QUALITY POLICY

A Practical Tool
1
1
2
2
QUALITY POLICY
A Practical Tool

Vienna, Austria 2018

3
3
 Table of Contents

L I S T O F A B B R E V I AT I O N S ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
E X EC U T I V E S U M M A R Y ................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 8
G LO SSA R Y ................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
I N T R O D U C T I O N ..................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
S T E P - BY - S T E P A P P R O A C H TO Q P F O R M U L AT I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
S TA G E 1: D O T H E G R O U N D W O R K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
STEP 1.1 ESTABLISH THE NEED .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

STEP 1.2 FOSTER LEADERSHIP AND BUY-IN .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

STEP 1.3 IDENTIFY KEY STAKEHOLDERS ........................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . . 19

STEP 1.4 ENSURE APPROPRIATE OVERSIGHT, DEFINE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

S TA G E 2: CO N D U C T S T R AT EG I C P L A N N I N G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 22
STEP 2.1 UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT AND DEFINE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

STEP 2.2 CARRY OUT A GAP ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING QI .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

STEP 2.3 CONDUCT PRELIMINARY CONSULTATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

STEP 2.4 DEVELOP AND ANALYSE OPTIONS .................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . . 27

S TA G E 3 : P R E PA R E D R A FT Q P A N D B U I L D CO N SE N S U S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 30
STEP 3.1 ESTABLISH TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

STEP 3.2 PREPARE A FIRST DRAFT OF THE QP .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

STEP 3.3 INITIAL CONSULTATION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

STEP 3.4 INCORPORATE FEEDBACK AND INCLUDE LEGAL TEXT ................................................................... . . . . . . . . . 33

STEP 3.5 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND/OR ‘VALIDATION’ WORKSHOP .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

4
4
STEP 3.6 PREPARE “FINAL” VERSION OF THE QP AND THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

STA G E 4: A DVO C A C Y, LO B BY I N G A N D A P P R OVA L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 36

STEP 4.1 ADVOCACY AND ENDORSEMENT ....................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . 37

STEP 4.2 OBTAIN FORMAL APPROVAL . . . .............................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . 37

STA G E 5: I M P L E M E N T, M O N I TO R A N D R E V I E W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 38
STEP 5.1 PUBLISH QP .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . 39

STEP 5.2 COMMUNICATE, PROMOTE AND IMPLEMENT .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

STEP 5.3 MONITOR, REVIEW AND IMPROVE .................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . . 40

B I B L I O G R A P H Y ....................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

A N N E X 1: E X A M P L E O F I N I T I A L CO N CE PT PA P E R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 42

A N N E X 2: E X A M P L E O F T H E T E R MS O F R E F E R E N CE F O R A Q P ST E E R I N G
CO M M I TT E E . . . . . ........................................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

ANNEX 3: A G E N DA F O R I N I T I A L W O R KS H O P O N T H E Q P D E V E LO P M E N T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

A N N E X 4: A G E N DA F O R CO N SE N S U S - B U I L D I N G WO R KS H O P F O R T H E Q P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

A N N E X 5: T E M P L AT E F O R S U B M I SS I O N O F CO M M E N TS O N D R A FT Q P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 47

ANNEX 6: C A SE ST U D I ES ....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 48

NIGERIA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

PAKISTAN ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . 50

ECOWAS . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . . 52

5
5
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This Practical Tool has been prepared by the United Nations

Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) under the overall
supervision and guidance of Mr. Bernardo Calzadilla-Sarmiento,
PhD, Director of the Department of Trade, Investment and
Innovation (TII).
This publication is the result of a collaborative effort with the
International Network on Quality Infrastructure (INetQI). The
members of INetQI are: the International Bureau of Weights and
Measures (BIPM), the International Accreditation
Forum (IAF), the International Electrotechnical Commission
(IEC), the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation
(ILAC), the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO), the International Trade Centre (ITC), the International
Telecommunications Union (ITU), the International Organization
of Legal Metrology (OIML), the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE) and the United Nations Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO).
The work was funded by the contribution from the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Finland to the project on “Promoting good
governance and sustainability of quality infrastructure through
quality policy” and we wish to thank Mr. Antti Piispanen for his
continuous support.
The document draws on UNIDO’s extensive experience in the
areas of quality infrastructure and quality policy development in
developing economies. Special thanks go to the expert Mr. Nigel
Croft, who drafted the technical content.
We greatly acknowledge the contributions from the experts: Mr.
Justin Bayili, Mr. Marcel Gbaguidi, Mr. Aka Kouassi, Ms. Elsie
Meintjies, Ms. Eva Oduor, Mr. Alain Peyre and Mr. Badar Ul Islam
as well as the valuable support provided by the UNIDO staff:
Mr. Adnan Atwa, Mr. Nima Bahramalian, Mr. Bernard Bau, Ms.
Dominika Dor-Skrobot, Mr. Steffen Kaeser, Mr. Otto Loesener,
Ms. Karin Monaco, Ms. Dorina Nati and Mr. Raymond Tavares.

DISCLAIMER

This document has been produced without formal United Nations

editing. The designations and the presentation of the material
in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion
whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations
Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) concerning the
legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities,
or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or its
economic system or degree of development. Designations such
as “developed”, “industrialized” and “developing” are intended
for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a
judgment about the stage reached by a particular country or
area in the development process. Mention of firm names or
commercial products does not constitute an endorsement by
UNIDO. Although great care has been taken to maintain the
accuracy of information herein, neither UNIDO nor its Member
States assume any responsibility for consequences which may
arise from the use of the material. This document may be freely
quoted or reprinted but acknowledgement is requested.
© 2018 UNIDO - All rights reserved

6
6
List of abbreviations

AB Accreditation Body
BIPM Bureau International des Poids et Mésures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures)
CA Conformity Assessment
DCMAS Developing Country Network for Metrology, Accreditation and Standardization
DCED Donor Committee for Enterprise Develoment
ECO Economic Cooperation Organization
ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States
GRP Good Regulatory Practice
IAF International Accreditation Forum
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
ILAC International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation
INetQI International Network of Quality Infrastructure
IPPC International Plant Protection Convention
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ITU International Telecommunication Union
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MSME Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
NAB National Accreditation Body
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NMI National Metrological Institute
NQC National Quality Council
NSB National Standards Body
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
OIE International Organization for Animal Health
OIML International Organization for Legal Metrology
RIA Regulatory Impact Assessment
QI Quality Infrastructure
QP Quality Policy
SADC Southern African Development Community
SC Steering Committee
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SDO Standards Development Organization
SME Small and medium-sized enterprises
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
TBT Technical Barriers to Trade
TFA Trade Facilitation Agreement
TII Department of Trade, Investment and Innovation
UN United Nations
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
WTO World Trade Organization

7
7
 Executive Summary

Over the years, a wealth of knowledge has been The QP development process is divided into five
accumulated by UNIDO and others involved key stages, as follows;
in the implementation and/or improvement
of a Quality Infrastructure (QI) in developing »» Stage 1: Do the groundwork - Instil a sense
economies. The importance of establishing of need for the QP, and promote ownership
and coordination from within government
a Quality Policy (QP) to establish the primary
objectives, roles and responsibilities of such a »» Stage 2: Conduct strategic planning - Define
QI is well documented, but until now much of priorities and allocate resources
the guidance available has focused on “what”
the QP should contain, rather than “how” to go »» Stage 3: Prepare the draft QP - Provide for
about this very important process. transparent consensus-building and assure
coherence
This practical tool is consistent with, and
intended to be used in conjunction with, the »» Stage 4: Lobbying, advocacy and approval
UNIDO publications “Quality Policy Technical - Incorporate as part of national policy
Guide”1, which details the various elements of landscape
a QP, and “Quality Policy Guiding Principles”2
which sets out five core principles for QP »» Stage 5: Implement, monitor and review
development, namely Ownership, Inclusiveness, the QP - Ensure effective and sustainable
Coherence, Optimization and Sustainability. implementation
The tool adopts a process-based (step-by-step) Some practical examples of QP development are
approach, building on experiences obtained in presented in a series of Case Studies (Annex 6
different countries (each with their own specific to this Practical Tool).
context), and, in addition to answering the
question of “what” to do, guides the reader
through the practicalities of the “why”, “who”
and “how” of each step. It also examines some of
the challenges that are likely to be encountered,
and ways to overcome or mitigate them.
1
“Quality Policy Technical Guide”, UNIDO, Vienna, 2018
2
“Quality Policy Guiding Principles”, UNIDO, Vienna, 2018

8
8
Glossary »»
»»
standardization
accreditation
»» conformity assessment
Champion (See Figure 1)
»» market surveillance
A person who sees value in, takes the initiative for,
and leads the development of the QP. The champion
acts as an information-sharing channel to top-level
Quality Policy
government circles and as a consensus builder. The policy adopted at national or regional level to
develop and sustain an efficient and effective quality
Consensus infrastructure .
General agreement, characterized by the absence of
sustained opposition to substantial issues by any
Implementation Plan
important part of the concerned interests, and by a A plan detailing the implementation process after the
process that involves seeking to take into account the QP has been formally adopted, by specifying activities,
views of all parties concerned and to reconcile any responsibilities and a tentative time frame, as well as
conflicting arguments. financial and resource implications.
NOTE: Consensus need not imply unanimity.
Stakeholder
Drafting Group (See Figure 1) Person or organization that can affect, be affected by,
Group responsible for the operational aspects of or perceive itself to be affected by the QP.
preparing the QP, working under the guidance of the
Steering Committee. Steering Committee (SC) (See Figure 1)
Group of (typically 10-15) stakeholders with the
Quality Infrastructure 3 objective of defining the strategic direction of the
The system comprising the organizations (public and QP development process, ensuring the availability
private) together with the policies, relevant legal and of adequate resources, monitoring progress, and
regulatory framework, and practices needed to support ensuring its successful conclusion.
and enhance the quality, safety and environmental NOTE: An existing structure or body with appropriate
soundness of goods, services and processes. recognition/acceptance could also form the basis for
such oversight.
The quality infrastructure is required for the effective
operation of domestic markets, and its international Technical Sub-Committee (See Figure 1)
recognition is important to enable access to foreign
markets. It is a critical element in promoting and Group of subject matter experts convened to support
sustaining economic development, as well as the development of specific functional elements
environmental and social wellbeing. (standardization, conformity assessment, metrology,
etc.) and/or sector components of the QP (for example,
It relies on food safety; agriculture; tourism). These technical sub-
»» metrology committees (which could also be in the form of task
3
Definition approved by International Network of Quality forces, working groups, networks etc.) typically report
Infrastructure, June 2017 to the SC and provide inputs into the Drafting Group.

FIGURE 1: TYPICAL ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE FOR QP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Government

Lead Ministry

Steering Committee (10-15 stakeholders members)

Chair = QP “Champion” ( from Lead Ministry)

QP Drafting Group
(Operational)

Technical Technical Technical Technical

sub committee 1 sub committee 2 sub committee 3 sub committee “n”
© 2018 UNIDO

9
9
 I ntro duc tion
The Quality Policy (QP) is the basic government Government can use the development of the QP
instrument for establishing, formalizing, and as an opportunity to increase awareness among
overseeing the development and performance of a stakeholders of the importance of the QI, their own
Quality Infrastructure (QI). Developing and agreeing roles and responsibilities, and how the different
upon the QP is one of the vital first steps in defining national actors can benefit from it. It can do this by
a QI that is relevant and appropriate for the specific inviting broad stakeholder participation during the
context of a particular country. The QP typically defines consensus-building process for the QP. Examples
the objectives and structure of the QI and a road map of stakeholders include representatives of the
and schedule for setting it up. government’s own ministries and agencies, regulatory
Quality Infrastructure (QI) is a system that combines bodies, trade and industry associations, chambers
initiatives, institutions, organizations (public and of commerce, consumer associations, and providers
private), activities and people. It includes the policies, and users of calibration, testing, certification and
relevant legal and regulatory framework, and practices inspection services. Their input will help ensure that
needed to support and enhance the quality, safety the QP and QI meet the needs of the nation, while
and environmental soundness of goods, services and their participation will encourage implementation of
processes. It is required for the effective operation of the policy and “buy-in” to the Quality Infrastructure.
domestic markets, and its international recognition Whilst it is widely recognized that no “one-size-
is important to establish its credibility in local and fits-all” template can be used, the STEPS that need
foreign markets. QI is a critical element in promoting to be undertaken in order to develop a sustainable
and sustaining economic development, as well as and implementable QP are typically very similar. This
environmental and social wellbeing. It relies on document provides such a step-by-step approach for
metrology, standardization, accreditation, conformity countries to develop (or improve) their QPs in a way
assessment, and market surveillance. that is participative and lasting. It draws extensively
The QP provides details of the preferred QI structures on, and is intended to be used in conjunction with,
and their relevant responsibilities, to facilitate a proper the UNIDO publications “Quality Policy Technical
and coherent division of work within a particular Guide”, which details the various elements of a QP,
country’s context. The policy should also detail the and “Quality Policy Guiding Principles” which sets out
relationship of the QI with the framework for technical five core principles, namely Ownership, Inclusiveness,
regulations. No developing country can afford to Coherence, Optimization and Sustainability. The
duplicate effort and resources to establish parallel intent of the current Practical Tool is NOT to specify
systems of standards, testing and certification; one for WHAT the QP should contain, or its specific format,
the market place and another for regulatory purposes. but to describe in a simple, logical and practical way
the STEPS that typically need to be undertaken in
In recent years, it has also become clear that a well- order to successfully formulate, agree upon, publish,
implemented QI contributes to governmental policy disseminate, implement and/or revise a QP. This means
objectives in areas other than trade of goods and that the QP will have been developed in a participative
services; QI has thus proven useful, for example, manner, agreed among the national stakeholders
for cross-cutting issues such as the efficient use of and considered and approved by the highest relevant
natural and human resources, food safety, health, the authority in the country (i.e. government, cabinet,
environment, climate change, and other topics that Prime Minister, President, etc.). The resulting QP
are included in the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development should recommend the preferred options relating to
Goals (SDGs) for 2030. the legal framework for the establishment of the QI
It is important to understand that the QI of any country institutions and their relationships and be a living
comprises a number of institutions and service providers document that is subject to periodic review and
that must work together as a system. The absence or updating as the country’s needs and expectations
inadequacy of any one of the constituents will compromise evolve over time.
the effectiveness and ultimately the efficiency of the Although the publication and formal adoption of the
system as a whole, thereby negatively affecting business, QP is of course important, the process by which it is
trade and sustainability-related objectives. developed can also be extremely beneficial to the
In most countries, the QI institutions are public or country by bringing the various stakeholders together
semi-public bodies; therefore governments must (each of them with a different perspective), and by
secure resources for their long-term viability and building consensus among them.
play a continuous and active role in their setup and Figure 2 presents a summary of the five underlying
supervision. This is why the Implementation Plan principles and 22 sub-principles for effective QP
for the QP must include an indication of resources
development4.
(including technical assistance, equipment, personnel
and funding) that will be needed for it to achieve its
intended outcomes.
4
“Quality Policy Guiding Principles”, UNIDO, Vienna, 2018

