Browse all documents

Emerging International Framework for Accreditation

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This research paper by David H. Stanger for the International Institute for Sustainable Development examines the development of an international framework for accreditation to facilitate sustainable trade. It details the roles of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) and the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), their respective Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs), and the technical distinctions between laboratory accreditation and certification.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) was established in 1977 and launched its Multi Lateral Agreement (MLA) in September 2000 in Washington, DC, which was initially signed by 37 signatories from 28 economies.
  • The International Accreditation Forum (IAF) was formed in the early 1990s and launched its own MLA in Guangzhou, China, in January 1998, which as of the document's writing had 41 signatories across 33 economies.
  • There is a fundamental technical difference between laboratory accreditation and certification: accreditation against ISO/IEC 17025 focuses on establishing the technical competence of a laboratory for specific tests, whereas certification against ISO 9001:2000 focuses on compliance with generic quality management systems and does not demonstrate technical competence to produce valid data.
  • To improve efficiency and reduce redundant assessments, the ILAC and IAF created the Joint Committee for Closer Collaboration (JCCC) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in October 1999 to coordinate work of common interest.
  • The document identifies a trend where most economies developing accreditation services have merged their testing and certification activities into a single organization; for example, 13 of the 15 EU Member States have done so, while Germany, Belgium, Japan, and the United States maintain fragmented infrastructures.
  • The WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) encourages members to negotiate the recognition of each other's conformity assessment procedures, which can be verified through accreditation based on international standards.

Cite the original document

APA
International Institute for Sustainable Development (n.d.). Emerging International Framework for Accreditation. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/trade_standards_framework.pdf
Chicago
International Institute for Sustainable Development. Emerging International Framework for Accreditation. n.d. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/trade_standards_framework.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=International Institute for Sustainable Development |title=Emerging International Framework for Accreditation |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/trade_standards_framework.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{internationalinstituteforsustainabledevelopmentndemerging, author = {{International Institute for Sustainable Development}}, title = {{Emerging International Framework for Accreditation}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/trade_standards_framework.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated