ISO 14001 EMS standard, are emerging as elements of public policy in many countries around the world. Many governments are encouraging implementation of ISO 14001 based on the belief that EMSs can improve environmental quality, while simultaneously minimizing industry's regulatory burdens.

Government authorities are attempting to use ISO 14001, but are also forced to compensate for its deficiencies. Some of the key deficiencies that have been identified in this paper and other sources are:

  • Misrepresentation of the meaning of ISO 14001 certification;
  • Inadequate definitions of key terms, such as "pollution prevention"
  • Lack of openness and transparency, as well as accountability for results;
  • Demonstrated cases of companies certified to ISO 14001 that are not in compliance with environmental laws.

These deficiencies are not acceptable from a public interest/public policy perspective. Thus, environmental regulatory agencies try to compensate for them when EMSs are referred to in laws and policies. To the extent that ISO/TC 207 does not deal with these deficiencies during the standard setting process, governments around the world will compensate for them in potentially inconsistent ways, thus frustrating to some degree the goal of ISO to harmonize standards, and possibly leading to trade challenges and controversy.

One emerging application of the ISO 14001 standard is its use within EMS-based regulatory programs. Regulatory authorities in the United States, for example, have recognized that the ISO 14001 standard alone is limited in its ability to fulfill policy objectives (whether to assure compliance, promote superior performance and environmental quality improvements, or to guide government purchasing decisions). Therefore, for businesses seeking regulatory benefits for implementing an ISO 14001 EMS in the U.S., additional requirements are being imposed. State and federal agencies have begun to build public policy components around the standard; these include:

  • environmental performance measurement and reporting;
  • compliance assurance and auditing programs;
  • an emphasis on pollution prevention; and
  • stakeholder involvement in the design and implementation of EMSs.

Europe's revised Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS2) is another example of an EMS-based policy instrument that augments the ISO 14001 management system platform with public policy elements. EMAS2 uses ISO 14001 as the management framework, superimposing additional requirements, such as employee engagement, external communication of environmental performance, and government-approved third-party verification. The risk of national and regional differences in the manner in which ISO 14001 is integrated into public policy undermines the value of ISO 14001 for organizations that wish to derive maximum benefit from the standard.

A strong argument, therefore, can be made that if ISO/TC 207 does not try to address these deficiencies, then a major opportunity to provide value for the standard's users will be lost.


 

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENHANCING NGO INVOLVEMENT IN ISO/TC 207

...

The following recommendations are proposed for discussion with at the Stockholm plenary in June 2000:

  1. The discussion of revisions to ISO 14001 should include consideration of issues related to public policy applications.
  2. ISO/TC 207 and national member bodies should establish an oversight mechanism to ensure that ISO 14000 series standards are being appropriately used and communicated to the public.
  3. Guidelines should be established that promote a balanced matrix approach to stakeholder representation on standards setting processes.
  4. All ISO 14000 series standards should ensure that definitions are consistent to the maximum extent possible with definitions used in public policy.