10
10
 FIGURE 2: UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE QP DEVELOPMENT

» Ensur
e gov
ernm
» Promo ent
te tra res
es po
y practic indepe n
nden spare ns
e nce
gu lator c n c ibi
er re » Defin ea y lit
oh ood e cle nd , no ya
c g ork ar r co n
or
y ith
o ry w ole mp di - n
t w
da
t sa et scr
a es

d
ul ch an nd en im

le
ly

a m re c i
sp e

ad
al

ro d
e
on

an

er
na
on
r
d

olu pp

sh
ati

tio
n
na
a

ip
ern

n,
a

si
al

nt

bi
g

OWN
eg
int

ali

lit
el

ies
d

E ER
ev
lign

NC
an
sur

SH
rat

E
ply
»A
» En

R
epa
» Ap

HE
»S

IP
CO
» Fit for purp se and forward
» Follow ev nce and risk b
» Prioritize and focus
» Exploit regional econo
» Consider dynamics
» Encourage innov

V E N E SS
QUALITY POLICY
POLICY
» D o n’t re i n ve n

O PT I M I Z
ide

Guiding principles
Guiding Principles
o

ment
sumers

e
r balanc
USI

ngage
d con
t the

AT
a ti v

ende
and

CL

e
mie

IO

r
r an
wh
e

e
IN
ased
look

evo

d
ap

ng g
s of

ee

hol
e o secto
pro
l

l
u
ing

udi
ake
app

SU
sca

ac
ion

STA
ncl
ate
h

f st
le
roa

I N A B I L I TY
es

ty i
riv
an
ch

ep
ds

rsi
ac ll us
ag
co

ive

e »F
p

u
ng

ollo »E
ed
ef

»E w de
ak

ch
nsu ma n d -d
r iv e n a p p r o a ity »M m
br

»P re fi
eri nanc tainabil »E
» odi ial and resource sus
En call
su y mo
» re e nitor and review
Pro ffec
mo tive i
ting mplementation
info
rmati
on and awareness

© 2018 UNIDO

11
11
 Step-By-Step Approach to Quality Policy
Formulation
The following provides a summary of the key stages country and its motivation for developing or revising its
that typically need to be followed in order to develop QP. On the other hand, the process should not extend
(or revise) and implement a QP once a decision has beyond two years if it is to maintain momentum and
been made to initiate the process to do so. the motivation of stakeholders.
Regardless of the motivations for developing a QP, the Similarly, there is no golden rule for the ideal
steps involved in the process are similar, and the five duration/validity of the QP. It may be convenient
stages described in this Practical Tool can be adapted to align it with some other high-level development
according to the specific needs and context of each plans (where they exist), or simply adopt a 4- or 5-year
country. In many cases, the steps do not necessarily improvement cycle. While the preparation of the QP
follow a linear sequence; there will of course be some may generate some enthusiasm in the early stages, it
overlap and in some cases, a need to revisit some is also important to sustain interest and involvement
of the assumptions made in early steps later in the during its implementation. Too long a duration might
process. be detrimental to this purpose. In all cases though,
It is important to emphasize that the development regular (yearly) updates on achievements will help to
process for the QP should take into account the keep the policy as a “living document”.
implications for its subsequent implementation. It It has to be recognized that in many countries
is therefore appropriate to undertake the parallel government policy development follows a specific
development of an Implementation Plan that takes path, often prescribed by government procedures, and
into consideration the financial viability of the QP, the steps outlined in this Practical Tool might need to
priorities (based on cost/benefit) and other resource be aligned accordingly. The Case Studies in Annex 6 at
implications. the end of this Practical Tool provide examples of how a
There is no fixed or prescribed time-frame for each number of countries developed and implemented their
step, but it is unlikely that a truly participative and QPs, the various stages that were applied in practice,
consensus-based QP can be developed in less than and the lessons learned.
12 months, depending on the specific context of each

TABLE 1: 5-STAGE APPROACH TO THE QP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

DETAILED STEPS OBJECTIVE / OUTPUT KEY PRINCIPLE(S)

1 DO THE GROUNDWORK Instil a clear sense of need, ownership and

coordination from top levels of government

1.1 Establish the need (to A clear rationale for establishing or revising the »» Optimization
prepare or revise the QP) QP »» Sustainability
»» Coherence

1.2 Foster leadership and Interest and leadership from the highest level »» Ownership
buy-in of government; potential resistance from key
players has been overcome

1.3 Identify key stakeholders, Stakeholders identified who can affect or will »» Inclusiveness
including representatives from be affected by the QP
civil society and from business
sectors

1.4 Ensure appropriate Responsibilities established for coordination; »» Ownership

oversight, and define roles and strategic and operational oversight in place to »» Coherence
responsibilities meet timelines
Announcement defining what, when and how
the QP and its implementation plan will be
prepared

12
12
DETAILED STEPS OBJECTIVE / OUTPUT KEY PRINCIPLE(S)

2 CONDUCT STRATEGIC PLANNING Define priorities and allocate resources

2.1 Understand the context and Criteria defined to ensure the QP will reflect »» Optimization
define strategic objectives for the real needs of the country »» Sustainability
the QP »» Inclusiveness
»» Coherence

2.2 Carry out a Gap Analysis of Key issues to be addressed by the QP have »» Ownership
the existing QI been identified

2.3 Conduct preliminary Awareness among stakeholders of the need »» Inclusiveness

consultations with stakeholders for the QI; findings and issues of Gap Analysis
discussed, and inputs gathered to allow for
preliminary drafting of QP
2.4 Develop and analyse Lessons learned from others; benchmarking »» Coherence
options carried out; most cost-effective basis for the »» Sustainability
QI defined
Resources identified and available

3 PREPARE DRAFT QP AND BUILD Provide for transparent consensus-building;

assure coherence
CONSENSUS

3.1 Establish one or more Basis for the QP to address needs of all sectors »» Optimization
Technical subcommittee(s) »» Inclusiveness
to prepare parts of the QP as »» Coherence
needed
3.2 Prepare a first draft of the First draft produced and circulated to provide a »» Inclusiveness
QP starting point for stakeholder discussion »» Coherence

3.3 Initial consultations on the Inputs from relevant stakeholders provided »» Inclusiveness
draft QP Detailed discussions concluded on
implementation modalities

3.4 Incorporate feedback and Second Draft of QP and its Implementation Plan »» Optimization
include legal text produced and circulated »» Inclusiveness
»» Coherence
3.5 Circulate for public Wider buy-in for QP; public comment received »» Inclusiveness
consultation and/or hold
‘validation’ workshops in the
main activity centres of the
country

3.6 Incorporate comments Further improved draft of the QP produced »» Optimization

and prepare the “final” QP and circulated »» Inclusiveness
version together with the »» Coherence
Implementation Plan

13
13
 4 ADVOCACY, LOBBYING AND Incorporate as part of policy landscape
APPROVAL

4.1 Advocacy and endorsement All implementation issues resolved and »» Inclusiveness
by institutional stakeholders appropriate resources committed

4.2 Obtain formal approval QP formally adopted as part of overall policy »» Ownership
from top-level of government Roles clearly defined and implementation plan »» Coherence
approved

5 IMPLEMENT, MONITOR AND Ensure effective and sustainable implementation

REVIEW THE QP

QP available to all citizens together with the »» Inclusiveness

5.1 Publish QP implementation plan

5.2 Communicate, promote Awareness among all stakeholders; liaisons »» Inclusiveness

and implement QP established with partners and donors to
facilitate implementation
5.3 Monitor, review and
QP is able to adapt to changing circumstances »» Sustainability
improve the QP
and national priorities

14
14
 15
15
 STAGE 1
D o t h e g roun d wo rk

16
16
Preparing the groundwork for the subsequent objectives for the preparation / revision of the QP are
consensus-building process is probably the most clear, and there is a well-coordinated plan to achieve
important stage of the entire process, and one them, then the remainder of the process should be
which rarely attracts sufficient emphasis. If there is relatively straightforward. The individual steps in this
good leadership from within government; if all the stage of the process are as follows:
relevant stakeholders are identified and involved; the

STEP 1.1 ESTABLISH THE NEED (TO PREPARE OR REVISE THE QUALITY POLICY)

Intended outcome In some cases, a Gap Analysis might already have

A clear understanding of WHY the QP needs to be been conducted as part of earlier development
developed or revised. projects, with a recommendation to prepare a QP
to address issues related to deficiencies identified
in the QI. For the purposes of this Practical Tool,
Why? however, we assume that such a Gap Analysis has
To ensure that the relevant authorities (and specifi-
not yet been conducted, and this will be addressed
cally high-level government officials in the relevant
in Step 2.2 as part of the QP development process.
Ministries) understand and agree on the need to
begin the work and are supportive of it.
Challenges and mitigation measures.
Who? For some countries, the decision to develop a QP is
The catalyst to provoke the initiation of work on a spontaneous one, aimed primarily at ensuring the
developing or revising the QP is likely to come from QI is formally defined and adopted, with the overall
one or several of the following possible sources: objective of enhancing participation in international
trade and contributing to other sustainable
»» Ministry of Trade and Industry (or equivalent), as development goals. In these circumstances, there
a result of an identified need to participate in (or might not be any immediate urgency for the QP to be
increase) regional and/or international trade published, and a comprehensive, fully participative
consensus-building process can be foreseen. This can
»» Industry stakeholders who are not satisfied with
have the additional benefits of engaging all relevant
the existing QI (or the lack thereof) to support their
stakeholders in a national dialogue aimed at breaking
activities
down eventual “silos” that may have been built up over
»» Development Partners, who want to have the years, with the inevitable associated inefficiencies.
confidence in the country’s strategic ability to It is, however, important to establish a clear timeframe
support trade capacity building initiatives for development of the QP, to avoid complacency and
maintain the momentum of the process.
»» Regulators, who wish to ensure the effective
deployment, implementation and monitoring of On the other hand, there may be external factors that
technical regulations provoke the decision to develop a QP and result in
some time-pressures; for example, the need to achieve
»» Consumers, who demand that products and international recognitions for the quality infrastructure
services available on the market are safe as a pre-condition to entering international trading
partnerships. It is also becoming more and more
What and How? common for Development Partners to require a formal
QP as a pre-condition for investments in the various
The most powerful argument in favour of developing or
components of the QI in developing economies. Whilst
revising the QP will come from a review of successful
this approach is to be applauded, it can lead to the
examples in other countries and/or regions, where this
country having a focus exclusively on achieving the
has resulted in tangible benefits and supported trade
end result (the formally-adopted QP), without making
and other sustainable development initiatives. Some
full use of the corresponding benefits associated with
such examples are given in the Case Studies provided
the policy development process, including proactive
in Annex 6. It should be noted that many DEVELOPED
communications with and feedback from all the
countries have a QI that has evolved gradually and
relevant stakeholders.
matured over a long period of time, without ever
having a formally defined QP. A disciplined, systematic In these situations, the use of Development Partners
and consensus-based approach to developing and and consultants can be extremely useful in order
implementing a QP can, however, provide significant to facilitate and expedite the process by providing
benefits for developing countries. Such countries, independent and impartial inputs. It is important to
who are probably starting on their quality journey, stress, however, that each country should develop
can use not only the QP itself, but also the process a sense of “ownership” of its QP, rather than simply
for its development, to bring together the various hiring a consultant to prepare it on their behalf, and
public and private sector institutions involved in the should encourage the maximum participation of the
QI, and agreeing clear responsibilities, authorities and relevant government organs at all stages of the QP
interactions between them. development.

17
17
 STEP 1.2 FOSTER LEADERSHIP AND BUY-IN

Intended outcome What and How?

