1. ISO Partnering & Twinning
ANSI Conference on U.S. Leadership
in ISO and IEC
Presented by
Mr. Steven P. Cornish
Director, International Policy
American National Standards Institute

2. ISO Partnering & Twinning The Issue
The ISO General Assembly:
recognized that the need to increase developing country participation in ISO's technical work was a strategic issue having high priority and
requested that immediate action be taken to implement the concept of twinning/partnering/mentoring arrangements as a means of building capacity in developing countries and in countries with economies in transition.
The ISO Technical Management Board developed and approved supplemental guidance to the ISO/IEC Directives to institutionalize this concept in the form of:
Partnering between members of ISO technical committees and subcommittees, and
twinning arrangements at the level of chairs and secretariats of committees.

3. ISO Partnering & Twinning A Recommended Step-Wise Approach
Observer (O) membership accompanied by ISO DEVCO training programs.
Participating (P) membership in partnership with a developed country. Countries may only partner with one other country at a time.
Termination of partnering arrangement and participation as an independent P member.
Possible pursuit of twinning arrangements to serve as Vice Chair or co-secretariat.
Independent assumption of committee leadership roles.

4. ISO Partnering & Twinning Key Considerations in P Member Partnering
A developing country should carry out a self assessment of its capacity to participate actively in international standardization work to fulfill the associated obligations before pursuing a P membership.
All partnering arrangements are reached on a voluntary basis. It is left to the member bodies concerned to determine the most effective way of implementing a twinning arrangement. This may include financial support for the developing country.
Geographical and cultural issues should be considered when deciding on partners.
If a developed country partner has not been identified, the committee secretary shall circulate the request to all the P-members and ask whether a P-member is willing to enter into a partnering arrangement.
Proxy votes of developing countries may be carried at a meeting. The country cannot carry more than one proxy and the committee leadership must be informed prior to a meeting that a proxy is being carried. The partner not able to attend should submit its position known in writing to the committee secretary prior to the meeting.
The details of any agreed partnering arrangement should be made known to the members of the committee and to ISO/CS.

5. ISO Partnering & Twinning Key Considerations in Secretariat Twinning
Before applying for twinning with a secretariat, an ISO member body should have been a P member of the TC/SC for at least 12 months.
The member body holding the secretariat will need to consider whether the requester shares a common interest and approach towards the sector concerned. The possibility of differing views is unavoidable, but these differences should not make cooperation impossible.
It is recommended that a framework contract be signed by both parties. This will help in identifying tasks and to whom they are allocated. Each party to the twinning arrangement thereby agrees to be held accountable for identified tasks matching their available resources (human and financial) and skills.
The duration of the arrangement should be agreed upon when signing the contract which should be reviewed no later than after 3 years.
This contract may also serve as a "business plan“ to support regular review of the twinning arrangement by the partners concerned.
It is possible that twinning arrangements may evolve over time, due to training and the acquisition of skills by the twinned partner.
The details of any agreed twinning arrangement should be made known to the members of the committee and to ISO/CS.

6. ISO Partnering & Twinning Key Considerations Regarding Chairs
The sharing of secretariats and chairs by developing and developed countries is strongly encouraged.
Secretariats in developed countries are encouraged to consider the possibility of nominating a chair from a developing country and vice versa.
In the case of a possible developing country chair, the country should have been a P-member in the TC/SC for at least 12 months.
Evidence of involvement of relevant stakeholders in the country in the activities of the committee should also be given (e.g. does the country have a relevant industrial strength in the field concerned?).

7. ISO Partnering & Twinning Key Considerations Regarding Vice Chairs
If a committee decides to establish a Vice Chair position for an individual from a developing country, this position should have legitimate tasks and functions and not be merely symbolic.
In order to promote standardization in all developing countries, it is encouraged that meetings take place in developing countries.
Thus, Individuals from developing countries could be nominated by the TC/SC chair and secretariat to the position of vice-chair only for the duration of a particular meeting.
This position would not require P-membership status in the TC/SC concerned, nor a twinning arrangement as such. The vice-chair would, for instance, be entrusted with organizing meetings facilities with the help and financial commitment of the TC secretariat and ISO/CS.

8. ISO Partnering & Twinning Some Cases to Date
ISO/TC 207 (Environmental management) - SCC/Canada (Chair and Secretariat) with ABNT/Brazil (Vice Chair).
ISO/TC 207/SC 1 (Environmental management systems) - BSI/United Kingdom and BSN/Indonesia (Co-Chair twinning).
ISO/TC 207/SC 1 (Environmental management systems) - BSI/United Kingdom and SABS/South Africa (Co-Secretariat twinning).
ISO/TC 224 (Water services) - AFNOR/France and SNIMA/Morocco (P member partnering).
ISO/TC 228 (Tourism) - AENOR/Spain and INORPI/Tunisia (Co-Secretariat twinning).
ISO/TMB Social Responsibility WG - SIS/Sweden and ABNT/Brazil (Co-Chair and Co-Secretariat twinning).

9. ISO Partnering & Twinning Why Aren’t There More Cases?
A new concept introduced in the last two to three years.
Many cases are being considered/negotiated.
NSBs have submitted multiple requests, but have priorities.
ISO’s work program reflects the developed world.
Capacity building is needed first.
Requests have been made, but no one is home for follow-through.
Secretariats: “How do I do it? How do I get it started?” There is no one model approach. Each case may have specific terms that need to be negotiated.