Voting Responsibilities in ISO
Karen Hall, National Hydrogen Association
ISO/TC 197 is the International Technical Committee responsible for developing standards in hydrogen technologies. As there is a growing interest in the development of international standards and technical specifications for hydrogen energy technologies, organizations are becoming more involved in the development of these standards within ISO/TC 197.
Voting Within the National Mirror Committee
When new experts become involved, they are provided a document describing their role in their National Mirror Committee, and the ISO Technical Committee. Even so, experts often are not clear about what is expected of them, particularly when the expert is only involved for their interest or expertise in one or more specific technologies. ISO/TC 197 has active work items in many technologies, so there are inevitably some items for which an expert may have no interest or expertise. In this case, the expert can still make an important contribution by replying with an abstention on the national vote.
This is important because the National Mirror Committee administrator strives to keep the committee roster current, by ensuring members are actively participating in the work and that interested parties have the opportunity to participate. By responding to ballots, the administrator knows the member is still an active participant.
Active participation on a National Mirror Committee requires responses to ballots. Participation includes reviewing and providing input to the national position on draft documents relating to the member’s area(s) of interest and expertise. Being involved does not necessarily require travel, however the expert is welcome to attend meetings if they wish.
Participants may also join active Working Groups of ISO/TC 197. This may be beneficial when a document under development relates directly to the interests of the expert’s organization. For example, a company that manufactures, plans to distribute or use electrolyzers for domestic applications may wish to be an active expert of WG 8, which is currently developing an international standard on this topic.
In addition, experts on key aspects of a document are encouraged to participate to ensure the standard development process has the benefit of this specialized expertise. For example, experts on processes to determine safety distances may wish to provide input to Task Group 1 of WG 11, even if their organization is not planning to build, operate or use hydrogen refuelling stations, as this specialised expertise may otherwise be lacking.
Voting by Countries
Depending on the status of the document, members of a National Mirror Committee are asked to respond in accordance with the ISO procedures. They may be asked to indicate their position as voting for approval of the document to move to its next stage of development, including publication, or vote against moving the document forward, in which case the member must provide technical reasons (comments). Alternatively, the member may indicate that the National Mirror Committee should abstain from voting on this document.
There are a number of reasons why a country might abstain. For example, a document may not be of interest to the country or there may be no experts on the relevant technologies on the National Mirror Committee. An Abstention means that the request has been considered, and the country has no opinion or that consensus can not be reached at the present time.
Since abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted (along with negative votes not accompanied by technical reasons), they are an important part of the voting process. When a country abstains, the fate of the document is decided by the countries that have voted for approval or who have provided technical reasons for not doing so. Due to the mathematical procedure used to determine the results of a vote, casting a vote in favor of a document without due consideration from experts can lead to a document moving forward prematurely.
The voting requirements vary for different processes and the type of document under consideration. In the case of balloting a Draft International Standard in ISO/TC 197, the following example represents the impact of abstaining:
Let’s say tere are 21 countries submitting a vote on an ISO/TC 197 ballot. For a given item out for vote, 11 of these 21 countries either are unable to achieve national consensus, or are not involved in the technology being addressed and have no national interest in the document. Of the remaining 10 active countries, 5 of these want to vote against the document with technical reasons, and 5 want to vote to approve the document moving to Final Draft International Standard, with or without comments. If the 11 disinterested countries vote to approve even though they are not familiar with the work but want to register a vote, the results of the vote would be as follows:
In favor: 11 + 5 = 16
Against: 5
Abstentions: 0
16/21 = 76% in favor (requirement is greater than 66.66%)
5/21 = 23.8% against (25% is required for the vote to fail)
The document would pass, despite the fact that half of active countries with a national interest have serious technical concerns. If you are in one of those 5 countries, you would not be very happy about this result.
If, however, countries with no national consensus, no interest or no expertise vote to Abstain, the results are as follows:
In favor: 5
Against: 5
Abstentions: 11
5/10 = 50% in favor (requirement is greater than 66.66%)
5/10 = 50% against (25% is required for the vote to fail)
This time the document fails. This result is more consistent with the desires of the countries with an interest in the document, and who are likely to use it.
Even if only 5 of the 11 countries with no interest were to abstain, the result is different than if they all were to submit an approval without an expert review. In this case the result would be:
In favor: 6 + 5 = 11
Against: 5
Abstentions: 5
11/16 = 68.75% in favor (requirement is greater than 66.66%)
5/16 = 31.25% against (25% is required for the vote to fail)
Therefore the vote fails as it received negative votes by more than 25% of those voting.
Everyone with a vote in a National Mirror Committee is encouraged to respond to ballots. Individual members with no interest or expertise in an item may indicate they would like to personally abstain. If a member feels their country has no interest or expertise, they can indicate that the national position should be to abstain. By doing so, a member can fulfill their obligations, and allow appropriate weight to be given to those experts for whom the activity is important.
|