Key players from government and other relevant For the appropriate high-level government officials to
stakeholders are sensitized and convinced about the provide leadership they may first need to be convinced
need for and potential benefits of a formally-adopted about the need for and potential benefits of a formally-
QP. A leader / champion (or group of champions) for adopted QP, as well as the risks associated with not
the process is identified. having such a national policy. It is to be hoped that this
practical tool and the Case Studies herein, as well as
other UNIDO publications, can be useful in providing
Why? justification for the initiative.
To promote leadership and commitment from the It should be emphasized that the benefits of developing
highest appropriate level of government and to a QP are twofold:
overcome potential resistance from other key players.
Obtaining a sense of ownership at the governmental »» The consensus-building process for the QP, if
level for the formulation or revision of the QP is vital conducted in line with the recommendations of this
for the ultimate success of the project. Without one or Practical Tool (with clear government leadership,
more “champions” within government who understand and contributions from key stakeholders), can
provide a unique opportunity to address national
the need for and are committed to the development
priorities (both public and private sector) and to
of the QP, the initiative is likely to fail, or take an
ensure that the QI is aligned with those priorities.
inordinate amount of time and effort.
»» The governance and strategic direction provided
by a formally adopted QP should ensure the
Who? prioritization of resources for the QI that are
Typically, the process will be initiated by one or more appropriate within the national context, and its
of the following “actors”: sustainability even under changing political and
economic landscapes. Whilst the overall objectives
for the QI will be to support the legitimate
»» Representative of the Ministry of Trade and In- objectives of government via regulatory measures
dustry (or equivalent), often with support from to protect the health and safety of its citizens and
business associations, as a result of the need the environment, the QP is also a vital instrument
to improve the country’s ability to export goods for trade facilitation and economic growth, as
and services in an increasingly demanding in- well as contributing to the nation’s Sustainable
ternational market, and in line with WTO TBT/ Development initiatives.
SPS criteria. On the other hand, if there is no clearly defined QP,
the governance and interactions between the various
»» The National Standards Body (usually one of institutions that comprise the QI can be confused,
the first QI components to be established in with overlap and sometimes conflicting priorities and
any ad-hoc system that may be established pri- objectives. This typically results in overall inefficiency of
or to the development of a formal QP), recog- the system, increased bureaucracy, and un-necessary
nizing the need for better organization and dis- burdens both for the public and private sector entities
cipline in order to clarify potentially conflicting and for citizens who rely on the QI institutions for their
roles and responsibilities for topics such as business and other needs.
standardization, technical regulation, confor-
mity assessment, metrology and accreditation. Although there may already be local specialists who
are knowledgeable in the technical aspects of a QI, the
»» Development Partners, who are increasingly involvement of internationally recognized consultants
requiring countries seeking technical assis- can be useful at this early stage in order to support
tance to have a formally adopted QP in order and reinforce the messages that are transmitted to
to provide confidence in their ability to make high-level government officials. This may necessitate
effective use of financing for initiatives that in- individual audiences or meetings with such officials
volve components of the QI. from the various ministries involved (for example,
Trade and Industry, Health, Agriculture, Fisheries and
Exactly WHO takes on the role of “champion” will others), as well as focus group discussions and larger
vary depending on the overall stimuli that led to workshops, in which the simultaneous participation
the decision to initiate the process of developing or of the different ministries could be a challenge. It
enhancing the QP. Ideally, the “champion(s)” should must be emphasized that the focus of these initial
be at the Ministerial level, or at least high-level meetings and workshops is at the national government
government officials supported by colleagues in other level, and they should not be confused with those to
parts of government. be conducted with other stakeholders later in the QP
consensus-building process.

18
18
Prior to the meeting(s), it is beneficial to prepare a short Challenges and mitigation measures
(maximum 2-page) briefing note (“Concept Paper”)
on what is being planned, the issues that need to be Reactions to the QP development initiative are likely
addressed, the benefits of formalizing the QP for the to vary between the different ministries - indifference
country, the risks associated with not having a formal or some opposition can be expected by those who
QP, an overview of the steps involved, preliminary feel threatened by the real or perceived changes in
time-frames and some early recommendations. Some responsibilities, accountabilities and authorities
of the issues that it is useful to highlight typically that the QP and the associated QI might bring. This
include the effect of globalization, challenges faced opposition may be overt (in which case it can be
by enterprises, the current situation regarding the QI discussed openly) or covert (which is more difficult
and the technical regulation regime, and the need for to identify and address). It is important during these
a clear commitment of government. An example core initial steps, therefore, to establish a critical mass of
text that might be used as a basis for such a Concept support from within government to overcome such
Paper is shown in Annex 1. resistance to the change process. It is at this point
that independent international consultants can have a
With adequate preparation, it is to be expected facilitating role, using concrete examples of successes
that these initial meetings and/or workshops could and failures from elsewhere. The style of government
be held over a two-week period, though this will of and the national culture is an important factor to be
course depend on the availability of the appropriate taken into account when seeking to obtain wider
ministers and officials. Unlike the later workshops, support.
these meetings are likely to be concentrated in the
capital city.

STEP 1.3 IDENTIFY KEY STAKEHOLDERS

Intended outcome number of regulatory bodies, whilst in others these

could be spread over a large number of independent
Identification of those who will be affected by, or
agencies.
perceive themselves to be affected by the QP, so that
their needs and expectations (and concerns) can be The following generic categories of stakeholder
taken into consideration during the development should be considered and adapted for the specific
process. Note that preliminary identification of the context of each country:
stakeholders can be conducted in parallel with Steps
1.1 and 1.2. Policy makers and regulators
»» Relevant Ministries
Why? »» Government Agencies
To ensure a comprehensive consensus-building Any pre-existing standards organizations
process for the QP, that will, in turn, facilitate its
»» National Standards Body (if already
effective implementation. constituted)
»» Other Standards Development Organizations
Who? »» Industry-based standards organizations
Initial identification of the key stakeholders is likely Any pre-existing metrology organizations
to be made by the project “champions” based on a
»» National Metrology Institute (NMI)
preliminary analysis, prior to the establishment of the
Steering Committee, and subsequently reviewed and »» Legal Metrology Department
modified as necessary as the QP development process »» Calibration Laboratories
evolves.
Any pre-existing accreditation organizations
(national or regional)
What and How? Other organizations
In terms of the identification of the relevant »» Quality associations
stakeholders, the specific categories and their »» Inspection agencies (for example import
relevance to the QI and QP will depend primarily on inspection agencies)
the individual nation’s economy. For example, in some
»» Testing laboratories (for example medical,
countries agriculture might be of key importance; in food testing, or environmental laboratories)
others it might be fisheries, or tourism. Some countries
might have easy access to international accreditation »» Product, system, or personnel certification
bodies operating in the country
on a regional basis; others not. Some may have
technical regulations that are restricted to a small »» Industry, Trade and/or Service sector

19
19
 associations stakeholders are identified in a timely manner and are
»» Users (for example contractors, utility able to provide their inputs into the QP development
companies, private or public sector process. It is not realistic to expect that ALL stakeholders
purchasing/procurement organizations, will be identified right at the beginning, prior to the
exporters, etc.) establishment of the Steering Committee (See Step
»» Consumer organizations 1.4). This topic should, however, be a routine agenda
item for the Steering Committee, not only in terms of its
»» Private sector organizations own membership, but also to ensure that the relevant
stakeholders are invited to participate in the various
Challenges and mitigation measures consensus-building activities (including workshops
The main challenge is to ensure that the relevant and commenting on the draft QP).

STEP 1.4 ENSURE APPROPRIATE OVERSIGHT, AND DEFINE ROLES AND

RESPONSIBILITIES

Intended outcome »» Ministry of Trade and Industry (or equivalent)

Steering Committee membership and Terms of »» Ministry of Agriculture and/or Fisheries
Reference defined (see Annex 2); drafting group
»» Ministry of Health
appointed and a tentative schedule and work division
circulated. »» Ministry of Defence
»» Ministry of the Environment/Energy/Water
Why? »» Ministry of Finance
To provide oversight and support for the process, Representatives of Industry and/or Service sector
in terms of strategic planning and control, and the organizations such as:
assignment of roles and responsibilities for the more
operational aspects of the QP development. The »» National Chamber of Commerce
Steering Committee can be important in order to ensure »» National Industry Confederation
that there is sufficient diversity in the leadership
»» National Planning Commission (or
and oversight to provide continuity to the process in equivalent)
the event of changes to the political landscape. The
Steering Committee can eventually form the basis of »» Hotel and Tourism Associations
a National Quality Council (NQC) or equivalent for the Consumer organizations
subsequent implementation and maintenance of the Representatives of any pre-existing QI institutions,
QP (See Stage 5). such as:
»» National Standards Body
Who? »» National Metrological Institute
Overall coordination should be a high-level official
»» Accreditation Body (or Accreditation Focal
in the relevant Ministry (ideally the “Champion” Point)
defined in Step 1.2), and this person should Chair the
Steering Committee. This is likely to be someone from »» Governmental and/or Private sector
laboratories (National Laboratory
the ministry responsible for the implementation of the Association)
WTO TBT Agreement in the country, or if the country
is not yet a member of the WTO, then the Ministry »» Management systems and product
responsible for trade and industry, or equivalent. certification body associations

It is important to include high-level officials from other What and How?

stakeholder ministries, especially those that develop One of the main activities of the Steering Committee
and implement technical regulations. should be to establish and monitor a high-level
If international consultants are to be used, it is project plan for the development of the QP and its
important to assign clearly the national focal point(s) subsequent implementation, using the key stages and
who will coordinate their interactions with the Steering steps outlined in Table 1 (modified as appropriate),
Committee and other stakeholders. to define the “Who, What, When, Where and How”
for the various stages. As mentioned previously,
The typical initial composition of the Steering
there is no fixed prescriptive approach or pre-defined
Committee might include the following:
time lines, and each country will need to develop
its own plan based on the context in which the QP
State bodies involved in regulatory and support/ is being developed or updated. It is, however, vital
planning activities, such as: that such a plan IS established, so that progress can
be monitored and any corrections to the plan made

20
20
as the work progresses, using a “Plan-Do-Check-Act” »» Preparing and following-up the implementation
(PDCA) approach. plan (to be initiated in parallel with the
development of the QP).
Factors that can affect the project plan include:
»» The motivations for developing and formalizing the »» Liaising with any International Consultants who
QP (including any specific time pressures) might be involved in the development of the QP.
»» The current status of the Quality Infrastructure Challenges and mitigation measures
components (including ad-hoc activities The main challenge is to ensure that the Steering
that may have been implemented prior Committee members are the appropriate ones and
to the establishment of a formal QP)
are prepared to participate actively in the process.
»» Resources (and in particular the human and Some typical challenges and their mitigation measures
financial resources) available to contribute to the include the following:
project
Low participation and/or involvement in SC
»» National priorities meetings
»» The demographics of the country (in terms of size, »» If the decision to initiate the development or
overall industrial policy, infrastructure and level of revision of the QP and the associated concept
economic development) paper (See Step 1.2) have been approved
at an appropriate level of government,
»» Any political considerations (including political
participants will be encouraged to attend
stability, upcoming elections and/or other factors
the steering committee meetings and are
that could influence the consensus-building
likely to be more positive and receptive
process)
towards it.
In addition to the high-level strategic planning
and coordination, it is also important to define an »» Meetings need to be planned well in
operational drafting team who will actually “do the advance, and dates/times should not be
work” involved in the development of the QP, under the changed, even if some key members are
guidance of the Steering Committee. This drafting team unable to attend. (Note that in some cases
international consultants may need to report
will typically be responsible for the following activities
to meetings of the Steering Committee, and
(among others):
might not be available at short notice).
»» Coordinating and documenting the national
context and potential priorities for the QP »» Each SC member should appoint a substitute
development (Stage 2). who is able to represent them when needed.

»» Publicizing and organizing workshops for »» Provide for remote participation (web-based
stakeholders at various stages during the or by teleconference).
awareness and consensus-building process and
Inadequate preparation for meetings
ensuring that feedback is adequately recorded and
addressed. »» The ministry responsible for the coordination
»» Developing the first draft of the QP (Stage 3), taking should ensure that there are sufficient
into consideration the results of the previous resources available and that operational
stages, and the implications for the subsequent responsibilities are defined for planning
implementation of the QP. and follow-up of meetings.

»» Circulating the draft QP (via the SC) for comment »» Inappropriate formulation of the SC
among stakeholders.
»» The SC should include a fixed set of core
»» Encouraging, stimulating and facilitating feedback members in order to provide continuity,
in a structured and documented manner. but its composition can be modified as the
project evolves.
»» Incorporating feedback into the revised draft(s)
as appropriate. »» Consideration should be given to ensure
the SC is inclusive in nature (for example,
»» Liaising with legal advisors/Attorney General in terms of gender), and that no single
Office (or equivalent) to frame the QP within the stakeholder or institution dominates.
appropriate legislative format and wording.
»» After an initial kick-off meeting, and once
»» Ensuring that there is good communication when a full analysis has been made of the
the QP is circulated for public consultation. relevant stakeholders (see Step 1.3), other
»» Coordinating/facilitating drafting of the final representations might need to be added to
version of the QP, taking into consideration the Steering Committee.
technical, administrative and legal aspects. »» The SC should not aim to include ALL
»» Publicizing the formal approval of the QP among stakeholders and should not be seen as a
stakeholders. substitute for stakeholder workshops.

21
21
 STAGE 2
Co nd u c t stra tegi c planni ng

22
22
 “ Fa il u re to pl a n means pla n n ing to fa il”
Benjamin Franklin

The QP articulates the government’s intentions as international commitments - see Figure 3. During
regarding QI development in the country. The QP the strategic planning stage, it is also important to
does not exist in a vacuum; it has to be promulgated begin thinking about the cost/benefit relationship
within the context of industrial development, export of any changes to the QI that the policy will imply,
promotion, trade promotion and other similar and the resources that are likely to be required for its
government policies, strategies, and priorities as well subsequent implementation.

