7 mins read
Related topics
Switching from an exchange-based system of conformity assessment attestations to an access-based system (which can be more easily digitised) potentially holds the key to solving many of the problems the existing paper-based process poses to modern global trade.
Brett Hyland is Stakeholder Engagement Manager at Australia’s national accreditation body NATA. Brett has been leading a project to deliver a white paper on Digital Product Conformity Certificate Exchange (DPCCE) to the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT). The paper aims to explore the many opportunities that ‘access’ technology may present to address existing problems with paper/PDF-based ‘exchange’ systems and lower barriers to international trade.
In this interview, Brett outlines how DPCCE represents a framework for adding trust to supply chains, by providing assurance over conformity data that has been issued by independent parties.
What are the common problems associated with the existing paper-based systems used to demonstrate product conformity and how would switching to a digital system resolve them
Authenticity and validity are the two fundamental issues facing a person holding either a paper or PDF product conformity certificate. Initially it may be difficult to determine whether the physical product they have purchased is the same as the subject of the certificate. Even if that is established, they may not be in a position to assess the authority of the issuing body and would probably be unaware if the certificate had subsequently been revised or withdrawn.
Digital systems allow key data points from different sources to be securely and easily linked together – for example, linking the identifiers for physical delivery with any directly related conformity data. Digital systems also enable access to original data sources in real time, enhancing confidence by ensuring that the data being accessed is both current and valid. Another advantage of digital systems is that they support automated processes, avoiding reliance on manual interrogation that might be compromised by either human error or a lack of timely intervention.
The DPCCE provides a mechanism for accessing, at its source, conformity data that has been digitally linked to both physical product supply and to the issuing body’s credentials. In addition to providing certainty and trust, the DPCCE increases accessibility and speed of verification whilst simultaneously reducing the potential for fraud and risk of loss.
How will the DPCCE help businesses operate and develop in an increasingly competitive and global marketplace?
Proving product claims is fundamental to gaining overseas market access and for attracting pricing premiums in any market. The promised pay-off of a DPCCE for producers and suppliers is that it provides a reliable, rapid and robust system for the digital verification of product claims, whilst avoiding the many potential pitfalls of using paper-based systems, which rely on difficult-to-prove links. In turn, the increased speed, confidence and security generated by using a DPCCE system helps businesses build strong supply chains and lower barriers to trade, enabling them to trade more effectively at both domestic and international levels.
What additional benefits would digitisation bring to stakeholders within the conformity assessment industry?
The UN/CEFACT framework places conformity assessment bodies at the centre of trade data exchange, giving greater visibility to their role as global anchors of trust and supporting the overall value of the industry. We know that misuse of certificates brings reputational damage to issuing parties. While many certificate issuers are now building authentication safeguards into their certificates, it still doesn’t help in situations of misattribution of certificates to irrelevant products. Hopefully, the ideas presented can be seen as augmenting the great steps that the industry is already taking towards enhancing the value of conformity assessment outcomes.
Who would benefit from the introduction of a DPCCE system and in what ways?
Ultimately it is the consumer that benefits from reliably authenticated product claims because their choices (whether driven by considerations of health, performance, place of origin, social or environmental aspects) can be made with greater confidence. When sub-standard products no longer have anywhere to hide, all honest producers and suppliers benefit as well.
Is the accredited conformity assessment industry itself ready to switch to a digital system?
As for any industry, conformity assessment providers need to meet the expectations of their customers and regulators. I am confident that some stakeholders, for some product classes, will be demanding digitally connected capabilities in the near future and that conformity assessment bodies will step forward to meet this demand. However, it is not necessary that one hundred percent uptake be achieved from day one, only that the capacity to do so can expand proportionately to demand.
What are the biggest challenges associated when considering the necessary structure and delivery mechanisms of a DPCCE system?
I mentioned the safeguards that many certificate issuers are now building into their certificates. To deliver maximum benefit, any implementation of the UN/CEFACT concepts needs to be compatible with, and complementary to, these processes. This will likely mean a spectrum of delivery mechanisms, all fulfilling an overarching set of outcomes.
The key to global data exchange is not trying to force everyone to use the same systems but to ensure that different systems are compatible. In the same way that different e-mail platforms do not create hassles for end users, we can hope the same may achieved when applying digital protocols to conformity assessment. I am confident that there is sufficient interest and incentive within both governments and the private sector to generate such an outcome.
Generating confidence in the integrity, validity and extensiveness of the source data will be a crucial part of creating end user buy-in to the DPCCE. What data verification processes will be in place and how will they deal with issues around incomplete and/or ‘questionable’ data?
While data verification can be made as robust as one may wish, it can also become burdensome for the parties navigating such systems. The key is to achieve a consensus level of assurance, with minimum intrusion. Finding appropriate verification processes for product claims, especially environmental claims, is the subject of enormous effort across the world right now, including within UN/CEFACT itself.
The security, confidentiality and ownership of client-related data are important considerations for conformity assessment bodies. How will DPCCE allay these concerns?
Conformity assessment bodies are already obliged to handle information in accordance with the wishes of their customers and they are also unlikely to make publicly available any insights into their own client listings. Fortunately, these constraints can be respected through modern technology, but a shift in outlook may still be needed to prepare for a truly digital future. The UN/CEFACT work provides a new lens through which these challenges might be considered.
How have stakeholders been able contribute to the development of this White Paper?
The UN/CEFACT white paper represents a broad conceptual framework and is a call for stakeholder dialogue, rather than describing a specific plan for implementation. To date, we have been assisted in the development of this white paper by a number of other stakeholders, including international Accreditation Bodies, such as UKAS.
Despite this valuable input, given that the concepts laid out in the UN/CEFACT paper potentially affect every industry in the world, comprehensive stakeholder engagement represents an obvious challenge. However, as an intergovernmental standardisation body, UN/CEFACT has proven to be a useful forum for engaging with governments. Engagement with industry is less advanced, but as pilot activity starts to gain pace, this will hopefully change. The key message is that the concepts are not seeking to replace any of the existing governance structures, but simply examine how these might be adapted to a digital future.