Global standard-setting 2.0: How the WTO spotlights ISO and impacts the transnational standard-setting process

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    Abstract

    Transnational technical standard-setting has grown in prominence in recent years. The World Trade Organization (WTO) requires the use of international standards but adopts a deferential approach towards international standards. However, practice shows that several international standards are promulgated through opaque and exclusionary processes. In line with this observation, in its recent US—Tuna II ruling, the Appellate Body adopted a more critical stance regarding international standards and the processes that lead to their adoption. Against this backdrop, this article focuses on an analysis of the properties and mechanics of international standard-setting processes within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), discussing procedural and substantive guarantees regarding transparency, openness, deliberation and participation. As the WTO becomes the de facto arbiter of the legitimacy of international standards, much needed institutional reform in international standard-setting is bound to occur. Arguably, this is bringing a paradigm shift in standardization practices and introduces “global standard-setting 2.0.” Such trend is in line with emerging demands for a more inclusive global legal order.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)273-326
    Number of pages54
    JournalDuke Journal of Comparative and International Law
    Volume28
    Publication statusPublished - 2018

    Fingerprint

    international organization
    WTO
    technical standard
    legal order
    mechanic
    deliberation
    transparency
    guarantee
    legitimacy
    paradigm
    reform
    participation
    trend

    Cite this

    @article{3f6f6f523273474d950f1feccde2aff5,
    title = "Global standard-setting 2.0: How the WTO spotlights ISO and impacts the transnational standard-setting process",
    abstract = "Transnational technical standard-setting has grown in prominence in recent years. The World Trade Organization (WTO) requires the use of international standards but adopts a deferential approach towards international standards. However, practice shows that several international standards are promulgated through opaque and exclusionary processes. In line with this observation, in its recent US—Tuna II ruling, the Appellate Body adopted a more critical stance regarding international standards and the processes that lead to their adoption. Against this backdrop, this article focuses on an analysis of the properties and mechanics of international standard-setting processes within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), discussing procedural and substantive guarantees regarding transparency, openness, deliberation and participation. As the WTO becomes the de facto arbiter of the legitimacy of international standards, much needed institutional reform in international standard-setting is bound to occur. Arguably, this is bringing a paradigm shift in standardization practices and introduces “global standard-setting 2.0.” Such trend is in line with emerging demands for a more inclusive global legal order.",
    author = "Panagiotis Delimatsis",
    year = "2018",
    language = "English",
    volume = "28",
    pages = "273--326",
    journal = "Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law",
    issn = "1053-6736",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Global standard-setting 2.0

    T2 - How the WTO spotlights ISO and impacts the transnational standard-setting process

    AU - Delimatsis, Panagiotis

    PY - 2018

    Y1 - 2018

    N2 - Transnational technical standard-setting has grown in prominence in recent years. The World Trade Organization (WTO) requires the use of international standards but adopts a deferential approach towards international standards. However, practice shows that several international standards are promulgated through opaque and exclusionary processes. In line with this observation, in its recent US—Tuna II ruling, the Appellate Body adopted a more critical stance regarding international standards and the processes that lead to their adoption. Against this backdrop, this article focuses on an analysis of the properties and mechanics of international standard-setting processes within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), discussing procedural and substantive guarantees regarding transparency, openness, deliberation and participation. As the WTO becomes the de facto arbiter of the legitimacy of international standards, much needed institutional reform in international standard-setting is bound to occur. Arguably, this is bringing a paradigm shift in standardization practices and introduces “global standard-setting 2.0.” Such trend is in line with emerging demands for a more inclusive global legal order.

    AB - Transnational technical standard-setting has grown in prominence in recent years. The World Trade Organization (WTO) requires the use of international standards but adopts a deferential approach towards international standards. However, practice shows that several international standards are promulgated through opaque and exclusionary processes. In line with this observation, in its recent US—Tuna II ruling, the Appellate Body adopted a more critical stance regarding international standards and the processes that lead to their adoption. Against this backdrop, this article focuses on an analysis of the properties and mechanics of international standard-setting processes within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), discussing procedural and substantive guarantees regarding transparency, openness, deliberation and participation. As the WTO becomes the de facto arbiter of the legitimacy of international standards, much needed institutional reform in international standard-setting is bound to occur. Arguably, this is bringing a paradigm shift in standardization practices and introduces “global standard-setting 2.0.” Such trend is in line with emerging demands for a more inclusive global legal order.

    M3 - Article

    VL - 28

    SP - 273

    EP - 326

    JO - Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law

    JF - Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law

    SN - 1053-6736

    ER -