FIGURE 3: CROSS-CUTTING NATURE OF THE QP

© 2018 UNIDO

Strategic planning is therefore a key stage in the steps are important in order for the project to succeed:
development or revision of the QP, and the following

STEP 2.1 UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT AND DEFINE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

Intended outcome affect the ways in which the QP is developed and

An understanding of the current status of the overall implemented. Both national and international factors
national quality infrastructure, and a definition of need to be considered when developing the QP, and
the objectives and priorities for the QP and QI within a good understanding of these is important to help
the overall framework of the national development define priorities.
strategies.
Who?
Why? The initial context analysis should be conducted
Every country presents a different situation, so it under the guidance of the Steering Committee, and
is important to establish the specific factors that subsequently presented, reviewed and modified as

23
23
 necessary during the stakeholder workshops. Inputs journey” that prioritises initially the very basic needs
from consultants can be useful at this stage, in order of society, and that progresses through the various
to provide an independent and impartial perspective. levels, with examples as follows6:
»» Level 1: focus on quality Infrastructure aspects
that address issues such as water purity, food
What and How? safety and health care. Examples may include
The context in which the country seeks to implement the need for technical regulations (preferably
its QP includes the following factors5: based on international, regional or national
standards), testing and medical laboratories and
International context - This can include, for example: the associated metrological capabilities.
»» key drivers and global trends that can have
an impact on the country’s aspirations and
objectives »» Level 2: Initiatives aimed at achieving the
legitimate objectives of government; protection
»» relationships with, perceptions and values of the health and safety of citizens, supported
of international business partners and by appropriate standards, technical regulations
the international community in general and conformity assessment services. Quality
(including cultural, social, political, infrastructure to include basic legal metrology to
legal, regulatory, financial, technological, provide confidence in local trade, and conformity
economic, and natural factors as well as assessment services to verify compliance with
the competitive environment) that are technical regulations (for both local production
considered relevant and imports).
»» international agreements to which the »» Level 3: Initiatives aimed at promoting exports and
country is a signatory facilitation of international trade. Participation
in regional and international standards
National context - This can include, for example: development; availability of internationally-
recognized conformity assessment facilities, a
»» governance, structure, roles and
national focal point for accreditation, and a NMI
accountabilities
focused on legal and industrial metrology with
»» policies, objectives, and overall traceability to international standards for the
development strategies relevant measurements (prioritized according to
the national needs).
»» capabilities in terms of resources and
knowledge (e.g. capital, time, people, »» Level 4: QI initiatives aimed at providing
processes, systems and technologies) confidence in initiatives other than trade, that will
contribute to Sustainable Development (energy
»» information systems, information flows and efficiency; water efficiency; greenhouse gas
decision-making processes (both formal emissions, IT compatibility and interoperability,
and informal) etc). Development of metrological capabilities
in these areas, and international recognition
»» relationships with, and perceptions and of conformity assessment activities (national
values of national stakeholders accreditation focal point; recognition of regional
accreditation initiatives).
»» the country’s culture
»» Level 5: Innovative QI initiatives aimed at emerging
»» standards, guidelines and models adopted technologies (nanotechnology; biomedical
by the country technologies etc), with the associated capabilities
»» form and extent of contractual relationships in scientific metrology.
and adherence to international norms and Following a similar philosophy to define the national
conventions priorities and assign resources accordingly will
This means that there is no single uniquely-defined facilitate the development of the QP and its subsequent
starting point for the development of the QP that implementation, rather than deciding priorities solely
applies for all countries - this will depend on the based on the availability of international donor
maturity of their existing Quality Infrastructure, funding.
national priorities and the needs and expectations of
the relevant stakeholders.
It is convenient to think in terms of a “Hierarchy of
Challenges and mitigation measures
Needs” and apply these to the various stages of the Some governments in developing countries still
evolution of a Quality Infrastructure that is appropriate 6
It is important to emphasize that the quality infrastructure should
for the current level of development of the specific be defined in such a way that it can evolve to address these
changing priorities over time as the country develops. The same
country. This suggests a “quality infrastructure core infrastructure should be capable of addressing both national
5
Adapted from the definition given in ISO/IEC Guide 73:2009 (Risk and international policy objectives over the course of time, with the
management — Vocabulary) corresponding levels of recognition.

24
24
pursue national policy goals which frequently Another challenge is to ensure that the QP is appropriate
undermine trade, leading to a poor overall business for the reality of the country, and that it can be used
environment. These goals may have been influenced as a building block for future development. In terms of
by vested interests to limit competition or profit, by the prioritization of policy objectives, it is important
regulatory authorities, by interest groups lobbying to relate these to the overall maturity of the specific
for stronger national regulations than the prevailing country, and avoid being too ambitious for the current
international norms and/or “turf wars” between stage of development. Whilst international funding
different stakeholder groups. This can be overcome by initiatives are of course to be welcomed, these may not
comprehensive engagement and awareness-building always align with the current level of maturity, thereby
among stakeholder groups of the wider international diverting national counterpart resources from where
implications of the QP. they may be better utilized.

STEP 2.2 CARRY OUT A GAP ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING QUALITY INFRASTRUCTURE

Intended outcome given that the QI institutions may be unable to

provide objective information themselves.
Clear assessment of the current capabilities of the QI,
and the key areas to be addressed in the QP in order »» Analysis of the technical regulation regime,
for it to achieve its objectives (see Step 2.1) and custom and practices amongst the many
responsible Ministries. The technical regulation
regime should be benchmarked against criteria
defined by the WTO TBT and/or SPS Agreements,
Why? the practices of major actual and potential
To define the starting point for the development of the trading partners, and the country’s sustainable
QP. If the country does not have the appropriate QI (or development commitments.
does not make the best use of its current resources), Use of the SWOT methodology (“Strengths,
it will not be able to achieve its overall development Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats”) and PESTLE
objectives. analysis (Political, Economic, Social, Technological,
Legal and Environmental) are tools that can be
appropriate at this stage.
Who? Other tools that can be useful in conducting specific
It is important that the Gap Analysis be conducted by gap analyses for QI are available from various
people who are impartial, who are seen to be impartial, international development partners.
and who are not inhibited from expressing concerns
or criticisms of the current QI and its component
institutions. Typically, the Gap Analysis will be led by Challenges and mitigation measures
an international consultant (or consultants), familiar By far the biggest challenge in conducting the gap
with the national and international context in which analysis is for those involved to avoid the inevitable
the QI has to be effective, with unrestricted access attempts to influence their findings in favour of “vested
to and collaboration from relevant interested parties. interests”. These vested interests might include
“territorial” issues from existing institutions that
could face streamlining, mergers or even extinction,
What and How? or arise due to commercial interests of private sector
By definition, a Gap Analysis is a comparison between organizations.
the desired state of the QI (to be defined in the QP) The best way to mitigate against these challenges is by
and the current (actual) situation. Prior to the initial the appropriate selection of a team (not an individual)
drafting of the QP, therefore, the following activities to conduct the gap analysis. This should ensure that
should be carried out: their competence and impartiality is recognized and
accepted beyond doubt by all interested parties.
»» Analysis of the policy environment in which the QP
Desirable behaviours for the assessment team include
has to be established.
the following (according to the recommendations of
»» Identification of the current QI in the country, ISO 19011 for an independent management system
especially its strengths, weaknesses and audit, which are considered to be relevant here):
challenges compared to the objectives that have
been defined in Step 2.1. This includes not only »» ethical (fair, truthful, sincere, honest and
the institutions themselves, but the ways in which discreet)
they collaborate and interact as a coherent whole. »» open-minded (willing to consider alternative
»» The views of the clients of the QI institutions ideas or points of view)
should be sought, especially the private sector, »» diplomatic

25
25
 »» observant »» acting with fortitude (able to act responsibly
and ethically, even though these actions may
»» perceptive not always be popular and may sometimes
result in disagreement or confrontation)
»» versatile (able to adapt to different
situations) »» culturally sensitive
»» tenacious (persistent and focused on It is, however, important to ensure that the team works
achieving objectives) well together, and that there is good complementarity
between a variety of individual profiles.

STEP 2.3 CONDUCT PRELIMINARY CONSULTATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS

Intended outcome It is also important that any workshops be professionally

facilitated, in order to ensure that all participants have
The objectives to be achieved by the QP are endorsed an opportunity to voice their opinions. Workshops
and the Gap Analysis of the QI is confirmed/agreed by should be an opportunity for those who are directly
stakeholders, who are then involved, consulted and involved in the coordination of the QP development
take an active role in the development of the QP. to LISTEN, in order to ensure an approach that
Why? takes into consideration the views and concerns of
all the relevant stakeholders, in a balanced way.
This is another key stage in the development of a
truly consensus-based QP, and if sufficient attention Together with the workshop invitations it is advisable
is given to the planning and execution of these to inform potential participants about the objectives
consultations (typically “workshops”), in such a way of the workshop. This could be a “white paper” based
that they really reach out to those who will be affected on the original Concept Paper (see Stage 1) to explain
by the QP, then its subsequent implementation will be what is being planned, the main issues that need to be
greatly facilitated. This facilitates awareness-building addressed (taken from the gap analysis), the aims and
and the “buy-in” of the stakeholders, and a sense of benefits of formalizing the QP for the country, and an
ownership by seeking their inputs, rather than presenting overview of the stages involved. This will help to put
them with a “fait-acompli” that is to be imposed. the workshop in its proper context, and, if signed by
As stated in the UNIDO Publication “Guide for the someone at a high level of government (for example
Development of National Quality Policies”, “Special a Minister), will encourage participation. It will also
attention should be given to the consultation process, provide an appropriate focus for this stage of the
as the implementation of a QP will seriously impact consensus-building process and make these initial
many entities in both the public and private sector. consultations with stakeholders more efficient.
Continuous and wide consultations throughout the Some of the issues that it is useful to highlight typically
whole development process is therefore indicated, e.g. include the effect of globalization, challenges faced
it would not be good enough just to circulate the final by enterprises, the current situation regarding the QI
draft for public comment after it has been developed and the technical regulation regime, and the need for a
in isolation by a small group of government officials.” clear commitment of government. It is also important to
stimulate discussion about potential options (public,
private or public/private partnerships) for the various
Who? components of the QI. See also Step 2.5.
The Steering Committee should be responsible for A typical agenda for a one-day Workshop is given in
overall coordination of these initial consultations/ Annex 3.
workshops, with operational support from the Drafting
Group.
Challenges and mitigation measures
One of the biggest challenges is to stimulate and
What and How? facilitate the participation of relevant stakeholders
The planning of initial awareness-building workshops in the initial consultations and workshops. The
is key to ensuring that the relevant stakeholders are difficulties in this respect can be seen in some of the
given the opportunity (and have the resources) to Case Studies presented in this Practical Tool.
participate BEFORE the first draft of the QP is prepared.
There are a number of ways in which this potential lack
Good communication ahead of time, and the provision
of participation can be mitigated, including:
of appropriate funding is particularly important for
SMEs and consumers, who may not be organized into »» Planning and announcing workshops well in
formal, well-funded associations, and are therefore advance, including, for example, circulating
more difficult to reach. Consideration could be given a “save-the-date” announcement before the
to having consultations with individual stakeholder definitive workshop programme becomes
groups and/or conducting workshops in geographic available. It is unrealistic to expect good
locations other than the capital city. participation if invitations are only issued less

26
26
 than 20 days in advance. thoroughly the outcomes of consultative sessions and
workshops. The ongoing work and results can thus
»» Ensuring the participation of key opinion-formers be edited for clarity, and either posted on a website
and influential government officials / international or circulated to stakeholders (especially those in
consultants to provide keynote speeches that will remote regions). Similarly, transparency requires
attract stakeholders to take part. that virtually any view or position be accounted for
»» Providing funding for some stakeholder groups to in the QP development process. Stakeholders will
participate, as necessary (travel; accommodation). certainly have divergent senses of priorities; these
need to be reconciled and in some cases could be
»» Providing funding so that the consultations can be accommodated by adapting the time-line for the
done in selected geographic locations other than QP implementation. When the consensus-building
the capital city. process leads to a proposition being discarded, this
As the QP preparation needs to reach out a large entry should nevertheless be mentioned (in Annexes
number of stakeholders, it is also useful to document listing, for example, all comments and their treatment
during the development process).

STEP 2.4 DEVELOP AND ANALYSE OPTIONS

Intended outcome demand from conformity assessment services in

the country might not justify setting up a national
An understanding of the different ways in which the QI
accreditation body, (AB) and it might be more cost-
might be structured, how other countries have chosen
effective to rely on regional or international ABs to
to define their QPs, the lessons that can be learned,
provide the necessary oversight of the local conformity
and the most appropriate solution for the country.
assessment bodies, with a local “accreditation focal
Why? point” responsible for coordination.
It has to be emphasized once again that there is no There are several ways in which these various factors
“one-size-fits-all” approach for the QI, and this should can be taken into consideration when analysing the
be appropriate to the context of the particular country options available, and the choice of the appropriate
in which it is being implemented. Instead of simply methodology will depend on the time and resources
copying what others have done, it is likely that the best available. These include:
QP will be a hybrid solution that incorporates the good
practices of several possible alternatives. In order to »» Study tours to countries with a similar national
context (probably, but not necessarily within the
be able to make an informed decision, therefore, it
same geographical region), to learn from their
is important to understand the different options that
experiences (what went well, and what they would
might be available. do differently if they could start over again).
»» Analysis of the various case studies presented in
Who? this practical tool.
This analysis should be conducted by a group of »» Discussions with international agencies and
stakeholders specifically assigned to the task, consultants, who should be encouraged to present
supported as necessary by International Consultants, options, and not a single proposed solution.
and under the overall guidance of the Steering
Committee.
Challenges and mitigation measures
As discussed previously in Step 2.3, the structure of
What and How?
the QI can include public, private or public/private
Extensive guidance is provided in the UNIDO Quality partnerships. In some countries two or more functions
Policy Technical Guide for the Development of QPs7, may be conducted by sister organizations within the
and will not be repeated here. same overall structure, in which case real or potential
The first policy issue to be decided by a country relates conflicts of interest will need to be considered. This is
to the options for the legal status of its QI institutions. particularly true in cases where standards bodies have
These range from pure government departments to previously taken on the role of “de-facto regulators”.
organizations that operate in accordance with normal Other examples of real or perceived conflicts may
business profit motives. The government also has to arise when sister organizations under the same parent
decide the extent to which it can afford to establish organization are involved in standards development
independent (governmental) institutions, and the and the provision of conformity assessment services;
commercial freedom it will allow such organizations accreditation and metrology; accreditation and
to provide services at market-related prices. This is regulatory activities, and other such combinations.
particularly the case for accreditation, where the It is therefore important to define a structure
Quality Policy Technical Guide, UNIDO, Vienna, 2018
7 that recognizes and manages these potentially

27
27
 conflicting roles and responsibilities for topics such
as standardization, technical regulation, conformity
assessment, metrology and accreditation among the
various QI institutions. If these multiple activities are
all centralized under a “single roof” (for example in
small economies), then it is important to implement
the appropriate “firewalls” between them. Whilst
these firewalls may effectively manage real conflicts
of interest, however, perceived conflicts of interest
become almost inevitable and may also need to be
taken into account.
On the other hand, if, for example, inspection and
laboratory capacities are established by a number of
different ministries in order to service their regulatory
framework, this may led to significant duplication of
resources. Most institutions refer to their mandates
in accordance with the Acts that established them,
so a review of the content of these Acts in a holistic
manner is important.
In order to initiate the consensus-building process
(Stage 3) it may be appropriate to produce a second
‘White Paper’ resulting from the initial consultations
and from strategic considerations that can be
widely circulated for feedback. All options and their
consequences should be included, and any unresolved
issues clearly identified.

28
28
 29
29
 STAGE 3
P repa re d ra f t Quali ty Poli cy and
bu ild co ns ensus

30
30
Consensus does not just “happen”. It needs to be final version is agreed. The steps that are outlined in
guided and driven in stages, and the drafting team this stage will help to guide the consensus-building
that is responsible for preparing the text of the QP must process.
be prepared to go through various iterations until the

STEP 3.1 ESTABLISH TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEES TO PREPARE PARTS OF THE

QUALITY POLICY AS NEEDED

Intended outcome What and How?

Subject matter experts (in the form of technical sub- There are inevitably a number of different perspectives
committees, task forces, working groups etc.) are of the various stakeholders for the content of the QP,
designated and are able to contribute to specific topics and after the initial awareness-building workshops
that are relevant for the formulation of the QP. it may be appropriate to establish specific technical
subcommittees (reporting to the Steering Committee),
each with a clearly defined remit. These could include,
Why? for example, groups focused on:
The QP needs to address the (often numerous)
»» Specific components of the QI and the relevant
viewpoints of society and the various stakeholder stakeholders (those who will be involved in or
perspectives. It is important not only to focus affected by the QP)
exclusively on industrial / manufactured products,
but also to address the needs of the food, healthcare, »» International trade (and specifically, WTO/TBT)
and service sectors (including tourism). These are implications of the QP
unlikely to be covered by WTO/TBT rules, but they
are frequently subject to SPS measures and technical »» Food and agriculture, with a focus on SPS aspects
regulations, and require a functioning QI to be properly »» Implications for technical regulations, and the
implemented. It is also pertinent to consider the interactions between the various regulatory bodies
country’s commitments to environmental and social
issues that might be involved in meeting sustainable »» Sustainability issues (economic, social and
development goals and targets. environmental)
It is unlikely that the Steering Committee or the
drafting group will themselves have sufficient in-depth
knowledge of each of these domains, and access to Challenges and mitigation measures
this expertise can be achieved by forming smaller There may be some incompatibilities between the
technical groups of subject-matter experts (including perspectives and recommendations of the different
consultants, where appropriate). technical subcommittees. This can be mitigated by
strong coordination and conflict resolution by the
Steering Committee, which should meet regularly to
Who? review progress.
Experts in the specific topics that are relevant to the Whilst the objective should always be to achieve
QP within the country’s context. full consensus, it is important to adopt working /
decision rules that have been defined and agreed at
the beginning of the process.

STEP 3.2 PREPARE A FIRST DRAFT OF THE QUALITY POLICY

Intended outcome Who?

A first working draft of the QP that can serve as a basis This should be coordinated by the drafting team
for further discussion and consensus building. (see Stage 2), using inputs from the Technical Sub-
committees, under the guidance of the Steering
Committee, and with technical assistance (as necessary)
Why? from development partners and consultants.
To form the foundation for initial stakeholder
consultation and subsequent refinement of the draft
QP. What and How?
The initial drafting should take into consideration the
following inputs:

31
31
 »» The strategic direction for the QI that has been Even at this early stage of drafting, it is important to start
defined by the Steering Committee thinking about the implementation strategy for the QP,
once approved. This should include the prioritization
»» Outputs from the initial awareness-building of objectives, a tentative time-frame to achieve them,
workshop(s) with stakeholders and the financial and resource implications. Whilst the
»» Inputs from the Technical sub-committees (Step QP should of course be forward-looking, it is vital that
3.1) its effective implementation is realistic in the short-
to-medium term and feasible in terms of the country’s
»» Preliminary implementation considerations for the (primarily economic) context.
QP (including realistic budgets and other resource
implications).
The important topics to be addressed in the early drafts Challenges and mitigation measures
of the QP include: It is important that the first draft is not perceived as
being a definitive document developed by International
»» Introduction with the justification for, and benefits Consultants or by a small group of government officials,
of, the QP in the particular national context (See
for “rubber-stamping” by the stakeholders. This can
Stage 2).
be mitigated by providing possible alternative text
»» Outline of the QI structure of the future. This should and solutions, and by framing the draft in a way that
deal with all the public entities and provide space allows for stakeholders to be able to comment on their
for private sector involvement. preferred approach.

»» Agreement on a common approach for the Another challenge is to avoid getting “bogged down”
development of standards i.e., according to the in legal text. The first draft of the QP should focus on
requirements of Annex 3 of the WTO TBT Agreement. technical/administrative aspects of the various topics
to be included within the specific national context. It
»» Development of a common approach to technical is of course advisable to have legal expertise available
regulation to be followed by all Ministries. during the drafting process, but the legal language can
be refined at a later stage.
»» Definition of responsibilities of government, the
private sector, NGOs and development partners. The QP should be a “living document” that can (and
should) be reviewed periodically as the country
Extensive examples of topics that are typically evolves (see Stage 5), and revised as necessary. This
addressed in the QP and sample text are provided in is not something that can realistically be done on a
the UNIDO publication “Quality Policy Technical Guide” frequent basis, though, since it will involve a review
and will not be repeated here. Some examples of by the relevant interested parties, consensus-building
experiences in the development and implementation and submission for formal approval once again. With
of national and regional quality policies are presented this in mind, it is important to make the QP as forward-
in the Case Studies in Annex 6. looking as possible, to reflect possible future changes
in its overall context.

STEP 3.3 INITIAL CONSULTATION

Intended outcome to include other stakeholders from outside the country,

including (for example) regional QI organizations,
All relevant stakeholders have been given the
Development Partners and others.
opportunity to participate and have provided their
inputs into the formulation of the QP. These inputs are
analysed and addressed in a structured, balanced way.
What and How?
There are a number of ways in which this might be
Why? done, ranging from “proforma” communications in
governmental/ministerial media (with the objective of
In order to build consensus and improve the first
merely fulfilling the obligation to consult stakeholders),
draft, and to facilitate the subsequent adoption and
to more proactive methods aimed at stimulating
implementation of the QP.
greater input that can be taken into consideration
when refining the draft. Clearly, the latter option is
the most desirable (under normal circumstances), and
Who? the time and effort at this stage will be well spent,
Wherever possible, the same stakeholders that took to ensure that any potential anomalies or problems
part in the initial awareness-building workshop (Stage are identified and resolved prior to the final public
2) should be invited to contribute their comments, as consultation for the QP. Such proactive circulation for
well as any additional stakeholders identified during comment can be achieved in the following ways:
the initial drafting. It may be appropriate at this stage

32
32
»» By conducting Workshops to present the first requiring suggestions for alternative text, rather
draft to an audience of key stakeholders. A typical than simply criticizing existing text. An example
programme for this workshop is shown in Annex 4. of such a table is presented in Annex 5. Note that
the use of such a template will also facilitate the
»» Formally circulating the draft to all participants collation of comments for subsequent analysis.
of the initial awareness-building workshop, with
a request to forward to other stakeholders as »» Sending a “friendly reminder” that comments are
appropriate. due about 2 weeks before the deadline.
»» Making the draft available on an appropriate Once the commenting period has expired, all comments
website, supported by press releases, and received should be collated in order to provide inputs
requesting the key stakeholders to place hyper- into Step 3.4.
links to the document on their own websites.
Challenges and mitigation measures
»» Highlighting any issues where specific comments
and/or inputs are requested. There is always a risk that comments submitted
by individuals purporting to represent a specific
»» Allowing sufficient time for stakeholders to discuss stakeholder group might not be representative. This
the draft with their constituent members, in order can be mitigated by establishing clear communication
to provide considered opinions. It is unlikely that channels and allowing sufficient time for consensus-
this can be done effectively in less than 60 days building. It is particularly important to engage with
(depending on the time of year). SMEs and consumer organizations, and to facilitate
»» Making available a “comments template” to discussion fora for them to be able to reach a consensus
oblige the stakeholders to be specific about the position among their constituents prior to submitting
text in the QP to which their comment refers, and comments.

STEP 3.4 INCORPORATE FEEDBACK AND INCLUDE LEGAL TEXT

Intended outcome discussed at a public validation workshop, or series

of workshops.
Draft QP in a semi-final format that can be submitted
for further evaluation and endorsement among If the concerns cannot be resolved, or if conflicting
stakeholders. viewpoints of diverse stakeholders cannot be
reconciled, then it may be necessary to repeat Steps
3.1 – 3.4.
Why? At this stage, the coordination/drafting team should
In order for stakeholders (including those in seek assistance from lawyers/legislators and/or
government) to be able to evaluate the full implications request support from the lead Ministry to incorporate
of the QP, and to be able to make additional comments the appropriate legal text and format in order to prepare
prior to publication. the final draft QP for consideration by government.

Who? Challenges and mitigation measures

Drafting team, with inputs from the Steering Committee, Achieving full consensus among all stakeholders will
legal/legislative experts and international consultants, always be a challenge. It is important to remember
as needed. the definition of “Consensus” given in ISO Guide 2
(“Standardization and related activities -- General
vocabulary”) which does not necessarily mean that
What and How? there will ultimately be unanimity.
As a result of Step 3.3, the coordination/drafting team “Consensus” is defined as “general agreement,
should be able to collate and categorize the comments characterized by the absence of sustained opposition
received and resolve many of them without the need for to substantial issues by any important part of the
further consultation (particularly those of an editorial concerned interests and by a process that involves
nature). Any systematic or contentious issues that are seeking to take into account the views of all parties
raised (potential “showstoppers”) should, however, concerned and to reconcile any conflicting arguments”
be brought to the attention of the Steering Committee This should be emphasized from the outset of the
for consideration and, where appropriate, discussed project, and reinforced as the QP development process
“one-on-one” with the relevant stakeholders in order to progresses.
understand better their concerns. If these concerns can
be resolved (without generating additional potential
conflicts with other stakeholders), the drafting team
can incorporate the changes into a final draft QP to be

33
33
 STEP 3.5 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND/OR ‘VALIDATION’ WORKSHOP

Intended outcome According to Rodrigo and Amo8 , (in the context

All citizens and stakeholder groups are given a final of regulations, but equally appropriate here)
opportunity to provide inputs on the content and “Consultation systems should be designed according
implications of the QP. to each country’s context, legitimised by the
inclusion of all groups of interest and by transparent
procedures, while fighting to improve information
Why? quality and spreading the use of the new information
technologies. Regulators should ask themselves: ‘Have
This is essentially the last stage in the consensus-building all stakeholders had the opportunity to present their
process, and should provide an opportunity for any final views?’. Regulations should be developed in an open
concerns to be voiced, based on the outputs of Step 3.4, and transparent fashion, with appropriate procedures
before the QP is finalized. for effective and timely input from stakeholders such
as affected businesses and trade unions, other interest
groups, or other levels of government”
Who?
As with Step 3.3, it is convenient to request commenters
It is to be expected that each country will have its to use a format similar to that shown in Annex 5, in
own process for the assignment of responsibilities order to facilitate the subsequent compilation and
for public consultation on proposed government analysis.
legislation. The Steering Committee is expected to
liaise with the appropriate authorities.
Challenges and mitigation measures
What and How? As with all stages in the QP development process,
the key challenge is to ensure that all the relevant
As with Step 3.3 (initial consultation on the Draft interested parties (citizens and stakeholder groups)
QP), the most proactive way of conducting a public are given the opportunity to provide their comments.
consultation involves extensive communication using This can be mitigated by the use of extensive and
traditional and electronic means as well as social comprehensive communication strategies, including
media. traditional methods as well as social media, including
Each country is likely to have its own well-developed an explanation of the objectives for the QP in terms of
criteria for public consultation on regulatory and/or national development strategies.
policy issues, and these need to be followed if the 8
Rodrigo, D, and Amo, P A, “Background Document on Public
QP is to have the appropriate level of approval and
Consultation”, OECD Regulatory Policy Division, Public Governance
legitimacy. and Territorial

STEP 3.6 PREPARE “FINAL” VERSION OF THE QUALITY POLICY AND

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Intended outcome be endorsed by the Steering Committee before it is

A final version of the QP together with the formally submitted for government approval (Stage 4).
Implementation Plan that can be officially endorsed
by stakeholders and submitted for formal government
What and How?
approval and adoption.
Once the comments from the public consultation
have been collated and reviewed, their relevance and
Why? importance to the QP should be analysed, and the draft
QP adapted accordingly.
This is the final step in the technical consensus-
building process, after having incorporated any The QP should now be at a stage where it has passed
proposals from the public consultation. through several consensus-building stages, and has
been refined to address all technical, administrative
and legal issues. If the process thus far has been
Who? conducted in a transparent and proactive manner,
The drafting group should prepare the final draft, the final draft of the QP should be relatively simple
but at this stage it is also advisable for the draft to to produce.

34
34
The Implementation Plan should also be finalized
together with the conclusion of work on the QP. This
plan should include the prioritization of objectives,
a tentative time-frame to achieve them, stakeholder
responsibilities, and consideration of the financial and
resource implications.

Challenges and mitigation measures

At this stage it is vital to take great care when
incorporating comments from one specific stakeholder
group, in order to avoid generating new concerns from
other stakeholders. If insurmountable new issues are
introduced at this late stage, then it could be necessary
to repeat Stage 3 in its entirety, with the associated
delays that would ensue.

35
35
 STAGE 4
A d voca c y, l ob byi ng and approval

36
36
In order to provide legitimacy to the QP, it has to be
incorporated as part of the overall policy landscape,
and formally published and adopted.

STEP 4.1 ADVOCACY AND ENDORSEMENT

Intended outcome be conducted to inform the relevant stakeholders of

the outcome and to present the QP in its final version
All those who were involved in the consensus-building
for validation. This workshop(s) can also be used as a
process are given the opportunity to see the “end
basis for the promotion and advocacy for the QP, and to
result” and to give their endorsement of the QP.
begin to focus attention on the implementation plan,
once the QP has been formally adopted (See Stage 5).

Why?
To ensure full ownership of the QP by all stakeholders Challenges and mitigation measures
and facilitate its subsequent implementation.
If any concern or opposition is raised at this late stage
and cannot be resolved, or if conflicting viewpoints
of diverse stakeholders cannot be reconciled, then
Who? it may be necessary to repeat Stage 3. If the process
Steering Committee (coordination) thus far has been conducted in a transparent and
proactive manner, though, this situation should not
arise. In some cases, however, it might be necessary
What and How? to continue with the publication of the QP in pursuit
of the public good, despite ongoing resistance from
After the final draft of the QP has been prepared by specific stakeholders with vested interests that are
the Drafting Group and endorsed by the Steering irreconcilable and inconsistent with international best
Committee, a final workshop (or workshops) should practices.

STEP 4.2 OBTAIN FORMAL APPROVAL

Intended outcome with the policy objectives. Any conflicting requirements

that affect other national policies (such as industrial,
The QP is formally approved for publication by the
environmental, or trade policies) should already have
appropriate government authorities.
been identified and addressed at an earlier stage
(Stages 1 – 3).

Why?
To provide legitimacy to the QP. Although the QP should be “apolitical” it does not exist
in a vacuum, and it would be appropriate to judge the
political climate (for example in the case of upcoming
elections) to accelerate or delay its presentation to
Who? Government for approval, as needed.
It is to be expected that each country will have its own
process for the approval and publication of government
legislation. The Steering Committee is expected to Challenges and mitigation measures
liaise with the appropriate authorities. This is where things can stall and the formal adoption
process be delayed. If the development of the QP and
its associated Implementation Plan has been genuinely
What and How? collaborative and inclusive, however, the QP should
After the validation workshop, the now final draft already have the backing of the relevant government
QP can be introduced into the political level for ministries who will support it for formal approval.
consideration and final approval by Cabinet /
Parliament or equivalent as appropriate. Thereafter,
the approved QP should be made widely available as
a public document of government.
It is important to ensure that the QP foresees any
changes that might be necessary to the overall
legislative programme in order to align such legislation

37
37
 STAGE 5
I mple m e n t , m o ni to r and
revie w th e Quali ty Poli cy

38
38
The effective deployment of the QP throughout a complete overhaul and “re-engineering”. In either
the various components of the QI can be a gradual case, the following steps need to be taken:
adaptation of the existing infrastructure, or it may need

STEP 5.1 PUBLISH QUALITY POLICY

Intended outcome »» The confirmation or review of existing legislation

and the drafting of new bills to go through the
Formal adoption of the QP as part of overall government approval process
policy.
»» A formal law, published in the Official Government
record
Why?
»» An administrative decree
In order to provide legitimacy to the various components
of the QI. »» A Policy Document issued and endorsed by the
Government

Who? »» Others according to the country context.

The way in which the QP is published can vary
significantly from one country to another, with differing Challenges and mitigation measures
responsibilities. Once again, the Steering Committee
has an important role to play in guiding the QP through If there are any political changes that might affect the
the formal publication process. formal publication of the QP (for example upcoming
elections, that might result in delays due to changes
in government policy), it is important to foresee this
What and How? possibility as early as possible in the QP development
process. In this way, the schedule and forecast timing
Depending on the specific legislative requirements of publication can be adapted as appropriate, and
in each country, the publication of the QP might, for avoid becoming a political issue.
example, be in the form of:

STEP 5.2 COMMUNICATE, PROMOTE AND IMPLEMENT

Intended outcome role; that of a “Quality Council” (or some similar

designation), with the responsibility for overseeing the
All national stakeholders and international partners are effective implementation of the policy. At this stage,
aware of the new QP and are able to adapt accordingly. it might be appropriate to review the membership
QP translated into other languages (English; French of the Steering Committee, as it takes on this new
etc) as necessary. role, to make sure it is still representative of the key
stakeholders (relevant ministries and state authorities,
non-governmental quality organizations, conformity
Why? assessment service providers, industrial, service
The QP will not be useful if it is not effectively sector and employees’ associations, as well as trade
implemented, and implementation may take a number unions and consumer organizations, for example).
of years. Hence, it is good practice that a high-level
implementation plan is developed together with the
policy itself (see Stages 2 and 3), including associated What and How?
implementation and oversight responsibilities as well It is almost inevitable that some pre-existing public QI
as “ball-park” budget forecasts and priorities. Some institutions will need to undergo heavy re-engineering,
countries have national planning agencies which implementing changes to their organisational
have issued guidelines to be followed when policy structures, responsibilities, sources of income, etc.
documents are prepared. The corresponding legislation designating their roles
and responsibilities will most likely have to be totally
reviewed or developed from scratch. All of this needs
Who? to be coordinated at the highest level possible and will
Once the QP has been published, the Steering require public funding. The oversight responsibility
Committee typically will transform to take on another must therefore be clearly identified, with accountability
at least up to ministerial level.

39
39
 A typical Implementation Plan should typically identify: »» Press releases
»» “Quick wins” – actions that can have an almost »» Seminars and workshops
immediate impact, with minimal investment.
»» Interviews with key government personnel (TV,
»» Short-term actions (implemented over the course social media)
of 1 – 3 years) that may be primarily administrative
in nature and do not require significant investment. »» Prominent placement on government and private
sector websites
»» Longer term actions (3 – 5+ years), that might
require significant capital expenditure in, for »» Publication of “Success stories” (from other
example, buildings and equipment. countries – see, for example the Case Studies in
Annex 6 of this Practical Tool)
The Implementation Plan should not, however, include
a detailed list of activities over the life of the QP »» Explanatory / guidance documents on (for
because there are potentially so many uncertainties example) “The new QP – what will it mean for “xxx”
with regard to their implementation. Instead, it should industry; “yyy” services; testing laboratories;
assign priorities to the various short and long-term medical laboratories; regulators; importers” etc.
actions mentioned above, with emphasis on those
that are most appropriate for the national/regional
context. Yearly workplans by sector or functions should Challenges and mitigation measures
be prepared and used, and regular (yearly) updates on
»» “The devil is in the detail” is a common phrase
progress and achievements produced and circulated.
that particularly applies at this stage. If, however,
It is important that the publication of the QP be the QP has been developed in an open and
accompanied by appropriate communications to transparent manner, much of the necessary
ensure that all stakeholders are made aware, not only groundwork (including forecast budgets) for its
of the Policy itself, but also of its implications. These effective implementation is likely to have been
communications can include: initiated in parallel with the development itself.
»» Realistic forecasting of resource needs (including
Human Resources, time and funding).

STEP 5.3 MONITOR, REVIEW AND IMPROVE

Intended outcome have a legal mandate to operate. If, for example, it

has to promote the harmonization or consolidation of
The effective implementation of the QP is subject activities of institutions that come under other senior
to ongoing coordination, and is able to adapt as ministries, and induce them to behave or invest in a
necessary to keep pace with changes to the national certain manner, it will need clear authority to be able
and international context under which it was initially to do that.
developed.
It is recommended that the implementation plan be
considered as the “Planning” stage of an overall “Plan-
Do-Check-Act” (PDCA) cycle, with periodic (annual)
Why? verification of progress against clearly defined
Factors affecting the implementation of the QP need milestones and performance indicators, with the
to be coordinated and monitored, in order to ensure identification and implementation of any necessary
its effectiveness. The world is continually changing, corrective actions.
and the QP and QI need to adapt accordingly and may
As mentioned in Stage 3, it is vital that the QP be
have to be modified over time.
considered as a “living document” that can (and
should) be reviewed as the country evolves beyond
its short- and medium-term goals, and as its overall
Who? national context changes. In addition to monitoring
The Steering Committee (now transformed into the progress against the implementation plan, therefore,
“Quality Council” or some other similar denomination) the Steering Committee (now the “Quality Council”)
should periodically review the QP for its ongoing
suitability and adequacy. This could typically be
What and How? scheduled for once every five years.
It is important to specify the authority and powers of
the Council, and this must be done at the highest levels
of government. Even if the council only has an advisory
Challenges and mitigation measures
role, it should be assigned to a specific Ministry and Ensuring the effective implementation of the QP

40
40
requires the continued engagement of the relevant There may also be potential conflicts introduced by
stakeholders, ongoing communication, and ensuring the need to align national legislation with the new
that the appropriate resources continue to be / revised QP. These conflicts can be avoided by the
available. It is therefore essential that the initial involvement of the relevant stakeholders from an early
budgets be realistic (sources of information might stage of the QP development process, to ensure that
include countries with a similar national context) and there are no “surprises”.
that their effective utilization is closely monitored.

B ibliography

UNIDO “Guide for the Development of the National

Quality Policies”, United Nations Industrial
Development Organization, Vienna, 2016

UNIDO “Quality Policy Technical Guide” United

Nations Industrial Development Organization,
Vienna, 2018

UNIDO “Quality Policy Guiding Principles”, United

Nations Industrial Development Organization,
Vienna, 2018

UNIDO Publication, Reference Manual for Quality

Infrastructure “Building Blocks”, United Nations
Industrial Development Organization, Vienna, 2011

UNIDO Publication “Meeting Standards, Winning

Markets – Trade Standards Compliance 2015” United
Nations Industrial Development Organization,
Vienna, 2015

Kellermann, M., “Thoughts on a National Quality

Policy”, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt,
2011

ISO Guide 2:2004 “Standardization and related

activities - General vocabulary”, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva
Rodrigo, D, and Amo, P A, “Background Document
on Public Consultation”, OECD Regulatory Policy
Division, Public Governance and Territorial
Development Directorate

41
41
 ANNEX 1
Example of an Initial Concept Paper 9

The following is one example for the development of

at the same time avoid unnecessary and costly
a briefing note, that could be modified according the barriers to trade.
specific needs of each country:
»» In recognizing the above realities, the government
»» In the present environment of increased of [Country] commits itself to re-engineering,
globalization, a well-defined Quality Infrastructure strengthening, upgrading and maintaining the
that includes standardization, metrology and the national regulatory, standardization, metrology,
associated conformity assessment components accreditation and conformity assessment
(including accreditation, testing, inspection and infrastructures to facilitate trade, enhance exports,
certification) has a very important role to play in accelerate economic development and reduce
technological progress, productivity and trade. poverty while at the same time protecting the
Increasingly, global purchasers demand goods health and safety of its people and the environment
and services that meet rigorous and advanced as a logical outflow of the overall objective of
acceptance criteria, not only to ensure that such [vision for the next decade], [trade or development
products and services integrate flawlessly with policy], [poverty reduction policy], and the UN 2030
others in the supply chain, but also to satisfy Sustainable Development Goals.
customer expectations and to comply with a maze
of technical regulations in importing countries. »» This overall definition of the framework and
the roles and responsibilities for the National
»» These same elements of the Quality Infrastructure Quality Infrastructure is normally formalized in
also assist in the achievement of [Country’s] a Quality Policy, approved at the highest level of
legitimate objectives for national technical government. The effective implementation of the
regulation, in order to protect the health and safety QP is expected to improve the competitiveness of
of its citizens, and the environment. both public and private sector organizations and
»» In order to compete successfully in developed contribute towards export enhancement, overall
markets, [Country’s] industry, especially the SME economic development, environmental protection
sector, faces a formidable array of challenges. Over and control of sub-standard products in the local
and above the logistics, management and financial market
issues, one of the major stumbling blocks is the
attainment of demonstrable product and/or service
quality demanded by regulatory authorities, as
well as the major players in the markets. Hence,
in order to fully exploit the possibilities of foreign
markets, [Country’s] industry needs to have access
to an internationally recognized, but supportive
national quality infrastructure that can provide
the required independent evidence of product
compliance.
»» [Country] realizes that its national quality
infrastructure and its technical regulation regime
may not yet be developed to their full potential,
and that they are not fully harmonized with those
of its major trading partners. It follows that these
need to be addressed in a holistic manner, as
they cut across many ministries, agencies and
stakeholders. Hence, as [Country] plans/upgrades
the national quality infrastructure, enhances its
technical regulation regime and organizes the
relationship between the two, it must decide how to
cater for technological and quality needs, minimize
environmental, health and safety externalities, and
9
Kellermann, M., “Thoughts on a National Quality Policy”, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, 2011

42
42
 ANNEX 2
Example of the Terms of Reference for a QP Steering Committee
PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUALITY POLICY IN (COUNTRY)

Background The Steering Committee will be supported in its role

and functions by xxxx (for example, the NSB) that will
As a result of the recommendations of the National
serve as its Secretariat and prepare briefing papers
Industrial and Economic Growth Policy published
and progress reports, providing all the necessary
by the government on xx/yy/zzzz, the project to
information and evidence it needs to make informed
revise/develop a Quality Policy (QP) has been
decisions.
initiated. The objective of the QP is to define the
roles and responsibilities of the various public and This will include;
private institutions that will comprise the Quality
Infrastructure, in order to support the overall strategy »» Circulation of relevant material to members in good
time for preparation for each meeting.
for economic growth and sustainable development in
the most cost-effective way.
»» Drafting of agendas for agreement with the
Chairperson.
Purpose
»» Keeping minutes and recording decisions made.
The Steering Committee will be the governing body of
the project to develop and implement the QP, and will »» Reporting on progress with all aspects of the QP
provide strategic leadership and governance oversight project implementation.
to ensure its successful and timely completion.

Roles and responsibilities Membership

The Steering Committee will be made up of
The Steering Committee is expected to give key policy
representatives from both public and private sector
direction, liaise with governmental and development
stakeholders including (typical examples):
partners, guide the Drafting Committee and the various
Technical Sub-committees in the execution of the »» Ministry of Trade and Industry (Chairs the Steering
project, and ensure effective oversight by receiving Committee);
regular reports, reviewing the results of project
evaluations that will take place periodically, and »» Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries;
providing guidance to keep the project on track. It is
expected to take the lead to promote policy dialogue »» Ministry of Health;
and advocacy on issues identified by the Project, at »» Ministry of the Environment and/or Energy;
Ministry level.
The specific responsibilities of the Steering Committee »» Ministry of Finance;
are to: »» National Chamber of Commerce;
»» Approve the work plan and budget for the »» National Planning Commission (or equivalent);
preparation of the QP, to ensure that resources
are deployed to their most productive use; »» National Industry Confederation;
»» Monitor the implementation of the QP »» Hotel and Tourism Association;
development project ensuring that any strategic
changes are undertaken in a timely manner so that »» Consumer protection Bureau ;
the project achieves its goals;
»» National Standards Body;
»» (If applicable) Liaise with development partners
to ensure that interventions from international »» National Association of Testing Laboratory;
experts will help to make the project more effective »» National Association of Exporters;
in delivering its intended outcome and impacts;
»» National Metrology Institute;
»» Review and endorse the recommendations for
implementation of initiatives presented by the »» National Accreditation Body (or Accreditation Focal
QP. Point).

43
43
 Meetings »» The Steering Committee will aim to achieve
consensus on decisions made. In the event
»» The Steering Committee is expected to meet this proves impossible, decisions may be made
quarterly and members will need to devote by simple majority vote amongst participating
additional time reviewing project documentation; members. In the event of a tie, the Chairperson
will have an additional casting vote;
»» Interim meetings may be convened as necessary
by teleconference or electronic communications. »» Individual members must be committed and must
ensure continuity in participation to all meetings.
Governance: Changes in individual participation should be
»» The quorum for the Steering Committee will be X notified to the Steering Committee in writing by
number of member institutions; the affected institution.

44
44
 ANNEX 3
Example of Agenda for Initial Workshop on the Development of a
Quality Policy

Time Topic Presenter(s) Comments

09:00 – Opening Ceremony High-level government Important to start on
09:30h officials; any international time!
experts who might be
involved

09:30 – Keynote address – “The importance of QP “Champion” (See This should address
10:15h developing a formally adopted, consensus- Stage 1), or International the specific national
based Quality Policy” Expert (also to act as context (using outputs
Workshop facilitator) from Step 2.1)

10:15 – Networking Break

10:30h

10:30 – Components of a Quality Infrastructure, and Invited National or

12:30h current status of (Country) International Subject
Matter Experts
»» Standardization/technical regulation
»» Metrology
»» Accreditation
»» Conformity Assessment

12:30 – Networking lunch

13:30h

13:30 – Breakout groups Introduction by workshop Divided into groups

15:00h facilitator; (max 8 people per
»» Discuss current situation of each QI group).
component, and topics for consideration/ All participants
prioritization in the formulation of the QP.
»» Discuss Gap Analysis, preliminary action
plans and potential options

15:00 – Networking Break

15:30h
15:30 – Feedback Designated spokesperson Each group needs to
17:00h for each group document its feedback
for subsequent input
into the draft QP
(Stage 3)

17:00 – Summary and closing Workshop facilitator

17:30h

45
45
 ANNEX 4
Example of Agenda for Consensus-building Workshop

Time Topic Presenter(s) Comments

09:00 – Opening Ceremony High-level government Important to start on time!
09:30h officials; any international
experts who might be
involved

09:30 – Keynote address – “Preparation of QP “Champion” (See Stage This should outline the key
10:15h the Quality Policy” (or similar) 1), or International Expert points of the draft QP, and the
(also to act as Workshop process to be undertaken to
facilitator) build consensus

10:15 – Networking Break

10:30h
10:30 – Implications for Invited National Experts Wherever possible, these
12:30h presentations should be made
»» Standards development by respected local experts,
»» Regulators who are supportive of the QP
in their respective areas of
»» Metrology Institutes activity.

»» Accreditation
»» Conformity Assessment
»» Laboratories
»» Certification Bodies
»» Inspection Agencies

12:30 – Networking lunch

13:30h
13:30 – Breakout groups Introduction by workshop Divided into groups (max 8
15:00h facilitator; people per group).
»» Discuss the draft QP and its
implementation All participants

»» opportunities
»» challenges
»» priorities
»» timelines
15:00 – Networking Break
15:30h
15:30 – Feedback Designated spokesperson Each group needs to document
17:00h for each group its feedback for subsequent
input into draft QP and the
draft implementation plan
(Stage 5)
17:00 – Summary and closing Workshop facilitator
17:30h

46
46
 ANNEX 5
Template for submission of comments

Submitter Clause/ Paragraph/ Type of Comment Proposed change

Subclause/ Line comment (justification
Annex/ Figure number (Editorial/ for change)
of Draft QP Technical)

47
47
 ANNEX 6
Case studies

NIGERIA: The development process of the Nigeria National Quality Policy (NNQP)

Context Conduct Strategic Planning

Under the National Quality Infrastructure Project for Based on the recommendation of the National Quality
Nigeria (NQIP), the underlying objective is to: Policy (NQP) Drafting Committee, a National Steering
Committee (NSC) was constituted on 27 January, 2014
»» establish an appropriate framework for the by the Honourable Minister of Industry Trade and
development and publication of national Investment. The Committee was given the following
standards, to clearly define the role of the national terms of reference (ToR):
standards organization at the pinnacle of all
standardization work, and to involve all relevant »» To review and harmonize existing Quality related
stakeholders in the process; policies in Nigeria
»» expand the use of accreditation into all of the »» To prepare a draft NQP that is acceptable to all
national regulatory environment; stakeholders
»» provide a framework for the establishment of »» To support the approval and implementation of
conformity assessment service providers in the NQP
both the public and private domain, that are, in
addition, technically competent; As part of the governance process and the
demonstration of ownership and commitment to the
»» strengthen the national metrology system and, course, the Honorable Minister of Industry Trade and
in particular, raise the profile of metrology as a Investment was appointed as the Chairperson, while
significant component in Nigeria’s overall market the standardization body, the Standards Organization
activities; of Nigeria (SON) became the Technical Secretariat. NSC
had forty-eight (48) institutions as members drawn
»» give clear mandates and elaborate a proper from Ministerial Departments and Agencies (MDAs)
division of work regarding the administration and members of Organized Private Sector (OPS).
of technical regulation, TBT (Technical Barriers
to Trade) and SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary)
measures and; Preparation of Draft QP/Consensus Building
»» provide a national quality culture promotion To carry out the objectives of the NSC, 20 technical
strategy that builds on existing efforts. secretaries have been appointed from SON staff,
including a Chairperson.
To work with the technical secretaries, five technical
Process of the Quality Policy formulation subcommittees were formed with Chairpersons selected
to head each sub-committee, namely, Accreditation,
Standardization, Technical Regulations, Conformity
Do the Groundwork
Assessment, Metrology, and one non-technical sub-
The Nigeria Quality Infrastructure Project supports the committee on Information and Communication.
development of the missing standards and accredited
Implementation of the first objective of the committee
testing and certification bodies within the framework
which is to review and harmonize existing policies in
of the National Quality Infrastructure (NQI) in order to
Nigeria, was led by a UNIDO National Lead Expert
improve the quality of products and services exchanged
on Policy in 2014. Each sub-committee chairperson
in the Nigerian, regional and international markets.
worked with members of the steering committee and
To this end, the Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade made submissions on their respective mandates to
and Investment on 26 September, 2013, inaugurated a the technical secretariat. Sub-committee submissions
National Quality Policy (NQP) Drafting Committee. The by respective Chairpersons formed the basis for the
policy drafting committee, after two months of review of preparation of the draft QP.
existing policy options and preliminary consultations,
All submissions from the sub-committee Chairpersons
identified the need for wider consultation.

48
48
were received by the technical secretaries. A draft of stakeholder institutions and top government
the policy was developed by the technical secretariat, officials responsible for decision making.
and ready for international peer review, which was
carried out by a UNIDO International Expert in 2014. »» Exposure of key stakeholders through study tours
to countries with similar economic reality like
Nigeria, where such quality infrastructures exist.
Advocacy, lobbying and approval
»» Publication of educative materials on the
After the review and validation of the international peer- components of the project and its benefits, in
reviewed zero draft version of the QP by the National fact-sheets, newsletters, featured appearances
Steering Committee, public consultations followed in on radio and television programs.
November 2014, in various geopolitical regions of the
country, namely, Calabar (Southern Region), Enugu »» Training of members of the media (print and
(South East Region), Minna (North Central Region), electronic) on the subject of quality infrastructure
Sokoto (North West Region) and Abuja where the final and the method of coverage of the project
public validation was concluded. implementation activities.

All feedback from the public were cross reviewed with »» Implementation of a stakeholder engagement
the zero draft for finalisation and thereafter presented initiative, through the engagement of solely
to the Director General of the Standards Organization of dedicated project focal person(s), situated and
Nigeria by the Chairperson of the Technical Secretariat. working for NQIP within stakeholder institutions
The DG SON, subsequently presented the final draft for smooth implementation of activities.
to the Honourable Minister of Industry Trade and
»» Cost estimation of the implementation of the QP
Investment for an onward memorandum: “Prayer for for an informed buy-in of the Federal Government.
Ratification” to the Federal Executive Council (FEC)
and its subsequent presentation for legislation as a
single executive bill. Lessons learned
»» In the first year of the project, embark on massive
Implement, monitor and review (continually improve) nationwide campaigns on the subject of quality,
In December, 2014, a published version of the Green to industry stakeholders, academic institutions,
Paper was presented to the public and copies were major market places, state governors and relevant
disseminated. During the waiting period for FEC federal government offices to secure buy-in.
ratification, there were some major changes in the »» Develop a brand communication strategy and
political terrain, as a new government was voted into provide funds to implement it as a full roll-out
office in 2015, which required some changes in some campaign to provide soft landing for the project
parts of the document, specifically in section I, on implementation team; such that it demonstrates
“Vision, Objectives, and Drivers for the NQP”, these the linkage of the subject of quality infrastructure
parts were reviewed to allow the draft policy to be and its various benefits to both government,
aligned with the new focus of the government. organised private sector, and the regular
individual.
»» Make provisions for the extension of the
Challenges project timeline for stakeholder engagement,
The issues encountered during the development consultations and advocacy in case the project
stages, were as follows: cycle crosses into an election/transition year, to
make up for lost time. Every new government needs
»» Stakeholder apathy in the development process a fresh round of advocacies and engagement to re-
of the policy, due to the fear that their regulatory align their support for the project.
power could be affected.
»» Stakeholders’ non-conformance with technical
advice on role and separation of institutional
duties under a quality infrastructure framework.
»» Delayed buy-in of top leadership, due to poor
understanding of the subject of a quality
infrastructure national framework and its benefits
or linkage to the country’s priorities.
»» Change in government priority due to transition
in government, which led to the delay of policy
ratification by the Federal Executive Council.

The issues were addressed as follows:

»» Increased bilateral meetings with all key

49
49
 PAKISTAN: The development of Pakistan National Quality Policy
(NQP)

Context Conduct Strategic Planning

Under the EU funded Trade Related Technical UNIDO, in consultation with the Working Group,
Assistance (TRTA II) Programme implemented by formulated a road map for the development of the
UNIDO, the following was the context within which NQP. Five policy objectives were identified during the
the development of Pakistan’s NQP was pursued: consultation sessions and working group meetings.
The technical regulation regime in Pakistan is of Four possible scenarios on a future re-engineering of
an ad-hoc nature, fragmented, non-compliant with the National Quality Infrastructure of Pakistan were
international requirements and with overlaps among developed and shared with MoST and representatives
various regulatory agencies. This in turn undermines of the current NQI organizations to: (i) render the NQI
the integrity of products, creates bureaucratic chaos acceptable to the international community, (ii) better
for suppliers and adds unnecessary transaction costs, serve the needs of the authorities and the private
rendering products non-competitive. In addition, the sector in Pakistan, and (iii) facilitate its financial
Government lacks the capacity collectively to review the sustainability in the long run.
existing technical regulation regime and the national
quality infrastructure due to their complex interwoven Preparation of draft QP/consensus building
nature. This however is obligatory in order to take full
advantage of the increases in world trade by complying First Draft Of NQP: A workshop was held to garner the
to the WTO Agreements on Technical Barriers to Trade first detailed input for the development of draft text for
(TBT) and Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary (SPS) measures. the 1st working paper of the NQP. UNIDO developed a
draft content list for the NQP based on international
The Government of Pakistan thus realizes that, in good practices and knowledge of Pakistan together
order to improve its industrial development and export with a short paragraph on the rationale for each
performance, it must implement policies that facilitate article/sub-article. The draft content list was finalized
compliance of manufactured products with global in consultation with the members of the working group.
quality standards, meet expectations of consumers Thereafter, the first working draft of the NQP was
and facilitate integration of local industries into global developed and circulated within MoST and members
value chains. UNIDO, under the TRTA II Programme, of the Working Group for review and comments.
provided the Government of Pakistan with technical
assistance in developing a NQP in order to integrate Second Draft of NQP was developed and circulated
better with the international community, and establish to more than 80 stakeholders by MoST. The NQP
policy frameworks conducive to social, ecological and Working Group established by MoST met under the
market-economic development. Chairmanship of the Joint Technical Advisor, MoST and
various comments from stakeholders were considered.
A number of relevant comments were incorporated in
Process of the Quality Policy formulation the document, the list of regulatory authorities was
completed, the vision was drafted and the document
Needs Assessment was completed. This completed 2nd Working Draft was
The National Quality Infrastructure (NQI) developments presented to the 2nd National Quality Forum.
in Malaysia, Turkey and Vietnam were studied and The 1st Working Draft Implementation Plan was
the Pakistan situation was benchmarked against developed based on the 2nd Working Draft of the NQP.
them. Moreover, the responsibilities of the national The 1st Working Draft was discussed in the Working
standards body, namely the Pakistan Standards and Group, and its modalities were presented in detail.
Quality Control Authority (PSQCA) were reviewed. The Policy Objectives and Measures taken from the
Focus group workshops were held to gain inputs from NQP were further developed with activities, outcomes,
wider stakeholder groups. One of the key initiatives timelines, budget and responsible implementation
to improve the quality infrastructure, as identified agency. The Working Group was requested to consider
by a variety of stakeholders during discussions and carefully all of these and provide recommendations as
workshops, was the development and implementation to whether the activities and outcomes were complete
of a NQP. with regard to the Policy objectives and measures, the
timeline reasonable, and to develop the initial budget
Working Group Establishment figures. MoST and the Working Group members agreed
to this draft implementation plan.
The Ministry of Science and Technology (MoST)
established a Working Group including members from
NQI organs and the Ministry of Commerce to draft the Advocacy, lobbying and approval
text of the National Quality Policy under the guidance UNIDO, in collaboration with the Government of
of UNIDO. Pakistan, organized advocacy meetings on the NQP

50
50
with private and provincial stakeholders. Meetings »» Restructuring of national standards body has
with selected industrial companies indicated that it been proposed to separate the roles related to
will be a major undertaking to convince provincial regulatory and NQI service provider.
authorities, after devolution of power to provinces, that
this would be in the interest of Pakistan as a whole. The »» Strengthening the technical regulation regime
provincial authorities were approached on the notion through the implementation of a national Technical
Regulation Framework to meet requirements
of a NQP. The re-organization of PSQCA, Pakistan
such as the WTO TBT and SPS Agreements and
National Accreditation Council (PNAC) and National
international best practices, including the
Physical & Standards Laboratory (NPSL) as apex establishment of cooperation amongst the NQI
NQI organizations of Pakistan with specific service institutions and the national regulatory authorities,
provision mandates was also welcomed. The notion and with their international counterparts.
that implementation of technical regulation should
not be undertaken by the apex NQI organizations and
that it could be undertaken at the provincial level, was Lessons learned
enthusiastically supported.
»» While proposing NQI and TR strategy by
The text of the draft NQP and Technical Regulations benchmarking good practices, local conditions
Framework, along with the implementation mechanism should be given due consideration e.g. priority
and associated budget, was finalized by the Working areas, availability of skilled manpower and
Group in consideration of some further comments resources;
from important stakeholders such as the Pakistan
Business Council. This document was approved by »» As the NQI has a crosscutting role in various
MoST and presented to the Prime Minister’s Cabinet ministries and institutes, it requires attention from
for consideration, approval and implementation. a high political level to create sustainable synergy;
»» The private sector should be seriously involved in
shaping the NQI;
Implement, monitor and review (continually improve)
The NQP was approved by MoST and presented »» While initiating the NQI, composition and level of
to the Prime Minister’s Cabinet for consideration, responsibility of the governance structures have
approval and implementation. The NQP contains an to be clearly elaborated;
implementation mechanism and associated budget.
»» Seek appropriate international recognition for all
service providers;
Challenges »» Conduct thorough surveys on the existing analytical
labs (number and status) to determine the issue
»» There is a trust deficit between the industry (private of capacity and competence to gain accreditation;
sector) and public NQI. Industry perceives NQI as
the rent extractors and believes that NQI services »» There should be clear demarcation between the
should be provided free of charge. role of regulatory bodies as enforcing bodies and
NQI elements as service providers;
»» NQI must connect with the international systems
of standards, metrology and accreditation along »» Adopt appropriate NQI reform strategies to
with leveraged government investments in the QI. sustain the NQI functions e.g. twinning, liaising,
outsourcing and change averters versus change
»» Regulatory bodies have not been separated from agents;
NQI service providers, generating conflict of
interest and weakening trade negotiations. »» Consider the nature of decisions and the extent of
their influence i.e. incremental or radical change;
»» Common technical regulation approach across
all ministries related to standards, conformity »» Overall regulatory reform is absolutely necessary.
assessment, regulatory authorities, and sanctions
has not been implemented and allocation of TRs
to specific ministries has not been demarcated.
The issues were addressed as follows:
»» By raising the quality consciousness amongst both
the suppliers and the consumers and fostering
a quality culture in public life and throughout
society. National Quality Forums were conducted
to increase interaction between industry and
public NQI so as to realize the importance and
role of all the stakeholders in a cohesive NQP
environment.
»» Staff of the NQI were trained on different aspects
of NQP and TRs to instil adaptation of NQI best
practices of benchmarked countries.

51
51
 ECOWAS: The development process of ECOWAS Regional Quality
Policy (ECOQUAL)

Context workshop on the strategic options of the ECOWAS QP

was organised in each ECOWAS Member State in June
The ECOWAS Common Industrial Policy (WACIP), 2012.
adopted in 2010, identified the development of
Standardization, Quality, Accreditation and Metrology The objective of these two-day workshops was to:
(SQAM) amongst its ten priority Programmes to be
implemented. The SQAM Programme was expected »» inform and involve all stakeholders of ECOWAS
to facilitate the development of intra – trade within Member States in the elaboration process of the
West Africa and the ECOWAS/UEMOA-UE Economic ECOWAS Quality Policy;
Partnership Agreement which is being prepared to »» collect national viewpoints on the selected
develop trade between EU and the ECOWAS region. options.
Furthermore, the Regional Steering Committee Based on the country reports of these workshops a
(RSC) meeting of the transitional phase of the SQAM draft ECOWAS QP document was prepared.
Programme held on the 8th and 9th of May 2012 in
Abuja, Nigeria, strongly recommended the elaboration
of the ECOWAS Quality Policy during the transitional
phase which ended in December 2012, in order to take Preparation of draft QP/consensus
advantage of the implementation of the next phase
(West Africa Quality System Programme, WAQSP) to building
operationalize the Policy and the West Africa Quality The draft policies were prepared in 7 key Steps:
Infrastructure.
Step 1: Sensitization Workshop on the Regional Quality
Policy, held in Accra, Ghana
Process of the Quality Policy formulation Step 2: Organization of two national concertation
workshops on the strategic options of the ECOWAS QP.
Do the groundwork
Step 3: Preparation of the draft ECOWAS QP taking into
The adoption of ECOQUAL (ECOWAS Quality Policy), account national expectations.
was deemed necessary to prepare a state of play vis-
à-vis the existence of the national quality policies in Step 4: Dissemination of the draft document in the
the member countries. The ECOQUAL was necessary Member States and to the ECOWAS Commission
for the harmonization and alignment of the QIS in the legal department, to collect their observations and
region, in particular the next steps would be: comments on the form and content of the document.
»» Ensure that existing quality policies or those to be Step 5: Finalization of the draft document by
prepared are in line with ECOQUAL incorporating the observations of the Member States;
and then submission to the ECOWAS Commission.
»» Support countries with draft quality policies for Step 6: Meeting of National Experts on the ECOWAS
their technical or official adoption QP from the 17th to 19th October 2012 in Niamey,
»» Provide necessary assistance for the formulation Niger, followed by a meeting of Ministers in charge of
and technical adoption of the National Quality Quality. The draft ECOWAS Quality Policy (ECOQUAL)
Policies for countries without any NQP was validated by the Ministers who recommended to
the ECOWAS Commission that it be adopted by the
»» Support all the countries for the development of statutory bodies.
action plans, with budget, in view of their National
Step 7: Adoption of the ECOWAS Quality Policy
Quality Policies effective implementation
(ECOQUAL) and its implementation framework
Those activities were than to be supported by the through SUPPLEMENTARY ACT A/SA.1/02/13 at the
West Africa Quality Support Programme (UNIDO is an 42nd Ordinary Session of the ECOWAS Authority of
implementing agency). A team of experts at regional Heads of State and Government, held from the 27th to
and national level was deployed to coordinate and 28th February 2013, in Yamoussoukro, Cote d’Ivoire.
facilitate the progress. The identification of key
stakeholders was carried out depending on the each
Advocacy, lobbying and approval
individual country context.
All ministries in charge of quality and national focal
points of the West Africa Quality Support Programme
Conduct Strategic Planning (WAQSP), mainly national standards bodies, were
After initial discussions in Dakar, and based on the involved in the advocacy strategy for the official
works of international expert, a national consultation adoption of the QP. To support this strategy, the WAQSP

52
52
has taken advantage of the organization of ECOWAS »» The Mechanism to fund the Implementation Plan
meetings of ministries in charge of quality, to present needs to be identified at national & regional level.
the Programme achievements, and to organize side »» A key factor of success, is to ensure an anchoring
events focusing on the importance of adoption of of the policy at the highest public decision making
national quality policies. All opportunities to meet the level within the country.
national ministers in charge of industry, to advocate for
the adoption of policies and implementation plan were
realized. Up to date, 7 countries out of 16 (including
Mauritania), have officially adopted their policies. The
ECOWAS Commission, with the support of the WAQSP,
is continuing the advocacy. In this context, the ECOWAS
Commission organized in January 2018, the first edition
of the ECOWAS Quality Infrastructure Forum (ECOQUAF).
During the forum, one of the main topics discussed was
the development of quality policies. Representatives
from several ministries in charge of quality were able to
present the state of play of the NQPs in their countries.

Implement, monitor and review (continually improve)

It is expected that, with the support of the action plans
and budget available, each country develops specific
national plans and finds relevant financial resources
for the implementation of the adopted NQPs. The
WAQSP has secured a small budget for each country
to continue advocacy at national level or to start
implementing some key activities of the action plan
of the NQP. This will contribute to give the necessary
visibility to the merits to have a NQP, notably the direct
positive impact of a QP on consumers.
To facilitate the dissemination, the WAQSP has
started the drafting of a directory containing the set
of officially adopted NQPs, as well as the ECOWAS
QP. Furthermore, all policies will be available on
the ECOWAS Quality and Industry database that is
being created. It should be recalled that every five
years the effectiveness of the implementation of
ECOQUAL should be assessed. To this end a first
review was done during the ECOQUAF 1st edition.

Challenges
Issues encountered and resolved in the formulation
of QPs:
»» In some countries, the approval of the NQP was
done without the drafting of an implementation
plan (IP). Hence, the WAQSP has supported the
designing of IPs for 15 countries.
»» A misunderstanding with other ministerial
departments vis-à vis- ministers of industry taking
the leadership of the drafting of the Policy was also
noted. The WAQSP has proposed the setup of a
small coordination structure located at the Head
of State, Vice President or Prime Minister’s Office.

Lessons learned
»» The NQP drafting process should be inclusive.
»» The coherence with other policies at national &
regional level, namely Food Safety, Quality in
Health Department, etc. is a must.

53
53
 55
55
 Department of Trade, Investment and Innovation (TII)
Vienna International Centre,
P.O. Box 300, 1400 Vienna, Austria
Email: tii@[Link]

56 [Link]
56